ESPN Conspiracy?

#26
#26
Lexvol said:
As I remember, it was really Keith Jackson that beat the drum the loudest on this issue. Count me among those who believe that both Woodson and Peyton were great. Michigan beat tOSU and the rest is history.

Peyton, on the other hand is not nearly as scarred by the incident as most Tennessee fans. He can give you about a hundred million reasons why he isn't bitter.
Click to expand...

FWIW, if I would have had a vote that year, I would have voted for Moss. But Moss's high school was like an hour from mine, and I was in HS some of the years he was in HS. He was a state legend, and I have always been a fan.
 
#28
#28
kidbourbon said:
FWIW, if I would have had a vote that year, I would have voted for Moss. But Moss's high school was like an hour from mine, and I was in HS some of the years he was in HS. He was a state legend, and I have always been a fan.
Click to expand...
He was far and away the best athlete without question.
 
#29
#29
Big Orange Junky said:
See that's where we disagree. Yes he was a very good back, but when you are not even the best at your position then we got a problem tryin to say you were the best over all player in the Nation.

Look up the stats for the Vandy DB as well as Champ Bailey, they were BOTH better and played much, much tougher competition (Michigans schedule was ranked 89th the week we played Auburn caught that in an article about the Auburn game).

4 big plays the entire year VS owning 40 collegate or school records???

As I said before Manning made 4 big plays in just the UCLA game.

It was a no contest blow out if you look objectively, Manning was the clear cut hands down best player in the Nation that year and should have won the heistman by a landslide.

Of course the power of the media was released and many people only saw Woodsons good plays and Peytons bad plays all day every day on ESPN and Woodson won on hype with almost no substance. If you looked at every game that year I would be that Woodson had more busted coverages than Manning had interceptions, the Whisky one was about as bad as I have ever seen a DB beat on a play, and that was one of their slow guys. Seems like it was an 80 something yard pass play.

Sure he was good, no doubt about it, but he wasn't close to Manning level good.
Click to expand...

This may not resonate with you b/c it appears that you think ESPN is the disease here. But Woodson was #12 on ESPN's list of top 25 all time greatest college football players. Manning didn't make the list.
 
#30
#30
I can still remember Dick Shap (sp) crying the next day with joy and proclaiming how proud he was to have voted for Woodson and how proud he was that the "underprivilidged black man finally beat out the favored white guy" (almost word for word).

He really was tearful, then he went on a rant about Jim Brown who was also screwed over for the heistman.

No doubt ESPN was "all in" on the Woodson boat, and single handedly won the heistman for him with their coverage.
 
#31
#31
ESPN...no

But there are certain individuals that reveal their anti-Vol bias quite frequently. Then, there are those that say things just to rile up a fan base for ratings.
 
#33
#33
kidbourbon said:
This may not resonate with you b/c it appears that you think ESPN is the disease here. But Woodson was #12 on ESPN's list of top 25 all time greatest college football players. Manning didn't make the list.
Click to expand...


Now that's funny right there. Really it is.

He was nowhere near the back that Champ Bailey was.

LMBO

The ONLY reason he is on that list is because he was given the heistman.

ESPN is the only reason he won it.

The two go together.

As I posted before, I see why they did it, it was their conference against a conference of the competitor. Woodson was their horse and they intentionally only showed his good stuff and intentionally hilighted Mannings worst stuff.

They even admitted it and apologized for it officially if the KNS and Chattanooga News Free Press can be believed.

Does that mean that I think they "hate" UT now, no but that does mean that they were openly campaigning for a person and against another one in the race and they did change the outcome.
 
#34
#34
Big Orange Junky said:
See that's where we disagree. Yes he was a very good back, but when you are not even the best at your position then we got a problem tryin to say you were the best over all player in the Nation.

Look up the stats for the Vandy DB as well as Champ Bailey, they were BOTH better and played much, much tougher competition (Michigans schedule was ranked 89th the week we played Auburn caught that in an article about the Auburn game).

