One more thing ESPN needs: to NEVER let Chris Berman in the booth to do a baseball game. He’s the play-by-play guy?!?!?!?!? He can frickin’ let a whole half inning go by without EVER ONCE calling a pitch. Even many hits and outs are ignored. If you’re not watching and just listening, three outs can occur and you’d never know it until the commercials start. Thankfully he only does a few games a year but good God he is THE WORST.

1. Jim Rome.
2. Some sportscenter scrub did a piece comparing the Shipley/McCoy passing connection to skeet shooting, and uttered these words. “McCoy favorite skeet is Jordan Shipley’s” – thank you ESPN

Subpoint, When ESPN does put their real soccer expert on air (not including Julie Fowdy and Alexie Lalas) it is actually quite insightful and concise.

Definitely agree with most of this. Also, was intending on typing what Josh S. above wrote about ESPN Radio. It’s incredible that so much of their great content is found on the radio. There are better analysts, better thinkings… people that can actually connect one idea to another and really paint a picture. Listening to Gammons (who has left ESPN) or Tim Kurkjian (who is still awesome at ESPN) is fantastic. Listening to John Kruk? Not as fantastic.

I’m not sure the problem totally lies with ESPN though.

I kind of want to blame the Sunday Football Pre-Game shows instead. These guys are 1000% less intelligent than your given ESPN chatterbox. Whoever decided that Shannon Sharpe would be great on TV is a complete moron. The fact that it’s WORKING and he still has a job says something about the viewer…or the fact that no other programming can contend with the NFL on Sundays and you either watch Shannon Sharpe do his best Mr. Ed impersonation or you’re stuck with loads of fake laughs and boo-ya’s from FOX or ESPN. (I’m allowed to type run-on’s in comments, right?)

FYI – NFL Pre-Game / Post-Game guys: We have computers that make special effects, you don’t need to make noises.

We’d have to do some research, but I feel like when the NFL Pre/Post-game shows went to a goofier bunch, ESPN got a little more ludicrous too. Now the newspapers are going. Everyone is blogging (so do I). Anyone is a journalist. I think mainstream media is just getting less and less professional, they’re trying to appeal to mass consumers and not to people that are legitimately intelligent (see: recent changes at the Wall Street Journal).

I prefer listening to guys that know what they are talking about. That’s why ESPN’s baseball broadcasts, mostly, have been great since I’ve been stumbling around Earth. Professional guys that have been in the business a long time, know what they’re talking about, and have stories about the old guys.

Case in point:

Bill Walton is considered a “terrible” basketball announcer to most people our age and people think he is a joke.

Fact:

Bill Walton was one of the greatest big men of all time, is vastly intelligent, has a ton of knowledge about the NBA and its history and is able to inspire people like few can.

Unfortunately, his jokes aren’t quite good enough and that’s why he’s not an ESPN NBA Broadcaster anymore.

Good article fellas, please annoy ESPN with it.

One criticism on the column though: while I agree wholeheartedly that sports fans are generally dumb, I’m not sure the Sammy Sosa corking was the best example you could’ve come up with. That seems an example more tailored to a discussion of how people don’t care about the transgressions of their sports figures so long as they perform. I always like to joke about how Knick fans embraced Latrell Sprewell en masse because he put the ball in the basket.

If anything, those are illustrations of the public’s shaky set of morals, not of their intelligence level. There’s nothing “dumb” (i.e. misinformed, unintelligent, , etc) per se about overlooking a sports figure’s shaky character or cheating.

1. While not perfect, ESPN radio still offers a superior product to ESPN tv and ESPN.com. Disney knows full well that no one besides 80-year-old men and myself listen to sports talk radio (something I am reminded of every day at work). Because of this, the amount of censorship and athlete worshiping is significantly toned down, leaving room for some actual, helpful, analysis. Furthermore, at least 50% of the programming is local, and most stations can be tuned from anywhere online. This comes in handy when I grow slightly tired of hearing about your “greatest baseball team ever to not win a championship in 102 years and those south-side guys who got lucky” and want to listen to commentary about consistently underperforming Wisconsin teams.

2. ESPN could improve dramatically by removing one hour of mind-numbing repetition and replacing it with a show written by the guy who started deadspin.com. Although his site lacks some substance and can often be very bias and frustrating, it does offer the unique quality of being highly sinical and quite critical of the sports industry, and more specifically sports media. A humorous “breath of fresh air” can go a long way.

Thats all I have. Time to go waste my 30 minute lunch break learning about NASCAR and how bad the Nets still are.