Angry Rant Against ESPN

[gabe1984]

Now, correct me if I'm wrong here, because maybe I'm just still having trouble dealing with how bad the Skins were this year, and my judgement is clouded with anger/sadness because they're not in the playoffs, but it seems to me like ESPN likes jump all over certain teams and certain players nuts, all the time!
ESPN, please jump off the Patriots bandwagon and Tom Brady's nuts. It's like all they talk about how much of a genius Bellachick is, and how awesome Brady is during the playoffs. But, they usually fail to mention some obvious truths that don't support why that might not be true this year. One, since the Patriots won their last Superbowl they've lost several key pieces such as Romeo Cornell, Charlie Weiss, Ty Law, Willie McGinnest, Deion Branch, and I think Harrison is hurt this year. And what happened last year in the playoffs when they didn't have these key pieces, they lost to the Broncos, Brady threw that interception to Bailey in the endzone and he ran it all the way back to his one yard line. I want the Chargers to win just so that they stop talking about the freakin Patriots for a minute.
ESPN please get off of the Ravens nuts. Okay, it's a good story, and the Ravens are nasty this year, but it's like ESPN is just writing the Colts off, like they don't have a chance at all. I want to hear positives about both teams, not just the Ravens. They give very little coverage to the fact the Peyton usually finds a way to beat the Ravens, and how their defense is healthy now with McFarland and Sanders. They just want to brown nose Ray Lewis, McNair, Ed Reed, and the rest of the defense. Why are they so biased? You know what, the ESPN analysts are probably right, there's no way the Colts can stop Jamal Lewis, no way in Hell, it's impossible, they can only stop Larry Johnson,right?
They kinda do the same thing with the Saints too. It's like the Saints are good, but they're playing the Eagles who are absoutely hot right now. This how the coverage usually goes by ESPN: Drew Brees this, Brees that, Reggie Bush, some more Reggie Bush, Jeff Garcia, did we mention how good Drew Brees is yet?, MArquis Colston, blah blah blah Reggie Bush is good in space, Brian Dawkins, the Saints are playing at home, Drew Brees has a cannon, Marquis Colston is gonna cause some matchup problems. Come on ESPN.
Let's not forget what happened during the College Championship game this year. ESPN was all over Ohio State's nuts and they got worked!!!
I dunno exactly what I'm trying to say, I just wish they'd stop giving so much opinion and start giving more positves and negatives about both teams. Does anyone else notice this or am I just nuts?

[dall-assblows]

the media always falls in love this the hot team and that becomes all they talk about. it is nothing new to me.

[celts32]

I agree on the Pats...I remember rooting for them in their 1st Super Bowl but now it's to the point where I can't stand them and hearing about how great they are. And the thing is...they are not even that great anymore. i will be shocked if that team wins the Super Bowl.

[djnemo65]

Originally Posted by celts32

I agree on the Pats...I remember rooting for them in their 1st Super Bowl but now it's to the point where I can't stand them and hearing about how great they are. And the thing is...they are not even that great anymore. i will be shocked if that team wins the Super Bowl.

As Bill Simmons correctly said, this year's Pats represent the greatest rebuilding year in the history of sports.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

As Bill Simmons correctly said, this year's Pats represent the greatest rebuilding year in the history of sports.

And he isn't biased one bit...

Let's see if they say that after LT has 180 and 4 touchdowns.

[djnemo65]

Originally Posted by Grim21Reaper

And he isn't biased one bit...

Let's see if they say that after LT has 180 and 4 touchdowns.

What does bias have to do with it? They went 12-4.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

What does bias have to do with it? They went 12-4.

How are the Patriots in a "rebuilding year"? They won their division and went to the playoffs last year and they won their division and went to the playoffs this year. Because they dump Deion Branch, they are rebuilding? They dump guys every year.

[SouperMeister]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

As Bill Simmons correctly said, this year's Pats represent the greatest rebuilding year in the history of sports.

Bill Simmons is the biggest Boston "homer" on ESPN.com. What the hell did New England rebuild from??? They finished in first place in their division BOTH last season and this season. I for one am a lot more impressed with what the Saints did as a reclamation project. Coming off a last place finish, they bring in a new coach, sign an injured Drew Brees that San Diego and Miami wanted no part of, draft Bush, then plug in a bunch of role players and ride it all the way to the NFC Championship. Bill Simmons should take off his rose-colored Patriots glasses for a dose of reality.

[The Huddle]

Originally Posted by SouperMeister

Bill Simmons is the biggest Boston "homer" on ESPN.com. What the hell did New England rebuild from??? They finished in first place in their division BOTH last season and this season. I for one am a lot more impressed with what the Saints did as a reclamation project. Coming off a last place finish, they bring in a new coach, sign an injured Drew Brees that San Diego and Miami wanted no part of, draft Bush, then plug in a bunch of role players and ride it all the way to the NFC Championship. Bill Simmons should take off his rose-colored Patriots glasses for a dose of reality.

Simmons has never denied he's a Boston homer. It's part of his schtick. When the Patriots were on their way to their first title he went on at length about what a bland, unexciting history they had, how there had never been a truly memorable game in Foxboro Stadium, etc. He's not without bias and doesn't pretend to be.

New England lost Willie McGuinest, Deon Branch, David Givens, Adam Venatieri and several other players from recent Super Bowl teams. While the overall value of these players (save Venatieri) to other teams in questionable, there's really no arguement that they were vital to the Patriots. I disagree that they are the biggest rebuilding job in the league and would agree with your example of New Orleans, but in this day and age to sustain their kind of success (12-4) with losses like that is remarkable.

