Espn promoting Power 5

[HuskyHawk]

I think people are missing a key part of this. On the initial moves, I made that argument repeatedly. And still believe it. But what we had going for us was the bottom of our conference being stronger than the bottom of the other big conferences. The addition of Memphis and Temple changed the equation in terms of computer rankings (even before you get to market share and prestige and history).

Agreed. The strength of the Big East was never at the top, it was balance. Now we have flea ridden dogs that are worse than the worst team in most leagues, plus we have very little up top, gaining Boise and losing WVU. Zls is right, there are several programs even in the ACC, FSU/GT/Clemson/UNC/VT/BC that have more to offer than any in the NBE. Yes BC stinks right now, UNC is being punished and Miami can't get it's %$#@ together. But NC State is actually looking pretty good and should be ranked this year. So even with two of its most successful programs (Miami and BC) in the toilet, the ACC still looks better than the BE in 2012.

 

[businesslawyer]

Agreed. The strength of the Big East was never at the top, it was balance. Now we have flea ridden dogs that are worse than the worst team in most leagues, plus we have very little up top, gaining Boise and losing WVU. Zls is right, there are several programs even in the ACC, FSU/GT/Clemson/UNC/VT/BC that have more to offer than any in the NBE. Yes BC stinks right now, UNC is being punished and Miami can't get it's %$#@ together. But NC State is actually looking pretty good and should be ranked this year. So even with two of its most successful programs (Miami and BC) in the toilet, the ACC still looks better than the BE in 2012.

Why is it that every time you agree with something I post, I feel dirty?

 

[businesslawyer]

It works both ways. Parity in the conference due to a strong bottom meant the champions had relatively poor records, and since many fans only pay attention to the bowl teams, our bowl teams looked worse than other conferences. The top teams in the Big 12, Big Ten, Pac 12, and ACC really benefit in terms of prestige by having a big group of weak teams to run up their records against.

In any case computer rankings are being replaced by a selection committee, so even if the lack of weak teams in the old conference was beneficial in the past, it may not be so in the future.

There is a lot of reality in what you said, and I freely admit to being a "truth" guy as opposed to a "perception" guy. That having been said, you will never convince me that the Big East is stronger in football because it added Memphis. Saying that just turns the use of common words on their head.

 

[businesslawyer]

[quote="RS9999X, post: 278427, member: 502"

One thing is certain: ESPN isn't afraid to make enemies in CT.[/quote]

Which would be o.k. if they hadn't inked a huge development deal with the State literally days before the ACC raid. One of the secrets of this whole thing that I'd still like to know is whether Malloy called ESPN on day one and what the heck the conversation sounded like.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Let's do a quick test here.

Games vs. major conference opponents: 2002-2004:

Louisville: Kentucky 17-22 (2002), Duke 40-3 (2002), Florida State 26-20 (2002), Kentucky 40-24 (2003), Syracuse 30-20 (2003), Temple 21-12 (2003), Kentucky 28-0 (2004), UNC 34-0 (2004), Miami 38-41 (2004) 7-2, although only two quality wins in the whole group, over FSU and Syracuse, and both of them lost 6 games the year Louisville beat them. Kentucky didn't suck in 2002 either.

Cincinnati: WVU 32-35 (2002), Ohio State 19-23 (2002), Temple 35-22 (2002), WVU 15-13 (2003), Temple 30-24 (2003), Ohio State 6-27 (2004), Syracuse 7-19 (2004) 3-4 with one quality win over WVU.

South Florida: Arkansas 3-42 (2002), Oklahoma 14-31 (2002), Alabama 17-40 (2003), South Carolina 3-34 (2004), Pitt 14-23 (2004). 0-5.

Overall, 10-11 with 4 quality wins and 6 wins over Temple, Duke and bad UNC and Kentucky teams.

Games vs. majors: 2009-2011:

Boise: Oregon 19-8 (2009), TCU 17-10 (2009), Virginia Tech 33-30 (2010), Oregon State 37-24 (2010), Utah 26-3 (2010), Georgia 35-21 (2011), TCU 35-36 (2011), Arizona State 56-24 (2011). 7-1, with every win on this list better than any win by the 3 additions from 2005.

