PDA

View Full Version : My letter to ESPN


HTown2ATX
12-13-2011, 12:50 PM
Mods....I assume this is cool here?

So, I just emailed them, they only allow 1000 characters on their submission for the subject matter I was emailing on, so this first one below this is what I ended up sending...it's short and sucks IMO they only allow 1000 charcters....that is nothing....my daughter types 1000 charcters just by accident...total FAIL and I couldn't find and actual something@something email...anyway....here is what I sent first and below that is what I would have sent had they alowed REAL email.....

(*submission and yes...the last part that says FAIL was submitted)
I'm a little confused and concerned as to why the Texans got very little (that I could see when watching) coverage for their recent win last Sunday over the Bengals to reach the playoffs for the first time in their history. Not to mention they did that by winning the division with a 5th round rookie QB out of a basketball school (North Carolina) 3rd stringer in T.J. Yates. Not only that statement alone I would think warrants coverage, but the last second TD to win was incredible as well. I woke up Monday morning to get ready for work eager to watch ESPN and see highlights and relive the emotional high from the day before. The game did not even make the top 10 plays if I remember correctly. In fact, throughout the day on ESPN I saw nearly every game it seemed but this game. I came home at lunch and watched First Take on ESPN2, hoping they would at least touch it after the normal 20 minutes to an hour of Tebow and Cowboys coverage but was left with nothing. (only 1000 characters?...FAIL)

(*original...hey since I wrote this whole damn thing I'm posting it somewhere damnit :D )
To whom it may concern at ESPN,

I first want to thank you for reading this. I work 2 jobs and don't have much time for TV, so outside of the occasional movie and my LIVE sports games, ESPN before work and at lunch and between jobs most times I am able to watch TV I am tuned into your station. I have a question as it relates to ESPN and whether I should set expectations for it from now on as a Sports News (Journalsm) network or simply Sports Entertainment (hard news may be bypassed for ratings).

I will state up front that I am a die hard Houston sports fan, especially the Texans and this is where my concern comes in and why I emailed you. I'm a little confused and concerned as to why the Texans got very little (that I could see when watching) coverage for their recent win last Sunday over the Bengals to reach the playoffs for the first time in their history. Not to mention they did that by winning the division with a 5th round rookie QB out of a basketball school (North Carolina) 3rd stringer in T.J. Yates. Not only that statement alone I would think warrants coverage, but the last second TD to win was incredible as well. A very exciting game to say the least as was noted by more than just Texans fans but football fans in general.

I woke up Monday morning to get ready for work eager to watch ESPN and see highlights and relive the emotional high from the day before. Only to be severley let down. The game did not even make the top 10 plays if I remember correctly. In fact, throught the day on ESPN I saw nearly every game it seemed but this game. I came home at lunch and watched First Take on ESPN2, hoping they would at least touch it after the normal 20 minutes to an hour of Tebow and Cowboys coverage but was left with nothing that I saw during my lunch hour.

I later got to watch Around the Horn and PTI in between jobs and all I caught was a brief "Mail Time" mention of TJ Yates on PTI. So, while I cannot watch ESPN all day, it is apparent that even if I missed some coverage, there was not much to begin with.

I understand that some of these shows like PTI are more geared towards entertainment so that is mostly for ratings which is fine and opinions of the guys not at the anchor desk may be what they want as they are paid for differing opinions. But I would think this story would at least make the debate on some of these shows.

My main concern is that I view the hard news Sports Center shows as more journalism than anything but lack of covering this story has me confused. I am not trying to attack the brand or company as much as set my expectations correctly when watching. Should I be expececting more of a ratings geared presentation kind of like a TMZ for sports, mainly continuing coverage on Tebow, Dallas, etc, or is it actually journalism yet somehow major stories such as this one are passed over?

Many fans believe or have allowed themselves to be beaten into believing that "Winning will bring respect" but I feel this goes against that theory.

