PDA

View Full Version : ESPN has now even corrupted....



IronHorseSooner
11/26/2008, 09:09 AM
Former OU Assistant and friend of the program Jim Donnan. He said that even though he was friends with Bob he thinks UTerus should be given the nod due to head-to-head. This was on College Coaches Spotlight in between Mack's weekly presser and Bob's. Wow, if ESPN was a religious program, they would brainwash the Pope to become a Baptist:eek:

TexasLidig8r
11/26/2008, 09:38 AM
It's only because ESPN is conspiring against you to hold you down.

Everyone knows that.

OUHOMER
11/26/2008, 09:47 AM
Doesn't matter, The last coach's poll showed what the majority thought. The computer comes around with a win in stoolwater

Leroy Lizard
11/26/2008, 10:43 AM
Was Donnan talking about pre-Bedlam or post-Bedlam?

bri
11/26/2008, 10:54 AM
Former OU Assistant and friend of the program Jim Donnan. He said that even though he was friends with Bob he thinks UTerus should be given the nod due to head-to-head. This was on College Coaches Spotlight in between Mack's weekly presser and Bob's. Wow, if ESPN was a religious program, they would brainwash the Pope to become a Baptist:eek:

You know, has it ever occurred to you that maybe, JUST MAYBE, Donnan said that because it's what he actually thinks?

TopDawg
11/26/2008, 10:57 AM
You know, has it ever occurred to you that maybe, JUST MAYBE, Donnan said that because it's what he actually thinks?

Maybe Donnan's the one who corrupted ESPN!!! :eek:

Half a Hundred
11/26/2008, 10:58 AM
The decision to promote UT has come down from the Disney board of directors. Gotta get those ratings for the Big 12 Championship, you know.

3.5 million vs 26 million. It's simply a numbers game at this point.

Follow the dollar signs.

FirstandGoal
11/26/2008, 11:01 AM
You know, has it ever occurred to you that maybe, JUST MAYBE, Donnan said that because it's what he actually thinks?


Or maybe he was abducted by aliens and was used in some 'experiments' and has a weird sympathy for Bevo as a result.


Yeah, that seems like a more possible scenario

85sooners
11/26/2008, 11:51 AM
:eek:

bri
11/26/2008, 01:02 PM
The decision to promote UT has come down from the Disney board of directors. Gotta get those ratings for the Big 12 Championship, you know.

3.5 million vs 26 million. It's simply a numbers game at this point.

Follow the dollar signs.

That doesn't even make sense.

You know what does make sense? If you replace "has come down from the Disney board of directors" and everything else after it with "comes from the fact that they won by ten points in a head-to-head meeting this season".

I KNOW you guys want this to be some giant, nefarious, Bilderberg-esque consiparacy against us. But the only thing nefarious about this whole situation is our kickoff coverage and inability to cover the unstoppable Jordan Shipley.

Half a Hundred
11/26/2008, 01:17 PM
That doesn't even make sense.

You know what does make sense? If you replace "has come down from the Disney board of directors" and everything else after it with "comes from the fact that they won by ten points in a head-to-head meeting this season".

I KNOW you guys want this to be some giant, nefarious, Bilderberg-esque consiparacy against us. But the only thing nefarious about this whole situation is our kickoff coverage and inability to cover the unstoppable Jordan Shipley.

Come off it. You know as well as I do that a three-way tie is a three-way tie, and that the only way around it is the idea that Texas and Oklahoma are more storied programs than Texas Tech. That is a pretty weak argument, considering that usually the flavor of the month, or the dark horse, or Cinderella usually gets favored coverage in the national media. That's not happening now.

Are you really saying that Disney, which has a vested interest in the Big 12 Championship having as high of ratings as possible (so they can make money), wouldn't be doing everything it could to make sure that the team that will bring the higher ratings (Texas, due to fanbase size), ends up being the selected team? That's not conspiracy theory, that's just plain common sense.

Yeah, Texas won. Yes, it was a long time ago, which usually factors into these things. Yes, it's a three-way tie, so the head-to-head argument is moot.

Am I saying Disney can do anything other than steer the conversation in a certain direction? Of course not. However, there's way too much money wrapped up in the whole thing to think that they would just stay out and let things play out without trying to influence it some.

Blues1
11/26/2008, 01:20 PM
Here's a good Answer. from espn ....

