OT: Jeremy Crabtree Out at ESPN

[huskerfan1414]

I know there are a bunch of entertainment experts here, but until you look at the data, you won't understand why the networks go for more story lines, even controversial perspectives.

Same thing happened on MTV. At first, MTV was the only place to watch a music video, so we jumped on it and watched and waited for our song. Then two things happened, 1) people could start to see videos online when they wanted to and 2) watching a video you'd already seen is less appealing and you don't tune in as frequently. So they created reality shows which were actually quite successful initially.

In sports, we all get scores, including highlights and statistics on our phones, tablets or computers. ESPN used to be the only way to get those. So now, ESPN is seeking new ways to get people to tune in. Hard to blame them, right?

This is more a story about a changing media type and how people consume media than it is boycotting against political takes on the network.

Watch Mike & Mike any given morning. Their show is maybe 50% sports-related (of which 90% is a story line and not really talking about outcomes of a game) - the other 50% is humorous lifestyle content.

Its not just that they do it, its the way they do it. You cant slam social justice and America hate into peoples brains all the time. Look at why msnbc has such low ass ratings. Its all crap (and false).
Espn thinks of themselves as something they arent. Its not that they veer off sports, its the way they choose to do it.
Methinks a lot of their personalities either think their jobs arent important enough or they think they are more important individuals than they are.

 

[BigRedPimp]

I think BTN, NFL, MLB networks will be just fine as long as they continue to give good programming. When they get political, race-baiting, or shock-jock shows.... then they will feel what ESPN is going through.

I stumbled across an article today where the theme was ESPN isn't close to being done feeling financial pain. So much so that they may have to back out or ask for price concessions on their existing contracts. This includes Big Ten and others. My question is if that were to happen, how bad would NU get screwed since we're not full share even?

This can not be making AD's excited since a revenue stream is drying up. That could lead to a "correction" with skyrocketing college athletics facilities, coaching salaries, etc.

 

[chicolby]

Its not just that they do it, its the way they do it. You cant slam social justice and America hate into peoples brains all the time. Look at why msnbc has such low ass ratings. Its all crap (and false).
Espn thinks of themselves as something they arent. Its not that they veer off sports, its the way they choose to do it.
Methinks a lot of their personalities either think their jobs arent important enough or they think they are more important individuals than they are.

That would be one point of view. MAGA!

 

[jlb321]

Trent Dilfer and Jason stark out .. meanwhile Ed Cunningham and Beth Mowins are still pulling a paycheck

 

[mothmonsterman]

I stumbled across an article today where the theme was ESPN isn't close to being done feeling financial pain. So much so that they may have to back out or ask for price concessions on their existing contracts. This includes Big Ten and others. My question is if that were to happen, how bad would NU get screwed since we're not full share even?

This can not be making AD's excited since a revenue stream is drying up. That could lead to a "correction" with skyrocketing college athletics facilities, coaching salaries, etc.

Well, if you're at a school that can sell tickets and merchandise along with pulling in big donations, you'll be okay. This would probably have the effect of returning us to the 80s and 90s where the up jumped programs of today resume their rightful place as bottom feeders. Salaries might fall and big projects might get scaled back, but the haves will still be in the same spot relative to the have nots.

As for ESPN, I don't think the problems are related to ratings. I'm sure that puts something of a dent in their revenue, but the problem appears to be subscribers. I doubt anyone is getting rid of cable entirely because they don't like that ESPN is saying things they find distasteful, the primary driver is people who probably aren't sports fans finding other ways to watch the programming they want without paying for cable. I think their programming model used to be better. They showed college football, college basketball, MLB and that was about it for major sports. They had studio shows for the major sports and Sports Center. The rest of their programming day was filled with filler like reruns of old World's Strongest Man competitions, chuck wagon racing, and Putt-Putt golf tournaments. This stuff was cheap and made for more entertaining viewing than yet another show about the NFL draft or some yawn fest where some columnists argue about stuff.

In any event, their flagship show, Sports Center is more or less obsolete. No one needs to watch it to find out what the scores and highlights are. I can see any score and watch any highlight I want on my phone or computer without having to sit through stuff about games and sports I don't care about. I'll happily watch ESPN if they're showing a game I want to watch, or to see their college football highlight shows, or there's a compelling 30 for 30, but I don't really have any other reason to watch.

 

[litespeedhuskerfan]

R&K ruled, and they couldn't have been paying K that much. They screwed the pooch on that one. That was probably their best show next to PTI.

