ABC sucks

19 replies to this topic
  • Shawn_Mc

Posted January 07, 2002 - 01:11 PM


If David Bailey was smart, he'd turn down the next annoucing job with ABC. I personally wouldnt want to be associated with such mediocrity. Maybe Ive come to expect too much, but the "show" on Sunday was pathetic. Race was great, I feel bad for RC, and Im not totally convinced that Bubba Stewart is a human. Humans cant tipically hit the ground that hard or often and continue at such a pace. Just my 2 cents. At least it I didnt have to pay for it. :)

  • mikeolichney

Posted January 07, 2002 - 01:19 PM


Well, at least you got to see it. I have dish network and even though the on-screen guide said EA Sports Supercross, a basketball game was on. I don't know who stuck it to me, ABC or Dish Network.

  • mxracer553

Posted January 07, 2002 - 01:27 PM


At leaste they dont have Dennis Miller doing comentary. YET!

  • motoman393

Posted January 07, 2002 - 01:57 PM


At least SX was on TV for all to see (especially ABC)! It is just now getting to the point where it is getting popular among the "normal" household! This will make our sport grow...and hopefully RC and MC will be common names to "normal" people just like Emmitt Smith and Deion Sanders are for football! Later,


  • bigharvey

Posted January 07, 2002 - 02:31 PM



While we all agree that increased coverage is better; I have to side with the others regarding the dislike for ABC's coverage. In fact, this issue is one reason that I side with the AMA's recently announced TV strategy for 2003 even though I am not in favor of a AMA / Clear Channel battle.

I'm old enough to remember the days of having to wait 6 mos. for the Carlsbad 500GP to be replayed on ABC's Wide World of Sports and having to suffer through Dick Button and figure skating during the entire WWS broadcast. Thus, I do appreciate the level of coverage that we have.

However, I do not believe that ABC / ESPN2 are good for the long-term. SX always has been and always will be a sub-par sport for those networks. How many times have we seen a race be bumped for bowling?

SX/MX needs to pursue a good deal with Speedvision (especially now that they are combined with Fox). It is the only way that the sport will get the appropriate level of priority in the programming.

Those of us who have followed Formula One over the years can appreciate the differences in programming emphasis between the ABC/ESPN2 family and Speedvision. ESPN2 only provided 2 hours of coverage on race day; Speedvision provides 3 hours on race day + 1 hour for qualifying + 1 hour for practice.

Of course the negative with Speedvision is the limited household audience but that should quickly change with the Fox ownership.

  • RichB

Posted January 07, 2002 - 03:02 PM


I have to agree with Garrett on this one guys. Moving to network TV will help the sport and at the very least will help more people watch SX racing. If WWO Sports schedules to haveSX, they most likely will air it unlike the coverage we sometimes get to see on ESPN2 which the promoters etc have to pay them to air (and subsequently gets bumped for bowling, cheerleading, basket weaving etc).

Motocrossers are a funny lot. I think a lot of folks don't like it on ABC for the same reason I wear Moto-XXX and gear like that instead of the Fox stuff I used to wear. I believe a lot of us Sub-consciously like to be a part of something special, a unique and exclusive group (not like every swinging @#$% mainstream NASCAR type fan. When walmart started selling fox and every loser on the street has a Fox shirt on I found myself going the less traveled road (without really thinking about it at the time).

As far as switching it to Speedvision, I don't want to have to buy twice as much programming on my dish just for that one channel. Also, as speedvision grows it will become just like the others we love to bitch about.

  • motojunkie

Posted January 07, 2002 - 05:55 PM


Supercross on networks is great! The networks have a responsibility to show the race so it is enjoyable. They failed with Anaheim. ABC has to produce a show that people will want to watch, they didn't do that. Newcomers to SX were probably bored silly with that broadcast. It did nothing to draw people to the sport.

  • thumpy

Posted January 07, 2002 - 06:46 PM


I agree, the coverage was terrible. Whoever produced the show should go back to school. Notice Art Eckman wasn't in the booth with Baily. I think Art has resented being sent to cover Supercross all these years. To this day he still stomps all over Baily and makes erroneous comments which shows how little he really knows about the sport and how little interest he really has in the sport (how is it possible to cover it for as many years as he has and not pick up one thing/aspect of it?).

They (ABC) need to step up the program with the full show (qualifiers, LCQ, and mains for both the 125 & 250). I think a "game day" format would work really well and if promoted in that manner you'd draw people that wouldn't normally watch just by them simply recognizing the format, then they'd get hooked on the excitement and reeled in by the intensity. If nothing else they'd watch for simple morbid curiousity (aka, crashes).

