espn hate/bias towards seattle in new article

[Largent80]

Who watches or listens to those hate shows?...I don't even have ESPN it's become irrelevant. Anyone that promotes hate is doing one simple thing. Trying to get you pissed off and clicking or watching their stupid shit. Quit doing it. Life is short, don't waste it on this crap.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Exactly, grab that remote and turn the station, easy to do.

 

[Largent80]

Skip and Shannon, Undisputed....Hahahahaha...you watch one of these and thats all you need for a lifetime. Just BULLSHIT...If you watch this shit I feel sorry for you.

 

[MD5eahawks]

Aaaand the Tin Foil hats are getting bigger and bigger.

It’s embarrassing.

 

[bmorepunk]

I don't see any real bias going on there?
Their top 2 points are valid IMO.

1) Strength of schedule is cut and dried. A disadvantage.

2)

The Seahawks have outscored their opponents by just 21 points over 10 games

Common sense that barely squeaking by in wins is not a reliable formula to count on.

I see no reason to take this as a knock on where we stand and our chances personally.

This team is giving up over 25 points a game. 25. That's below average at best, and certainly not the mark of a team that should be getting mentions without caveats. There are six games left; five of them against teams with winning records. Three of them are division games. If we see more of the defense we saw in the last game, they could be really good. But if it looks like the games before that? Ugh.

Wilson is playing amazing, and the offense can put up some points. But if you're looking at this team on the defensive side and who they have to play, and you can't handle someone thinking that it's going to be hard to carry an 80% win rate through the rest of season, you're probably going to get let down real bad, real soon.

Objectively you can't really fault someone who has questions about an 8-2 team who barely squeaks out wins at the end and gives up 25 points a game. Nobody looks at that and thinks it is a higher percentage winning formula unless they are a homer.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

8-2, nothing else matters.

 

[Scorpion05]

At least post the article.

But generally, I do feel we're the middle child of the NFL. The kid who does all the right things, and should get more praise and attention. But the favorite kid who doesn't get good grades and screws up from time to time gets the most genuine love.

Yea the parents love ya, but you can just tell. Everyone will just say that kid is whining though. But it happens in families everyday and it happens in media.

I used to just think maybe I was paranoid about the bias, until many pundits predicted the "fall of the Seahawks" when the Rams got good. And when some media entities predicted that we'd go 4-12, or something crazy.

What that showed to me was just a complete lack of respect for Russell & Pete. When you have the coach and the QB, no way you can say that team will have a losing record that significant. The media wouldn't say that about a Brees + Payton, Brady + Belichick, Peyton Manning, or Aaron Rodgers team.

They predicted it for us because quite frankly, Russ despite his numbers and consistent performance over the years has always been LIKED but was never fully RESPECTED. Ditto for Pete. The idea was just that he can coach defense and can't build or coach a winning team. The media will only pick us if our talent is so undeniable on defense they have to pick us. This year, with Russ playing out of his mind they honestly have no choice.

If you ran ESPN or one of the other major sports cable stations, would you focus more of your programming on the major market teams like NY, LA or Dallas......or would you specialize your programming to cater to smaller market demographics.

I'm always yelling at ESPN in the morning too for telling us more nonsense about the Jets and Giants, and why does anyone care when they're both complete dumpster fires. And why I need to hear about the Cowboys 62% of the time more than any other team. Or why I need a daily Lebron update.

But I certainly understand on a business level why they do it. So it's not some sort of nefarious "bias" because we're the Hawks, or M's, or whoever........it's because they love money.

If I ran ESPN I'd make sure Russ gets coverage, given his playing style.

I would buy your argument if we weren't also scheduled for so many primetime games year in and year out. Which actually just goes to show that the NFL realizes that Russ is must see TV.

We've also had the playoff success, the back to back Super bowl visits, the playoff appearances, and the QB who isn't boring to watch. The argument doesn't add up.

Andrew Luck got more attention, he's from Indianapolis. Cam Newton is from Carolina, not exactly high market. Lamar Jackson is in Baltimore, Mahomes is in Kansas City. New Orleans..I can go on and on, but it gets harder and harder to really justify this.

But, typical human instinct is to jump to "hey, it makes sense" rather than "hey, there's clear and noticeable bias here." The ratings argument doesn't explain the bias. The Seahawks get scheduled for primetime because of ratings. The Browns, in freakin Cleveland got coverage because of ratings. It does not explain the lack of respect or attention. It simply doesn't. I think the lack of respect for Russ over the years combined with the South Alaska bias goes hand in hand.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

At least post the article.

But generally, I do feel we're the middle child of the NFL. The kid who does all the right things, and should get more praise and attention. But the favorite kid who doesn't get good grades and screws up from time to time gets the most genuine love.

Yea the parents love ya, but you can just tell. Everyone will just say that kid is whining though. But it happens in families everyday and it happens in media.

