Random baseball shit - Page 3

**Jesus Shuttlesworth** · 07-11-2006, 02:31 AM

I dunno, its not like the A's are all over ESPN but I don't think the bias is as bad as people make it out to be. I've heard plenty about the A's being injuried but I think I've actaully seen more about how their offense isn't where it should be yet they are still in first.

What I haven't heard about in relation to the A's tho is how Bradley is acting. Still a shithead or did he "turn it around?"

**Jesus Shuttlesworth** · 07-11-2006, 02:33 AM

I dunno how the Yankees are the most impressive team because even with the injuries look at the top of the line up: Damon, Jeter, A-Rod and Giambi

**ct2k** · 07-11-2006, 07:07 AM

To be fair considering we've only had 2 consistent starters in Mussina and Wang, our bullpen has not been entirely solid (besides the obvious) and Sheff, Matsui and Cano are all injured...And A-Rod had that massive slump...I'd settle for 3 games back, especially considerin how good and well rounded a team Boston are

**The Miz** · 07-11-2006, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sTiMa34

I dunno, its not like the A's are all over ESPN but I don't think the bias is as bad as people make it out to be. I've heard plenty about the A's being injuried but I think I've actaully seen more about how their offense isn't where it should be yet they are still in first.

What I haven't heard about in relation to the A's tho is how Bradley is acting. Still a shithead or did he "turn it around?"

But if it were an east coast team, the coverage would be immense. Remember when they won like 80% of their games for that 2 month stretch last year? Went from 15 below .500 to 15 above .500? Yeah it was a story, but it was still always behind "Fact or Fiction: Manny asking for a trade is just 'Manny being Manny'" and all that bullshit. Imagine if an east coast team did that. Their games would be the first highlight and would be followed by 10 minutes of analysis of every minute detail of the team. The fact is that with the exception of Barry Bonds, NO West Coast baseball story gets Yankees/Red Sox coverage, but if the stories happened on the east coast they would be huge.

For example:
Mauer leading the league in BA almost at .400 (2006)
Oakland going from 15 under to 15 over (2005)
Gagne's ridiculous saves record (2004)
Ichiro's hit record (2004)
Texas threatening all types of offensive team records (2005)
AL West coming down to the last series of the year betwween Oakland/LAAA (2004/2005)

Imagine if any of these things happened to Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Baltimore, etc. Yeah these things got coverage, but was never "the big story" even when it should've been because it took place out west.

**ct2k** · 07-11-2006, 08:28 AM

Is it all just a remnant from the fact that baseball was first popularised in and spread from the north-east primarily?

I dunno, i might be wrong on that but yknow. plus the north-east whilst having a huge population and a lot of teams is not exactly a vast geographical area, especially when you're comparing it to the 'West' or the West coast.

**The Miz** · 07-11-2006, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sTiMa34

What I haven't heard about in relation to the A's tho is how Bradley is acting. Still a shithead or did he "turn it around?"

lol Bradley never did anything. He is just a regular L.A. black kid but guys like that never play in MLB so the fans couldn't except him being himself. What did he do, throw some baseballs on the field and call Jeff Kent a racist? Wow what a shithead. The media wants him and every other player to play the Sammy Sosa "Baseball been very good to me" bullshit but Bradley KEEPS IT REAL. When keepin' it real goes wrong

Bradley is fine now because Oakland is probably the easiest place for a player to play, the media doesn't care about the team and the clubhouse has always been considered the most "laid-back" in baseball. A's have taken in several guys who were supposedly "team cancers" (Bradley, Jose Guillen) and there's never been any kind of problem.

