It's been a while since I bothered watching the ESPYs. Though I can't exactly remember how long ago it was, I can distinctly recall changing the channel after suffering through yet another lame attempt at humor by one of the WWL's talking heads. Safe to say, I've found something better to do in subsequent years. I hope you have too.But now that fans of ESPN have bestowed the ESPY for best NHL player on Pittsburgh Penguins center Sidney Crosby after a season where Washington Capitals winger Alex Ovechkin simply dominated the entire league, I feel compelled to comment. It's only been a few weeks since Ovechkin cleaned up at the NHL Awards, going home with the Hart Trophy as the regular season's most valuable player; the Lester Pearson Trophy for most outstanding player as voted by the league's players; the Art Ross Trophy for most total points; and the Maurice Richard Trophy as the league's leading goal scorer.
When you clean up like that, I like to think that Ovechkin won't miss an ESPY.
But really, it's worse than that, isn't it? After all, Crosby, who was injured for a good chunk of the season, might not have even been the best player on his team during the regular season. That honor would go to Evgeni Malkin, the man who carried the Penguins offensively in Crosby's absence, and earned himself consideration for both the Hart and Pearson all on his own. As for the playoffs, while Crosby led his team in scoring, it was Marian Hossa who stole the show, scoring 12 playoff goals compared to Crosby's six.
In the end, I can't help but think this vote is an incredible indictment of the way ESPN covers all sports, not just the NHL. After all, if you can't figure out who the best athletes in the world really are after watching countless hours of SportsCenter and digesting endless amounts of content online at ESPN.com, it's pretty clear ESPN is falling down on the job. Then again, I'm not the first person to make note of that. It's clear I won't be the last either.
ADVERTISEMENT
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
7-17-2008 @ 10:41AM
robbywilli said...
It is very clear that ESPN has lost touch with the NHL. Maybe they think Hockey is not worth their once, exclusive coverage. Then there have been the slow but steady defections of annalists and casters that knew the game and brought color to Hockey. Sad. I think the new stations will be on the rise in the future. Hockey is a good sport and has a purity all it's own. Left to the mercy of ESPN, a lot of sports that play at that time of the year, will suffer. Here's hoping that ESPN gets their collective head out of their a**es, and finally sees the profit margin is not really important when it comes to total sports networking. Thank you for your time.
Reply
7-17-2008 @ 11:03AM
Tn_Winger said...
I agree with this article. ESPN has been clueless from day 1. Gone are the days when ESPN usually gets it right the first time when it comes to recognizing athletes and their exploits. But it's usually corporate bigwigs that now control the strings because 1. The NHL's equally clueless and inept bigwig, Gary "Buttman" Bettman, the erstwhile commish tabbed Sid the Kid as the anointed savior of the NHL from day 1 of the NHL draft. Well, Sid the Kid is not...in my opinion the Best NHL Player Of The Year..if anything the best NHL player of the year should have gone to Malkin. Because it was Malkin who stepped up when Sid the Kid was OUT for a considerable length of time during the regular season. If it weren't for Malkin's scoring and such, I highly doubt it the Penguins would have made it to the Stanley Cup Finals. And I will point this out...TEAM WORK, offense and defense will always trump the megawatt power and hype of ONE single player. The Red Wings team beat the Penguins because it relied on TEAM WORK. Not on one single "Buttman" anointed messiah.
Reply
7-17-2008 @ 11:36AM
Chris said...
Not an answer to the oscars, more like the MTV music video awards...
Reply
7-17-2008 @ 12:08PM
J.P. said...
Clue #1 that the ESPYs (at least insofar as they relate to hockey) are a complete and total joke: Henrik Zetterberg was not among the five finalists for NHL Player of the Year.
Reply
7-17-2008 @ 12:08PM
Dr Huxtable said...
Oh, I guess they didn't tell you. Crosby is in the league of clutch, so, um, he's obviously the best.
Reply
7-17-2008 @ 12:34PM
dmg said...
ESPN doesn't just fail when it come to hockey coverage, they fail when it comes to all sports coverage. It used to be a place hardcore sports fans could turn to and find endless sports or sports analysis. Now it's just obsessed with using sports as a launching pad for obsessing over the celebrity culture surrounding sports and product placement.
Reply
7-17-2008 @ 12:52PM
Tom said...
ESPN covers the NBA. Need we say more? I love watching 47 minutes of dunks and no defense NBA highlights as opposed the highlights of the fastest, most physical and most graceful game on earth. Is why I rarely watch Sportscenter anymore.
Reply
7-17-2008 @ 2:23PM
Adam said...
"But now that fans of ESPN have bestowed..."
If the fans vote for the winners, then, even as lame as ESPN has gotten, you can't put the blame on them, can you?
Reply
7-19-2008 @ 12:16AM
Mark said...
Of course Crosby won the ESPY. He scored the winning goal in the Winter Classic outdoor game, which was the only hockey game ESPN employees watched this year.
ESPN is an embarrasment to the network once anchored by Tom Mees and George Grande.
Enjoy your spelling bee, cheerleading competition and scrabble.
Reply
7-20-2008 @ 7:48PM
Josh said...
I agree that ESPN needs more (and better) coverage of the NHL, but that is not the problem with this particular instance. The reason that Crosby won the ESPY is because fans vote. Hell, I voted for him (but I'm a Pens fan). The reason that so many fans voted for Crosby is that he's probably th only current hockey player they knew on their trip through the "ballot." I voted for a NASCAR driver, but I couldn't tell you who.
And btw, Ovechkin must've been saving all his energy to collect those trophies while Malkin and Crosby were making it to the Stanley Cup Final. Because apparently 60-some goals makes your team a Stanley Cup contender. maybe if he had a goalie, or a winger or something.
Reply
7-21-2008 @ 11:17AM
Mike Thompson said...
Yeah, because Washington would have made it to the playoffs WITHOUT Ovechkin. I love your insane Pittsburg fan-boy logic. Did you even SEE the complete and utter domination that was Ovie's 2007-2008 season?
Eric is right, there's a pretty good case that Crosby wasn't even the best player on his team this season, so why would you vote for him over someone who was? At least you were honest that you voted for him because he was on your favorite team, but don't denegrate AO's season to try and make you feel better about Crosby's underwhelming post-season.
7-21-2008 @ 3:02PM
Anne said...
The fans vote. So your rant on ESPN is pointless. I, however, am not saying ESPN doesn't suck. Cause it does. But you're wrong on this one to blame ESPN. Besides, as someone else pointed out recently, ESPN didn't pick up the contract to air NHL games, etc. after the lockout. They didn't want to pay and VS. did so of course the NHL went with VS. So if you want hockey to get more coverage, the NHL should've kept their contract with ESPN since they are more widely watched.
Reply
8-05-2008 @ 5:42PM
Toddcommish said...
Who the hell cares who gets an ESPY anyway? I wouldn't be surprised if Brett Favre got Best Player in the NFL... or Derek Jeter gets Best Player in MLB...
They measure everything by popularity with the average (read: ignorant) fans, the casual observers who think that John Madden and Joe Morgan are expert analysts.
Reply
9-21-2008 @ 10:01AM
TomFor said...
Maybe Crosby won the ESPY because the Pens beat the Caps so often. I wonder how Crosby and Ovie match up when they play head to head? I know the answer.
Reply
10-01-2008 @ 12:20AM
TomFor said...
Maybe Crosby won the ESPY because the Pens beat the Caps so often. I wonder how Crosby and Ovie match up when they play head to head? I know the answer.
Reply