I used to just think maybe I was paranoid about the bias, until many pundits predicted the "fall of the Seahawks" when the Rams got good. And when some media entities predicted that we'd go 4-12, or something crazy.

What that showed to me was just a complete lack of respect for Russell & Pete. When you have the coach and the QB, no way you can say that team will have a losing record that significant. The media wouldn't say that about a Brees + Payton, Brady + Belichick, Peyton Manning, or Aaron Rodgers team.

They predicted it for us because quite frankly, Russ despite his numbers and consistent performance over the years has always been LIKED but was never fully RESPECTED. Ditto for Pete. The idea was just that he can coach defense and can't build or coach a winning team. The media will only pick us if our talent is so undeniable on defense they have to pick us. This year, with Russ playing out of his mind they honestly have no choice.

If you ran ESPN or one of the other major sports cable stations, would you focus more of your programming on the major market teams like NY, LA or Dallas......or would you specialize your programming to cater to smaller market demographics.

I'm always yelling at ESPN in the morning too for telling us more nonsense about the Jets and Giants, and why does anyone care when they're both complete dumpster fires. And why I need to hear about the Cowboys 62% of the time more than any other team. Or why I need a daily Lebron update.

But I certainly understand on a business level why they do it. So it's not some sort of nefarious "bias" because we're the Hawks, or M's, or whoever........it's because they love money.

If I ran ESPN I'd make sure Russ gets coverage, given his playing style.

I would buy your argument if we weren't also scheduled for so many primetime games year in and year out. Which actually just goes to show that the NFL realizes that Russ is must see TV.

We've also had the playoff success, the back to back Super bowl visits, the playoff appearances, and the QB who isn't boring to watch. The argument doesn't add up.

Andrew Luck got more attention, he's from Indianapolis. Cam Newton is from Carolina, not exactly high market. Lamar Jackson is in Baltimore, Mahomes is in Kansas City. New Orleans..I can go on and on, but it gets harder and harder to really justify this.

But, typical human instinct is to jump to "hey, it makes sense" rather than "hey, there's clear and noticeable bias here." The ratings argument doesn't explain the bias. The Seahawks get scheduled for primetime because of ratings. The Browns, in freakin Cleveland got coverage because of ratings. It does not explain the lack of respect or attention. It simply doesn't. I think the lack of respect for Russ over the years combined with the South Alaska bias goes hand in hand.

If the Hawks are continually in prime time and Russell's leading the MVP race right now, then I'm confused as to what you're complaining about.

I could show you a dozen current sports show segments where the Hawks and Russell are one of the their segments, especially over the past month when the Russell MVP talk have really heated up.........and Cowherd, who is one of the top rated national shows has been beating the Russell bandwagon for years.

So any perceived "bias" is you and others not being objective enough to see what I and others are talking about. I don't watch all the sports shows, but I watch enough to see we've been getting plenty of attention (good and bad) from just about all the sports shows and online reporters and personalities.

There are 32 football markets, so if you're expecting more than the 10-15% we see about the Hawks on a monthly basis, not sure what you want.

 

[Rat]

I used to just think maybe I was paranoid about the bias

You should revisit that thought.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

8-2. Nothing can be said or done to change that FACT.

Go Hawks

 

[Popeyejones]

I regret to inform that basic math does not have a bias against the Seahawks. It is incapable of love or hate.

Apparently from that article ESPN also has an anti-Christian McCaffrey bias and an anti-49ers bias. Who knew?

The latter is particularly surprising to me given that I'm a 49ers fan and for weeks on this board I've been saying the same thing about the 9ers that this anti-49ers article does: the strength of their team so far (their defense) is likely to decline in the second half of the season.

Apparently basic math and even me are biased against the team I root for. :lol: :roll:

 

[DJ_CJ]

The more people don’t like us the better. Keep it coming. Allow that chip on the shoulder to grow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

I regret to inform that basic math does not have a bias against the Seahawks. It is incapable of love or hate.

Apparently from that article ESPN also has an anti-Christian McCaffrey bias and an anti-49ers bias. Who knew?

The latter is particularly surprising to me given that I'm a 49ers fan and for weeks on this board I've been saying the same thing about the 9ers that this anti-49ers article does: the strength of their team so far (their defense) is likely to decline in the second half of the season.

Apparently basic math and even me are biased against the team I root for. :lol: :roll:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[TreeRon]

The two biggest Russell haters Marcellus Wylie and Skip Bayless.

 

[evergreen]

People keep complaining about the point differential. The 9ers have a great point differential, we don’t. Who did better in OT? We play the best and worse to OT. I’m not too worried about the close games. I still don’t believe we look like the best team in NFL, but the best looking teams don’t always win!

 

[KiwiHawk]

1) Strength of schedule is cut and dried. A disadvantage.

