Comments on: The Twins and ESPN http://firegardy.com/2009/03/02/the-twins-and-espn/ Mismanaging games since 2002 Mon, 07 May 2012 02:37:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: FunBobby http://firegardy.com/2009/03/02/the-twins-and-espn/comment-page-1/#comment-1989 FunBobby Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:02:41 +0000 http://firegardy.com/?p=429#comment-1989 <p>Agreed. How many people in random, rural places in Idaho or Nebraska or something have been drawn to the Red Sox because of their exposure on ESPN? My guess is a lot. It also doesn't help that one of their most recognizable faces (Peter Gammons) is a former Red Sox beat writer.</p> Agreed. How many people in random, rural places in Idaho or Nebraska or something have been drawn to the Red Sox because of their exposure on ESPN? My guess is a lot. It also doesn’t help that one of their most recognizable faces (Peter Gammons) is a former Red Sox beat writer.

]]> By: sirsean http://firegardy.com/2009/03/02/the-twins-and-espn/comment-page-1/#comment-1988 sirsean Mon, 02 Mar 2009 22:23:22 +0000 http://firegardy.com/?p=429#comment-1988 <p>Also, there's a chicken and egg problem here. While it's true that there is a disproportionate number of "Red Sox fans" buying cable packages and pink hats, that does not imply that they existed before ESPN started showing nothing but Red Sox and essentially encouraging their audience to become fans of a specific team.</p> <p>If that's not irresponsible journalism, I think the definition is incorrect.</p> <p>Also, let me point out that this is not a political blog, so I hope you consider "the socialist running the country" to be a joke similar in meaning and potential reaction to "the illiterate that runs the country" that might have been uttered a year ago. Otherwise, comments like that have no place here. Whoever you are.</p> Also, there’s a chicken and egg problem here. While it’s true that there is a disproportionate number of “Red Sox fans” buying cable packages and pink hats, that does not imply that they existed before ESPN started showing nothing but Red Sox and essentially encouraging their audience to become fans of a specific team.

If that’s not irresponsible journalism, I think the definition is incorrect.

Also, let me point out that this is not a political blog, so I hope you consider “the socialist running the country” to be a joke similar in meaning and potential reaction to “the illiterate that runs the country” that might have been uttered a year ago. Otherwise, comments like that have no place here. Whoever you are.

]]> By: FunBobby http://firegardy.com/2009/03/02/the-twins-and-espn/comment-page-1/#comment-1987 FunBobby Mon, 02 Mar 2009 21:37:58 +0000 http://firegardy.com/?p=429#comment-1987 <p>I wouldn't say its all population distribution. The Angels don't seem to get that much coverage. I recently learned that Houston is the Country's 4th largest city, behind New York, LA, and Chicago. The astros are hardly on tv. However, you do have a point. There are more people who claim to be red sox fans, (i.e. buy a cable package with espn) than many other teams (sometimes combined). I'm not necessarily demanding equal time, but it seems like ESPN might as well be NESP, New England Sports Programming Network.</p> I wouldn’t say its all population distribution. The Angels don’t seem to get that much coverage. I recently learned that Houston is the Country’s 4th largest city, behind New York, LA, and Chicago. The astros are hardly on tv. However, you do have a point. There are more people who claim to be red sox fans, (i.e. buy a cable package with espn) than many other teams (sometimes combined). I’m not necessarily demanding equal time, but it seems like ESPN might as well be NESP, New England Sports Programming Network.

]]> By: Bob http://firegardy.com/2009/03/02/the-twins-and-espn/comment-page-1/#comment-1986 Bob Mon, 02 Mar 2009 21:33:30 +0000 http://firegardy.com/?p=429#comment-1986 <p>Population distribution. They cater to the larger markets. It's frustrating to see limited coverage for the Twins, but perfectly understandable. If you want equal coverage for all teams maybe you should take it up with the socialist running the country.</p> Population distribution. They cater to the larger markets. It’s frustrating to see limited coverage for the Twins, but perfectly understandable. If you want equal coverage for all teams maybe you should take it up with the socialist running the country.

]]> By: FunBobby http://firegardy.com/2009/03/02/the-twins-and-espn/comment-page-1/#comment-1984 FunBobby Mon, 02 Mar 2009 16:29:53 +0000 http://firegardy.com/?p=429#comment-1984 <p>Remember a few years back on ESPN when Steve Phillips held mock MLB GM press conferences. They made it seem like they were going to do every team, but in reality they only did the Yankees, Red Sox, Mets and a few other teams. I'm pretty sure he didn't do the Twins.</p> Remember a few years back on ESPN when Steve Phillips held mock MLB GM press conferences. They made it seem like they were going to do every team, but in reality they only did the Yankees, Red Sox, Mets and a few other teams. I’m pretty sure he didn’t do the Twins.

]]> By: sirsean http://firegardy.com/2009/03/02/the-twins-and-espn/comment-page-1/#comment-1983 sirsean Mon, 02 Mar 2009 16:18:43 +0000 http://firegardy.com/?p=429#comment-1983 <p>Very true, they're doing their "30 teams in 30 days" thing. ESPN would never do that.</p> <p>But this wasn't a question about the Red Sox. It was a question about baseball in general, and the answer was "The Red Sox are great!"</p> <p>And seriously, what team doesn't have at least some mix of homegrown talent and free agents?</p> <p>And if they were going to talk about the Red Sox because it was during a Red Sox game ... allow me to point out that it was also a Twins game. And they did not mention the Twins at all.</p> Very true, they’re doing their “30 teams in 30 days” thing. ESPN would never do that.

