The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Is it just me(maybe I'm getting old) or is there getting to be too much sports coverage?I enjoy watching the games but it seems like you can't turn on the tube without yet another young,too slick talking head going "in depth" about every little detail about some rich spoiled overpaid athlete.I mean they cover this stuff like its life and death.Example;a couple weeks ago the news was our government doesn't have enough money...omg it may shut down.....turn over to espn and its (insert athlete)will he play for only 18 million this year?!Priorities,right?I turned on espn radio the other night hoping to hear the days baseball scores because i forgot my phone,and instead I got to hear about Tiger Woods and will there be an NBA lockout,and,of course,the latest on Brett Favre,lol.I know it is a gazillion dollar industry and they have to fill airtime but c'mon.I really don't care if Michael Vick is picking his nose with his right hand because he has a blister on his throwing hand.Scores and highlights are fine with me.

No such animal as "too much sports coverage"...

I believe that ESPN News is the best "Scores & Highlights Only" TV channel out there. It's for the most part pure news, scores, highlights with lots of on-screen stats and that's it.

There's an XM / Sirius channel also that's ESPN News.

Let's get to the real issue. You are complaining about a government shutdown being the big news and are shocked to hear a sports story regarding an athlete's pay while on ESPN. It is a 24 hour sports channel. You are going to hear sports if you turn to it. The only reason anyone is exposed to "too much" sports coverage is if they make themselves available to "too much" sports coverage.

I too get burned out and think man I've heard this story over and over again. The main reason, I kept tuned into ESPN. I did it to myself. Had I not kept going back to a sports themed program, I would have has much less exposure. Sure maybe someone on the phone would say, "Hey did you hear about so and so" or maybe I could have heard a short blurb on the radio (non-sports station) but the only way to get overexposed is doing it yourself.

^ That doesn't sound like his real issue. It sounds like to me that he just wants the scores and the highlights and not all the "off-the-field" stuff, like holdouts, negotiations, and personal player updates.

My biggest beef with sports coverage is when they try to cover sports like People Magazine.  Tabloid-esque, you know?  I don't care about the player's personal lives unless it directly interferes with their performance on the field/court/ice...

I don't need to know who's dating who, who's been out on the town, who's getting a divorce, who's a baby daddy, etc. 

ESPN is a joke. If you have a local all sports channel (YES, MSG, or SNY for NY, NESN for Boston...etc) those channels do the best work these days. Even on a national level covering more than just the local stuff. They give scores, highlights, and don't have hosts trying to be the next Henny Youngman working out a comedy routine in-between.

I work on this show a ton, it is definitely what I would watch if I didn't work here.  Highlights, scores, and live pressers after each game.  Seriously, that's probably the best part....we will go live to podiums after all major sports events.

They greatly changed the format of the time slots, for the past 6 months we have been running SportsCenter on ESPNews during the hours it's not on ESPN.

This is just a simulcast of the TV feed.

Which I love! When I was working full time, I would listen to PTI and Around the Horn on my drive home (Mike & Mike on the way in). My first two Sirius presets are ESPN and ESPN2

you hit the nail on the head,thanks for uncluttering what I was trying to say!

Wow, I actually agree with you on this, Mike.  Don't get offended, I'm not trying to be childish or throw a barb at you, I just don't usually agree with a lot you post, even if I don't post about it.

Regardless, agreed with you on this.  No disrespect to you, Tony, but I think ESPN has gone downhill A LOT compared to 10-15 years ago.  It was probably even better in the 80's/early 90's as well, but I didn't start watching it much until around '93 or '94 (I'm 27 years old, for what it's worth). 

I would like to mention that I also think Phish hit it close, too, for me personally, because I just had it on too much on off days or whatever (it's hard to want to have soaps on, though, right?) until I figured out I could just have it on USA or TNT during the day and not pay attention to what was even on in the background, or even just turn off the tv.  Magical little thing, you know?  :D It kept me from getting bitter and pissed off that they were talking about the same thing and being "overexposed" to it too much because...well, I took the action so that that was less likely to happen.  I was particularly cognizant of this the previous two summers with the "Favre saga"s and all,  because I'd already grown tired of his act a couple of seasons before that, when he was still at GB.  The best way to avoid it was just not to have it on at all!

Ultimately, though, I'm also with mecadonzilla...I don't care about athletes in this light that they try to portray to me or put them in (nor do I care about that with almost any movie "star" or musician, for that matter!), and it's disappointing that ESPN seems to be more and more going that route when "delivering" news.  I wouldn't care as much if they actually had some competition, but damn it if FSN didn't end up sucking pretty quickly itself, and there's just not that much out there otherwise.  That's part of why I enjoy football season so much, because I actually do like CBS a lot (at least for NFL) and Fox, with the exception of JJ's bastard arse.  I love TNT's NBA show as well--it's probably my favorite of them all--even though NBA is second to the NFL for me.  Like Sir Charles or not (personally, I enjoy him, even if he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about half the time), it's an entertaining show.

I've gone to exclusively MLB network,and NFL network....I even quit watching Pardon the interruption,and I was never really much of a around the horn fan

I hate ESPN to the point,Like the NFL,it's the Giants/Jets, Patriots,NFC east.....Pittsburgh,Ravens,Colts,and who happens to have won the Super bowl the last two years....The rest of the teams in the league hardly exist....IMO Baseball is it's the same way....

The NFL shows are horrible,MLB isn't any better...it's horrible too...They do 30 minute,or 1 hour show but can be bumped by golf, little league world series,anything Tiger woods....(unless it's like countdown,or pregame...Ack they're bad too,they were fine when I was 17,but at 36 I want more/ better)...

Dan Patrick was totally right,the mother ship has gotten so big,that they have to bring in people to disagree with themselves.....

ESPN is part of the problem IMO, they own millions of acres of oats,and there aren't enough dead horses to throw them on....

ESPN reminds me of my local NBC affiliate,they keep touting they're number one, but don't change with the times,and they seem to forgot what got them there...and there are better options out there that do it better....

Just my two cents....

I am no ESPN supporter but you can't get on them for giving coverage to the "GOOD" teams and not the bad ones. Sorry nobody wants to hear talk about the Browns and the Redskins...ha ha. I mean seriously.

You want ESPN to talk about the losing teams and teams NOT in the playoffs....ha ha ha ha ha! I mean come on!

I'd rather hear about the Redskins and Browns,than a 10 minute fluff piece touting the Jets or Patriots...

you are alone on that one champ. Nobody wants to see or hear about losers.

^^^ There you go again, assuming that what you think is what "everyone" must think.

I would much rather get some real football news about the Browns, Bengals, etc... than a 10 minute fluff piece with no real football value about a "more popular" team.

^

Add me to that.  So that makes us nobodies, right?

Well TV ratings say otherwise. If you would rather hear about a team that is 2-14 over a team that is 14-2 you are in the minority! That is a fact. And you can't blame ESPN for talking about the "good" team

I think what he was saying is he would rather the network give a somewhat equal amount of coverage to all of the league.It is no secret that the Bristol,Conn. based ESPN has an east coast bias,Or should I say a Northeast coast bias because I never see or hear about the Dolphins either.Even when my Sox won it all in '05,their coverage was more about why Boston lost to us than why we swept them in the ALDS.It was clear they didn't like that.

some bias. Cause the Heat and the Hurricanes are NEVER talked about on ESPN  ::)

give me a break