- Aug 21, 2005
- 8,139
- 88
uh suuure
ESPN needs to be held accountable for things
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by CP1708,
- Start date
uh suuure
- Nov 11, 2007
- 18,274
- 26,915
Read what I posted on page 3.
- Aug 21, 2005
- 8,139
- 88
no thanks
- Nov 11, 2007
- 18,274
- 26,915
Uhh...ok?
DeadsetAce
Supporter
- May 31, 2004
- 112,012
- 58,834
- Nov 9, 2007
- 6,376
- 433
Originally Posted by CP1708
Durden, I certainly don't speak for everyone, but I want a channel/corporation to offer me my sports with no agenda. I know they aren't robots or any of that, but if they get paid to cover a sport, then I want them to report news, or analyze situations based on what's happening or happened, and not just pick and choose based on what might help or hurt them later on down the line.
They were all over the Kobe trial, he still gives interviews to ESPN, why wouldn't Ben? No reason to try and protect anything when all it really does is make it worse, much like the Nike/Bron dunk tapes.
And for those that say just turn the channel, it works like this, if I tell you a Laker rumor/opinion, you may choose to not believe it as I am a fan. But if a Nuggets fan tells you the same thing, you might listen to that person as they have nothing at stake in the team. Sound reasonable right?
Well, if I want to know what's up with my Lakers, I can head to fan sites, message boards, they're .com, whatever, but if I want an unbiased opionion, and an analytical look at them, where do I need to go? Should be ESPN right? But if they aren't covering their end of the bargain, we as sports fans are screwed. I really truly don't need to see 14 reporters outside Brett Favre's house for 7 days straight, to tell me that he's throwing a football with his kids, and that they think, that a neighbor thinks, that his wife said, that he might come back.
Does that sort of show what it is that we as sports fans are lookin for? Give us the "real" news, give us the highlights, give us the stats, give us the games and coverage, give some opinions from "experts" and that's it. No exposes, or rehashing the rehashed or a tired story, or any of that other agenda stuff they are pulling nowadays.
Theyre reporting what they think its worthwhile news. If the Ben situation came back as a fasle report, and they had been discussing it on their programs theywould be blasted here for talking about "non-news". They simply can not win. They were roasted for the Owens and Isiah Thomas "suicide"attempts, which turned out to be false. I just think theyre covering themselves with this story and waiting till theyre comofortable enough with the sourcesto cover it.
You can tell from the tone of voice of the sportscasters and other people that even theyre tired of covering Favre. Like it or not, it has become news. HateFavre for creating all these situations, not ESPN for simply covering it. Does ESPN go beyond what they need to do with coverage? Yes, they do but thats justa minor flaw and not a reason to hate the company.
To comment on your last paragraph, the consumer has always been asking for more from ESPN. Since the day the company began to now, it is constantly evolvingand giving its consumers what they want. They made ESPN2 to initially cover "different" sporting events because they realized that people wereinterested in seeing beach volleyball, roller blading, skiing, beach workouts, etc. When that era of extreme sports faded they simply turned it into anothersports channel to feature games and shows. People loved seeing old games so ESPN Classic was created to televise games from other eras. There was a time whenthe consumer hated waiting till the 6 pm sportscenter for their news so ESPN created ESPNews and give its fans all day coverage of highlights and scores andeventually ESPNU for college sports. There has always been a demand for something at ESPN and theyve always given their consumer what they wanted.
The problem is that now that there are so many choices, youre left with alllll these programming time slots and very little information to fill it in. Highlights arent more than a minute long, and there simply isnt enough time to fill an entire show with that kind of format. Theyre almost FORCED to coverthings too much to fill time.
I wont mention it too much, but the fact that you can get sports news from ANYWHERE now is leading to the over saturation of certain topics. Its not ESPNsfault you hear about Favre/Pacman/TO from them, Yahoo, AOL, Fantasy Sites, blogs.
Face it, the Internet is ruining sports as we loved it.
- Mar 12, 2004
- 16,410
- 23,879
im sure its been posted several times already but the simple explanation is because Ben is white
- Jan 13, 2001
- 6,597
- 10
go away
- Feb 6, 2007
- 76,449
- 36,454
Originally Posted by Durden7
Originally Posted by CP1708
Durden, I certainly don't speak for everyone, but I want a channel/corporation to offer me my sports with no agenda. I know they aren't robots or any of that, but if they get paid to cover a sport, then I want them to report news, or analyze situations based on what's happening or happened, and not just pick and choose based on what might help or hurt them later on down the line.
