Ever doubt the Northeast's Media Bias?

midatlantech

Dodd-Like
Joined
Aug 20, 2003
Messages
6,754
ESPN SportsReporters, four nationally syndicated reporters, all said this Sunday morning that they have no clue who the new starting runningback is for Dallas. John Saunders, said that none of us knows this guy. The second guy mentioned his name, Tashard Choice. The third guy, Mitch Albon, said "Whew, I'm glad that you said his name first, because I wasn't eager to give it a try."

I'm sorry, but the two time leading rusher in the ACC, first team All-ACC, and they couldn't even figure out who he was. If you have ever questioned the media bias toward the northern players, take a long hard look.
 
ESPN SportsReporters, four nationally syndicated reporters, all said this Sunday morning that they have no clue who the new starting runningback is for Dallas. John Saunders, said that none of us knows this guy. The second guy mentioned his name, Tashard Choice. The third guy, Mitch Albon, said "Whew, I'm glad that you said his name first, because I wasn't eager to give it a try."

I'm sorry, but the two time leading rusher in the ACC, first team All-ACC, and they couldn't even figure out who he was. If you have ever questioned the media bias toward the northern players, take a long hard look.

This is ACC bias, not Northern bias. Trust me, if Tashard had led the SEC in rushing two years in a row, they would have known his name. Of course, he also would have been a much more high-profile player and draft pick, but there you go, it's the whole SEC thing again.
 
This is ACC bias, not Northern bias. Trust me, if Tashard had led the SEC in rushing two years in a row, they would have known his name. Of course, he also would have been a much more high-profile player and draft pick, but there you go, it's the whole SEC thing again.


I have to disagree. The NFL has taken more players from the ACC than the SEC in recent years. There is no bias on their part, unless you think they are predisposed to take ACC players.
 
I have to disagree. The NFL has taken more players from the ACC than the SEC in recent years. There is no bias on their part, unless you think they are predisposed to take ACC players.

We're talking about media bias, not NFL bias. I'm sure most coaches in the league know who Tashard Choice is. When I said "high profile draft pick," I meant in terms of media recognition and people actually caring a little bit about where he went. Kind of like how people know who Troy Smith was drafted by even though he went fifth round.
 
We're talking about media bias, not NFL bias. I'm sure most coaches in the league know who Tashard Choice is. When I said "high profile draft pick," I meant in terms of media recognition and people actually caring a little bit about where he went. Kind of like how people know who Troy Smith was drafted by even though he went fifth round.


Wow, I must say, I went brain dead for a moment there. You were referring to ACC media bias. But we agree on how bad it is.

It's actually good to see the SEC taking it on the chin the last couple of weeks. But it would be nice for more of the media to pick up the ACC mantle.
 
Wow, I must say, I went brain dead for a moment there. You were referring to ACC media bias. But we agree on how bad it is.

It's actually good to see the SEC taking it on the chin the last couple of weeks. But it would be nice for more of the media to pick up the ACC mantle.

Yeah, it is really bad. But you did hear rumblings of how the ACC beat the SEC head-to-head this season on several different shows. I think that a good showing by the ACC in bowl season coupled with a disappointing one by the SEC could start to turn the tide going into next season. After all, the ACC should have one or two of the dominant teams it was lacking this year.
 
We're talking about media bias, not NFL bias. I'm sure most coaches in the league know who Tashard Choice is. When I said "high profile draft pick," I meant in terms of media recognition and people actually caring a little bit about where he went. Kind of like how people know who Troy Smith was drafted by even though he went fifth round.

Troy Smith also played on a team ranked #1 for parts of several years, and led the team in a national championship game.

While Tashard was an ACC leading rusher, he never made a splash on the national scene, either in big games or just through hype. He was never a serious canadiate for Hesiman, and only led the team for one year, a year in which we didn't even go to the ACCCG.

Quick, who led the Pac 10 in rushing this year?
 
Troy Smith also played on a team ranked #1 for parts of several years, and led the team in a national championship game.

While Tashard was an ACC leading rusher, he never made a splash on the national scene, either in big games or just through hype. He was never a serious canadiate for Hesiman, and only led the team for one year, a year in which we didn't even go to the ACCCG.