My 2 cents...


Posted January 08, 2002 - 04:28 AM


Well guys,
I was one of the fortunate people to be able to watch the race in my house on the east coast at 3 o'clock. (I think) First off, I am one of those people who has the 3 main networks and no dish. OK I have 200' VHS movies and a couple of DVD's and a playstation 2 to keep me occupied. I do think that our sport should be broadcasted on local networks, ABC NBC CBS, but the coverage that ABC had on Sunday was terrible. Just showing the main events only focusing on the leaders the whole time sucks! I want to see some qualifying, heat races etc. etc. Now Stewart had to race all the heats and still didn't make it till the LCQ race. Now that would have been good footage. ABC only focused on the big name riders in the measley 1 hour of coverage. And to top off this pitiful excuse of coverage I had the nice little school and church closings for the evening while the damn race was going on. So on my limited screen I had only a little square in the top right hand of my screen to watch this in. I mean seriously if this had been an Indy500 race or Tiger Woods Championship golf tnmt. do you think the closing of round 6 of the old timers BINGO game would have been going on during that!! Come on let's get some better coverage. ABC you need to tighten the #$%^ UP! Just my 2 cents!! :) :D

  • MikeOK

Posted January 08, 2002 - 05:55 AM


You should have heard all the whining on here last year about espn's coverage of sx. I was one of the worst too lol. I saw an interview on motoworlod a few weeks back with some guy from easports, he said they could get coverage of 100 million people on ABC, and he also mentioned that speedvision wasn't able to get them a big enough audience. I liked it when speedvision covered the races, and I wrote to them last year about it. They responded, and they really want to cover it but aren't able to compete with espn/abc. Last year they would pre-empt sx with russian women's log throwing (I'm stealing Boit's description) or with a bunch of fat college dikes playing soccer (got that one from Bill). At least we have a better chance of being able to see the races with abc covering them.

Visit the ThumperTalk Store for the lowest prices on motorcycle / ATV parts and accessories - Guaranteed
  • yzf

Posted January 08, 2002 - 07:09 AM


[even though abc could do a better job of showing more of the race than just the leaders i still would rather watch the race on abc compared to espn at least abc shows most of the main event eveytime i watch the race on espn they start the race and go to a commercial on lap 2 and come back on lap 14 i remember one time last year on espn when thier was a battle for the lead with 1 1/2 laps to go and they went to a comercial and came back with rider interviews! me and my friends coudnt belive it we were pissed big time!! they didnt even show the last lap of the race i'll take abc over espn anyday anytime. espn sucks .

  • JohnnyG

Posted January 08, 2002 - 07:27 AM


I agree that the ABC coverage was not that impressive, but it was a hellava lot better than nothing! At least they showed RC's horrific crash. I could have done without the Bubba Stewart bio during the entire 125 race. Chad Reed is as impressive as Bubba in my book yet we heard nothing about him.

I also agree that David Baily and ABC should part ways, cept ABC should get rid of him. Isnt everybody sick of his Honda bias?

  • Tommy_Gun

Posted January 08, 2002 - 07:41 AM


You must be joking! David Bailey is the best thing that has happened to SX/MX. At least he's knowledgeable and points out the details that 'normal' announcers are blind to. Honda bias? Who cares - notice all the things he points out about the riders and the course. I used to think Art Eckman was less than desireable, but even he's worlds better than the guy who was with Bailey on ABC last Sunday.

Think about this: we're fortunate to have Bailey announcing, otherwise we could have 'normal' announcing dorks that just talk hype and sound like radio DJs (ala stick and ball sports).

  • Shawn_Mc

Posted January 08, 2002 - 08:34 AM


Tommy you just made my point, unfortunatley you missed mine altogether, its ok though, bottom line is you think the same as I.

  • Kirtwell

Posted January 08, 2002 - 10:12 PM


I wasn't impressed with ABC either. I like the ESPN2 coverage much better. As with David Bailey...he's by far the most qualified announcer.
He tells it like it is......Oh well if it bothers some...I like that up front kinda commentation.

Isn't there anything we as a group can do to let ABC know how we feel? Can TT open a forumn just for this subject and send it to ABC.? Let them read it...if they care enough.
I'm sure it's a complicated process for
TV broadcasting time slots (a subject I know nothing about)however, we should at least tell them what we think.....It might help. :)

  • Shawn_Mc

Posted January 09, 2002 - 03:11 PM


ESPN and ESPN2 are simply slivers of the ABC tree, we oughta bitch long and loud to get the coverage simply transfered in form from ESPN to ABC. I believe the more SX is on Network television the better. Hell, you can get wrestling on several smaller networks. So I cant believe that this is a really difficult thing, it boils down to advertising dollars.