I would greatly appreciate any explantion or clarification if possible and again thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
Jordan Gnipp

Hardcore Texan
12-13-2011, 01:02 PM
Chris Berman gave us some love last night on MNF halftime show, FWIW.

brakos82
12-13-2011, 01:05 PM
Chris Berman gave us some love last night on MNF halftime show, FWIW.

You watched MNF? I'm sorry.

SeminoleTexan
12-13-2011, 01:08 PM
You watched MNF? I'm sorry.
Yea I didn't even bother watching that game. MNF games have been really bad lately since it seems sunday nights are the new primetime slot.

HOU-TEX
12-13-2011, 01:18 PM
Yea I didn't even bother watching that game. MNF games have been really bad lately since it seems sunday nights are the new primetime slot.

Next Monday should be a good one. 49ers and Steelers

As for the OP, I guess I just don't understand what good it does to take the time to write letters to these people. I mean, odds are, they fall upon deaf ears even if they respond with their generic responses.

By no means am I baggin on anyone who does.

Errant Hothy
12-13-2011, 01:21 PM
You watched, which is all ESPN and those who pay for their ads to be on ESPN care about.

Kthx
12-13-2011, 01:26 PM
It's a win/win to ESPN either way.

Either you watch and get pissed off that the Texans don't get any coverage but you still watch.

Or you don't watch and they don't really give a **** if you are upset or not.

I think they sorta gave up on people from certain markets really watching their sportscenter coverage on Monday long ago otherwise they would show more highlights from around the league instead of commenting on Tim Tebow 30 times on repeat for an hour.

eriadoc
12-13-2011, 01:29 PM
1000 words is way more than enough to say "Please grant us your approval."

Personally, I don't watch, so we have a mutually indifferent attitude toward each other.

HTown2ATX
12-13-2011, 01:30 PM
Next Monday should be a good one. 49ers and Steelers

As for the OP, I guess I just don't understand what good it does to take the time to write letters to these people. I mean, odds are, they fall upon deaf ears even if they respond with their generic responses.

By no means am I baggin on anyone who does.

No, I know what you mean man....I say the same ting to myself as I do it lol...I'm usually a pessimist too so I am sure no one will read that. But sometimes, I just have too much to say to NOT write it you know.

Not sure if that makes sense?

HTown2ATX
12-13-2011, 01:39 PM
1000 words is way more than enough to say "Please grant us your approval."

Personally, I don't watch, so we have a mutually indifferent attitude toward each other.

I could give a F about some "approval" stuff. I would like to see highlights of an exciting NFL game the day after? Too much to ask?

When this whole subject gets brought up it always seems anyone who brings it up is seeking some kind of approval from national media....I have been around long enough I think most people know I could give a flying F about most of society especially some mammoth mainstream ****, but do your journalistic duty ESPN...not solely lick Tebows nuts.

Not trying to go off on you man, just the comment you made sounds right in line with all the other comments that usually follow somoen brining up the media and it's off base sometimes IMO.

Also, so is the whole "Win and get respect argument"....I'm not seeing it so far and again it's not even about "respect".

:twocents:

Again, not trying to attack so much as frustrated man.... :handshake:

Speedy
12-13-2011, 01:40 PM
I'm starting to get this less and less every day. If you've got an internet connection, you can be your own ESPN. After the Texans game Sunday, I got game highlights, post game interviews, just everything that ESPN never gives you, with a simple click of the mouse. I don't get why anybody needs ESPN any more.

HTown2ATX
12-13-2011, 01:43 PM
I don't get why anybody needs ESPN any more.

Cause I can't watch highlights on my computer while I am in the shower and getting dressed for work like I can watch ESPN while doing those things at home and while on lunch....that's why.

:twocents:

DX-TEX
12-13-2011, 01:46 PM
My letter to Jamie Dukes @ NFLN:


Dear Mr. Dukes,

You're an id.iot.


