Ten shovels to the ESPN face

[AUesquire 1]

Stephen A. Smith is a racist jerk. Other than that...ESPN's okay.

[tigerfan1234 0]

I would agree that Stephen A. Smith is an arrogant, intolerable jerk and Lou Holtz is awful. Not crazy about some other stuff that ESPN does, but you have to at least give them props for branching out and trying new concepts and using a colorful array of people. Also, who in the world is that hideously ugly guy that bickers with Sean Salisbury all the time? He has a good voice, but man, that dude needs to take some of his salary and get an extreme makeover.

[Lurking Tiger 62]

I like how ESPN has evolved over the years. I do have a problem with their show of favortism for a few college football teams, but overall, I like the fact that the network has branched out to include many different shows and sporting events. What's wrong with the poker championships? PTI, Around the Horn, Cold Pizza, and some others? Those shows are pretty entertaining in my book. Basically what you guys are saying is you want a return to the days when ESPN was a couple of guys behind a desk reporting scores and highlights. Those days were boring folks. I love how older people always moan about how things aren't what they used to be. Times are changing. Some of you just need to relax and not be so resistant to change.

I weep for the future.

[GalensGhost 0]

who in the world is that hideously ugly guy that bickers with Sean Salisbury all the time? He has a good voice, but man, that dude needs to take some of his salary and get an extreme makeover.

John Clayton. He knows more about football than Salisbury could ever learn. Salisbury is an overbearing idiot.

You see? That's the difference to me. I'd rather hear what Clayton has to say because he's intelligent, insightful and has good information. Salisbury is a make-up caked talking head. Hard to tell if he's passing gas or talking because both sounds come out of the same basic place. But ESPN gravitates to the babbling fools because they look/dress better.

I don't give ESPN "props" for any of the garbage they've aired. Most of it is contrived and pretty awful. Got nothing to do with being "old" or wating things to remain status quo. I enjoyed the interaction between Patrick and Olberman. I thought they did a good job of presenting the information in an entertaining way. But it's just gone completely overboard now. It's gone from telling us about sports to trying to CREATE the news. They spent all weekend, every single talking head they had, pimping a Texas move up the polls to create a 1 vs. 2 matchup. They pimped it hard. When the polls came out guess what happened?

Two years ago, those boobs pimped just as hard against Auburn. And they'll do it again this season if things work out that way. Don't think it has an effect? Look at this week's polls.

I HATE ESPN. Given the choice of games being only on the radio or having to be subjected to their attempts to manipulate the game, I'd choose radio. I raised all kinds of hell about the Arkansas game not being on TV last season, but when I reconciled myself to doing the radio only, I actually enjoyed it immensely. I lit a fire in the copper pit, put some food on the grill and played in the backyard with my kids and some of the kids from the neighborhood while listening to the game. I enjoyed that as much as I've enjoyed any AU game in forever.

[Lurking Tiger 62]

who in the world is that hideously ugly guy that bickers with Sean Salisbury all the time? He has a good voice, but man, that dude needs to take some of his salary and get an extreme makeover.

John Clayton. He knows more about football than Salisbury could ever learn. Salisbury is an overbearing idiot.

You see? That's the difference to me. I'd rather hear what Clayton has to say because he's intelligent, insightful and has good information. Salisbury is a make-up caked talking head. Hard to tell if he's passing gas or talking because both sounds come out of the same basic place. But ESPN gravitates to the babbling fools because they look/dress better.

I don't give ESPN "props" for any of the garbage they've aired. Most of it is contrived and pretty awful. Got nothing to do with being "old" or wating things to remain status quo. I enjoyed the interaction between Patrick and Olberman. I thought they did a good job of presenting the information in an entertaining way. But it's just gone completely overboard now. It's gone from telling us about sports to trying to CREATE the news. They spent all weekend, every single talking head they had, pimping a Texas move up the polls to create a 1 vs. 2 matchup. They pimped it hard. When the polls came out guess what happened?

Two years ago, those boobs pimped just as hard against Auburn. And they'll do it again this season if things work out that way. Don't think it has an effect? Look at this week's polls.

I HATE ESPN. Given the choice of games being only on the radio or having to be subjected to their attempts to manipulate the game, I'd choose radio. I raised all kinds of hell about the Arkansas game not being on TV last season, but when I reconciled myself to doing the radio only, I actually enjoyed it immensely. I lit a fire in the copper pit, put some food on the grill and played in the backyard with my kids and some of the kids from the neighborhood while listening to the game. I enjoyed that as much as I've enjoyed any AU game in forever.

Testify, brutha.

[tigerfan1234 0]

I definitely agree that there are some things about ESPN that suck, but it isn't total garbage in my opinion. I agree that they take the college football world and make it into their personal plaything. That pisses me off because most of the media and fans are not that educated in the game so they just follow ESPN's advice like blind sheep. Auburn is oviously not one of the networks favorites and it sucks, but would people feel differently if we were a favorite? I hated Cold Pizza when it first came out, but it has really grown on me.