Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

ESPN-bashing and the departure of David Aldridge

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    ESPN-bashing and the departure of David Aldridge

    Apparently loudmouth Steven A. Smith is taking over as the solo NBA "expert" on ESPN. A shame...

    Also a shame to see ESPN morphing into MTV.

    http://www.nypost.com/sports/25596.htm

    SPORTSCENTER: 'ROCK' BOTTOM

    By ANDREW MARCHAND


    July 26, 2004 --
    FACT or Fiction: Put ting a band on SportsCenter" is the best idea ESPN has ever had?

    Fiction. It is the worst idea!

    This week, SportsCenter will have musical performances by Alanis Morissette, The Roots and Five For Fighting, among others.
    With them, SportsCenter will officially jump the shark. It is downhill from here.

    "I don't think it is going to be the end of the world as we know it because we are going to try it," SportsCenter managing editor Norby Williamson said.

    It definitely isn't the end of the world as we know it. It is the beginning.

    This is SportsCenter.

    Formerly the best sports show on TV, it now antagonizes the addicted, die-hard sports junkies as it seeks to lure the casual viewer. So there are more HotSeats, Hearsays and "experts," who seem to know a lot about yelling.

    It apparently works. GimmickCenter ratings keep rising. The new beautiful high definition set should be gold-plated, because the show brings in millions (a source said $50-60 million for the 2002 fiscal year. It is probably more now, but ESPN won't comment.)

    After blowing Fox Sports Net and CNN/SI out of the national sports news business, ESPN is in a rumble for viewers with MTV, E! and the History Channel. How do you steal their audiences? You add music, movies and entertainment, knowing diehards are on the sports' wagon.

    With the rockers scheduled for this week, Williamson gallantly tried to play down the ratings factor, but, in big-time TV, it is always about the ratings.
    Face it, if viewers stick around extra long for the music segments this week, Ryan Seacrest could be seated next to Stuart Scott by Friday.

    The goal is to use SportsCenter to sell other ESPN programs, more than it is to inform. For heaven's sake, even the Bottom Line is about the bottom line.

    On Wednesday evening, the Bottom Line, the ubiquitous sports ticker, took a break from news to read, "Coming up on SportsCenter: Why Tony Hawk thinks Charles Barkley should not ride a skateboard." Bristol, hello?

    On the beer sponsored Hot Seat, the appropriately named Hawk promoted the upcoming X Games. Then viewers finally got the pay off, Hawk said Barkley's feet are too big and he is too heavy for a skateboard. Scintillating.

    On Thursday evening, host Dana Jacobson — who seems like a credible anchor — introduced that night's Top 10 by embarrassingly saying, "Phil Mickelson and Tiger Woods, it is not. But the battle between Happy Gilmore and Shooter McGavin is a golf classic; at least on the silver screen."

    She droned on, introducing the Top 10, which featured real two-sport athletes. As for the make-believe Happy Gilmore, coincidentally, his movie was on ESPN Thursday night.

    SportsCenter still has positives. The attention to detail should be admired. The production is awesome. Giving bigger games more highlight time is effective. If you sift through the garbage, there is some news. On big stories, SportsCenter still shines, snaring a Shaquille O'Neal or a Kobe Bryant for sit-downs.

    The show breaks some news, but not nearly as much as it gives itself credit for, as Kenny Mayne hilariously used to note by saying, "David Aldridge is reporting the Nets beat the Knicks, 82-81." By the way, the soft-spoken Aldridge's ESPN career is done next month.

    Loud is in. As Stephen A. Smith quickly morphs into caricature of himself, he seems like the face of the new SportsCenter. Good for him. The more of an act he develops to rope in casual fans the richer and more famous he'll become. The band plays on, quite literally this week.

    Williamson said the singers are just a tie-in as part of a five-part series on music and athletes. He said he doesn't expect musical acts again any time soon. Whatever.

    It is still on SportsCenter, where there used to be only the sweet sound of, "Duh-duh-dah . . . duh-duh-dah."

    --------------------------------------------
    http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centr...ts/9214737.htm


    Three words to start a personal revolution: I'm boycotting ESPN.

    (For as long as I can.)

    Starting with this morning's "SportsCenter" rerun and lasting until I suffer from a piercing bout of Dick Vitale-deprivation or the network publicly disavows the entire run of "Around the Horn," I'm boycotting ESPN, ESPN2 and any other part of the ESPN broadcast empire.

    (I feel better already.)

    I'm boycotting ESPN because it's the only game in sports-TV journalism and, like all monopolies, has gotten bloated and maddeningly self-absorbed. I'm boycotting ESPN because I want to know if I can. I'm boycotting ESPN because it has become as omnipresent and dangerous as Microsoft, and it takes a conscious effort to avoid the brand.

    Hey, we survived thousands of years before the ESPN era began in 1979 and Chris Berman started demanding that sports virgins be brought to his throne as tribute, right?

    So I have to do something to avoid the inexplicable new "Stump the Schwab" game show, which is either a hoax or proof that ESPN programming guru Mark Shapiro has replaced Marlon Brando as America's most powerful loon.

    The horror!

