|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 218
2nd String
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 218 |
It seems every week, there is very little to nonexistent talk about the Browns regardless of who they play and what they do.
Even when talking about the 5 Starting Rookie QB's, they will show clips for all of them except Weeden.
When picking winners of their match ups, I remember one of them saying, "come on, it's the Browns".
When reviewing the TQBR on ESPN, even on a good day, Weeden can't seem to get a break. It appears they take into account "clutch" way too much.
Anyone else seen this kind of non-attention?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
Win games, then you'll get attention.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,936
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,936 |
Well, when we start winning games, we'll start getting more love. I don't think anybody "hates" the Browns. Most probably feel sorry for us Browns fans. I think the media would love to tell the story of a truly resurgent Browns team. I'm hoping to see that story in my lifetime! 
[color:"white"]"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
-- Mark Twain [/color]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858 |
Somebody brings this up every years. until we win, they won't give us any love at all.. if we win, they'll be on our bandwagon so fast it will make your head spin.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
No they don't hate us... the Browns are irrelevant. Yes, when mentioning the 5 rooks Weeden gets the least discussion, Tannehill gets marginally more... the big 2 get most of it and Wilson gets some because he was a surprise.
ESPN doesn't watch the Browns with orange colored glasses on gauging moral victories, they know we almost always lose a lot more games than we win and until that changes they will not talk about us.
I will say this though, when they have talked about us, I think their assessment has been pretty accurate....
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
ESPN loves ratings. Fantasy football drives much of the ratings for the NFL (outside a fan's market at least).
What Browns player starts for a majority of fantasy football teams? Trent Richardson (maybe), Dawson (maybe), and our defense (likely under 50% as I don't think that people trust them yet).
So, without the flashy fantasy players on the team, the small market size, and the constant losing, ESPN isn't going to give us much airtime.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
Colin Cowherd rarely brings up good points, but a few weeks ago, he was talking about the perceived bias at ESPN.
Like he said ... "ESPN needs the Yankees and Red Sox. The Yankees and Red Sox don't need ESPN."
It's a business, they have to talk about what gets airtime, what makes money.
That isn't the Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
It's a business, they have to talk about what gets airtime, what makes money
it's a larger issue, but that is the problem with journalism these days. instead of reporting the facts, news, they are all just worried about the ratings. i get it, it makes sense for them, but it can stink for us at times.
i don't slight espn as much for it as places like CNN though because their charter from the beginning has been as "entertainment sports" not "sports journalism"
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,882
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,882 |
The NFL Network has a show called NFL 32 (or something to that effect). They supposedly talk about all 32 teams... If by 32 they mean the Cowboys, Giants, Ravens, 49'ers, Patriots, and Packers. I just wish there was one show on one of the networks that would actually talk about the bottom teams. Kind of a '.500 and under', 'what needs to happen to fix the team', or 'why the teams are losing' breakdown show. Instead we get laughed at openly or just completely dismissed. I think there is a market for a show like this. A bunch of markets actually. Like Cleveland, New Orleans, Miami, Jacksonville, Carolina...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,101
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,101 |
I have noticed in the past while watching high lites from games on ESPN when it gets to the Browns game even if the score where for instance Rams 24 Browns 14 they will show the Rams TDs and then proceed right to the end game stats.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
How quickly we forget that they couldn't stop talking about us after the '07 season.
One analyst even picked the Browns to be in the Super Bowl.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
I just wish there was one show on one of the networks that would actually talk about the bottom teams. Kind of a '.500 and under', 'what needs to happen to fix the team', or 'why the teams are losing' breakdown show. Instead we get laughed at openly or just completely dismissed. I think there is a market for a show like this. A bunch of markets actually. Like Cleveland, New Orleans, Miami, Jacksonville, Carolina...
They play to the big markets. That's why Dallas, who hasn't done squat for many years, is always on the air and in the news and a super bowl "contender". They'll also play to the teams with super stars, Brady, both Mannings (though one is in New York), Drew Brees, etc. Then they'll play to smaller market winners.
Cleveland doesn't have enough people for ESPN to spend a lot of air time on them. We don't have a superstar yet and we haven't been winning. That's a formula for boring updates received by few people.
Our only chance is to win a lot of games coupled with Richardson or someone else becoming elite so that the nation is interested.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,882
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,882 |
I'm not talking about a three hour breakdown show. Just an hour a week breaking down film on the under .500 teams. Talking about why they lose. What they need to do better. Yes Dallas has a bigger market. But combine the markets of the under .500 clubs and I have to believe there'd be viewers.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,732
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,732 |
Dispite what some on this board believe, respect is earned, not given. So far, we haven't earned it.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 716
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 716 |
The Browns are getting blasted more than I have ever heard as of late.