San Diego State: UCLA 14-33 (2009), TCU 12-55 (2009), Utah 7-38 (2009), Missouri 24-27 (2010), TCU 35-40 (2010), Utah 34-38 (2010), Washington State 42-24 (2011), Michigan 7-28 (2011), TCU 14-27 (2011). 1-8, with most of them blowout losses until 2010.

Houston: Oklahoma State 45-35 (2009), Texas Tech 29-28 (2009), Mississippi State 31-24 (2009), UCLA 13-31 (2010), Mississippi State 24-47 (2010), Texas Tech 20-35 (2010), UCLA 38-34 (2011), Penn State 30-14 (2011). 5-3, with 3 very high quality wins.

SMU: Washington State 27-30 (2009), TCU 14-39 (2009), Texas Tech 27-35 (2010), TCU 24-41 (2009), Washington State 35-21 (2010), Texas A&M 14-46 (2011), TCU 40-33 (2011), Pitt 28-6 (2011). 3-5 with a great win over TCU.

Central Florida: Miami 7-27 (2009), Rutgers 24-45 (2009), NC State 21-28 (2010), Kansas State 13-17 (2010), Georgia 10-6 (2010), Boston College 30-3 (2011). 2-4, with a good win over Georgia.

Temple: Penn State 6-31 (2009), UCLA 21-30 (2009), UConn 30-16 (2010), Penn State 13-22 (2010), Penn State 10-14 (2011), Maryland 38-7 (2011). 2-4, with win over UConn counting as quality. Really just proved they could beat Edsall.

Memphis: Mississippi 14-45 (2009), Mississippi State 7-49 (2009), Tennessee 28-56 (2009), Louisville 0-56 (2010), Tennessee 14-50 (2010), Mississippi State 14-59 (2011). 0-6 with all blowout losses.

20-31 with 13 of the losses coming from Memphis and SDSU. SDSU has shown they can play with the big boys, they just need to pull out some W's. Temple has played Penn State tough 2 straight years, and is pulling out W's. UCF and SMU are equivalent to middle to bottom half BCS programs. Houston is a top half BCS program and Boise is a powerhouse. Memphis is terrible, and one of the worst teams in FBS.

 

[SAMCRO]

Just for S&G's I looked at the final 2012 cumulative computer rankings for all the teams, placing them in their new (or soon to be new) leagues. So this has Memphis, Navy, SDSU, etc... in the BE, WVU and TCU in the B12, TAM and Mizzou in the SEC and SyraPitt in the ACC. Averaging out all of the rankings for each conference from 2012 season, anyone care to guess who finishes in the Big 5? Any guesses on who is not in the Big 5? Anyone, anyone???

#1 B12 (avarage ranking of 30.4)
#2 SEC (average ranking of 33.5)
#3 B1G (average ranking of 48)
#4 P12 (average ranking of 50.5)
#5 BE (average ranking of 56)
#6 ACC (average ranking of 59.1)

The average ranking of 2 teams leaving the BE to join the ACC (SyraPitt) was 73. The average ranking of the 7 teams joining the BE was 58.5.

Doesn't change the fact that the perception of the BE is a dog, but even factoring Memphis (ranked 117) into the BE, the league still averages a higher ranking than the ACC. Does it matter in TV contracts, media attention, etc... no, absolutely not, but the league did get better on the field, you just won't hear anyone talking about it on TV. Our interim commissioner should have been prepared to slam ESPiN or anyone else he spoke to with these FACTS. He did not.

 

[UConnDan97]

Just for S&G's I looked at the final 2012 cumulative computer rankings for all the teams, placing them in their new (or soon to be new) leagues. So this has Memphis, Navy, SDSU, etc... in the BE, WVU and TCU in the B12, TAM and Mizzou in the SEC and SyraPitt in the ACC. Averaging out all of the rankings for each conference from 2012 season, anyone care to guess who finishes in the Big 5? Any guesses on who is not in the Big 5? Anyone, anyone???

#1 B12 (avarage ranking of 30.4)
#2 SEC (average ranking of 33.5)
#3 B1G (average ranking of 48)
#4 P12 (average ranking of 50.5)
#5 BE (average ranking of 56)
#6 ACC (average ranking of 59.1)

The average ranking of 2 teams leaving the BE to join the ACC (SyraPitt) was 73. The average ranking of the 7 teams joining the BE was 58.5.