LINK

http://sports.espn.go.com/broadband/video/videopage?videoId=3725756


R"

bri
11/26/2008, 02:18 PM
Come off it. You know as well as I do that a three-way tie is a three-way tie, and that the only way around it is the idea that Texas and Oklahoma are more storied programs than Texas Tech. That is a pretty weak argument, considering that usually the flavor of the month, or the dark horse, or Cinderella usually gets favored coverage in the national media. That's not happening now.

Are you really saying that Disney, which has a vested interest in the Big 12 Championship having as high of ratings as possible (so they can make money), wouldn't be doing everything it could to make sure that the team that will bring the higher ratings (Texas, due to fanbase size), ends up being the selected team? That's not conspiracy theory, that's just plain common sense.

Yeah, Texas won. Yes, it was a long time ago, which usually factors into these things. Yes, it's a three-way tie, so the head-to-head argument is moot.

Am I saying Disney can do anything other than steer the conversation in a certain direction? Of course not. However, there's way too much money wrapped up in the whole thing to think that they would just stay out and let things play out without trying to influence it some.

I think you're flattering yourself if you think Disney gives a rat's *ss who plays in the damn game. They already have their money; it's not being shown on pay-per-view. Plus, we've been in a few of these things before, and I don't think ABC has ever gone broke showing at OU Big 12 title game. So yes, I think you're grapsing at straws with your "zomg, Disney" freak-out.

And it's a three-way-tie in name only. Tech is completely out of the equation due to the *ss-reaming we gave them. So it boils down to a question of "who do you send: Oklahoma or Texas"? Once you're considering two teams, head-to-head becomes a huge factor.

Oh, and here's a pre-emptive one for all the people who will just robotically cry "three-way tie! three-way tie!" Tell me, if all three teams win this weekend and Tech got the nod to play in the B12CG, would you not just flip the f*ck out? I mean, it's a three-way tie, right? Or have you completely written Tech out at this point?

Cam
11/26/2008, 02:33 PM
But it is a 3 way tie, and yes, I've written off Tech. Why? They played 2 1AA teams this season. Has nothing to do with us crushing them Saturday. It's about the body of work for the entire season at that point for me.

I can see both sides of the argument. If Texas gets in ahead of us, we've got nothing to bitch about IMO.

Half a Hundred
11/26/2008, 02:42 PM
I think you're flattering yourself if you think Disney gives a rat's *ss who plays in the damn game. They already have their money; it's not being shown on pay-per-view. Plus, we've been in a few of these things before, and I don't think ABC has ever gone broke showing at OU Big 12 title game. So yes, I think you're grapsing at straws with your "zomg, Disney" freak-out.

And it's a three-way-tie in name only. Tech is completely out of the equation due to the *ss-reaming we gave them. So it boils down to a question of "who do you send: Oklahoma or Texas"? Once you're considering two teams, head-to-head becomes a huge factor.

Oh, and here's a pre-emptive one for all the people who will just robotically cry "three-way tie! three-way tie!" Tell me, if all three teams win this weekend and Tech got the nod to play in the B12CG, would you not just flip the f*ck out? I mean, it's a three-way tie, right? Or have you completely written Tech out at this point?

In this economy, if you were a shareholder, and you didn't think your board of directors and their subordinates were doing everything they could to keep the stock price high by making as much money as possible, thereby not raping your 401(k) further, wouldn't you think that they weren't doing their job? Face it, this is what they're paid a ton of money to do: make sure outcomes occur that are favorable for the stockholders. I'm not saying that the board of directors itself is convening to scheme up how to get Texas into the CCG. What I am saying is that some subordinate realizes that this is the best route for them, and consequently is doing what he's paid to do: influencing the decision makers so that the best outcome for ESPN/ABC/Disney happens. If he isn't, he should be fired.

If OU loses (god forbid), and the other teams win, Tech is in, in case you forgot. So no, they aren't out of the discussion at all. If it weren't for that, head-to-head would be much more relevant. Is it likely that Tech will get in if all three teams win? No, not very. That has more to do with human psychology than objective merits, as indicated by computer polls that still have Tech ranked ahead of OU. That being said, most of those very same computers will have OU with the best body of work overall if OU beats O-State. Are you going to discount that?

However, with that final argument, you are implying that because of the "what have you done for me lately?" argument, that OU's position is the strongest. Why not stick to that rather than continue on your typical (for this season) bashing of our fanbase?

OUDoc
11/26/2008, 02:44 PM
It's obvious Donnan has had an emotional meltdown or is being blackmailed.
Either way, someone should alert the authorities.




