redout22 Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Just about every other post in the game thread was about the announcers so I would say so Quote Link to comment
ladyhawke Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Good. I don't like it when one station gets so much power like they have. Bring football back to the masses! Quote Link to comment
True2tRA Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 You know what these SEC homers can't change? THE SCOREBOARD! Nebraska beat that SEC ass! GBR! 2 Quote Link to comment
Redman Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Interesting ESPN/SEC article: http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2013-05-07/sec-network-espn-bias-ownership-derrick-thomas-manziel-stoops Quote Link to comment
southernoregonhusker Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 It's gonna get worse. ESPN has a billion+ dollar partnership with the SEC. Fox is our network. BTN is owned by Fox if I'm not mistaken. Here's another little fun snippet. ESPN used to routinely mock the Pac10 as well. But now with the FSN coming on and getting a good sized slice of the Pac12 pie, notice ESPN being a bit more Pac12 homer this year. Buttering up that conference as well before FSN gets it. It's all a game of perception and money. I just really hope FSN gets their sh#t together and believe they have the potential to do so. ESPN is what they are only because there has never been a legit alternative, and I guarantee you 50% of ESPN's viewers are salivating for an alternative. At the very least, it will make ESPN become a bit more impartial. There are a lot of contradictions in this post. ESPN has a partnership with the SEC. Check ESPN also has a partnership with the B1G and that's why most of our games were on ABC/ESPN. It wouldn't make sense for them to ding us or BTN, since BTN gets the lower tier games anyway and the best B1G games are on ESPN/ABC. As for the Pac 12, they already have a deal with Fox and Fox has been broadcasting their games for two years now. I don't understand why ESPN would butter up the Pac 12 knowing they're in bed with Fox, but then dog BTN because it belongs to Fox. See the contradiction? As for your guarantee, there is an alternative. Fox Sports 1 has been out for roughly 4-6 months now. I never watch it because it's not that good and Fox is struggling to sell it to cable companies. In fact, the only companies that have it are the companies that had Fox's SPEED Network (or something like that). Fox also hoped for roughly $5 per subscriber like ESPN gets. Instead, they're getting the same 70 cents per subscriber that SPEED got. I think UNL fans have an illogical hate for ESPN. They show most of our games. It doesn't make sense for them to hate us. I think some fans just want to hear that our team is the greatest no matter what the truth may be. Though not part of your post, I like to mention that those of us on DirecTV are in for some trouble regarding the BTN. The only reason BTN is part of the sports package is because DirecTV owned BTN when BTN first started broadcasting. Now that they no longer own it, it's going to be interesting to see what happens since DirecTV doesn't carry the Pac 12 Network, SEC Network, Longhorn Network, etc. 2 Quote Link to comment
Count 'Bility Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 It's gonna get worse. ESPN has a billion+ dollar partnership with the SEC. Fox is our network. BTN is owned by Fox if I'm not mistaken. Here's another little fun snippet. ESPN used to routinely mock the Pac10 as well. But now with the FSN coming on and getting a good sized slice of the Pac12 pie, notice ESPN being a bit more Pac12 homer this year. Buttering up that conference as well before FSN gets it. It's all a game of perception and money. I just really hope FSN gets their sh#t together and believe they have the potential to do so. ESPN is what they are only because there has never been a legit alternative, and I guarantee you 50% of ESPN's viewers are salivating for an alternative. At the very least, it will make ESPN become a bit more impartial. There are a lot of contradictions in this post. ESPN has a partnership with the SEC. Check ESPN also has a partnership with the B1G and that's why most of our games were on ABC/ESPN. It wouldn't make sense for them to ding us or BTN, since BTN gets the lower tier games anyway and the best B1G games are on ESPN/ABC. As for the Pac 12, they already have a deal with Fox and Fox has been broadcasting their games for two years now. I don't understand why ESPN would butter up the Pac 12 knowing they're in bed with Fox, but then dog BTN because it belongs to Fox. See the contradiction? As for your guarantee, there is an alternative. Fox Sports 1 has been out for roughly 4-6 months now. I never watch it because it's not that good and Fox is struggling to sell it to cable companies. In fact, the only companies that have it are the companies that had Fox's SPEED Network (or something like