Also Bradley won the award for most time and money donated to the community of any Dodger player in 2005, and has a program called "Bradley's Youth" where he meets kids before games. LA Times left out a few details

He's still more well-behaved than 80% of the NBA

**ct2k** · 07-11-2006, 08:36 AM

Haha, i just typed out a huge reply and hit that faggy little button on the mouse that goes back

But yeah, i was making a point about the NE and its teams in general being steeped in far more baseball history than the West. Plus bear in mind the Giants and Dodgers spending the first halves of their existence firmly planted in New York, the NY Jews probably still hold a grudge for them moving away all those years ago

**Joey Slugs** · 07-11-2006, 12:36 PM

I'll add to Miz's arguement of an east coast bias -

After Boston won the world series they seemed to have a game on ESPN atleast once a week. The White Sox have had 3 so far this year (including Opening Night when they were the only team playing).

You would think that no matter who the world champs are, they deserve a much bigger spotlight.

**ct2k** · 07-11-2006, 01:46 PM

Agreed, but the Red Sox are the Red Sox, the only team with (debateably) more general buzz around them are the Yankees, both are coincidently East Coast. Remember a few years back when it was nothing but St Louis? Every goddamnit week! Atlanta before that, they got loads of airtime! Neither are remotely east coast

**Jesus Shuttlesworth** · 07-11-2006, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

For example:
Mauer leading the league in BA almost at .400 (2006)
Oakland going from 15 under to 15 over (2005)
Gagne's ridiculous saves record (2004)
Ichiro's hit record (2004)
Texas threatening all types of offensive team records (2005)
AL West coming down to the last series of the year betwween Oakland/LAAA (2004/2005)

True, a lot of those probably would recieve a lot more coverage (some listed did receieve a lot tho, especially Ichiro's hit record) if those teams/players played on the East Coast but I think it also has something to do with the number of fans team have and shit like that as well. I haven't heard much about the Florida Marlins rookie pitcher Johnson or 2nd basemen Ugga and they are located on the east coast as well.

**The Miz** · 07-11-2006, 02:10 PM

They're nice rookies but aren't doing anything out of this world.

**BCWWF** · 07-11-2006, 02:48 PM

That's the same thing people said when I ranted about this a while back...but when you say "East Coast Bias" it generally refers to the New England/New York/Pennsylvania area in my opinion. Four of the top ten markets are in that area (New York, Boston, D.C., Philly).

I would say that Atlanta and Miami, the other major (technically) east coast teams are just as left out at the teams in Texas and the other secondary places. Basketball is kind of skewed because New York has an awful basketball team and nobody likes the Nets, but if the Heat didn't have Wade and Shaq and won the NBA title, you wouldn't hear about them either. But news about the Knicks is about 100 hours to 1 compared to news about the Atlanta Hawks, who are all but the same team.

**ct2k** · 07-11-2006, 03:47 PM

NE you have Boston, Yanks, Mets, O's, Phillies, Pirates and Nats all in a (relatively) small geographic location in the far NorthEast corner of the US, it just so happens that NY is the most culturally and financially important city in the world and its media is incredibly influential etc etc etc, there's loadsa factors, its not MLB dictating things. Out West you have the Pads, Dodgers, A's, Angels, Giants and Seattle all strewn our over a thousand odd miles of coastline, i guess there's just not the same concentration of people, teams etc there as there is in the NE.

**Joey Slugs** · 07-11-2006, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ct2k

...NY is the most culturally and financially important city in the world...

Most financially important city in the world? Hardly.

**ct2k** · 07-11-2006, 04:18 PM

Well...Yes it is quite frankly

**Joey Slugs** · 07-11-2006, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ct2k

Well...Yes it is quite frankly

Another East Coast bias. Chicago is a far more important financial center.

**ct2k** · 07-11-2006, 05:21 PM

Lol, you really do think the world orbits around Chi-town don't you?

The New York financial district and stock exchange is the busiest and most important in the Western economy and thus the world, END OF

Chicago is probably 3rd behind LA as far as the US goes and definitely not as important as Tokyo or London

**Jesus Shuttlesworth** · 07-11-2006, 06:08 PM

Can't really say I've ever heard that the East Coast biased has some effect on Chicago - like Chicago is located in Oregon or something. It is only one time zone away and I hear plenty about the Cubs. Probably because the Cubs where recently named the 4th most popular major league team. They talk about teams that casual fans enjoy hearing about, since the majority of fans aren't diehards.

