Good article about Espns bias in the Leach situation...

[Collier11]

This is very interesting as it is written by an ESPN writer, it also talks about the hipocrisy of Bob Knight criticizing John Calipari...warning its long

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=ohlmeyer_don&id=4844048

[Leroy Lizard]

Can you imagine the criticism we would've received if we just focused on the game?"

"The conflict between Coach Leach and the Texas Tech administration involves, even if only in a secondary role, one of our own broadcasters. Therefore, ESPN thinks it is best to reserve commentary on this situation during the course of this presentation."

How much criticism would they have received? Probably not much at all. Certainly a lot less than they did.
'
The game is an entertainment event. The broadcasters are entertainment announcers, not journalists. There was no need to discuss the Leach/Tech incident during the game.

ESPN has its own journalistic programming for this purpose, Sportscenter. Let them handle it.

[Sooner70]

ESPN and others are making Leach look bad, but it's not over till its over. Leach is a lawyer by education. My guess is there's another side to this story, and a lot of people are going to be shocked when it comes out. Leach is smart like a fox on this kind of stuff. TTech may end up paying dearly on this if Leach is vindicated, or Leach's Pirate costume may come off and he may be exposed big time. We'll see.

[Jacie]

What I got out of the article is that ESPN is making itself look bad, not Mike Leach.

[King Barry's Back]

What I got out of the article is that ESPN is making itself look bad, not Mike Leach.

Yeah, that's mostly right. I think the ombudsman was saying that what the announcers actually said was one-sided, and therefore made Mike Leach look bad.

But, to viewers who were in-the-know, and who would realize that the coverage was one-sided, ESPN was making itself look bad.

Either way, not what the network should be doing.

What's most interesting to me is what the ombudsman relayed regarding ESPN corporate's response -- dismissing the record number of complaints because only a few thousand complained out of 8 million that watched.

This kind of defensiveness is common among broadcasting execs when criticized. (Maybe other execs, too, but I don't know about that.)

I don't want to be political, but does anyone remember the falsified document that CBS News used to say that a young George W Bush used influence to avoid Vietnam service? It really doesn't matter where you stand on the political spectrum, or what you think that W did to avoid Vietnam -- the fact that CBS aired an investigative piece based solely on one counterfeit document should have been deeply embarrassing for everyone involved.

But Dan Rather continued to stand by the story, I think even to today -- because he said that he thought W really did the things in the fake document, so the fact that it was counterfeit shouldn't take away from the story.

When things like the counterfeit document, or the big number of complaints regarding Mike Leach coverage come up, I never understand why they can't accept this as constructive criticism, and think about how they could use this input to be better next time.

[rawlingsHOH]

ESPN and others are making Leach look bad

Leach made Leach look bad.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

That's a very good article, and nobody will read it. Will they go out on College Gameday next year and apologize for their obviously biased coverage? I doubt it.

[TopDawg]

Great article. Thanks for sharing.

[S.PadreIsl.Sooner]

Leach made Leach look bad.


There is some truth to that. However, ESPN made ESPN look even worse! And Craig James was seriously out of line. Let your kid "man-up!"

[ouduckhunter]

Good read! Thanks for posting it!

[gotpoi73]

in the telecast, i don't believe they represented that story objectively. it definitely had a leach is already found guilty approach. espn has never been worried of letting the truth get in the way of a good story. their ticker on news often has stories in the morning that are removed later due to a lack of accuracy. i am not saying leach is not partially or fully to blame, they should just present the story, not create it

[MamaMia]

Leach made Leach look bad.
ESPN's coverage over this entire matter has been totally bias against Leach, favoring Craig James and his drama queen, lazy azz son.

[btk108]

Enjoyed the article and glad to know that someone can reach ESPN and they do notice. Now they need to know they've gone from being every sports fan's addiction to become Tabloid TV. I'm beginning to wonder if they've hired a bunch of staff away from TMZ. I enjoy ESPN's camera coverage, but I now mute the announcers. I want to watch the game, not listen to some opinionated idiot preach to me.

[Leroy Lizard]

Tabloid journalism isn't just limited to ESPN.

Oh, if you want to respond to my post, make sure you quote me. btk108 loves it when you do that.

[Eielson]

No one can deny that Knight is about as knowledgeable about hoops as they come. By the end of a telecast he's working, you feel as if you've attended a world-class coaching clinic. His observations are perceptive, his compliments succinct and his criticisms often withering.

Does anybody actually feel this way? I thought he was awful in our basketball game against OSU. He kept saying things like "I bet this will happen" and at one point said "games over". All his "bets" were wrong and OSU ended up hitting a three to put the game into OT. Everything he predicted seemed to be wrong. Obviously the guy knows basketball, but he sucks as an announcer.

[Leroy Lizard]

Didn't the article point that out?

[SeattleOUstudent]

That article was 10 pages long when I posted it to word. Yikes.

[TUSooner]

Thanks for posting that. I was one of the many who emailed that guy, and I was one of those who mentioned Mike Patrick's outrageously prejudicial assertion that Adam James was "punished for having a concussion." So I am glad to see the response. I think it was a fair response. Judging from his criticism of ESPN top guys, I think at least Don Ohlmeyer "gets it," though the "World Wide Leader" probably does not.

It was shameful episode for ESPN.


"The conflict between Coach Leach and the Texas Tech administration involves, even if only in a secondary role, one of our own broadcasters. Therefore, ESPN thinks it is best to reserve commentary on this situation during the course of this presentation."

How much criticism would they have received? Probably not much at all. Certainly a lot less than they did....

I agree. ESPN could and should have said something like LL suggested and then butted out until another time.

I thought the comments about the GMAC bowl were good, too. A bunch of guys and their coaches friends and families devoted a lot time and energy to that game, They deserved more than three hours of commentary about another game.

[Soonerfan88]

Thanks for posting, wouldn't have seen it otherwise as I am boycotting ESPiN.

Since the suits at ESPiN seem to think that wasn't enough emails to worry about, I sent one to the Ombudsman to make sure my voice is added. If the silent majority starts talking, I'm sure they will start listening.

[bri]

I hope you used "ESPiN" in your emails. That always gets 'em taken seriously.