Let me begin by saying that I typically can’t bear to read Bill Simmons (aka “The Sports Guy”). His NBA writing is often insightful, if arrogant, and he’s still good for a few humorous draft observations or pop culture references here and there. But I consider him less than knowledgeable about most other sports, and find his pretentious “theories” and monotonous, grating writing style to be irritating.
His recent article on sports movies, however, was spot on, and it got me thinking about the future of sports entertainment.
Sports programming will forever remain valuable in the modern media spectrum because of a few well-known and obvious qualities. Games and matches almost have to be watched live, and are therefore somewhat immune to the DVRs and “time-shifting” that depresses the value of advertisements embedded in the programming. The demographic is valuable, time-tested, and difficult to consistently reach with scale via other programming. The audience is immensely loyal because of geographic, social, and academic ties. And so on and so forth.
But recent trends in entertainment and content distribution are making the competition for eyeballs fiercer by the day. Barriers to frictionless video consumption are eroding quickly, as quality programming is increasingly available on-demand via cable/set top boxes, DVD by mail, iTunes, and the myriad streaming services that are purchasing rights to more and more compelling and timely content.
So how does sports programming compete? By making sure that more of its live events become “can’t miss” social moments. Of course, the leagues have worked to maximize viewership through conventional scheduling means for years. The NFL and MLB have long tried to line up rivalries and big-market teams on Sunday/Monday nights and attractive weekends, respectively, and the NBA has done a fantastic job the last few years of aligning rivalries and compelling individual storylines with their largest captive audience (Christmas Day viewers).
But I expect that we are going to see an explosion of promotional sports programming along the lines of HBO’s excellent 24/7 series, especially in support of sports on the fringe like hockey and boxing. The mini-series’ are a great example of entertainment with the aim of promoting sporting events as “can’t miss” moments, and I believe that they will be seminal in shaping the way the leagues drive audience engagement moving forward. Each of these mini-series offers an in-depth look at athlete and team preparation for upcoming events, and has been highly successful in luring pay-per-view purchases for boxing events and new viewers for the NHL. The NFL has also worked with HBO to manufacture compelling storylines and team buzz with its Hard Knocks series.
How much of this content will sports audiences eat up before it loses its freshness and immediacy? It’s hard to say. But I can’t wait to see more of it, even if it comes at the expense of the traditional sports film genre whose demise Simmons laments so much.
