PDA

View Full Version : ESPN Boycott - well sorta, kinda.



westofyou
05-01-2010, 11:18 PM
Valid points.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/giants/detail?&entry_id=62625



I am boycotting ESPN "Sunday Night Baseball" tomorrow

I'm not one to call for boycotts. I'm just telling you what I'm doing.

Tomorrow night, the New York Mets will appear on "Sunday Night Baseball" for the third consecutive week. Next week it will be the Yankees, who opened the series and season April 4 against the Red Sox.

On May 16, ESPN takes a breather from its courtship with New York to show the Phillies at Brewers. Maybe that's just so everyone can be rested up for the May 23 Yankees-Mets game on "Sunday Night Baseball." It's time for Major League Baseball to grow a pair and tell ESPN, "Enough." There is baseball outside the Metropolis and the Hub.

Yes yes yes. ESPN pays a lot of money for the rights. All the teams share that money equally. It's good for the Oakland A's bottom line if incessant Yankees and Mets coverage drives ratings up. I'm a capitalist. I want ESPN to make money. Heck, my company owns a huge chunk of ESPN. What's good for the network is good for the Chronicle.

But at some point, it get ridiculous, and three Mets games in three weeks is ridiculous.

Fix it.

Ghosts of 1990
05-02-2010, 12:21 AM
I couldn't have said it better myself

Unassisted
05-02-2010, 12:21 AM
It's time for Major League Baseball to grow a pair and tell ESPN, "Enough." There is baseball outside the Metropolis and the Hub.And ESPN will reply "We paid umpteen million dollars for the rights to your sport. The contract Commissioner Bud signed entitles us to show any game that we damn well please. An April and May, we choose to show games from the nation's largest television market, the home of your sport's defending champions. Was there anything else you wanted to discuss?"

KronoRed
05-02-2010, 12:41 AM
Does anything think MLB cares? showing the big guys is what they like, pretending teams like the Reds, Pirates and Royals don't exist is good.

paintmered
05-02-2010, 01:25 AM
New York/Boston/LA bring the highest ratings nationwide. It's as simple as that.

TheNext44
05-02-2010, 02:08 AM
New York/Boston/LA bring the highest ratings nationwide. It's as simple as that.

But it is very short sighted for MLB to allow ESPN and FOX along these ways. Similar to how the SportsChannel contract stifled NHL growth at the expense of making more short term cash for the league. The made millions, but lost billions in the long term.

This mentality, combined with no real action taken to curtail the payroll divide, will only make that divide wider and eventually shrink MLB's overall audience. Fans from Middle America will lose interest in baseball as a sport if this trend continues. MLB needs to start promoting all of it's teams or else it will be left with a coastal only league.

When I was kid, every team, including the expansion Mariners and Blue Jays, were on the NBC Saturday game of the week at some point each year. The NY/LA teams were on a bit more, but every team got national attention at least once a year. It was because of these games, that I learned of other players and franchises, and got a sense of the history of the game. That is crucial if the league wants to grow its fanbase, not shrink it.

The owners will make more money for awhile showing only NY/LA teams on national broadcasts, but if this continues over the next decade or longer, eventually baseball will become as popular as Hockey.

Redsfaithful
05-02-2010, 03:25 AM
Yet another area where the NFL has it figured out and MLB does not.

GAC
05-02-2010, 06:01 AM
I pretty much boycott ESPN altogether. I go there on occasion for stats only.

nate
05-02-2010, 07:26 AM
ESPN hasn't been the same since George Grande left.

:cool:

BCubb2003
05-02-2010, 08:00 AM
Remember, the first word in ESPN is Entertainment. The MLB Network does seem to have a healthier attitude toward the other teams, giving them their due.

reds1869
05-02-2010, 08:51 AM
Remember, the first word in ESPN is Entertainment. The MLB Network does seem to have a healthier attitude toward the other teams, giving them their due.

Quick Pitch is already a firmly entrenched part of my morning routine. I absolutely love the MLB Network.

thatcoolguy_22
05-02-2010, 09:16 AM
The Reds should pay a network to air all of their games nationwide. Do this for a decade and build a fanbase a la WGN and the Cubs. Those fans are nationwide and that's the only reason I can think of that someone from Montana would ever become a fan of that franchise.