I think its pretty funny how heavily the bias is talked about on here, its obviously there but you kind have to expect a little bit when ESPN is located in Connecticut/all the big markets in the Northeast/time differences. I really don't think it is as bad as people make it out to be tho, then when you point out a situation where the bias has no effect that, for some reason doesn't count. Like Barry Bonds, the LA Lakers, the NFL constantly trying to get another team in LA even though 2 teams already failed there, College football (Uproar over Utah, USC football, Texas - I am sure the excuse for that is because college football isn't big in the Northeast, BC has only won their last 5 bowl games and finished in the top 25 the last few seasons)

I guess you guys don't remember the 49ers vs the Cowboys rivilary either, but that probably doesn't count either because the Cowboys are Americans team or something.

**Joey Slugs** · 07-11-2006, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ct2k

Lol, you really do think the world orbits around Chi-town don't you?

The New York financial district and stock exchange is the busiest and most important in the Western economy and thus the world, END OF

Chicago is probably 3rd behind LA as far as the US goes and definitely not as important as Tokyo or London

I do not think the world orbits around Chicago, but I do want people to get there facts straight.

The NYSE might be the "most known" exchange but it is not the end-all-be-all.

Chicago hosts the world's largest and busiest trading floor, the biggest NASDAQ pit, the world's only currency exchange, the world's largest and busiest options exchange, and host to the headquarters of 8 of the top 10 biggest trading firms in the world.

Yes... there is even an East Coast bias in the financial world.

**Joey Slugs** · 07-11-2006, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sTiMa34

Can't really say I've ever heard that the East Coast biased has some effect on Chicago - like Chicago is located in Oregon or something. It is only one time zone away and I hear plenty about the Cubs. Probably because the Cubs where recently named the 4th most popular major league team. They talk about teams that casual fans enjoy hearing about, since the majority of fans aren't diehards.

I think its pretty funny how heavily the bias is talked about on here, its obviously there but you kind have to expect a little bit when ESPN is located in Connecticut/all the big markets in the Northeast/time differences. I really don't think it is as bad as people make it out to be tho, then when you point out a situation where the bias has no effect that, for some reason doesn't count. Like Barry Bonds, the LA Lakers, the NFL constantly trying to get another team in LA even though 2 teams already failed there, College football (Uproar over Utah, USC football, Texas - I am sure the excuse for that is because college football isn't big in the Northeast, BC has only won their last 5 bowl games and finished in the top 25 the last few seasons)

I guess you guys don't remember the 49ers vs the Cowboys rivilary either, but that probably doesn't count either because the Cowboys are Americans team or something.

The reason you hear alot about the Cubs (or why the Cubs are so popular) is because their games are shown on a national network.

The only team in sports that can claim that.

**The Miz** · 07-11-2006, 06:17 PM

TBS?

**Joey Slugs** · 07-11-2006, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

TBS?

No, the Cubs are on WGN. The Braves have somewhat of the same deal but they are on cable.

**The Miz** · 07-11-2006, 07:05 PM

I get TBS but not WGN

**Joey Slugs** · 07-11-2006, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

I get TBS but not WGN

I'm sure you get WGN (might not be called that)... it's a network "superstation".

**BCWWF** · 07-11-2006, 07:22 PM

OMG how pissed was I on opening day of 2005 when the Cubs game was broadcasted live on both ESPN and WGN and the Twins/Mariners, which was on in most of the nation, was not shown

But yeah, Chicago and Atlanta have that aspect to them, but I don't think that really affects their coverage on ESPN.

One thing that you have to look at is the people that ESPN uses. Pardon the Interuption is two columnists from the Washington Post. Around the Horn is better, but Boston is always represented (which they should be) through Michael Smith, Bob Ryan or that lady (who is pretty good IMO) and now Woody Paige is located in New York, making two of the four columnists from the said region. In terms of the sports world, having New York, Boston, Texas, Chicago and Los Angeles, sometimes Denver covered it pretty good, but it wouldn't hurt to get more people.