4 big plays the entire year VS owning 40 collegate or school records???

As I said before Manning made 4 big plays in just the UCLA game.

It was a no contest blow out if you look objectively, Manning was the clear cut hands down best player in the Nation that year and should have won the heistman by a landslide.

Of course the power of the media was released and many people only saw Woodsons good plays and Peytons bad plays all day every day on ESPN and Woodson won on hype with almost no substance. If you looked at every game that year I would be that Woodson had more busted coverages than Manning had interceptions, the Whisky one was about as bad as I have ever seen a DB beat on a play, and that was one of their slow guys. Seems like it was an 80 something yard pass play.

Sure he was good, no doubt about it, but he wasn't close to Manning level good.
Click to expand...

What were Bailey's stats in 1997? I do not believe they were comparable to Woodson's.

Yes, I am saying you are wrong.

But I haven't looked it up, so put me in my place if you can.
 
#35
#35
Big Orange Junky said:
Now that's funny right there. Really it is.

He was nowhere near the back that Champ Bailey was.

LMBO

The ONLY reason he is on that list is because he was given the heistman.

ESPN is the only reason he won it.

The two go together.

As I posted before, I see why they did it, it was their conference against a conference of the competitor. Woodson was their horse and they intentionally only showed his good stuff and intentionally hilighted Mannings worst stuff.

They even admitted it and apologized for it officially if the KNS and Chattanooga News Free Press can be believed.

Does that mean that I think they "hate" UT now, no but that does mean that they were openly campaigning for a person and against another one in the race and they did change the outcome.
Click to expand...

Do you actually believe that ESPN likes the Big 10 more than the SEC?
 
#36
#36
Big Orange Junky said:
I can still remember Dick Shap (sp) crying the next day with joy and proclaiming how proud he was to have voted for Woodson and how proud he was that the "underprivilidged black man finally beat out the favored white guy" (almost word for word).

He really was tearful, then he went on a rant about Jim Brown who was also screwed over for the heistman.

No doubt ESPN was "all in" on the Woodson boat, and single handedly won the heistman for him with their coverage.
Click to expand...

So you will concede that ESPN the entity does not actually vote for the award? So, at most, ESPN put together a good argument in favor of Woodson over Manning and it persuaded the voters to vote for Woodson over Manning. Agreed?

And that makes you angry?

I mean, ESPN could tell me that Linda Cohn is hotter than Erin Andrews till I am blue in the face, but that isn't going to affect my vote.
 
#38
#38
Please don't forget the comment by the ESPN announcers that "Tennessee fans are trailer park trash" (not verbatim). That they had to cancel their GameDay visit to Knoxville because of all the upraor from the fans. And rightly so I'd say.
 
#39
#39
volfan4evr said:
Please don't forget the comment by the ESPN announcers that "Tennessee fans are trailer park trash" (not verbatim). That they had to cancel their GameDay visit to Knoxville because of all the upraor from the fans. And rightly so I'd say.
Click to expand...

It was that the Tennessee fans were in a "trailer park frenzy" after Manning lost. Still below the belt in my opinion.
 
#40
#40
kidbourbon said:
What were Bailey's stats in 1997? I do not believe they were comparable to Woodson's.

Yes, I am saying you are wrong.

But I haven't looked it up, so put me in my place if you can.
Click to expand...

It appears that you are having difficulty coming up with those statistics that you so confidently asserted were better than Woodson's? You must still be looking. Good luck with your research.
 
#41
#41
Actually no I haven't had time to look it up. First time I have checked back here.

I have looked it up in the past, don't need to now. Champ Bailey had better college statistics than Charles Woodson.

There was some dude from Vandy that did as well but I can't remember his name.

As I said before, at the time ESPN had the contract with the Big 10. I can see why they did what they did.

