Mike Tirico?

[Hostile]

Searching the Net I find where they canned Harold Reynolds, but not a single mention of Tirico. I think the Fed Ex driver heard wrong.

 

[StanleySpadowski]

You're telling me that ESPN "created" a story about Reynolds and sexual harrasment as an excuse to fire Reynolds for "creating" a story .......?

The media creates stories all the time and no one gets in trouble, but sexual harrassment is an offense that could lead to lawsuits, not only against Reynolds, but against ESPN, and something that would lead to much closer media scrutiny by other news organizations.

Sounds to me like you are the one doing the "creating".

No, Reynolds is probably guilty of harrassment, he's pretty well know as a skirt chaser, but the reason he was let go was he constantly argued about the oversaturation of negative ARod stories on Baseball Tonight.

The culture of sleaze is almost legendery in Bristol and the executives only seem to care when they can use that behavior as a weapon to get their way.

If ESPN points to harassment as the only reason for dismissal and Reynolds can point to other even more abhorent behavior by other employees that was swept under the rug, he stands a very good chance of prevailing in court.

 

[Stautner]

No, Reynolds is probably guilty of harrassment, he's pretty well know as a skirt chaser, but the reason he was let go was he constantly argued about the oversaturation of negative ARod stories on Baseball Tonight.

The culture of sleaze is almost legendery in Bristol and the executives only seem to care when they can use that behavior as a weapon to get their way.

Now why would ESPN expose themselves to a lawsuit (especially if Reynolds was "pretty well know as a skirt chaser") by giving credence to a sexual harassment charge against Reynolds when they could have just let his contract expire and not rehire him?

 

[NorthTexan95]

Now why would ESPN expose themselves to a lawsuit (especially if Reynolds was "pretty well know as a skirt chaser") by giving credence to a sexual harassment charge against Reynolds when they could have just let his contract expire and not rehire him?

Maybe because the finally woke up and realized how awful Harold Reynolds is.

 

[Waffle]

Searching the Net I find where they canned Harold Reynolds, but not a single mention of Tirico. I think the Fed Ex driver heard wrong.

I'm beginning to think the same thing. There is nothing about this anywhere to be found.

 

[baj1dallas]

Wow that would suck. He is one of the best guys on TV. He is the only thing that saves MNF. Joe and Tony really suck! Tirico made a comment last night when his mascott's head fell off he said, "Thats what I feel like after doing MNF with you guys!" I feel that way after listening to Joe and Tony.

I dunno about that, Tirico is mediocre at best.

 

[Stautner]

Maybe because the finally woke up and realized how awful Harold Reynolds is.

Even so, that doesn't answer the question of why they would expose themselves to a lawsuit to do it - there are other ways.

 

[StanleySpadowski]

Now why would ESPN expose themselves to a lawsuit (especially if Reynolds was "pretty well know as a skirt chaser") by giving credence to a sexual harassment charge against Reynolds when they could have just let his contract expire and not rehire him?

I don't think you realize some of the egos involved.

Reynolds told the suits "no". That's not something that's done and it's not a precendent that can be set. What would be next, the ESPN radio guys expressing their true opinions on the abomination that is MNF? Can't have that, they're still required to rearrange the deck chairs.

As I said, Reynolds is probably guilty of some degree of harassment and ESPN thought they had their bases covered but this could get really ugly if any other media outlet decides this is a story that needs told. That probably won't happen to a great extent though because who else really wants to touch this.

 

[yennor24]

Why dont they say something about this every 10 min on sportscenter like they would if it was a player and not one of their own????????

 

[Stautner]

I don't think you realize some of the egos involved.

Reynolds told the suits "no". That's not something that's done and it's not a precendent that can be set. What would be next, the ESPN radio guys expressing their true opinions on the abomination that is MNF? Can't have that, they're still required to rearrange the deck chairs.

As I said, Reynolds is probably guilty of some degree of harassment and ESPN thought they had their bases covered but this could get really ugly if any other media outlet decides this is a story that needs told. That probably won't happen to a great extent though because who else really wants to touch this.

Renolds told the suits no?

I thought he just created a story about A-Rod that wasn't there?

Oh yeah, then it became that he complained about the oversaturation of negative A-Rod stories.

Wow, we get a new reason added to why he was fired every time you post.

Hmmmm, so out of all of this, sexual harassment is the only bogus reason for Reynolds being fired ..........?

Sorry, I just don't buy that the "suits" would willingly expose themselves to a sexual harassment lawsuit to protect their egos.

 

[Fletch]

Brad Nessler?

Brad Nessler would be ideal! He, in my humble opinion is the best commentator out there. I love his voice and his insight.

 

[StanleySpadowski]

Renolds told the suits no?

I thought he just created a story about A-Rod that wasn't there?

Oh yeah, then it became that he complained about the oversaturation of negative A-Rod stories.

Wow, we get a new reason added to why he was fired every time you post.

Hmmmm, so out of all of this, sexual harassment is the only bogus reason for Reynolds being fired ..........?

Sorry, I just don't buy that the "suits" would willingly expose themselves to a sexual harassment lawsuit to protect their egos.

Maybe because you have some sort of reading comprehension problem?



I've said the same thing in every one of my posts. ESPN wanted to make a huge story about Rodriguez struggling, Reynolds wanted to point out on BBTN that his numbers were still better than any else at 3B and it was much ado about nothing. That doesn't drive ratings so they ordered Reynolds to toe the line, he refused, they fired him.

They thought they had the proverbial Sword of Damocles with his poor behavior and he'd slink silently into the night. They appear to be wrong.


What story would damage ESPN more? The fact that men in and around athletics sometimes act like pigs or the fact that ESPN orders their analysts to state opinions they don't agree with in order to drive ratings?