:)

oumartin
11/26/2008, 02:52 PM
he's still upset he didn't get the job in 99

bri
11/26/2008, 03:55 PM
In this economy, if you were a shareholder, and you didn't think your board of directors and their subordinates were doing everything they could to keep the stock price high by making as much money as possible, thereby not raping your 401(k) further, wouldn't you think that they weren't doing their job? Face it, this is what they're paid a ton of money to do: make sure outcomes occur that are favorable for the stockholders. I'm not saying that the board of directors itself is convening to scheme up how to get Texas into the CCG. What I am saying is that some subordinate realizes that this is the best route for them, and consequently is doing what he's paid to do: influencing the decision makers so that the best outcome for ESPN/ABC/Disney happens. If he isn't, he should be fired.

If OU loses (god forbid), and the other teams win, Tech is in, in case you forgot. So no, they aren't out of the discussion at all. If it weren't for that, head-to-head would be much more relevant. Is it likely that Tech will get in if all three teams win? No, not very. That has more to do with human psychology than objective merits, as indicated by computer polls that still have Tech ranked ahead of OU. That being said, most of those very same computers will have OU with the best body of work overall if OU beats O-State. Are you going to discount that?

However, with that final argument, you are implying that because of the "what have you done for me lately?" argument, that OU's position is the strongest. Why not stick to that rather than continue on your typical (for this season) bashing of our fanbase?

You know, there's every chance in the world that you actually made some good points in the last 2/3 of that post. But I wouldn't know, 'cause the sunlight glinting off your tinfoil hat distracted me halfway through that first paragraph.

TEH FIXX IS IN!!!

madillsoonerfan5353
11/26/2008, 03:56 PM
What I don't get is that 2/3 of the BCS formula has got OU ahead of Texas!!!! :confused:

jwlynn64
11/26/2008, 04:00 PM
And it's a three-way-tie in name only. Tech is completely out of the equation due to the *ss-reaming we gave them. So it boils down to a question of "who do you send: Oklahoma or Texas"? Once you're considering two teams, head-to-head becomes a huge factor.

So your argument is that is we had only beaten Tech by 10 points, we would have a stronger argument to get into the CCG?

I think that you might want to rethink your logic.:rolleyes:

madillsoonerfan5353
11/26/2008, 04:05 PM
Just like Coach Stoops said if head to head is the way to go than Tech wins the south!!!! :texan:

instigator
11/26/2008, 04:05 PM
While I hate to agree with Bri, he's right.

People we lost. It's out of our hands now. If our team had taken care of business then this wouldn't be a problem but we didn't. It's our own faults.

We have a good case and Texas has a good case. Our bias tells us we should be in, but since we didn't take care of business it's out of our hands. Same thing goes for Texas. They intercept that ball and there's no argument against them. Since they lost, they may miss out and they can't blame anyone but themselves. They didn't take care of their business either.

bri
11/26/2008, 04:14 PM
So your argument is that is we had only beaten Tech by 10 points, we would have a stronger argument to get into the CCG?

I think that you might want to rethink your logic.:rolleyes:

I never said it was my logic. I'm merely explaining the thought processes at work in the non-Sooner parts of the world, because logic always seems more likely than a "far-reaching consipiracy of shadowy figures, manipulating events to their liking from on high". Not that I don't think that'd be super-cool, I just don't think the Cigarette-Smoking Man is running the show over at Disney/ABC/ESPN.

In point of fact, I think we should go. I can see all the very reasoned out and convincing reasons why we shouldn't, but I don't care. I want my team to play for championships; f*ck everyone else. It's silly to think otherwise.

BoulderSooner79
11/26/2008, 04:15 PM
A 3-way tie is a 3-way tie. The only reason folks are discounting Tech is because we all know the tie breaker will come down to the BCS rating and Tech is at the bottom of the totem poll. If the tie breaker could well be a roll of a dice and Tech would have an equal chance and no one could bitch. I think the Pac10 used to have a tie-breaker of which school went to the Rose bowl least recently, so their goal was not the best team necessarily. But it's a valid rule that everyone signs up to up front. Having the BCS decide the big12 is bogus and I say that regardless of who gets chosen.

stoopified
11/26/2008, 04:21 PM
That doesn't even make sense.

You know what does make sense? If you replace "has come down from the Disney board of directors" and everything else after it with "comes from the fact that they won by ten points in a head-to-head meeting this season".Shipley.Ifit is about head to head why is't TT going?Lead UT all but 89 seconds then drove the length of the field against Headcoach designate Muschamp's D for game-winning TD(in 88 seconds).

