If you hold your nose and listen to Mike and Mike in the morning you will now know the entire day's programming for ESPN, just different heads mouthing it. I prefer to wait until evening and listen to PTI, the only daily show I can stand. Then Sunday morning I sit down with chorizo con huevos, frijoles y papas and corn tortillas and watch The Sports Reporters. Beyond that ESPN might as not exist.

greg.w.h said:

---

Our SEC Network revenue probably will go down simultaneously with ESPN's decline due to cable cutting. We might be insulated because our network is purpose specific or they might hand more of the duties and costs to the schools on non-revenue sports to attempt to slow the plunge.

I honestly just am uninterested in most of their content. And force feeding political perspectives (presumably to reach the mostly disinterested in "sports ball" millennials) makes the content unlistenable (I can turn down the sound to a light background and still catch details I care about on live actual sports broadcasts.)

I also think it's mostly not fixable. They were a juggernaut and dominated through the perception of invulnerability due in large part to being unchallenged for the first 20 years (plus novel all sports format.) Could even blame the ABC then Disney lashups but I think it's more fundamentally about overexposure than anything else. We used to starve for being able to watch SPORTS (not commenrary) and needed reliable sports news without waiting for the newspaper (that inevitably failed to report late games anyway.). The ESPN tackled both and kept it fun. Now the Internet solves the news problem and I'm out of time and attention to watch everything. And they have shifted to the MTV model of filling schedule with things that eke out revenue but really aren't compelling commentary.

It would be sad except it is exactly how commerce needs to work: innovate or die.

---

Fixed timing on commercial breaks.
No longer waiting for a break in the game to get that ad revenue.

aggieaviator said:

---

Too bad. So sad.

---

!!!

jja79 said:

---

Being able to watch so much CFB is probably going to change.

---

The lesson to learn here is don't be part of the problem sharing your ESPN GO password with cord cutters.

Keeper of The Spirits said:

---

They should hold a poll and let the fans select atleast on personality to be cut.

---

Personality Hunger Games

Robots. They are all being replaced by robots.

Quote:

---

When they started making their hard left turn in to the realm of politics and social justice about 10 years ago, I've gradually lost all interest in them outside of sporting events that are showing a team I'm actually interested in.

---

this

Keeper of The Spirits said:

---

They should hold a poll and let the fans select atleast on personality to be cut.

---

Good bye Stephen A Smith and First Take

I can't listen to Steven A. but I think I can't stand Bomani Jones more. It pains me that he's on XM ESPN radio on the drive home.

TXAGFAN said:

---

jja79 said:

---

Being able to watch so much CFB is probably going to change.

---

The lesson to learn here is don't be part of the problem sharing your ESPN GO password with cord cutters.

---

Exactly but don't suggest that on a cord cutter thread. Somehow they don't see anything wrong with it.

ESPN is no longer watchable. It's program has deteriorated over the last 10 years. And, here is my educated opinion as to why:

Consultants likely came in to "help" their product to make it appeal to larger audiences. They started focusing more on their on-air personalities and opinions instead of what they originally used to grow their audience.

ESPN lost its base viewers while trying to gain the fringe viewers. Hardcore sports fans would turn to Sportscenter to see the highlights of their favorite teams and extra coverage of the really big games. ESPN would give extra stats you couldn't get anywhere else.

Then 10 years ago (maybe 15), ESPN started moving to sports info-tainment. They have alienated their core viewers. They're relying heavily on ex-athletes to provide something extra on their games. They are running marketing spots for movies during their shows. Viewers who go to ESPN want to see the highlights. A lot of the time, your favorite team's highlights will not run in Sportscenter, so one of their talking-heads can provide their "insight" into what happened.

That's a big thing -- a lot of the stuff ESPN presents now is just a waste of time. I don't need to see several NFL draft experts being interviewed in front of a smart board, showing viewers the 5 players they *think* will be taken in the top 5. Who cares? McShay and Kiper (though they both are "meh") are the only ones worth listening to. I don't need an ex-athlete's analysis about the draft. He is not a draft expert, focusing on it all. Don't waste my time.

ESPN needs to get back to basics. It needs to make sure it shows highlights of all the teams -- and spend less time letting people like Merrill Hoge pontificate. They need their anchors with good personalities (SVP, Buccigross, John Anderson), reporters bringing accurate information, and reliance on the stats.

TL;DR version -- Get back to the highlights. Drop the fluff and time-wasting elements. Get back to catering to hardcore sports viewer.

Good move, although about 5 years too late....

They ought to make use of all of the live SEC Network+ content being produced and put it on all of their cable channels instead of their commentary shows. The content is already being produced, but right now most of it falls onto streaming only service. Oh, and of course pay the SEC a hefty fee for the privilege...

Irish_Man said:

---

I hate Jamiel and whatever that guys name is on the 6pm sports center.

---

Everyone does.

I predict that show will be a casualty of the downsizing. They may not fire the racist hosts, but the show is a complete failure and will be gone soon.

I hope Stephen A. Smith's dumbass is the first one on the chopping block.

Would be curious to know the ins and outs of the SECN agreement. Now that iit has proven to be capable of generating ad revenue I would like to see the conference bring the SECN in-house. Let the conference run it and perhaps add the occasional tier 1 game. We all pay $1.40 a month for it right now, but if they broke free from ESPN and maintained the same level of quality I would be fine with paying $2 a month just for the SECN.

I think most people these days only watch live games on ESPN. Speaking for myself I don't even really do that; I DVR them wait until about halftime and then skip through all the commercials, halftime, et al. In fact if a team does not use HUNH then I use the 30 second skip between plays. Pretty neat to watch an entire game in less than an hour as it means you can fit in over 10 games on a Saturday in the fall and still have time to do other things.