Was listening to Sirius NFL Radio....and a caller called in saying the Browns somehow always find a way to beat the Super Bowl Champions...they have done it like 5 years in a row (something like that)
Anyway..the announcers just went off....said Cleveland is not a good team...they have been built wrong, and poorly......You normally hear them be a little more "walk the line"...but they were just flat out saying worst team and not getting better stuff.
I was surprised because I actually felt they have looked on the right track this year. Weeden is having your typical rookie ups and downs...the defense has been playing tough.....and Richardson is a star in the making....IMO if the WR's just catch a few more balls the Browns have 1 or 2 wins at this point.
I don't know if I would call it a bias....but something is up...because I don't think I have ever heard those guys just so flat out negative....They usually at least try to give the teams in the bottom of the rankings some "hope"
HACK
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/SteelHack/hackfun.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
they pick one or two teams every year to pile on though (last year it was Indy until TB went into meltdown mode). right now we are that team because we are 1 of 2 '0' win teams and NO has already been piled on from the bounty stuff.
if we manage to win a couple games and KC continues on their path of getting blown out each week (or starting Quinn as Romeo suggested may happen), then KC will become the new whipping boy.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
The Browns are getting blasted more than I have ever heard as of late.
Was listening to Sirius NFL Radio....and a caller called in saying the Browns somehow always find a way to beat the Super Bowl Champions...they have done it like 5 years in a row (something like that)
Anyway..the announcers just went off....said Cleveland is not a good team...they have been built wrong, and poorly......You normally hear them be a little more "walk the line"...but they were just flat out saying worst team and not getting better stuff.
That broadcaster may have watched some of the Ravens game and that's about it. The vast majority of these national people don't watch 16 games a week and I'm sure that the Browns are near the bottom of the list to watch unless there is a compelling reason (like being on national television)...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,165
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,165 |
Quote:
The Browns are getting blasted more than I have ever heard as of late.
Was listening to Sirius NFL Radio....and a caller called in saying the Browns somehow always find a way to beat the Super Bowl Champions...they have done it like 5 years in a row (something like that)
Anyway..the announcers just went off....said Cleveland is not a good team...they have been built wrong, and poorly......You normally hear them be a little more "walk the line"...but they were just flat out saying worst team and not getting better stuff.
I was surprised because I actually felt they have looked on the right track this year. Weeden is having your typical rookie ups and downs...the defense has been playing tough.....and Richardson is a star in the making....IMO if the WR's just catch a few more balls the Browns have 1 or 2 wins at this point.
I don't know if I would call it a bias....but something is up...because I don't think I have ever heard those guys just so flat out negative....They usually at least try to give the teams in the bottom of the rankings some "hope"
HACK
Why does anyone put ANY stock in what media personalities say, anyway?
I mean, you're wanting people with Broadcasting degrees (or Basket Weaving degrees) to feed you compliments on your football team.... WHY??
People put WAAAAYY too much value on what people in the media have to say. With the possible exception of guys that actually played the sport at the pro level, the people on TV and radio have absolutely no more of a clue than anyone on this site, or ANY message board. The sooner people realize that, the sooner you'll realize that you don't need them to validate you.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Pretty simple to me:
TV Market Population x Winning Percentage = ESPN Coverage
0 x any other number = 0
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 716
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 716 |
Quote:
Quote:
The Browns are getting blasted more than I have ever heard as of late.
Was listening to Sirius NFL Radio....and a caller called in saying the Browns somehow always find a way to beat the Super Bowl Champions...they have done it like 5 years in a row (something like that)
Anyway..the announcers just went off....said Cleveland is not a good team...they have been built wrong, and poorly......You normally hear them be a little more "walk the line"...but they were just flat out saying worst team and not getting better stuff.
I was surprised because I actually felt they have looked on the right track this year. Weeden is having your typical rookie ups and downs...the defense has been playing tough.....and Richardson is a star in the making....IMO if the WR's just catch a few more balls the Browns have 1 or 2 wins at this point.
I don't know if I would call it a bias....but something is up...because I don't think I have ever heard those guys just so flat out negative....They usually at least try to give the teams in the bottom of the rankings some "hope"
HACK
Why does anyone put ANY stock in what media personalities say, anyway?
I mean, you're wanting people with Broadcasting degrees (or Basket Weaving degrees) to feed you compliments on your football team.... WHY??
People put WAAAAYY too much value on what people in the media have to say. With the possible exception of guys that actually played the sport at the pro level, the people on TV and radio have absolutely no more of a clue than anyone on this site, or ANY message board. The sooner people realize that, the sooner you'll realize that you don't need them to validate you.
Sirius NFL Radio have at least one guy...if not two that are former players.....I think it was either Rich Gannon or Pat Kirwan that really went off...I don't remember.
HACK
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234 |
Quote:
Does ESPN hate the Cleveland Browns?