They were all over the Kobe trial, he still gives interviews to ESPN, why wouldn't Ben? No reason to try and protect anything when all it really does is make it worse, much like the Nike/Bron dunk tapes.
And for those that say just turn the channel, it works like this, if I tell you a Laker rumor/opinion, you may choose to not believe it as I am a fan. But if a Nuggets fan tells you the same thing, you might listen to that person as they have nothing at stake in the team. Sound reasonable right?
Well, if I want to know what's up with my Lakers, I can head to fan sites, message boards, they're .com, whatever, but if I want an unbiased opionion, and an analytical look at them, where do I need to go? Should be ESPN right? But if they aren't covering their end of the bargain, we as sports fans are screwed. I really truly don't need to see 14 reporters outside Brett Favre's house for 7 days straight, to tell me that he's throwing a football with his kids, and that they think, that a neighbor thinks, that his wife said, that he might come back.
Does that sort of show what it is that we as sports fans are lookin for? Give us the "real" news, give us the highlights, give us the stats, give us the games and coverage, give some opinions from "experts" and that's it. No exposes, or rehashing the rehashed or a tired story, or any of that other agenda stuff they are pulling nowadays.
Theyre reporting what they think its worthwhile news. If the Ben situation came back as a fasle report, and they had been discussing it on their programs they would be blasted here for talking about "non-news". They simply can not win. They were roasted for the Owens and Isiah Thomas "suicide" attempts, which turned out to be false. I just think theyre covering themselves with this story and waiting till theyre comofortable enough with the sources to cover it.
You can tell from the tone of voice of the sportscasters and other people that even theyre tired of covering Favre. Like it or not, it has become news. Hate Favre for creating all these situations, not ESPN for simply covering it. Does ESPN go beyond what they need to do with coverage? Yes, they do but thats just a minor flaw and not a reason to hate the company.
To comment on your last paragraph, the consumer has always been asking for more from ESPN. Since the day the company began to now, it is constantly evolving and giving its consumers what they want. They made ESPN2 to initially cover "different" sporting events because they realized that people were interested in seeing beach volleyball, roller blading, skiing, beach workouts, etc. When that era of extreme sports faded they simply turned it into another sports channel to feature games and shows. People loved seeing old games so ESPN Classic was created to televise games from other eras. There was a time when the consumer hated waiting till the 6 pm sportscenter for their news so ESPN created ESPNews and give its fans all day coverage of highlights and scores and eventually ESPNU for college sports. There has always been a demand for something at ESPN and theyve always given their consumer what they wanted.
The problem is that now that there are so many choices, youre left with alllll these programming time slots and very little information to fill it in. Highlights arent more than a minute long, and there simply isnt enough time to fill an entire show with that kind of format. Theyre almost FORCED to cover things too much to fill time.
I wont mention it too much, but the fact that you can get sports news from ANYWHERE now is leading to the over saturation of certain topics. Its not ESPNs fault you hear about Favre/Pacman/TO from them, Yahoo, AOL, Fantasy Sites, blogs.
Face it, the Internet is ruining sports as we loved it.
Hey, I can agree with a lot of what you just said, and the expanding of the market.com's and such are another product of that and what not, sure I getthat. But you still can't deny that at some level, they have an agenda on certain teams/players/markets, whatever. Be it Pacman, or USC football, or theRed Sox/Yankees rivalry, or focing Tood McShay down our throats
And I see the problem getting worse, not better. And sure, maybe the net is at some fault, on some level, but it's not my fault that Chris Mort still hasa job, or Peter Gammons, or other clowns of that ilk.
- Mar 12, 2004
- 16,410
- 23,879
nahhh homie niketalk is my life I wont be goin anywhere, your homerism should go thoughOriginally Posted by Craftsy21
go away
- Aug 21, 2005
- 8,139
- 88
- Jan 13, 2001
- 6,597
- 10
You're right - ESPN is always holding the black man down.. they never go out of their way to hype up black players or anything. Bunch ofracists.Originally Posted by DontStepOnMyShoes
nahhh homie niketalk is my life I wont be goin anywhere, your homerism should go thoughOriginally Posted by Craftsy21
go away
- Mar 12, 2004
- 16,410
- 23,879
Originally Posted by Craftsy21
You're right - ESPN is always holding the black man down.. they never go out of their way to hype up black players or anything. Bunch of racists.Originally Posted by DontStepOnMyShoes
nahhh homie niketalk is my life I wont be goin anywhere, your homerism should go thoughOriginally Posted by Craftsy21
go away
yup ur exactly right, thats what I said verbatim..id also like to ad that the only reason they hired stuart scott is to make all black people look likebuffoons
- Feb 6, 2007
- 76,449
- 36,454
If ESPN racist, how you explain LeBron?
