• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Petition to ESPN for better World Cup broadcasters

Bloodwhiner

Commodore
Commodore
Okay, I know not everyone is a fan of Futball (Soccer to most of you) but this is for the folks who are. ESPN has the most dismal broadcast team possible assigned to the World Cup. A baseball color commentator who has watched his kids play youth league! North Korea has better insight than these guys

Before the World Cup coverage is utterly destroyed join the petition to get someone who knows the sport and can analyze the game. Get someone who at least has emotion.

Sign the petition -- http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/World_Cup_Announcers#signForm
 
Nice idea but it comes down to who ever pays the most for the coverage rights. If ESPN were to pay top $ for the rights and not show a single second of the World Cup the governing body wouldn't worry too much - they got they their money.

Just look at the crappy coverage of the various Olympic Games. You'd think after doing a crappy job the networks wouldn't be allowed to show them again. Nope - along comes the next Olympiad and with the same shitty coverate.
 
Surely you could hire these guys ?
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMgxF3dDZHw[/yt]
 
Nice idea but it comes down to who ever pays the most for the coverage rights. If ESPN were to pay top $ for the rights and not show a single second of the World Cup the governing body wouldn't worry too much - they got they their money.

Just look at the crappy coverage of the various Olympic Games. You'd think after doing a crappy job the networks wouldn't be allowed to show them again. Nope - along comes the next Olympiad and with the same shitty coverate.

That's not exactly accurate. Some sports organisations do care about the way their "product" is presented also and not just the money itself. I don't know how restrictive FIFA is, but Formula1 for example is extremely strict and demands that channels show the qualifiying and a certain amount of pre- and post-race coverage etc and all kinds of other stuff or they just don't get the rights to show the race at all.
 
This whole thing makes me wonder why America was given the World Cup in 1994 to begin with: nobody really gave a shit, Letterman and Leno constantly insulted the game with suggestions to make it more like NFL football, and MLS wasn't around yet, so why host the thing? Why not give it to a North American country that gives a shit, and whose broadcast channels/networks (TSN & CBC) can cover it better than NBC, CBS, ABC, and ESPN, like-oh, I don't know, Canada?

As it is, I say that America will have to wait until the generation that grew up with European football grows up and takes over things; then, and only then, will TV coverage of the World Cup get better.
 
On that note, can you get the CBC where you are, Bloodwhiner? Because their soccer coverage is generally excellent.
 
On that note, can you get the CBC where you are, Bloodwhiner? Because their soccer coverage is generally excellent.

He might also want to thrown in TSN as well, because they cover soccer all the time on Soccer Saturday a lot more than CBC does.
 
Nice idea but it comes down to who ever pays the most for the coverage rights. If ESPN were to pay top $ for the rights and not show a single second of the World Cup the governing body wouldn't worry too much - they got they their money.

Just look at the crappy coverage of the various Olympic Games. You'd think after doing a crappy job the networks wouldn't be allowed to show them again. Nope - along comes the next Olympiad and with the same shitty coverate.

That's not exactly accurate. Some sports organisations do care about the way their "product" is presented also and not just the money itself. I don't know how restrictive FIFA is, but Formula1 for example is extremely strict and demands that channels show the qualifiying and a certain amount of pre- and post-race coverage etc and all kinds of other stuff or they just don't get the rights to show the race at all.

How much qualifying would they have to show becasue I know in Australian when Nine Network had F1 we got the Australian hosts for a few minutes before the race, went to the race on warmup lap, race (with occasional comments from the Australian hosts after an add break) and a few minutes after the race with the hosts and that was it. Only exception was the Australian F1 GP. I think Ch10 does show a bit more but they don't do overly much. I'm pretty sure it wasn't unprecedent for the race not to be even shown live.

Ch9's Tennis coverage is even worse. Last year they had the guy in the studio pretending the match on centre court featuring an Australian player was live when it had been over for a couple of hours.

Though SBS has the World Cup and there coverage is usually pretty good (until the day it proves a rating bonaza and the commerical networks outbid them).
 
This whole thing makes me wonder why America was given the World Cup in 1994 to begin with: nobody really gave a shit, Letterman and Leno constantly insulted the game with suggestions to make it more like NFL football, and MLS wasn't around yet, so why host the thing? Why not give it to a North American country that gives a shit, and whose broadcast channels/networks (TSN & CBC) can cover it better than NBC, CBS, ABC, and ESPN, like-oh, I don't know, Canada?

As it is, I say that America will have to wait until the generation that grew up with European football grows up and takes over things; then, and only then, will TV coverage of the World Cup get better.

MLS is around because of the '94 World Cup. A domestic league starting play within a few years was a condition made by FIFA to the US Soccer Federation of hosting that year. The thing is that many people in the US DO give a shit. Most of them are immigrants from footy countries. But the NASL killed soccer interest in the US and Canada. It may never be a top tier sport here, but it could be a solid second tier sport, and a step below the other top leagues in the world as the kids who are growing up as MLS fans start to have children.

CBC's coverage is great; I'm so glad I live here for World Cup watching. Heading out with my Brit girlfriend (she in her England kit, me in my USA jersey) for the tilt on Saturday and CAN'T WAIT.
 
I've been fed up with ESPN for awhile. I haven't even watched any of their networks since they dropped the NHL and any other hockey related shows. Even before that however, I was disappointed that they seemed to have baseball commentators as hockey analysts. IT was a little weird, since the sports are nothing alike, and a lot of the baseball guys got a lot of hockey terms and names wrong.

By contrast, I wasn't super bothered when Universal Sports was showing the Champions Hockey League and using Soccer announcers. The sports are more similar, even if some of the terms were misused. I could just mute it, for after all, how many professional British hockey commentators could there be?

What I find sad about the original poster's troubles in this thread is that Soccer may not be huge in the US, but it us huge worldwide. I'm sure ESPN could find announcers if it looked. Instead, they are just trying to give their Poker analysts something to do on off Hold'em nights. I think the channel has slid a very long way. The X-Games is the only remotely sports thing they have left. Do they still have that? Now its all secondary sports and games-even log rolling! Who is watching this stuff? What are their ratings like?
 
^Tyler does Premier League games, yes ?

I'm not sure, but I think in that case he's actually working for Sky Sports in the UK on Football First and ESPN in the US just take the feed.
 
The articles I've read make me think that he's being employed by the Disney/ABC/ESPN Conglomerate to call the World Cup live for them.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top