Jason Witlock tells the truth about ESPN in his latest article

[runhogsrun]

He wrote the plain truth about ESPN and their control off all things that are sports.

Please read

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/8853534?MSNHPHMA

[hogsanity]

Without ESPN, guys like Whitlock woud not have jobs, because sports reporting would be about 1/10th as popular as it is now.

[BEvERage]

whitlock has a job in spite of espn

[runhogsrun]

Yea, but you got to admit, a lot of what he said is true.  They control things like steering people to vote for players who happen to be playing on their stable of networks, thus trying to insure that people will catch the latest big 12 game that is on their network.

[OTTER]

Good column when you consider what they have done to all sports.  They have  ruined almost everything they touch, including BASS and I am concerned about the deal they have with the SEC.  It will be a Petrino hate fest and a Nutt love fest and you can bet Arkansas will not be treated on par with other SEC schools reguardless of the sport.

[hogsanity]

Yea, but you got to admit, a lot of what he said is true.  They control things like steering people to vote for players who happen to be playing on their stable of networks, thus trying to insure that people will catch the latest big 12 game that is on their network.

Do they really?  Or is it the fact that they have the rights to the best conferences already, and, 9 times out of 10 the best players play in those leagues.  If I held the rights to the best tv show, I would promote the heck out of it.

The points about the Heisman are valid.  Now, to win it if you are not a QB, you have to be superman.  I contend Qb's get way too much credit for a lot of their stats.  Throw several short passes that Wr's bust for 70 yards after the catch and the Qb gets credit for a 70 yard td pass.  Tebow had a huge year last year, but something like 20 of his total tds were 5 yards or less. 

[Fatmanhog]

one word for ya TEBOW

[stchane]

Good column when you consider what they have done to all sports.  They have  ruined almost everything they touch, including BASS and I am concerned about the deal they have with the SEC.  It will be a Petrino hate fest and a Nutt love fest and you can bet Arkansas will not be treated on par with other SEC schools reguardless of the sport.

Great point, but this will provide Petrino a forum to showcase what kind of caliber a coach he really is, and show up the feminine toolbag ESPN announcers.  Our talking will be on the field, and that will have a greater impact than anything ESPN says about us

[hogsanity]

Good column when you consider what they have done to all sports.  They have  ruined almost everything they touch, including BASS and I am concerned about the deal they have with the SEC.  It will be a Petrino hate fest and a Nutt love fest and you can bet Arkansas will not be treated on par with other SEC schools reguardless of the sport.

How have they ruined everything they touch?  I would say college fb is pretty good.  College bb coverage is great, it is just the style of play that is becoming unwatchable ( like what happened to the NBA ).  MLB is something most people either like or they dont. 

So, I ask again, how has ESPN ruined everything?

[stchane]

How have they ruined everything they touch?  I would say college fb is pretty good.  College bb coverage is great, it is just the style of play that is becoming unwatchable ( like what happened to the NBA ).  MLB is something most people either like or they dont. 

So, I ask again, how has ESPN ruined everything?

Its not the sport itself, its the coverage of the sport provided.  The coverage they provide is more like a propaganda campaign to make people think one way or another about a school, player, conference, etc.  Its not journalism, its advertising. 
The sport would be better with objective people involved in it instead of people trying to promote something. 

[hogsanity]

Its not the sport itself, its the coverage of the sport provided.  The coverage they provide is more like a propaganda campaign to make people think one way or another about a school, player, conference, etc.  Its not journalism, its advertising. 
The sport would be better with objective people involved in it instead of people trying to promote something. 

Maybe, maybe not.  If the people covering it did not have a vested interest in it, would the coverage be as good or as widespread?  I remember when college fb was 1 or 2 games on ABC and that was it.  We would stay up during Monday night football, to see who the college games the next sat were, just hoping that it would be the Hogs.  And, teams were limited to how many appearances in a year as well.  It was great when USA started showing a PAC10 game on tape dealy on Sat nights.   

Of course, I usually watch the games on Saturdays, no matter the network, with the sound off ( with 2 boys in the room running around, playing, watching the other tv, etc it is just easier ).

[mizzouman]

Whitlock, sometimes, can write a decent column, but I'm not sure this is one of them.  He's way off base with this statement.

"Here's what's more frustrating. Not one of the Big 12's quarterbacks is in the same physical ballpark as Ball State's Nate Davis. It's not close. They can't match his arm, instincts, touch, accuracy, presence, ability to move in the pocket, out of the pocket or make plays when things break down."