Sincerely,
Texans Nation

Speedy
12-13-2011, 01:52 PM
Cause I can't watch highlights on my computer while I am in the shower and getting dressed for work like I can watch ESPN while doing those things at home and while on lunch....that's why.

:twocents:

But they never show the Texans so what difference does it make? And get with the times already. You don't have internet in the shower? Come on, man!

HTown2ATX
12-13-2011, 01:54 PM
But they never show the Texans so what difference does it make? And get with the times already. You don't have internet in the shower? Come on, man!

LMAO.....repped

Errant Hothy
12-13-2011, 01:56 PM
Cause I can't watch highlights on my computer while I am in the shower and getting dressed for work like I can watch ESPN while doing those things at home and while on lunch....that's why.

:twocents:

Or just connect your TV to your laptop and play all of that computery goodness on your TV.

HOU-TEX
12-13-2011, 01:56 PM
No, I know what you mean man....I say the same ting to myself as I do it lol...I'm usually a pessimist too so I am sure no one will read that. But sometimes, I just have too much to say to NOT write it you know.

Not sure if that makes sense?

Makes sense. I gotcha, bro. :thumbup

Playoffs
12-13-2011, 01:57 PM
My letter to Jamie Dukes @ NFLN:


Dear Mr. Dukes,

You're an id.iot.


Sincerely,
Texans NationMy name is Asleep, and I approve of thishttp://www.medicalbiostatistics.com/img/red-up-arrow.gif post!

Texecutioner
12-13-2011, 01:58 PM
I commend people for wanting to write to ESPN to express their displeasure, but you're doing it all wrong.

ESPN is not going to care about what you put on their website emails. They never have. I've sent them many emails over the years expressing what I didn't like about them or their coverage. ESPN will never care about Houston teams until one of them wins a SB or something. They just won't. Either that or until Bob Mcnair gets out of that "we have to be classy" mode and starts doing a ton of things to make the Texans a team that gets talked about like Jerry Jones does. Love him or hate him, JJ has made the Cowboys a huge talking point year after year, and they're from Dallas. If anything that should prove that you don't have to be from LA or NY to be a huge draw for the league, but you've got to make your team stand out somehow other than just by winning. Bob needs to figure that out somehow.


ESPN is going to do what ESPN does though. They're going to find a hype machine and right now it's Tebow Mania, and you might as well count on that for the rest of the season until Tebow and Broncs are out of it.


If you really want to send a message to ESPN and voice your displeasure, then send some letters and messages to their sponsors and inform them that you won't be using any of their products until they stop supporting a network like ESPN and tell them why you hate ESPN. THAT'S WHAT ESPN ACTUALLY CARES ABOUT. THEY CARE ABOUT THEIR SPONSORS BEING HAPPY.

Showtime100
12-13-2011, 02:02 PM
Next Monday should be a good one. 49ers and Steelers

As for the OP, I guess I just don't understand what good it does to take the time to write letters to these people. I mean, odds are, they fall upon deaf ears even if they respond with their generic responses.

By no means am I baggin on anyone who does.

I write too but know it is a losing cause. Local stations are easier to deal with and you can really put them to the screws, ie, make them sorry they ever lied....etc. National monopolies are a little hard of hearing, but still I write where I see the need. If nothing else I then know I did what I could.

HTown2ATX
12-13-2011, 02:07 PM
I write too but know it is a losing cause. Local stations are easier to deal with and you can really put them to the screws, ie, make them sorry they ever lied....etc. National monopolies are a little hard of hearing, but still I write where I see the need. If nothing else I then know I did what I could.

*cough* myFOXaustin 7 *cough*

Still hate those mother effers!

Blake
12-13-2011, 02:10 PM
I look at it this way. we dont get alot of love, respect, coverage, whatever you want to call it from ESPN, but really, do the Ravens? 49ers?