I agree. However, I find it interesting it's not mentioned with regard to the Patriots or 49ers.

The Patriots are feasting in a division of almost legendary failure. The rest of their schedule barring the Bills (6-3) and the Ravens (7-2 and the Pats' only loss) have been pansies:

Steelers (5-4)
Dolphins (2-7)
Jets (2-7)
Bills (6-3)
Redskins (1-8)
Giants (2-8)
Browns (3-6)

That's not exactly a murderer's row of teams, but who's talking about it? They played the Jets twice, who have the league's 4th-worst points-scored. The other 3? Redskins, Dolphins, and Bengals, and the Pats get to play the Bengals, too.

Not sure I've ever seen a softer schedule. But hey, let's put them way up in our power rankings.

The 49ers - they talk about the pass rush and how it may go one way or the other as if it's random, but no mention that their second half is even more difficult than our second-half.

They won some games against (and tell me if these names sound familiar):
Bengals
Steelers
Browns
Redskins

But there's no mention of the upcoming games against:
Ravens
Packers
Saints
Rams
Seahawks

With only the Cards and Falcons having losing records, and they struggled against the Cards.

I'm not promoting an active bias, but those are some pretty glaring omissions.

 

[Scorpion05]

At least post the article.

But generally, I do feel we're the middle child of the NFL. The kid who does all the right things, and should get more praise and attention. But the favorite kid who doesn't get good grades and screws up from time to time gets the most genuine love.

Yea the parents love ya, but you can just tell. Everyone will just say that kid is whining though. But it happens in families everyday and it happens in media.

I used to just think maybe I was paranoid about the bias, until many pundits predicted the "fall of the Seahawks" when the Rams got good. And when some media entities predicted that we'd go 4-12, or something crazy.

What that showed to me was just a complete lack of respect for Russell & Pete. When you have the coach and the QB, no way you can say that team will have a losing record that significant. The media wouldn't say that about a Brees + Payton, Brady + Belichick, Peyton Manning, or Aaron Rodgers team.

They predicted it for us because quite frankly, Russ despite his numbers and consistent performance over the years has always been LIKED but was never fully RESPECTED. Ditto for Pete. The idea was just that he can coach defense and can't build or coach a winning team. The media will only pick us if our talent is so undeniable on defense they have to pick us. This year, with Russ playing out of his mind they honestly have no choice.

If you ran ESPN or one of the other major sports cable stations, would you focus more of your programming on the major market teams like NY, LA or Dallas......or would you specialize your programming to cater to smaller market demographics.

I'm always yelling at ESPN in the morning too for telling us more nonsense about the Jets and Giants, and why does anyone care when they're both complete dumpster fires. And why I need to hear about the Cowboys 62% of the time more than any other team. Or why I need a daily Lebron update.

But I certainly understand on a business level why they do it. So it's not some sort of nefarious "bias" because we're the Hawks, or M's, or whoever........it's because they love money.

If I ran ESPN I'd make sure Russ gets coverage, given his playing style.

I would buy your argument if we weren't also scheduled for so many primetime games year in and year out. Which actually just goes to show that the NFL realizes that Russ is must see TV.

We've also had the playoff success, the back to back Super bowl visits, the playoff appearances, and the QB who isn't boring to watch. The argument doesn't add up.

Andrew Luck got more attention, he's from Indianapolis. Cam Newton is from Carolina, not exactly high market. Lamar Jackson is in Baltimore, Mahomes is in Kansas City. New Orleans..I can go on and on, but it gets harder and harder to really justify this.

But, typical human instinct is to jump to "hey, it makes sense" rather than "hey, there's clear and noticeable bias here." The ratings argument doesn't explain the bias. The Seahawks get scheduled for primetime because of ratings. The Browns, in freakin Cleveland got coverage because of ratings. It does not explain the lack of respect or attention. It simply doesn't. I think the lack of respect for Russ over the years combined with the South Alaska bias goes hand in hand.

If the Hawks are continually in prime time and Russell's leading the MVP race right now, then I'm confused as to what you're complaining about.

I could show you a dozen current sports show segments where the Hawks and Russell are one of the their segments, especially over the past month when the Russell MVP talk have really heated up.........and Cowherd, who is one of the top rated national shows has been beating the Russell bandwagon for years.

So any perceived "bias" is you and others not being objective enough to see what I and others are talking about. I don't watch all the sports shows, but I watch enough to see we've been getting plenty of attention (good and bad) from just about all the sports shows and online reporters and personalities.

There are 32 football markets, so if you're expecting more than the 10-15% we see about the Hawks on a monthly basis, not sure what you want.

Let’s be clear here. I’m not “whining,” I’m providing a counter argument. Just because you believe there isn’t a bias, doesn’t mean that counter points are whining. That would be like me saying you’re “blind” not to see the bias. I won’t go that far.

