ESPN Is Pathetic

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
10,133
ESPN's ombudsman, er, public editor didn't cover himself in glory last night.

http://deadspin.com/your-head-a-splode-1817176880
He's been pretty bad since he started (his Deflategate pieces have been terrible), but last night he basically went full on playground name calling. Particularly embarrassing when you consider (1) his job is to be commenting on journalistic standards at ESPN in general, and (2) this particular controversy started with twitter and is about posts made on that platform. Some selected tweets:

 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I dunno. He just sounds robotic and stiff to me. Are we supposed to get offended?

edit: At least in the tweets you posted and the one I read on his account before getting bored. It's typical internet argument garbage.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,091
Newton
I actually didn't think his responses were that bad once I went and read his piece. People were suggesting he was soft on white supremacy because he was repeating ESPN's line that Hill's job isn't to report on politics.

They weren't totally wrong but I'm not sure I totally disagree with his position either. His piece did an ok job of basically laying out how we are in somewhat uncharted territory here and this is kind of a no-win situation for all involved (which after watching Kimmel's Spicer interview kind of goes for Huckabee Sanders having to defend Trump – and yes, I think I need to shower).

It's easy enough to say Trump is a white supremacist based on his actions but the vast majority of people on that Twitter thread were arguing that it isn't an opinion. Which is weird. I mean, I think Trump has white supremacist tendencies – his dad certainly seems to have. But do I think he has Nazi armbands in his nightstand drawer? No. Bigot feels a lot more accurate (a term Hill also used). Regardless, applying the label to Trump is still an opinion no matter how widely shared it is or how much evidence there is to back it up.

The problem here remains that ESPN is neither a news organization nor purely entertainment, but some hybrid "journalistic organization" (as Skipper unintentionally put it in his memo) that affords them the benefits and protections of neither.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
10,133
I dunno. He just sounds robotic and stiff to me. Are we supposed to get offended?

edit: At least in the tweets you posted and the one I read on his account before getting bored. It's typical internet argument garbage.
Not offended, just unprofessional.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,807
Not offended, just unprofessional.
Yeah you would think a guy whose job it is to monitor the behavior of media professionals would understand that engaging with random people on Twitter who are criticizing you is a lose-lose situation. Ironically, it was what landed Hill in hot water earlier.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,556
Going back to the legal side of the Executive branch calling for a private sector firing because of criticism of the President, here's a law I never heard of until someone suggested that S.HuckSanders broke it. (I'm not sure she violated it, fwiw, since I'm not sure her comments fit into a1 or 2):

18 U.S. Code § 227 - Wrongfully influencing a private entity’s employment decisions by a Member of Congress or an officer or employee of the legislative or executive branch