- Aug 21, 2005
- 8,139
- 88
Originally Posted by Stringer Bell 32
- Jan 13, 2001
- 6,597
- 10
Originally Posted by DontStepOnMyShoes
Originally Posted by Craftsy21
You're right - ESPN is always holding the black man down.. they never go out of their way to hype up black players or anything. Bunch of racists.Originally Posted by DontStepOnMyShoes
nahhh homie niketalk is my life I wont be goin anywhere, your homerism should go thoughOriginally Posted by Craftsy21
go away
yup ur exactly right, thats what I said verbatim..id also like to ad that the only reason they hired stuart scott is to make all black people look like buffoons
If you'd read this thread, you'd understand why they aren't covering the Big Ben story... and that it has nothing to do with race. The only colorESPN cares about is green.
- Jul 14, 2003
- 7,949
- 5,122
I used to dig ESPNEWS but now it's FreeCreditReport.com, Gieco, and Progressive Insurance programming with sports mixed in when they have time.
- Aug 21, 2005
- 8,139
- 88
all fine commercials though, you can't deny that
- Mar 12, 2004
- 16,410
- 23,879
the truth of the matter is Im pretty much a hypocrite and pretty closed minded and dont care to read 6 pages of method man-esque posts I read whatI wanna read and make my own opinions based off that right or wrong or however ridiculous it is, its worked pretty well for 27 yrs and imma roll withitOriginally Posted by Craftsy21
Originally Posted by DontStepOnMyShoes
Originally Posted by Craftsy21
You're right - ESPN is always holding the black man down.. they never go out of their way to hype up black players or anything. Bunch of racists.Originally Posted by DontStepOnMyShoes
nahhh homie niketalk is my life I wont be goin anywhere, your homerism should go thoughOriginally Posted by Craftsy21
go away
yup ur exactly right, thats what I said verbatim..id also like to ad that the only reason they hired stuart scott is to make all black people look like buffoons
If you'd read this thread, you'd understand why they aren't covering the Big Ben story... and that it has nothing to do with race. The only color ESPN cares about is green.
DeadsetAce
Supporter
- May 31, 2004
- 112,012
- 58,834
ah yes the race card...the answer to all of life's questionsOriginally Posted by DontStepOnMyShoes
the truth of the matter is Im pretty much a hypocrite and pretty closed minded and dont care to read 6 pages of method man-esque posts I read what I wanna read and make my own opinions based off that right or wrong or however ridiculous it is, its worked pretty well for 27 yrs and imma roll with itOriginally Posted by Craftsy21
Originally Posted by DontStepOnMyShoes
Originally Posted by Craftsy21
You're right - ESPN is always holding the black man down.. they never go out of their way to hype up black players or anything. Bunch of racists.Originally Posted by DontStepOnMyShoes
nahhh homie niketalk is my life I wont be goin anywhere, your homerism should go thoughOriginally Posted by Craftsy21
go away
yup ur exactly right, thats what I said verbatim..id also like to ad that the only reason they hired stuart scott is to make all black people look like buffoons
If you'd read this thread, you'd understand why they aren't covering the Big Ben story... and that it has nothing to do with race. The only color ESPN cares about is green.
DeadsetAce
Supporter
- May 31, 2004
- 112,012
- 58,834
sportscenter just showed the bron getting dunked on video...the anchors were quick to point out that it wasn't that bad and not THAT big of a"posterization" since it appeared he was just moving over to help out.
in all honesty, it wasn't THAT bad. not sure why nike freaked
in all honesty, it wasn't THAT bad. not sure why nike freaked
- Jun 26, 2005
- 8,608
- 2,039
- Nov 9, 2007
- 6,376
- 433
Originally Posted by CP1708
Originally Posted by Durden7
Originally Posted by CP1708
Durden, I certainly don't speak for everyone, but I want a channel/corporation to offer me my sports with no agenda. I know they aren't robots or any of that, but if they get paid to cover a sport, then I want them to report news, or analyze situations based on what's happening or happened, and not just pick and choose based on what might help or hurt them later on down the line.