The main stories are Packers 16-0, and Tebow Time. Thats what the "majority" of the USA wants to hear about, discuss, or what ESPN thinks we want to talk about, discuss, whatever. But they must feel that the viewership is greater when they talk about those 2 topics. Otherwise they wouldnt do it so much.

Try not to let them affect your mood. I just get as much coverage as I can from texanstalk.com, Chron.com, and my twitter feed as possible. ESPN is great if you are a packer fan, or broncos fan, but other than that dont waste your time.

Texan_Bill
12-13-2011, 02:13 PM
I didn't watch last night. I assumed they would be showing a Yankees / Red Sox game from 1987. :cool:

HTown2ATX
12-13-2011, 02:25 PM
I look at it this way. we dont get alot of love, respect, coverage, whatever you want to call it from ESPN, but really, do the Ravens? 49ers?

The main stories are Packers 16-0, and Tebow Time. Thats what the "majority" of the USA wants to hear about, discuss, or what ESPN thinks we want to talk about, discuss, whatever. But they must feel that the viewership is greater when they talk about those 2 topics. Otherwise they wouldnt do it so much.

Try not to let them affect your mood. I just get as much coverage as I can from texanstalk.com, Chron.com, and my twitter feed as possible. ESPN is great if you are a packer fan, or broncos fan, but other than that dont waste your time.

See, I get what you are saying about ratings and popularity, I totally do, but that should be more of a concern for their entertainment shows like PTI, Around the Horn, etc..

Their Sports Center shows whic try to pass themselves off as "Hard Journalism" fall way short and you would think that ratings would take a back seat to actual news.

I grew up in a big media family (mom and step dad are/were journalists etc) so I know about "jounralistic integrity" and stuf like that and ESPN seems only interested in ratings when it comes to segments of their broadcasts that should deal with "news".

That is I guess my main beef.

Blake
12-13-2011, 03:39 PM
See, I get what you are saying about ratings and popularity, I totally do, but that should be more of a concern for their entertainment shows like PTI, Around the Horn, etc..

Their Sports Center shows whic try to pass themselves off as "Hard Journalism" fall way short and you would think that ratings would take a back seat to actual news.

I grew up in a big media family (mom and step dad are/were journalists etc) so I know about "jounralistic integrity" and stuf like that and ESPN seems only interested in ratings when it comes to segments of their broadcasts that should deal with "news".

That is I guess my main beef.

I get ya. Their [ESPN] radio shows are exactly the same. Ratings over substance. Colin Cowherd will straight up tell you that. He cares only about ratings and how it affects his contract each year. Its sad...

eriadoc
12-13-2011, 03:45 PM
See, I get what you are saying about ratings and popularity, I totally do, but that should be more of a concern for their entertainment shows like PTI, Around the Horn, etc..

Their Sports Center shows whic try to pass themselves off as "Hard Journalism" fall way short and you would think that ratings would take a back seat to actual news.

I grew up in a big media family (mom and step dad are/were journalists etc) so I know about "jounralistic integrity" and stuf like that and ESPN seems only interested in ratings when it comes to segments of their broadcasts that should deal with "news".

That is I guess my main beef.

So take the best recourse any consumer has.

Thorn
12-13-2011, 04:06 PM
The main stories are Packers 16-0, and Tebow Time.

That and long ass interviews and press conferances with that foot sucking coach of the Jets.

HTown2ATX
12-13-2011, 09:51 PM
The old canned response...but hey, at least I wrote them I guess...

Dear Jordan,

Thank you for contacting ESPN.

ESPN makes its programming decisions based on a number of factors, including viewership, as reflected by ratings and the interest from advertisers and affiliates, on a nationwide basis.

We’ll be sure to let our programming executives know that our viewers would like to see more Houston Texans coverage on our air.

Sincerely,

Steve
ESPN Viewer Response

EllisUnit
12-13-2011, 10:03 PM
atleast they show tebow after tebow after tebow high light, even though it was the kicker who kicked 2 50 yarders to win the game. Tebow will never have long term success winning like this. I feel ya though the texans get 0 coverage on ESPN or NFLN

EllisUnit
12-13-2011, 10:05 PM
The old canned response...but hey, at least I wrote them I guess...