My argument was never that Russell got zero coverage. My argument was never that the media “hated” Russell, or the Seahawks. My argument was that the respect and attention given by the media DOES NOT match with Russell and Pete’s track record.

I watch all the sports shows. On my way home from work, I watch YouTube videos of all the shows. Even Colin Cowherd has argued that Russ doesn’t get enough respect. You yourself just literally asked me if I ran ESPN would I cover the Seahawks as much. You are literally acknowledging that the Seahawks would logically get less attention than bigger markets. I DIRECTLY pointed out several examples of other teams getting more attention.

On any given day, I can find more videos or articles from the national media discussing Mahomes, Lamar, or Rodgers more than the Seahawks. If you doubt that, research it yourself. Scroll through ESPN or Fox Sports 1’s videos, or rewatch on demand, and keep track of how much coverage certain teams or topics get. When Mahomes was playing well, I would see up to 3 segments on him and the Chiefs alone. I’ve been watching in the past week or more, and I see a LOT more coverage of Lamar than Russ.

This is about nuance. If your argument is simply “Shannon and Skip are trolls!” (As if they don’t have a national platform), and if we’re really going to pretend as if we haven’t been listening to the media focus on Cam, Luck, more than Wilson. Or the Packers, Chiefs, Rams, Colts, etc. more than the Seahawks, then we’re just not going to agree. Human and media bias isn’t black and white but many here are discussing it as if it is.

 

[Scorpion05]

I used to just think maybe I was paranoid about the bias

You should revisit that thought.

No thanks, I’m going to go with the whole “5’10 QB and great coach has been expected to have losing seasons by the media despite their consistent success. And that also 5’10 QB and great coach was mocked and dismissed for years until they started winning and won the Super Bowl. And even after all of their success and record in November and December 5’10 QB and great coach still somehow would have been doubted to make the playoffs.”


On this very forum, at least a quarter of the fan base spent the last 3 years ignoring every obstacle Russell had to overcome (compared to other QBs) to nitpick at everything he did wrong. And some even wanted Pete fired when he has NEVER had a losing season. I don’t need to revisit that thought because much of the dismissiveness is black and white here. Russ didn’t need to have an MVP season to be talked about because he’s performed well every year and lesser Qbs have gotten more coverage.

This thread should be a case study to how unwilling people are willing to face human/media bias in general Lol. I don’t want the media to be biased, it doesn’t make me feel good inside. I don’t enjoy being frustrated or playing some arbitrary victim card. Every argument I make, whether you or others agree or not is based on my genuine opinion, GIVEN the amount of sports coverage I watch EVERYDAY. I catch up on all the sports talk shows (The Herd, Undisputed, First Take, Get Up, Inside the NFL, Total Access) every day driving on my 30 minute commute to work, my commute home, my lunch break, and early in the morning on my weekends off before I head to the mountains.

My perspective, even if it can be debated, is not being pulled out of thin air. There is less attention given to Seattle at 8-2, there is less attention given to Russ even with the moderate coverage he gets now. And far too many media pundits have focused on the mistakes our opponents have made in our wins (like the Rams or Niners missing a field goal), rather than focus on the mistakes we made to even allow the games to be close (and have improved on).

 

[Hawkpower]

I don't see any real bias going on there?
Their top 2 points are valid IMO.

1) Strength of schedule is cut and dried. A disadvantage.

2)

The Seahawks have outscored their opponents by just 21 points over 10 games

Common sense that barely squeaking by in wins is not a reliable formula to count on.

I see no reason to take this as a knock on where we stand and our chances personally.

This team is giving up over 25 points a game. 25. That's below average at best, and certainly not the mark of a team that should be getting mentions without caveats. There are six games left; five of them against teams with winning records. Three of them are division games. If we see more of the defense we saw in the last game, they could be really good. But if it looks like the games before that? Ugh.

Wilson is playing amazing, and the offense can put up some points. But if you're looking at this team on the defensive side and who they have to play, and you can't handle someone thinking that it's going to be hard to carry an 80% win rate through the rest of season, you're probably going to get let down real bad, real soon.

Objectively you can't really fault someone who has questions about an 8-2 team who barely squeaks out wins at the end and gives up 25 points a game. Nobody looks at that and thinks it is a higher percentage winning formula unless they are a homer.

Questions about an 8-2 team??

Maybe if this was some other long season sport. There are only a few games left.

At this point in the season, you are who you are. Seattle could conceivebly coast into a playoff spot at this point.

No need to wring our hands over whether or not we are as "good" as our record says we are or obsessing over whether or not will continue. Its all about winning when it counts now. Playoffs here we come.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Feeling persecuted as a fan base is perversely fun for certain people. Like picking a scab. So everyone expects to get it from the media, and thus they see it happening when it really isn't.