Also, I don't think anybody made any reference to it being a MLB conspiracy. It's mainly due to the fact that there are a lot of teams in a small area and that ESPN headquarters is an hour away from New York, ESPN magazine is in New York as is Sports Illustrated. What is weird is that a lot of shit is based out of Atlanta too.

I've always wondered why somebody can't come out and try to rival ESPN. I mean look at the options. Midwest Sports Channel: Chicago, Milwaukee, Twin Cities, St. Louis, Indianapolis, Detroit, Ohio, Tennessee, Kansas City. Pick up the NHL rights to start and go from there.

Texas seems like the most underrepresented sports area in the nation if you ask me. They have so many major league and major college teams that are basically taken forgranted. Some of the best fans in the nation are from the south, it seems like a network could take advantage of that. And then the West Coast. This is where a primary network would benefit the most because of the time zones. Think about it: San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Sacramento, Portland, San Jose, Seattle and Phoenix all have major league teams. So many big colleges in there too, and the Denver and Utah markets aren't too far away.

Dunno.

**BCWWF** · 07-11-2006, 07:24 PM

WGN is basically really, annoyingly biased White Sox and Cubs games, reruns of Family Matters and a horrible newscast. Not a bad channel though, especially if you're a Cubs fan.

**The Miz** · 07-11-2006, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey Slugs

I'm sure you get WGN (might not be called that)... it's a network "superstation".

Nope

**The Miz** · 07-11-2006, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BCWWF

One thing that you have to look at is the people that ESPN uses. Pardon the Interuption is two columnists from the Washington Post. Around the Horn is better, but Boston is always represented (which they should be) through Michael Smith, Bob Ryan or that lady (who is pretty good IMO) and now Woody Paige is located in New York, making two of the four columnists from the said region. In terms of the sports world, having New York, Boston, Texas, Chicago and Los Angeles, sometimes Denver covered it pretty good, but it wouldn't hurt to get more people.

lol I HATE Jackie MacMullen

**Joey Slugs** · 07-11-2006, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BCWWF

WGN is basically really, annoyingly biased White Sox and Cubs games, reruns of Family Matters and a horrible newscast. Not a bad channel though, especially if you're a Cubs fan.

I wouldn't say that WGN is biased towards Sox games. Our "home" channel is Comcast Sports Chicago.

WGN is definitely a Cubs station. Tribune Co. owns the Cubs, Chicago Tribune Newspaper, WGN, and Wrigley Field. Meaning that the Cubs have Yankee and Red Sox money but spend like the Royals.

**The Miz** · 07-11-2006, 07:30 PM

Are you saying Harrelson and Johnson aren't cheerleaders?

**Joey Slugs** · 07-11-2006, 07:31 PM

I wouldn't really say that Chicago is fairly represented in ATH.

Mariotti is a fag.

**Joey Slugs** · 07-11-2006, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

Are you saying Harrelson and Jackson aren't cheerleaders?

fixed.

They are, but what announce team isn't? Plus - they aren't just the WGN team for the Sox... they are the announce team no matter what station their on.

**The Miz** · 07-11-2006, 07:36 PM

Listen to Vin Scully sometime. There's a reason he's been the best for 50 years: he's not a Dodger homer.

Hawk and DJ are the worst, period. Nobody openly cheerleads like those 2

**Joey Slugs** · 07-11-2006, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

Listen to Vin Scully sometime. There's a reason he's been the best for 50 years: he's not a Dodger homer.

Hawk and DJ are the worst, period. Nobody openly cheerleads like those 2

oh come on. you are trying to tell me that not one other team in baseabll has a radio or tv team that "cheerleads"?

impossible.

plus, there is nothing wrong with them rooting for the team... i wouldn't want to listen to an announce team that really didnt care about the club that they worked for... no matter how good they were.

