elrockinMT Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 (edited) It looks like at least three of the first games of the week will have the Yankees and Red Sox as the star teams. Good to see that nothing has changed Edited March 29, 2011 by elrockinMT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeavyTime Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 I never thought MLB Network was biased, but almost every preseason game they showed this year involved the Yanks or Saux. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 People have to understand ESPN is just doing what makes sense to them from a business perspective. If you were in charge of scheduling programming, and your goal is to raise as much advertising revenue as possible, which teams would you schedule? The fact is, the Yankees and the Red Sox have the largest fanbases, and these Yankees-Red Sox games bring the largest ratings, which, in turn, allow ESPN to charge more for it's advertising and maximize revenue. It's business, and nothing else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sircaffey Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 Never going to change, but I actually like it. The Yanks/RSox is a good series to watch, and watching any Red Sox game this year should be entertaining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 (edited) I understand it's business, but business also shouldn't include leaving out the little guys and only focusing on what will get you the most money. If ESPN cut down on half the Red Sox/Yankees games, and did a variety of other teams, they would not be getting ads pulled from them left and right, and even if they did, I'm pretty sure they are not hurting for money. Edited March 29, 2011 by JoeCoolMan24 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Mar 28, 2011 -> 10:38 PM) I understand it's business, but business also doesn't include leaving out the little guys and only focusing on what will get you the most money. If ESPN cut down on half the Red Sox/Yankees games, and did a variety of other teams, they would not be getting ads pulled from them left and right, and even if they did, I'm pretty sure they are not hurting for money. It doesn't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottyDo Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 29, 2011 -> 12:39 AM) It doesn't? I don't know if this is true or not, but it seems as though their pretty obvious bias has gotten under the skin of enough fans that it could eventually be a problem. I, for one, only watch ESPN when they have a game on that I want to see. I don't watch it for highlights anymore at all, simply because I find their choice of coverage obnoxious. They may be winning over a few fans but they might be alienating a lot more in the process. I'm sure their finger is on the pulse of this issue much more than mine, but some balanced coverage and non-meathead/sensationalist analysis might get them some people back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 QUOTE (PeavyTime @ Mar 28, 2011 -> 09:47 PM) I never thought MLB Network was biased, but almost every preseason game they showed this year involved the Yanks or Saux. there were also a decent amount of Cubs, Sox, Mets and Phils game, I think it's because they are larger market teams that show a decent amount of preseason games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 28, 2011 -> 11:39 PM) It doesn't? I mean't shouldn't. I know a lot of people who hate ESPN simply for reasons such as this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Mar 28, 2011 -> 09:46 PM) I don't know if this is true or not, but it seems as though their pretty obvious bias has gotten under the skin of enough fans that it could eventually be a problem. I, for one, only watch ESPN when they have a game on that I want to see. I don't watch it for highlights anymore at all, simply because I find their choice of coverage obnoxious. They may be winning over a few fans but they might be alienating a lot more in the process. I'm sure their finger is on the pulse of this issue much more than mine, but some balanced coverage and non-meathead/sensationalist analysis might get them some people back. Well don't you think they have people in charge of their network that have considered all these things? I am not privy to the inner workings of ESPN, but my guess is that they understand there is a certain segment of their audience that gets alienated by the Red Sox/Yankees coverage, however, the ratings they get are enough to trump this. You can never please all of the people all of the time, so you just try to please as many of them as you can as much of the time. The challenge is to find that sweet spot which results in the big ratings from the Yanks/Red Sox games and the Cubs/Cards games, while still keeping around as many fans of the other teams and casual fans as possible. And I am certain they have poured plenty of research into finding where that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sircaffey Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 The majority of other teams' fans are local so they'll either have the local broadcast or the ESPN broadcast will be blacked out. It makes little sense to broadcast a Royals game, or the like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottyDo Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 29, 2011 -> 01:05 AM) Well don't you think they have people in charge of their network that have considered all these things? I am not privy to the inner workings of ESPN, but my guess is that they understand there is a certain segment of their audience that gets alienated by the Red Sox/Yankees coverage, however, the ratings they get are enough to trump this. You can never please all of the people all of the time, so you just try to please as many of them as you can as much of the time. The challenge is to find that sweet spot which results in the big ratings from the Yanks/Red Sox games and the Cubs/Cards games, while still keeping around as many fans of the other teams and casual fans as possible. And I am certain they have poured plenty of research into finding where that is. I'm sure you're right, but often times business are too shortsighted to worry about their image long-term. I wouldn't discount the possibility that ESPN continues to progress towards becoming YES/NESN 2 in order to milk as much Atlantic money as possible to their long-term detriment as they lose credibility. Not saying it'll happen, but I also don't buy that just because companies spend a lot of money on a problem, they will necessary come to the long-term best conclusion. Short-term almost always wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 Speaking of baseball networks - anyone else fell that Al Liter on MLB Network is a *bit* too - ummm... enthusiastic? B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 With MLB TV and MLB extra innings options...just complain about the blackout rules. Seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
striker Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Mar 29, 2011 -> 03:38 AM) I understand it's business, but business also shouldn't include leaving out the little guys and only focusing on what will get you the most money. If ESPN cut down on half the Red Sox/Yankees games, and did a variety of other teams, they would not be getting ads pulled from them left and right, and even if they did, I'm pretty sure they are not hurting for money. I think you should start a 24X7 Pittsburgh Pirates station. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeavyTime Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 QUOTE (hi8is @ Mar 29, 2011 -> 05:40 AM) Speaking of baseball networks - anyone else fell that Al Liter on MLB Network is a *bit* too - ummm... enthusiastic? B) I heard his all AL Central team was a joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted March 30, 2011 Author Share Posted March 30, 2011 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Mar 29, 2011 -> 03:38 AM) I understand it's business, but business also shouldn't include leaving out the little guys and only focusing on what will get you the most money. If ESPN cut down on half the Red Sox/Yankees games, and did a variety of other teams, they would not be getting ads pulled from them left and right, and even if they did, I'm pretty sure they are not hurting for money. I agree that it shouldn't include leaving out other teams. If you have a bias as a network for certain teams like the Red Sox and yankees then admit it and don't jerk the rest of the baseball fans around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Mar 30, 2011 -> 03:34 PM) I agree that it shouldn't include leaving out other teams. If you have a bias as a network for certain teams like the Red Sox and yankees then admit it and don't jerk the rest of the baseball fans around. Admitting that would be bad for business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ginger Kid Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 at least one of their "experts" picked the Sox to win it. ESPN predictions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Mar 30, 2011 -> 04:57 PM) at least one of their "experts" picked the Sox to win it. ESPN predictions Wow, if we were to go by their picks, there would barely be any reason for a fan of almost any team to watch this season. It's basically this: 90% - Red Sox 5% - Phillies 4% - Braves 1% - White Sox or Giants Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Mar 30, 2011 -> 05:03 PM) Wow, if we were to go by their picks, there would barely be any reason for a fan of almost any team to watch this season. It's basically this: 90% - Red Sox 5% - Phillies 4% - Braves 1% - White Sox or Giants The Red Sox are pretty darn buck nasty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Mar 30, 2011 -> 05:04 PM) The Red Sox are pretty darn buck nasty. Sadly, this is true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ginger Kid Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Mar 30, 2011 -> 03:05 PM) Sadly, this is true. Don't worry, after Lester and Buchholz they fall back to earth pretty hard. IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Someone actually picked the Astros to win the NL Central. I can't believe someone paid him while he came up with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeavyTime Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 When did Boston get a pitching staff? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.