that). Fox also hoped for roughly $5 per subscriber like ESPN gets. Instead, they're getting the same 70 cents per subscriber that SPEED got. I think UNL fans have an illogical hate for ESPN. They show most of our games. It doesn't make sense for them to hate us. I think some fans just want to hear that our team is the greatest no matter what the truth may be. Though not part of your post, I like to mention that those of us on DirecTV are in for some trouble regarding the BTN. The only reason BTN is part of the sports package is because DirecTV owned BTN when BTN first started broadcasting. Now that they no longer own it, it's going to be interesting to see what happens since DirecTV doesn't carry the Pac 12 Network, SEC Network, Longhorn Network, etc. I'm talking in terms of exlusive networks being viewed by more than just regionally. ESPN with the SEC and Texas. Fox doesnt have that yet with the Pac12. But I believe it's headed there. As far as directv goes, it's probably time for something different. Consumers are in control. Lastly, it's not about hate. I know I kid about it a lot. But it is about their power and ability to sway favortism to the SEC whom they have a remarkable partnership with. I to this day dont know how it's even legal for them to act the way they do. This is after all, intercollegiate athletics and not professional. The way ESPN acts is having an effect on the landscape of college sports. College football more importantly. But I guess that's what happens when networks and conferences have more power and money (and competence for that matter) than the NCAA. Yes, FS1 is only 4-6 months. And that's the point. They need to improve. Quote Link to comment
1HuskrFan Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 We're the announcers pissing anybody else off the entire game? Every time we made a good play they always said something about a Georgia player being hurt, or the field conditions were bad. We have had tons of injuries too and we were playing on the same field. When Cooper made that great 3rd down tackle on Gurley at end of game. The one said at least three times that there was no way Cooper makes that tackle if Gurley is 100% and the field wasn't wet. How bout just give our guy credit for a great play and shut up. yes. I had to pause the game and collect myself... It's a disgrace the way they called the game....GBR Quote Link to comment
chamrocck Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 The LeRoy Alexander "targeting" call...O. M. G. So glad that Pac12 official put it in perspective just so Ed could back track I tried my best to listen to Cunnigham but the guy is biased. Wasn't he a UW player? Did NU match up with his team back in the day and he just always had it out for us? The other announcer was alright IMO but Cunnigham was ready to have LeRoy Alexander ejected so I loved it when the official called him on it and he did let Ed save face. I heard him mention a bit about our O-Line being dinged up and us not knowing who would play at game time but the large majority of his comments were about how UGA was injured...and he did not give same weight to all of the injuries we have had. Not sure what is up with this guy. Quote Link to comment
husker_rob Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 It's gonna get worse. ESPN has a billion+ dollar partnership with the SEC. Fox is our network. BTN is owned by Fox if I'm not mistaken. Here's another little fun snippet. ESPN used to routinely mock the Pac10 as well. But now with the FSN coming on and getting a good sized slice of the Pac12 pie, notice ESPN being a bit more Pac12 homer this year. Buttering up that conference as well before FSN gets it. It's all a game of perception and money. I just really hope FSN gets their sh#t together and believe they have the potential to do so. ESPN is what they are only because there has never been a legit alternative, and I guarantee you 50% of ESPN's viewers are salivating for an alternative. At the very least, it will make ESPN become a bit more impartial. There are a lot of contradictions in this post. ESPN has a partnership with the SEC. Check ESPN also has a partnership with the B1G and that's why most of our games were on ABC/ESPN. It wouldn't make sense for them to ding us or BTN, since BTN gets the lower tier games anyway and the best B1G games are on ESPN/ABC. As for the Pac 12, they already have a deal with Fox and Fox has been broadcasting their games for two years now. I don't understand why ESPN would butter up the Pac 12 knowing they're in bed with Fox, but then dog BTN because it belongs to Fox. See the contradiction? As for your guarantee, there is an alternative. Fox Sports 1 has been out for roughly 4-6 months now. I never watch it because it's not that good and Fox is struggling to sell it to cable companies. In fact, the only companies that have it are the companies that had Fox's SPEED Network (or something like that). Fox also hoped for roughly $5 per subscriber like ESPN