The Business Behind the Espy's

The ESPY Awards (Excellence in Sports Performance Yearly Awards) have become one of the most prestigious events in sports since their inception in 1993. While viewers tune in to see their favorite athletes dressed in their finest attire, accepting awards for their outstanding performances, there's a complex business and voting structure behind the glitz and glamour. In this article, I’ll be exploring the mechanics of how the ESPYs operate, from voting processes to award category distinctions and the role of statistics in determining winners. (Warning: jokes may not be as funny as Shane Gillis’, but I’ll try my best.)

P.S. Before we get into it, I’ll be starting a new series on Substack Live called Women’s Sports Wednesday where I’ll be breaking down the top headlines each week. Join me today at noon EST on Substack! You can listen to the replay of the first episode here. Bring your lunch or late breakfast and join me in the chat next week!

The ESPY Awards voting system has three parts:

• Nomination Committee: Before public voting begins, a nomination committee comprised of ESPN executives, producers, and sports experts determines which athletes, teams, and moments qualify as nominees in each category.

• Fan Voting: Since 2004, most ESPY categories are decided by fan votes. ESPN opens online voting to the public several weeks before the ceremony, allowing fans worldwide to support their favorite athletes and moments.

• Expert Panels: For certain specialized categories or to determine nominees, ESPN assembles panels of sports journalists, broadcasters, sports executives, and former athletes who lend their expertise to the selection process.

This hybrid approach balances popular opinion with expert assessment, but it has occasionally led to criticism that some awards become popularity contests rather than pure merit-based recognitions.

One of the most challenging aspects of the ESPYs is the cross-sport categories such as "Best Male Athlete" or "Best Female Athlete," which require voters to compare excellence across entirely different disciplines. The inherent subjectivity in comparing, for instance, a quarterback to a basketball player to a swimmer, is part of what makes these categories particularly debated among sports fans. For cross-sport categories, the nomination committee considers how athletes performed relative to the standards of their specific sports. This might include dominance within their league, record-breaking performances, and championship victories. Beyond pure statistics, an athlete's broader cultural influence, storyline, and impact on their sport often factor heavily into cross-sport nominations and voting. The ESPYs cover performances from the previous calendar year, which creates interesting dynamics when comparing sports with different seasons and championship timelines.

While the ESPYs aren't purely statistics-driven awards, performance metrics play a significant role in the nomination and voting processes. For categories within a single sport, traditional statistical achievements (points scored, batting averages, race times, etc.) provide clear benchmarks for comparison. Statistics accumulated during championship runs or critical moments tend to carry more weight than regular season numbers. In recent years, the rise of advanced sports analytics has influenced how performances are evaluated, with metrics like PER (player efficiency rating) in basketball or WAR (wins above replacement) in baseball sometimes factoring into discussions. Statistical performances that break records or set new benchmarks in a sport often receive special consideration. However, the ESPYs ultimately balance statistical excellence with narrative appeal. A statistically dominant athlete might lose to someone with a compelling comeback story or historic achievement that transcends pure numbers.

Beyond the awards themselves, the ESPYs represent a significant business venture for ESPN and its parent company Disney. The broadcast generates substantial advertising revenue, with companies paying premium rates for commercial slots during the star-studded event. Various award categories are often sponsored by major brands, creating additional revenue streams. The ESPYs are connected to the V Foundation for cancer research, adding a philanthropic dimension that enhances the event's brand value while supporting a worthy cause. The awards serve as a platform for ESPN to promote its other programming (like ESPN original films and podcasts) and maintain relationships with leagues, athletes, and sports organizations.

The ceremony strategically takes place during a relatively quiet period in the sports calendar (after the NBA Finals and before NFL training camps, but smack dab in the middle of the WNBA and NWSL seasons), maximizing viewership and attention from sports fans.

The ESPYs haven't been without their share of controversies over the years. Fans sometimes argue that more popular athletes or those from major market teams have advantages in fan voting regardless of their statistical achievements. The definitions and criteria for certain categories have sometimes been questioned, particularly when it comes to special awards like the Arthur Ashe Courage Award. The awards have faced scrutiny regarding the representation of diverse sports, athletes from smaller markets, and niche sports that may not receive the same attention as major leagues. These controversies reflect the inherent challenges in creating an awards show that spans the entire sports world while maintaining both entertainment value and credibility.

For athletes, an ESPY represents recognition that transcends their specific league or sport. For ESPN and Disney, the ceremony provides a valuable platform for celebrating sports while generating content, revenue, and goodwill. And for fans, the ESPYs offer a rare opportunity to compare excellence across the entire spectrum of athletic achievement, even if the comparisons themselves aren't always apples-to-apples.

So tell me, who was your biggest snub at this year’s ESPYs Awards?