No ESPN Bias, just a Backlash...

[Blue]

True story...

I was in New Orleans this weekend for a wedding and was talking to someone who worked in Bristol (ESPN) the last 4 or 5 years...

Me: "Why no love for OU?"

ESPN Soulless Demon: "Cause they made us (ESPN) look stupid two years in a row."

So, there ya have it folks. Straight from the horses mouth.

They're mad because they hyped us and we choked.

I guess you could call it a temporary Bias until we go 14-0 and they start calling us the best team ever again.

[Snrfn4ever08]

True story...

I was in New Orleans this weekend for a wedding and was talking to someone who worked in Bristol (ESPN) the last 4 or 5 years...

Me: "Why no love for OU?"

ESPN Soulless Demon: "Cause they made us (ESPN) look stupid two years in a row."

So, there ya have it folks. Straight from the horses mouth.

They're mad because they hyped us and we choked.

I guess you could call it a temporary Bias until we go 14-0 and they start calling us the best team ever again.
Maybe they should be a little bit more protective of using the "best team ever" moniker if that's just going to backfire on them most of the time.

[picasso]

True story...

I was in New Orleans this weekend for a wedding and was talking to someone who worked in Bristol (ESPN) the last 4 or 5 years...

Me: "Why no love for OU?"

ESPN Soulless Demon: "Cause they made us (ESPN) look stupid two years in a row."

So, there ya have it folks. Straight from the horses mouth.

They're mad because they hyped us and we choked.

I guess you could call it a temporary Bias until we go 14-0 and they start calling us the best team ever again.

they didn't need any help.

are they dorks, wanna be comedians or just jaggoffs? tough call.

also, I heard a quip on ESPN radio Saturday by the hosts about OU being almost a pro team this season (Bomar, etc..).
I'm curious to know if they make the same cracks about USC?

[westcoast_sooner]

Er, so if Herbie and Corso don't pick us in the RRS and we go out and destroy whoever it is we play there, doesn't THAT make them look STOOOPID?

[Snrfn4ever08]

Er, so if Herbie and Corso don't pick us in the RRS and we go out and destroy whoever it is we play there, doesn't THAT make them look STOOOPID?
Don't try to use logic with those guys, it never works.:D

[Cam]

So are they ****ed at USC now? If that's their logic, they should be.

[usmc-sooner]

so what about all the USC is the best ever made them look great? Getting beat by Cal? Texas?

what about hiring Doug Gotlieb? They should have some major issues with that.

[Snrfn4ever08]

So are they ****ed at USC now? If that's their logic, they should be.
My thoughts exactly. Of course, they still believe USC is the best team ever deep down in their hearts. They're just waiting for tOSU to lose before they say that.:rolleyes:

[Scotty]

Didn't they run a feature every week comparing USC to the greatest teams ever??

[Cam]

Didn't they run a feature every week comparing USC to the greatest teams ever??
For about 3 freakin months.

[OUMallen]

Isn't it better television when the mighty fall as opposed to Goliath pounding down then eating David? They should be on our collective Sooner sack.

[TopDawg]

If OU and Georgia hadn't done with they did with the NCAA, ESPN might not even be around today.

[olevetonahill]

No way in hell We make em look stupid they achieve that greatness on their own

[SoonerLB]

I guess that so-so quarterback from ohio state is gonna make them look purty stupid this year, 'cause he AIN'T gonna win the Heisman!

[Ike]

Sorry, but I don't buy that ****. We didn't make em look stupid two years in a row. LSU and USC did that. We had a pretty good football team those years. They had better ones. Or at least they were better on those single days. I still say we deserved the hype...maybe LSU and USC deserved more...If they want to blame us for making them look stupid, then blame us for 2000. Because they predicted our demise every week that year, and we turned around and made em look stupid.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Sorry, but I don't buy that ****. We didn't make em look stupid two years in a row. LSU and USC did that. I'm thinking more that K State did it to us instead of LSU. We almost beat LSU (thanks, Chuck)

[DrZaius]

If OU and Georgia hadn't done with they did with the NCAA, ESPN might not even be around today.