As far as espn goes, show whoever they want. There are a lot other ways to watch a ball game today. I'm not reliant on the 3 nationally aired games a week to watch the Reds any longer.

lollipopcurve
05-02-2010, 09:21 AM
This is nothing new. The disease has simply progressed. I have avoided that network as much as possible for years now due to their aggrandizing of just a very few teams and a select few stars, and their abandonment of what I find interesting and inspiring in sports in favor of a Hollywoodlike slavering worship of personality.

Hoosier Red
05-02-2010, 09:48 AM
Yet another area where the NFL has it figured out and MLB does not.

I'm curious why you say that. The games of the week almost always feature one of Cowboys, Jets, Giants, Patriots, Pittsburgh, Indianapolis or Chicago.

Sure, Pittsburgh and Indianapolis are small markets but it's not like they're brought on to be balance to the big market teams. They're brought on to get ratings.

I looked at Sunday Night Football's schedule for next year and 14-18 games feature one of those teams. Of the ones that don't, 2 involve the Vikings, one is Philadelphia at San Francisco(crappy week I'm guessing) and the last week San Diego at the Bengals which might get flexed out.

As soon as the A's, Reds, Royals, Pirates and Marlins prove that they will bring eyeballs to the set, ESPN will be happy to put them on.

westofyou
05-02-2010, 09:52 AM
The Reds should pay a network to air all of their games nationwide. Do this for a decade and build a fanbase a la WGN and the Cubs. Those fans are nationwide and that's the only reason I can think of that someone from Montana would ever become a fan of that franchise.


Umm 30 years too late.

Yachtzee
05-02-2010, 11:49 AM
But it is very short sighted for MLB to allow ESPN and FOX along these ways. Similar to how the SportsChannel contract stifled NHL growth at the expense of making more short term cash for the league. The made millions, but lost billions in the long term.

This mentality, combined with no real action taken to curtail the payroll divide, will only make that divide wider and eventually shrink MLB's overall audience. Fans from Middle America will lose interest in baseball as a sport if this trend continues. MLB needs to start promoting all of it's teams or else it will be left with a coastal only league.

When I was kid, every team, including the expansion Mariners and Blue Jays, were on the NBC Saturday game of the week at some point each year. The NY/LA teams were on a bit more, but every team got national attention at least once a year. It was because of these games, that I learned of other players and franchises, and got a sense of the history of the game. That is crucial if the league wants to grow its fanbase, not shrink it.

The owners will make more money for awhile showing only NY/LA teams on national broadcasts, but if this continues over the next decade or longer, eventually baseball will become as popular as Hockey.

Exactamundo. When it comes to baseball, ESPN has evolved over the years into something akin to a NY/Boston superstation. It may be great for ratings in the Northeast, but it just drives away fans of teams in other markets. The top ten most populous states in the country are 1. California; 2. Texas; 3. New York; 4. Florida; 5. Illinois; 6. Pennsylvania; 7. Ohio; 8. Michigan; 9. Georgia; and 10. North Carolina. While the Northeast contains other states with decent populations, that doesn't change the fact that, by focusing so much attention on NY/NJ and Mass., ESPN is pretty much punting on attracting viewers from places like Texas, Illinois, a significant portion of PA, Ohio, Michigan, Georgia, and North Carolina (ESPN coverage of West Coast games is of course determined by the later start times out there). Those are all places with a lot of baseball fans who might not exactly be interested in the Yankees, Mets or Red Sox.

I agree that it hurts baseball, a lot, to have one of its major media outlets so far geared toward one part of the country. Short-term ratings wins do not necessarily equate to what is best for the game. If someone like Fox decided to launch a nationwide sports network to compete with ESPN, I think they would do well in their baseball coverage to work on gaining strong ratings in those markets outside the NY/Boston area.

Yachtzee
05-02-2010, 11:52 AM
I'm curious why you say that. The games of the week almost always feature one of Cowboys, Jets, Giants, Patriots, Pittsburgh, Indianapolis or Chicago.

