GREAT Article: The story ESPN doesn't want you to know

[SDogo]

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/8853534?MSNHPHMA

 

[Rogah]

I like Whitlock. I really do. And I agree with a lot of what he said in his column (such as the unavoidable conflict-of-interest ESPN takes on when they become broadcast partners of the sports they analyze).

But sometimes I read his articles and see little but sour grapes. For example:

"Ball State's football season perfectly illustrated my problem with ESPN and why I believe the World Wide Leader is the most evil and destructive force in the sports world. It has driven and hastened the destruction of authentic, independent, democratic, courageous sports journalism."

Well, you know Jason, you made a lot of money working for "the most evil and destructive force in the sports world" and you really never said much by way of criticism until they fired you. Where was the self-righteous outrage back then?

 

[joseephuss]

FOX will broadcast all the BCS games at the end of this season just like they have the last couple of years. Why would ESPN have anything against Ball St. being included in a game they don't even have the television broadcast rights? Does the FOX team talk about Ball St. on The OT when they release the weekly BCS rankings?

If ESPN did not truly want anyone to know about then they would not broadcast a single game involving Ball St. but they have.

Of course ESPN has a bias, but I don't think it is to the extent that Whitlock makes it out to be. Most fans have a bias as well and know that many of the small conference schools aren't going to be contenders year in and year out. The big boys play in the SEC, Big 12, Big 10, ACC and Big East. Even when one of those conferences is having a down year they still tend to be better than the other conferences in D1 football. Football is not equal across the board. Not every of the 119 or so schools is a legitimate contender.

 

[bootsy]

I like Whitlock. I really do. And I agree with a lot of what he said in his column (such as the unavoidable conflict-of-interest ESPN takes on when they become broadcast partners of the sports they analyze).

But sometimes I read his articles and see little but sour grapes. For example:

"Ball State's football season perfectly illustrated my problem with ESPN and why I believe the World Wide Leader is the most evil and destructive force in the sports world. It has driven and hastened the destruction of authentic, independent, democratic, courageous sports journalism."

Well, you know Jason, you made a lot of money working for "the most evil and destructive force in the sports world" and you really never said much by way of criticism until they fired you. Where was the self-righteous outrage back then?

I am not a big fan of Whitlock but you are wrong about this statement. Whitlock was fired for making comments about Mike Lupica and Scoop Jackson who both work for ESPN while still working for ESPN at the time of this interview.

http://thebiglead.com/?p=1038


Here is the follow up interview after he was fired:

http://thebiglead.com/?p=3359

 

[bobtheflob]

I'm not much of a Whitlock fan. I remember being mad by something he wrote once, but I don't even remember what it was at this point. But I found this to be too whiny.

He had some good points, but he also had some bad points. Leading Ball State to a perfect record against a schedule that includes zero ranked teams is not as impressive as what Colt or Bradford have done. Their biggest win came against Western Michigan, a team that got blown out by Nebraska.

This QB may be good, I haven't watched him play so I can't say for myself, but to portray this as being evil manipulation by ESPN is a little absurd.

 

[bootsy]

I'm not much of a Whitlock fan. I remember being mad by something he wrote once, but I don't even remember what it was at this point. But I found this to be too whiny.

He had some good points, but he also had some bad points. Leading Ball State to a perfect record against a schedule that includes zero ranked teams is not as impressive as what Colt or Bradford have done. Their biggest win came against Western Michigan, a team that got blown out by Nebraska.

This QB may be good, I haven't watched him play so I can't say for myself, but to portray this as being evil manipulation by ESPN is a little absurd.

As a Ball St alum I will say this. They haven't beaten any ranked teams but they have beaten everyone on their schedule so far which is more than I can say for Colt or Bradford. If BSU runs the table that is a tremendous accomplishment period and this is without having their lead receiver for most of the season.