 

[bigboxes]

I dislike most everything ESPN besides the actual game broadcasts. Long, long ago when ESPN started messing with Sportscenter I stopped watching. They used to showcase the sport that was having the biggest event on any given day. So, if it was college football season that would mean that college football would headline Sportscenter that day. On Sunday, it would be NFL. If it was NBA playoffs time then NBA would get the lead. MLB playoffs? MLB lead the show. Then, they'd show all the scores and highlights from that one sport before they'd move on to the next one. It made perfect sense. Today? There is no sense. You show highlights from one game of one sport and then move to another sport. You never know when they are going. And that is their plan. To make you watch that crap all day. Not going to do it.

Don't get me started with reality programming. It's not reality. Just scripted made up stuff. I couldn't care less about someone's personal life or their causes. Sports talk? Bor-ring! I really don't care what someone else thinks of sports. Fantasy sports? Waste-O-Time. Instead of wasting time with fake leagues I'd rather watch REAL GAMES.

What has changed? The internet. Even espn.com has got overblown with crap. I just want to see scheduling, the standings, links to teams and statistics. Limit the human interest stories and eff social media.

 

[TruHusker]

I will probably get reported to the politically correct police for this but....... I can't remember the last time I watched ESPN at length for anything and only Fox a couple of times. For me there are several things that soured me. ESPN is way too political and some of the screaming heads (Stephen Smith, Shannon Sharp, Keith Olberman) grind on me. Then there is this movement towards more women and minorities on the sets and in the booths. I don't have anything against either as people but to just be hirjng people to be politically correct doesn't work for me. I can't get use to a women telling me about how hard it is to hit a fastball coming in at 98 mph or doing the play by play of football. I realize that not all of the men announcers have played football or even baseball as well so I will give you that. Half of the guys I can't understand what they are saying. With the emphasis on everything except knowledge of the games I hear the really deep analysis that comes down to who ever stops the other team, shoots better, gets more yards, or has fewer mistakes will likely win the game. Sheez, that was some serious analysis there.

Its like they are all trying to hard to be different they are forgetting the game. There is a huge watering down of all things sports as well so it is competitive for viewers, I get that. I am guessing there are a couple more that checked out long ago like me.

 

[Tyante]

I second this. I feel for these guys too, but And in no way, shape or form do I work for FOX Sports or mean to jam FOX Sports down this thread's throat, I just know that they are ESPN's top competitor and it's a huge chance to get gnab quality journalists and really compete with ESPN even more than they have been able to in recent past. Laying off this many decent sports content workers is also a huge risk. ESPN may think they are 10 steps ahead letting them go due to digital sport content demand, but I could see FOX sports gaining some cred from this and might be able to flip some loyal ESPN viewers.

BTN and the PAC-12 Network, were smart to partner with Fox and not just let ESPN have the majority share of viewers.

The Pac-12 Network is not partnered with Fox. The Pac-12 Network is completely owned by the conference where Fox own 49% of the BTN. This is part of the reason the Pac-12 Network has had a hard time getting into cable packages.

 

[t7w0c1]

should have never signed contracts with SEC/Texas...That turned a lot of people off

 

[NikkiSixx]

I stumbled across an article today where the theme was ESPN isn't close to being done feeling financial pain. So much so that they may have to back out or ask for price concessions on their existing contracts. This includes Big Ten and others. My question is if that were to happen, how bad would NU get screwed since we're not full share even?

This can not be making AD's excited since a revenue stream is drying up. That could lead to a "correction" with skyrocketing college athletics facilities, coaching salaries, etc.

I think we are full share in the next month or two. What bothers me, is we paid in a lot of money for that share, which is in all likelihood worth less. It's like buying a stock on credit margin, and making installment payments, all while the stock price goes down (loss of principal) and the stock also issues new shares (diluting your share).

When ESPN cannot make the payments on their contracts, they may simply default, or more likely, the contracts will be sold off to bidders at a big discount.

What is interesting to me, is to see how those contracts are valued. It's essentially a right to televise a series of sporting events and sell the advertising for those events. If the costs are greater than the potential ad revenue, then those rights aren't worth anything.. they become liabilities and are no longer assets. There isn't going to be much interest in buying a liability lol.

 

[BigRedPimp]

I think we are full share in the next month or two. What bothers me, is we paid in a lot of money for that share, which is in all likelihood worth less. It's like buying a stock on credit margin, and making installment payments, all while the stock price goes down (loss of principal) and the stock also issues new shares (diluting your share).