Sure, Pittsburgh and Indianapolis are small markets but it's not like they're brought on to be balance to the big market teams. They're brought on to get ratings.

I looked at Sunday Night Football's schedule for next year and 14-18 games feature one of those teams. Of the ones that don't, 2 involve the Vikings, one is Philadelphia at San Francisco(crappy week I'm guessing) and the last week San Diego at the Bengals which might get flexed out.

As soon as the A's, Reds, Royals, Pirates and Marlins prove that they will bring eyeballs to the set, ESPN will be happy to put them on.

Prime time football schedules are usually set to include play-off teams from the year before. Teams that make the playoffs regularly get more prime-time games. When the Bengals have made the playoffs, they've gotten more prime-time games, and if they could manage to make them two years in a row, I suspect you might see them on Sunday Night more than once.

Chip R
05-02-2010, 11:52 AM
I barely watch ESPN except for ESPNU. I do like their website.

RBA
05-02-2010, 11:53 AM
Umm 30 years too late.

Yup, current MLB rules don't allow it anymore. The teams that still do it are grandfathered into it. And they are gradually weening them off it.

Yachtzee
05-02-2010, 12:08 PM
Yup, current MLB rules don't allow it anymore. The teams that still do it are grandfathered into it. And they are gradually weening them off it.

Which teams still have the support of a superstation behind them? TBS has pretty much divorced themselves from a strictly Braves-based schedule (Braves are now on Turner South for much of their schedule, no?). Even WGN splits games between the Cubs and White Sox.

Caseyfan21
05-02-2010, 01:31 PM
I could care less what games ESPN shows. If you don't want to watch the game then turn the TV station to something else. I have the Extra Innings package and I get every Reds game and most nights that is exactly what I watch. What ESPN chooses to show is up to them but I won't lose any sleep over it or get worked up about it.

reds1869
05-02-2010, 01:36 PM
I could care less what games ESPN shows. If you don't want to watch the game then turn the TV station to something else. I have the Extra Innings package and I get every Reds game and most nights that is exactly what I watch. What ESPN chooses to show is up to them but I won't lose any sleep over it or get worked up about it.

The thing is, it is harmful to the long term health of the game for the Yanks and Sox to be shown repeatedly. As one who works with kids I can tell you many of them support whatever the media tells them to, be it music, movies or sports. A shockingly high number of kids in Cincinnati--if they even watch baseball--support one of the big market teams and when asked why basically say "they're always on." Some of it is simply kids being frontrunners, but a lot of it is ESPN telling them who to support. If we lose the kids we lose an entire generation of fans.

Caseyfan21
05-02-2010, 02:18 PM
The thing is, it is harmful to the long term health of the game for the Yanks and Sox to be shown repeatedly. As one who works with kids I can tell you many of them support whatever the media tells them to, be it music, movies or sports. A shockingly high number of kids in Cincinnati--if they even watch baseball--support one of the big market teams and when asked why basically say "they're always on." Some of it is simply kids being frontrunners, but a lot of it is ESPN telling them who to support. If we lose the kids we lose an entire generation of fans.

I can understand what you're saying, and it could be true in many situations, but I think ultimately a team builds its biggest fans from generation to generation. If a kid grows up in a home where the parents are Reds fans if they become a baseball fan odds are they will support the Reds. I think a lot of the younger members on this site are proof of that. I know I became a Reds fan because my dad was and the game was always on and I grew up going to games.

And when you talk about Cincinnati kids saying the Yankees or Sox are "always on," how can they not be watching the Reds? FSN shows virtually every Reds game in the viewing area. A kid growing up in Nebraska or whatever state rooting for the Yankees or Sox I can understand but not Cincinnati. I can see how some kids grow up only watching ESPN so I guess I could understand that somewhat.

