Once Upon A Time, ESPN Saved Television

Over the past week I spent several otherwise valuable hours watching “Playmakers” for the sixth or seventh time.

For those unfamiliar, ESPN put out “Playmakers” as a mini-series—or, rather, a soap opera for men—back in 2004. It explored life in a fictional NFL team, including references to steroids, cocaine, in-fighting and homosexuality. In response, the league threatened to pull football highlights if the series continued on to a second season.

ESPN caved in, cancelling out one of the best dramas seen on television.

Freedom is not free, we’re told. Freedom of speech also has consequences.

Yet in its original iteration as the Entertainment and Sports Production Network, ESPN freed us from the tyranny of network executives who dictated our tastes back in the good old days.

Yes, I know—the 500-plus channel world brought us such inanities as “Here Comes Honey Boo Boo,” “Duck Dynasty,” “Southie Rules” and Glenn Beck. The 24-hour news cycle has devolved from straightforward accounts to talking head dullards and conspiracy theorists.

Ah, but freedom of speech, like democracy, is messy business.

Think about our options today: dozens of college football games on fall Saturdays, every Formula 1 and NASCAR race, news and talk and stupidity and baseball until we cannot stand the end of it.

Again for those unfamiliar, the 1960s and 70s were ruled by an implied form of censorship. Threatening, groundbreaking programs indeed aired, from “All in the Family” to “M*A*S*H*” to the great “WKRP in Cincinnati.”

Must admit, I was a fan of the lower-brow shows, such as “Hogan’s Heroes.”

When it came to sports programming, however, those of us who grew up in the golden age were stuck with bowling instead of second level college football, Minnesota Fats shooting pool in place of a Cardinals vs. Cubs rivalry game, cliff diving from Mexico while the Daytona 500 was in full roar.

For some reason, educated and trained network executives believed that Mutual of Omaha’s Wild Kingdom would pull a greater market share than, say, Oklahoma battling Oklahoma State or Richard Petty fencing with David Pearson on the high banks of Darlington.

It astounds me, sometimes, how little the suits in charge of our entertainment truly understood. ESPN began airing NASCAR races live. The networks then realized all those packed seats from the 50s, 60s and 70s counted for something. ESPN took a chance on the College World Series, based in Omaha. The networks were shocked to learn that audiences preferred the drama of sport to The Frugal Gourmet—and then suggested they move the event to an indoor stadium in Minneapolis.

Soccer is one of the older and more revered sports around the world. Manchester United puts the New York Yankees and the Dallas Cowboys to shame, name recognition-wise. When America hosted the World Cup, however, network execs asked the sport’s governing body—FIFA—to alter centuries of rules so that they could stuff more advertising into the time slot.

FIFA told them to do something to themselves, politely.

So watching a decade old mini-series that lasted for just one year thanks to pressure from corporate types reminded me that we live in the greatest era of television.

Yeah, there are no Walter Cronkites now. The news has dissolved into partisan nobodies spouting meaningless dribble. But over the 500 or so channels, there is something for just about everyone, every minute of the day.

And we don’t have to watch surfing from Maui instead of Manchester United vs. Liverpool or Georgia vs. South Carolina.

So what was wrong with executives in the good old days?

Really, I have no idea.