Everyone deservedly bashes ESPN for their awful and faux-controversial studio shows. And I obviously get why. But their live event coverage is so prolific, I give them somewhat of a pass for their "embrace debate" bullshit. I'm not sure people understand how hard or expensive it is to cover one college football or basketball game. They do thousands. They put the money on the screen.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
ESPN loses over 3 million subscribers over the past year
- Thread starter Kinsella
- Start date
- Status
I'm happy for any live sports coverage, and as someone who grew up without SportsCenter (I'm not *that* old, but we didn't get it where I was born) I certainly can appreciate having a solid highlights program (even though I have plenty of complaints about the current state of SportsCenter).
But the problem with their live coverage is that they're always bottom tier, other channels just do it soooooooooooo much better.
superfriar19
Neo Member
I dont want it.
And this year they're adding EVO 2016 SFV Top 8, The International 6 and maybe HOTS World Finals and League of Legends World Finals.
Playmakers will never happen again as long as ESPN and NFL get along.
Robot Pants
Member
Came for this post. Left more than satisfied
Fried Food
Banned
I don't have cable and would buy ESPN a la cart, but not for 30 bucks a month
TarpitCarnivore
Member
Your actual bill for cable is $69/month, not $150. We can't keep lumping everything together when arguing the cost of cable.
$35 of that bill is just in STB alone. We need to be arguing for more open box standards so that innovation in that area can be pushed further forward. It's 2016, we have massive arrays of cloud infrastructure and we're still relying on dedicated boxes with hard disks.
Technically yes it's far less for the cable bill but the entire thing is subsidized by the insane DVR and STB fees. Cable companies are able to charge less for the bundle by charging exorbitant pricing on the hardware and software that should already be built into the pricing.
Skinny Pete
Banned
ESPN went down the drain. For me it started with Brett Favre and then Tim Tebow.
Don't want it here. It's 90min if sports gossip on loop. I call it TMZ for men.
Everything's become Infotainment.
At that rate you can buy a lifetime TiVo subscription with a box and a mini and come out ahead before you're contract is up. And not have the shitty FiOS guide
As mentioned above there are alternatives to the cable company cable boxes. Tivo is one. Being a Tivo owner, I much prefer this approach where not everything is bundled into the cable price, as I am not interested in subsidizing boxes for everyone else.
If someone wants a fancy HD DVR box from the cable company, let them pay for it. I do hope for more open standards, so that there is more competition on the boxes, but I prefer things to be itemized the way they are now.
sixteen-bit
Member
And a year after this post we find they're streaming Evo finals next week, lol
Ron Mexico
Member
I actually disagree here and it's a big reason why I cut the cord. While I agree we need a solution that doesn't involve a set-top box, as long as it currently does, it belongs in the cost of the package.
SoRuffShoNuff
Member
As long as ESPN has Hubie Brown and Jeff Van Gundy calling NBA games there is no way their live coverage will be bottom tier. They are much better than Reggie Miller on TNT and whoever calls the NBA TV games.
A basic box is generally free or very cheap. A HD one is more expensive, and a DVR is more expensive still. Again, options that make it more expensive, despite being nearly ubiquitous.
I am with you on Hubie Brown but Jeff Van Gundy is horrible one of the worst to me. He goes on rants and misses whats going on in the game all the time. He tries to make the games about him and his opinions and it's not. ESPN should let Doris Burke or Hubie Brown call big games and the finials.
ESPN turned into hot garbage and as my interest in football has waned I just don't need sports talk and sport shows at all in my life. ESPN just is not as relevant as they used to be with the sub 40 crowd from my experience.
This will never happen, the NFL HATED Playmakers. Their football money trumps an original show.
This will never happen, the NFL HATED Playmakers. Their football money trumps an original show.
JrBaconCheeseburger
Member
If there is one thing i do not understand about espn, it is that (In)sider where everything seems to be behind a pay wall.
Who pays for these articles?
Who pays for these articles?
I switched my Sling package to the one that doesn't have ESPN but instead has Fox Sports and it's regional channel. Way more beneficial to me. So I'm one of those lost subscribers
Google that WSJ link and you can view the article without paying
Google that WSJ link and you can view the article without paying
30 for 30
Andodalf
Banned
College football with the best announcers and analysts. Kirk is the goat.