[stchane]

Maybe, maybe not.  If the people covering it did not have a vested interest in it, would the coverage be as good or as widespread?  I remember when college fb was 1 or 2 games on ABC and that was it.  

Its not just having a vested interest in it.  They have basically monopolized their coverage of college football, especially now that CBS won't be carrying SEC games anymore (not that I ever agreed with ANYTHING the CBS guys ever said). 

When it was 1 or 2 games on ABC and that was it, the whole country was watching because they didn't have a choice.  Now that they do, the monopolization of the sport gives ESPN the access to tell fans what or what not to think.  They have the big picture locked up, and can tell you what to think about it and often times do. 

When it was just one or two games on tv each week, the big picture wasn't provided and no conclusions about national stuff (like the Heisman) could be drawn as a result.  I guess the game was more pure back then from a journalistic standpoint.  But I couldn't stand it that two teams could be playing for the national title and not be playing each other; that always bothered me with the old system.

The BCS was the 1st step toward a playoff because it pitted #1 & #2 against each other, even though the way those rankings are chosen are arbitrary & capricious.  That is where the journalistic integrity is sorely needed.  If ESPN didn't have so much influence on who #1 & #2 were, then it might be ok.  The amount of dollars tied up in the BCS is ridiculous.  Now that ESPN has the rights to televise the games, their promotion of who gets into what spot is going to have an even bigger impact:  can you say "conflict of interest"?

I guess its a good thing their televising SEC games now

[honkyfool]

Jason Whitlock a fellow Kansas Citian,  I am so proud of him.

[hogsanity]

Its not just having a vested interest in it.  They have basically monopolized their coverage of college football, especially now that CBS won't be carrying SEC games anymore (not that I ever agreed with ANYTHING the CBS guys ever said). 

When it was 1 or 2 games on ABC and that was it, the whole country was watching because they didn't have a choice.  Now that they do, the monopolization of the sport gives ESPN the access to tell fans what or what not to think.  They have the big picture locked up, and can tell you what to think about it and often times do. 

When it was just one or two games on tv each week, the big picture wasn't provided and no conclusions about national stuff (like the Heisman) could be drawn as a result.  I guess the game was more pure back then from a journalistic standpoint.  But I couldn't stand it that two teams could be playing for the national title and not be playing each other; that always bothered me with the old system.

The BCS was the 1st step toward a playoff because it pitted #1 & #2 against each other, even though the way those rankings are chosen are arbitrary & capricious.  That is where the journalistic integrity is sorely needed.  If ESPN didn't have so much influence on who #1 & #2 were, then it might be ok.  The amount of dollars tied up in the BCS is ridiculous.  Now that ESPN has the rights to televise the games, their promotion of who gets into what spot is going to have an even bigger impact:  can you say "conflict of interest"?

I guess its a good thing their televising SEC games now

CBS WILL still have an SEC game on Saturdays, just like they do now. 

As far as monpolization- last Sat at noon, there were at least 5 different games on tv, maybe more.  I know here in Ft Smith we were getting TN/Vandy  Mich/Osu, at least one other big 10 game, a big east game, Someone was on CBS College, and I did not even check Fox sports. 

If ESPn did not exist, are you saying the top 4 in the polls would be different?

[Biggus Piggus]

I am disappointed in Whitlock's effort there.  He was moved to dump on ESPN only because of Ball State, while he left out stuff like the interference in last year's Heisman race, the overt support for Duke and North Carolina basketball recruiting, chronic ACC/Big East/Big Ten favoritism, exaggerated coverage of pro teams in the Northeast, practically zilch coverage of the spreading plague of cheating in college recruiting, it goes on and on.

[kcabrozaR]

That is a very good article, Witlock is very easy to read, and he is right on.

[stchane]

I am disappointed in Whitlock's effort there.  He was moved to dump on ESPN only because of Ball State, while he left out stuff like the interference in last year's Heisman race, the overt support for Duke and North Carolina basketball recruiting, chronic ACC/Big East/Big Ten favoritism, exaggerated coverage of pro teams in the Northeast, practically zilch coverage of the spreading plague of cheating in college recruiting, it goes on and on.

I sent him an email to that effect.

CBS WILL still have an SEC game on Saturdays, just like they do now. 

As far as monpolization- last Sat at noon, there were at least 5 different games on tv, maybe more.  I know here in Ft Smith we were getting TN/Vandy  Mich/Osu, at least one other big 10 game, a big east game, Someone was on CBS College, and I did not even check Fox sports. 