DangTire
11/26/2008, 05:18 PM
It's only because ESPN is conspiring against you to hold you down.

Everyone knows that.

Or maybe he's watched their defensive performance in certain championship games and meaningless bowls. Having your *** whipped, not just beaten but actually bitch slapped, by inferior opponents because your genius D-coordinator couldn't poor **** out of a boot is something people tend to remember.

meoveryouxinfinity
11/26/2008, 05:26 PM
I honestly think the "45-35" campaign has the ability to sway some votes. I think we can overcome that by beating OSU by 10 or more.

Half a Hundred
11/26/2008, 05:37 PM
I never said it was my logic. I'm merely explaining the thought processes at work in the non-Sooner parts of the world, because logic always seems more likely than a "far-reaching consipiracy of shadowy figures, manipulating events to their liking from on high". Not that I don't think that'd be super-cool, I just don't think the Cigarette-Smoking Man is running the show over at Disney/ABC/ESPN.

In point of fact, I think we should go. I can see all the very reasoned out and convincing reasons why we shouldn't, but I don't care. I want my team to play for championships; f*ck everyone else. It's silly to think otherwise.

:rolleyes:

No one said anything about it being a huge conspiracy to get Texas in. I said that it was in ESPN's best interests to have high-population, high-ratings teams in the Big 12 Championship Game. Therefore, why is it a stretch to think that they would direct their talking heads to give Texas the benefit of the doubt in the general conversation? ESPN is well-known for its ability to present a tight, cohesive narrative on a story.

At that level, College Football, for better or for worse, isn't a sport, it's a business. Why would any self-respecting business let its product run wild without exerting some sort of control? Like I said, I don't think they're paying off refs or anything, however, I am saying that they have a vested interest in maximizing their revenue. Texas does that to a greater extent than OU does. Therefore, they will give Texas favorable coverage so that hopefully, the product (of the Championship Game) will be better and in higher demand (with the team they feel will bring higher ratings).

Why does that seem X-Filesish to you? Seems like good business practice to me.

oumartin
11/26/2008, 06:12 PM
No doubt OU lost the game to texas but people are quick to bring up the dropped interception in the Tx/Tech game.

Nobody talks about the whipping texas was getting in that game for 3 quarters.

nobody talks about the fact that OU was kickin' texas around the field until we lost RR. Nobody talks about the interception that wasn't by lamont robinson.
how about the fact that just like last year at tech that OU went into shell shock mode after the injury and tried to take the air out of the ball instead of running your offense.(well I guess thats not really a good argument)

budbarrybob
11/26/2008, 06:12 PM
Or maybe he was abducted by aliens and was used in some 'experiments' and has a weird sympathy for Bevo as a result.


Yeah, that seems like a more possible scenario

I never saw him onboard the ship ;)

bri
11/26/2008, 07:02 PM
No one said anything about it being a huge conspiracy to get Texas in. I said that it was in ESPN's best interests to have high-population, high-ratings teams in the Big 12 Championship Game. Therefore, why is it a stretch to think that they would direct their talking heads to give Texas the benefit of the doubt in the general conversation? ESPN is well-known for its ability to present a tight, cohesive narrative on a story.

So what you're saying is, it's not a conspiracy. They're just conspiring.

Okay. Got it now.

RedstickSooner
11/26/2008, 07:11 PM
And it's a three-way-tie in name only. Tech is completely out of the equation due to the *ss-reaming we gave them. So it boils down to a question of "who do you send: Oklahoma or Texas"? Once you're considering two teams, head-to-head becomes a huge factor.


I've been waiting for someone to say this, because it's been going around unsaid and it really irks the hell out of me.

We should be left out BECAUSE WE PLAYED SO DAMN WELL?

This, sir, is rickdiculous. That blowout is evidence of our worthiness, and to punish us for being so dominating is nonsensical.

It's a three way tie. Unless one of the three loses another game, none of the head-to-heads matter one whit. About the only distinguishing feature is that all of those head-to-heads were competitive EXCEPT one. In other words, only one team distinguished themselves: Us.

I simply don't get why we should be left out for kicking ***. What is this, powderpuff? We punishing teams for being mean, now?

RedstickSooner
11/26/2008, 07:13 PM
Oh, as a side note, please, fellow Sooners, I beg of you: Cut out the corporate conspiracy stuff. We routinely draw better ratings than most other teams. If there was a conspiracy, based on ratings, it'd favor us -- not the Whorns.

When we make these sorts of accusations, it makes us look silly.

