Once upon a time, the fledgling sports network known as ESPN was more of a curiosity than anything else. A quirky blend of offbeat, out-of-the-mainstream sports, the network labored to fill its 24 hours with darts, bowling, billiards and strength contests. 

Since its inception in 1979, the Entertainment Sports Programming Network has grown from those humble beginnings into the single greatest entity in sports. Bigger than any league, any sporting event and certainly any player, ESPN sets the agenda for sports fans, processes according to advertisers’ wishes and feeds it to sports consumers. 

And that’s why ESPN is bad for sports.

It wasn’t always like this. By any definition, ESPN is a true original, breaking the mold of what sports programming could be. And in doing so, the network tapped into something constant: fans’ love for their sports and their teams. 

ESPN’s signature telecast, SportsCenter, debuted with the network and aired its 30,000th episode on Feb. 11, 2007. Eventually, the show became required viewing not just for fans, but for athletes. And that was the tipping point when ESPN officially became bigger than any of the sports it showcased. 

It was also the moment the network’s trademark quirkiness began to dissolve in favor of blatant ego.

Those same athletes whose highlights had once filled the network soon went to work for ESPN after they retired, eating up the airtime that once went to anchors who perhaps were a bit less polished, but were definitely more accessible and still saw sports as something to enjoy, not worship. The new “stars” had to have their own segments to showcase them, so that meant more sidebars and analysis on SportsCenter, which drew sponsors and more money.

College football contracts became more lucrative, flooding conferences with money. In turn, ESPN spotlighted the games it was carrying, helping turn the Southeastern Conference into practically a Triple-A affiliate of the NFL, with the scruples to match. 

Eventually, ESPN expanded its cable networks, spinning off several new channels and claiming programming that had once been the promise of only the mighty broadcast networks. Soon ESPN was outbidding the big boys for the biggest events, culminating in college football’s biggest prize, the Bowl Championship Series. 

NBC still has the Olympics, Fox still has the World Series and CBS still has March Madness. But for how long?

The problem with all of this is the very real threat of sports hegemony when ESPN wields enough influence to alter the very sports it broadcasts by driving the national conversation.

Hockey, for instance, was once one of the “Big 4 Sports,” along with football, baseball and basketball. ESPN carried the Stanley Cup playoffs for a while, but over the last decade, it has turned its on-air attention to NASCAR, deeming it the up-and-comer. That has, to an extent, helped marginalize the NHL by giving it less and less airtime. Now the league has trouble getting games on basic cable at all.

Another example is that of UConn women’s basketball, a team (based in nearby Briston) that ESPN has chosen to shine an incredibly bright light on, often at the expense of other teams in women’s college basketball. The network made a star of the Lady Huskies head coach, Geno Auriemma, and its slanted coverage of the Women’s College Basketball Tournament reflected that. 

SportsCenter long ago became more entertainment than journalism, and that’s a shame. One of the basic tenets of journalism is to serve as a watchdog – to ask questions on behalf of your audience. 

But where was the network during baseball’s steroid scandal? Like the rest of us, they weren’t asking questions, but riding the home-run train as far as it would go, not realizing the sanctity of the sport itself had already jumped the track. 

Blurring the line between entertainment and journalism is easy to do, but there’s no blurring what’s on deck in the form of the Longhorn Network.

For the first time ever, a sports network is basically sponsoring a single university and specifically, its sports teams. It’s unprecedented, it’s risky and it reeks of opportunism. No college athletics department makes more money than UT, and ESPN wanted a piece of the action.

Goodbye, objectivity. Goodbye, balanced journalism. Hello, Mack Brown and company 24/7. 

It was the latest example of ESPN’s desire to be in the conversation with the biggest names in sports – indeed, to be bigger than the sport itself. That, and to make a ton of money, as evidenced by the network’s $300 million investment in the Longhorn Network. I’ll elaborate more on that topic in the next issue.

There was a time not too long ago when ESPN’s claim as the worldwide leader in sports was uttered with tongue planted firmly in cheek. Now, it could not be more true. And we’re all the worse for it.

Matt Mitchell is a sports reporter for KVUE Sports. For more information, contact him at mmitchell@kvue.com.