If ESPn did not exist, are you saying the top 4 in the polls would be different?

Yes I am saying that.  Although the other outlets might not pimp some objective of ESPN while they broadcasting (like ESPN does), they have almost exclusive commentary on every other day of the week.  Even on Saturdays, the premier show to watch before 11 am is Gameday, where the ESPN mouthpieces pimp their agenda.

When its not Saturday, College Football Live functions in that way.  I'm sorry, but former players are in no way qualified to be journalist, like ESPN is holding them out to be.  The voters in the other polls don't have much of a choice but to listen to these guys, and therefore the ESPN influence in the polls.

One of the polls is the ESPN Allstate poll after all, and that is included into the BCS (isn't it?). 

[Dwight_K_Shrute]

I agree with many points that Whitlock raises and will offer a few of my own.

First, best line in the column:

ESPN is the enemy of the truth, and all who believe a pursuit of the truth is the lifeblood of a genuinely free society must stand against the Wal-Mart-ization of sports journalism.

I believe ESPN does a very good job at producing high quality sports content and broadcasts.  They make their money off the ratings this programming generates so it is in their best interest to steer things in a certain direction and this creates a conflict of interests between their news/journalism arm and their enternainment arm.  They actually blur the lines between reporting on sports/news and being the news.  Plus to appeal to the broadest base of people their news/journalism has to be as vanilla as possible.  Heaven forbid we ask the proles to think for themselves.

I have read some very thought provoking articles on ESPN.com, but nothing you would ever see on the network.

I know Whitlock pisses people off sometimes and you may not agree with his opinions but I appreciate the fact that he sometimes goes against the popular or most widely held views, and I really appreciate him giving us the term "Pear Bryant"

[OTTER]

Its not just having a vested interest in it.  They have basically monopolized their coverage of college football, especially now that CBS won't be carrying SEC games anymore (not that I ever agreed with ANYTHING the CBS guys ever said). 

When it was 1 or 2 games on ABC and that was it, the whole country was watching because they didn't have a choice.  Now that they do, the monopolization of the sport gives ESPN the access to tell fans what or what not to think.  They have the big picture locked up, and can tell you what to think about it and often times do. 

When it was just one or two games on tv each week, the big picture wasn't provided and no conclusions about national stuff (like the Heisman) could be drawn as a result.  I guess the game was more pure back then from a journalistic standpoint.  But I couldn't stand it that two teams could be playing for the national title and not be playing each other; that always bothered me with the old system.

The BCS was the 1st step toward a playoff because it pitted #1 & #2 against each other, even though the way those rankings are chosen are arbitrary & capricious.  That is where the journalistic integrity is sorely needed.  If ESPN didn't have so much influence on who #1 & #2 were, then it might be ok.  The amount of dollars tied up in the BCS is ridiculous.  Now that ESPN has the rights to televise the games, their promotion of who gets into what spot is going to have an even bigger impact:  can you say "conflict of interest"?

I guess its a good thing their televising SEC games now

Very good, well put.

[tiber]

The intention is good and someone needs to step up and call out ESPN for a number of things they do to dilute sports.  However, in this case people at ESPN will point to the Ball State affiliation and claim hurt bias. 
What is needed is for someone that is respected (or at least with a broad readership) and that has no dog in any current fight to take ESPN to task on these and a number of other issues.

[WindyCityHog]

He wouldn't have been so long-winded if it had anything to do with anything other than his alma mater, Ball State University.

It's a covert effort to get an undeserving team into a BCS game. 

He's obviously passionate about it, but somewhat too obvious.

[HawgnCorona]

one word for ya TEBOW

thanks fatmanhog, but let me say it this way...DMac!! now you can see/read why he didnt get it. as far as i'm concerned no need to spell it out anymore that than.

[Mark Lericos]

They make their money off the ratings this programming generates so it is in their best interest to steer things in a certain direction and this creates a conflict of interests between their news/journalism arm and their enternainment arm.  They actually blur the lines between reporting on sports/news and being the news. 

   And that, to me, is the exact problem with ESPN. Dead on. 

[HawgnCorona]

I agree with many points that Whitlock raises and will offer a few of my own.

First, best line in the column:

ESPN is the enemy of the truth, and all who believe a pursuit of the truth is the lifeblood of a genuinely free society must stand against the Wal-Mart-ization of sports journalism.