But this wasn’t a question about the Red Sox. It was a question about baseball in general, and the answer was “The Red Sox are great!”

And seriously, what team doesn’t have at least some mix of homegrown talent and free agents?

And if they were going to talk about the Red Sox because it was during a Red Sox game … allow me to point out that it was also a Twins game. And they did not mention the Twins at all.

]]> By: Erica http://firegardy.com/2009/03/02/the-twins-and-espn/comment-page-1/#comment-1982 Erica Mon, 02 Mar 2009 16:16:03 +0000 http://firegardy.com/?p=429#comment-1982 <p>Yeah, but they've been doing stuff like that for EVERY organization. It's interesting to see that they have lengthy Orioles and Astros analysis, for example. You know ESPN wouldn't give the time of day to those teams.</p> Yeah, but they’ve been doing stuff like that for EVERY organization. It’s interesting to see that they have lengthy Orioles and Astros analysis, for example. You know ESPN wouldn’t give the time of day to those teams.

]]> By: sirsean http://firegardy.com/2009/03/02/the-twins-and-espn/comment-page-1/#comment-1981 sirsean Mon, 02 Mar 2009 15:56:49 +0000 http://firegardy.com/?p=429#comment-1981 <p>I wouldn't say MLBN is much better than ESPN when it comes to Boston-worshiping.</p> <p>Yesterday during the game they had some technical difficulties with the camera at the stadium. So they cut away to commercial until they could get the studio crew in place. Then they cut to the studio crew, and it went like this:</p> <p>Guy 1: So what do we think about the status of baseball in 2009? Guy 2: Well, to me, the Red Sox are really the perfect franchise. They've simply done everything right. Guy 3: Yeah and they're really a franchise that, when you look at it, is built on homegrown players as well as free agents. That's really special. Guy 1: The Red Sox are really good. We're the MLB Network, where baseball is always on!</p> <p>Then they cut to commercial again, and when they came back, they played that exact same tape over and over until the game was available again.</p> <p>It was EXCRUCIATING.</p> I wouldn’t say MLBN is much better than ESPN when it comes to Boston-worshiping.

Yesterday during the game they had some technical difficulties with the camera at the stadium. So they cut away to commercial until they could get the studio crew in place. Then they cut to the studio crew, and it went like this:

Guy 1: So what do we think about the status of baseball in 2009? Guy 2: Well, to me, the Red Sox are really the perfect franchise. They’ve simply done everything right. Guy 3: Yeah and they’re really a franchise that, when you look at it, is built on homegrown players as well as free agents. That’s really special. Guy 1: The Red Sox are really good. We’re the MLB Network, where baseball is always on!

Then they cut to commercial again, and when they came back, they played that exact same tape over and over until the game was available again.

It was EXCRUCIATING.

]]> By: Erica http://firegardy.com/2009/03/02/the-twins-and-espn/comment-page-1/#comment-1980 Erica Mon, 02 Mar 2009 15:38:51 +0000 http://firegardy.com/?p=429#comment-1980 <p>This is why I'm glad MLB network has come along- so far they haven't been showing nearly as much bias towards the Yanks/Red Sox (plus, there's just a lot more coverage). A little competition for the Baseball Tonight slot might motivate the folks at ESPN to remove their heads from their sphincters. </p> <p>To be fair, the Twins looked like they were half-asleep at the plate Sunday. But if the ESPN announcers decided to praise Beckett, they definitely should have given a nod to Slowey as well.</p> This is why I’m glad MLB network has come along- so far they haven’t been showing nearly as much bias towards the Yanks/Red Sox (plus, there’s just a lot more coverage). A little competition for the Baseball Tonight slot might motivate the folks at ESPN to remove their heads from their sphincters.

To be fair, the Twins looked like they were half-asleep at the plate Sunday. But if the ESPN announcers decided to praise Beckett, they definitely should have given a nod to Slowey as well.

]]> By: FunBobby http://firegardy.com/2009/03/02/the-twins-and-espn/comment-page-1/#comment-1979 FunBobby Mon, 02 Mar 2009 15:07:24 +0000 http://firegardy.com/?p=429#comment-1979 <p>Its one thing to have people like Bill Simmons on staff, nobody expects him to be objective. But when most of your baseball staff are very biased, you are in trouble. Peter Gammons was a writer for the Boston Globe. Buster Olney was a beat writer for the Yankees at the new york times (yes, apparently they do have a sports section). I really think espn should do for baseball what they have done with basketball and the TrueHoop network. A network of blogs that covers all the NBA teams. I volunteer firegardy.com to be the Twins representative on such a network.</p> Its one thing to have people like Bill Simmons on staff, nobody expects him to be objective. But when most of your baseball staff are very biased, you are in trouble. Peter Gammons was a writer for the Boston Globe. Buster Olney was a beat writer for the Yankees at the new york times (yes, apparently they do have a sports section). I really think espn should do for baseball what they have done with basketball and the TrueHoop network. A network of blogs that covers all the NBA teams. I volunteer firegardy.com to be the Twins representative on such a network.

]]>