 

[Stautner]

Maybe because you have some sort of reading comprehension problem?



I've said the same thing in every one of my posts. ESPN wanted to make a huge story about Rodriguez struggling, Reynolds wanted to point out on BBTN that his numbers were still better than any else at 3B and it was much ado about nothing. That doesn't drive ratings so they ordered Reynolds to toe the line, he refused, they fired him.

They thought they had the proverbial Sword of Damocles with his poor behavior and he'd slink silently into the night. They appear to be wrong.


What story would damage ESPN more? The fact that men in and around athletics sometimes act like pigs or the fact that ESPN orders their analysts to state opinions they don't agree with in order to drive ratings?

The idea that ESPN allowed a "pretty well know as a skirt chaser" to remain on staff and eventually get accused of sexual harassment would hurt MUCH more, particularly in the pocketbook. Those "suits" you are referring to are interested in the bottom line, not that every single analyst agree on everything.

ESPN had several baseball analysts who could have and did report that A-Rod wasn't playing up to snuff - how much did it hurt that they had a desenter. Hell, descencion is what fuels media created stories - without two sides there isn't any controversy.

Reynolds wasn't hurting the ratings by supporting A-Rod, and what you are suggesting is that the ESPN "suits" had a personal vendetta against A-Rod and would axe anyonewho stood in the way of carrying it out.

Pretty far fetched stuff.

The other thing that cannot be ignored here is that you pulled this whole thing out of your backside - the sexual harassment story not only is more logical, it's the only story that has any foundation outside of your personal conspiracy theory.

 

[Hostile]

Brad Nessler would be ideal! He, in my humble opinion is the best commentator out there. I love his voice and his insight.

Yeah, that 1st Monday night with the 2 games it was obvious to me that the 2nd crew was far superior.

 

[StanleySpadowski]

The idea that ESPN allowed a "pretty well know as a skirt chaser" to remain on staff and eventually get accused of sexual harassment would hurt MUCH more, particularly in the pocketbook. Those "suits" you are referring to are interested in the bottom line, not that every single analyst agree on everything.

ESPN had several baseball analysts who could have and did report that A-Rod wasn't playing up to snuff - how much did it hurt that they had a desenter. Hell, descencion is what fuels media created stories - without two sides there isn't any controversy.

Reynolds wasn't hurting the ratings by supporting A-Rod, and what you are suggesting is that the ESPN "suits" had a personal vendetta against A-Rod and would axe anyonewho stood in the way of carrying it out.

Pretty far fetched stuff.

The other thing that cannot be ignored here is that you pulled this whole thing out of your backside - the sexual harassment story not only is more logical, it's the only story that has any foundation outside of your personal conspiracy theory.

There's no personal vendetta against Rodriguez or anyone else, it's all about ratings. Do you think becoming the all-Owens channel was personal or about $$$? And controversy doesn't "sell" when coherent thought and logic are on the side of the one they're smearing that week and an intelligent thinker is willing to present that side. Why do you think a loudmouth like Irvin is the only one who ever defends Owens?

Look up some of Tirico's past behavior problems if you think ESPN wouldn't keep a "harasser" on the payroll. Heck if 1/10th of the stories I've heard are true, half the ESPN staff's lucky not to be in jail.

And if you think that I've pulled everything I've said out of my backside, so be it. Just remember where you heard it when you learn a little more sometime in the future.

 

[StylisticS]

That would be a great choice.

I agree. Brad Nessler is great. Probably one of the few bright spots on ESPN. They really need to use him more.

 

[Stautner]

There's no personal vendetta against Rodriguez or anyone else, it's all about ratings. Do you think becoming the all-Owens channel was personal or about $$$? And controversy doesn't "sell" when coherent thought and logic are on the side of the one they're smearing that week and an intelligent thinker is willing to present that side. Why do you think a loudmouth like Irvin is the only one who ever defends Owens?

Look up some of Tirico's past behavior problems if you think ESPN wouldn't keep a "harasser" on the payroll. Heck if 1/10th of the stories I've heard are true, half the ESPN staff's lucky not to be in jail.

And if you think that I've pulled everything I've said out of my backside, so be it. Just remember where you heard it when you learn a little more sometime in the future.

EVERYONE was saying A-Rod was playing below par - not just ESPN. Do you really think ocassionally mentioning A-Rod not having a stellar season on "Baseball Tonight" dramatically affected ratings, or that a lone dissenter in the group meant people were going to watch Fox Sports instead of ESPN?

Be realistic.

Reporting that A-Rod was not having a great season was not a ratings boost for ESPN, and having a dissenter in the bunch did not result in a ratings loss.

It's absolutely mindless to suggest otherwise.

Tell me how Reynolds saying A-Rod was having an adequate season harmed ESPN or how the "suits" could have perceived that it did or would ..........

Tell me how the ESPN suits could believe that ratings would only remain high as long as they only reported a single opinion about A-Rod.......

And tell me the foundation for all this malarky you are posting.

 

[kyle73401]

I hope this isnt true. I cant stand to listen to Theezman and Kornheiser alone. AAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Stautner]

I hope this isnt true. I cant stand to listen to Theezman and Kornheiser alone. AAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That won't happen, they need an actual broadcast professional (as opposed to an ex-athlete and a tabloid journalist) in the booth. Mike Patrick called games with Theismann last year, and Tirico beats the hell out of him. Frankly no one could make the pair of Theismann and Kernheiser look good.

 

[Bull Frog]

I agree. Brad Nessler is great. Probably one of the few bright spots on ESPN. They really need to use him more.

Nessler is good and I like Gary Thorne. I always thought of him as a hockey guy, but I enjoy the football games he calls too.