(a) Whoever, being a covered government person, with the intent to influence, solely on the basis of partisan political affiliation, an employment decision or employment practice of any private entity—
(1)
takes or withholds, or offers or threatens to take or withhold, an official act, or
(2)
influences, or offers or threatens to influence, the official act of another,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than 15 years, or both, and may be disqualified from holding any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.
(b) In this section, the term “covered government person” means—
(1)
a Senator or Representative in, or a Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress;
(2)
an employee of either House of Congress; or
(3)
the President, Vice President, an employee of the United States Postal Service or the Postal Regulatory Commission, or any other executive branch employee (as such term is defined under section 2105 of title 5, United States Code).
(Added Pub. L. 110–81, title I, § 102(a), Sept. 14, 2007, 121 Stat. 739; amended Pub. L. 112–105, § 18(a), Apr. 4, 2012, 126 Stat. 304.)
 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
Going back to the legal side of the Executive branch calling for a private sector firing because of criticism of the President, here's a law I never heard of until someone suggested that S.HuckSanders broke it. (I'm not sure she violated it, fwiw, since I'm not sure her comments fit into a1 or 2):
It'd be tough to prove "solely on the basis of partisan political affiliation" too, but yeah, as I said, I can see the potential for bringing a claim against the government, Sanders, or Trump, but espn is a reach.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
13,799
Springfield, VA
Cbssports.com guy here. I think it's excellent and not too cluttered and it is also very easy to navigate. I dropped ESPN a decade ago and everytime I go back, I remember why I left. I visited that site multiple times a day in 2004 and was even an insider and they forced me to change because it was so cluttered and horrendous.
I'm trying to make cbssports.com my go-to as well, but they seem really poor at up-to-date news. Right now two of their top three MLB stories are about looking ahead to Tuesday's action. (It's Wednesday morning.)
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
62,078
New York City
I'm trying to make cbssports.com my go-to as well, but they seem really poor at up-to-date news. Right now two of their top three MLB stories are about looking ahead to Tuesday's action. (It's Wednesday morning.)
I'm not sure how they are for news, I don't get my news there, but just for straight score checking, it's pretty good. One other thing I really like about that site is when you check the scores, it shows what network(if any) the game is being televised on. For college football, this is very helpful.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
8,469
New York City
One other thing I really like about that site is when you check the scores, it shows what network(if any) the game is being televised on. For college football, this is very helpful.
I generally use Yahoo, which I find to be very clean and useful, especially their app which has a ton less clutter than ESPN's and is generally easier to navigate. (It also freezes way less often - it was reaching a point where ESPN's app was freezing almost every time I tried to use it, which could just be a local thing on my phone but which was the final straw causing me to give up ESPN altogether.)

Yahoo also shows the network, which I agree is very helpful. It also shows the Vegas odds, which is less helpful but still a little bit of extra info.
 

normstalls

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 15, 2004
4,501
This is easy money but I do enjoy ripping on ESPN and their idiotic QBR rating system. Looking at last week's 'Top 3' quarterbacks I couldn't find TB12. Instead it was Case Keenum, Jared Goff and Jacoby Brisett. Laughable. Apparently 378 yds and 5/0 isn't good enough to make top 3.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,625
This is easy money but I do enjoy ripping on ESPN and their idiotic QBR rating system. Looking at last week's 'Top 3' quarterbacks I couldn't find TB12. Instead it was Case Keenum, Jared Goff and Jacoby Brisett. Laughable. Apparently 378 yds and 5/0 isn't good enough to make top 3.
Not to be a complete jerk, but who gives a fuck? Do you really need an ESPN metric to tell you that Tom Brady is playing really well? Do you think that Tom Brady needs it? How about Bill Belichick? You think that anyone--other than a few pedantic dicks on ESPN--think that Jacoby Brisett shouldn't have been traded and should be starting over Brady for the Pats right now? C'mon.

ESPN doesn't "love" the Pats, they don't "hate" the Pats; they just love starting the conversation. Don't be a part of that conversation. Ever.
 

normstalls

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 15, 2004
4,501
Point taken - but seeing as this is the ESPN is Pathetic thread I thought it was the appropriate place to comment on how pathetic their home cooked QBR statistic is. The Top 3 QB list for last week was solely based off of QBR, it wasn't subjective at all.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,332
Hingham, MA
Point taken - but seeing as this is the ESPN is Pathetic thread I thought it was the appropriate place to comment on how pathetic their home cooked QBR statistic is. The Top 3 QB list for last week was solely based off of QBR, it wasn't subjective at all.
Alex Smith registered a 7.8 despite a 70%+ completion %, 2 TD, and 0 INT
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,332
Hingham, MA
Yeah but I find it hard to buy that his performance was only in the 7.8% of all QB performances ever when his team won on the road and he didn't turn the ball over.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,625
Point taken - but seeing as this is the ESPN is Pathetic thread I thought it was the appropriate place to comment on how pathetic their home cooked QBR statistic is. The Top 3 QB list for last week was solely based off of QBR, it wasn't subjective at all.
I don't want you to think that I was coming down on you, because I'm not. And you're right, this is the correct thread for something like that. It's just that ESPN goes out of it's way to agitate -- and I get why this is needed (from ESPN's perspective). A few years ago they decided it was better for their brand to BE the news, not just report on it.

