Anti - Tennessee Bias

Is ESPN biased against UT?

  • Total voters
    0
#51
#51
Originally posted by U-T@Apr 18, 2005 10:01 PM
Investigation into what?
Click to expand...

Agreed, information came to ESPN. They did not just randomly start investigating UT.

If something pops up at USC, ESPN will jump on it.
 
#52
#52
Only thing I've heard about Southern Cal is that 6 players are facing ineligibility, oh and that their spring game tickets cost 30 friggin dollars a piece.
 
#53
#53
I think it was due to academics... Players becoming ineligible due to academics is not ratings-garnering news.

ESPN's only bias is towards themselves. They report whatever they can find that's sensational on the big teams. Right now, ESPN is one of the best-looking teams in the country. We have had many players arrested in a short amount of time. It's gonna be big news.

As far as the Peyton Heisman thing... I was not really that wary of the situation, but I know that Michigan was undefeated that year, and that was in the thick of the period where Spurrier had Tennessee by the throat. Sorry to say it, but a player needs to be on a sensational team to get Heisman consideration. I'd say being a star starter in all three aspects of the game on an undefeated team is going to give a player a big edge. Not saying Peyton didn't deserve it, but Woodson was a more sensational player on a more sensational team in 1997.

LIO, I'm not calling you a Bammer at all. But I have to question anybody that says everybody is out to get them (or their team in this case).

And what U-T said is right. ESPN ends up hurting the reputation of any team that is at the top of the heap and something bad comes up. Just look at the Ohio State stuff that surfaced towards the end of last season. How do you think that made the Buckeyes look?

Anyhow, I vote no. There is no ESPN conspiracy. They may suck, but they have no bias against Tennesse nor against any other school in particular.
 
#54
#54
I would bet money that if the same scandal ( any scandal) hit three universities at the same time and if UT was one of the universities, ESPN would break the scandal with an expose of UT.

Because they know we loyal rabid fans are going to hit their site and complain until it crashes.

I heard that happened after the Peyton thing.
 
#55
#55
I don't remember who said it on here, but the problem with too many people on ESPeeN is that they have their heads up their own butts. Geez, I bet you could cut the EGO air on there with a knife!

So, my vote is...

:espn: :espn: :espn:
 
#56
#56
Originally posted by LadyinOrange@Apr 18, 2005 9:01 PM
I would bet money that if the same scandal ( any scandal) hit three universities at the same time and if UT was one of the universities, ESPN would break the scandal with an expose of UT.

Because they know we loyal rabid fans are going to hit their site and complain until it crashes.

I heard that happened after the Peyton thing.
Click to expand...

It depends. Are the other two teams loaded with talent at virtually every position and looking at a title run?
 
#57
#57
Milo, WHY do you keep ruining ALL my points???


:p



Be quiet like a good little boy. Children are to be seen and not heard.


:dlol:
 
#60
#60
Because I take pride in the fact that fans of football at the University of Tennessee have their heads screwed on straighter than any other football program in the country.
 
#63
#63
Until they get in fights and get them knocked a little screwy.

:p

Oh wait....you said fans, not players.
 
#64
#64
Originally posted by milohimself@Apr 18, 2005 10:56 PM
As far as the Peyton Heisman thing... I was not really that wary of the situation, but I know that Michigan was undefeated that year, and that was in the thick of the period where Spurrier had Tennessee by the throat. Sorry to say it, but a player needs to be on a sensational team to get Heisman consideration. I'd say being a star starter in all three aspects of the game on an undefeated team is going to give a player a big edge. Not saying Peyton didn't deserve it, but Woodson was a more sensational player on a more sensational team in 1997.
Click to expand...

OK, I can't believe I just read that here. A STAR in 3 aspects?? Woodson was not at the top of any categories that year. He had very few catches and 8 int's. He ran a punt back and was a shut down corner. He had a couple of highlight reel int's in the OSU game and that's about it. If I remember right Carl Pickens did better than that in his day. Take Peyton away from that team and it struggles. Take Woodson away and I bet UM still goes undefeated. I thought it was a joke when ESPN started hyping Woodson for the Heisman, but it turned into a nightmare. Woodson more sensational is :censored:
 
#66
#66
Woodson was not a batter player than Manning. His stats were not that impressive and he only showed up for one game, OSU. The knock against Manning was Florida. They used that game as the reason Manning did not get the Heisman. Manning meant more to Tennessee, than Woodson did to Michigan. Remember, the voting takes place before the NC game. And both teams won their conference titles that year.
 
#68
#68
look at the top 10 posters!!! yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!
 
#69
#69
Originally posted by toddbond007@Apr 19, 2005 12:36 AM
look at the top 10 posters!!! yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!
Click to expand...

dude, you need to take your medicine...
 
#70
#70
Like I said, I'm not too familiar with that season. But I have also heard it on here that Woodson was the up-and-comer contender for the Heisman whereas Peyton was the shoe-in. What's more sensational than that?

My only arguement is that ESPN has no particular bias against UT, nor towards any school. Only towards what will garner ratings.
 
#73
#73
Originally posted by Volstorm@Apr 18, 2005 11:33 PM
Woodson was not a batter player than Manning. His stats were not that impressive and he only showed up for one game, OSU. The knock against Manning was Florida. They used that game as the reason Manning did not get the Heisman. Manning meant more to Tennessee, than Woodson did to Michigan. Remember, the voting takes place before the NC game. And both teams won their conference titles that year.
Click to expand...

I agree with Volstorm. Woodson had one really good game and ESPN showed those replays on every promo from that day through the rest of the season. IMO they definately influenced voters.
 
#74
#74
Read this and see if it sounds familiar.

Link

Being upset with ESPN coverage is not exclusive to any particular team.
 
#75
#75
they can't show every highlight of evry great play everyday, but they do have their favorites, and they still suck with the volume up!
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top