At ESPN, criticism of Skip Bayless was apparently forbidden.

[ReMeDy]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/06/21/at-espn-criticism-of-skip-bayless-apparently-was-forbidden/

 

Now that he's left, people are no longer binded to keep quiet about him so they're delivering the trash talk. The article makes a good point that hopefully when Bayless joins FOX, they won't give him that same level of power.

[NewColtsFan]

 

On a certain level,  I understand ESPN execs not wanting their on-air talent getting into heated disagreements with other ESPN on-air talent.     Because then you become the story in a very, very bad way.    

 

That said,  there's a way to publicly disagree without engaging in personal attacks.    I'm sure Skippy wouldn't have liked that because so many of his views are just down right.....    silly.     And ESPN has a number of very talented people who could literally CRUSH Skippy everyday.    Then, all you're doing is hurting yourself.

As for Skip at Fox.....    there's no way of knowing what will happen there.    Fox is the Animal House of Network TV Sports.      It might go great,   and it might go terribly.    But Fox is paying all the former ESPN guys a ton of money,  so they'll get years and years to figure it all out.     That said,   I won't be watching Fox.     They're style over substance.     Not what I like....

 

[oldunclemark]

  Back in the old days of AM radio....it was common practice to have the DJs feud with each other..

the morning guy would talk trash about the drive time guy..

It got people to listen to hear what the guy they liked said about the other guy on his station.

It works, even if its fake,  because it lifts the audience of both shows...and the morning man on radio never sees the afternoon guy in the hallways

 

I admit it would be more touchy if they were in the building at the same time every day.

But ESPN is more opinion than it is news.......Like they said in the PFT piece..I think that if one host blasts

another..he should go on his show  and say it to his face...

 

Confrontation help the company....embrace debate, isn't that what they said

 

[OffensivelyPC]

14 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

And ESPN has a number of very talented people who could literally CRUSH Skippy everyday.    Then, all you're doing is hurting yourself.

 

That's probably why they had the criticism ban on Skip.  When the conversation is so one-sided, it's not much of a conversation and makes for terrible TV.  Because he certainly doesn't seem like the kind of person who can formulate a well thought out argument.  Maybe he's better at Fox, who knows?  At this poitn it's been years since I've watched the man because he's just that predictabe and uninteresting.

[Superman]

There's no evidence there was a prohibition on criticizing Bayless. The article quotes other ESPN members as saying they didn't want to get into it because 'nobody wants to deal with it.' 

[Coffeedrinker]

IN a book by Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead, there was a character, Ellsworth Toohey who used his influence to push mediocre and bad talent and proclaim it great.  He did it for architecture, books, art, anything, if it was bad, he would proclaim it great and his large following would agree.

 

Skip Bayless (and let's face it there are a lot more like him) makes me think that Ayn Rand was being prophetic.

[loudnproudcolt]

Skip Bayless from day 1 said he would draft RGIII over Luck. In fact, he said he would have never drafted Luck, and kept Manning and got the draft picks for Luck, which is incredibly insane if you look back at that time. Regardless, even after RGIII imploded, he never changed his opinion on Luck, no matter how much he was

criticized, and Smith to his credit did. It goes to show you almost everything he said was to get attention. He will

fit in really well at Fox if it is style over substance, since their is no substance to what he says. It is all

insinuation.

[2006Coltsbestever]

I honestly think Skip was about Ratings and getting certain fanbases riled up because anyone that can look at the camera with a straight face and say picking Luck over RG3 was a mistake is either on drugs or he is trying to get people riled up LOL. He also constantly debated that Tim Tebow was a Great QB and that Johnny Manziel would be a Good pro. I can go on and on. Stephen A Smith was the far better of the 2 IMO. I agreed with him 90% of the time over Skip. I wonder now what ESPN is going to do with First Take? I don't think anyone is suited to debate Stephen A like Skip was. They were polar opposites which made for an entertaining show.

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I honestly think Skip was about Ratings and getting certain fanbases riled up because anyone that can look at the camera with a straight face and say picking Luck over RG3 was a mistake is either on drugs or he is trying to get people riled up LOL. He also constantly debated that Tim Tebow was a Great QB and that Johnny Manziel would be a Good pro. I can go on and on. Stephen A Smith was the far better of the 2 IMO. I agreed with him 90% of the time over Skip. I wonder now what ESPN is going to do with First Take? I don't think anyone is suited to debate Stephen A like Skip was. They were polar opposites which made for an entertaining show.

Before First Take Skip was an award winning columnist and author. He was very good at his job. Then the mistake of putting his face in front of the camera and putting him on a point counter point argumentative show inflated his ego. I highly doubt he himself believed 90% of what he was pushing on the viewers but then it turned into ratings. It became more shock TV because of his outlandish points of views. Who knows, he might go back to what he was really good at before ESPN. We will see.

[Defjamz26]

I could see that. I always wondered why no one ever served him live on air. If you're going to let someone make such strong and blatant declarations on TV, then you should absolutely let him him a double serving of crow when he's wrong. They basically let him be an unchallenged sensationalist. And I would think that'd be bad for ratings, but I don't know the First Take numbers off the top of my head. But I think that's why they never put him in segments with a guy like John Gruden. Gruden would've ripped his Luck criticism to shreds and laughed at him saying Wilson is better than Rodgers. Anyone with credible football/basketball acumen would have embarrassed him on TV. I wouldn't be surprised if they did try and protect him.