On Netflix month later but OJ 30 for 30 maybe a sign tide is changing.
Violence Jack
Member
I also switched my Sling package to the non-ESPN one because I don't watch it aside from MNF, College Gameday, and the later NBA playoff rounds. If I want to see it now, I just bum off my parents Xfinity account and watch it on the app.
Ron Mexico
Member
And that's just it. Can you use a SD box? Sure. How many people actually would though?
There's reasonable expectations that come with today's tech. I'd include HD as a reasonable minimum, which again means adding it to the "total cost"
BFIB
Member
Not surprising. ESPN is bottom tier for sports coverage. If your an MLB fan, MLB Network is leagues above what ESPN offers. And covers more than just a few teams like ESPN does.
Same goes if your into the NFL, NBA, there are dedicated channels just for their respective sport that is way above what ESPN offers nowadays.
Same goes if your into the NFL, NBA, there are dedicated channels just for their respective sport that is way above what ESPN offers nowadays.
VicDaMoan03
Member
I dropped ESPN but kept my DirectTV subscription until my contract ends in a couple months. Went from paying $100/month to $30/month. Decided to keep the subscription till contract end since the early termination fee is $20/month, only a difference of $10/month. Once my contract ends DirectTv can kiss me goodbye for good. Only thing I will miss is Monday Night Football and Thursday Night Football when the NFL season begins. Love me some NFL. O well maybe if enough people cut the cord, Disney will move MNF from ESPN to ABC. Any chance of that?
therealist
Member
I know. The series was too real, literally and figuratively. But let a man dream
Playmakers would be epic if a premium network revived it. Playmakers always looked out of place on ESPN, it was way too graphic and raunchy. I don't get why it's been a decade now and someone hasn't looked to pick up that franchise.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Thankfully, 10 of the Thursday Night Football games are being carried by CBS or NBC this year.
SDCowboy
Member
As a Cowboys fan, I'm ok with that. But yeah, it definitely is an issue.
spookyfish
Member
I only missed it when the bowl games came on in the fall, but ... it wasn't enough to make me sign back up. Later, ESPN.
dskillzhtown
keep your strippers out of my American football
I really can't hate too much on ESPN. Without them, the sports explosion likely wouldn't have happened. I hate First Take, but I know plenty of people who love it. I am not a fan of only showing highlights of the most popular teams/schools, but on the other hand ESPN and ESPN3 are the only ways I get to see many of the smaller schools play at all. So it is definitely a mixed bag.
ESPN seems to be poised for the digital transition as well. They have WatchEspn now, they bought part of the company that handles MLB.tv as well. So looks like they are getting ready to attract those cord cutters. If ESPN is the only reason many are holding on to cable, a stand alone app would be perfect for them, if they are comfortable with streaming to TV.
ESPN seems to be poised for the digital transition as well. They have WatchEspn now, they bought part of the company that handles MLB.tv as well. So looks like they are getting ready to attract those cord cutters. If ESPN is the only reason many are holding on to cable, a stand alone app would be perfect for them, if they are comfortable with streaming to TV.
Thats not what happened so much, I don't think. For one, people were never interested in the 24/7 aspect of ESPN. People didn't tune to ESPN because they were talking sports all the time, they tuned in a precise moments of live sports action.
I suspect what happened is many people realized they should share online logins and still have enough access to those live sports moments, or have flat-out turned to illegal streaming services, especially if this is true of the cord-cutting crowd. The 30 and under crowd isn't unfamiliar with such sites. I remember they were everywhere when I was in college.
I know so many people who say they'd subscribe to an online version of ESPN separate from the cable tv just for live sports. It's crazy how there is an obvious product out there that people want, and the conglomerates just can't put it together.
andythinkpad
Member
I would pay for a high quality niche channel, like a GoPro channel or hiking channel. But ESPN can get fucked.
SirClinksAlot
Member
PTI is still great. Except when Wilbon is bitching about analytics. Or when Tony is out.
So actually yeah, nothing really left.
Ron Mexico
Member
I do think a la carte is 100% the future, I just don't want to see the bastardizations of it before they get it right. I can easily see something ridiculous like a pay by the hour along the lines of the old old school Prodigy and early AOL days.
ATH and maybe Highly Questionable?
- Status