The Sports Media Thread

[The_Admiral]

On 8/12/2023 at 10:02 AM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Indeed, just about every choice that a person makes, ranging from the monumental (where to live, where to work, whom to date) to the mundane, constitutes a bet.

 

What? Shopping for apartments is not an attempt to get something for nothing. Applying for jobs is not an addictive behavior. And assessing one's options through a course of life decisions is not the same as putting money on the outcome of a TV show. Back to the drawing board.

 

I thought that bringing sports betting out of the shadows would be a net benefit but sports betting has just brought a certain crassness to everything it touches. Net loss.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

On 8/13/2023 at 11:52 AM, the admiral said:

Shopping for apartments is not an attempt to get something for nothing.

 

Betting is most certainly not an attempt to get something for nothing, as one must risk money in order to place a wager.

 

 

On 8/13/2023 at 11:52 AM, the admiral said:

Applying for jobs is not an addictive behavior.

 

Neither, in most cases, is betting. While some people definitely do elect to behave in a self-destructive manner with respect to gambling (people who, according to the prevailing orthodoxy, are said to have an addiction), the same is true with respect to, let's say, food.  Adults can for the most part be expected to handle these things responsibly, and the majority of them in fact do.

 

 

On 8/13/2023 at 11:52 AM, the admiral said:

And assessing one's options through a course of life decisions is not the same as putting money on the outcome of a TV show.

 

Sorry, but it is. When a person decides what school to go to, or whether to continue to go to school, or what job offer to accept (or makes any other decision in life), the question at hand is: which of the possible expenditures of time, energy, emotion, and money is most likely to lead to an outcome that is best for me?  No matter how you wish to dress this up, these are, fundamentally and in every meaningful respect, bets.

 

 

On 8/13/2023 at 11:52 AM, the admiral said:

sports betting has just brought a certain crassness to everything it touches.

 

I actually agree with this. I don't even like fantasy baseball. I can remember when fantasy baseball (Rotisserie leagues) began. Many of my friends participated in that, but I didn't, because I didn't  want my financial interests to clash with my rooting interests. Sports betting only amplifies this phenomenon, as people whose main interaction with sports is through betting don't care at all about the players or the teams, and have no rooting interests, in the sense that I understand. That approach holds no attraction for me.

 

Alas, that approach does hold a significant attraction for plenty of people. From the standpoint of justice, people being allowed to do the things that they enjoy is a value of the utmost importance; this is true even if those people's preferences do not align with mine. 

 

As a comparison, let's stipulate that current-day pop music is terrible. Despite this, the people who enjoy that crappy music  are entitled to listen to it. Imagine a rule mandating that the only popular music be the masterful rock and roll of the 1970s and the 1960s. Such a rule would create an environment that is very aesthetically pleasing for me; nevertheless, I cannot fail to acknowledge that this restriction would be a tremendous injustice.

 

The point is that having a free society sometimes requires accepting that you're in the minority on certain matters of culture, and that you're going to be surrounded by people whom you consider to be annoying idiots.

[spartacat_12]

On 8/11/2023 at 2:35 PM, Digby said:

Penn struck a deal with ESPN to finally put ESPN's name on a sportsbook, and in the process handed Barstool back to Portnoy for a couple legal documents. What a piece of business.

 

Well that's a bit of an oversimplification. If Barstool ever decides to sell again Penn will get a 50% cut. They also had to agree to a non-compete clause which means Barstool is out of the gambling business for good. Funny that Penn realized quickly it was a mistake to partner with the Stoolies so decided to partner with ESPN, who also happened to go through the same situation when they tried working with Barstool.

 

On 8/11/2023 at 7:10 PM, the admiral said:

If it's true that Penn National got out of the Barstool business because Deadspin readers in the government were denying them gaming licenses out of loyalty to Drew Magary and Barry Petchesky, 

 

I don't even know how to end the post.

 

They were being denied gaming licenses because Portnoy & co. were frequently violating regulations. Some of the major rules around being a gambling operator are that you cannot promote it as a way to make money, can't imply a certain bet is going to win, and can't encourage people to bet more than they can afford to lose. When you have the face of your brand describing himself as a "degenerate gambler" and encouraging people to "bet your house" on a particular game, that's going to ruffle some feathers with the regulators.

 

On 8/12/2023 at 1:22 PM, BBTV said:

One last point about sports gambling - there's always risk involved when the thing you're betting on can be rigged by the people involved, whether they're on the take (more likely in the case of college sports vs pro), or decide to take a "rest day" and not play in the game you bet on, or pull a Ben Simmons and simply not take a shot that may or may not have factored into it.