When ESPN cannot make the payments on their contracts, they may simply default, or more likely, the contracts will be sold off to bidders at a big discount.

What is interesting to me, is to see how those contracts are valued. It's essentially a right to televise a series of sporting events and sell the advertising for those events. If the costs are greater than the potential ad revenue, then those rights aren't worth anything.. they become liabilities and are no longer assets. There isn't going to be much interest in buying a liability lol.

Last paragraph is exactly my point. When NU joined our "entry fee" was priced accordingly based off data the conference had at the time. They had a good sense of how much they could get come renegotiation and that was accounted for in our entry fee. However, the game is changing so the return we expected could be much lower. Will be curious to see how this plays out. Will a decrease happen? If so, how will conference guarantee to NU, etc?

 

[otismotis08]

These two turd burglars made the cut?

Hard to believe. They are awful.

 

[kerpal_68]

I used to watch espn daily a couple hours a day. I couldn't tell you the last time I turned ESPN on.

 

[chicolby]

A lot of things to address here.

1) The changing way that people consume media is a big part in this. People used to rely on ESPN to get updates, scores, stats and highlights. That's not required any longer. Even if their program was exactly the same, people still wouldn't tune in at the frequency they used to.

2) The contracts ESPN won to get broadcasting rights are killing them due to the amount of people cutting cable. Advertising rates and the amounts ESPN charged cable companies are getting decimated because of this issue.

3) Cutting 100 on-air personalities is a temporary band-aid to this problem, but it comes nowhere near what ultimately will be required to operate successfully again.

4) The people (or at least one) who doesn't want women or minorities in the booths... I assume you are a white man. It is easy to want to see someone you relate with giving you the news or play-by-play. How do you think women or people of color feel when the only voices they hear and people they see are white men? This is not strictly about appealing to the white man, and I suggest you see that the world is not made of only white men. This is the world we all live in and sometimes that requires you to be exposed to different types of people from time to time.

 

[PeliniTheCrutch]

4) The people (or at least one) who doesn't want women or minorities in the booths... I assume you are a white man. It is easy to want to see someone you relate with giving you the news or play-by-play. How do you think women or people of color feel when the only voices they hear and people they see are white men? This is not strictly about appealing to the white man, and I suggest you see that the world is not made of only white men. This is the world we all live in and sometimes that requires you to be exposed to different types of people from time to time.

Nobody in the world watching a football game wants a woman doing play-by-play in the booth. Nobody.

 

[schuele]

A lot of things to address here.

2) The contracts ESPN won to get broadcasting rights are killing them due to the amount of people cutting cable. Advertising rates and the amounts ESPN charged cable companies are getting decimated because of this issue.

True, and the people cutting cable haven't necessarily stopped watching. Since there's a lot of talk about political correctness in this thread, I think there's one point on which we can all agree:

When you answer a survey as to why you dropped cable, it's definitely not politically correct to say, "Well, I still watch 90% of what I really want to watch, but now me and three of my buddies are splitting the tab and using one password."

 

[Suvey101885]

They should have fired Sportscenter

 

[big red22]

Nobody in the world watching a football game wants a woman doing play-by-play in the booth. Nobody.

I really don't care one way or the other... Hell I'd take Beth Mowins and Pam Ward over Ed Cunningham

 

[jflores]

I dislike most everything ESPN besides the actual game broadcasts. Long, long ago when ESPN started messing with Sportscenter I stopped watching. They used to showcase the sport that was having the biggest event on any given day. So, if it was college football season that would mean that college football would headline Sportscenter that day. On Sunday, it would be NFL. If it was NBA playoffs time then NBA would get the lead. MLB playoffs? MLB lead the show. Then, they'd show all the scores and highlights from that one sport before they'd move on to the next one. It made perfect sense. Today? There is no sense. You show highlights from one game of one sport and then move to another sport. You never know when they are going. And that is their plan. To make you watch that crap all day. Not going to do it.

Don't get me started with reality programming. It's not reality. Just scripted made up stuff. I couldn't care less about someone's personal life or their causes. Sports talk? Bor-ring! I really don't care what someone else thinks of sports. Fantasy sports? Waste-O-Time. Instead of wasting time with fake leagues I'd rather watch REAL GAMES.

What has changed? The internet. Even espn.com has got overblown with crap. I just want to see scheduling, the standings, links to teams and statistics. Limit the human interest stories and eff social media.

