# New ESPN Scorebar for Monday Night Football



## Msguy (May 23, 2003)

I Love it. I absolutely Love it. It's at the bottom of the screen.


----------



## cdizzy (Jul 29, 2007)

I'm at work. Can anyone post a picture?


----------



## krock918316 (Mar 5, 2007)

i also like it much better


----------



## mightyb (Jan 5, 2006)

my vote doesn't count, but if it did i'd say the bottom is way better! go espn. could be a bit smaller though....


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Kinda big if you ask me...


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

i like it


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

*TOTALLY SUX....*they dont show down & distance in the scorebox.

1. its on the field which makes it hard to read.
2. sometimes the players stand on it & u cant read it.
3. they waste space on the screen with just colored bars but cant put down & distance.

some jerk producer again who doesnt know anything.


----------



## jrodfoo (Apr 9, 2007)

dcowboy7 said:


> *TOTALLY SUX....*they dont show down & distance in the scorebox.
> 
> 1. its on the field which makes it hard to read.
> 2. sometimes the players stand on it & u cant read it.
> ...


yeah i didn't like the fact that it was on the field, hopefully they change that.

well they had it up during the final few minutes in there. Hopefully it says... but I do like the format.


----------



## Msguy (May 23, 2003)

tcusta00 said:


> Kinda big if you ask me...


I like it being a little bigger. It's nice and very readable. You don't have to feel like you have to squint your eyes to read it. I'm all for this new ESPN Scorebar. I really thought CBS would go to a scorebar. They are the only network now for NFL Football who still has a bug on there screen. Come on CBS. Time for you to get a new scorebar.


----------



## cdizzy (Jul 29, 2007)

Hmmmmm.......I don't like it. I think it would be better if you took the "Monday night football" part out of it.

With that said, I do like it on the bottom.


----------



## DBSNewbie (Nov 3, 2007)

I "time-outs remaining" indicator would be nice to have, though.


----------



## tftc22 (Mar 30, 2007)

I don't like it and found it highly distracting, but I'm glad they put it on the bottom. It's interesting to me how placing graphics in different places on the screen so radically changes how it's perceived. If they put the same graphics on the top of the screen they would seem to take up more space since the mind automatically assumes that objects that are higher up are more distant (and mentally adjusts the perceived sizes accordingly). It's the same type of effect that makes people think they are seeing less picture with pillar box (bars on the side) and more of the picture (a panoramic view) for letterbox (bars on the top and bottom). 

Now if they would just make the parts that don't have any text or graphics at least semi-transparent, then the new graphics would be great.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I suppose it is better in some ways than before... but honestly, I'd rather just have the required info and no more. If they interrupt a couple of times an hour (or less) with rolling scores at the bottom for a minute, I could deal with that... but that bar could have been half the height it was and not lost any info at all... and they could have not extended it out left/right beyond the actual scoreboard needed area.


----------



## brant (Jul 6, 2008)

i like it at the bottom, but it was way too big. It takes up about 10% of the screen.


----------



## ARKDTVfan (May 19, 2003)

It was just like the Raiders' D, terrible :lol: :lol:


----------



## loowaters (Jun 4, 2007)

To the best of my estimation, this opaque info bar takes up about 15% of my HD real estate. I emailed them immediately asking what they were thinking. I hate it!!!


----------



## cmasia (Sep 18, 2007)

When will this madness end?

Last year they had a terrific - SMALL - graphic.

This year, it takes up about 10% of the screen and almost half of that has no info.

Add that to the BS pixie dust sound effects on all their graphics, and multiply that by the total idiot Kornheiser, and the game is completely unwatchable.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

It is taking up far to much room for my tastes.


----------



## braven (Apr 9, 2007)

I dislike the new MNF score bar. Takes up way too much real estate and it doesn't even show Time Outs remaining. Ugh. 

What would you expect from a network that gives Tony Kornheiser screen time?


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

This post maybe considered off topic,but it relates to the ESPN/MNF theme of the thread.  
The game drew record TV numbers.
12.95 million homes and 18.6 million viewers.
Those numbers add up to the largest audience ever for a program on "cable" TV.
I would imagine those numbers include Satellite and OTA viewers too,although the following article doesn't mention it.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80adfe69&template=with-video&confirm=true


----------



## Kansas Zephyr (Jun 30, 2007)

Steve615 said:


> I would imagine those numbers include Satellite and OTA viewers too,although the following article doesn't mention it.


It was on ESPN, so there was no OTA.

But, yes, I would like think that they consider sat subscribers as part of the "cable universe".


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

Kansas Zephyr said:


> It was on ESPN, so there was no OTA.
> 
> But, yes, I would like think that they consider sat subscribers as part of the "cable universe".


Viewers in the respective local markets ( Philly & Dallas ) may have had access to the game via OTA with their ABC affiliates.
I remember catching part of a TN Titans game that was televised by ESPN in the past.But,that game was also made available/simulcast via the Nashville ABC affiliate ( WKRN ) too.
That is why I mentioned OTA in my previous post.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

yes those #'s include everthing...sat, cable, local ota, ham radio (ok maybe not that).


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

dcowboy7 said:


> yes those #'s include everthing...sat, cable, local ota, ham radio (ok maybe not that).


:lol:


----------