They were all over the Kobe trial, he still gives interviews to ESPN, why wouldn't Ben? No reason to try and protect anything when all it really does is make it worse, much like the Nike/Bron dunk tapes.
And for those that say just turn the channel, it works like this, if I tell you a Laker rumor/opinion, you may choose to not believe it as I am a fan. But if a Nuggets fan tells you the same thing, you might listen to that person as they have nothing at stake in the team. Sound reasonable right?
Well, if I want to know what's up with my Lakers, I can head to fan sites, message boards, they're .com, whatever, but if I want an unbiased opionion, and an analytical look at them, where do I need to go? Should be ESPN right? But if they aren't covering their end of the bargain, we as sports fans are screwed. I really truly don't need to see 14 reporters outside Brett Favre's house for 7 days straight, to tell me that he's throwing a football with his kids, and that they think, that a neighbor thinks, that his wife said, that he might come back.
Does that sort of show what it is that we as sports fans are lookin for? Give us the "real" news, give us the highlights, give us the stats, give us the games and coverage, give some opinions from "experts" and that's it. No exposes, or rehashing the rehashed or a tired story, or any of that other agenda stuff they are pulling nowadays.
Theyre reporting what they think its worthwhile news. If the Ben situation came back as a fasle report, and they had been discussing it on their programs they would be blasted here for talking about "non-news". They simply can not win. They were roasted for the Owens and Isiah Thomas "suicide" attempts, which turned out to be false. I just think theyre covering themselves with this story and waiting till theyre comofortable enough with the sources to cover it.
You can tell from the tone of voice of the sportscasters and other people that even theyre tired of covering Favre. Like it or not, it has become news. Hate Favre for creating all these situations, not ESPN for simply covering it. Does ESPN go beyond what they need to do with coverage? Yes, they do but thats just a minor flaw and not a reason to hate the company.
To comment on your last paragraph, the consumer has always been asking for more from ESPN. Since the day the company began to now, it is constantly evolving and giving its consumers what they want. They made ESPN2 to initially cover "different" sporting events because they realized that people were interested in seeing beach volleyball, roller blading, skiing, beach workouts, etc. When that era of extreme sports faded they simply turned it into another sports channel to feature games and shows. People loved seeing old games so ESPN Classic was created to televise games from other eras. There was a time when the consumer hated waiting till the 6 pm sportscenter for their news so ESPN created ESPNews and give its fans all day coverage of highlights and scores and eventually ESPNU for college sports. There has always been a demand for something at ESPN and theyve always given their consumer what they wanted.
The problem is that now that there are so many choices, youre left with alllll these programming time slots and very little information to fill it in. Highlights arent more than a minute long, and there simply isnt enough time to fill an entire show with that kind of format. Theyre almost FORCED to cover things too much to fill time.
I wont mention it too much, but the fact that you can get sports news from ANYWHERE now is leading to the over saturation of certain topics. Its not ESPNs fault you hear about Favre/Pacman/TO from them, Yahoo, AOL, Fantasy Sites, blogs.
Face it, the Internet is ruining sports as we loved it.
Hey, I can agree with a lot of what you just said, and the expanding of the market.com's and such are another product of that and what not, sure I get that. But you still can't deny that at some level, they have an agenda on certain teams/players/markets, whatever. Be it Pacman, or USC football, or the Red Sox/Yankees rivalry, or focing Tood McShay down our throats, whatever, they still gear to sensationilzed reporting rather then just report the sports news as is.
And I see the problem getting worse, not better. And sure, maybe the net is at some fault, on some level, but it's not my fault that Chris Mort still has a job, or Peter Gammons, or other clowns of that ilk.
I agree that they most likely do have "hidden agendas", but in reality what news program doesnt? Other than mayyybe your local news station, everyother news outlet is going to be biased in some way or tend to give their gives in a skewed way.
The thing with sensationalized reporting is that its what draws people in to the program. Does it suck? Yeah it does, but its just how the the media marketis presently.
Youre right, its not your fault that Mort or Gammons has a job, but it is your choice to mute them or simply change the channel for a moment.
ESPN makes a lot of dumb mistakes, but I still just dont see a reason why anyone who hate the company.
- Dec 14, 2001
- 12,435
- 2,256
Peter Gammons is legit
- Feb 12, 2005
- 60,665
- 32,372