    Something became clear to me recently amid the dopey "Home Run Derby," the repulsive ESPYs, the rewrite-history-as-schlock ESPN25 broadcasts and the mindless shrieking and whining.

    (I was a member of the voting panel for ESPN25; I can't be the only voter horrified by the first few shows.)

    Somewhere in the past few days, it dawned on me that Bad ESPN had finally gobbled up Good ESPN.

    ESPN has always had a split personality: Good ESPN, with tremendous reporters, excellent game coverage and a sense of responsibility; and Bad ESPN, which believes that the only way to cut through the clutter is to SHOUT LOUDER AND LOUDER and produce dumber and dumber shows.

    Good ESPN is "Baseball Tonight," "Pardon the Interruption" and "Outside the Lines." It's Tom Jackson, Bob Ley, Harold Reynolds, Linda Cohn, Chris Mortensen and Dan Patrick.

    Bad ESPN is almost everything else, from Berman to the ESPYs to Stuart Scott to NFL analysts Sean Salisbury and John Clayton (two very nice guys off-air) yelling at each other like kindergartners.

    Bad ESPN created "Dream Job" and its winner, new "SportsCenter" anchor Mike Hall, whose attempts at humor and highlight narration make him sound like a 5-month-old cocker spaniel doing the sports report: lots of high-pitched squealing, some drooling, playful pats on the nose by those nearest to him.

    And he makes me think of that amplifier joke in "Spinal Tap."

    We know that Scott and Berman are all-time "10s" on the annoyance meter. Now Hall has come along and, hello, we find out ESPN can pump it up to "11" when it really needs to.

    Of course, remnants of Good ESPN survive. Only Wednesday, I was mesmerized by Ley's "SportsCenter" report on the doping charges leveled at Lance Armstrong.

    I'd estimate I watch about 75 to 90 minutes of ESPN programming a day, either as background noise or to catch up on things by tuning in to "SportsCenter." And Bad ESPN is everywhere.

    Over those 75 minutes, ESPN is a TV obstacle course: Whoops, watch out, blatant self-promotion, turn to CNN! Get back in time for the update on the Los Angeles Lakers' break-up. Oh no, it's an ESPYs replay, turn off the TV right now!!!

    ESPN had two main NBA analysts last season - thoughtful, knowledgeable veteran NBA reporter David Aldridge and the infamous Screamin' A. Smith. Guess which one they just let go? Hint: It wasn't the guy who actually makes sense and doesn't harm your ears.

    Look at what they're doing. What does that tell you about how ESPN sees its viewers? As children, you think?

    It's no secret that Disney-owned ESPN is trying to transform itself into a mega-entertainment studio to rival Pixar. But instead, it's mutating into a particularly smarmy dimension of hell to rival, well, hell.

    Eventually, there will be major ESPN backlash. I don't know if it's coming yet, but I know I want to be out there first, because I want to be on the side with a soul.

    So I'm boycotting. I toyed with the idea of drafting my sports-crazy nephew - smack dab in the middle of ESPN's 18-to-25 demographic target territory - to make this a contest.

    But I just want to test myself for now. It's not a crusade. I have no desire to become a martyr, squashed by the ESPN logo, though that might occur anyway.

    I admit, I chose to start the boycott now, partly because I knew it'd be a relatively easy time to go ESPN cold turkey.

    The Shaq-and-Kobe drama is done, the NFL isn't revving up until September, I can get my baseball fix from the Giants and A's local telecasts, and the Olympics, one of the few things not in the ESPN orbit, will soon blot out the landscape.

    But it still will be difficult to keep up the boycott. For instance: Where can I get gossip about the upcoming baseball trade deadline? Fox Net's "Best Damn Sports Show" is not an option, because that's like boycotting Shell by buying a Chevron station.

    I know eventually I will come back to ESPN. I need it, I hate it. I'm boycotting it, for as long as I can.

    You can support me. You can belittle me. But I'm boycotting ESPN. I'll let you know when I relapse.

    [edit=97=1090928526][/edit]
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: ESPN-bashing and the departure of David Aldridge

    I wish there was an alternative - how on earth do they get rid of Aldridge? Where is he going? I hope to NBA TV.

    ESPN's 'personalities' are more than I can take - starting with Berman and Scott. Vitale used to be the exception to the rule - now he is one of dozens of jokes ESPN continues to play on us.
    Heywoode says... work hard man.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: ESPN-bashing and the departure of David Aldridge

      Scott is the one I can't stand.

      Man, that Booyah schtick is really annoying.

      Along with Big Ups, and Dawg!

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: ESPN-bashing and the departure of David Aldridge

        YAY! More Stephen A......wait......that sucks....



        I think his opinions are always far from reality and the truth, oh well I guess its better than Walton.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: ESPN-bashing and the departure of David Aldridge

          Two great articles.

          I rarely watch Sportscenter anyway, but I do watch ESPN's NBA coverage because at least in the playoffs we have no choice.

          ESPN does have some excellent NFL programming, or they did the last time I have watched it which now that I think about it might be a couple of years ago. But their Sunday morning NFL pregame show was always excellent as was their Monday night 90 minute NFL show.