Scott D
11/26/2008, 07:28 PM
:rolleyes:

No one said anything about it being a huge conspiracy to get Texas in. I said that it was in ESPN's best interests to have high-population, high-ratings teams in the Big 12 Championship Game. Therefore, why is it a stretch to think that they would direct their talking heads to give Texas the benefit of the doubt in the general conversation? ESPN is well-known for its ability to present a tight, cohesive narrative on a story.

At that level, College Football, for better or for worse, isn't a sport, it's a business. Why would any self-respecting business let its product run wild without exerting some sort of control? Like I said, I don't think they're paying off refs or anything, however, I am saying that they have a vested interest in maximizing their revenue. Texas does that to a greater extent than OU does. Therefore, they will give Texas favorable coverage so that hopefully, the product (of the Championship Game) will be better and in higher demand (with the team they feel will bring higher ratings).

Why does that seem X-Filesish to you? Seems like good business practice to me.

no offense pal, but using the logic you've used in this thread. It'd be in their best interest to ensure every season that USC played Rutgers for the National Championship, because it's all about ratings, and since New Brunswick, NJ is the closest there is in terms of a "bigtime" program near NYC.

RedstickSooner
11/26/2008, 07:40 PM
no offense pal, but using the logic you've used in this thread. It'd be in their best interest to ensure every season that USC played Rutgers for the National Championship, because it's all about ratings, and since New Brunswick, NJ is the closest there is in terms of a "bigtime" program near NYC.

Population centers don't seem to matter much for ratings -- New Yorkers just don't give a rat's arse about college football.

When it comes to ratings, we're one of the juggernauts. Maybe one of the more motivated amongst the board members can go prowl the Web, come up with some actual figures on different teams and the sorts of audiences they draw?

StoopTroup
11/26/2008, 07:40 PM
Dig the suc arrogance in this video

http://sports.espn.go.com/broadband/video/videopage?videoId=3723057

RedstickSooner
11/26/2008, 07:46 PM
It'd be nice if Stoops would include in his politicking that we're being punished for winning so convincingly -- that our overwhelming victory over Tech has turned a three-way tie into a two-way tie in the minds of some pundits... Which means that we'd be in better shape if we'd let them hang closer to us.

Heck, I bet if we'd won by only, say, 17 points, nobody would talk about it being a head-to-head issue between us and Tejas. They'd all say it was a three-way tie, and the best performance among the three was our win.

Instead, we won too well, so now everyone just dismisses Tech as if they hadn't won their other 11 games.

cvsooner
11/26/2008, 07:53 PM
Or maybe he's watched their defensive performance in certain championship games and meaningless bowls. Having your *** whipped, not just beaten but actually bitch slapped, by inferior opponents because your genius D-coordinator couldn't poor **** out of a boot is something people tend to remember.

There's more to it than you think. Pete Fiutak's "Cavalcade of Whimsy" is a pretty good column at collegefootballnews.com, but he posted this, this week:

"Dear Oklahoma,

"So, when’s it going to come?

"We’ve fallen for you before. We’ve believed in you before. We’ve given you the benefit of the doubt way too many times when you’ve been the best team in America, only to see you come out flat, seemingly disinterested, or unable to play up to your immense talent level.

"You’re not Choke-lahoma for nothing.

"Oh sure, you sure look like one of the two best teams in the nation (Florida being the other), but you looked like a world-beater going into the last two Fiesta Bowls against vastly inferior teams. How’d that work out?

"You dominated throughout 2004 and won your last two games of the regular season and the Big 12 Championship by a combined score of 107 to 6, and then you decided not to show up against USC in the national championship.

"You got blasted in the 2003 Big 12 title game by Kansas State, and then got the biggest break in the book and came up with a loss to LSU in the national championship. You had a shot to stay in the national title hunt late in 2002, but you blew it at Oklahoma State. The same went for 2001 when you lost to the Cowboys 16-13.

"So when’s it going to come? When are you going to be all Oklahoma-ey and lose when everyone’s expecting the magic? Will it be in Stillwater or against Missouri in the Big 12 title game? If you could let us all know in advance, that would spare us all from having to listen to all the talking heads proclaim you the greatest team of all-time (like some were doing in 2003 before the Kansas State debacle).

"Toodles!

"The College Football World"

Also, cfn's Big 12 picks this week have OSewe winning Saturday, 45-42. So I guess they figure it's coming this week.

