ESPN's hate and NFL Network's love for the Hawks

[-The Glove-]

I always felt Tom Jackson was pretty fair. Outside of his understandable bias to the Broncos for whom he made his career -- I think he has always been pretty even keeled on it.

I can't necessarily blame ESPN entirely. I mean I acknowledged before the season started, that Seattle needed to take the next step -- to be able to win as the hunted team, not the hunter. That was a legitimate question going into the season. Part and parcel was the road record. We smashed both of those benchmarks.

The NFL nework guys seem more plugged in, because a lot of them played the game and aren't necessarily on the network to make outrageous statements to increase viewership. The ex players that ESPN trots out there are guys that seem to be interested in creating talking points for neilsen ratings. NFLN analysts tend to do more in depth stuff. Irvin was on the train early after getting a good dose of I told you so. He came, visited the players and got a behind the scenes sense of what the team was about. Faulk resisted to the end. Warner is never going to come around. He's just an offensive honk and unabashed about that. Anyone with a real appreciation for defense and team balance (ex NE Patriots/defensive player analysts) were on board pretty quickly.

It's actually interesting, that the offensive analysts who played for predominantly crappy defensive clubs -- didn't come around on us. Defensive guys (Jackson/Ray Lewis/Teddy Bruschi/Deion) or players who played on good defensive teams (Irvin/Evans/Young) tended to be more fair. The only holdout on that seemed to be Dilfer and I can't help but think there was some bad blood between him and the organization over something.

What are you talking about? Warner has done nothing but praise the Seahawks ALL year long. Picked them to win SB48.

Uh no he didn't...he rooted for Peyton and picked the Broncos... Can't remember which show it was but it was split pretty even between defensive guys picking us and offense picking Broncos

 

[SouthSoundHawk]

Hahahaha, what a silly thing to give a damn about.

 

[kearly]

The media is made up in large part by guys who never played football, not even on a high school varsity level. It is very rare to see someone with quality knowledge of the game who never played. That doesn't mean their opinion is worthless, but I do think it is an obstacle to overcome.

I think former players (jocks) tend to go with the gist of things, and the gist of Russell Wilson is that he just makes plays and wins games. All those former players have probably had at least one time in their lives where they were beaten by a guy who on paper shouldn't have beaten them, so they've been conditioned to respect great players who come in surprising packages.

In the media, there is always a search for storylines, and every story starts at the beginning- the NFL draft. If a guy goes #1, he's always going to be over-rated and/or over-hated no matter what, whereas 4th and 5th round super studs like Geno Atkins and Richard Sherman have to fight to get the respect their deserve.

Because Seattle is built mostly from the later rounds, it's only natural that the media is slow to come around. Usually when a player from the late rounds succeeds, his success is labeled a fluke and it usually does not last either. I think the media has been conditioned to be skeptical of late round players. Though Tom Brady is one big fat exception to that, his playing in Boston probably factored.

One other thing, ESPN may broadcast nation-wide, but in truth it began as a local sports outlet for the northeast and in many ways it still is. East coast bias was coined specifically because of the regional bias ESPN has. Seattle is not the only team to suffer from poor coverage, most of the other western teams are under-represented in varying degrees too.

By contrast, this is not an issue for NFL network, which began as a national network and isn't centralized the way ESPN is at Bristol, Connecticut.

 

[Largent80]

I have not been watching either of them, and rarely do.

We had way more "fans" on NFL all year so it isn't a surprise. Willy McG. was all over us.

 

[AROS]

Remember ADB's twitter message this past week? Seems apropos here.

The more I sit back and observe everything that has to do with the NFL the more I realize it’s just an entertainment business. I was so caught up in trying to make football at this level purely football. But when I look around me, it’s nothing, NOTHING but a business understandably so. But I want to inform you, the fans. Don’t be sucked in to ESPN, NFL Network and all these money making media outlets. Their singular purpose is to entertain you. Make you think something is important when it really isn’t. It’s not for news, it’s for ratings.

They want you to be sucked into their opinions. Why? That pushes their brand and eventually makes them money at some level. I’m asking you, the fans, to be informed. Do your own thinking. They will say a guy is too short to play QB… he’ll win a SuperBowl. They will say he’s too small to play linebacker. He’ll make an interception for a touchdown in this biggest stage the game has to offer. They will say he is too tall to play corner, not quick enough, not smart enough… and become the best corner in the game.

They will say he can’t because of this, he can’t because of that… and they will continue to be wrong… Why? Because they are human. They want to look at the 40. The shuttle. They broad jump. The vertical jump. All of these measurables. But they will continue to miss. Why? Because you can not measure the Heart, Passion and Relentlessness to be great that someone has deep down in their soul. So while these pundits and so-called expert analyst fill the air with their irrelevant jargon, realize they are talking about PEOPLE.