And I think that what ESPN does is systematic of what has become of sports coverage in the early part of the 21st century. The Pats are 10-0 and Michael Felger and Tony Massarotti are saying that they're not a good team. The Red Sox get Chris Sale and there are people who say that the price was too high and the team got screwed, before he throws a pitch. Certainly there are two ways to view each issue, but if your (royal your, here) knee jerk reaction is to say that X can't be X because you haven't taken into account (a tangental) Y, then that is just as wrong as saying X is X because there is no Y.

I think that this idea that there is truth behind under some unseen rock or that you have to be a centrist to commentate on an issue is dumb. I'm not sure blame is the correct word here, but Bill James gets some of that "blame" that there is hidden gold in all numbers. Sometimes the Pats are 10-0 because the Pats are pretty fucking good. That's all I'm trying to convey.

EDIT: and despite years of practice and dozens of brain-dead morons, ESPN doesn't even do contrarian well. It's all see-through bullshit.
 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
"When I was a little girl, I always dreamed that one day announcements regarding my specific assignments would be forthcoming."

LOL. She's such a little troll.
 

SocrManiac

Tommy Seebach’s mustache
SoSH Member
Apr 15, 2006
8,676
Somers, CT
F1 on ESPN scares the crap out of me. NBC's presentation over the last two or three years has been very good. I haven't watched ESPN in years, driven away by the network's seeming need to be bigger than whatever they're covering. I hope they can do as competent and respectful a job as NBC.
 

kelpapa

Costanza's Hero
SoSH Member
Feb 15, 2010
4,652
These are the same guys who have led a crusade against the NFL in the name of Brady
To be clear, barstool are the guys that ran the crusade, but pft and big cat did not participate in it. Their producer was part of the group that got arrested, but there is no mention of him in the article.

I realize the person you responded to specifically mentioned barstool, but that should be pointed out.
 

allstonite

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 27, 2010
2,491
To be clear, barstool are the guys that ran the crusade, but pft and big cat did not participate in it. Their producer was part of the group that got arrested, but there is no mention of him in the article.

I realize the person you responded to specifically mentioned barstool, but that should be pointed out.
This is true and a meaningful distinction. A lot of people will say "I hate Barstool but I love Pardon My Take." They've become almost their own brand and get a lot of guests who I think otherwise wouldn't want to be associated with the more seedy (Portnoy) parts of Barstool. They've already been on ESPN a few times on SVP's Sportscenter and Russillo's show.

I think Big Cat has a good relationship wth ESPN and can be polished enough while still being funny to make it work. With this news and the news of Katie Nolan I'm wondering if ESPN is maybe, possibly trying to take itself less seriously and let their personalities have a little more personality.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,314
This is true and a meaningful distinction. A lot of people will say "I hate Barstool but I love Pardon My Take." They've become almost their own brand and get a lot of guests who I think otherwise wouldn't want to be associated with the more seedy (Portnoy) parts of Barstool. They've already been on ESPN a few times on SVP's Sportscenter and Russillo's show.

I think Big Cat has a good relationship wth ESPN and can be polished enough while still being funny to make it work. With this news and the news of Katie Nolan I'm wondering if ESPN is maybe, possibly trying to take itself less seriously and let their personalities have a little more personality.
I barely watch ESPN anymore, but isn't part of the problem that they let their personalities have too much personality and none of them - outside maybe SVP - are talented like Dan Patrick or Kenny Mayne were? The channel seems to be entirely personality driven whenever I flick by or get stuck at an airport, but it's all just a bunch of yelling and hot takes.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,881
Maine
Once again demonstrating ESPN's priorities. Tweet about the president...slap on the wrist (more than she deserved, IMO). Tweet about an NFL team...suspension.

Can't have the people you pay to opine about sports actually have a bad opinion of the NFL. No no no.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,053
I am kinda anti-ESPN overall, but the NFL has a huge business relationship with ESPN. Of course they're going to react.

