The Pittsburgh Pirates have no chance. Sure, they have a brand new stadium that rivals the best the league has to offer, but come September — in the heat of a playoff race (hypothetical) — don’t plan on seeing much of anything reported on the Pirates on the de facto network of record, ESPN. The rule of the game in Bristol: New York, Boston, Los Angeles, or nothing.

The Boston Red Sox – New York Yankees rivalry is admittedly the best in the sport, however a mid-season three-game series between the two does not warrant an hour-long special beforehand and the first twenty minutes of a half-hour SportsCenter afterward. The fact is the game is played in many small- and medium-market cities — including Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Kansas City and Minneapolis — but the network of record has made little effort to cover these teams. And the reason is plainly simple and obvious: revenue.

Revenue is not a dirty word in the sports world, and ESPN is — first and foremost — an entertainment company. At the same time, the network also makes the pitch that it has the authoritative voice on the game itself, both journalistic and opinion. But the only aspects of the game that ESPN truly covers well are the aspects that project greater revenue potential for The Worldwide Leader. And that means Red Sox – Yankees coverage — on-screen debates, pre-game interviews, post-game interviews, inning-by-inning highlights, pitch-by-pitch breakdowns — all at the expense of covering small- and medium-market teams.

ESPN does not do the sport justice. ESPN’s objective is increased revenues, not journalistic integrity in its coverage of the sport. If that were the case, you’d see commercials for an upcoming Pirates-Reds game, and not a teaser for an “exclusive” Alex Rodriguez interview. The A-Rod interview may bring ESPN better ratings, but the A-Rod interview does not constitute baseball. And contrary to ESPN, you can find baseball outside of New York, Boston and Los Angeles, and plenty of times, it is baseball worth watching.