gets. Instead, they're getting the same 70 cents per subscriber that SPEED got. I think UNL fans have an illogical hate for ESPN. They show most of our games. It doesn't make sense for them to hate us. I think some fans just want to hear that our team is the greatest no matter what the truth may be. Though not part of your post, I like to mention that those of us on DirecTV are in for some trouble regarding the BTN. The only reason BTN is part of the sports package is because DirecTV owned BTN when BTN first started broadcasting. Now that they no longer own it, it's going to be interesting to see what happens since DirecTV doesn't carry the Pac 12 Network, SEC Network, Longhorn Network, etc. I typically share your point of view. I tend to think many Husker fans are very sensitive of national perception of little respect, yet they don't understand that, in the big picture, we haven't been a very good program for a good decade. We've had a few years that were good, here or there, but mostly we've been an average program that won most of the games we were supposed to win and lost most of the games we were supposed to lose. Not very noteworthy. However, today, even I could detect a little bias. It started from the beginning of the day, when Georgia was shown getting off their bus. The announcers said something to the effect of "here are the Georgia players leaving their bus -- what players were actually healthy enough to make the game." And then they made a big deal about their senior QB not making the game. Never did they mention that Nebraska was just as roughed up all year, and our star senior QB wasn't able to make the game, either. Add to that the actual game broadcast where the announcers seemed to maybe be a bit in awe of Georgia's athleticism, especially considering they graduated so much talent and, well ... it just didn't seem to me that we were an equal team in their eyes. Unlike some fans, however, I don't perceive it as an anti-Nebraska bias. Simply put, we're just not on the same plane right now in their eyes for the following reasons: Our conference has not shown up well in bowl season for the past several years. The SEC has won the past 7 championships (6 or 7, I can't remember). We have laid egg after egg on national broadcasts in the past several years, including losing our last 3 bowl games. Simply put, we're going to have to earn our respect back. It's going to take several years of winning some games that we're not supposed to win -- surprise some people. I see no reason why ESPN wouldn't be biased in our direction in the future if we would just take care of business consistently. And we also need the Big Ten to win some high-profile games against other conferences, in general. Great win, Michigan State! And go Buckeyes! Just my opinion, of course. 2 Quote Link to comment
clyde40 Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 I loved when they called Armstrong Mason for 2 or 3 straight plays. 1 Quote Link to comment
Toe Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 ESPN has a partnership with the SEC. Check ESPN also has a partnership with the B1G and that's why most of our games were on ABC/ESPN. They may have more than one son, but that doesn't mean they don't have a favorite son... 1 Quote Link to comment
ladyhawke Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 ESPN's bias shows up with any SEC team. Go read their facebook page and see all of the complaints from teams that are non-SEC. It's not just Nebraska-it appears to be against any team that isn't SEC. The one way that non-SEC teams can make a difference is to keep winning games. We upset Georgia, MSU won the Rose Bowl which was huge (even though Stanford isn't an SEC team) now if Ohio State can win their game that will make our conference look a little better. We also have the entire basketball season to look forward to! GBR! Quote Link to comment
AZRaiderH8r Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Stupid question, but was Taylor at the game? The reason I ask is because they were sure to do a nice, long interview with Murray to discuss his injuries and NFL future (sounds like a pretty good kid, by the way), and only mentioned Taylor's injury late in the 3rd or early in the 4th, with no interview of him at all, unless I missed it. That had me pretty pissed off; it was blatant favoritism. Even if Taylor wasn't there, he deserved more recognition than the tiny bit they gave him. Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 He was at practices all week. Some games he was up in the pressbox so he might not have been on the sideline. Not surprising either way. Quote Link to comment
In the Deed the Glory Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 He was at practices all week. Some games he was up in the pressbox so he might not have been on the sideline. Not surprising either way. He was there, they showed him on the field during warm ups on Gameday I believe. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.