Espn to cut 150 employees

Submitted by FranklinHatchett on
Hey y'all I saw on a couple different news sites that espn is cutting more employees. It's sad cause espn use to be awesome. Y'all think any network can take over and dominate like espn use to? Any chance espn can come back? I heard they renewed there president, which compares to asking the Titanic captain to rise from the grave and captain a ship again if you ask me. Sports center was the best back in the day, you know when they showed highlights. Sorry I don't know how to link a website in here, if someone could do that to help that'd be nice.

MGoGrendel

November 29th, 2017 at 10:55 AM ^

They had very good talent and showed sports highlights.  The Top 10 and No So Top 10 were great.

Now the SportCenter at 6:00 is movies, music, whatever, and ... sports.  It's not what people tune in for at 6:00 pm.  They want sports.  Thus, rating are free falling.

wile_e8

November 29th, 2017 at 11:18 AM ^

Back in the day you had to watch SportsCenter to get highlights from around the country - the last segment of the local news would show local highlights along with a few important national games, but you needed to watch SportsCenter to get anything else. That pretty much went out the window with the proliferation of web video - who's going to watch an hour long highlights show when they can just look up what they want to see on YouTube right now? Never mind highlights pushed out minutes later via Twitter. 

So ESPN had to come up with somethin besides just showing highlights. And what they came up with sucks. But what they were doing back in the day just wasn't working any more, so it's not like staying put was an option. 

Pit2047

November 29th, 2017 at 4:40 PM ^

Were post-smart phones. Tebow was annoying but the decision was rightly pumped, it was the first time the best player in basketball was going to switch teams since what? Kareem? That was a HUGE sports story. Even if Tebow was overhyped I'd bet dollars to donuts that every time they covered him ratings went up and clicks went through the roof.

panthera leo fututio

November 29th, 2017 at 5:37 PM ^

It's not smart phones per se, but expansive data plans and ubiquitous, high-quality video streams. If all ESPN is offering is highlights, there's just no way that they compete with a different medium that's much, much better at feeding you highlights (of your own choosing, at your leisure, and of nearly infinite potential variety). I agree that a lot of their flavor-of-the-week programming is awful, but there's no golden age of Sportscenter that would be particularly successful in the current environment.

NowTameInThe603

November 29th, 2017 at 1:08 PM ^

Yes sportscenter cant have the same draw it used too but I would absolutely watch a show again that was an hour long of prepackaged/cut up highlights on an endless loop.

 

Yes I see highlight on twitter now but thats only live highlights and I dont go searching for it. There is still a place for sportscenter

814 East U

November 29th, 2017 at 10:41 AM ^

I remember watching Sportscenter every morning before school to see who won games the previous night. Actively reading the ticker at the bottom because I had no clue who may have won in the NBA, NHL or the Monday Night Football game. Those were the days!

ijohnb

November 29th, 2017 at 10:48 AM ^

Smith should have never been appointed as Captain of that ship in the first place.  He was a disaster on the Olympic and almost sunk that thing too.  Putting him in the captains-quarters of the Titanic was like Alabama hiring Brady Hoke after he was fired here.

Mr Grainger

November 29th, 2017 at 10:49 AM ^

I agree. SportsCenter was once an icon of sports TV, when it was a news and highlights show. Then it opted to become a gossip rag where talking heads with no real knowledge (Bayliss, Stephen A. Smith, Jamele Hill, Paul "Jugears" Finebaum. etc.) discussed the same three topics day in and day out until viewers, like me, tuned out.

You can only listen to them carry on about LeBron and the Cowboys for so long.

On top of that, they paid over the top rates for sports TV rights - they pay more to air NFL games than the broadcast networks do despite getting only one playoff game a year and NO Super Bowls. That raised carriage fees so even people who don't care about sports have to belly up more cash for basic cable.

So yeah, this is like throwing the cooks off the Titanic while the captain tells the first mate to keep heading towards that ice berg.

Screw ESPN.

Thus ends my mini rant.

ijohnb

November 29th, 2017 at 10:59 AM ^

if he had headed directly toward the iceberg and slowed the ship as much as possible, it would likely not have sank, or at least would have taken long enough to sink that help could have arrived.  But no, he went with the fancy dancy "port around."  Not a chance.