Realize these people are not just items to be shown off at the combine to be auctioned off to the highest bidder. Didn’t think about that…. Because at the end of the day, the players are all expendable. The only thing that matters to the NFL is the brand of NFL.

 

[volsunghawk]

While I don't care about which sports media figure hates, likes, disrespects, or slobbers all over us, I will agree that ESPN has long been moving more and more toward a style of tabloid journalism for which I don't care.

I haven't watched ESPN in about 3-4 years and don't plan to start anytime soon.

 

[Hawks46]

I don't really watch either, but I do go to nfl.com over espn.com a lot, so I get clips of the NFLN.

One of my favorite guys is Willie McGinnest. He's becoming a very good TV analyst.

Heath Evans wasn't really on the bandwagon at first, he wasn't convinced of our offense, but he came around and almost seemed a fan at the end.

The defensive guys all love Seattle. The thing I've noticed is that NFLN guys will change an opinion as the season goes on, while the ESPN guys seem to stick to an early season opinion or prediction and stay pretty recalcitrant about it.

Dilfer does seem to have a hard on against the Hawks, but he had a spot on analysis of Wilson after he got drafted. He said that Wilson was short, so he had to do everything else at an extremely high level to make up for it, while a taller guy has less of a margin for error. He's since come back and said Wilson has done everything needed. It's kind of funny because he'll waffle; pick against the Hawks or rip on Wilson a bit, then come around and say Wilson was playing very well.

 

[HawkRiderFan]

The morning guys on radio are really all I hear on ESPN. They've come around big time. Mike and Mike both picked the Hawks to win and have been showing a lot of Hawk love. Cowherd admitted he was a wimp in picking Denver. Said all the signs pointed to Seattle but was scared to pick against Manning. He's been positive on the Hawks since the Super Bowl.

The one thing that annoyed me was during pre-game when Berman said "It seems un-American to root against Manning in the game." I thought for a network that should be un-bias, that was over the top

 

[Escamillo]

Steven A Smith and Skip Bayless admitted they were totally wrong about the Hawks the day after the Super Bowl. The clip is on YouTube if you want to see it.

So what? They also both admitted to being totally wrong after the first Sea/SF game, after the first Sea/NO game, after the Sea/NO playoff game, and after the Sea/SF NFCCG. They picked against the Seahawks in each of those games, and each time after the game admit they were wrong, "I can't believe how wrong I was, I underestimated Seattle, blah, blah". Yet they don't learn their lesson, they keep picking against Seattle in every big game.

Stephen A Smith even said after the first Sea/SF game, "Nobody is beating Seattle in Seattle. Let me be very clear: If the Seahawks get home field advantage in the playoffs, the Seahawks are going to the Super Bowl.". Yet he then went on to ignore his own words and picked against Seattle over and over.

You know how Stephen A smith said the Broncos got "straight up punked" by the Seahawks? He said the exact same thing about the Saints after the first Sea/NO game. Added that the Saints "don't belong on the same field" as the Seahawks. Yet when the playoffs come around, he's right back to picking NO over Sea, just like he did in the regular season game.

Cowherd doesn't even admit he was wrong to pick Den over Sea in the SB. Oh, he acknowledges that the pick itself ended up wrong, but says the reasoning he used to pick Den was right, and still is. BTW, he also picked against Sea throughout the playoffs, and in the regular season game against NO. And after the NFCCG he said, "SF is still the best team", and he repeated that after the SB.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not mad about such, I'm rather amused by it. I enjoyed listening to these guys admit they were wrong over and over. 8)

 

[Escamillo]

There's a big difference between ESPN's "media personalities" and ESPN's hardcore analysts.

For example,
Only 11 of 38 ESPN "media personalities" picked Seattle in the Super Bowl.

But the more knowledgeable ESPN folks, their analysts and website writers, were more evenly split, with 25 of 48 picking Seattle.

NFL.com's analysts overwhelmingly picked Seattle, 9 out of 12, one of them in a blowout. I don't know how their "media personalities" picked.

BTW, ESPN's Jason Whitlock called Seattle in a blowout, as did former Bear defensive great Richard Dent. 8)

 

[plyka]

Hahahaha, what a silly thing to give a damn about.

Out of all the worthless posts, this is the...mostest worthlessness...