          I watch ESPN news as much as I watch ESPN

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: ESPN-bashing and the departure of David Aldridge

            Very nice articles.

            I'd boycott ESPN too, if it weren't for there's no other place to get decent highlights, quick stats, etc.

            I too cannot stand Berman, Stu Scott, Stephen A., Dick Vitale, (former host) Max Kellerman, Tony Reali (new ATH host, who is also a Yankee fan ), and Sean Salibury, who had no business to be a "celebrity" at the Indy 500 this year.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: ESPN-bashing and the departure of David Aldridge

              I hope Aldridge goes to TNT or something.

              And I hate most of those guys, exception being Berman. I really like how he conducts things during the NFL season.
              Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: ESPN-bashing and the departure of David Aldridge

                Note, the "boycott" article was even from last week, before Aldridge got canned.

                I'm sick of ESPN. Besides the above complaints, my biggest is they drove TK away from radio, then replaced him with that POS Cowherd. My god is he horrible.

                But, after everything, I was thinking, "I've still got PTI". So, what happens? Tony and Wilbon are off this week, replaced by, brace yourselves, Skip Bayless and Screamin A. Oh, the horror.

                As for DA, while I'd love to see him on TNT, that's not enough for him. They don't cover the NBA year round, or even daily, just game coverage. He needs more than that. Hopefully, he'll go write for a national paper, and go to work for NBATV so we can see more of him. And by "we" I mean those who actually have it, myself sadly not included.

                [edit] Also, UB, their football coverage has gone down hill since two years ago.
                [edit=67=1090941326][/edit]
                Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: ESPN-bashing and the departure of David Aldridge

                  You do know this is all taking place because of the Curse of John Madden. If people had only known, someone could have took him out years ago.
                  [edit=346=1090944913][/edit]
                  You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: ESPN-bashing and the departure of David Aldridge

                    Did you guys know that ESPN was originally mainly for sports betters? Odds, up to the minute scores, etc.
                    Ever notice the extreme attention that major betting events like horse racing, boxing, etc get. And now "live" pokerzz!
                    The fact that it became commercially viable to mainstream america had to make some hoods VERY happy.
                    [edit=467=1090945228][/edit]

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: ESPN-bashing and the departure of David Aldridge

                      ESPN are total idiots for choosing Steven A. Smith over DA.

                      The only good things remaining on ESPN in my eyes are PTI, ATH, Outside the Lines, and Dan Patrick.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Damn you, infotainment!!

                        Tom,

                        I just posted a couple of weeks ago either here or on the Indystar board that I'm done with ESPN.

                        Steven Smith is absolutely ridiculous. On top of that, he has the nerve to be smug. He's singlehandedly can make me turn the channel. Jagoff!

                        I never understood why they make Clayton and Salsbury take contrary stances on EVERYTHING.

                        David Aldrige gone? David Aldridge!?? :shakehead: WTF??!!

                        I don't know Mike Hall...cause...well...I gave up on ESPN. And what's that stupid show where athletes answer sports trivia? What is that? How is that entertaining??

                        Why does everything have to be about gloss and danm the content.

                        Did I see ESPN showing movies the other day?

                        I'm with you. I'm holding out long as I can. I just got a jump start before you and not being a fan of baseball , I'm sticking to my guns long as I can. It just sucks that there's no other real options.

                        You know what would be nice..and interesting? If someone started doing a sports network, or BIG block of sports programming that took the stance that sports was life or death. Not really, but by that, I mean, no quirky jokes, no nicknames, just really analytical, cerebral reporting. Treat it like political reporting. Tale a stance like 60 minutes.

                        I never thought I'd say this...and literally with a copy of The Big Show: inside ESPN's Sportscenter literally on my desk (A good read of the early days, BTW)...but ESPN blows!!
                        Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: ESPN-bashing and the departure of David Aldridge

                          The funny thing is, we've been calling out ESPN on this garbage for quite some time now. Nice to see more jumping on the bandwagon.

                          ESPN = sellouts

                          It is now BSPN. :shakehead:

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Damn you, infotainment!!

                            Originally posted by Skaut

                            Why does everything have to be about gloss and damn the content...

                            You know what would be nice..and interesting? If someone started doing a sports network, or BIG block of sports programming that took the stance that sports was life or death. Not really, but by that, I mean, no quirky jokes, no nicknames, just really analytical, cerebral reporting. Treat it like political reporting. Take a stance like 60 minutes.
                            Sort of like a TV version of the short-lived paper by Frank DeFord called "The National".

                            That would be GREAT. I've always HATED FoxSports and "Best Damned Sports Show" but ESPN is morphing into something annoyingly similar.

                            The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: ESPN-bashing and the departure of David Aldridge

                              It's interesting to see how ESPN's influence is spreading. Just the other day I found out (and I know I was late in this) that the former ATH host, Max Kellerman has a new show on Fox Sports called Imax. I decided to check it out just to see what the fuss was all about.

                              I was very dissapointed to see that the show was nothing more than a ATH ripoff.

                              And DA was one of the extremely few people that ESPN had that actually knew what he was talking about.
                              Bob Ley is still great though, I love outside the lines.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X