NowTameInThe603

November 29th, 2017 at 1:13 PM ^

uhhh ya...

they get to shore Jack becomes an alcoholic and Rose gets knocked up. Rose has mental breakdown after mental breakdown because her rich family has disowned her and she cannot adjust to life without luxury. They live their remaining 20 years hating eachother and the only thing they leave behind are their children who will continue the cycle of unhappiness.

ijohnb

November 29th, 2017 at 2:31 PM ^

is actually worse than that.  The end of Rose and Jack's romance is shown in Revolutionary Road.  Let's just say that life off the boat wasn't what they hoped it would be.

Seriously, if you watch that movie, it is like watching a really shitty "what could have been" ending to Titanic.

1201SouthMain

November 29th, 2017 at 10:58 AM ^

My take is that it was a very profitable and bloated company that has trimmed some fat.  I read somewhere that ESPN is by far the most expensive channel on cable tv.  And their subsribers are falling at a slower rate than cable subribers as a whole.  I don't see any of their layoffs as a sign that the network could collapse.

Billy Seamonster

November 29th, 2017 at 11:01 AM ^

Theyve got to get away from some of the stupid money they spend. I get it may be a drop in the bucket, but they send like 5 of the Monday Night Football hosts, i.e. Randy Moss and Charles Woodson to each game. Think about the airfare, hotel, expenditures that incurs. Just have them in the damn studio, its the same thing. They do the same thing with some of the football games. I really don't need a sideline reporter because nothing they say or talk about is valuable.

panthera leo fututio

November 29th, 2017 at 12:17 PM ^

I agree that the number of on-air personalities involved in live events gets excessive. But that excess might make sense if you think about a business model that's going to have to increasingly rely on live events. As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, ESPN's extended blocks of highlights are becoming obsolete -- the internet is just way better at showing people clips. So rather than having people watch Sportscenter for an hour before a three-hour game, it might make sense to try to stretch that three-hour game into a four-hour event with Randy Moss juggling footballs pre-game, etc.

Sopwith

November 29th, 2017 at 11:13 AM ^

The old Sportscenter used to be two guys sitting at a news desk running through the highlights of games with some wit and verve. It was must-watch for any sports fan. It was fundamentally a highlight show with an occasionally interspersed personal interest story here and there. 

Contrast with today's grossly overproduced, swingin'-zoomin'-effects-driven camera and graphics work on a set that looks like it's a Terry Gilliam satire of a dystopian media nightmare society. It's a personal interest and personality show occasionally interspersed with some highlights when they need filler material.

I'd watch the old Sportscenter style if they brought it back.

I'll get off my own lawn now.

Year of Revenge II

November 29th, 2017 at 12:07 PM ^

I probably agree as well.

Right on the money; they might as well just blow it all it at this point.

Only things worth watcing is live football or basketball, women's softball during series, and little league.

Shows are a tire fire; the personalities are essentially loud morons for the most part.  30 for 30 and the dude from miami are the only decent shows. 

VintageBlue

November 29th, 2017 at 12:05 PM ^

The problem with ESPN is that the vast majority of their content is crap that's played on mute on TVs hanging in lobbies, lounges, and bars.  If it's not a game, programming attached to a game/game day, or 30 for 30 type stuff, then who really watches it?  Turn off all the talking heads and just broadcast the SMPTE color bars the rest of the time.  Sponsors airing ads on ESPN during the day will continue to flush that money down the toilet and ESPN can save some bucks on 'talent' and production.

You're welcome Disney for the free consulting.

mjv

November 29th, 2017 at 12:17 PM ^

While I'm not rooting for anyone to lose their job, I think that you may be looking at this the wrong way.  ESPN had effectively become a monopoly and was likely making outsized profits relative to the value they created.  If that assumption is true, it is highly likely that their staffing levels became far too large relative to the work being done.  

Now with cable cutting and other networks bidding up the broadcast rights on properties they have owned for years, they are being forced to look at the costs within their business. 

We can debate whether or not the move towards personality driven programming is good or bad, but the reductions in staff/expenses are a different discussion.

FranklinHatchett

November 29th, 2017 at 12:58 PM ^

THANK YOU TO WHOEVER DELETED ALL THE RIDICULOUS POLITICAL COMMENETS. DANG MAN SOME A YALL WERE TRIPPIN HARD. ID RATHER PLAY PITTY PAT THEN LISTEN TO SOME A YALL DUMB OPINIONS ON POLITICS.