  • bigharvey

Posted January 13, 2002 - 05:29 AM


Most of you griped about ABC's coverage but also claim you want more network coverage. Several points:

1. As one pointed out, ABC and ESPN2 are affiliated (Disney owns them). The differences in broadcasts are intentional. They use a different anchorman but mostly the difference represents an intended "new fan friendly" style in their weak attempt to gain new viewers. If I'm not mistaken, the same production company produces the coverage for both networks. This same production company also produces other motorsports coverage for Speedvision, etc. I like the broadcast team (Eckman, Bailey and Coombs). I just want the network to be dedicated to our sport.

2. Despite SX's increased popularity, MX / SX will always be a niche sport. Always has been and always will be. An important point to note is that the overall popularity of motorcycling still lags behind the glory days of the 70's.

3. ABC's willingness to broadcast MX / SX over the years has partially resulted from the network's lack of traditional weekend sports programming (ball sports). That void in their programming led to the development of Wide World of Sports which often showcased odd sports such as the Carlsbad GP and now the Anaheim SX. However, SX / MX will always take a backseat to other sports such as bowling, ice skating, etc. There is no way this sport will ever have LIVE broadcasts of the entire main events on ABC especially given the risk of race delays, etc. You're naive if you think that it will happen.

4. Speedvision represents the only viable choice for live broadcasts for our sport. I would like to have live broadcasts so that I will no longer know that Villumein won the San Diego SX one week prior to ESPN2's scheduled broadcast. The downside to Speedvision relates to its limited audience but the recent acquisition by FOX should increase its availability quickly.

5. Clear Channel is the one to blame for the current network strategies. They want ESPN2, and eventually ABC, because they stand to realize greater revenues on ABC. Speedvision would offer a better package for the viewers because the channel is dedicated to us gearheads. However, Clear Channel is more concerned about the value of their TV rights to the sport. As long as ABC pays Clear Channel, Clear Channel doesn't give a sh_t if the broadcast is delayed 2 weeks, pre-empted, etc.

As I said in an earlier post, the Clear Channel / AMA dispute sucks for all of us. However, I have to take the AMA's side on TV.

  • thumpy

Posted January 13, 2002 - 05:21 PM


And what's the "AMA's side on t.v."?

  • John_H

Posted January 13, 2002 - 05:54 PM


That's probably right that it's a niche sport (although you'd never know it if you cruised out towards Albuquerque's west mesa on the weekend).

Probably all about ratings and the almight $$$. Don't think they fill too many sky boxes at the SX races.

  • bigharvey

Posted January 14, 2002 - 02:49 PM



The "AMA's side on TV" is live broadcasts on Speedvision (name changing to Speed Channel).

If you've followed the recent developments in the AMA / Clear Channel dispute for 2003 SX, you've seen that the AMA has announced a TV package with Speedvision that has 3-hour live broadcasts.

On the other hand, Clear Channel announced that it will continue with its current TV strategy for 2003 (i.e. tape delayed broadcasts with ESPN2 / ABC).

Officials for both organizations have stated that the "live broadcast" issue is a major point of contention in the ongoing battle between the AMA (sanctioning body) and Clear Channel (promoter).

Go to MotoWorld.Com for more background as well as interviews with the officials for both organizations.

Related Content


2016 YZ450 by CaptainKnobby

Dirt Bike   Dirt Bike Technical Forums   Suspension
  • Hot  59 replies

Is the 2016 GYTR Yamaha YZ450F too fast? by Fryboy

Dirt Bike   Special Interest Forums   Pro Racing
  • * - - - -
  • Hot  241 replies

YZ450F 03 Sparks driving me crazy by SirAttard

Dirt Bike   Make / Model Specific   Yamaha   YZ 400/426/450
  • 5 replies

100 hrs on 2014 yz450f, shim valves or replace them? by ttr230rider6

Dirt Bike   Make / Model Specific   Yamaha   YZ 400/426/450
  • Hot  79 replies

Is it worth it? (Cam and High compression piston) by macgi77

Dirt Bike   Make / Model Specific   Honda   CRF 150/230 F/L
  • Hot  36 replies

Join Our Community!

Even if you don't want to post, registered members get access to tools that make finding & following the good stuff easier.

If you enjoyed reading about "" here in the ThumperTalk archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join ThumperTalk today!

The views and opinions expressed on this page are strictly those of the author, and have not been reviewed or approved by ThumperTalk.