ESPN Is Pathetic

jmm57

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,285
David Ross has been awesome to listen to the last two nights.

Can’t decide if I love or hate Tim Kurkjian in the booth. The voice is bad, some of the stories/facts are totally pointless, but he clearly loves the game.
 

patoaflac

Member
SoSH Member
May 6, 2016
1,250

http://www.espn.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=401074815
Tigers Pitching

Pitchers IP H R ER BB K HR PC-ST ERA
B. Farmer (W, 1-0) 0.2 0 0 0 0 2 0 10-8 0.00
J. Jimenez (H, 1) 1.0 0 0 0 1 2 0 18-10 6.75
S. Greene (S, 4) 1.0 0 0 0 0 1 0 10-6 0.00

Yankees Pitching
Pitchers IP H R ER BB K HR PC-ST ERA
M. Boyd 6.1 5 1 1 3 13 0 98-62 3.18
J. Loaisiga 4.0 1 1 1 3 4 0 70-41 2.25
J. Holder 2.0 1 0 0 0 2 0 20-16 2.25
C. Green (L, 0-1) 2.0 1 1 1 0 1 1 27-16 4.50
Z. Britton 1.0 0 0 0 0 1 0 11-7 0.00

Can someone add at ESPN?
Oh wait, maybe this is the reason yankees are losing.
 

Buck Showalter

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2002
5,706
704 Houser Street Queens, NY
David Ross has been awesome to listen to the last two nights.

Can’t decide if I love or hate Tim Kurkjian in the booth. The voice is bad, some of the stories/facts are totally pointless, but he clearly loves the game.
You mean (as mentioned during last night's telecast) you weren't in awe of Tim's list for Top 5 strongest MLB hands that he has shaken in his life?

What a joke.

And then Greenberg this morning tells us that he thinks the Cleveland Browns are the best team in the AFC.

Good Lord.....they pay people to do this stuff?
 

jmm57

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,285
You mean (as mentioned during last night's telecast) you weren't in awe of Tim's list for Top 5 strongest MLB hands that he has shaken in his life?

What a joke.

And then Greenberg this morning tells us that he thinks the Cleveland Browns are the best team in the AFC.

Good Lord.....they pay people to do this stuff?
The top strongest hands list was after my post. That one give me a strong push to the Hate column.
 

ConigliarosPotential

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member

Lose Remerswaal

Leaves after the 8th inning
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Until about a week ago, when I chose the Scores tab on the espn app on my Android phone, it gave me my Favorite teams (Sox, Bruins, Celts, Pats), so I could just look there and get all the scores for those teams from yesterday l useful when two teams have late night games to have those grouped together.

Now the Scores tab just shows me the scores they want to show me, not the teams I have Favorited. Sheesh.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
20,974
Hingham, MA
Until about a week ago, when I chose the Scores tab on the espn app on my Android phone, it gave me my Favorite teams (Sox, Bruins, Celts, Pats), so I could just look there and get all the scores for those teams from yesterday l useful when two teams have late night games to have those grouped together.

Now the Scores tab just shows me the scores they want to show me, not the teams I have Favorited. Sheesh.
I like the Yahoo sports app
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
19,840
No snark here, but I had no idea that ESPN the Magazine was still a thing, I believe that I have the first issue somewhere.

I had a subscription back when it started and I hated it. The layout was confusing, it tried really hard not to be "your daddy's sports magazine" and was just not very good in terms of written content or photographs. Also, IIRC it was about the size of Rolling Stone, which made it awkward to read too.
 

kelpapa

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 15, 2010
2,537
No snark here, but I had no idea that ESPN the Magazine was still a thing, I believe that I have the first issue somewhere.

I had a subscription back when it started and I hated it. The layout was confusing, it tried really hard not to be "your daddy's sports magazine" and was just not very good in terms of written content or photographs. Also, IIRC it was about the size of Rolling Stone, which made it awkward to read too.
Bill Simmons had a podcast with John Skipper recently, and he discussed the beginning of the magazine. IIRC he said they were modelling it after the Rolling Stone and even ended up using the same print shop as them to reduce expenses.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
19,840
Bill Simmons had a podcast with John Skipper recently, and he discussed the beginning of the magazine. IIRC he said they were modelling it after the Rolling Stone and even ended up using the same print shop as them to reduce expenses.
That makes sense and mission accomplished ESPN. Was it still that size? I know that RS reduced it's magazine size about 10 years ago, I wasn't sure if ESPN TM did the same.
 