 

The "players will start throwing games" argument has always seemed a bit overblown to me. There's way too much to lose for athletes these days, so it just isn't worth it to risk your career. The main reason for the Black Sox scandal was that the players were being paid peanuts and saw it as their only chance to make some real money. Now most athletes are millionaires who have to be more concerned with their public image.

 

Also, having the market regulated means it would be much easier to catch any players/coaches doing anything shady. Instead of guys dealing with some barroom bookie or off-shore sports book their money goes through the government now.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

Sage Steele is out at ESPN to presumably do InfoWars or something like that.

 

She really tanked the NBA coverage there and it's not been good ever since.

 

With JVG gone, hopefully they reset everything in a better way.  Not holding my breath though.

[sportsfan7]

On 8/15/2023 at 9:33 AM, spartacat_12 said:

The "players will start throwing games" argument has always seemed a bit overblown to me. There's way too much to lose for athletes these days, so it just isn't worth it to risk your career. The main reason for the Black Sox scandal was that the players were being paid peanuts and saw it as their only chance to make some real money. Now most athletes are millionaires who have to be more concerned with their public image.

Really the only way this made sense was for college sports, but now thanks to NIL anyone in position to rig a high-profile game is certainly already making money. Part of the reason the Bama baseball scandal was caught quickly was bc there were only 4 total bets on the game iirc. Again this was on an SEC baseball game, not anything super obscure. If your profit is only a couple hundred bucks at most, you're not convincing a college pitcher to throw a start for $100 a risk his entire future.

[infrared41]

On 8/15/2023 at 1:38 PM, DG_ThenNowForever said:

Sage Steele is out at ESPN to presumably do InfoWars or something like that.

 

Seems like a step down in her career, but maybe the money at InfoWars is too good to pass up.

[Cujo]

On 8/15/2023 at 11:38 AM, DG_ThenNowForever said:

Sage Steele is out at ESPN to presumably do InfoWars or something like that.

 

She was a very forgettable ESPN personality. I don't think anyone will miss her.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

1 hour ago, Cujo said:

 

She was a very forgettable ESPN personality. I don't think anyone will miss her.

 

She hated Bill Simmons, so she had that going for her.

[Luigi74]

17 hours ago, sportsfan7 said:

Really the only way this made sense was for college sports, but now thanks to NIL anyone in position to rig a high-profile game is certainly already making money. Part of the reason the Bama baseball scandal was caught quickly was bc there were only 4 total bets on the game iirc. Again this was on an SEC baseball game, not anything super obscure. If your profit is only a couple hundred bucks at most, you're not convincing a college pitcher to throw a start for $100 a risk his entire future.

Yeah, the amount of money needed to get someone to throw a game or shave points will drive up the amount that's betted by the gamblers, big money bet on a random Bama-Florida regular season baseball game is going to alert the sports books and law enforcement that something is up. 

[who do you think]

On 8/15/2023 at 1:38 PM, DG_ThenNowForever said:

Sage Steele is out at ESPN to presumably do InfoWars or something like that.

 

She really tanked the NBA coverage there and it's not been good ever since.

 

With JVG gone, hopefully they reset everything in a better way.  Not holding my breath though.

 

Doc Rivers was great with Al Michaels in 2004, but that was way before ESPN's house style became "talk about literally anything but the game happening right now", so all bets are off. Even if Doc ends up being a net positive, never fear, Bore-is Burke is here to ensure a mediocre-at-best telecast.

[The_Admiral]

The NBA on ESPN has always been worse than NBC or Turner. Somehow, the NBA being the preferred league of the media class only seems to make ESPN's coverage worse. They overhaul their personnel every two years and it never makes a difference; no one ever says anything interesting or appears to be enjoying themselves. Maybe their next round of budget cuts will make it so they can't send a camera crew to the arena and just have to cut to Mike Greenberg in a studio doing "What We Talk About When We Talk About LeBron."

 

Al Michaels did not care about the NBA, by the way.

[FinsUp1214]

With all due respect to Mike Breen, who I genuinely think is a great broadcaster himself and not the problem, ESPN’s NBA broadcasts have always seemed so mediocre to me in comparison to NBC’s. The NBA on NBC felt like a massive spectacle that you couldn’t miss, and the coverage was excellent. Outside of Breen, ESPN’s has always felt a bit mailed in and somewhat forgettable.
 