"I just want to see scheduling, the standings, links to teams and statistics. Limit the human interest stories and eff social media."

A basic Web truth, if you don't like the content, don't click on it. Click the other ones.

ESPN has pages for all those.

They would be dumb to dump the rest for *only* those. They can accommodate both on the Web rather easily.

 

[PeliniTheCrutch]

I really don't care one way or the other... Hell I'd take Beth Mowins and Pam Ward over Ed Cunningham

Cunningham is a woman.

 

[bigboxes]

A basic Web truth, if you don't like the content, don't click on it.

I don't. However, just telling me "If you don't like it, don't do it." is not very helpful in this context. We are just expressing our opinions and I can't see a right or wrong here. Maybe ESPN has retained the staff that reads our comments and makes better business decisions based on that feedback. I know that ESPN (Disney) creates content for clicks. I'm just stating why I've tuned out of much of what they have to offer.

 

[ThrowBones92]

I get that ESPN is trying to go more digital and probably try and hire younger people, but that is just complete **** for guys like Crabtree, McMurphy and now Kannel. I haven't been able to watch ESPN longer than 25 minutes anymore without getting bombarded with political sports hot takes.

FOX Sports needs to get on top of this immediately. I recently switched my viewing habits from ESPN to FOX in the past year. Content is getting better and better, on-air personalities are good and they give me what I want: SPORTS. I'd also add that the FOX Sports app has been by and far the best addition to my phone. I hope FOX picks up some of these guys because they produce good content.

the R&K Show was my jam. I loved their chemistry. I would laugh all afternoon. I'm sure Rusillo is pissed. He just lost a guy who added huge value to his show. Dropping Kanell is a mistake, in my opinion. They were hilarious and also level headed. Really enjoyed that show. Probably won't turn it on for a while as it won't be the same.

 

[ThrowBones92]

R&K ruled, and they couldn't have been paying K that much. They screwed the pooch on that one. That was probably their best show next to PTI.

Totally agree. Some number cruncher got his head buried in a line of data and didn't realize the mistake he was making.

 

[TheBeav815]

I suspect it has way more to do with the rising tide of competitors to traditional cable packages and the mind-numbing payouts for the rights to sporting events than it does with them "bein' too damn political all the time!" Part of me wonders what that's supposed to mean, but more of me is afraid to ask.

With the increase in DVR and ways to watch that don't involve being hostage to the commercials, I suspect it's getting harder to convince advertisers to put up the astronomical sums ESPN would need to fulfill these multi-million dollar contracts they have all over the place. I suspect that's also hurting ratings and making it harder to quantify how many eyeballs actually watched something they created and when.

It would seem they made broadcast deals with the idea in mind that "larger subscriber base...something something something...profit" and it's not playing out that way. For my part, I watch ESPN/BTN during football season and that's it. I have DirecTV on in the fall, then I shut it off after football season, turn it on for the Spring Game and the draft, then shut it off again over the summer until CFB season.

I listen to ESPN radio in the car during football season. That's it. I do think they overreached with their bet on how much people want to tune in for sports pundits. There is a ton of competition in the space for who you wanna listen to on whatever the couple big sports stories are for the day, or week.

 

[jflores]

I don't. However, just telling me "If you don't like it, don't do it." is not very helpful in this context. We are just expressing our opinions and I can't see a right or wrong here. Maybe ESPN has retained the staff that reads our comments and makes better business decisions based on that feedback. I know that ESPN (Disney) creates content for clicks. I'm just stating why I've tuned out of much of what they have to offer.

In the context of the Web page, which you singled out, complaints about "they have too much content I don't like" isn't as valid a concern as it would be in say...the Ann Coulter at Berkeley event or even in the case of Baseball Weekly instead of another locker room gossip show.

In the latter, the venues have to push or suppress content to make room for other content.

On a web page, there are no such restrictions. You can have your stats and your locker room gossip, and assuming you have a moderately competent web design team, everyone can get what they like without it turning into a flame war.

 

[jflores]

I suspect it has way more to do with the rising tide of competitors to traditional cable packages and the mind-numbing payouts for the rights to sporting events than it does with them "bein' too damn political all the time!" Part of me wonders what that's supposed to mean, but more of me is afraid to ask.

With the increase in DVR and ways to watch that don't involve being hostage to the commercials, I suspect it's getting harder to convince advertisers to put up the astronomical sums ESPN would need to fulfill these multi-million dollar contracts they have all over the place. I suspect that's also hurting ratings and making it harder to quantify how many eyeballs actually watched something they created and when.