**The Miz** · 07-11-2006, 09:33 PM

I said none "like them", meaning, not nearly as bad. No other announce team calls the opposing team "the bad guys". No other announce team fails to compliment any opposing player on anything no matter how god he or or how good a play he just made. No other announce team goes completely silent when their team starts losing.

Not only are they homers, they're just morons.

**Joey Slugs** · 07-11-2006, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

I said none "like them", meaning, not nearly as bad. No other announce team calls the opposing team "the bad guys". No other announce team fails to compliment any opposing player on anything no matter how god he or or how good a play he just made. No other announce team goes completely silent when their team starts losing.

Not only are they homers, they're just morons.

Never have anything good to say about opposing teams?
Wrong. They do praise a great catch or a top player.

Something wrong with them calling the opposing team the "bad guys"?
Last time I checked... good guys always tried to beat the bad guys.

Fall silent when the Sox start to lose?
How many Sox games do you watch a year? Since I haven't heard that yet... in about 16 years (since Harrelson started in the booth).

Eh. My favorite annoucner is Bob Uecker.

**The Miz** · 07-11-2006, 09:46 PM

It's even mentioned on his wiki page (which I didn't edit)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Harrelson

Harrelson's distinctive announcing style is a subject of much contention amongst Chicago sports fans. Most have criticized him for the monotony of his voice, his repetitive and predictable and over the top calls, and his frequent long stretches of silence while calling a game, especially if the White Sox play on the field is subpar.

**The Miz** · 07-11-2006, 09:48 PM

I like how you bolded your answers though, in case I couldnt find them

**The Miz** · 07-11-2006, 09:53 PM

Just did a quick google search and the first page alone had sites talking about Hawk's silence when the Sox start to suck including deadspin, baseballthinkfactory, and a Braves blog. But yeah I probably just made it up and am the only one who thinks it

**The Miz** · 07-11-2006, 10:05 PM

http://letsgosox.blogspot.com/

He's annoying enough as it is, but to complain about the umpires calls, claiming that there are two different strike zones, one small one for the White Sox pitchers, and one bigger one for the Red Sox, and then to just say nothing when an obvious bad call goes Chicago's way makes him sound like an ass. At one point, as we saw a replay of what looked to me like a perfect pitch, he said, "Schilling was given that pitch." And it's not like he was merely pointing it out, he was groaning about it. Literally. Saying things like "oh, come on." Speaking of saying nothing, that's one of his favorite calls. Play happens, he stays quiet. It's refreshing when announcers shut the hell up for a second, but when something's going on, feel free to chime in!

http://www.athleticsnation.com/user/RudiFan

The best time to catch his act is when the White Sox are getting their butts whipped. He is as quiet as a church mouse. Otherwise his constant homer chirping is extremely annoying.

http://www.netshrine.com/vbulletin2/...ead.php?t=5859

Harrelson is definitely the star of the Hawk and DJ show - his rampant homerism drives most out of towners crazy and nearly led to fist fights with Phil Garner and Kent Hrbek. No doubt the duo is kept on a short leash by the owner. Team criticism is strictly verboten, but if you listen carefully you can tell when Hawk is disgusted by the current bunch of losers. Often he'll just remain silent after a boneheaded play. The increasingly incompetent Sox have sucked the life out of Harrelson recently - even his trademark "You can put it on the board!" has become a halfhearted ritual at times.

http://www.bravesbeat.com/bravesjour...harrelson.html

If the Sox are losing late in the game, Hawk will go minutes without saying anything, just pouting. Someone gets a hit: Hawk spits out a terse "There's a basehit into left." Then back to more pouting silence. Phenomenal broadcasting. I vote for Hawk.

http://www.deadspin.com/sports/baseb...ers-167619.php

Hawk says some, ahem, intereting things from time to time. He has been known to say "Jose Valentin is the best baserunner I have ever seen" or "Paul Konerko turns a 3-6-3 better than anyone I've ever seen", but these things obscure how critical Hawk actually is. His complete silence for minutes at a time after a White Sox blunder sometimes says more than beating Jerry Manuel to death with a wrench. I guess you have to spend 400+ hours listening to him per year to understand the Hawk.