Enlighten me!

[toast]

They employed Doug Gottlieb and they think OU made them look stupid?

[sooner n houston]

Enlighten me!
By the 1980s, televised college football was a significant source of income for the NCAA. Had the television contracts the NCAA had with ABC, CBS and ESPN remained in effect for the 1984 season, they would have generated $73.6 million for the Association and its members. In September 1981, the Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma and the University of Georgia Athletic Association filed suit against the NCAA in district court in Oklahoma. The plaintiffs stated that the NCAA's football television plan constituted price fixing, output restraints, boycott and monopolizing, all of which were illegal under the Sherman Act. The NCAA argued that its procompetitive and noncommercial justifications for the plan -- protection of live gate, maintenance of competitive balance among NCAA member institutions and creation of a more attractive "product" to compete with other forms of entertainment -- combined to make the plan reasonable. In September 1982, the district court found in favor of the plaintiffs, ruling that the plan violated antitrust laws. It enjoined the Association from enforcing the contract.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA


The NCAA has not forgotten.

[TUSooner]

What good luck that you just happened to talk to the one guy who totally controls ESPN's editorial content! I hope you got his cel-phone number. ;)

[Fraggle145]

If OU and Georgia hadn't done with they did with the NCAA, ESPN might not even be around today.

Amen.

[tbl]

We almost beat LSU (thanks, Chuck)

Well, we almost tied them.

[OUmillenium]

Sorry, but I don't buy that ****. We didn't make em look stupid two years in a row. LSU and USC did that. We had a pretty good football team those years. They had better ones. Or at least they were better on those single days. I still say we deserved the hype...maybe LSU and USC deserved more...If they want to blame us for making them look stupid, then blame us for 2000. Because they predicted our demise every week that year, and we turned around and made em look stupid.

Well said...go national with that post.
:texan: sux

[TopDawg]

Thanks sooner n houston. Here's another article written a couple of years ago. It states that things may not have ended up all that differently.


Twenty years ago the U.S. Supreme Court changed the way America watched college football.

And, Wayne Duke says, the ruling changed much more.

"The state of college football today is the direct result of that decision, including the arms-race mentality, conference realignments, money pressures, the dilution of rules and regulations," says Duke, Big Ten commissioner from 1971-89 and one of the NCAA's first staffers when it opened an office over a Kansas City, Mo., saloon in 1952. "The spelling of 'principal' was changed to 'principle.' "

The case itself, brought by the universities of Oklahoma and Georgia, involved whether the NCAA was violating antitrust laws by negotiating national TV deals and determining how many times college football teams could appear on TV.

Kids today might find this hard to believe: Under the old NCAA plan, which had been in effect since 1952, teams were limited to six appearances during two seasons.

Limiting the supply of college TV games, the court ruled, stifled competition. Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the 7-2 majority, said the NCAA's plan meant conferences and schools "lose their freedom to compete" in the marketplace, as did broadcasters who couldn't bid on national packages.

But Justice Byron White, who'd been an All-American at Colorado and dissented in the case, said it was wrong to treat the NCAA as a "purely commercial venture." Its TV plan, he wrote, "fosters the goal of amateurism by spreading revenues among various schools and reducing the financial incentives towards professionalism."

That might sound pretty dry. And Kevin O'Malley, executive producer for college sports at CBS in 1984, recalls being in the courtroom "and three of the justices slept through the oral briefs." But, says O'Malley, now a consultant, the decision "produced a sea change. ... It really tore college athletics apart."

The result was that college football, rather than being centrally marketed like the NFL, became a confederation of conferences cutting their own TV deals. And that led to today's wall-to-wall TV coverage — including weeknight games and more national TV exposure for smaller conferences.

But Tom Hansen suggests you can't assume fans wouldn't get all those choices without the 1984 decision. Hansen helped administer the NCAA TV plan before assuming his current position as commissioner of the Pacific-10 in 1983. And if the NCAA plan had been able to remain in effect, he says, "for the fan, it wouldn't have made much difference."

