In later posts it has been suggested that it is perhaps a generational thing that so many of us have been unimpressed with the current studio crew at ESPN. I don't find that to be the case. Studio, sideline and broadcast commentators have skewed towards being younger (and I'm sure hipper) for a while now. When Kara first became a part of the ESPN broadcast team I might have had fair reason to discount her commentary (being from you know where) but I immediately liked her personal and well informed approach to the games and I became her fan and enjoyed the work that she did on many UCONN games.
Fair View's comment that the current crew is bad for the game I think is a fair assessment. Those of us who have been followers of NCAA women's basketball for three decades or more have watched the game grow in popularity country wide and as new fans turn on to watch the broadcasts we hope that they'll be encouraged to continue to tune and and to follow the game throughout the season (or to possible even come to emulate the year round interest demonstrated by the members of this group of bloggers).
Its possible to present a product as being relevant to audience members of all generations if you see to it that the experts that you hire are competent and well-informed and add to the experience of seeing the game. The game has been entertaining for many years on its own. We should not be encouraged (as some fellow BY's have stated that they are) to turn away from the halftime reports because the three analysts that are paid to pontificate on the sport are strong on style but weak on substance.
Not every broadcast crew member in the past has been a strong contributor but this crew seems to represent a move by ESPN to move away from serious commentary. I can honestly say that I can't think of an observation made by any of the three during this post season run that I found added to my appreciation or understanding of the games that were taking place. I don't think that you advance the public's appreciation of your product by insulting their intelligence.
That's the challenge however. New fans may gravitate to this type of personality. It's like the NFL's partnership with Nickelodeon for some of their broadcasts. While it's not my thing, I can see where it catches the attention of a different demographic.
And when I say generational, age is only part of it. It's also music, fashion, pop culture and overall personality. It's appealing to personalities who ESPN may not have considered before. The reason why I said Elle is relatable to me, is because I was her watching that double OT game. I felt that. And I feel the same way when I watch Spain, Kimes of Kaplan on the other ESPN shows. Five or ten years ago, it wasn't like this from what I can recall.
Elle Duncan has to be doing something right as she also hosts SportsCenter and participates on other ESPN programs. She's respected by both her colleagues and athletes from various pro sports. I don't believe she's weak on substance based on the work I've seen her do over the years.
And in the end, how do we know that majority of the public are actually turning away from half time? I know I'm not. This forum is a small subset of WBB fans, with all due respect. We can't assume it's a turn off just because some in this thread say it is to them. Ratings have been trending triple digit increases from last year. Something's working to help expand the fan base. This could be part of it.