07-11-2006, 02:31 AM	#81
Jesus Shuttlesworth Posts: 42,765	I dunno, its not like the A's are all over ESPN but I don't think the bias is as bad as people make it out to be. I've heard plenty about the A's being injuried but I think I've actaully seen more about how their offense isn't where it should be yet they are still in first. What I haven't heard about in relation to the A's tho is how Bradley is acting. Still a shithead or did he "turn it around?"

07-11-2006, 02:33 AM	#82
Jesus Shuttlesworth Posts: 42,765	I dunno how the Yankees are the most impressive team because even with the injuries look at the top of the line up: Damon, Jeter, A-Rod and Giambi

07-11-2006, 07:07 AM	#83
ct2k Triple A Posts: 48,551	To be fair considering we've only had 2 consistent starters in Mussina and Wang, our bullpen has not been entirely solid (besides the obvious) and Sheff, Matsui and Cano are all injured...And A-Rod had that massive slump...I'd settle for 3 games back, especially considerin how good and well rounded a team Boston are

07-11-2006, 08:28 AM	#85
ct2k Triple A Posts: 48,551	Is it all just a remnant from the fact that baseball was first popularised in and spread from the north-east primarily? I dunno, i might be wrong on that but yknow. plus the north-east whilst having a huge population and a lot of teams is not exactly a vast geographical area, especially when you're comparing it to the 'West' or the West coast.

07-11-2006, 08:36 AM	#87
ct2k Triple A Posts: 48,551	Haha, i just typed out a huge reply and hit that faggy little button on the mouse that goes back But yeah, i was making a point about the NE and its teams in general being steeped in far more baseball history than the West. Plus bear in mind the Giants and Dodgers spending the first halves of their existence firmly planted in New York, the NY Jews probably still hold a grudge for them moving away all those years ago

07-11-2006, 12:36 PM	#88
Joey Slugs Second City Saint Posts: 5,806	I'll add to Miz's arguement of an east coast bias - After Boston won the world series they seemed to have a game on ESPN atleast once a week. The White Sox have had 3 so far this year (including Opening Night when they were the only team playing). You would think that no matter who the world champs are, they deserve a much bigger spotlight.

07-11-2006, 01:46 PM	#89
ct2k Triple A Posts: 48,551	Agreed, but the Red Sox are the Red Sox, the only team with (debateably) more general buzz around them are the Yankees, both are coincidently East Coast. Remember a few years back when it was nothing but St Louis? Every goddamnit week! Atlanta before that, they got loads of airtime! Neither are remotely east coast

07-11-2006, 02:10 PM	#91
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	They're nice rookies but aren't doing anything out of this world.

07-11-2006, 02:48 PM	#92
BCWWF The People's Member Posts: 18,092	That's the same thing people said when I ranted about this a while back...but when you say "East Coast Bias" it generally refers to the New England/New York/Pennsylvania area in my opinion. Four of the top ten markets are in that area (New York, Boston, D.C., Philly). I would say that Atlanta and Miami, the other major (technically) east coast teams are just as left out at the teams in Texas and the other secondary places. Basketball is kind of skewed because New York has an awful basketball team and nobody likes the Nets, but if the Heat didn't have Wade and Shaq and won the NBA title, you wouldn't hear about them either. But news about the Knicks is about 100 hours to 1 compared to news about the Atlanta Hawks, who are all but the same team.

07-11-2006, 03:47 PM	#93
ct2k Triple A Posts: 48,551	NE you have Boston, Yanks, Mets, O's, Phillies, Pirates and Nats all in a (relatively) small geographic location in the far NorthEast corner of the US, it just so happens that NY is the most culturally and financially important city in the world and its media is incredibly influential etc etc etc, there's loadsa factors, its not MLB dictating things. Out West you have the Pads, Dodgers, A's, Angels, Giants and Seattle all strewn our over a thousand odd miles of coastline, i guess there's just not the same concentration of people, teams etc there as there is in the NE.