Doesn't change the fact that the perception of the BE is a dog, but even factoring Memphis (ranked 117) into the BE, the league still averages a higher ranking than the ACC. Does it matter in TV contracts, media attention, etc... no, absolutely not, but the league did get better on the field, you just won't hear anyone talking about it on TV. Our interim commissioner should have been prepared to slam ESPiN or anyone else he spoke to with these FACTS. He did not.

That's a solid post, Samcro!

 

[Marty Jackson]

I think people are missing a key part of this. On the initial moves, I made that argument repeatedly. And still believe it. But what we had going for us was the bottom of our conference being stronger than the bottom of the other big conferences. The addition of Memphis and Temple changed the equation in terms of computer rankings (even before you get to market share and prestige and history).

Memphis (not sure about temple) will provide some additional seperation in our league. When people think of the SEC, they aren't thinking about Vandy or Miss St. Northwestern in the Big10 as well. Sure they compete some years, but for the most part, they are fodder for the other league teams. We now have Memphis.
What's killed this league the past couple years is that we've had 9 teams and our champion has typically been bunched up in the standings with #2 and #3. The added teams will provide some seperation just because of the added conference games. But adding Memphis (and Temple if you like, even though we can't seem to beat them consistently), we now have a 'cellar' program.

 

[Marty Jackson]

Just for S&G's I looked at the final 2012 cumulative computer rankings for all the teams, placing them in their new (or soon to be new) leagues. So this has Memphis, Navy, SDSU, etc... in the BE, WVU and TCU in the B12, TAM and Mizzou in the SEC and SyraPitt in the ACC. Averaging out all of the rankings for each conference from 2012 season, anyone care to guess who finishes in the Big 5? Any guesses on who is not in the Big 5? Anyone, anyone???

#1 B12 (avarage ranking of 30.4)
#2 SEC (average ranking of 33.5)
#3 B1G (average ranking of 48)
#4 P12 (average ranking of 50.5)
#5 BE (average ranking of 56)
#6 ACC (average ranking of 59.1)

The average ranking of 2 teams leaving the BE to join the ACC (SyraPitt) was 73. The average ranking of the 7 teams joining the BE was 58.5.

Doesn't change the fact that the perception of the BE is a dog, but even factoring Memphis (ranked 117) into the BE, the league still averages a higher ranking than the ACC. Does it matter in TV contracts, media attention, etc... no, absolutely not, but the league did get better on the field, you just won't hear anyone talking about it on TV. Our interim commissioner should have been prepared to slam ESPiN or anyone else he spoke to with these FACTS. He did not.

I couldn't find the site (I'm sure there's more than one), but looking back since 2003, the BE has finished as high as #3 and finished higher than the ACC several times. I think we're the 6th conference, but suggesting "5 Power" conferences is an agenda...

Bill King has referenced the "5 Power" conferences now as well.

 

[Pudge]

Look at the five conferences. Then look at the Big East.

If you think the Big East is on the same level with the other five, you are out of your mind. Yes, Boise is a great program. But if/when Petersen leaves, then what? For all the failures of the ACC, FSU/Clemson/UNC/Miami are all still major programs, recruiting major players, with large fanbases and national appeal. You can whine and moan and bring up OOC records and BCS game records, but the truth is, nobody gives a about Cincinnati-Rutgers.

I think ZLS ... cannot imagine that IT might be fun playing the AFL ... to the NFL. He can't remember how exciting it is to be the upstart. The Boise upsetting the SEC/B12 apple cart.

That's got to be your perspective here. WE are trying to break down the door ... ESPN was also once the upstart. I remember that distinctly. You got to play your role.

 

[Pudge]

I agree on Memphis.

But ... what you have to remember ... in 2003, Cincinnati was a horrible mess. Dantonio was just into his turnaround there; and they were damn good the next year. Give Fuentes & that Program the benefit of hope.

It is amazing to me how much better all the BE Programs got between 2003-2012. Except Syracuse. And Pitt.

 

[Excalibur]

I'm sorry but that is a stupid comment. Look at Alabama without Saban. Take Urban Meyer away from Florida and look what's happened. Miami hasn't been relevant since Johnson left.
For 10 years, Boise has been one of the winningest programs, and whenever they've been given the shot to play with the 'big boys' they've competed very well. Peterson has had tons of offers and he doesn't appear to be moving.
Alabama sucked before Saban and quite frankly, the country didn't seem to care. Miami sucks, and could be headed for the death penalty. Yet we still manage to get by. Texas has been out of the debate for a couple seasons and they've been pushed to the back-burner.
People want to watch good matchups. And if a good Boise team ranked #2 is playing a top ranked LSU, people are going to watch. I also bet a top 10 ranked Cincy playing a top 10 ranked RU will get some national attention as well.