h8mfy

lurker
Jul 15, 2005
250
At least where I have lived (NY and LA markets), Jeopardy runs on ABC, so I assumed it was due to "synergy"
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
9,485
That makes sense and mission accomplished ESPN. Was it still that size? I know that RS reduced it's magazine size about 10 years ago, I wasn't sure if ESPN TM did the same.
Yes, it was massive. As someone that got the magazine for the Insider membership (now ESPN+) that came with it; it had shifted even further into a magazine about athletes off-the-field more than anything, with each issue having a specific theme (Fashion, Fame, NEXT, Gambling, etc.) and was pretty worthless unless you were really into what Odell Beckham Jr. is wearing. They would occasionally still deliver a really nice, well-written long-form piece from time to time, though.
 

johnmd20

literally like ebola
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
37,772
New York City
Yes, it was massive. As someone that got the magazine for the Insider membership (now ESPN+) that came with it; it had shifted even further into a magazine about athletes off-the-field more than anything, with each issue having a specific theme (Fashion, Fame, NEXT, Gambling, etc.) and was pretty worthless unless you were really into what Odell Beckham Jr. is wearing. They would occasionally still deliver a really nice, well-written long-form piece from time to time, though.
I completely agree with your last sentence. There were a few years when the Magazine was actually a great read, even when it was getting universally mocked, especially on SoSH. But that was many years ago.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
17,216

Archer1979

shazowies
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
3,489
Right Here
Anyone else notice that they're having issues updating the current data? I'm not talking players' stats. The MLB standings haven't reflected the previous night's results in some cases. They used to have updates within seconds after the game ended.

And before I get the barrage... Yes. I do have better things to worry about.
 

blueline

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 23, 2012
218
Anyone else notice that they're having issues updating the current data? I'm not talking players' stats. The MLB standings haven't reflected the previous night's results in some cases. They used to have updates within seconds after the game ended.

And before I get the barrage... Yes. I do have better things to worry about.
On their app a lot of soccer tables haven't updated for weeks.
 

cromulence

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 25, 2009
4,091
I know I shouldn't be going there for soccer coverage (suggestions welcomed), but it's hilarious to me how they seem to think that nobody gives a shit about the Bundesliga. Their listing of Top Leagues when you mouse over the Soccer tab: Premier League, MLS, Liga MX, La Liga, Champions' League, Europa League, and fuck it, Serie A because ESPN has the rights. Bundesliga though? Nah, who cares?
 

Mugsy's Jock

Longtime Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 28, 2000
10,032
Bi-Coastal, for the time being
Watching ESPN section of ABC/Disney upfront presentation. The sizzle reel at the top included footage of the Dodgers, Chiefs and Rams...but not the NFL or MLB champs. Worse was their pitch for Monday Night Football which touted upcoming performances by all 12 playoff teams from last year, including the Chiefs and their brilliant young quarterback, the up and coming Chargers, America’s team Cowboys, the exciting Rams, and all the teams in the NFC East. They then brought out on stage Eli (who has won 2 Super Bowls) and Saquon.

The words “New England” and “Patriots” were never uttered.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
34,110
Rotten Apple
Sep 10, 2017
374
Confused in covering the stories, or confused on which side they should take even if against their own beliefs? Great Monday morning quarterbacking by Pitaro. The most obvious case of the intersection of politics is the Kaepernick story. To think 2 people of color who are passionate about things in and outside of sports like Jemele Hill and Michael Smith would either not cover this at all at the time or be dispassionate and not cover it from their angle/POV is just stupid.
 

Doug Beerabelli

Killer Threads
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Agreed on Hill/Smith - it made sense to have them cover those topics and provide their POV. However, was there anybody at ESPN available or willing (or permitted) to give an opposing viewpoint? I haven't watched enough to know if that happened or not, but I don't recall reading much about that happening.
 
Sep 10, 2017
374
Agreed on Hill/Smith - it made sense to have them cover those topics and provide their POV. However, was there anybody at ESPN available or willing (or permitted) to give an opposing viewpoint? I haven't watched enough to know if that happened or not, but I don't recall reading much about that happening.
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/other-sports/news/skip-bayless-fs1-undisputed-trent-dilfer-colin-kaepernick-49ers-shannon-sharpe-espn-sunday-nfl-countdown-plantation-mentality/90am4rhlu6ah19rr74pozbova

Trent Dilfer was one person I recalled. What I am not sure of is if he had cross-pollinated to other debate shows or Sportscenter or was exclusively on NFL countdown at that time. In fact I think a majority of the NFL sportscasters at ESPN were of the "don't protest on the clock" opinion, though maybe not expressed strongly. Hill/Smith were also highly publicized in their takeover of the "newly revamped" evening Sportscenter, so anything they did outside of reading highlights after this show premiered was going to be highly focused on.
 