07-11-2006, 04:18 PM	#95
ct2k Triple A Posts: 48,551	Well...Yes it is quite frankly

07-11-2006, 05:21 PM	#97
ct2k Triple A Posts: 48,551	Lol, you really do think the world orbits around Chi-town don't you? The New York financial district and stock exchange is the busiest and most important in the Western economy and thus the world, END OF Chicago is probably 3rd behind LA as far as the US goes and definitely not as important as Tokyo or London

07-11-2006, 06:08 PM	#98
Jesus Shuttlesworth Posts: 42,765	Can't really say I've ever heard that the East Coast biased has some effect on Chicago - like Chicago is located in Oregon or something. It is only one time zone away and I hear plenty about the Cubs. Probably because the Cubs where recently named the 4th most popular major league team. They talk about teams that casual fans enjoy hearing about, since the majority of fans aren't diehards. I think its pretty funny how heavily the bias is talked about on here, its obviously there but you kind have to expect a little bit when ESPN is located in Connecticut/all the big markets in the Northeast/time differences. I really don't think it is as bad as people make it out to be tho, then when you point out a situation where the bias has no effect that, for some reason doesn't count. Like Barry Bonds, the LA Lakers, the NFL constantly trying to get another team in LA even though 2 teams already failed there, College football (Uproar over Utah, USC football, Texas - I am sure the excuse for that is because college football isn't big in the Northeast, BC has only won their last 5 bowl games and finished in the top 25 the last few seasons) I guess you guys don't remember the 49ers vs the Cowboys rivilary either, but that probably doesn't count either because the Cowboys are Americans team or something.

07-11-2006, 06:17 PM	#101
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	TBS?

07-11-2006, 07:05 PM	#103
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	I get TBS but not WGN

07-11-2006, 07:22 PM	#105
BCWWF The People's Member Posts: 18,092	OMG how pissed was I on opening day of 2005 when the Cubs game was broadcasted live on both ESPN and WGN and the Twins/Mariners, which was on in most of the nation, was not shown But yeah, Chicago and Atlanta have that aspect to them, but I don't think that really affects their coverage on ESPN. One thing that you have to look at is the people that ESPN uses. Pardon the Interuption is two columnists from the Washington Post. Around the Horn is better, but Boston is always represented (which they should be) through Michael Smith, Bob Ryan or that lady (who is pretty good IMO) and now Woody Paige is located in New York, making two of the four columnists from the said region. In terms of the sports world, having New York, Boston, Texas, Chicago and Los Angeles, sometimes Denver covered it pretty good, but it wouldn't hurt to get more people. Also, I don't think anybody made any reference to it being a MLB conspiracy. It's mainly due to the fact that there are a lot of teams in a small area and that ESPN headquarters is an hour away from New York, ESPN magazine is in New York as is Sports Illustrated. What is weird is that a lot of shit is based out of Atlanta too. I've always wondered why somebody can't come out and try to rival ESPN. I mean look at the options. Midwest Sports Channel: Chicago, Milwaukee, Twin Cities, St. Louis, Indianapolis, Detroit, Ohio, Tennessee, Kansas City. Pick up the NHL rights to start and go from there. Texas seems like the most underrepresented sports area in the nation if you ask me. They have so many major league and major college teams that are basically taken forgranted. Some of the best fans in the nation are from the south, it seems like a network could take advantage of that. And then the West Coast. This is where a primary network would benefit the most because of the time zones. Think about it: San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Sacramento, Portland, San Jose, Seattle and Phoenix all have major league teams. So many big colleges in there too, and the Denver and Utah markets aren't too far away. Dunno.

07-11-2006, 07:24 PM	#106
BCWWF The People's Member Posts: 18,092	WGN is basically really, annoyingly biased White Sox and Cubs games, reruns of Family Matters and a horrible newscast. Not a bad channel though, especially if you're a Cubs fan.

