• The KillerFrogs

ESPN Hemorrhaging

Chongo94

Active Member
Wexahu said:
That last sentence, man it just drives me nuts. What "small brand" team got screwed this year by the committee? Penn State? Michigan? Are those not big brands?

Tell me what small brand got hosed. In case you're wondering, Penn State is a HUGE school with a HUGE east coast following, right in ESPNs backyard.

What was the committee supposed to do to prove that last sentence of yours is BS?
Well you took his last sentence and completely changed it to something else entirely and something he never said. He didn't say a small brand got hosed this year, only that the system is such that it keeps the big brands in power and is only about selecting the biggest brands, which it is.

Soooo the only bs being spread here isn't by him...
 

Wexahu

Full Member
Chongo94 said:
Well you took his last sentence and completely changed it to something else entirely and something he never said. He didn't say a small brand got hosed this year, only that the system is such that it keeps the big brands in power and is only about selecting the biggest brands, which it is.

Soooo the only bs being spread here isn't by him...
There's no proof of that though.

If the best teams are the biggest brands, the committee choosing the biggest brands doesnt prove anything other than they are doing their job, i.e. picking the best teams.
 

froginaustin

Active Member
If you count their several extension campuses, and they do (considering them all NItanny Lions so to speak), Pedo State enrolls 65,000 iirc. So I expect ESPiN thinks a lot of them.
 

rifram09

Active Member
Wexahu said:
That last sentence, man it just drives me nuts. What "small brand" team got screwed this year by the committee? Penn State? Michigan? Are those not big brands?

Tell me what small brand got hosed. In case you're wondering, Penn State is a HUGE school with a HUGE east coast following, right in ESPNs backyard.

What was the committee supposed to do to prove that last sentence of yours is BS?
What Chongo said.

The committee can't do anything to "prove" my statement is BS. This year's committee is different than the committee we had the first two years, and it'll be different every couple years moving forward. My problem isn't the committee members, my problem is the system. It's designed to create controversy, and the committee has and will always resolve that controversy in favor of the schools perceived to be best for college football. Some years, it will work itself out neatly. Others it won't. And when it doesn't, blue chip ratings monster will always be chosen as "better" by the committee.

The system needs to change to be fair for all schools, and then the committee will be just fine.
 

Spike

Full Member
Peacefrog said:
Just a question - if ESPN was nothing but right wing politics wrapped up in sports news and coverage, would that be ok with you?

Or are you simply against politics and society being discussed within the context of sports altogether?

Not trying to start a political debate. Just interested in your view point.
You didn't ask me but I'm going to interject any way.
 
I lean pretty far right, but when I am watching sports I want to escape, not hear the arguments again. I also like the fact that sports can be a unifier, so really a lost opportunity when its used as an avenue to bring up social issues.  
 

Peacefrog

Degenerate
Spike said:
You didn't ask me but I'm going to interject any way.
 
I lean pretty far right, but when I am watching sports I want to escape, not hear the arguments again. I also like the fact that sports can be a unifier, so really a lost opportunity when its used as an avenue to bring up social issues.  
Completely agree. I just like to ask people that get angry about either a left or right narrative if they would be so mad if the narrative were on their side. It happens too often that people are mad the viewpoint isn't shared not that there is a viewpoint at all.
 

Pharm Frog

Full Member
Peacefrog said:
Completely agree. I just like to ask people that get angry about either a left or right narrative if they would be so mad if the narrative were on their side. It happens too often that people are mad the viewpoint isn't shared not that there is a viewpoint at all.
There is a time and place to research and discuss sports in the context of politics and societal issues/trends. But that's the realm of political scientists and historians. Feel pretty strongly about this as someone who once upon a time taught the History of Baseball (a course too often mistaken by athletes for an easy 3000-level elective)
 

Moose Stuff

Active Member
Spike said:
You didn't ask me but I'm going to interject any way.
 
I lean pretty far right, but when I am watching sports I want to escape, not hear the arguments again. I also like the fact that sports can be a unifier, so really a lost opportunity when its used as an avenue to bring up social issues.  
Quickest way to get me to change the channel is to get political during the sports programming I'm trying to watch.
 

Spike

Full Member
Peacefrog said:
Completely agree. I just like to ask people that get angry about either a left or right narrative if they would be so mad if the narrative were on their side. It happens too often that people are mad the viewpoint isn't shared not that there is a viewpoint at all.
I actually supported Fox not keeping Craig James, even if it was over his politics. Aside from the fact that he's a complete jackwagon, I don't want to ponder the merits of the issues when IT'S THIRD DOWN!!!!!
 

Peacefrog

Degenerate
Pharm Frog said:
There is a time and place to research and discuss sports in the context of politics and societal issues/trends. But that's the realm of political scientists and historians. Feel pretty strongly about this as someone who once upon a time taught the History of Baseball (a course too often mistaken by athletes for an easy 3000-level elective)
Also agree with this. Herbstreit and Stephen A are not qualified. Discussing race relations etc through he lens of sports is terrific. In the right environment. Jamming political agendas down my throat during a football broadcast is not it.
 

Spike

Full Member
Pharm Frog said:
There is a time and place to research and discuss sports in the context of politics and societal issues/trends. But that's the realm of political scientists and historians. Feel pretty strongly about this as someone who once upon a time taught the History of Baseball (a course too often mistaken by athletes for an easy 3000-level elective)
Slightly OT to what we are talking about here, but I had an off n on relationship with 1 member of my family. If some guy making a million dollars to throw a baseball gave us some common ground, then pay him a million dollars and stop complaining about how people spend their money. 
 
I've been with Vue for 2 months and haven't looked back at DTV.  Above all, I'm finding that less options actually simplifies my life.  Vue doesn't carry a live ABC channel so I got an antenna in case I ever need to watch it for any reason.  Holy smokes, local TV has tons of channels now.  Last week I watched Green Acres, Dragnet and Gunsmoke all day.  Not once did I wonder what else I could be watching.  I don't DVR as many things.  I don't have to worry about how much space on the DVR is left.  Less is more.  I basically have Vue for sports.  Everything else I watch through the ROKU apps.
 

Portland Frog

Full Member
Just learned this. ESPN in some regions and with some carriers is not part of the basic package. It's extra. So it is possible that ESPN is being dropped on its own in some areas. NYC for example. But I don't recall the service provider. But I do recall it was not part of the basic cable package.

Maybe this was obviously and already discussed here. I always thought it came standard with basic cable/satellite etc
 
Top