Everything on this forum is silly to give a damn about --it's football, it's entertainment, it's all silly to give a damn about. Also, can we have a simple dialog regarding the media and how they cover topics without the customary 6 or so posts on "why do you care, you shouldn't care," etc? It was ok when there was 1 of those posts per each thread about the media, but now we are getting 6-7 posts per thread. All because the posters want to seem nonchalant and thus confident and carefree, blah blah blah. Get over it. No one here cares, we are discussing how two different media outlets are covering the Seahawks. No one is getting angry at ESPN, we are DISCUSSING on a FORUM.

 

[JMR]

I really like NFLN. They only cover NFL, so the depth of coverage is a lot better, and they certainly gush on the Hawks to a high degree.

ESPN has a breadth of coverage across nearly all sports so I don't lean on them as much as I used to for NFL stuff....but I don't have a big problem with how they view the Hawks. The guys I watch the most -- M&M, Cowherd, even Kornheiser/Wilbon -- praise and respect the Hawks plenty.

NFLN is a lot newer. The Hawks have been pretty good for most of the time that network has been alive, so maybe that has something to do with it. We've been relevant while they have. A little different with ESPN.

 

[sc85sis]

I have not been watching either of them, and rarely do.

We had way more "fans" on NFL all year so it isn't a surprise. Willy McG. was all over us.

Willie played for Pete in Boston and is a USC alum. He's one of the guys who spoke up on Pete's behalf when Pete was hired at USC and all those people were complaining about the choice.

Teddy B. also played for Pete in Boston.

 

[BlueTalon]

Steven A Smith and Skip Bayless admitted they were totally wrong about the Hawks the day after the Super Bowl. The clip is on YouTube if you want to see it.

And they retracted it a day later, in all likelihood. Or they did it to tick off the Broncos.

Say what you want, they were pretty forward and adamant about it.

(This is just audio, but still.)

[youtube]_CBg0xjnXgU[/youtube]

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

I can't take any network seriously that employs Ron Jaworski. He can't see the forest beyond the trees. Also Doug Baldwin absolutely nailed it, it's all just meaningless noise to distract and entertain the ignorant.

 

[HawkWow]

I suspect Baldwin will ultimately move to India, hire his own yogi and frolic naked and carefree on the beaches of Goa while tripping on acid with the unshaven. The NFL's version of John Lennon.

I'm a Doug guy, but I won't be letting Doug influence what I seek in way of sports entertainment. "Ignorant"? I would only call the combine, NFL draft coverage (etc) ignorant if I expected to be drafted...but was not. Time to turn that that frown upside down, Douglas. You're only hurting yourself with this rambunctious behavior.

 

[Mick063]

FOX can be worse than ESPN at times.

Jimmie Johnson, Terry Bradshaw, Howie Long, and Michael Strahan have all historically railed against the Seahawks. Only this season have they grudgingly given it up to them. Johnson just got tired of losing his "pick em" sessions and finally declared "I'm not picking against Seattle again." Long had to endure his son losing twice to Seattle and that is what sparked his eventual humility. Strahan never did like the Seahawks. Nothing is right with him unless the NFC East is front and center.

Bradshaw? What a waste of air time. Can't stand his rambling, joking interruptions while others are talking. He always steers away from the current topic with unrelated attempts at humor. Trying to glean insight is impossible with his clown show disrupting things. The others provoke it by laughing at his dumba$$.

 

[chris98251]

I've always liked Bradshaw, he's a goof at times but also as a player most reminds me of someone that came from no where and managed to win everything. He had a really tough go as a player with Chuck Noll in his ear hole his entire career, it was truly a love hate thing , Noll loved his arm but hated his head a lot. Bradshaw was sandlot football at times as far as go deep and I'll throw it to you. Bradshaw was also a tough SOB which garnered the respect of his coach and his team mates. Not easy to do when you have a defense like the Steelers did back then who made a living out of beating the crap out of people much like ours do today.

 

[drdiags]

Bradshaw the player was okay. Those Pittsburgh teams were built from the ground up, reminds me of how the Seahawks have been built. Mel Blount (HOF - Sherman maybe??) drafted late in the draft, and the rest of that defense. The offense having the ability to be explosive but yet controlled by a conservative coach was lethal, just like the current underrated Seahawks offense could become if they improve the playmakers at a few spots.

My condolences to Bradshaw and his loss but glad I didn't have to see him making jokes with Paul Allen and company while presenting the Lombardi. Still chaps my hide when I think of the 2005 NFCCG Halas trophy presentation where he talks about having to play his Steelers. Come on Man! Yes, I am a hater.

It was cool though that he offered Wilson advice on how to approach the Superbowl when asked. Showed that unlike me, Wilson respected him for his accomplishments in and outside the game.

 

[Evil_Shenanigans]

Fine with me. No room for them on this bandwagon anyway.