You guys don't seem to get the importance of public perception. People will still care about Alabama if they aren't coached by Saban anymore. They were on the cover of SI in 2005 when they went 9-3 against a schedule with a god awful head coach. Why? Because they matter. If Boise or UCF goes 9-3, nobody is going to pay attention.

 

[Dann]

You guys don't seem to get the importance of public perception. People will still care about Alabama if they aren't coached by Saban anymore. They were on the cover of SI in 2005 when they went 9-3 against a ****ty schedule with a god awful head coach. Why? Because they matter. If Boise or UCF goes 9-3, nobody is going to pay attention.

u are selling dan tosh short. he will rock ucf to the college kids like no other.

 

[WestCoastHusky]

You guys don't seem to get the importance of public perception. People will still care about Alabama if they aren't coached by Saban anymore. They were on the cover of SI in 2005 when they went 9-3 against a ****ty schedule with a god awful head coach. Why? Because they matter. If Boise or UCF goes 9-3, nobody is going to pay attention.

UCF is starting to beat out bunch of traditional schools for recruiting now that they are in the BE. Look at some schools that offered to kids that committed to UCF so far.

3* Benjamin 3* Dinovo, 3* Reed, 3* Willis, 3* Hernly, 3* Holman, 3* Lowry, 3* Keller, 3* Killings, NR Berman, NR Evans​

Offers​

1 Alabama​

1 Arizona St​

1 Auburn​

1 Ball St​

1 Boston College​

3 Cincinnati​

2 Florida​

2 Florida St​

5 FIU​

1 Georgia​

1 Indiana​

1 Iowa St​

1 Kansas​

4 Kentucky​

1 La Lafayette ​

2 Louisville​

1 LSU​

2 Marshal​

1 Miami (FL)​

1 Michigan St.​

2 Minnesota​

2 Miss​

1 Miss St​

1 Missouri​

1 North Carolina​

2 NC St​

1 Notre Dame​

1 Ohio State​

1 Oklahoma​

1 Pitt​

1 Purdue​

1 Rutgers​

1 South Alabama​

1 South Carolina​

4 South Florida​

1 Tennessee​

1 UCLA​

1 USC​

1 UMass​

3 Vanderbilt​

2 Wake Forest​

1 Western Kentucky​

2 West Virginia​

1 Wisconsin​

3 FCS​

 

[pj]

It's going to be a tough conference! A lot of hungry programs, many in good recruiting territories.

 

[WestCoastHusky]

Brett McMurphy actually wrote something based on facts and figures today. He works for CBS though, not ESPN.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/brett-mcmurphy/19380435

 

[Carl Spackler]

Brett McMurphy actually wrote something based on facts and figures today. He works for CBS though, not ESPN.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/brett-mcmurphy/19380435

Sorry to be 'that guy', but the article you linked is dated June 19.

 

[B1GEast]

What has happend to the state of college sports, not just football due to all of this re-alignment has damaged college sports as a whole, rivalries forever gone, conferences scrambling to find any available replacement, and worst of all these horrible geographical foot prints just plain sucks.

It's now just the big 4 and the ACC not too far behind, this is college sports for now and the foreseeable future.

 

[pj]

What has happend to the state of college sports, not just football due to all of this re-alignment has damaged college sports as a whole, rivalries forever gone, conferences scrambling to find any available replacement, and worst of all these horrible geographical foot prints just plain sucks.

It's now just the big 4 and the ACC not too far behind, this is college sports for now and the foreseeable future.

Agree with the first part ... not so sure about the latter.

The "big 5", if that's what they are, leave too many important markets unserved. The Big East has a bunch of hungry programs. I think much like realignment has increased competition for UConn in the northeast (Temple, UMass, increased ACC presence), it's also increasing competition for the big conferences. Houston, SMU, TCU will poach in Texas; USF and UCF in Florida; Boise and SDSU out west. Meanwhile as budget stress increases the major conference teams will be tempted to rest on their laurels, and draw upon football money to fund other parts of the athletic programs and the university as a whole.