They think if they hate on everything Cleveland, LeBron will love them more. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,276
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,276 |
Something I've noticed is that every team that was awful last season in the NFL has improved considerably.
The Colts were terrible with Painter. Gabbert was awful in Jax. No more Orton / Tebow in Denver. RG3 is doing well for Washington. Ponder stepping it up in Minnesota.
The worst team in the league this year wouldn't crack the bottom 5 last season. The Browns are far better than the bottom 8 teams last year.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
I mean can we really blame them?
We are the only winless team in the league ... well, except for the Saints but that just feels strange. Almost unbelievable.
We, as fans, see hope and wish the talking heads would see the bigger picture like we do ... young team, building for the future, superstar RB, possible franchise QB, yada, yada, yada ...But we have emotion tied into it.
Two things ... we can get better but it's how much better can we get relative to the rest of the league because the rest of the league is trying to get better too AND maybe our hope is clouding the picture. Maybe there is no bigger picture for us. Maybe these objective, non-biased guys look at our team and maybe they're right.
The evidence is certainly stacked in their favor. We are unanimous #32 ranked football team in every rankings that came out today.
Maybe these guys are right. We are winless...0 wins ... every team has injuries ... EVERY team ... every team has weaknesses ... EVERY team ... even the Jacksonvilles and St. Louis has found a way to win.
It all starts with winning. I would sure like to see us get one this Sunday.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
The evidence is certainly stacked in their favor. We are unanimous #32 ranked football team in every rankings that came out today.
And ESPN has NO at #28, above 3 teams with a win, so obviously, number of wins doesn't matter.
I would argue that we have played consistently better than other teams, and due to who we've played, and missing a few plays here, we're better than almost all of the 1 win teams, and maybe a few 2 win teams.
Which is why I hope we can stay the course, Am I big on Shurmur? Not really. But I think we are close, regardless of who the coach is.
Last edited by OSGuy; 10/02/12 03:56 PM.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Maybe there is no bigger picture for us. Maybe these objective, non-biased guys look at our team and maybe they're right.
or maybe they don't really look at our team. Think about it...
Why were we in the Philly game? It wasn't us, it was because the Eagles tried hard to implode... had little to do with us.
Why were we in the Bengals game? Because Dalton made a mistake and allowed DQ to return a pass for a TD. If not for that, they were going to run away with it.
Why were we in the Bills game? Because Spiller got hurt early. If not for that, we were toast.
Why were we in the Ravens game? Because they were tired, 4 games in 18 days, blahblahblah.. If not for that, they would have killed us.
That is largely the opinion of many in the national media and the media of those other teams... the Browns didn't do ANYTHING to be in those games really... we were only in them because of some excuse surrounding the other team's play. And until we win and win CONSISTENTLY, that is going to be how it is... we will get no credit for being a team on the rise, we will just be losers who get close once in a while because other teams screw up....
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
So what's the difference between 4 games in 18 days, and 4 games in 19 days?
Completely ignoring the fact we had to travel TO Baltimore for TNF...
I love built in excuses.
Last edited by OSGuy; 10/02/12 04:34 PM.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
All I'm saying is they could be right.
That's a least a possibility. Maybe the Eagles played down to us. Maybe the Bills score 50 if Spiller doesn't get hurt. Maybe the Ravens were tired and spent emotionally.
It all could be true.
I'm not saying I believe that, but if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, then it's a duck. If it plays like a winless team, it's a winless team.
And I'm not trying to be all negativity nancy here. I actually believe in the direction we are going, but the bottom line is we are winless. That makes us the worst team in the league. 32 out of 32. We are extreme, all the way at one end of the curve. That sucks. I think it's just has hard to be 4-0 as it is to be 0-4. Kind of defies the law of averages.
But the Cleveland Browns have been defying the law of averages for years.
I love this team. But damn, losing sucks.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
So what's the difference between 4 games in 18 days, and 4 games in 19 days?
Completely ignoring the fact we had to travel TO Baltimore for TNF...
I love built in excuses.
Which is my point, they gloss over our injuries and Haden and Taylor being out while blaming another teams performance on injuries, they gloss over our schedule to excuse another teams schedule.... they aren't LOOKING for the things we are doing well, they are looking for the things other teams are doing poorly to allow us to even be in these games.
I think the announcers who have called our games have done a pretty good job of highlighting our youth and inexperience as well as the players we are missing and most have seemed genuinely impressed with our play... which is why I contend that those in the national media aren't really watching, they are looking at the final score and the stat line then trying to figure out what the other team did to allow it to be so close..
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 293
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 293 |
Our games have been against Philly in a close one (got attention), the Bengals (Who honestly cares), the Bills (see last game), and the Ravens (Thursday night game where they talked about it for a day).
Not quite sure what you want, we're 0-4.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
When we win games, we'll be darlings.
