I don't think that it has benefited.

Of course, that raises the question, "what" or "who" is college football. But, from my perspective, ESPN's dominant media role in college football is a negative that has accelerated the NFL Juniorization of the sport.

People are saying enough is enough.

ESPN is still a cash-earning machine, the most profitable monster in the Disney empire. A deal Eisner made way back in the day essentially allows them to raise their subscriber fee on a near-annual basis, explaining why ESPN is by far the most expensive cable channel for viewers, and probably double any other.

Of course, what does ESPN do then? Shove it down not just your throat, but everybody's throat -- and they're a big reason why cord-cutting and ala carte cable is coming sooner than later. Add to that the gigantic premium people place on live sporting events -- they cost more and more, and ESPN is paying 4 or 5x for their next NBA deal than their last -- and that's why the financial pinch is being seen.

To be clear, they're finally trying to show some fiscal restraint, because they can't go and fluff guys like Simmons with million-dollar pocket lining and vanity projects like Grantland without being able to monetize what the guy does (Newsflash, ESPN isn't earning their money back on Simmons' podcast, that's for sure). Plus, they want to keep churning out low-namebrand talent to do SportsCenter, all but running minor leaguers in there who'll take the opportunity just so they don't create any more namebrands like Dan Patrick, etc.

There are few companies more predictably awful in my opinion. They've focus-grouped their way into creating an unwatchable flagship show, f'ing up SportsCenter by turning it into some debate-porn, and humoring their anchors by giving them a final 90 second soap box, as if that'll make sense on a show that's an hour-by-hour trainwreck.

It's unwatchable, but making things worse is the fact that other networks look at their dominance and think they need to copy what's going on in Bristol, turning Andy Roddick, Gabe Kapler and Donovan McNabb into people who discuss hockey or tennis in a panel. The sports world has gone mad.

(Sorry. Rant over.)

What we've seen with a few of the subscriber dip reports might well be the tip of the ice berg. I foresee rocky times ahead for the WWL. That more than anything will probably pump the breaks on some of the ridiculousness in CFB revenues.

if the ESPN infrastructure can keep the machine humming while it replaces the component parts. In other words, has ESPN created itself into such a content juggernaut via exclusive deals and whatnot that the actual people presenting the content are effectively plug and play. They've unloaded a boatload of high-profile talent of late (Simmons, Olbermann, Holtz, Cowhere [although I've read they tried to keep him]). I wonder if they've looked at competitors try to put together a comparable product and really fail to pull anywhere close to the same eyeballs and realize they could do just as much with a lot less.

- No text -