|
Post by SportsFan508 on Oct 2, 2006 10:08:07 GMT -5
Did the NFL make a bad decision to move Monday Night Football to ESPN and Sunday Night Football to NBC? Without Madden and Michaels on MNF, it is making the monday night games kind of boring. The NBC games arent bad, but NBC doesnt seem like the right channel for football. Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by GEO on Oct 2, 2006 13:18:38 GMT -5
Alright. I have some points for this one 1. In the United States, everybody gets ABC. Not everyone gets ESPN. 2. Disney, ESPN, and ABC are all owned by the same person. 3. That means no significant money was trading hands when this deal was made. NBC is fine. In fact, they do a pretty good job covering games. I like Madden a lot better on Sunday Nights. On Monday, I wanted him fired. But on Sunday, I can take him. He actually talks about what's going on around the league. Michaels is all class and I could listen to him all day. What makes a channel the right channel? ESPN and ABC only? That's nuts. Now, I don't like football on ESPN. Having football on ABC was special, because the only time you see sports on ABC is when the event is special. The Stanley Cup (Pre-2004), the Super Bowl, plus some other games throughout the year. ESPN always has sports on. So a Monday game means pretty much nothing. It's just something else ESPN can add to their resume. Plus, that scoreboard is terrible. I spend more time watching that then I do the game. And Kornheiser is way out of place. Funny guy, but he doesn't really add anything. In fact, it'd probably be better if they cut Trico, and made it Theisman and Kornheiser.
|
|
|
Post by BlackOps on Oct 2, 2006 15:51:12 GMT -5
Well, with ESPN on ABC airing now..what's the point of it being on ESPN when if it were on ABC it would be ESPN on ABC?
*cough*
GEO, who's gonna do play by play? Football/opinion guys can't be that. They can't add opinions into the regular broadcast.
I petition for ESPN/ABC to get rid of the 'Bottomline' when a sporting event is on. It shortens the screen and makes us unfortunate 90% of people without wide screens have a bad time.
|
|
|
Post by GEO on Oct 2, 2006 21:12:12 GMT -5
Tradition. And all of that ESPN on ABC stuff is too confusing for my taste.
Sorry, I messed up. Buy out Joe Buck from Fox, throw him up there with Kornheiser. Put Trico in the studio.
I agree with the bottomline. What's the point of having it run on two chjannels at the same time? Plus, ESPNEWS (for most people) has it as well.
|
|
|
Post by blindlywewander on Oct 2, 2006 23:51:09 GMT -5
Um.. the announcers don't really matter to me that much. Madden is old and repeats everything he says, even though he hardly ever says anything.. (ie. "Football is a hard game. Being physical is the name of the game because it's a hard game.") (That's not really something he said, but he probably has said something similar). Al is good though.
That first thing blackops said, I have no idea what you're even talking about. That whole first paragraph read like this to me.. (ESPN on ABC and ABC on ESPN alongside ABC). I can't really debate this. This topic is kind of.. I don't know. It should've been a thread in the football section, not a debate. I guess I agree, but I don't have a strong opinion. As GEO already said, ABC and ESPN are close affiliates, so the only real difference is the bottomline and the announcers.
To sum up: I don't care that much. I don't watch the games for the announcers. I watch for the actual game. If it's on, I want to watch it. I don't care what channel. Football's football. NBC and ABC must've had some reasoning behind the moves. Monetary or something? Who cares. It's football season so I'm not complaining. When FOX stops showing Skins games, then I'll complain. Until then, they can change all they want.
|
|
OOYL
Rookie
Posts: 51
|
Post by OOYL on Oct 3, 2006 14:13:50 GMT -5
This is more of an "opinion" than a debate reply. Sometimes programs on tv run its course, and it eventually it becomes necessary for them to go off the air, on another channel, reruns, etc. Everybody Loves Raymond, Seinfeld, Friends (and eventually The Simpsons and SNL) were all great shows back in the day, but eventually ran out of gas. Yes, MNF can be considered one of these shows. In the 70's, MNF was the biggest thing on tv on Monday, not just a football game, but the biggest tv event. Everybody used to watch it. They loved the announcers. They loved the excitement. They loved the novelty. But, everything eventually gets old, and MNF made the transicion from weekly tv bonanza to just another football game. It seems natural that it should move to cable. (And obviously ESPN couldn't do Sunday AND Monday night, so they had to give it to another channel). Bottom line. Monday Night Football is just another game. It shouldn't be judged differently. The announcers suck. They can't shut up. There is no need for three, with Tirico doing too detailed play-by-play and his "comrade" Theisman elaberating too much, with Kornheiser throwing out an occasional joke or question. Bye-Bye Monday Night Football. We loved you. For a while.
|
|
|
Post by GEO on Oct 3, 2006 16:23:22 GMT -5
MNF can't be considered a regular show. If they want more people to watch it, putting it on cable makes absolutely no sense.
All of the shows you named were on the same channel until they stopped filming. Did MNF stop filming?
|
|
|
Post by blindlywewander on Oct 3, 2006 18:50:22 GMT -5
Ha.. MNF is still on. It's just on another channel. GEO's right again. That was a dumb argument. MNF isn't a sitcom. It won't get canceled. This isn't about the removal of MNF permanently, it's just about it changing channels.
I do agree with OOYL though. This is too much of an opinion thing. Yes, the other ones are too, kind of. But this one's too much opinion. No fact whatsoever.
|
|
|
Post by GEO on Oct 4, 2006 14:22:06 GMT -5
Then debate your opinion. I have a good one planned for the next one i do anyway.
|
|
|
Post by blindlywewander on Oct 4, 2006 20:35:03 GMT -5
You should've just hosted the idea you had for this debate. This one sucks.
My opinion, I've already stated, is that it was done for business reasons beyond our knowledge. It's still on TV, so it doesn't matter to me. I don't care who announces. I don't care how the score is displayed. I don't care what channel it's on. I don't care if the 'Bottomline' is on. As long as it's on TV and I can watch it, let them change the channels as much as they want.
My favorite announcers are Madden and Al. Not because they're the best announcers, but because I grew up listening to them. They're classics. Thinking of MNF without them is just weird. But, I still got them on Sunday's, so whatever. The new announcers on ESPN are ok. Tony Kornheiser is a good announcer. He brings a lot to the table. Mike Tirico sucks. He sucks at life.. and announcing. Former REDSKIN Joe Theismann is an okay announcer. He's smart, but he's.. oppinionated.
That's my opinion.
|
|
OOYL
Rookie
Posts: 51
|
Post by OOYL on Oct 5, 2006 14:14:32 GMT -5
All of the shows you named were on the same channel until they stopped filming. Did MNF stop filming? ESPN is an affiliate of abc, so it is very easy for them to move it. Also, the only reason the Eagles Packers game was on ABC and ESPN is because the Eagles game was only being shown regionally to people who didn't have cable. It was entirely 6 ABC's decision to boost local ratings. This game wasn't being shown on ABC in Seattle, Washington, for example.
|
|
|
Post by GEO on Oct 5, 2006 16:55:58 GMT -5
OOYL: what are you talking about? When did I say anything about anything you just said?
|
|