They were responsible for a HUGE campaign which intentionally placed an inflated impression of Woodson and intentionally placed a less than flattering impression of Manning. They admitted they did it intentionally but said they "didn't believe it would have swayed the votes it did."

So yes, they actively campaigned for their guy and against Manning. Likely at the time it had nothing to do with them disliking Tennessee and more to do with who they had a contract with, but they did it.

They influenced the vote.
 
#42
#42
ESPN has had an axe to grind against UT ever since we wouldn't move a home game to Thursday Night. They just don't seem to understand it's hard to reschedule 100,000 people with about a weeks notice. I can't remeber the AD then but he told them in no uncertain terms we would never move a home game. Apparently it did not set well with them and we have been treated like step kids ever since. To my knowledge we still have never played a game at Neyland stadium on Thursday night.
 
#43
#43
".........."Champ Bailey is the premier multi-purpose threat in the nation," wrote Tom Dienhart of The Sporting News. "His big-play ability on offense and defense makes him a threat to break open any game. He is a guy worth watching."

Indeed. He is a guy worth writing on ballots as well, like in Heisman Trophy ballots. But he has so little chance to win because of what happened last year. Michigan's Charles Woodson won the Heisman as a "defensive" player, although it was his dabbling in offense that caught the attention of the voting media. Woodson was not the best football player in the country last year, he just came up big in a couple of big television games and then he became the trendy candidate. Heisman voters voted him in as a backlash against complaints that the most cherished college football award always went to a quarterback or running back. Woodson gave them a chance to say, in essence, see how smart we are? We picked a defensive player for the Heisman?

Now understand I don't blame Woodson for that at all. He was merely the recipient of the backlash and he rode it to the Heisman Trophy. But with Woodson winning the award, the door has probably been slammed shut against a defensive player for the next 15 or 20 years. Bailey, who is twice the football player that Woodson was, would have to come up extra big whenever the Bulldogs get television exposure on a national level to even get into the national media's mindset........"

Champ Bailey for the Heisman? - Official Athletics Site of the University of Georgia Bulldogs

Hard to find actual stats as UGA doesn't go back that far etc. It was easy to find several years after though as that was current info and detailed stats were available such as int's, returns, returns for TD's etc. Champ was an awesome player even if he did play for UGA.

The reason articles like that even came out is because Bailey had better stats than Woodson had.

I'm not saying Woodson wasn't a good corner. I'm saying that he wasn't good enough to win the heistman, nowhere near, especially when you realize that the SEC had at least TWO cornerbacks in that same time frame that were better.

I mean you are basically comparing 4 big plays against over 40 collegate/school records (don't think Woodson ever got a record, maybe but I don't think so, it was a long time ago).

It's not even close.

50 years from now when people that were not tainted by the slanted media coverage during that time look at the heistman ballot they will all be scratching their heads saying WTF were they smoking???
 
Last edited:
#44
#44
Fwiw...i live close to nashville and i remember hearing a certain heistman winner from ohio state say he didnt even vote manning 2nd cause he knew manning would still win with the 2nd place votes? Dont know how true it was but i havent liked him since....even when my cowboys gave him a million $ for nothing!
 
#45
#45
I don't think ESPN hates us, they just don't like us as much as they like Florida and the Little 12.
 
#46
#46
I dont think they hate us at all. all we are now is a conflict story they can run to try to spur interest in kiffin and CUM going at it. they dont hate us....they just dont respect us...
 
#47
#47
People think that if they aren't saying anything really positive on us that they hate us. If anything ESPN wants to see us do well. They have hundreds of millions invested in the SEC and its teams. The reason they keep talking about Kiffin, weather its negative or positive, is because nothing else is going on right now so whatelse is outside the lines going to cover. Why would a network decide to have a grudge against one school? Some people on here are the types of people who think the US was behind 9/11
 
#48
#48
but sitting here saying they are all after us reminds me too much of republicans crying that the media hates them....and we all know we dont want to look like republicans....:D
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top