Skip to main content

ESPN+ cannot carry the team

As a writer, as well as a believer in the power of good journalism, I would never attempt to tear apart someone else's material nor I would knowingly attempt to discredit anyone's credentials. However, in the interest of fairness and honesty, I will at times offer a rebuttal to someone's op-ed piece that simply seems to fall flat while attempting to be persuasive. In all honesty, I would expect someone to do the same for me.

In the interest of respect, I will not link the article nor name the author or publication, but the summary of the article is that ESPN+ is an essential and worthwhile investment for those who love sports and are cutting the cord on cable. The problem is that the author did not make an argument even close to sufficient to make the point that it is essential for sports enthusiasts; the entirety of their argument centered around the fact that more soccer would be available for everyone. While this is great for soccer fans (which I consider myself at times), it does not even remotely make a strong case for ESPN+ because there really is no good argument for ESPN+ currently.
Image result for espn+ logo
ESPN+ Logo

If you are not a sports fan, or do not watch ESPN, you may have no idea what ESPN+ even means. Basically, it is a standalone streaming service from ESPN (Disney) that offers (for $5 a month) various sports programming that is not carried on the main ESPN family of programs. Those sports will basically range from soccer to various college sports to some MLB regional broadcasts that are not blacked out. Like WatchESPN, the additional service offered to ESPN cable subscribers, you say? Not even close because while WatchESPN has all of the programming on ESPN networks as well as additional programming such as ESPNU, ESPN+ currently only gets the programming that will not be featured on any of the ESPN networks. Also, if you like any programming such as SportsCenter, Get Up!, or Golic and Wingo, forget about it because those are only on "regular" ESPN.

Thankfully, Disney had the sense to make it clear this was simply a complementary service to ESPN and not designed to stand on its own; I just wish the author of the article had had the sense to make sure people understood that (full disclosure, they hastily put that in the last paragraph of the article). For those who love all sports and watch them 24/7, ESPN+ could be a good use of $5 a month as it will get you access to the equivalent of ESPN8. However, for those of us who love sports other than soccer and archived streams of games long-since-passed, ESPN+ is certainly not yet ready to be our end-all-be-all of sports entertainment and may never be that. Pretending that it is, and even making the case that it is based on a specific preference, will lead to a lot of cord-cutters unsatisfied...that is until they launch a new studio show featuring Cotton McKnight and Pepper Brooks.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Trust Indicators and Fake News

It is no secret that we have a significant "Fake News" problem in the world today. Before everyone starts preparing their defenses for their favorite news sources, let me clarify that I am not talking about "Biased News". As much as President Trump likes to say it, CNN is not actually "Fake News" and neither is FOX, NBC, ABC, et cetera. Biased as these sites may be at times (mostly all the time), the news they are reporting is based in fact; it just has a very biased spin. I would think that functioning adults would be able to tell the difference between: "Trump signs healthcare reform in to law causing issues for middle-class" and "Trump seen punching babies on his way out of gentleman's club" While there is no way for me to know if the second statement ever happened (I highly doubt it), I would assume that most people would understand that one is fake and one is biased. Unfortunately, we seem to have reached a point that peop...
Post a Comment
Read more

iPhone 7

It is that time again: Apple has launched a new iPhone, and the masses will flock tomorrow to get their hands on the "best one yet". However, I believe that this line is beginning to be slightly misleading. Is it the best iPhone? Yes. Is it the best phone? I would say no. At the same time, I do believe that it is a solid device. Admittedly, I have not had an iPhone since 4; I also had a MacBook Pro and iPad 2 at the time. I used to be fully in the iCorner. I believed that the ecosystem they designed was unbeatable, and their hardware was second-to-none. These days I have a slightly different perspective. That is a different story, however. Let's look at the iPhone 7 (and plus) just on its own merits. In the days of 6" plus screens, built in DSLR's (hyperbole), and pixel-less screens, the iPhone is a jack-of-all trades, master of none. I have not personally tested the phone, but like all tech announcements, I watched the live streaming event. I did not see any...
Post a Comment
Read more

Mobile payments are the future, but how long will it take for us to get there?

We are all understandably protective of our money right? We conceal our cash when we are forced to open our wallets, keep our pin numbers to ourselves, and certainly do not just hand our credit cards off to just anyway. So, along those lines, I am curious how we as a society feel about mobile payments. Now, because I try to keep this blog open and understandable to all, I will not talk about the encryption of mobile payment nor the process of virtual card numbers and the like. I am curious as to the perception of the average person. Personally, I am all for mobile payment, and I love the convenience of simply pulling out my phone and then being on my way. I never have to worry about pulling out my card, trying to figure out whether to slide it or insert it, typing in my number, putting my pin number in, pulling it back out and in my wallet, and putting my wallet away; when I am waiting in line, I often already have my phone out anyway. There is so much potential in mobile payment. ...
Post a Comment
Read more