It would seem they made broadcast deals with the idea in mind that "larger subscriber base...something something something...profit" and it's not playing out that way. For my part, I watch ESPN/BTN during football season and that's it. I have DirecTV on in the fall, then I shut it off after football season, turn it on for the Spring Game and the draft, then shut it off again over the summer until CFB season.

I listen to ESPN radio in the car during football season. That's it. I do think they overreached with their bet on how much people want to tune in for sports pundits. There is a ton of competition in the space for who you wanna listen to on whatever the couple big sports stories are for the day, or week.

It just depends on what's being reported. The latest story I saw is a report that Kaepernick is being "blackballed". Which is probably getting a lot of cheers from the "sports is too political" crowd. In this case the politics align, and they don't mind the story.

Stories from a year ago that might have reported on locker room gossip that Kaepernick generated a decent amount of support from African American players, however would not.

In general, I think folks are more comfortable cheering more or a less a blank slate on, rather than figure out what it means if their favorite player is an Obama guy and they are not, or whatever. In the present political environment, taking priding in not consorting with the enemy is at an all-time high.

 

[jflores]

I think we are full share in the next month or two. What bothers me, is we paid in a lot of money for that share, which is in all likelihood worth less. It's like buying a stock on credit margin, and making installment payments, all while the stock price goes down (loss of principal) and the stock also issues new shares (diluting your share).

When ESPN cannot make the payments on their contracts, they may simply default, or more likely, the contracts will be sold off to bidders at a big discount.

What is interesting to me, is to see how those contracts are valued. It's essentially a right to televise a series of sporting events and sell the advertising for those events. If the costs are greater than the potential ad revenue, then those rights aren't worth anything.. they become liabilities and are no longer assets. There isn't going to be much interest in buying a liability lol.

Well in the normal market, if an investor takes a bath, we generally just tell the investor to make a better choice next time.

Until too many investors get upset, and then Uncle Sugar checks in.

 

[jflores]

more to chew on

https://www.si.com/extra-mustard/2017/04/27/espn-layoffs-nfl-draft-prop-bets

 

[maplesyrup95]

The Pac-12 Network is not partnered with Fox. The Pac-12 Network is completely owned by the conference where Fox own 49% of the BTN. This is part of the reason the Pac-12 Network has had a hard time getting into cable packages.

Yes the conference may own their own network, but FOX Sports has split-media rights for PAC-12 and Big 12 games. I do understand that ESPN still rules college football, though.

 

[chicolby]

If you didn't read all the news about this - don't be confused by making cuts and changes to the media landscape as a sign that ESPN's ship is sinking. They are still making money, just not as much as before. They see the tide turning and they are getting out in front of it. I don't believe ESPN has any leverage to renegotiate TV deals, although I would expect that to change when the next contract comes around.

 

[Pennsyhusker]

Three things:

1. I hate ESPN, so whatever hurts them, I favor.
2. I hope the failure of ESPN somehow hurts Iowa
3. Iowa sucks

 

[Dean Pope]

A lot of things to address here.

2) The contracts ESPN won to get broadcasting rights are killing them due to the amount of people cutting cable. Advertising rates and the amounts ESPN charged cable companies are getting decimated because of this issue.

The heart of the matter is ESPN's demand to be paid per household rather than as part of a package like every other network. That's why ESPN is getting hit so hard by cord cutters. A total lack of vision by the network while corporate greed was the entire focus.

 

[jlb321]

not sure why so many are delighting in this ....

as some have mentioned there is a trickle down effect

ESPN and other cable franchises are less valuable >>> rights to carry sports .. ie football are negotiated for less >>> Conferences are paid less for their TV rights >>> conference teams are paid less >> there is wider gap between programs like OSU, Michigan, Texas and programs like Iowa and Nebraska

 

[Wasker77]

I'm not sure that ESPN is losing a ton of viewers

where they are getting killed is all the alternative ways to have access to TV shows

5-10 years ago people who had no interest in sports had to pay for a cable package that included ESPN in order to have access to all the other channels that they valued ... that scenario and business model is now on the way out .. perhaps ESPN was late to react

it was a genius business model .... bundling packages so that people with no interest in sports still had to pay for the package that included ESPN ... that model is now becoming obsolete and ESPN is reacting accordingly

I think they are losing viewers. 20 years ago I watched and listened to ESPN a lot. Now I only watch games. I don't watch any of their shows. I can get all the sports news I want on my Iphone