- ESPN wants to own the lion’s share of sports telecasting content. A good share of that content isn’t worth owning.
Not long ago I wrote about issues facing ESPN and what I thought the company could do to address those challenges. ‘Thoughtful’ is the word I hope describes that contribution.
‘Pissed off and angry’ are words that will come across in this piece. That’s because I am pissed off and angry.
I’m tired of ESPN’s serving too much ‘stuff’ that has little national appeal. I’m ticked because ESPN is defying a basic organizational mantra—form follows function. The form is a collection of national broadcast platforms—ESPN, ESPN2, etc. But the functions don’t align with the need for having national broadcast platforms.
Cornhole players find a home at ESPN (photo, Forbes)
Just the other day, I flipped channels to see The National Collegiate Cornhole championship on one ESPN network, and Alabama at SF Austin basketball on another. Without question (and argument), each of those telecasts appeals to viewers who are invested in what’s being offered. Personally, I could care less about either offering—and I’m far from being alone.
This morning at the gym I heard two guys talking about how they’ve turned away from what ESPN is showing—unless it has personal relevance. I listened, then nodded.
Their voices are the voices of reason.
There was a day when televised sports content was painfully absent. Even the NCAA had a rule that college football teams could appear on TV so many times a year. That’s because TV options were limited and the NCAA didn’t want a team to dominate the airwaves.
Big crowd at SFAU because playing ‘Bama is big-time stuff. But the game has zero national relevance. (photo, ‘Bama Athletics)
Those days are over, of course. Today, we’ve gone from way too little availability to way too much content. Worse yet, teams are changing schedules to accommodate TV. That’s why we get to see Toledo v. Akron on Tuesday night–not Saturday afternoon.
I’m not arguing for eliminating options like that or saying goodbye to ‘Bama at SF Austin basketball. I’m arguing for form follows function.
–When games aren’t relevant nationally, don’t show them nationally. Make them accessible nationally to those who want to watch them. There is a difference!
That’s the appropriate form for the function. ESPN has plenty of platforms to accommodate it because ESPN has multiple viewing platforms available.
Let’s face it: ESPN wants to own the majority of sports content that’s shown on TV. But I don’t buy the notion that growth (to become big, really big) is always good. As a cancer survivor, I can guarantee you that. A surgeon removed the growth and saved my life.
Did you watch the Georgia Southern v. Eastern Michigan bowl game? I didn’t. (Mandatory Credit: Marvin Gentry-USA TODAY Sports)
ESPN needs to do the same—cut and remove. Scale back rather than grow endlessly.
Does ESPN really need all those networks, ESPN, ESPN2, and ESPNU? A better option, I think, is to refer content to its affiliates (e.g., collegiate conference networks) and sell content (and don’t bid on content) that has local and regional interest only.
–Be a NATIONAL network and show programs that have NATIONAL interest, like the CFP Playoff.
But that’s not what ESPN does. Instead, it grabs and dominates. Yes, ESPN shows almost all of the college bowl games. But almost all of those games demand a “Who Cares!” response…except (per my argument) for partisans of the teams involved.
Once upon a time, ESPN made a bad thing good. Today, ESPN needs to find good again…badly. That’s because enough has become way too much. And it’s way too much of just about everything…sets that are are way too much, sportscasters’ wardrobes that are way too much. Even the graphics are over the top.
I don’t know what ESPN is trying to show, other than it has lost a grip on its founding mission.
Today, just about everything ESPN does is over the top. And I find that to be a turnoff.
Literally.
(Oh! Just got an ESPN text alert: “Ed Orgeron smashes headset.”)