I believe ESPN does a very good job at producing high quality sports content and broadcasts.  They make their money off the ratings this programming generates so it is in their best interest to steer things in a certain direction and this creates a conflict of interests between their news/journalism arm and their enternainment arm.  They actually blur the lines between reporting on sports/news and being the news.  Plus to appeal to the broadest base of people their news/journalism has to be as vanilla as possible.  Heaven forbid we ask the proles to think for themselves.

I have read some very thought provoking articles on ESPN.com, but nothing you would ever see on the network.

I know Whitlock pisses people off sometimes and you may not agree with his opinions but I appreciate the fact that he sometimes goes against the popular or most widely held views, and I really appreciate him giving us the term "Pear Bryant"

I agree with on the points you make. I only watch them when the hogs are on...otherwise they are a garbage.

[demonHOG1013]

If it wasnt for ESPN, Darren McFadden would have been on the heisman scene long before the Tennessee game, and he might have even won it twice instead of two runner up finishes.

[stchane]

If it wasnt for ESPN, Darren McFadden would have been on the heisman scene long before the Tennessee game, and he might have even won it twice instead of two runner up finishes.

At least he made history.  He'll always be the 1st person to be the runner-up twice.  What a dubious distinction...thanks alot ESPN

[OklaU]

If it's not ESPN then its someone else folks. 

[stchane]

If it's not ESPN then its someone else folks. 

Not necessarily.  It could be multiple peoples like it should be.  Then we might get an objective view, or maybe at least different perspectives.  But thats capitalism I guess.  That was the one objectionable thing in Whitlock's article, that Wal-Mart comment that is.  Wal-Mart & ESPN are models for the logical endpoint of capitalism.   

[OklaU]

There are some others but it is all crap.  I don't care what those guys on Fox Sports Net have to say...their programming is terrible and their anchors stink.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

He wrote the plain truth about ESPN and their control off all things that are sports.

Please read

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/8853534?MSNHPHMA

I am sure he is his player of choice and is a great player. Maybe he would achieve similar achievements in a conference such as the SEC or Big 12, and perhaps not. He can say this is unbiased, but it is in fact, very biased. Where was he when his player of choice from his alma mater wasn't in the mix? Why wasn't he calling them(ESPN) out then? Answer: This is as biased a piece of journalism as I have seen in some time that is directed at one thing........promoting Ball State and his player of choice. The kid ended up at Ball State for a reason. That doesn't mean he hasn't evolved into a first class player or that Ball State isn't a good team. But if you want to promote your choice of players, tell them to get into a better conference to begin with or they will relegated to the level of  consideration that Nate Harris has been given.

[Albert Einswine]

Whitlock, sometimes, can write a decent column, but I'm not sure this is one of them.  He's way off base with this statement.

"Here's what's more frustrating. Not one of the Big 12's quarterbacks is in the same physical ballpark as Ball State's Nate Davis. It's not close. They can't match his arm, instincts, touch, accuracy, presence, ability to move in the pocket, out of the pocket or make plays when things break down."

Jason Whitlock is a Ball St. grad,  as I now see Windy had already pointed out above in reply #22.

[Albert Einswine]

There are some others but it is all crap.  I don't care what those guys on Fox Sports Net have to say...their programming is terrible and their anchors stink.

I disagree.  I believe Fox Sports Radio absolutely blows ESPN away.  Hosts are better, content is better and humor is much better... it's not even close.

[Brer Hog]

This is a good article.  He is right, why isn't Davis in the Heisman conversation.  Before you call this article crap, remember Jason Whitlock was one of the very first to write about Petrino being smart to leave Atlanta like he did and point out the Falcons shortcomings rather than calling Petrino a coward for doing so.  He was right then and I highly suspect that he is right now.  ESPN is more interested in sports brand promotion than sports journalism.  Them ignoring Ball State's success this year is more proof.  It seems that the wholesale commercialization of sports is something that I have seen many on even this board lament.  I certainly lament the commercialization of all things Razorback.

Brer Hog

[stchane]

I am sure he is his player of choice and is a great player. Maybe he would achieve similar achievements in a conference such as the SEC or Big 12, and perhaps not. He can say this is unbiased, but it is in fact, very biased. Where was he when his player of choice from his alma mater wasn't in the mix? Why wasn't he calling them(ESPN) out then? Answer: This is as biased a piece of journalism as I have seen in some time that is directed at one thing........promoting Ball State and his player of choice. The kid ended up at Ball State for a reason. That doesn't mean he hasn't evolved into a first class player or that Ball State isn't a good team. But if you want to promote your choice of players, tell them to get into a better conference to begin with or they will relegated to the level of  consideration that Nate Harris has been given.