Dear Jordan,

Thank you for contacting ESPN.

ESPN makes its programming decisions based on a number of factors, including viewership, as reflected by ratings and the interest from advertisers and affiliates, on a nationwide basis.

We’ll be sure to let our programming executives know that our viewers would like to see more Houston Texans coverage on our air.

Sincerely,

Steve
ESPN Viewer Response

:mariopalm: sounds like an automated response. I'm sure we will let them know :mail:. they will show our score more at the bottom of the screen now haha

HTown2ATX
12-13-2011, 10:10 PM
:mariopalm: sounds like an automated response. I'm sure we will let them know :mail:. they will show our score more at the bottom of the screen now haha

Exactly.....I have worked in jobs where you send fill in the blank emails so I guarantee they send that response all the time and I'm sure it looked like this before he filled in Houston Texans....

Dear XXXCUSTOMERNAMEXXX,

Thank you for contacting ESPN.

ESPN makes its programming decisions based on a number of factors, including viewership, as reflected by ratings and the interest from advertisers and affiliates, on a nationwide basis.

We’ll be sure to let our programming executives know that our viewers would like to see more XXXTEAM/SUBJECTXXX coverage on our air.

Sincerely,

(rep name auto fills once sent)
ESPN Viewer Response

BigBull17
12-14-2011, 11:44 AM
The old canned response...but hey, at least I wrote them I guess...

Dear Jordan,

Thank you for contacting ESPN.

ESPN makes its programming decisions based on a number of factors, including viewership, as reflected by ratings and the interest from advertisers and affiliates, on a nationwide basis.

We’ll be sure to let our programming executives know that our viewers would like to see more Houston Texans coverage on our air.

Sincerely,

Steve
ESPN Viewer Response

Translation:

Dear Jordan,
Shut the **** up and watch our channel you pointless hick,
Sincerly, ESPN

Bull Butter
12-14-2011, 11:51 AM
Translation:

Dear Jordan,
Shut the **** up and watch our channel you pointless hick,
Sincerly, ESPN

Or....
Dear Jordan,
Shut up and jump on the Tebow bandwagon like the rest of us because no one cares about your team. They're not exciting or relevant like the Cowboys or Jets or Tebow

Sincerely,
Colin Cowherd
Director of ESPN programming

arb729
12-14-2011, 11:56 AM
It's actually really funny.. I live outside of Boston, and am a huge Sox/Celtics (/Texans as well, obviously) fan, so I never really understood people talking about never showing their teams when they were doing great things, because they always showed mine regardless of if they were winning or losing. Now that the Texans are having this season, I can totally see where everyone was coming from. I'm 100% spoiled.

conundrum
12-14-2011, 01:19 PM
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7349027/nfl-houston-texans-just-keep-coming

They responded online...

"Two stories -- Tim Tebow, and the undefeated Green Bay Packers -- have dominated NFL coverage this season, but the Texans have been a revelation. Houston, not Denver, has the second-longest winning streak behind the Packers; the win in Cincinnati was its seventh straight."

arb729
12-14-2011, 02:01 PM
Also this article I just saw. It's an Insider article so here is the entire thing so everyone who wants to can read it. (Sorry if that's not allowed)

At some level, the 2011 Houston Texans look like one of those teams that make great fodder for the annual video team yearbooks. They overcame adversity in the form of injuries to Mario Williams, Andre Johnson and Matt Schaub. Then their backup quarterback, Matt Leinart, went down with a collarbone injury. Still, the Texans pulled themselves together after a 3-3 start and won the first division title in team history.

Asking for much more than that out of a team that is playing a third-string rookie quarterback in T.J. Yates might seem to be a bit much, but after doing a detailed game tape and metric review, it's clear that Houston still looks to be more than capable of making a strong run at an AFC title.

