HL2VCTRS

April 26th, 2017 at 5:18 PM ^

It's a great example of handling a bad situation with extreme class. I don't know her, but she seems to carry herself with a great few of humor, class, and thoughtfulness and I hope she lands somewhere even better.

I Like Burgers

April 26th, 2017 at 9:33 PM ^

This is the problem with the whole sports media environment right now.  Where's Chantel going to go? Where are any of these people going to go?  Every single media outlet is on the verge of layoffs, or coming off a round of layoffs so its not like there's a bevy of jobs out there.

If you're not able to do multiple things for a company -- write, be on TV, podcast, radio appearances, etc then you're a dying bread.  The days of being able to be a singular great writer are just about over.  If I learned anything at all from today's layoffs, that's it.

ppToilet

April 26th, 2017 at 10:23 PM ^

Ultimately, you need to generate money in whatever you do. The more money you generate for a business, the more influence you will have. It's not fool-proof (see Fox News) but it works in general. While cliche, I truly believe that when one door closes another opens. Good people, like Chantel seems to be, adapt and thrive. I think it's good to keep in mind that we're all replaceable and that outcome is inevitable one way or another.

With that said, I don't necessarily disagree with your point that the sports media environment is changing. I'm not sure it's completely a bad thing though. Tastes change. Times change. MTV used to play music videos. I think there is always room for smart talented writing (that's why I come to this site so often). But, you're right, you better have a backup plan...

kman23

April 26th, 2017 at 10:53 PM ^

Not all sites are doing badly. Vox just had a Q&A on their podcast about Vox and said they're making more money than they ever thought they would. I could see her end up at a place like that. Looking for sports related news not necessarily sports news but yeah there are places for talented people to go.

 

She could write a book or something too. 

Rabbit21

April 26th, 2017 at 5:21 PM ^

Damn shame and a reason why I don't really feel like today is a day to celebrate.  Sure some 'hot take" artists that have recently cheesed us off have gone, but losing a job is always traumatic and it's not like ESPN is going to drop the Hot Takedness of it all.

enlightenedbum

April 26th, 2017 at 5:31 PM ^

From what I've seen the only hot taker to get canned was Kanell.  All the rest are basically reporters, most of whom range from decent to really good at their jobs.  Like Jayson Stark manages to write smart baseball columns that are entertaining consistently, even for someone who cares less about baseball every year like me.

Bigku22

April 26th, 2017 at 9:02 PM ^

First off never like to see anybody lose their job. I know she was a UM grad and UM reporter so this probably gets negged, but I didn't find her writing very compelling. Maybe it just wasn't my style. Also, she was never breaking any team news. Found her as "just another reporter", the Ringer has some incredibly talented writers, she strikes me as more of just a generic team reporter. 

Wolfman

April 26th, 2017 at 5:54 PM ^

but when I found out she was a PAC 12 beat writer, it made sense. Totally agree with OP that mentioned politics will rear its ugly head during this purge. I actually thought Jamele Hill would be taken to task for her adolsecrent behavior after the dropped punt in the UM vs. MSU game, then later in the season, I thought she had shown herself the door when she tweeted, "We got fucked," during the Nebraska game, then added, "Yeah, I said it." She was acting as if she were immune. Appears she is. She's a so-so reporter, certainly will not draw people in with her looks and I always thought the best part of her show was he co-host. 

Regardless of who gets the gold mine and who gets the shaft, its apparent espn was merely -except for their staple, Mike & Mike - was retaping shows all day long to try and meet every demograph in the U.S., young blacks, young sports fans, men and women alike, wealthy, upper class business men, blue collar first shifters, whatever it was, they tried too hard to produce a show geared at certain audiences, all day long. this is simply cost prohibitive, and I am guessing due to the record setting money they made during their first quarter-century on air they thought they could do this without watering down the product. When they became the evident result they should have thrown in the towel then. Really don't feel too bad for those who are being released because I think they will all get jobs as soon as they want them and they had the honor of working in perhaps the best work enviornment they'll ever have as to all co-woirkers having common interests, etc.  Good luck young lady. I'm certain you'lll find a new position as soon as you are ready. Right now, I'd share the benefits of the golden hand shake and take the summer off on a paid vacation. Don't forget to hit up the unemployment office as well. 

