More Cuts at ESPN

ESPN made a deliberate decision back in its salad days that it was going to be all things to all people in sports. It would have the screamfests and the hot take shows, but it would also have serious journalism, and daily beat reporters on dozens of teams and show all the bowl games and have a slice of every pro sport, and foreign soccer, and so on and so forth. That was insanely ambitious and even more insanely expensive, but they were rolling in the kind of dough that drives people insane. Now the money flood is ebbing, so ambitions are being scaled back. Not too surprising former print journalists and beat reporters were the first victims. But the cutbacks won't come close to solving their problem, which is one affecting the entire cable universe, as has been noted here by many. Disney is very, very hard on underperforming divisions, and has been long before they bought ESPN. We'll know the former Worldwide Leader is in real trouble when it starts cutting back on the most expensive part of the operation -- rights fees for live sports. I don't want to get the soccer fans on my case, but if I were the head of MLS, I'd be pretty nervous about that deal.

 

Cable watchers are a lot like newspaper subscribers. I'm in my mid 50s and will probably never cut the cord because it's easier to just turn on the TV than hook up a device. My wife would admit she's not that tech savvy, so she wouldn't want to deal with that either.

But as we age, the next generation may never have cable. My 19-year-old son at college watches strictly Nextflix and Amazon, although he occasionally watches a show using our cable app.

 

Another good point. I was in a restaurant briefly today, and on the way out, I noticed the poker game on the flat screen. I thought of the days when ESPN would show that stuff all the time. The resources had to be diluted back when ESPN tried to appeal to everyone.

Of course, now it goes out of its way to piss off much of its former base. Not really an improvement.

 

Bret Bielema making a classy move

 

Add Dr. Jerry Punch

 

Priorities have not changed a bit since I covered ESPN in its infancy in the mid-'80s. Priority No. 1 remains profit.

 

All that makes perfect sense. Extremely bloated. The culling seemed odd in its across the board element though. Almost like you're trying to buttress every area by saying, See, we cut at least one big name from every section. As Deadspin pointed out, this seems like window dressing, not an actual bean counting but a nod to investors that they are cutting costs -- but also a nod to the remaining employees; or at least an acknowledgment that they actually have no fucking clue how to move forward.

 

Not so much the "replaced after one bad game" as much taking stock every few years to see if there's better talent out there than what you have. If you have a guy who's been around for five years but is a marginal talent doesn't it make sense to hire someone who is just flat-out better?
You tell your employer to F off. Some would strive. No different than an athlete who plays for a coach who yells and one who doesn't.
I think the keeping your job thing is a reward, but I get what you're saying. Wish there was some way to make it worth it.

 

Agreed on the labor part. When NBC News had an overnight show (back in the Linda Ellerbee days), it was based in Charlotte for that reason.

 

Well, OK. But the methodology for pursuing that profit has changed.

 

Do you have some specific criticism of these people? Or are you just saying fuck 'em for being old?

Stark was one of the first people you mentioned. Why does he need to be put out to pasture? He remains one of the most entertaining and well-connected reporters in the business, and if he is working any less hard than he used to, I sure can't tell.