This is the sort of stuff I hope Stoops sticks on the bulletin board...from here on out to mid-January. And beyond.

bluedogok
11/26/2008, 08:32 PM
I have heard several in the national media this week saying the same thing, funny, I thought this years polls and such apply to THIS season, not years past....and this crap about "defending champions", no there is no such thing as a defending champion in any sport especially with free agency/graduation. They were last seasons champion, every season is its own unique entity and rarely has anything to do with the season before.

Half a Hundred
11/26/2008, 08:42 PM
no offense pal, but using the logic you've used in this thread. It'd be in their best interest to ensure every season that USC played Rutgers for the National Championship, because it's all about ratings, and since New Brunswick, NJ is the closest there is in terms of a "bigtime" program near NYC.

If NYC gave two whits about college football, and Rutgers were historically any good, I think this would be more likely than you give it credit for, much like RedstickSooner said.

It isn't just population centers. OU is certainly one of the bigger ratings players, mostly thanks to our Switzer-era teams. It certainly was more equitable when ABC had its monopoly, though not necessarily better. That's why we're still relevant even though we're in a smaller state. However, things have changed drastically since then, and Texas's national prominence is substantial (just look at merchandise sales).

For example, 2005 USC-Texas was going to be the greatest game ever played after the fact, no matter the outcome (unless it were really crappy). Makes it easier to sell commemorative stuff to a large audience.

College Football is a business. Looking at it from that perspective makes a lot of nonsensical things gain greater clarity.

soonerboomer93
11/26/2008, 09:15 PM
:rolleyes:

No one said anything about it being a huge conspiracy to get Texas in. I said that it was in ESPN's best interests to have high-population, high-ratings teams in the Big 12 Championship Game.

Yeah, especially when OU is one of 2 schools that sued the NCAA over tv rights and draws so poorly it was offered the NBC contract before Notre Dame.

SoonerinSouthlake
11/26/2008, 10:29 PM
It's only because ESPN is conspiring against you to hold you down.

Everyone knows that.

Finally someone from the dark side understands

Half a Hundred
11/26/2008, 11:51 PM
Yeah, especially when OU is one of 2 schools that sued the NCAA over tv rights and draws so poorly it was offered the NBC contract before Notre Dame.

Newsflash: It ain't 1986 anymore. A lot has happened since then, including the darkest period in OU history. While OU was a hot commodity in the monopoly days, due to the exciting offense, and still is to a great extent, the landscape has simply changed. In those days, the teams playing the best football would get the coverage, because that drew in the most viewers.

With as many options available as there are for televised games now, it's natural that the networks are still going to go with the options that bring in the most people week in and week out. OU is certainly one of those teams, however, teams with a natural geographic and population advantage are going to inevitably get the lion's share of coverage, since that's where the television sets are.

I'm not saying this because I like it, I'm just saying it because that's the nature of the business. Do I think the networks have that great of a control over the process? Not really. Do I think they try like hell to influence it in favor of matchups that will bring better ratings? Of course they do, they wouldn't be doing their jobs otherwise.

soonerboomer93
11/27/2008, 12:39 AM
You're right, ESPN hates us.

that's why we're playing our second statement game in a row at the best possible time slot for the game, with gameday there (again).

Yes, the 90's were damaging, but OU still has a huge national following. It's not about state populations, especally considering how many OU fans are in Texas. The networks are well aware of OU's appeal.

Half a Hundred
11/27/2008, 12:42 AM
You're right, ESPN hates us.

that's why we're playing our second statement game in a row at the best possible time slot for the game, with gameday there (again).

Yes, the 90's were damaging, but OU still has a huge national following. It's not about state populations, especally considering how many OU fans are in Texas. The networks are well aware of OU's appeal.

Which is why we're even in it to begin with. There's only about 15-20 teams that can win a national championship in a given season these days, for that reason alone.

Scott D
11/27/2008, 12:00 PM
Population centers don't seem to matter much for ratings -- New Yorkers just don't give a rat's arse about college football.

When it comes to ratings, we're one of the juggernauts. Maybe one of the more motivated amongst the board members can go prowl the Web, come up with some actual figures on different teams and the sorts of audiences they draw?

if that's the case, then you're arguing that his case that Texas means more money for them should be out the window, because you say population centers don't matter.

The problem with the "perfect ratings scenario" is that USC and ND play each other each year, and it's it's a case of supreme ugliness on the field.

sendbaht
11/27/2008, 07:38 PM
I LOVE ESPN I get to watch the horns play A&M LIVE here in Thailand.....

That is so cool, come on A&M

batonrougesooner
11/27/2008, 07:41 PM
this thread is ghey