Failure To Launch

Unless you live in a cave and pay absolutely no attention to sports, you probably know that Fox is launching a new sports channel starting tomorrow called, Fox Sports 1. (The worked really hard on the name.) Now, as a sports fan I get as frustrated with ESPN as anyone due to their annoying choice of topics and the pundits which they have decided to give more and more airtime. Somewhere along the way ESPN fell into the trap most cable networks do, which is they stopped paying people to say things which were interesting and allowed them to say anything that came to mind in the name of ratings. There is nothing worse than seeing a sports story break and knowing I will have to avoid ESPN for the next week because their coverage will be so predictable right down to knowing which pundit will say insane things just to get attention. Honestly, at this point there are more ESPN pundits I dislike than people whose opinions I am interested in hearing and I know I am not alone in feeling this way, yet for some reason ESPN continues to give extra airtime to the pundits many people don't like. The problem is that ESPN can make these horrible personnel decisions because they don't really have any solid competition. These days sports networks are getting more specified like the Golf Channel or the NFL Network instead of general which means if you want insight on a specific pro league you go to them, but if you just want to know who won a game from the night before you still have to go to ESPN. That is why I would love it if this channel somehow positioned themselves to be the alternative to the Worldwide Leader because sometimes a challenge is just what you need to shape up. The problem is that I am just not sure this channel has what it takes to be that worthy challenger.

Right off the bat I have a few concerns. The first is that for all the promotions the channel is doing, I had no idea where it was ultimately going to show up on my program guide. (For those of you wondering, they are taking over the Speed Network.) But I had to do my own Googling to find that out, which seems like kind of a big detail to overlook because if you were trying to get people to come to your store you would want them to know the address. They can't count on everyone being as curious as I was in the moment. But, don't get me wrong - if the channel fails it will not be because of lack of brand awareness, as Fox Sports 1 is trying its best to get its name out there. Every where I have turned this week I have seen a banner ad or some member of the new Fox Sports channel out promoting the launch during on another Fox network. What's amazing is that it is hasn't even crossed over into annoying yet because they are sticking to their lanes. Unlike a crappy movie which tries to shoehorn itself into my life by showing up at a sporting event and doing it so often that I eventually hate the film, Fox Sports has made sure their new studio hosts are only seen in their element doing interviews in which they are talking about sports. Not only has this made sure they don't get in people's way, it lessens the chance they will say something stupid in an effort to be funny. As far as first impressions go, they are doing a lot better than most.

They are also being smart by launching now, when there is a lot going on. It's silly to launch a sports network in February, but August has plenty of information to give to the public. Most importantly, the channel won't be hurting for programming, which is key because at the end of the day the main thing a sports channel needs to do is show sports. Whoever is in charge of the channel has spent a lot of money buying the rights to pretty much any sports league which was looking for a new TV deal, betting that there is no problem at a television network which can't be solved by throwing money at it. They have deals with several college leagues and recently closed a big deal to get the US Open. On top of that they are bringing in several well-known personalities to be the face of the channel, letting other networks groom the talent and then swooping in to reap the rewards. But, the danger with that is people will still associate those faces with ESPN (I still do that with Dan Patrick and he left Bristol years ago). On top of that if you want to use a real-sport analogy, as we have seen time and again bringing in the biggest name doesn't necessarily equal success. Sometimes the best analysts are the people who fly under the radar for a couple of years. Essentially by not going that way Fox Sports 1 has ESPN's old playbook and are running it page-by-page. That kind of thinking is exactly why I am in no hurry to locate the new channel on my guide.

I am not trying to bury the channel before they even start, but this is the same tactic "ESPN alternatives" CBS Sports and The NBC Sports Channel tried and I still couldn't tell you where one of those channels is located on my TV guide. I just feel like if you want to be an alternative to a product than you should try and be a real alternative and from what I have seen Fox Sports is more interested in doing the exact same things as ESPN and simply hoping they will attract people who are sick of the same old faces doing the same old shtick. But when all you are offering is new faces doing their own shtick it isn't much of an improvement. For example, I continue to think that when it comes to news analysis less is more. I would much rather hear two informed opinions than ten slightly less qualified ones (this is why "PTI" is one of my favorite shows) but these days every pregame show just keeps trucking in talking heads. Fox could have been a real difference by coming up with a show with a bare-bones approach and yet their new studio show appears to have a large enough cast to play a game of basketball five-on-five with subs. The only different thing they have done is hired more recently-retired athletes than anyone else. This will provide viewers with a better perspective than a guy whose has been retired from the game for 15 years could provide but it also means 90% of the people at the desk have no TV experience and are nervous. Not exactly the solid foundation I would want to build my empire on. I'll give Fox Sports 1 a chance if for no other reason than I do believe a well-run channel could start to chip away at ESPN's stranglehold on sports coverage, but standing one day before they go live, I'm just not sure this channel is going to be all that well-run.