BursleyBaitsBus

April 26th, 2017 at 6:18 PM ^

For your information, ESPN does indeed fire black people. 

See Jason Whitlock and Rob Parker. 

 

Did you read the memo sent by the CEO? They're trying a new format and are keeping the people that make the cash which apparently (idk how) SC6 is doing. 

 

It's hilarious to see you write out paragraphs when you could have just said "Jemele Hill sucks and isn't fired b/c she's black."

 

You're not fooling anyone. 

Lionsfan

April 26th, 2017 at 6:31 PM ^

Exactly. 10 anecdotal stories of people "swearing off ESPN cause they're of their liberal agenda!1!!" means nothing compared to shit like this.

 

ESPN debuted its “future-proofed” new SportsCenter set on Sunday night, the crown jewel in a massive new digital facility that cost a reported $125 million.

Even with cable numbers going down, they still spent $125 million to have their anchors sit in fancier chairs

Link from 2014

Mr. Yost

April 26th, 2017 at 10:52 PM ^

You are a niche audience. You're like watching the Daily Show or Colbert if that's your reasoning.

Sure some people want to watch highlights and funny people...but that's pretty much what those shows are, except politics.

For every person like you who wants to watch that, there is someone else who wants reality TV screaming at one another. And for every one of them...are 5 people who flat out don't care about SportsCenter anymore because they already know the news and they've seen the highlights.

---------------

...this is what I've been saying over and over. Greedy bosses didn't kill SportsCenter, plenty of businesses have those. Changing the format and selling out didn't kill SportsCenter, people would still watch. A "liberal agenda" didn't kill SportsCenter - that's just a dumb idea to make certain folks feel empowered.

Our current climate/culture killed SportsCenter. Back in the year of whenever your picture was taken...there was no instant news cycle. People couldn't get all news, highlights, and updates on their phones in real-time. Maybe you heard about it in class or at work and wanted to go home to see it. Social media wasn't what it is today where people can not only get breaking news, but they can read opinions and share their own.

Who rushes home to watch SportsCenter because they want to get caught up on what happened in the sports world? Highlights are even irrelevant with us connected to the internet lierally every moment we're awake. There's nothing "exclusive" about SportsCenter. 

Folks just have to accept that things pass...you know there was a time where people went to video stores to rent movies? Then they came out with this vending machine that was cheaper and quicker. Now those are going away because they have these things you plug into your TV and access the same movies without ever leaving your house.

Blockbuster wasn't killed by greedy bosses and poor spending. It was killed by our nature to want things cheap, easy, and effortless. SportsCenter could go back to that same format (or never left it) and you'd be watching but millions of others still wouldn't. No need.

People watch ESPN for live sports, exclusive or time-sensitive content (30for30/OTL "journalism," pregame shows, etc.)...really the only other reason they watch is because they love/hate the personalities. Highlights, recaps, focusing on the "daily need to know" in sports is dead...you can do that yourself and you don't have to watch for someone to tell it back to you. You can also get it right when you want it.

Just yesterday I heard Marty Smith was in Rome following Michigan. I Googled Marty Smith Rome Michigan and bam...a 6-7 minute clip of his segment on SportsCenter. I never turned the TV on.

It's the same thing with the Daily Show and Colbert...people really don't watch for news on politics. They watch because they enjoy the personalities and want a laugh. It's not really for the information. ESPN is basically trying to do the same thing. My point is...you just don't like the personalities. Which is fine (I don't either)...but their audience isn't growing by showing highlights for an hour.