While Turner isn’t without it’s flaws, I do think it’s much better than ESPN and I often find myself preferring to watch games there instead.

[RyanMcD29]

Yeah ESPN's NBA coverage has always been... not great. Breen's the only touch of class it really has and outside of that everything seems mailed in, forgettable announcers and analysts, or downright bad (Van Gundy and Jackson, the studio, the 1 minute "halftime shows" that have 30 seconds of promotion and 30 seconds of LeBron or Curry highlights). The new head team should be good given Doc's prior work and if Doris can get back to the way she was back in the mid 2010's, but even if not she's miles ahead of the past two analysts.

 

TNT's obviously got the sauce with Inside the NBA and the production, though I will say the analyst side's really fallen off a cliff the past 5 years or so. Harlan/Eagle/Anderson are all great, but man Reggie and SVG are BAD.

[BBTV]

Haven't seen any legitimate confirmation, but there seems to be some strong speculation that Apple is looking to buy ESPN and their rights to MLB, NBA, etc.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

2 hours ago, BBTV said:

Haven't seen any legitimate confirmation, but there seems to be some strong speculation that Apple is looking to buy ESPN and their rights to MLB, NBA, etc.

 

If that's the case, I hope Apple can find it in themselves to make a native Windows app.

[The_Admiral]

7 hours ago, FinsUp1214 said:

With all due respect to Mike Breen, who I genuinely think is a great broadcaster himself and not the problem, ESPN’s NBA broadcasts have always seemed so mediocre to me in comparison to NBC’s. The NBA on NBC felt like a massive spectacle that you couldn’t miss, and the coverage was excellent. Outside of Breen, ESPN’s has always felt a bit mailed in and somewhat forgettable.

 

That's what's so insane. The line used to be that everyone in Bristol was a hockey fan and it bled through into their NHL coverage. Obviously, that's not the case anymore with the NBA's ascension to Prestige League status since the last time ESPN lost the NHL. I don't think anything could bring more happiness to the lives of the Twitter-addled Syracuse graduates who populate ESPN to sit and talk all day about what it really means in 2023 to like Klay Thompson, but this zeal for Real Housewives For Men has never translated into an enjoyable presentation. Go figure. Never should have gone beyond being a baseball/hockey/junk-drawer channel, I say.

[Digby]

I mean, dispatching Jalen Rose never to be heard from again is fine with me, but what will it take to do the same with Shaq?

[who do you think]

22 hours ago, the admiral said:

Al Michaels did not care about the NBA, by the way.

 

Not wrong, but he still pulled it off. Al Michaels in his heyday was so naturally good that he could do play-by-play for the kitchen at Chili's and I'd probably still watch.

 

16 hours ago, FinsUp1214 said:

With all due respect to Mike Breen, who I genuinely think is a great broadcaster himself and not the problem, ESPN’s NBA broadcasts have always seemed so mediocre to me in comparison to NBC’s. The NBA on NBC felt like a massive spectacle that you couldn’t miss, and the coverage was excellent. Outside of Breen, ESPN’s has always felt a bit mailed in and somewhat forgettable.

 

Exhibit A of the gulf between NBC and ESPN is Game 1 of the 2001 Finals. Irrespective of the game itself - which was compelling going in and turned out to be a classic - it just feels like every single person involved in that broadcast, from Marv Albert and Doug Collins all the way down to [whoever, name a grunt position, I'm not in the business] was absolutely locked in. Multiple times I've opened the full-game broadcast on Youtube intending to skip ahead to overtime and/or the Iverson stepover, and instead get suckered in and end up just watching the whole thing. I'm sure there's some nostalgia at work there but whatever. ESPN has never and will never put on an NBA broadcast like that. Even when they've had truly classic games to work with - like 2016 Game 7 - the energy just hasn't been there.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

My turning point was Doris Burke asking Kawhi about his contract right after he won the title with Toronto. It was such a gross, crass moment and once you commit to that kind of coverage, there's no going back.

[Germanshepherd]

Agreed. Games just feel bigger when they’re on TNT, and their color commentators also tank the broadcast team. Most of that spectacle comes from Inside the NBA too, which is a show I love dearly but is better the less it talks about basketball. 

 

For ESPN, Breen/Jeff/Mark were amusing, but Breen was the only one capable of rising to the moment. I don’t see Doris/Doc doing anything to fix that.

 

Like this past NBA Finals felt especially mailed in. NBATV actually did a far better job with pre and postgame coverage than the flagship network.