Technology, too, will change TV/media distribution and enable upstarts to find their markets. The Big Ten is going around the distribution channels with the Big Ten Network; others can do the same.

This will take some time to play out, but I don't think the equilibrium is going to be a small group of haves and a large group of have-nots.

 

[WestCoastHusky]

There is an online petition to boycott ESPN for its BE smear campaign starting today. UCONN fans should do our part and pass the link around:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/boycott-espn-for-its-smear-campaign-against-the/

Maybe this will finally wake up the BE office to do something.

 

[Dann]

UCF is starting to beat out bunch of traditional schools for recruiting now that they are in the BE. Look at some schools that offered to kids that committed to UCF so far.

3* Benjamin 3* Dinovo, 3* Reed, 3* Willis, 3* Hernly, 3* Holman, 3* Lowry, 3* Keller, 3* Killings, NR Berman, NR Evans​

Offers​

1 Alabama​

1 Arizona St​

1 Auburn​

1 Ball St​

1 Boston College​

3 Cincinnati​

2 Florida​

2 Florida St​

5 FIU​

1 Georgia​

1 Indiana​

1 Iowa St​

1 Kansas​

4 Kentucky​

1 La Lafayette ​

2 Louisville​

1 LSU​

2 Marshal​

1 Miami (FL)​

1 Michigan St.​

2 Minnesota​

2 Miss​

1 Miss St​

1 Missouri​

1 North Carolina​

2 NC St​

1 Notre Dame​

1 Ohio State​

1 Oklahoma​

1 Pitt​

1 Purdue​

1 Rutgers​

1 South Alabama​

1 South Carolina​

4 South Florida​

1 Tennessee​

1 UCLA​

1 USC​

1 UMass​

3 Vanderbilt​

2 Wake Forest​

1 Western Kentucky​

2 West Virginia​

1 Wisconsin​

3 FCS​

UCF is not BE yet. so they can get kids that have qualifying issues still. kids in that spot know they can slip in and wala they can play in the big east right away without having to do a prep or juco. its a quick cheat basically. your going to see smu/bsu/uh/ucf/sdsu have great classes this year compared to where they were. its not the league bump, its the slip in. kids can enroll early or over summer and be considered pre 2013 season(mwc/cusa etc...). next year (2014) class will be the year to watch, if schools are doing this again, now there moving on up....

 

[Marty Jackson]

You guys don't seem to get the importance of public perception. People will still care about Alabama if they aren't coached by Saban anymore. They were on the cover of SI in 2005 when they went 9-3 against a ****ty schedule with a god awful head coach. Why? Because they matter. If Boise or UCF goes 9-3, nobody is going to pay attention.

I am too aware of public perception. Despite it, I'm still a BE fan.
What don't seem to get is that public perception is a fallacy fed to you by Espn which has a financial interest in making you think cfb can't survive without certain programs.
Five years ago Florida was the center of the universe. Didn't hear too much about them last year. Haven't heard about tenn either. If you're a fan of a school you'll follow them. What will get the national attention is when you have a number in front of your schools name on the scoreboard.
Ironically the cover you are talking about refers to bama coming back because they were unbeaten and had just beaten Florida. That hadn't been relevant for 12 Years up to that point. And it wasn't until Saban took over that anyone cared about bama outside of bama since 1994.
You may have proved my point. Rutgers goes unbeaten including a win over Arkansas and you'll see them discussed in the national media. A few years ago when the BE had one of their best seasons with Rutgers, UofL and WVU all gunning for a unbeaten season. You probably forgot all the coverage that year as the BE finished with 3 teams in the top 12.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Why is it that every time you agree with something I post, I feel dirty?

Don't like mingling with the other lawyers? It's a large and distinguished group. Like it or not, I'm a solid UConn fan and alumn. I just can't bring myself to be a Big East fan as currently constructed. Nor do I accept that what's good for UConn and what's good for the NBE are the same thing.