As to some of the other sentiments expressed in this thread, why should ESPN be raving about, or even mentioning, the Redskins except to crack on them? They were 5-11 this year, 21-27 since Gibbs game back, have only two playoff appearances in the last 14 years, only 5 finishes above .500 during that same 14 years and haven't been to the conference title game since 1991, much less the Super Bowl. This is New England's sixth straight winning season; you can dismiss that if you want but Washington hasn't done that in twenty years (1982-87). Those old Super Bowl trophies are dusty relics- if you went to listen to praise for what Gibbs did during those years, tune in to ESPN Classic.

I do understand some of the sentiment against listening to the endless Parcells/T.O./Dallas saga when the Tuna is still looking for a playoff win after four years, and I agree that it sucks the Redskins don't get much serious discussion anymore, but the bottom line is that if the Redskins were winning big right now, they'd be getting talked up- they'd be a big story and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[dall-assblows]

if espn upsets you then why do you keep watching? i'll tell you: because its good, because its real good.

[redsk1]

The Patriots are a contender every year!!! That's why they keep talking about them. They lose players & coaches but guess what, they are still contenders. Great coach and great organization. So i would much rather hear about the Patriots than the Eagles who've never won anything. By the way, Tom Brady is pretty good and pretty clutch too.

If the skins won 3 out of 4 SB's i bet we'd be on espn more than anyone else too.

[gabe1984]

Originally Posted by redsk1

The Patriots are a contender every year!!! That's why they keep talking about them. They lose players & coaches but guess what, they are still contenders. Great coach and great organization. So i would much rather hear about the Patriots than the Eagles who've never won anything. By the way, Tom Brady is pretty good and pretty clutch too.

If the skins won 3 out of 4 SB's i bet we'd be on espn more than anyone else too.

This year, during the regular season, the Patriots played against 4 teams with winning records, 4 TEAMS!!!!! THAT'S IT!!!!!! No wonder they made the playoffs!!! And against the teams with winning records, they were 2-3, I'm not impressed. I would much rather hear about an underdog team like the Eagles, that we don't know as much about, as opposed to repeatedly talking about how good the Patriots are!! If they beat the Chargers, then I'll start to give Brady more credit, but until then, I'm going to accredit much of Brady's success to his past stellar defenses with players such as Willie McGinnest, Rodney Harrison, Teddy Bruschi, and Ty Law. Plus coaches like Cornell and Weis, and let's not forget Deion Branch.

In addition, someone asked why I choose to watch ESPN. What the hell else would I watch? The other national sports network? What's it called? Oh, there isn't another one. There's lots of great things about ESPN, like Sportscenter, PTI, around the Horn, I just get sick of hearing about certain teams over and over.

[Redskins8588]

Originally Posted by gabe1984

This year, during the regular season, the Patriots played against 4 teams with winning records, 4 TEAMS!!!!! THAT'S IT!!!!!! No wonder they made the playoffs!!! And against the teams with winning records, they were 2-3, I'm not impressed.

Wouldn't they be 1-3 or 2-2 or 3-1 or 4-0 or 0-4 if the Pats played against only 4 TEAMS with a winning a record?

[gabe1984]

Originally Posted by Redskins8588

Wouldn't they be 1-3 or 2-2 or 3-1 or 4-0 or 0-4 if the Pats played against only 4 TEAMS with a winning a record?

No silly, the played the Jets, who had a winning record, twice because theyr'e in the same division.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by gabe1984

This year, during the regular season, the Patriots played against 4 teams with winning records, 4 TEAMS!!!!! THAT'S IT!!!!!! No wonder they made the playoffs!!! And against the teams with winning records, they were 2-3, I'm not impressed. I would much rather hear about an underdog team like the Eagles, that we don't know as much about, as opposed to repeatedly talking about how good the Patriots are!! If they beat the Chargers, then I'll start to give Brady more credit, but until then, I'm going to accredit much of Brady's success to his past stellar defenses with players such as Willie McGinnest, Rodney Harrison, Teddy Bruschi, and Ty Law. Plus coaches like Cornell and Weis, and let's not forget Deion Branch.

In addition, someone asked why I choose to watch ESPN. What the hell else would I watch? The other national sports network? What's it called? Oh, there isn't another one. There's lots of great things about ESPN, like Sportscenter, PTI, around the Horn, I just get sick of hearing about certain teams over and over.

They've (not just ESPN, but also other major outlets like SI) been on Philadelphia's nuts for years and years. I will say this about the Eagles, Andy Reid is a great team builder, and I'm not surprised that Philly is doing what they are doing. Of course if we were ANY good, they wouldn't be where they are right now, so if ESPN was talking up Reid's job ad nauseum, I'd probably be sick to my stomach.

Regarding the Pats...who knows where they'd be if the NFL rules weren't wacky, and they had lost to the Raiders in the 2001 divisional round (the snow bowl)? Brady could be a relatively underhyped QB right now. The bottom line is that good team building and coaching are helpful things, but the game chooses it's champions in a relatively random manner. No one player or coach is bigger than the game, but listening to some of the talking heads, you'd think guys like Brady and Belicheck are larger than life. They aren't. They are great players and coaches who just happened to be lucky enough to win a few championships. Tons of players who have a lot of tools similar to those guys flounder in mediocrity not because they go about playing/coaching the game any differently than a Brady or a Belicheck, but because guys like Brady catch all the breaks, not them.