Quote:

---

Get back to the highlights. Drop the fluff and time-wasting elements. Get back to catering to hardcore sports viewer.

---

It's interesting because ESPN saw the internet as the reason that they needed to add all this useless crap to their Sportscenter broadcast. It used to be you would have to watch to see some highlights of your team and the scores. Since there were so many teams and highlights, the show had to move. Once they decided all those highlights weren't needed, the show slowed down and got more expensive with all of these on-air personalities. It was completely the wrong direction. I used to watch Sportscenter for those games I didn't know anything about. I don't see those anymore. Online, I only look up my favorite teams. I just won't make it a point to look up things like the Clippers-Jazz highlights but I would if it were on in the morning while I drink coffee. That is too bad for ESPN because that is content that is being wasted.

RedlineAg08 said:

---

but I pretty much can't tolerate any of them outside of Russilo and Kanell.

---

I miss SVP and Rusillo sooo much. Listened to their podcast every day and watched when I could.

Just keep the people that texags doesn't like

Eff em.

Too much Insider driven content on the web.

They started injecting politics and social issues into sports on a daily in your face basis.

When what the majority of male sports viewers want is games, facts, game results and highlights. that's it. failry simple model and they screwed it up.

agproducer said:

---

ESPN is no longer watchable. It's program has deteriorated over the last 10 years. And, here is my educated opinion as to why:

Consultants likely came in to "help" their product to make it appeal to larger audiences. They started focusing more on their on-air personalities and opinions instead of what they originally used to grow their audience.

ESPN lost its base viewers while trying to gain the fringe viewers. Hardcore sports fans would turn to Sportscenter to see the highlights of their favorite teams and extra coverage of the really big games. ESPN would give extra stats you couldn't get anywhere else.

Then 10 years ago (maybe 15), ESPN started moving to sports info-tainment. They have alienated their core viewers. They're relying heavily on ex-athletes to provide something extra on their games. They are running marketing spots for movies during their shows. Viewers who go to ESPN want to see the highlights. A lot of the time, your favorite team's highlights will not run in Sportscenter, so one of their talking-heads can provide their "insight" into what happened.

That's a big thing -- a lot of the stuff ESPN presents now is just a waste of time. I don't need to see several NFL draft experts being interviewed in front of a smart board, showing viewers the 5 players they *think* will be taken in the top 5. Who cares? McShay and Kiper (though they both are "meh") are the only ones worth listening to. I don't need an ex-athlete's analysis about the draft. He is not a draft expert, focusing on it all. Don't waste my time.

ESPN needs to get back to basics. It needs to make sure it shows highlights of all the teams -- and spend less time letting people like Merrill Hoge pontificate. They need their anchors with good personalities (SVP, Buccigross, John Anderson), reporters bringing accurate information, and reliance on the stats.

TL;DR version -- Get back to the highlights. Drop the fluff and time-wasting elements. Get back to catering to hardcore sports viewer.

---

This is part of it, but also the ability to have score, stats and top plays for your favorite team right on your phone also killed them. I would tune into the 10pm Sportscenter every night just to wait for certain scores, now I just have to check the phone.

dreyOO said:

---

The hell with ESPN. There is a market for college ball. There isn't a market for social justice nonsense. If they have to croak to learn that, so be it.

Btw, the beauty of being in the SEC over the little 12 is that we are in the one rapid, dominant market for college ball. One way or another, SEC football will be televised plenty. It's the lame conferences and sports that should be nervous.

---

I think you mean rabid".

Ed Werder has tweeted he has been laid off.

When referring to the following fan bases:

SEC - rapid or rabid is acceptable
B12 - vapid is the word you are looking for

Let's face it, the answer is to get completely away from any women's sports( nobody watches) next any sport besides football, basketball, and baseball ... Should be only on occasion. Recruiting, drafts etc should stay. Small school stuff should go in football and eventually only major college should fill the schedule ( SEC, ACC, Big10, Big 12 ,Pac10) not enough viewers for any else....

Only other name I recognize so far is Dana O'Neil from NCAA basketball content on the web.

Buccigross is out also

bthomas98 said:

---

agproducer said:

---

Get back to the highlights. Drop the fluff and time-wasting elements. Get back to catering to hardcore sports viewer.

---

This is part of it, but also the ability to have score, stats and top plays for your favorite team right on your phone also killed them. I would tune into the 10pm Sportscenter every night just to wait for certain scores, now I just have to check the phone.

---

The accessiblity of mobile phones and highlights has hurt their viewership. They've done a "meh" job of linking tv and their web site. IMO, both entities should be working to supplement each other -- not push independent content. I'll echo what another poster said here that you watch SC to see what's up with the leagues as a whole and see players you aren't familiar with. ESPN doesn't let you do that anymore with all the extra fluff.

I used to work with a guy who worked on SC for a few years. Their directive was to find the "story" in every game -- not just the highlights. That's why you see highlight packages that have themes to them, and you end up missing out on what really happened.

Right now in sports, it seems the network that is doing thing right is MLB Network. They focus on the highlights, the live look-ins, and use their talent wisely. Check out MLB Tonight, MLB Whiparound and Quick Pitch.

ESPN used to do really well for highlights. 15 years ago, Baseball Tonight was the show to watch. It was a frantic 1-hour through baseball highlights and live look-ins. It was a show I dreamed of producing because of the breaking and live elements. Now, it's too much analysis, too many experts. The focus should be on the highlights with thoughtful analysis.