 

[Excalibur]

I am too aware of public perception. Despite it, I'm still a BE fan.
What don't seem to get is that public perception is a fallacy fed to you by Espn which has a financial interest in making you think cfb can't survive without certain programs.
Five years ago Florida was the center of the universe. Didn't hear too much about them last year. Haven't heard about tenn either. If you're a fan of a school you'll follow them. What will get the national attention is when you have a number in front of your schools name on the scoreboard.
Ironically the cover you are talking about refers to bama coming back because they were unbeaten and had just beaten Florida. That hadn't been relevant for 12 Years up to that point. And it wasn't until Saban took over that anyone cared about bama outside of bama since 1994.
You may have proved my point. Rutgers goes unbeaten including a win over Arkansas and you'll see them discussed in the national media. A few years ago when the BE had one of their best seasons with Rutgers, UofL and WVU all gunning for a unbeaten season. You probably forgot all the coverage that year as the BE finished with 3 teams in the top 12.

Sure, the Big East gets three teams in the top 12, and they will be relevant nationally. The other conferences are relevant regardless of how many teams are in the top 12. FL and TN are still national stories even in down years, if you're paying attention to national media and not just local papers and this site.

 

[huskymedic]

Just sharing for those who don't have time to read multiple outlets:

(Not Exactly) Breaking News: ESPN Still Hates The Big East

by Dustin Rensink • Jul 11, 2012 7:33 AM CDT

When the Big East Conference turned down ESPN's TV contract offer in 2011, opting instead to take its chances on the open market, questions could immediately have been raised about whether or not the network would choose to retaliate in the way it covered the conference. Granted, the Big East has left itself open to plenty of criticism, but the so-called "Worldwide Leader in Sports" has kept its distance from journalistic integrity in its quest to lead the smear campaign.

First came Boston College's athletics director outright admitting that ESPN encouraged them to raid the Big East for Pittsburgh and Syracuse. (Then quickly pulling a "Wait, was that too honest? Just kidding, I didn't mean it!" backpedal move soon after.)

With Big East TV negotiations set to begin in the next two months, ESPN has dialed up the heat against its least-favorite conference.

Even ESPN's own response to the Boston College fiasco was less than reassuring. Burke Magnus, ESPN's vice president for college sports programming, was quoted as saying, "We haven't been advocates of [conference realignment] because our business interests are best served by stability." Not only is this laughable, given how many eyeballs ESPN attracts by running conference realignment stories, Magnus' own statement gives him away, as it admits that ESPN's decision on whether or not to interfere in the news its supposed to be covering with integrity will hinge solely on its own business interests.
Along those lines, earlier this month came the sarcastic, vitriolic attack on incoming Big East member Temple from ESPN's Big East beat writer. And while other sports news outlets have pointed out how the new NCAA football playoff gives teams like those in the Big East access to a potential national championship game for the first time ever, ESPN quickly shot down any such notions, calling playoff access for the Big East "potentially...a big issue" and using the belittling, exclusionary "Big 5 conference" moniker. Lest anybody recall how high teams like Boise State, Houston, Cincinnati and South Florida have climbed in the rankings in recent years.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that the ACC has a tie-in with the Orange Bowl, while the Big East does not have a tie-in with any of the future power six bowls. I also understand that with teams like Miami, Florida State and Virginia Tech, the ACC has more "name " programs than the Big East. But what (should) count just as much is the fact that the Big East (both its past and current membership) has outplayed the ACC over any reasonable recent timeframe, using basically any metric.

On Monday, ESPN's College Football Live hosted Big East Interim Commissioner Joe Bailey to talk about the future of the conference. Oh good, so maybe the Big East will get a fair shake, at least for a day? Not exactly.

ESPN intro-ed the segment with a title screen reading "Big Least?". (Journalism: you can say anything you want, as long as you end it with question mark.) ESPN host Joe Tessitore ended the segment with a rambling psuedo-question which accomplished little more than to use the term "Power Five Conferences" multiple times. During his spiel, Tessitore also audibly laughed while discussing the "luxury" of BCS automatic-qualification that the Big East used to have.

Once again, ESPN would like you to politely forget that the Big East has been the better conference, and currently features the better teams, when compared to the "Power" ACC. Because the ACC signed its ESPN contract like an obedient little conference should.

ESPN: Where journalistic integrity goes to die.

 

[huskyjawz]

Just sharing for those who don't have time to read multiple outlets:

(Not Exactly) Breaking News: ESPN Still Hates The Big East

by Dustin Rensink • Jul 11, 2012 7:33 AM CDT

When the Big East Conference turned down ESPN's TV contract offer in 2011, opting instead to take its chances on the open market, questions could immediately have been raised about whether or not the network would choose to retaliate in the way it covered the conference. Granted, the Big East has left itself open to plenty of criticism, but the so-called "Worldwide Leader in Sports" has kept its distance from journalistic integrity in its quest to lead the smear campaign.

