ESPN started as an idea by father and son tandem Bill and Scott Rasmussen. They came up with the idea and got ESPN their first contract with the NCAA, but that's all what the Rasmussen's had to offer. The money for the network came through Stuart Evey of Getty Oil and Chet Simmons ran the network. The Rasmussen's were jettisoned after a couple of years with a chunk of equity. Getty eventually sold ESPN to ABC which was eventually sold to Capital Cities Communications which of course sold ABC/ESPN to Walt Disney during the mid-90's.
Those early years at ESPN sounded like hell to be a part of. They were located in the middle of nowhere Connecticut making no money and were controlled by an alcoholic oilman who fancied himself as some sort of Hollywood player. It's amazing that so many ego's could exist with each other and sometimes the ego's didn't get along.
Now a lot of people have complained about the length of book, it's certainly long, but I love the fact that Miller and Shales didn't leave one stone unturned. They go over everything and interview everyone. They talk about ESPN's highs (Signing contracts to broadcast MLB and NFL games) to the lows (ESPN the Phone).
It's the wide range of personalities that makes this book. It's amazing how many different personalities they had and still have. The personalities ranged from an alcoholic (Evey) to the jerk (Olberman) to the arrogant (Berman) to the nice guy (Bob Ley) to the over-the-top guy (Stu Scott) to the crazy (Jack Edwards). ESPN may have had creative people behind the scenes, but it was the personalities in front of the audience on camera that drew viewers to ESPN.
I have two little nit picks with this book. First I though Miller & Shales kissed ESPN's ass a little too much when it came to the NCAA Tournament. ESPN basically tries to say they made college basketball and the NCAA Tournament. Part of that is true. ESPN was the first network to start airing college basketball games regularly, yes Dickie V has been at ESPN as long as Ley and Berman, and they were the first network to start airing the early rounds of the NCAA Tournament. The authors and ESPN though forgot to mention the appetite viewers have for the tournament because of gambling and love of the sport. College basketball would have worked on any network if they had the foresight to air games.
My other nitpick that I had was that the book kind of jumped all over the place. If you're not paying close attention, you'll have no idea what they're talking about. I realize that oral history books are difficult to organize. The authors though could have made it clear they were jumping to another topic without italics.
I loved Terry Pluto's oral history book on the ABA. In the book Pluto would talk about a team, player, or event in individual chapters. Then there was mini chapters within those chapters to let the reader know they were changing subjects but still remaining on the main topic of the chapter. The ESPN book fails to do this in my opinion and makes the book difficult to read in my case.
Other than these nitpicks though, which are small in a larger context, I thoroughly enjoyed the ESPN book and would suggest it to anyone who is fascinated with broadcasting. The stories were fascinating, the people were tremendous, and ESPN upon itself captivating.
(Notice how I didn't mention Bristol, Connecticut? So many have piled on that poor town already I thought I would give it a break. Not to mention that I grew up in a small town and no the experiences of growing up/living in a town like that.)
I completely agree with your second point. Organizing the book by mini topic would have made for a much more seamless read.
ReplyDeleteAs to the NCAA Tournament, I think the main networks felt people wouldn't watch Duke and UNC beat up on Boston U. & Sam Houston State. ESPN deserves some credit for putting those games on, not knowing if people would have the appetite for it. The same holds true with their decision to begin televising the NFL Draft. There was no guarantee people would want to watch that.