The most obvious reason is Houston's rushing attack, which ranks second in the league with 151.9 yards per game.

The volume is impressive, but what is even more notable is how well the Texans' running backs fare in the good blocking yards per attempt (GBYPA) metric.

GBYPA measures how productive a ballcarrier is on rushing plays where he is given good blocking (which is loosely defined as when the blockers do not allow the defense to do anything to disrupt a rush attempt).

This is a very important metric because, in the many studies I have done on the running game over the years, ballcarriers tend to average 1-2 yards on rushing plays with poor blocking (meaning the defense was able to do something to disrupt the rush attempt). That means gaining yards on good blocking plays is imperative to posting top-line rushing totals.

So far this season, Arian Foster has tallied a 6.8-yard mark in the GBYPA metric. That number is good (the league average is usually around 6.5), but it's actually lower than his 7.4-yard total for this statistic in 2010.

That drop-off should have lowered the Texans' rush yards total, but it hasn't because of how well Ben Tate has performed.

Tate has served both as a fill-in starter for Foster and as an alternate when Foster's workload starts to get too high. Tate has excelled at both in large part because of a ridiculously high 9.6 GBYPA (few backs ever top the 9-yard mark in this metric at season's end). Tate's number is so good that a strong argument can be made that Foster and Tate form the best running back tandem in the NFL.

As good as they are at running the ball, the Texans are nearly equally adept at stopping the run. They have allowed good blocking only 40.5 percent of the time. To put that total into perspective, consider that the league-leading percentage in good blocking allowed in 2010 was 45.3 percent, so Houston is nearly five points ahead of elite production in this metric.

And that may not even be the strong suit of this defense. Defensive coordinator Wade Phillips, who is currently on a medical leave of absence, has made his reputation over the years by building a strong pass rush. In his 34 seasons as an NFL head coach/defensive coordinator/defensive line coach, his teams have ended the season in the top 10 in sacks 23 times.

This season is looking to be no different from that perspective, as the Texans are tied for sixth in sacks with 36.

Houston's pass coverage doesn't exactly take a back seat to the run D or pass rush, either. Its 6.0 YPA allowed total ranks second-lowest in the league.

The strongest link in the Texans' pass coverage is Johnathan Joseph. He was usually perceived as the weaker link in the Cincinnati Bengals' secondary, but as noted in a July Insider article about NFL free agency, during the past two years Joseph had coverage numbers that were actually better than Nnamdi Asomugha's. Joseph's 6.1 YPA this season is even better than his composite YPA during the past two years, and thus it could be said that he was the best free-agent acquisition this past offseason.

Houston also is getting solid coverage from cornerback Jason Allen (7.2 YPA) and superb coverage from safety Glover Quin (4.0 YPA).

As notable as all of these players are, they are nearly irrelevant if not for the performance of Yates.

The expectations for a third-string rookie quarterback who was drafted in the fifth round are quite low, but Yates has greatly exceeded those expectations.

He has shown the poise of a veteran by making zero bad decisions in 84 pass attempts, and his reads have been superb. Yates has had a few miscommunications with receivers, but those sorts of thing should get cleared up with more practice time together. (Note: A bad decision is defined as when a quarterback makes a mental mistake that leads either to a turnover or a near turnover, such as a dropped interception or fumble that is recovered by the offense.)

Yates and this offense will also have a lot greater upside if/when Johnson is able to return and stay in the lineup after his recurring hamstring injury heals.

Getting Johnson back would go a long ways toward eliminating one of the few weaknesses on this Texans team. If that is combined with a first-round bye -- something that could be achieved given Houston's favorable schedule -- and a favorable divisional playoff matchup, it could very easily put the Texans into the AFC Championship Game and only one step away from a date in Super Bowl XLVI.

gtexan02
12-14-2011, 02:17 PM
We are front page on NFL ESPN page

http://espn.go.com/nfl/