Until then... who cares?
I'm not very interested in bad teams I don't care about. Most people aren't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Yup.. you know who makes news and gets talked about?
Good teams.
Teams that were predicted to be good but are bad.
Teams that were predicted to be bad but are good.
Teams that were predicted to be bad and actually are bad don't get talked about... until draft time.... we can harp on how we have improved and how young we are and how we've been in every game, but in the end, we are 0-4
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223 |
Quote:
Win games, then you'll get attention.
Yeah...I mean, what do we expect? We suck year in and year out. Why would they want to focus on them?
![[Linked Image from pic18.picturetrail.com]](http://pic18.picturetrail.com/VOL905/3216203/6567769/349897772.jpg) "The Browns' defense is kicking mucho dupa."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
The Browns are getting blasted more than I have ever heard as of late.
Was listening to Sirius NFL Radio....and a caller called in saying the Browns somehow always find a way to beat the Super Bowl Champions...they have done it like 5 years in a row (something like that)
Anyway..the announcers just went off....said Cleveland is not a good team...they have been built wrong, and poorly......You normally hear them be a little more "walk the line"...but they were just flat out saying worst team and not getting better stuff.
I was surprised because I actually felt they have looked on the right track this year. Weeden is having your typical rookie ups and downs...the defense has been playing tough.....and Richardson is a star in the making....IMO if the WR's just catch a few more balls the Browns have 1 or 2 wins at this point.
I don't know if I would call it a bias....but something is up...because I don't think I have ever heard those guys just so flat out negative....They usually at least try to give the teams in the bottom of the rankings some "hope"
HACK
Well Hack, what's up imo is the "Dead man walking" syndrome.
"So let it be written so let it be done" ... akin to "that's my story and I'm stick'in to it".
Meh, at 0 and 4 it's the best story they have going.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284 |
It's about ratings. It's not "good for business" to talk about teams that don't generate more ratings.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Quote:
It's about ratings. It's not "good for business" to talk about teams that don't generate more ratings.
Bingo.
Why do you think the Yankees and Red Sox are on TV more than any other teams? Because more people watch those games. Even on the West Coast.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,064
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,064 |
Just to broaden our thinking: A) It does stink that we can't "earn" coverage with afew wins; but, B) I take it as an act of kindness in a away IMO. The "crazy" losses are not something would sit better with the fans or audience as we find unusual ways to lose. I am all for less drama and more coverage concerning the Browns. Any day now . . . .  
"Every responsibility implies opportunity, and every opportunity implies responsibility." Otis Allen Glazebrook, 1880
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Why do you think the Yankees and Red Sox are on TV more than any other teams? Because more people watch those games. Even on the West Coast.
Don't you think this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy though? The more you show them the more out of market people get familiar with them, the more fans they are able to draw out of market... therefore the more demand to continue to show them. I guarantee you that the average baseball fan can name more Yankees players than Nationals and Reds players combined.... because they are always discussed, always on television... so when the Yankees are on, people watch because they are familiar with who they are watching...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027 |
It's not right, but the Browns will have to earn their pub.
If the Jets were 0-4 in the fashion the Browns were, they'd be getting more pub than they are now at a horrible 2-2.
ESPN has their favorites, Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Lakers, Heat, Celtics, Jets, Patriots, Steelers, etc..
There are others, but this group will get pub regardless of wins and losses. The Celtics got pub when they were a garbage lotto team before the big 3.
It's about the market. They cater to ratings. I get it, I still thought the way they covered the Cavs with Lebron there was an embarassment. They couldn't wait until he left and they weren't afraid to hide it. We all knew Dwight Howard was leaving Orlando and even they didn't do to them what they did to us.
I understand that they have to do that, but it's crossing the line when you're airing a game and basically talking the entire time about how you can't wait until LBJ is a Knick (all while the Cavs were mopping the floor with them)
Thank God every league has its own network that you can get much more unbiased coverage. When I catch Cavs highlights on NBAtv, I get more than 1 play and a box score.
I still love how they think the world stops when the Yankees play the Red Sox.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027 |
Quote:
Quote:
Why do you think the Yankees and Red Sox are on TV more than any other teams? Because more people watch those games. Even on the West Coast.
Don't you think this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy though? The more you show them the more out of market people get familiar with them, the more fans they are able to draw out of market... therefore the more demand to continue to show them. I guarantee you that the average baseball fan can name more Yankees players than Nationals and Reds players combined.... because they are always discussed, always on television... so when the Yankees are on, people watch because they are familiar with who they are watching...
I think this is true. There are a lot of people who are Browns fans who aren't from Cleveland but were accustomed to seeing them every Sunday back in the day because that's who was on.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Does ESPN hate the Cleveland
Browns?
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/PortlandDawg/banner.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Heldawg/rgiii2.jpg)
