I apologize for the idiotic post. Those who know my posting tendencies know this was out of character for me. My fiancé and I are planning a wedding...super stressed with things...I should know better than to let something on ESPN get me angry. anyway, carry on .
Because we are named a leader for a top prospect, that makes it a OSU hate thread? I don't see where you are coming from.
apparently this is getting extremely misinterpreted. Im beyond happy OSU is the leader!
Im angry that espn continues to consider the SEC as a school and not a conference. It would be like saying the B1G is leading for him instead of saying Ohio State.
What i'm trying to say is...just name the SEC schools he is considering instead of making it seem like teams like vandy, UK and others at the Botton of the SEC are all equal.
where in what i said above did i ever say anything bad about OSU to make you think this is an OSU hate thread? Guess my title isn't clear enough...oh well, it's not changing.
Maybe he's saying OSU is equal to the entire SEC? Maybe he loves Ohio State and you sir are terribly mistaken...
“There’s one thing I have learned through all my adventures and conquests - it’s that some people are just wired for success. I had no choice when it came to being great - I just am great.” – Kenny Powers
well played
If anything, it appears to me, that the writer was lazy and nothing more. My guess is that instead of listing all the SEC schools in pursuit, he just lumped them all together, which also implies that OSU is the only non-SEC school who has a shot.
Those who stay will be CHAMPIONS!
~Bo Schembechler
I find a lot of the issues we in the B1G, and what seems like mostly OSU, with ESPN and their stories is that they are lazy. Either the titles are absolutely misleading or the story itself is half-ass written. I find it very funny that ESPN tries so hard to be the best on TV and in reporting, they practically buy out all of their major competitors or out bid for the services, but yet they are absolutely failing on their website. You would think that there would be some type of compliance or approval status for the titles to the stories or content they put up there. Yet we know for a fact that a website employee was fired because he put the title "Lin may have a CHINK in the armor"(I don't think it was exactly that but just as blatant). How does that get by management or supervisors without thought?
I sometimes do seeth in hate towards some of the horrible reporting ESPN does and for the most part my despise is specifically towards the continued employment of Mark Mays, but I do know that this type of stuff happens from lazy work and bad chain of approval.
Newspaper reporters have to have an editor to get their stories approved. Why aren't these web writers not held to the same level of scrutiny. It is absolutely lazy work and it makes us all feel like its biased work, which might not be accurate but still looks that way.
I've got a recommendation, if you hate ESPN so much how about you quit going to it's website or watching sportscenter to actually put action to your negative feelings about the organization....oh wait you will never ever do that.
Agreed. I have done just that. I do not watch ESPN at all unless its a live sporting event that I am interested in. Even then, if it's Dicky V and/or Mike Tirico and/or some of the other horrible attention seekers they have on the broadcast, I turn those off as well. I completely avoid their website at all costs as to not encourage them with page views. About the only thing related to ESPN I still frequent is Colin Cowherd's radio show.
It's not that I have a strong hatred for them it's just the way they cover and sensationalize. They make mountains out of molehills and steer opinions towards their own intra agendas. Rightfully so, but they have too much sway when they hold ownership in the very things they "report" on.
I found that the original post made a very legitimate point. The conglomoration of "SEC University" in the media is sickening, although I'm not sure that's what Shanker meant in his post. Needless to say, I'm not sure the attacks on the OP are incredibly necessary: it was a valid point, albeit misconstrued.