Doug Beerabelli

Killer Threads
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Gotcha - that's one. Seems like most differening opinions were of more a "time place and manner" type response. Still, most of the coverage and emphasis (seems the response from Bayliss got as much press as Dilfer's comments) was one sided. Not to say that the heavier covered side was necessarily the wrong side of the issue, but from a "not pissing off your viewers" standpoint, heavy emphasis/coverage of a political nature of one side is going to have that effect. So options are equally cover politics of both sides (this would be a disaster), or limit the coverage altogether.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
27,286

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
3,551
ESPN states in somber tones how unfortunate it is that Buckner is only remembered for his bad play, then lead off their retrospective of his career with the replay. The hypocrisy is bottomless.
 

ConigliarosPotential

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
ESPN states in somber tones how unfortunate it is that Buckner is only remembered for his bad play, then lead off their retrospective of his career with the replay. The hypocrisy is bottomless.
What would you have had them do - mention the bad play and then *not* show the replay? (Because the Sox have been so friggin' good for the past 15 years, believe it or not it's actually possible that some viewers actually might not remember Game 6 in 1986 very well.)
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
19,840
ESPN states in somber tones how unfortunate it is that Buckner is only remembered for his bad play, then lead off their retrospective of his career with the replay. The hypocrisy is bottomless.
I mean, listen, I liked Buck and I thought that he was a really good baseball player. But unfortunately, he's remembered for one pretty shitty play. To not show it wouldn't be correct. People make mistakes and shit happens. To ignore them or pretend that they didn't happen isn't being truthful.
 

Revkeith

lurker
Apr 23, 2010
436
I mean, listen, I liked Buck and I thought that he was a really good baseball player. But unfortunately, he's remembered for one pretty shitty play. To not show it wouldn't be correct. People make mistakes and shit happens. To ignore them or pretend that they didn't happen isn't being truthful.
I was 13 years old when Nixon died, and found it bizarre that there was literally zero mention of the resignation, Watergate, etc.

Not saying it was the wrong thing to do, but it feels like a safe move is to wait for the body to get cold before they start bringing up any negatives.
 

shaggydog2000

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
5,402
I mean, listen, I liked Buck and I thought that he was a really good baseball player. But unfortunately, he's remembered for one pretty shitty play. To not show it wouldn't be correct. People make mistakes and shit happens. To ignore them or pretend that they didn't happen isn't being truthful.
It's also been over 30 years. Many viewers weren't alive when it happened, and may not have seen it. It's right that they showed it, but I think they could have built up to it.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
19,840
It's also been over 30 years. Many viewers weren't alive when it happened, and may not have seen it. It's right that they showed it, but I think they could have built up to it.
Completely disagree.

So when Ralph Branca died, they shouldn't have shown the homer he gave up to Bobby Thompson? Or how about Ralph Terry? Or Pat Darcy? Or Mitch Williams? For every great moment in baseball history, there has to be a tragic moment for the person who made the mistake. That's just the way things have to work out.

if you were at a barbecue on Sunday night and were talking baseball and someone brought up Bill Buckner, what would the context have been? If you're very charitable, it may have been something along the lines of, "You know, when he was younger, Buckner was actually fast." Or maybe his last homer being an insider-the-park job. Or something that ran counter to the idea that Buckner was slow and not very athletic. And that's because when most people think of Buckner they think of the broken down dude in high tops who couldn't bend over to field a baseball.

I'm not saying that it's right, I'm not saying that it's fair, but it's what people remember him. Not showing his most infamous highlight or burying it, wouldn't be accurate. And if you did bury it, what's the reason? Out of respect for the dead? To his credit, Buckner seemed to have made peace with that a long time ago.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
3,551
The definitive Chris Webber highlight is the timeout right? Case closed.
I would bet every dollar I have that if he died tmw, the first highlight shown would be something from his run with Sacramento or a shot of him with the Fab Five.

Anyway, I don't disagree with anyone's pushback here. I've just had it with the hypocrisy, led by Shank, of these media outlets hand-wringing about how sad it is that the error is "all Buckner is remembered for" when they've done everything possible to make that the case since it happened. Either own the fact that life and sports are unfair and he is best known for the error, or try to do a retrospective/apologia that puts the error into the larger context of his career (i.e., don't lead with it).