07-11-2006, 07:30 PM	#110
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	Are you saying Harrelson and Johnson aren't cheerleaders?

07-11-2006, 07:31 PM	#111
Joey Slugs Second City Saint Posts: 5,806	I wouldn't really say that Chicago is fairly represented in ATH. Mariotti is a fag.

07-11-2006, 07:36 PM	#113
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	Listen to Vin Scully sometime. There's a reason he's been the best for 50 years: he's not a Dodger homer. Hawk and DJ are the worst, period. Nobody openly cheerleads like those 2

07-11-2006, 09:33 PM	#115
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	I said none "like them", meaning, not nearly as bad. No other announce team calls the opposing team "the bad guys". No other announce team fails to compliment any opposing player on anything no matter how god he or or how good a play he just made. No other announce team goes completely silent when their team starts losing. Not only are they homers, they're just morons.

07-11-2006, 09:46 PM	#117
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	It's even mentioned on his wiki page (which I didn't edit) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Harrelson Harrelson's distinctive announcing style is a subject of much contention amongst Chicago sports fans. Most have criticized him for the monotony of his voice, his repetitive and predictable and over the top calls, and his frequent long stretches of silence while calling a game, especially if the White Sox play on the field is subpar.

07-11-2006, 09:48 PM	#118
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	I like how you bolded your answers though, in case I couldnt find them

07-11-2006, 09:53 PM	#119
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	Just did a quick google search and the first page alone had sites talking about Hawk's silence when the Sox start to suck including deadspin, baseballthinkfactory, and a Braves blog. But yeah I probably just made it up and am the only one who thinks it

07-11-2006, 10:05 PM	#120
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	http://letsgosox.blogspot.com/ He's annoying enough as it is, but to complain about the umpires calls, claiming that there are two different strike zones, one small one for the White Sox pitchers, and one bigger one for the Red Sox, and then to just say nothing when an obvious bad call goes Chicago's way makes him sound like an ass. At one point, as we saw a replay of what looked to me like a perfect pitch, he said, "Schilling was given that pitch." And it's not like he was merely pointing it out, he was groaning about it. Literally. Saying things like "oh, come on." Speaking of saying nothing, that's one of his favorite calls. Play happens, he stays quiet. It's refreshing when announcers shut the hell up for a second, but when something's going on, feel free to chime in! http://www.athleticsnation.com/user/RudiFan The best time to catch his act is when the White Sox are getting their butts whipped. He is as quiet as a church mouse. Otherwise his constant homer chirping is extremely annoying. http://www.netshrine.com/vbulletin2/...ead.php?t=5859 Harrelson is definitely the star of the Hawk and DJ show - his rampant homerism drives most out of towners crazy and nearly led to fist fights with Phil Garner and Kent Hrbek. No doubt the duo is kept on a short leash by the owner. Team criticism is strictly verboten, but if you listen carefully you can tell when Hawk is disgusted by the current bunch of losers. Often he'll just remain silent after a boneheaded play. The increasingly incompetent Sox have sucked the life out of Harrelson recently - even his trademark "You can put it on the board!" has become a halfhearted ritual at times. http://www.bravesbeat.com/bravesjour...harrelson.html If the Sox are losing late in the game, Hawk will go minutes without saying anything, just pouting. Someone gets a hit: Hawk spits out a terse "There's a basehit into left." Then back to more pouting silence. Phenomenal broadcasting. I vote for Hawk. http://www.deadspin.com/sports/baseb...ers-167619.php Hawk says some, ahem, intereting things from time to time. He has been known to say "Jose Valentin is the best baserunner I have ever seen" or "Paul Konerko turns a 3-6-3 better than anyone I've ever seen", but these things obscure how critical Hawk actually is. His complete silence for minutes at a time after a White Sox blunder sometimes says more than beating Jerry Manuel to death with a wrench. I guess you have to spend 400+ hours listening to him per year to understand the Hawk.