Whitlock Crushes ESPN

[kghoya]

is ronny really that angry?

[AustinHoya03]

Whitlock makes a good point re: ESPN and the Heisman balloting, but doesn't go far enough to explain it. Voting for the Heisman is regional. In the old days, voters received information and formed opinions based on the reporting of their local or regional newspapers. (And I say newspapers, plural, because SMU games used to be covered by reporters from the DMN, the Dallas Times-Herald, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, AND the Fort Worth Press.) These reports were made by people who actually sat in the press box. And more often than not, voters were the people doing the actual reporting (and attending the games).

ESPN doesn't have beat reporters for teams. Fowler, Corso, and Herbstreit, as Whitlock points out, are flown around the nation every week to whatever college is playing in whatever game ESPN deems most ratings-worthy. Rece Davis, "Doctor" Lou Holtz, and Mark May sit in a studio and watch games on television. ESPN print journalists like Pat Forde are flown to the big events, similar to the College Gameday crew. The new journalists are unable to tell when a QB for a MAC team is playing beyond his ability to gut out a win, because they've never seen that QB play before. It's these reporters who are informing the ballots of print journalists who are suddenly being forced to pay less attention to the local team and more attention to the national beat because the Iowa City Press-Citizen has to compete with ESPN.com for readership.

The problem, as I see it, is that it's tough to have it both ways. Either Notre Dame is the only school on television on Saturdays, and we've got to attend a game or read about it in the local paper on Sunday to find out what happened, or we accept that the huge mobilization of HD cameras, crews, and talking heads that is necessary for us to enjoy college football from the comfort of our living rooms on Saturdays in the fall is likely going to breed this type of journalism.

It will be interesting to see in the future whether ESPN kills its own product. By that, I mean the ability to watch Texas in my living room has meant I have only trekked to Austin twice for football this season (although I don't consider doing so "blowing my entire weekend," as theexorcist says over in the CFB thread). The 'Horns don't have any problem drawing 90,000 when I don't make the trip, but what if the team we're talking about is Wyoming? Who the hell wants to drive to Laramie on a Saturday when you can stick some ribs in the oven, knock down a six-pack (can't do that in a college stadium), and enjoy some high-def CFB entertainment on the plasma in front of the couch? Or heck, change the school to Georgetown. Just as Wal-Mart killed mom and pop stores, ESPNization is going to knock off a few mid-level football teams.

Sorry -- that is a rambling post. But I did just sit in front of my television and consume one of said six-packs while watching the Longhorns demolish Texas A&M.

[theexorcist]

Austin:

I think you're missing Whitlock's main point. Whitlock's argument is that ESPN is slowly becoming a vested interest - that it's become the NFL Network, in essence - a biased organization that essentially rigs coverage to ensure the best promotion of its product. I think that the best attack against that is the proliferation of blogs - people are, within ten years, going to switch how they get news, and move from monoliths to smaller, focused providers. And ESPN won't be able to run every single blog, no matter how many people they buy off into their fold.

Your point, Austin, is another approach about the proliferation of content, and it's one that's not only related to the NCAA. A different thread commented on someone not liking hockey. Well, you haven't seen hockey until you see it in HD - it's finally better than going to see a game. Add in Bill Simmons' column last Friday about stadiums being poorly-designed for cheering and more a way to grab money, and things change. In less than ten years, Wyoming, and Florida, and - maybe most importantly - Delcastle Vo-Tech (a school in Delaware with little alumni fanbase and a middling team - in other words, every single team in America), are going to be able to stream their games on the internet. All of them. Cheaply. And in HD-quality. At that point, Wyoming is going to ask whether it's worth limiting distribution of their content to ESPN - they'll be able to sell targeted ads to a Wyoming fanbase that show up while people are watching.

That doesn't mean that people won't show up to games - people still go to sporting events that are driveable, even though those events are expensive. It DOES mean that the marketing of those events will change to emphasize the experience rather than actually seeing the game.

[MCIGuy]

I hate ESPN.
I hate Whitlock.
So the enemy of my enemy is, well, not worth listening to


Whitlock is still an idiot even if he makes good points about ESPN. His writing is so third-rate and he is comes across as a hypocrite as far as I'm concerned. Hell, he was willing to suck up to ESPN as long as he was an invited guest and getting paychecks. I was never impressed by him and his constant crying about ESPN from that far outpost known as foxsports just makes him seem bitter even if his points are spot on.

Most importantly he claims he is a huge fan of "The Wire" but based on his comments he doesn't get truly get the show or understand what David Simon was trying to convey. He doesn't grasp subtlety and can't see things as grey rather than black and white (hence his silly coined-phrase "The Black KKK" when referring to the drug dealers on the show).

[Gold Hoya]

Nov 28, 2008 7:05:30 GMT -5 theexorcist said:

Austin:

I think you're missing Whitlock's main point. Whitlock's argument is that ESPN is slowly becoming a vested interest - that it's become the NFL Network, in essence - a biased organization that essentially rigs coverage to ensure the best promotion of its product.

E.g. Mickey Mouse promotions before and after every commercial during Georgetown's last two games. The basketball is incidental to the Old Spice Classic; the tourney exists to get us to buy deodorant and take ourselves / our kids to disney next year.

[dungeon ball]

What drives me crazy is being forced to watch ABC's Dancing with the Star's highlights in the top 10 plays. If that isn't shameless cross-promotion, I don't know what is.

[kchoya]

Nov 28, 2008 11:49:21 GMT -5 MCIGuy said:

I hate ESPN.
I hate Whitlock.
So the enemy of my enemy is, well, not worth listening to


Whitlock is still an idiot even if he makes good points about ESPN. His writing is so third-rate and he is comes across as a hypocrite as far as I'm concerned. Hell, he was willing to suck up to ESPN as long as he was an invited guest and getting paychecks. I was never impressed by him and his constant crying about ESPN from that far outpost known as foxsports just makes him seem bitter even if his points are spot on.

Most importantly he claims he is a huge fan of "The Wire" but based on his comments he doesn't get truly get the show or understand what David Simon was trying to convey. He doesn't grasp subtlety and can't see things as grey rather than black and white (hence his silly coined-phrase "The Black KKK" when referring to the drug dealers on the show).

You're going to dump on a sports columnist because you don't think he understands a TV show?

I really don't have an opinion on his writing style, but at least he's moved away from his B.A. Homer schtick columns. Plus, he's miles better than

Bill.
Single.
Sentence.
Paragraphs.
Plaschke.

and a bunch of other well-recognized columnists. I think Whitlock turns in some very thoughtful columns and is not afraid to come out against an athlete or a business. The whole reason he was canned from ESPN was for ripping ESPN and Lupica while he was working for the network. How can you not like a guy for ripping Lupica.

Plus, between Whitlock and Joe Posnanski, the KC Star sports pages has a pretty good 1-2 punch.