First came Boston College's athletics director outright admitting that ESPN encouraged them to raid the Big East for Pittsburgh and Syracuse. (Then quickly pulling a "Wait, was that too honest? Just kidding, I didn't mean it!" backpedal move soon after.)

With Big East TV negotiations set to begin in the next two months, ESPN has dialed up the heat against its least-favorite conference.

Even ESPN's own response to the Boston College fiasco was less than reassuring. Burke Magnus, ESPN's vice president for college sports programming, was quoted as saying, "We haven't been advocates of [conference realignment] because our business interests are best served by stability." Not only is this laughable, given how many eyeballs ESPN attracts by running conference realignment stories, Magnus' own statement gives him away, as it admits that ESPN's decision on whether or not to interfere in the news its supposed to be covering with integrity will hinge solely on its own business interests.
Along those lines, earlier this month came the sarcastic, vitriolic attack on incoming Big East member Temple from ESPN's Big East beat writer. And while other sports news outlets have pointed out how the new NCAA football playoff gives teams like those in the Big East access to a potential national championship game for the first time ever, ESPN quickly shot down any such notions, calling playoff access for the Big East "potentially...a big issue" and using the belittling, exclusionary "Big 5 conference" moniker. Lest anybody recall how high teams like Boise State, Houston, Cincinnati and South Florida have climbed in the rankings in recent years.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that the ACC has a tie-in with the Orange Bowl, while the Big East does not have a tie-in with any of the future power six bowls. I also understand that with teams like Miami, Florida State and Virginia Tech, the ACC has more "name " programs than the Big East. But what (should) count just as much is the fact that the Big East (both its past and current membership) has outplayed the ACC over any reasonable recent timeframe, using basically any metric.

On Monday, ESPN's College Football Live hosted Big East Interim Commissioner Joe Bailey to talk about the future of the conference. Oh good, so maybe the Big East will get a fair shake, at least for a day? Not exactly.

ESPN intro-ed the segment with a title screen reading "Big Least?". (Journalism: you can say anything you want, as long as you end it with question mark.) ESPN host Joe Tessitore ended the segment with a rambling psuedo-question which accomplished little more than to use the term "Power Five Conferences" multiple times. During his spiel, Tessitore also audibly laughed while discussing the "luxury" of BCS automatic-qualification that the Big East used to have.

Once again, ESPN would like you to politely forget that the Big East has been the better conference, and currently features the better teams, when compared to the "Power" ACC. Because the ACC signed its ESPN contract like an obedient little conference should.

ESPN: Where journalistic integrity goes to die.

Wasn't the Big East bashing on ESPN just as bad before their offer was rejected?

 

[Waquoit]

The Big East bashing is getting comical. Even their Horse Racing columnist is getting in on the action. Out of nowhere we get this in a list of things a horse player should be on the lookout for:

5. Read bad handicappers. We are in something of a national handicapping crisis. Self-proclaimed experts are spraying around losers like the Big East does in football.

 

[uc1974]

With some exceptions, the best and brightest of us do not become talking sports heads, either on channel 3 or ESPN. Most of the clowns on ESPN remind me of my high school class--not a lot of high level academics and, surprisingly, not a lot of thought and individual analysis when it comes to sports. People like Joe Tessitore just aren't very intelligent and will do whatever they are told to do by management or pander to management in order to keep employment. If Joe loses his job, what the hell else can he do? I only watch ESPN when a game is on that I want to watch. Any of you that can stomach most of the other drivel (people like Jay Bilas excepted) have a stronger digestion than I do.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

The Big East bashing is getting comical. Even their Horse Racing columnist is getting in on the action. Out of nowhere we get this in a list of things a horse player should be on the lookout for:

5. Read bad handicappers. We are in something of a national handicapping crisis. Self-proclaimed experts are spraying around losers like the Big East does in football.

The funny thing is, most of the target audience is going to have no idea what this reference means. It just goes to show ESPN is attacking the Big East, and will do whatever it takes to undermine the league. It's like they are paying their writers per attack.

 

[CL82]

@huskymedic

ESPN: Where journalistic integrity goes to die.

Nice. I may make that a signature line once football season starts.