PDA

View Full Version : MLB and ESPN at war again


Fenway
09-24-2007, 11:11 AM
Look we all hate ESPN but they continue to be our main source of out of market games ( if you don't have Extra Innings )

They support baseball for 6 months and then Selig screwed them out of being in the post-season.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Versus getting MLB games in the not so distant future

http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=article.main&articleId=56446&requestTimeout=900

ESPN and Major League Baseball are having their second major skirmish in just two months, a fight that could see the league restrict the network's access to postseason games and that further shows a deteriorating relationship between baseball and one of its biggest media partners.


The current dispute centers on ESPN's refusal to run on-air spots promoting postseason telecasts on Fox and TBS. This is the first time in years that ESPN will not run ads promoting playoff games on other networks, and, not coincidentally, also marks the first time since 1996 that ESPN will not have postseason baseball on its schedule.

Oblong
09-24-2007, 11:24 AM
ESPN could probably fill the time talking about the playoffs on site to talking about college football and get higher ratings.

PatK
09-24-2007, 11:25 AM
I wouldn't be surprised to see Versus getting MLB games in the not so distant future




I'd be open for anything that gets MLB coverage away from the Red Sox, Yankees, and soon to be Cubs lovefest.

Fenway
09-24-2007, 11:25 AM
ESPN could probably fill the time talking about the playoffs on site to talking about college football and get higher ratings.

Bud Selig should talk to Gary Bettman about the folly of thumbing nose at ESPN

spiffie
09-24-2007, 11:42 AM
I'd be open for anything that gets MLB coverage away from the Red Sox, Yankees, and soon to be Cubs lovefest.
If you think it will be different on any other network you're likely to be disappointed. For reasons beyond my comprehension those three teams have by far the largest national fanbases. As long as that's the case, you're going to have to deal with a lot of their games on national tv.

Lip Man 1
09-24-2007, 12:07 PM
My heart 'bleeds' for the Eastern Sports Programming Network.

Screw them and the horse they road in on.

Lip

skottyj242
09-24-2007, 12:16 PM
I love ESPN, who could forget Berman crying on that lovely Friday night in 2005 when the Sox swept the Sawx?
W

HerzogVon
09-24-2007, 12:50 PM
It would be nice to see Bristol CT turned into a giant toxic waste dump. ( Oh, I forgot. Mariotti hangs out there. Guess it's already happened. )

ondafarm
09-25-2007, 08:48 AM
I share Lip's emotional response to ESPN, or at least my heart does.
However, my mind says that any publicity is better than none and ESPN does qualify as better than none, albeit just barely. Seriously, Fox and TBS just won't cover all the games and the choice is between letting them not be aired and letting ESPN do that. Given that, it's ESPN easy. Has baseball management gotten so high and mighty that they think the sport doesn't need the extra coverage of ESPN? Imagine that, baseball management getting a swollen head. Anyone here who thinks I care for ESPN just hasn't read much of my stuff, but given the choices here, I say shame on MLB.

Fenway
09-25-2007, 08:53 AM
First. Whoever does wind up with regular season baseball will still televise a boatload of Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Braves and Dodgers games. Those are the teams with national followings.

What surprises me is the White Sox have been on WGN Superstation now for nearly 20 years but never developed a national following. My hunch is Hawk drives most casual viewers away.

SBSoxFan
09-25-2007, 09:02 AM
First. Whoever does wind up with regular season baseball will still televise a boatload of Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Braves and Dodgers games. Those are the teams with national followings.

What surprises me is the White Sox have been on WGN Superstation now for nearly 20 years but never developed a national following. My hunch is Hawk drives most casual viewers away.

Why, because he's a homer? As a Sox fan, I have no problem with that, but I suppose I could see how he might rub non-Sox fans the wrong way. The thing is, however, that baseball fans watch baseball games regardless of the announcers. That's a good thing too, because national baseball broadcast booths are full of cookie-cutter announcers, e.g. Joe Buck, who add nothing to the game.

Hawk is nowhere near one of the worst.

TommyJohn
09-25-2007, 10:18 AM
First. Whoever does wind up with regular season baseball will still televise a boatload of Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Braves and Dodgers games. Those are the teams with national followings.

What surprises me is the White Sox have been on WGN Superstation now for nearly 20 years but never developed a national following. My hunch is Hawk drives most casual viewers away.

It's because of the Black Sox. hell, when you fix a World Series 100 years ago, you give up all rights to a "National Following." DUH!!

PKalltheway
09-25-2007, 02:20 PM
What surprises me is the White Sox have been on WGN Superstation now for nearly 20 years but never developed a national following. My hunch is Hawk drives most casual viewers away.
It doesn't really suprise me all that much. I think it probably has more to do with the fact that there are simply more Cubs games on WGN than Sox games. Don't the Sox only get like 50-60 games on WGN per year?

Plus, the schedule for Sox games on WGN can be weird sometimes. Like one week you may see them on WGN 3 times, but then you won't see them on there again for 2 weeks. When they come on infrequently, it's kinda hard to develop a really huge national following. The Cubs on the other hand, come on there on a consistant basis since that's one of their main networks, and they were a part of the Tribune for so long.

Lip Man 1
09-25-2007, 07:02 PM
PK:

At best the Sox might get 35 games on WGN Superstation.

Lip

kba
09-25-2007, 07:53 PM
PK:

At best the Sox might get 35 games on WGN Superstation.

Lip

This year it was 74 Cubs games on WGN, 32 Sox games. (Both numbers include five Cubs-Sox interleague telecasts.)

Nowadays, with MLB.TV, Extra Innings, and all the other ways to follow out-of-town games, I'm not sure how important those 74 Cubs telecasts are in building fan allegiance. But an awful lot of people became Cubs fans in the 80's, when WGN piped 150 Cubs games a year into homes across the nation.

wealz07
09-25-2007, 08:00 PM
Bud Selig should talk to Gary Bettman about the folly of thumbing nose at ESPN

Bettman is so far behind Selig and crew in terms of knowing how to grow their sports revenues it isn't even funny. That Selig is willing to tick off ESPN tells me he isn't worried about the next round of TV negotiations.

Frater Perdurabo
09-25-2007, 08:39 PM
This year it was 74 Cubs games on WGN, 32 Sox games. (Both numbers include five Cubs-Sox interleague telecasts.)

Nowadays, with MLB.TV, Extra Innings, and all the other ways to follow out-of-town games, I'm not sure how important those 74 Cubs telecasts are in building fan allegiance. But an awful lot of people became Cubs fans in the 80's, when WGN piped 150 Cubs games a year into homes across the nation.

Right, and many of those 32 Superstation WGN Sox games are on Saturday nights, traditionally one of the worst nights for TV ratings. Others are on early Sunday afternoons (also low ratings time slot), weekday games (when most people are at school or work) or very late nights games on the West Coast (9 p.m. start time).

PKalltheway
09-25-2007, 11:44 PM
PK:

At best the Sox might get 35 games on WGN Superstation.

Lip

:o: I didn't realize the number wat THAT low! Thanks for informing me!