OT: Fox Sports 1

[CTMike]

I thought this was a good read about Fox Sports 1 as its getting ready to launch and go head to head versus ESPN :

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-07-18/fox-sports-1s-strategy-vs-dot-espn-jockularity

That is all.

 

[SubbaBub]

OOT: The dearth of AAC FB coverage has really stuck me since the removal of the BE blog on ESPN. Nationally, they are getting no pub. This needs to change.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Chin Diesel]

One advantage FS1 has over previous attempts is they have a near equal amount of built-in subscribers- 90m as compared to ESPN's 100m.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

FS1's success can be measured by the tweakings or major moves by ESPN before you and I see the effects. Undoubtedly they have all sorts of internal metrics and they will see the needle moving before we notice any impacts FS1 is having.

It can only help fans and consumers.

 

[whaler11]

I generally don't have much faith in sports network and Fox's is generally annoying but ESPN is just unwatchable outside of live games.

 

[huskymedic]

I generally don't have much faith in sports network and Fox's is generally annoying but ESPN is just unwatchable outside of live games.

Johnny Manziel agrees...

Bruce Feldman (@BFeldmanCBS)
7/17/13, 9:43 AM
Manziel: "I used to be a person that watched SportsCenter every day all day. I shy away from it now."

 

[noeynox]

I generally don't have much faith in sports network and Fox's is generally annoying but ESPN is just unwatchable outside of live games.

It really is. Tjese stupid shows where bayless and smith yell at each other and the other crap on there. PTI was good. Their on air personalities suck for the most part. Really wish our conference would have ended up on fs1

 

[specialisthusky]

It really is. Tjese stupid shows where bayless and smith yell at each other and the other crap on there. PTI was good. Their on air personalities suck for the most part. Really wish our conference would have ended up on fs1

If fs1 is successful getting off the ground I'd suspect the aac to strongly consider signing with fox for its second contract. With the instability surrounding the conference the last thing the aac needed was to attach its self to a start up channel directly competing with espn despite how awful espn has become.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[OkaForPrez]

I stopped reading at Regis.

 

[UCFBfan]

It'll be interesting to see how FS1 does. I know they have deals with the B1G and B12 but ESPN still gets a heavy dose of those games for now. They'll also get the BE for bball. However they're losing the EPL which will be a blow as they will have minimal soccer coverage which they used to have lots of which was why I watched Fox Soccer, which will now be lumped in FS1. I'll be curious if NBC increases its viewership now that they landed the EPL. So far they've been a dud in many areas. I know many don't follow soccer but it's gaining a lot of popularity and should increase viewership. However, lack of college inventory will hurt NBC come fall.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[sportsart]

FS1 dropped the ball by not snagging Olberman.

 

[huskypantz]

FS1 is struggling to get contracts signed for 46m of the 90m cable subscribers that had speed. They're going to have a tough time getting anywhere close to the coin ESPN is pulling in.

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2013/07/15/Media/FS1.aspx

 

[jbdphi]

It really is. Tjese stupid shows where bayless and smith yell at each other and the other crap on there. PTI was good. Their on air personalities suck for the most part. Really wish our conference would have ended up on fs1

Did you read the article? It sounds like FS1 is going even further in that direction. Sportscenter is too serious and stats happy for them so they are going for "jockularity" which is the opposite direction of what I would have done. I know a lot of folks who can't watch Sportscenter anymore because it is too much about entertainment and not enough about sports. For relatively hardcore fans such as Boneyarders I would think a preference would be for more serious coverage.

 

[Dooley]

I stopped watching, listening, reading ESPN years ago and only watch it for live games that involve one of my teams. Their programs are absolutely intolerable and beyond uninformative. To paraphrase Billy Madison, we are all alot dumber for having to listen to them.

 

[noeynox]

Did you read the article? It sounds like FS1 is going even further in that direction. Sportscenter is too serious and stats happy for them so they are going for "jockularity" which is the opposite direction of what I would have done. I know a lot of folks who can't watch Sportscenter anymore because it is too much about entertainment and not enough about sports. For relatively hardcore fans such as Boneyarders I would think a preference would be for more serious coverage.

Did not sorry. I was just following that aside from live sports espn has become unwatchable to me at least. Even shows like nfl prime time and baseball tonight which i loved have taken a step back imo. If fs1 is going the same way too bad, be original.

 

[whaler11]

Did not sorry. I was just following that aside from live sports espn has become unwatchable to me at least. Even shows like nfl prime time and baseball tonight which i loved have taken a step back imo. If fs1 is going the same way too bad, be original.

The single sport networks kill ESPN on highlights now. I really only like college sports, MLB and to a degree the NFL.

I remember baseball tonight was a religion in college for my roommates and I. I haven't watched it in at least 2 years.

But give ESPN something like the British Open and it's excellent.

 

[ctchamps]

Did you read the article? It sounds like FS1 is going even further in that direction. Sportscenter is too serious and stats happy for them so they are going for "jockularity" which is the opposite direction of what I would have done. I know a lot of folks who can't watch Sportscenter anymore because it is too much about entertainment and not enough about sports. For relatively hardcore fans such as Boneyarders I would think a preference would be for more serious coverage.