"This was going to be your run-of-the-mill, I-told-you-so column gloating about my Ball State Cardinals running the regular-season table and climbing to No. 15 in the BCS poll.

I predicted all of this in August, and many of you justifiably thought I was simply mouthing off about my favorite football team in hopes of shining light on my long forgotten, never-remembered, mediocre playing days at Ball State and hamming it up in hopes of landing an invite to Dave Letterman's "Late Show."


Why are people acting like this guy didn't disclose that he is a Ball State grad?  Thats the 1st thing he said at the very beginning of the article.  Reading comp anyone?

[drivetimeporks]

hey , i heard whitlock go off on the same topic on rome today..but anyway, i dont wanna complain about espn..yeah they suck cramming "our" opinions down our throats but..jesus when i was a kid  it was like pro wrestling, monster trucks, table tennis.. its come a long way...thank god we have espn... what if all we had was raycom?

[k.c.hawg]

I moved here in the same year Whitlock moved here...his talent will always suck you in...but the fact is he has been fired by ESPN....he has been fired by the all sports radio station he worked for...he hung a sign out of the window of a media booth in an NFL stadium telling the opposing fans of a team playing KC to go f themselves and was subsuquently suspended by the KC Star. He does alot of good things for Big Brothers and various charities...but to be respected in this business you can't have the major slip ups/failures that JW has had.

[Dwight_K_Shrute]

hey , i heard whitlock go off on the same topic on rome today..but anyway, i dont wanna complain about espn..yeah they suck cramming "our" opinions down our throats but..jesus when i was a kid  it was like pro wrestling, monster trucks, table tennis.. its come a long way...thank god we have espn... what if all we had was raycom?

I agree on the programming side.  The quality and breadth and depth of their offerings is great.  And yes they may assign their #4 team to a midweek Ball State game, but it is better than no coverage at all.  But they can't be a great programmer and great journalists or critics of their own product and that's what they try to do.

[OklaU]

I disagree.  I believe Fox Sports Radio absolutely blows ESPN away.  Hosts are better, content is better and humor is much better... it's not even close.

Now RADIO is different I like Fox and Sporting News Radio.  They do have some good personalities...but the TV stuff is terrible.

[HoosierDaddy]

He made no bones about his bias towards Ball St, but this isn't the first time he's cracked on ESPN.  Especially considering the situation that got him fired from "Sports Reporters" (he suggests you google that situation in the article).

He didn't want to take the side of the discussion that he was told to.  Have to have some respect for that.

[WindyCityHog]

"This was going to be your run-of-the-mill, I-told-you-so column gloating about my Ball State Cardinals running the regular-season table and climbing to No. 15 in the BCS poll.

I predicted all of this in August, and many of you justifiably thought I was simply mouthing off about my favorite football team in hopes of shining light on my long forgotten, never-remembered, mediocre playing days at Ball State and hamming it up in hopes of landing an invite to Dave Letterman's "Late Show."


Why are people acting like this guy didn't disclose that he is a Ball State grad?  Thats the 1st thing he said at the very beginning of the article.  Reading comp anyone?

I aced Reading Comp.  You?

I bet you failed The [CENSORED] Obvious.

You don't see it as "funny" that this blowhard finally decides to attack the biggest obstacle to his alma mater's dream game only after it's convenient?

He got an A in the course.

[idiotghos]

At the end of the day, player- and coach-of-the-year awards are secondary to winning games, which Ball State has had no difficulties doing this year.  If Nate Davis really is the best quarterback in the country (which I'm fairly sure he isn't), then he'll have the last laugh in the NFL.  The typical fan may not know who Brady Hoke is, but you can bet athletic directors do.

[stchane]

You don't see it as "funny" that this blowhard finally decides to attack the biggest obstacle to his alma mater's dream game only after it's convenient?

He got an A in the course.

Thats is completely obvious, but that doesn't make him wrong either does it?

[MuskogeeHogFan]

"This was going to be your run-of-the-mill, I-told-you-so column gloating about my Ball State Cardinals running the regular-season table and climbing to No. 15 in the BCS poll.

I predicted all of this in August, and many of you justifiably thought I was simply mouthing off about my favorite football team in hopes of shining light on my long forgotten, never-remembered, mediocre playing days at Ball State and hamming it up in hopes of landing an invite to Dave Letterman's "Late Show."


Why are people acting like this guy didn't disclose that he is a Ball State grad?  Thats the 1st thing he said at the very beginning of the article.  Reading comp anyone?