Quick, who led the Pac 10 in rushing this year?

I have no idea. I'd like to say someone from USC, but I know they have that "stable" of running backs so probably not. What's your point? I can name who led the SEC in rushing.

EDIT: Also, it's not like I can name the Big East's leading rusher either....
 
Troy Smith also played on a team ranked #1 for parts of several years, and led the team in a national championship game.

While Tashard was an ACC leading rusher, he never made a splash on the national scene, either in big games or just through hype. He was never a serious canadiate for Hesiman, and only led the team for one year, a year in which we didn't even go to the ACCCG.

Quick, who led the Pac 10 in rushing this year?

Thanks to a 19 carry, 311 yd performance against winless Washington, I think that's Jahvid Best.

That performance capapulted him into the top 10 in rushing from outside the top 25, and took away JD's distinction of being the only top 25 rusher to get 7 yards per pop or better.
 
I have no idea. I'd like to say someone from USC, but I know they have that "stable" of running backs so probably not. What's your point? I can name who led the SEC in rushing.

My point is that just leading your conference in rushing, or getting All-Conference does not mean that you get wide national recognition. You have to make a splash. Calvin Johnson did it, but Choice never did. That's why the NFL reporters don't know who he is, not because of a biased towards nothern players.
 
My point is that just leading your conference in rushing, or getting All-Conference does not mean that you get wide national recognition. You have to make a splash. Calvin Johnson did it, but Choice never did. That's why the NFL reporters don't know who he is, not because of a biased towards nothern players.

Oh, okay. I'll agree with that. But I also think it's a lot easier to make a national splash in the SEC than it is in the ACC, in part due to the media's love of everything SEC.
 
Oh, okay. I'll agree with that. But I also think it's a lot easier to make a national splash in the SEC than it is in the ACC, in part due to the media's love of everything SEC.

Yea....but that is because the SEC has better defenses so you have to be a better RB to even do anything in that league...
 
Yea....but that is because the SEC has better defenses so you have to be a better RB to even do anything in that league...

Yea, the SEC defenses are so fast the option would never work against them. I guess that's why they didn't even know who Dwyer was.
 
My take on this is--it's their BUSINESS (JOB) to KNOW info like this--that is supposedly what they DO--slight or not, what it shows is their lack of PROFESSIONALISM--as if that is a SHOCK!!
 
My take on this is--it's their BUSINESS (JOB) to KNOW info like this--that is supposedly what they DO--slight or not, what it shows is their lack of PROFESSIONALISM--as if that is a SHOCK!!

If we were talking about SCOUTS, I'd agree with you 110%. But JOURNALISTS? Meh.

What's profressionalism to a journalist? Priority one is to hold as many people interested for as long as possible in order to sell ad space. Hence the focus on marquee players who "make a splash". Not low key players who just do their job well.
 
My take on this is--it's their BUSINESS (JOB) to KNOW info like this--that is supposedly what they DO--slight or not, what it shows is their lack of PROFESSIONALISM--as if that is a SHOCK!!

Well this is why I think it is a bias. It shows part of or all of the following:

1) Lack of interest in investigating other conferences during the season.
2) Lack of interest in going back and looking up players out of your region that might actually matter. (in other words, would these guys have said "we don't even know who he is" if the kid had played at Michigan? No, because they would have looked him up to remember who he was.)
3) Lack of energy for anything outside your region.
 
If we were talking about SCOUTS, I'd agree with you 110%. But JOURNALISTS? Meh.

What's profressionalism to a journalist? Priority one is to hold as many people interested for as long as possible in order to sell ad space. Hence the focus on marquee players who "make a splash". Not low key players who just do their job well.

But don't they do any show prep or do they just show up? How hard would it be to do a little research (or more likely get an intern to do it) on the guy who is thrust into an important role in one of the marquee NFL games of the week? If they had, they wouldn't look like such jackasses now that he has done okay.
 
These guys aren't really journalists...they don't cover anything, they just do opinion pieces for the most part.
 
Back
Top