Ultimately, it just comes down to winning. If the Reds win, the city of Cincinnati embraces them and everyone suddenly becomes a fan. Growing up in a suburb of Cincinnati, if the Reds were winning everyone was suddenly a fan but if the Reds were struggling then people bolted for other teams. If ESPN was around in the 1970's, they could have shown all Yankee and Sox games and no one in Cincinnati would have supported them because the Reds were winning.

westofyou
05-02-2010, 03:04 PM
Ultimately, it just comes down to winning.

That's not completely true, otherwise there wouldn't be all those Cubs fans in the stands at the GAB, most of those are folks who were weaned on WGN in the 80's, whilst Marge and crew took a stipend from the Braves and Cubs every year, and every year the Reds once giant region wide market share shrank. Mostly because they were not exposed as well as those teams were.

And the same thing is happening with ESPN's current coverage, they are on every providers list of sports shows offered, and they saturate the market with a select group and shrink the market of many others.

Redsfaithful
05-02-2010, 06:39 PM
I'm curious why you say that. The games of the week almost always feature one of Cowboys, Jets, Giants, Patriots, Pittsburgh, Indianapolis or Chicago.

Sure, Pittsburgh and Indianapolis are small markets but it's not like they're brought on to be balance to the big market teams. They're brought on to get ratings.

How many years in a row would the Pirates have to be good before they were consistently on Sunday night baseball? I'm guessing it wouldn't ever happen. Now contrast that with the Steelers and Colts.

Plus the Mets have been on three Sundays in a row? That would be like putting Tampa Bay or the Detroit Lions on Sunday nights for the first three weeks of the NFL seasons, given last year's results.

CarolinaRedleg
05-02-2010, 08:35 PM
I haven't watched Sunday Night Yankees-Red Sox-Dodgers-Mets-Cardinals-sCrubs Baseball in I don't know how long. I'm pretty much in the "If it's not the Reds on my TV, I could give a crap" camp.

Hoosier Red
05-02-2010, 09:09 PM
How many years in a row would the Pirates have to be good before they were consistently on Sunday night baseball? I'm guessing it wouldn't ever happen. Now contrast that with the Steelers and Colts.

Plus the Mets have been on three Sundays in a row? That would be like putting Tampa Bay or the Detroit Lions on Sunday nights for the first three weeks of the NFL seasons, given last year's results.

How many years would the Pirates have to be good before people cared? It's not like the Phillies were a staple on Sunday Night Baseball before they got good.

It's a circular argument. The NFL creates a level playing field but they still reward those who they think will bring the most eyeballs to the screen. I'd dare say if the Pirates had won two world championships in the past 5 years, and had a national audience, they'd be on Sunday Night Baseball a fair amount.

REDblooded
05-02-2010, 09:32 PM
I'm all aboard this boycott of sorts... I'll purposefully tune in for 10-15 minutes from here on out whenever it's not a NY/NY/Bos game...

Always Red
05-02-2010, 09:41 PM
...The disease has simply progressed. I have avoided that network as much as possible for years now due to their aggrandizing of just a very few teams and a select few stars, and their abandonment of what I find interesting and inspiring in sports in favor of a Hollywoodlike slavering worship of personality.

I just love the way this reads. My goal is to use "slavering" in a sentence tomorrow. :beerme:

Ron Madden
05-02-2010, 09:42 PM
I'm watching the Phillies pound the Mets right now.

I can't help it.... I love to watch Baseball.

Captain Hook
05-02-2010, 09:46 PM
I'm watching the Phillies pound the Mets right now.

I can't help it.... I love to watch Baseball.

Me to.

How do you think RZ would've reacted if a Reds pitcher walked the 47 Yr. old Jamie Moyer with the bases loaded only to give up a HR to the next batter?

mth123
05-02-2010, 09:48 PM
Me to.

How do you think RZ would've reacted if a Reds pitcher walked the 47 Yr. old Jamie Moyer with the bases loaded only to give up a HR to the next batter?

If it was Johan Santana I'd give him a pass.

Ron Madden
05-02-2010, 09:53 PM
Me to.

How do you think RZ would've reacted if a Reds pitcher walked the 47 Yr. old Jamie Moyer with the bases loaded only to give up a HR to the next batter?

Some of us would've been pretty outraged while some others would be singing Kum Ba Yah.

;)