I am aware he made the Ball State hugger disclaimer to begin with. But if he is such a long standing advocate of opposing the evil ESPiN and the BCS and Heisman processes, why wait until his player/team of choice is in the mix? I'm a fan of good journalism but the fact that he wants to grill these two processes along with ESPiN only when it benefits his school/player, just detracts from what he writes.

[stchane]

I am aware he made the Ball State hugger disclaimer to begin with. But if he is such a long standing advocate of opposing the evil ESPiN and the BCS and Heisman processes, why wait until his player/team of choice is in the mix? I'm a fan of good journalism but the fact that he wants to grill these two processes along with ESPiN only when it benefits his school/player, just detracts from what he writes.

While that may be true, we as a fanbase didn't really get to see the full brunt of ESPN bias until the Nutt departure/Heisman Race of 2007.  That really brought it out for us & let us see it.  Maybe its no different for the journalist, maybe it shouldn't be because they are journalist.  But in order for them to see just how bad the bias is, the bias has to affect something thats very close to them.  In our case HDN/DMAC, in his, Ball State/Nate whats-his-face

[MuskogeeHogFan]

While that may be true, we as a fanbase didn't really get to see the full brunt of ESPN bias until the Nutt departure/Heisman Race of 2007.  That really brought it out for us & let us see it.  Maybe its no different for the journalist, maybe it shouldn't be because they are journalist.  But in order for them to see just how bad the bias is, the bias has to affect something thats very close to them.  In our case HDN/DMAC, in his, Ball State/Nate whats-his-face

Let's assume for a moment that what you say is correct and that he "just noticed" because he had a dog in the fight. His team and player of choice are still nto being treated unfairly. Ball State is out of the Mid American. If you want to be considered with the big boys, then schedule every single one of your OOC games vs. THE BIG BOYS. Beat them all and then sweep your conference and you have more of a case to make.

[stchane]

Let's assume for a moment that what you say is correct and that he "just noticed" because he had a dog in the fight. His team and player of choice are still nto being treated unfairly. Ball State is out of the Mid American. If you want to be considered with the big boys, then schedule every single one of your OOC games vs. THE BIG BOYS. Beat them all and then sweep your conference and you have more of a case to make.

This is what he is complaining about, not where Ball State is ranked:

"I reached this conclusion when trying to figure out why Ball State quarterback Nate Davis isn't one of the top-five Heisman Trophy candidates and Ball State coach Brady Hoke isn't the front-runner for national coach of the year."

[MuskogeeHogFan]

This is what he is complaining about, not where Ball State is ranked:

"I reached this conclusion when trying to figure out why Ball State quarterback Nate Davis isn't one of the top-five Heisman Trophy candidates and Ball State coach Brady Hoke isn't the front-runner for national coach of the year."

My whole point. There aren't there because the average competition that they play. Play ALL big boys in your OOC schedule and perform as well as you do again your in conference competition and then you make a strong argument for being there. The author knows this is true so he is just lobbying for them. While this might not make him wrong in the point he is attmepting to make, it certainly does not make him right either. By the same token, you can't win 50 races at a local track and suddenly say that you deserve to be in a national NASCAR Championship race. If you want to run with the big dogs, you have to get off the porch and compete with the big dogs, not just sit on the porch and whine.

[Stamford Hog]

He makes all the right arguments with ESPN's influence on college football (it used to drive me crazy when there would be an SEC game between top 10 teams on CBS and Gameday would go to L.A. to watch USC play a #20-25 pac 10 team simply because it was a game on their network - in fairness, they seem to be doing a better job at that lately).  The only problem with the article is it loses its impact because he spends way too much time talking about Ball State and not enough focusing on the root of the problem.

[stchane]

My whole point. There aren't there because the average competition that they play. Play ALL big boys in your OOC schedule and perform as well as you do again your in conference competition and then you make a strong argument for being there. The author knows this is true so he is just lobbying for them. While this might not make him wrong in the point he is attmepting to make, it certainly does not make him right either. By the same token, you can't win 50 races at a local track and suddenly say that you deserve to be in a national NASCAR Championship race. If you want to run with the big dogs, you have to get off the porch and compete with the big dogs, not just sit on the porch and whine.

Yeah you can.  Hawaii did it last year.  If he wants to pimp his school because nobody else is, more power to him.  How is Ball State & their QB any different from Hawaii & Colt Brennan?  Washington, the toughest team on Hawaii's schedule last year, was hardly a big dog.