News   Nov 29, 2024
News Roundup for November 29, 2024
 220     0 
News   Nov 29, 2024
Mont Saint-Toronto
 274     0 
News   Nov 28, 2024
Wallace Emerson Community Centre Growing Beside Galleria on the Park
 724     0 

Toronto 2015 Pan American Games

syn said:
The fact that it's so difficult to find out broadcast information for these games should make it pretty obvious how little coverage they received.

"ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPN360.com will simulcast some of ESPN Deportes’ Spanish-language coverage. The ESPN family will provide more than 160 hours of Pan American Games-related programming, the most ever televised in the USA."

They didn't broadcast 160 hours on ESPN. They covered 160 hours on their Spanish language network, with only some of that simulcast on ESPN.
Click to expand...

Show me where in my quote where I said all 160 hours were simulcast. Tell me all the other events from 3 years ago where you can tell me exactly how many hours were broadcast....it tells us nothing. What we know is that that the original statement that they were not broadcast at all is faulse....no one said these were huge games just some of us (me at the front I guess) feel it is not right to just make blanket statements like "they were not broadcast in the states" to advance an argument and then change your premise/argument later because you don't like the fact that this is a false statement. The only major participant in the 2007 games that did not broadcast them was Canada....that probably says more about the state of our sports networks and broadcasting than it does the Pan Am games.
 
TOareaFan said:
Show me where in my quote where I said all 160 hours were simulcast. Tell me all the other events from 3 years ago where you can tell me exactly how many hours were broadcast....it tells us nothing. What we know is that that the original statement that they were not broadcast at all is faulse....no one said these were huge games just some of us (me at the front I guess) feel it is not right to just make blanket statements like "they were not broadcast in the states" to advance an argument and then change your premise/argument later because you don't like the fact that this is a false statement. The only major participant in the 2007 games that did not broadcast them was Canada....that probably says more about the state of our sports networks and broadcasting than it does the Pan Am games.
Click to expand...

TOareaFan said:
If if suits your argument that 160 hours of programing available to 99 milion homes = not available in America...I guess we have different definitions.
Click to expand...

If you want to be told you were right, that's fine. You were right - the Pan Am Games were televised in the US in 2007. I should've been more clear that I meant televised in any meaningful way that could result in anything that could be quantified as major viewership.

The fact is, the games were covered by an offshoot channel of ESPN - with some of the content simulcast on their main channel, and not in English. You can rest assured that you are right, but I don't think anyone would consider that even remotely significant coverage.
 
And again, you have to realize: this is the ESPN realm. We're not just talking about "US coverage"; we're talking about an overall sports-media omnibus gargantua that just happens to be based in the US. As for Canada...we just don't have the means to produce an ESPN-type network megaempire. But if the US didn't have said gargantua, coverage of the Pan Ams would be just as negligible--and all the more so if you factor out the Hispanic marketplace. Thus this argument about Canada being alone in not covering the Pan Ams might as well be re Canada being alone in its remoteness from anything "Latin American"--our "second language" is French, not Spanish as in the States. And even in the States, the Hispanic market's generally cubbyholed as "separate"--the "People en Español" marketplace.

This whole discussion might as well be an argument over how America is primarily Latin America, and how Canada and the non-Hispanic USA might as well be cubbyholed like "white Rhodesians".
 
adma said:
This whole discussion might as well be an argument over how America is primarily Latin America, and how Canada and the non-Hispanic USA might as well be cubbyholed like "white Rhodesians".
Click to expand...
Which proves that this whole tangent about broadcasting or priority is pretty much useless.

The various levels of government don't make their funding or infrastructure decisions based on who has the TV rights - though international exposure and relationship building is an added benefit that doesn't really require local TV participation.

The games are larger than the Winter Olympics in terms of countries, events, competitors and visitors and if there's a financial and international case to support hosting them, that's what matters.
 
Marko said:
The games are larger than the Winter Olympics in terms of countries, events, competitors and visitors and if there's a financial and international case to support hosting them, that's what matters.
Click to expand...

Hard to tell about "larger"--after all, we're talking about something that's confined to the western hemisphere; whereas the Winter Olympics are global in scope. It's better to say that the engaged mass marketplace is differently configured--and even so, when it comes to the armchair/fairweather-fan "externals", Guinness-type trivia about medals historically won, etc, the Winter Olympics still comes out on top. I mean, who can rifle off historical Pan Am Games trivia out there?

Your formulation would better suit a Stanley Cup vs FIFA World Cup argument.
 
syn said:
If you want to be told you were right, that's fine.
Click to expand...

not so much that I needed to hear I was right...i just could not understand why people were continuing to twist a simple one sentence original statement to mean so much (language, cable versus over the air, major network versus sports networkd etc) just because the original statement was incorrect.

syn said:
The fact is, the games were covered by an offshoot channel of ESPN - with some of the content simulcast on their main channel, and not in English. You can rest assured that you are right, but I don't think anyone would consider that even remotely significant coverage.
Click to expand...

See, even here you mix the word "fact" with things that are not so. While the main production was in Spanish, we know that some of it was simulcast on the English parts of ESPN.........and while the main production was with a "offshoot" some (3 years on it is hard to tell how much) made it to the main network.

But we should move on as the amended position (that they were broadcast in the states but not on a main network thus the Pan Am Games are not as major as, say, the Olympics) is something that I think everyone agrees on.
 
This is a rendering of the proposed field hockey venue.
 

Attachments

  • field hockey.jpg
    field hockey.jpg
    25.8 KB · Views: 255
TOareaFan said:
not so much that I needed to hear I was right...i just could not understand why people were continuing to twist a simple one sentence original statement to mean so much (language, cable versus over the air, major network versus sports networkd etc) just because the original statement was incorrect.
Click to expand...

There was really nothing to twist. The real point here is that outside of the Spanish speaking market in the US, it really had no coverage.



TOareaFan said:
See, even here you mix the word "fact" with things that are not so. While the main production was in Spanish, we know that some of it was simulcast on the English parts of ESPN.........and while the main production was with a "offshoot" some (3 years on it is hard to tell how much) made it to the main network.

But we should move on as the amended position (that they were broadcast in the states but not on a main network thus the Pan Am Games are not as major as, say, the Olympics) is something that I think everyone agrees on.
Click to expand...

How do we know that? All it says is that some of the Spanish broadcast was simulcast on ESPN. It doesn't say what language. You're just assuming that's the case. We don't even know how much "some" constitutes. If their press release was any indication, not much.

I'm looking forward to these games, but they're not remotely close to the Olympics as far as coverage is concerned.
 
Yes, but it's still a pretty small, low res rendering (not that it's any less appreciated).
 
syn said:
It looks pretty average, though it's not really fair to judge it on such a small render. Will this be a permanent venue?
Click to expand...

I have no problem with it. It is what it is and doesn't need to be beyond average.
 
Of course if Canada, Ontario and Toronto could cooperate on this event we might see advertisements around the world that linked attendance at the Games with an overall theme of visiting Canada. The PanAms are just one of many things happening in this fair land in 2015.

At least this is the way that India is making use of their hosting of the upcoming Commonwealth Games in countries near to it.

4525998848_9009672302.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top