My preference is same as yours but obviously those of us who prefer the more cerebral presentation are in the minority. The networks spend a lot of money gauging viewership. By the way things are trending it is obvious to me that currently far more people want to laugh at sports than take it seriously. Or at least laugh at/with people who talk about sports.

 

[whaler11]

My preference is same as yours but obviously those of us who prefer the more cerebral presentation are in the minority. The networks spend a lot of money gauging viewership. By the way things are trending it is obvious to me that currently far more people want to laugh at sports than take it seriously. Or at least laugh at/with people who talk about sports.

It's more like they care about drama than humor. There is nothing funny about the horrible shows that ESPN fills the day with.

 

[Chin Diesel]

My preference is same as yours but obviously those of us who prefer the more cerebral presentation are in the minority. The networks spend a lot of money gauging viewership. By the way things are trending it is obvious to me that currently far more people want to laugh at sports than take it seriously. Or at least laugh at/with people who talk about sports.

It's more like they care about drama than humor. There is nothing funny about the horrible shows that ESPN fills the day with.

I read that article as saying that ESPN has gone too far in the way of all the analytics, the breakdown and everything else and that FoxSports1 is going with a more Dan Patrick style.

No where did I read that FoxSports1 wants to go the route of First and Ten or any of the other yell fests with scripted points.

Keep the focus on the games that were played and not the ensuing side shows and I think Fox Sports will do just fine.

 

[whaler11]

I read that article as saying that ESPN has gone too far in the way of all the analytics, the breakdown and everything else and that FoxSports1 is going with a more Dan Patrick style.

No where did I read that FoxSports1 wants to go the route of First and Ten or any of the other yell fests with scripted points.

Keep the focus on the games that were played and not the ensuing side shows and I think Fox Sports will do just fine.

I don't watch much of the ESPN shows but I must be missing the analytics. Other than the ridiculous push on QBR and the one show about stats not lying it just seems like people yelling about uninteresting topics.

 

[itgoeslike]

Speaking of ESPN. . . not since Coke decided to change its formula has a company mis-stepped. The Facebook log-in requirement has generated single digit comments on their blogs/stories with several stories registering "0". Maybe I am missing something, but it appears they are in the process of undoing a decade of brand building.

 

[ctchamps]

It's more like they care about drama than humor. There is nothing funny about the horrible shows that ESPN fills the day with.

I don't find it funny. You don't find it funny. I gather someone does. Of course they could be staring at the show pretending they are getting something from it but in reality the purpose is to have all the noise drown out whatever their respective spouses are saying to them. Otherwise I'm scratching my head regarding what the value is for people. As far as drama goes, I don't get it. Maybe if they pulled out switch blades and started carving one another up it would be dramatic. Otherwise it reminds me of my visits to nursing homes where some of the unfortunate individuals are ranting and screaming meaningless things. In the case of the people in the nursing homes it is sad to see formally vibrant individuals reduced to incoherent rantings. To needlessly do so in the case of these shows borders on the pathetic. And that there is a viewership that is entertained by this .......

Of course this evaluation (mine) is coming from a guy who reads many of the Boneyard threads on several forums.

 

[whaler11]

Speaking of ESPN. . . not since Coke decided to change its formula has a company mis-stepped. The Facebook log-in requirement has generated single digit comments on their blogs/stories with several stories registering "0". Maybe I am missing something, but it appears they are in the process of undoing a decade of brand building.

Even for the Boneyard that's a pretty solid level of hyperbole.

 

[itgoeslike]

Even for the Boneyard that's a pretty solid level of hyperbole.

Perhaps, but I think you're giving me too much credit. . .I've witnessed some serious hyperbole over the past few months. I am sure ESPN will *survive*, but going from hundreds or thousands of comments on stories to literally a trickle is never a good thing.

 

[whaler11]

Perhaps, but I think you're giving me too much credit. . .I've witnessed some serious hyperbole over the past few months. I am sure ESPN will *survive*, but going from hundreds or thousands of comments on stories to literally a trickle is never a good thing.

ESPN.com is like 1% of ESPN's value and maybe 1% of the people who read a story feel the need to anonymously make idiotic comments.

I predict they survive and I suspect the site is already better.

 

[itgoeslike]

ESPN.com is like 1% of ESPN's value and maybe 1% of the people who read a story feel the need to anonymously make idiotic comments.

I predict they survive and I suspect the site is already better.

If it resulted in the disposition of select ESPN bloggers I could see an incremental improvement (and by the way, in the spirit of hyperbole, I do believe they will survive). What I do disagree with is the suggestion that ESPN and ESPN.com are wholly separate entities, or that ESPN.com is a substantial subset of broadcast ESPN. There is an ongoing merging of the "two" entities. Right now, ESPN.com is an important place holder and incubator for the future methodology, delivery and consumption of their product. Eventually the ESPN content will be perceived as one and the same by the average viewer. ESPN3 will eventually become ESPN. The same goes for every major network.

Lastly, there is a reason why social based companies are valued at such an exponential rate. I can see by the number of your posts you are engaged with this site. ESPN has a vested interest in garnering the same level of interaction, which provides them with more opportunities to generate revenue. Yes, TV revenue, as it's defined today, still outpaces "web" revenue, but it's changing, and will continue to change.