Don't know him...spend almost all my time here, but every now and then when I've read all the threads here I'll pop over there or Bucknuts to see if there's any new info there (there rarely is), and just happened to see Buck68 today.
I found the guy kind of entertaining and interesting, and thought some people might appreciate a little blast-from-the-past. I sure hope this doesn't turn into a bashing thread...not my intent! lol
There wasn't one thing wrong about what you said...it's a totally objective and reasonable and literally impossible-to-deny statement. There are a number of mentally-weak downvoters on this board whose poor feelings get hurt by reality.
There's no incentive to beef up SOS now...play cupcakes so you win all your games and you're in. For example, if we hadn't played Oklahoma and lost in 2017, we likely would have gotten in.
The OOC is already as meaningless as possible...play 3-4 cupcakes and try to remain undefeated so you can make the CFP. If autobids were used for conference champs, teams could afford to schedule amazing OOC games, knowing that a loss wouldn't kill their season. And if the playoff was moved to 8 teams (5 champs, 1 group-of-5, 2 at-large), the strength go the OOC schedule could help a team get one of those two at-larges if they don't win their conference.
Problem is, the CFP final four is just another poll.
You know, it's not really a compliment to us to when Michigan fans say that we (OSU) really hate them and think about the game all year long, but they don't really feel the same way and "it's just another game" to them. That's just a pompous and condescending way of saying we constantly think about them while they barely think about us at all. And it's their latest excuse for why we keep beating them. Very similar to when a team loses in a bowl game and says "they didn't really want to be there". I mean, they're totally full of shit about all of this, but that's what they're hinting at when they say things like this.
I hear ya. My point was not that they never cover us at all. My point was that they've covered us differently than the way they cover Alabama, Clemson, LSU, Georgia, et al, over the years. If you disagree, OK. But if you agree with that point, then the next question is whether this media bias can alter the perceptions of the committee enough to hurt OSU in a close vote for a playoff spot. That is my only concern here. I don't particularly care about the highlights themselves...I watched the whole game, so I didn't need highlights. I'm concerned about the decision-making process that led to showing highlights in the primetime window for all ranked teams except one...the #6 Buckeyes looking potent in a Big Ten conference road game. Because if that was a conscious purposeful decision (and it must have been, because they showed everyone except us, including games that were not a big story in any way), then I wonder what is really going on behind the scenes.
Six, I think I explained myself pretty clearly here. As a football fan, I don't care all that much that OSU is making more money off of TV rights than some team in the SEC is. I care that the bias that ESPN shows the SEC will affect the perceptions of the committee voters if there is a close vote for the 4th spot in the playoffs (as there has been 4 of the 5 years). It's pretty simple to understand. You sound like a Michigan fan who, when they lose, says "Well, whatever, our SAT scores are higher than yours". If we get left out of then playoffs in a controversial decision, are you going to yell "Well, whatever, we make more money than you do"? Who gives a rat's ass? I already noted that, in the grand scheme of things, that money will do plenty of good for the university. But in this discussion, on this website, in this forum, it would be better for the football team if ESPN pumped us up to the committee and the general public the same way they do the SEC.
Stx, nobody is saying it wasn't the right move financially. But it may have led to some backlash in media coverage for us. This backlash could, in a close vote (which is the norm for the CFP), lead to it being harder for OSU to be picked for the playoff. Who knows? But as a football fan, I'm obviously more concerned about what affects the team than I am whether we are winning the war financially. That may be more important in the grand scheme of things, but not on this website in this forum.
Look, I don't really disagree that ESPN has a bigger financial stake in the SEC or that there isn't any bias at play in terms of how they talk about the SEC.
This is all I'm saying, Cincy. I appreciate that you see that as a possibility. I absolutely agree that the blowout losses to average teams the last couple years were a huge problem.
I think this is right on
I'm a teacher myself. And I do avoid ESPN. But in this case, I happened to be watching a game that I wanted to see. This is my first ever post about it. I find the refusal to look at the situation objectively and come up with an answer equally strange. And if it's because you truly don't care, that's great...then I find the need to click on this thread at all confusing.
Typical response. The question was fair...OSU was not featured on either of the primetime halftime shows, while every other ranked team was. Earthoid brought up later in this thread that they couldn't be found on ESPN's website, while tons of other game stories could. If you're OK with this, that's great.