It would be the same at your company. The Cowboys sponsors are ESPN's sponsors too.

And yes, I understand that means we should always wonder about their coverage of sports that make them $$$.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,807
I don't like Hill; I think she isn't a very entertaining personality and has said some really stupid stuff over the years. This is really weak though; and very transparent of what ESPNs real priorities are. ESPN also is building the SC and other programs' brands on the personalities, like Hill, SVP, Smith, etc. They encourage these people to spill out hot takes and often poorly conceived theories; but say something bad about Jerry Jones and the NFL and suddenly they've crossed the line?
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
JFC. ESPN does not exist without the NFL. She called for a boycott of one of the marquee team's sponsors.

Who tolerates this, or should? It's absurd to argue it is tolerable.
 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
JFC. ESPN does not exist without the NFL. She called for a boycott of one of the marquee team's sponsors.

Who tolerates this, or should? It's absurd to argue it is tolerable.
Other networks tolerate it. Mike Florio can criticize an owner or the league without repercussion from NBC. ESPN has repeatedly claimed there is no conflict of interest with the NFL; they claim that Bill Simmons was suspended for calling Goodell a liar not because of the relationship with the NFL, because he didn't adhere to "journalistic standards." If ESPN wants to be just a financial partner with the NFL, that's fine; they're certainly free to be a mouthpiece or propaganda wing of the league. But they should put an end once and for all that they are a journalistic endeavor, and that there is no corporate policy influencing or limiting content when it comes to the NFL or the SEC, or whatever.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,837
Needham, MA
I don't like Hill either, but it's like people aren't even bothering to read what she wrote. She was reacting to people calling on Dez and Dak and other Cowboys to defy Jerrah and kneel. She said she thought that was an unfair burden to place those players, and anyone who was that upset about it should take it up with Cowboys' sponsors. She also specifically said she wasn't calling on a boycott of Cowboy sponsors, just re-directing people who were calling on Cowboy players to put their own livelihoods at risk.

Seems like a perfectly reasonable take to me. ESPN is hopeflessly caught in the middle of all of this now and will continue to fuck it up at every turn.
 

garlan5

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2009
2,684
Virginia
Perhaps maybe they want her to leave on her own but fear the PR nightmare in firing her. Maybe they're pushing her buttons.
 

Vinho Tinto

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 9, 2003
7,068
Auburn, MA
Florio doesn’t fuck with NBC’s money by critiquing the NFL or an owner. If he starts talking about how fans should boycott Budweiser or All State, he would have plenty of time to meet up with Jamele Hill for a lunch date.

EDIT: I think ESPN is pushing her out and don’t believe she really suggested organizing a boycott.
 

Sportsbstn

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 8, 2004
8,794
Florio doesn’t fuck with NBC’s money by critiquing the NFL or an owner. If he starts talking about how fans should boycott Budweiser or All State, he would have plenty of time to meet up with Jamele Hill for a lunch date.

EDIT: I think ESPN is pushing her out and don’t believe she really suggested organizing a boycott.
ESPN is not pushing her out, but her mission I believe is to get fired and then claim martyrdom.
 

coremiller

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
5,854
JFC. ESPN does not exist without the NFL. She called for a boycott of one of the marquee team's sponsors.

Who tolerates this, or should? It's absurd to argue it is tolerable.
Depends on what kind of organization you want to have. Don't most serious news organizations have a pretty strict firewall between the editorial and and business sides? If Paul Krugman wants to criticize in print one of the New York Times' biggest ad buyers, nobody is going to stop him.
 

Marceline

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2002
6,462
Canton, MA
Depends on what kind of organization you want to have. Don't most serious news organizations have a pretty strict firewall between the editorial and and business sides? If Paul Krugman wants to criticize in print one of the New York Times' biggest ad buyers, nobody is going to stop him.
You're confusing ESPN with a serious news organization.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
10,133
What's the over/under on Hill joining the Ringer in some capacity, 18 months? Simmons must be salivating to give her a podcast.