Seriously, am I ever going to get an answer? What is the problem?

I'm done

 

Someone told me I needed to pay more attention to it to back my claim. They were right.

Seriously, am I ever going to get an answer? What is the problem?

Wanting an answer to those who do not think ESPN has a major east coast and/or northeast bias.

Wanting an answer to those who do not think ESPN has a major east coast and/or northeast bias.

 

You didn't read any of my posts, then, did you?

I do and I disagree.

 

You cant tell me the Patriots and the Jets are the most followed NFL team in the United States. Yet, they dominate ESPN's coverage during NFL season.

 

Are you telling me people had rather see a breakdown of Joba Chamberlain's three-hitter over eight innings than two one-hit shutouts?

 

Are you telling me the Celtics are more popular than the Lakers? Really? We'll get a breakdown of the Celtics series before the show is out. We might with the Lakers.

 

20 minutes in and no Derby.

 

Again, I think ESPN believes there is an inflated interest in the Sox, Yanks, and Pats because they have rammed it down our throats for years.

To me, the worldwide leader is known as NESPN. All Northeast, all the time.

 

Their east coast bias is nothing new.

But in past years when the derby was carried on sister network ABC, the coverage during derby week was solid. It usually led on SportsCenter and they carried a half hour special each night, including the Derby draw.

 

Now that NBC carries the derby, you get nothing from ESPN. No post position show, which is understandable and likely not allowed through the NBC contract.

 

But nowhere on the front page of ESPN.com can you find anything about the Derby. Another horse dropped out today. Nothing. Post position draws held. Nothing. No news. No links to columns. Nothing on the Derby.

 

It's nothing new. ESPN gave NASCAR the stepchild treatment when they jumped networks. The did the same to the NHL, although you can expect them to triple their coverage next year when it returns to ESPN.

 

Of course, the only story from the six day baseball games dealt with the Mets. That's because the Yankees and Red Sox play tonight.

 

Nice story on soccer, which ESPN is going to put on ESPN Classic and do away with the format on that channel to make it a 24/7 soccer channel.

 

The bias has gotten so bad, it's almost sickening. And it's why I rarely watch the channel anymore.

 

It's what kept USC out of the national title the past few years, and I'm a Florida fan but I don't think USC would have had a problem with anyone they would have played this year.

 

Also, anyone that thinks that the BCS is going away anytime soon, hang it up, ESPN inked a deal with the BCS to air some of the BCS games starting in the next couple of years.

I do and I disagree.

 

You cant tell me the Patriots and the Jets are the most followed NFL team in the United States. Yet, they dominate ESPN's coverage during NFL season.

 

Are you telling me people had rather see a breakdown of Joba Chamberlain's three-hitter over eight innings than two one-hit shutouts?

 

Are you telling me the Celtics are more popular than the Lakers? Really? We'll get a breakdown of the Celtics series before the show is out. We might with the Lakers.

 

20 minutes in and no Derby.

 

Again, I think ESPN believes there is an inflated interest in the Sox, Yanks, and Pats because they have rammed it down our throats for years.

 

 

ESPN is a business. They cover what we as consumers demand they cover. There is no (insert your term: east coast, ACC Basketball, Big East Basketball, SEC Football, Big 10 Football, northeast) bias. There is simply greater demand to hear about certain teams and certain stories. If you want more coverage of the Brewers and Reds pitching gems, get a local paper. Those are local stories with local interest. ESPN deals in national news.

 

Incidently, there is a link to the Derby on the page you posted. ESPN has a link on the front page to tons of Derby information. It has been there for days now.

Edited April 30, 200917 yr by born2reign

When your base is in Bristol, Conn., between New York and Boston, it's easy to think that the rest of the nation is all about the Red Sox-Yankees feud because most of the baseball fans that live there are neck-deep in it.

 

It's the same thing about a New York bias in the news, because all of the major networks' news divisions are there.

 

I'm a huge baseball fan, and I love watching "Baseball Tonight" with two exceptions ... too much Yankees-Red Sox bias and the fact that the talking heads have to fill air time get them on some strange, rather meaningless topics.

I love ESPN and it's networks. :walk:

ESPN has many problems, but you have to respect what they have done and continue to do for the evolution of viewing and covering sports.

So instead we are going to get our sports report from Champ Kindley?

It's what kept USC out of the national title the past few years, and I'm a Florida fan but I don't think USC would have had a problem with anyone they would have played this year.

 

Also, anyone that thinks that the BCS is going away anytime soon, hang it up, ESPN inked a deal with the BCS to air some of the BCS games starting in the next couple of years.

 

Losing to inferior opponents is what has kept USC out of the national title game. Oregon State was 1-2 when they beat USC, including a loss to Stanford and of course the blowout loss to Penn State. In 2007 it was the terrible loss to Stanford and then a later loss to Oregon, but the Stanford loss alone was enough. In 2006 they lost to Oregon State midseason and then if that wasn't enough, lost to a 6-5 UCLA team in the last game of the regular season, which further denied them a shot.

 

Last year was the only year out of the last three USC even had an argument IMO, and neither Florida or Oklahoma had as bad a loss as USC's.

 

But it was TOTALLY bias....

I haven't read the thread, so this may have already been discussed.

 

But, should your displeasure be aimed at ESPN or NBC? It seems if NBC is airing the derby, they should be the one providing the most coverage & advertising.

 

If ESPN had the rights to the derby, you can bet it'd be all over.

 

And ESPN is located in the northeast. The Northeast is the most densely populated region. It makes sense that they'd get the most coverage.

 

And I'm not a New Englander, nor Northeastern fan...at all.

Losing to inferior opponents is what has kept USC out of the national title game. Oregon State was 1-2 when they beat USC, including a loss to Stanford and of course the blowout loss to Penn State. In 2007 it was the terrible loss to Stanford and then a later loss to Oregon, but the Stanford loss alone was enough. In 2006 they lost to Oregon State midseason and then if that wasn't enough, lost to a 6-5 UCLA team in the last game of the regular season, which further denied them a shot.

 

Last year was the only year out of the last three USC even had an argument IMO, and neither Florida or Oklahoma had as bad a loss as USC's.

 

But it was TOTALLY bias....

 

Florida lost at home to an unranked team with a losing record at the time. Oregon State was on the road. I just think if USC isn't playing Ohio State or someone big like that, they are either having to play on a Thursday night, or they are on the Fox Sports Channel. I don't know, I'm a little biased my self, my mom is a USC alum :thumb:

Last year was the only year out of the last three USC even had an argument IMO, and neither Florida or Oklahoma had as bad a loss as USC's.

No argument on Oklahoma.

 

On the other hand, Oregon State finished at 9-4 and was ranked 18th and 19th in the final polls. Mississippi, which beat Florida, was ranked 14th and 15th in the final polls.

 

Plus, USC lost on the road. Florida lost at home.

 

Does "east coast bias" play a role in the BCS? Perhaps. That's just one more reason we need an NCAA football championship tournament.

 

Is ESPN a part of that bias? I would say it plays a role in it, especially on the baseball side.