This is my stance, too, GTH. And it matters, because college football is the one sport stupid enough to choose their playoff participants through a vote. Every other sport at every level has teams that win their conference/division/whatever make the playoffs, but not this one. So perception matters, because it's a vote based on human opinions. And ESPN has the power to influence perceptions. Already there have been 4 controversies out of the 5 playoff years. Ironically, all 4 involved Ohio State (getting in over TCU/Baylor and Penn St, left out for Bama and Oklahoma). I have no issue with those 4 decisions. But it is likely there will be a close vote again this year, and in a situation like that, the perceptions of the voters on the committee definitely matter.
I saw the same thing with the Cavs against the Warriors in 2015 and 2016. For whatever reason (market size?), ESPN picked Golden State as their team. So in 2015, when the Cavs were missing TWO All-Stars for the ENTIRE series, and yet had a 2-1 lead (with the loss being in OT, so almost 3-0), you never heard that "Golden State beats short-handed Cavs", or "Cavs would have won with their two All-Stars, because LeBron almost won it all by himself". All you heard was "Golden State overpowers Cavs". Yet in 2016, when the Cavs were healthy and did beat them, all you heard was that Golden State had ONE All-Star miss ONE game, and that's why the Cavs won lol Never mind that the Cavs also had one All-Star (Love) miss one game that series (which the Cavs lost), which equalizes things. And never mind that Draymond did play 6 of the 7 games, and the Warriors went 3-3 in those 6 games, meaning the Cavs were just as likely to win when Draymond played as the Warriors were. Those facts didn't matter...all that mattered was the storyline. And to this day, Joe Public believes that storyline, because ESPN told him what to believe. Brainwashing works, people.
I'm not sure if you're calling me stupid here for creating this thread, but I can promise you I'm not. I simply asked a question that I have yet to receive an answer to...how can the two primetime games (Florida/Kentucky and Clemson/Syracuse) have halftime highlight shows that highlight every ranked team except the #6 team in the country? I'll keep waiting for an answer.
I'm not offended, Navy. I'm asking a simple question looking for a logical answer. Tons of other games with highly-ranked teams in uninteresting matchups received mentions, but not us. Why is that? So far, all the "answers" from people with your viewpoint have been sarcastic and/or condescending. I said before, I'm not an angry fan...but I am looking for answers. See Earthoid's examples in his reply to you. This has been consistent for years. Are you saying that you actually believe their coverage of Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Clemson, etc...has been exactly the same as their coverage of Ohio State? I would disagree.
Hey, I'm glad to hear that, Navy. But I know what I've seen and heard over the years on that station, and I haven't imagined it.
I understand what you are saying, Cincy. But what if ESPN has done the market research and concluded that a good Ohio State, when playing on Fox, will draw enough viewers away from ESPN that it actually benefits ESPN if Ohio State is perceived as "not that interesting to watch", even though a few of Ohio State's games might actually be on ESPN/ABC each year? Maybe ESPN feels that if Ohio State is considered "awesome" and "interesting", so many people will tune into Fox games and the BTN Network to learn more about Ohio State that it will cost ESPN ratings/money in the long run. So they do what they can to make sure that Ohio State is not portrayed very positively on their incredibly ubiquitous media platform, hoping to ensure that less people nationwide will think about them and want to watch them. Basically, ESPN already knows that people will watch whatever is on ESPN almost automatically...so when the Buckeyes are on their channel, ratings are already guaranteed. But they'd like to keep ratings down, if they can, when the Buckeyes are on Fox or BTN. Just spitballing here.
Trust me, I don't watch ESPN unless there's a game I really want to watch, and I'm interested in the Florida/Kentucky game. My mistake for watching halftime, I admit lol
Exactly, Hnyg8...and that response is something that needs to be recognized. There are three kinds of people in the world...conspiracy theorists who see problems everywhere, sunshine-pumpers who refuse to see problems anywhere, and realists who live in objective reality. I consider myself (as a scientist) firmly in the third group. It simply cannot be denied that ESPN covers Alabama, Georgia, etc... very differently than they cover OSU. That has been a fact for years. Just because I'm an OSU fan doesn't make me "wrong" or a "homer". What I want to know is "why". If the answer is the obvious one, that they own the SEC Network, then I would like the ESPN sunshine-pumpers to acknowledge that. If there's a different reason, please share it. But it's happening, and has for quite a while.
I hear ya...but Alabama and Georgia did the same, Georgia to a terrible opponent not worth mentioning.
That's good to hear. I'm not an angry fan...I am simply truly curious how some of these things seem to happen rather regularly. When people get all hot and bothered about ESPN, these are the kinds of things that they've seen over the years that bother them.
I can tell. But I'm looking for an actual answer. It does not make sense to not show highlights for the #6 team in the country when you show everyone else's. If you can't answer it, join the club...neither can I.