This has been part of broadcast football for a while now. The favored team gets more in-depth game prep (meaning, the announcers spend more time looking up and preparing cheat sheet notes on the favored team players, talk in more depth with that coaching staff, gather more human interest angles, etc.), and consequently gets more talk during the game.
The more lopsided the perceived balance between the teams, the more lopsided the prep and coverage will be.
Is it right? No. In the old days, announcers seemed to be more careful to give equal attention to both teams. That kind of went away with objective journalism in general, like 20-30 years ago.
These days the media are not driven by what's right, but by what sells. And as much as folks love an underdog, the neutral viewers want to hear all about Goliath while they're watching.
So if the TV audience is 20% Vols fans, 20% Bama fans, and 60% relatively neutral, that's 80% who might be cheering for the upset, but 80% in the other direction wanting to know more about the favored team.
And so that's what today's journalists follow.
Sucks when you're the underdog. So let's get to where we're the favorite.
Go Vols!
p.s. I'm not sure McElroy being McElroy was too much a part of that. He's shown an ability to provide objective assessment of teams playing Bama before. Remember, we had this same disfavored coverage in the Florida game, as well. And even in the Ole Miss game (part of that, though, is the media just loves to talk about Kiffin).
p.p.s. I'm all for play-by-play announcers not necessarily being former players. In fact, they almost never are. But the little fella who announced last night's game is about as opposite from an athlete as you could find. Tiny (he was talking to McElroy's shoulder all night long), scrawny, thick glasses, and a very Weird Science kind of vibe. But great voice. Maybe he was meant for radio.