He suggests the NCAA would have allowed more games to be televised. And while the 1984 lawsuit was brought because of "greed" by schools with major football programs, those schools might have been better served financially by leaving the NCAA plan intact. He says the powerful NCAA would have been in a better bargaining position with networks than the separate conferences are today.

Beano Cook, an ABC college football studio analyst in 1984 and now an ESPN commentator, also suggests the NCAA would have expanded the number of TV games. "It was obvious that with the emergence of cable TV in the 1990s that you'd see a lot more games on TV," Cook says. "They would have done what the NFL did — put games on different nights of the week."

O'Malley suggests other elements of the college sports landscape might look very different today without the 1984 court decision.

Colleges with marquee football programs had formed a group in 1979 called the College Football Association (CFA) and already wanted to sell their own TV rights. O'Malley says if the suit brought by Georgia and Oklahoma had been unsuccessful at the Supreme Court, that wouldn't have been the end of college football's haves wanting to break free from the conferences considered have-nots.

"The major conferences might have left the NCAA for all sports," O'Malley says. "So the NCAA basketball tournament, as we know it, might have gone under the control of the CFA. And then some of the schools with good basketball programs but not in major football conferences might have been left out of the basketball tournament."

The 1984 Supreme Court decision that stripped the NCAA's power ironically might end up leading to more antitrust allegations today. The U.S. Justice Department is investigating whether ESPN's exclusive TV deals with conferences might involve restraining trade. (The federal agency has made no comment or charges. ESPN also has not commented.)

Sports business consultant David Carter says it's no surprise ESPN has become so powerful in college football: "The emergence of cable TV in the 1980s was inevitably going to change the landscape of college football — whatever happened in a 1984 court ruling. Because as screwed up as some sports have been, including college football, they would have found a way to make money on TV."

link (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/hiestand-tv/2004-08-19-hiestand-college-football_x.htm)

The part I boldfaced is where ESPN really benefited from it. Sure, we didn't just make their bed for them, but we opened the door and they took advantage of it. Good for them. But let's not forget who helped you get started. I mean, if the NCAA is gonna hate us for it, we need ESPN to love us for it.

[goingoneight]

Er, so if Herbie and Corso don't pick us in the RRS and we go out and destroy whoever it is we play there, doesn't THAT make them look STOOOPID?

They're not supposed to be right...

[goingoneight]

For about 3 freakin months.

and they're still winning in 2006, some thought they didn't need to be stopped in 2005... You all know they will beat Oregon and Notre Dame, who else do they play en route to being the next best team ever???

Oregon is gonna get either throttled or bent over by the PAC 10 officials they love so much... Why? Think about it...

[stoopified]

so what about all the USC is the best ever made them look great? Getting beat by Cal? Texas?

what about hiring Doug Gotlieb? They should have some major issues with that.Doug is the secret weapon for ESPN.He STEALS Stories,office supplies or anything else they need,especially stereo equipment.

[sammmo]

I doubt I'm the only one that wonders when the next time OU will surprise anyone will be. Too bad some of those surprises are bad. really really bad

[Rocker]

Thanks sooner n houston. Here's another article written a couple of years ago. It states that things may not have ended up all that differently.



link (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/hiestand-tv/2004-08-19-hiestand-college-football_x.htm)

The part I boldfaced is where ESPN really benefited from it. Sure, we didn't just make their bed for them, but we opened the door and they took advantage of it. Good for them. But let's not forget who helped you get started. I mean, if the NCAA is gonna hate us for it, we need ESPN to love us for it.

BTW OU & UGA were the only 2 schools to stand up to the NCAA.
When we asked Texas, Nebraska etc. They were like noway we can't do that but we'll support you. So when we file suit against NCAA OU & UGA were the only ones follow thru with it. And one more thing both OU and UGA were put on probation a few years later. HMMMM I wonder why?