ESPN SPIN: Given the ref scandal was this 22 year drought a good thing?

[JSD]

More facts are now coming out, hence this thread. TD made 130 calls to another ref ect...

For months there were no new facts with the Patriots. Joey Porter had opinion and ESPN through it on the Sportscenter loop for god sakes. 

Did you not see this kind of stuff? Good VS. Evil!?


Where are the negative opinion pieces about the NBA?

What NBA team deserves an *? None! But it wouldn't have stopped an ESPN writer from "throwing it out there" or at least having a “fire David Stern” article nothing! Because ESPN invested.

You know about the calls because it was reported in places like ESPN.


But that is all the have.  Phone calls. 

What are they suppose to do?  Kill this official because of phone calls? 


There needs to be more to make it a bigger story. 

A reporter could write a piece on open probes and speculation hell yes.

My larger point of that post was the lack of "Easterbrook types" smashing and bashing the NBA with speculator opinion.

ESPN smashed the Pats in to the dirt with a crap opinion piece once a week for 8 months.

[Steve Weinman]

One more thing, why would ESPN protect the NBA and kill the NFL? 


I have no doubt Monday night football gets much better ratings then the NBA games.

You keep on going back to this NFL VS. NBA thing that is irrelevant. The ESPN picks and chooses what the major story.

Why is this irrelevant?

While I don't purport to suggest that ESPN does everything perfectly (or that SpyGate wasn't necessarily overblown), your lack of willingness to consider the point wdleehi is making here confuses me.

Yes, ESPN has a partnership with the NBA.

ESPN also has a parternship with the NFL.

The NFL has clearly demonstrated itself throughout recent memory as being the far more lucrative enterprise.  A primary reason for this is because that's what people in this country are interested in.  The sad fact of the matter (and I hate to admit this) is that the NBA isn't exactly "killin' it" as far as nationwide intrigue is concerned in general.  Thus, it isn't fair to look at the actual amounts of coverage received by SpyGate and the ref scandal without thinking about them in terms of the proportions in which the sports are covered to begin with.  Good or bad, ESPN gives football far greater priority over basketball all the time.  That isn't because they have an agenda against the Patriots or in favor of the NBA; that's because they know what draws viewers at this point.

For what it's worth, you'll remember that ESPN cancelled its inordinately well-rated Playmakers series back in 2003 after just one season because of pressure applied by the NFL.

The network is not wholly subservient to the NBA by any stretch of the imagination.

No doubt, ESPN pursues agendas at times, but in this case, from the breadth of your comments on this thread, it seems that you may be far more guilty of said offense than is the Worldwide Leader.

-sw

[crownsy]

The Pats were caught breaking a rule.  They were punished.  It was news.  All sports media reported it to death. 




One official was caught breaking the rules.  He was punished.  All sports media reported it to death. 




There was a story there might be a tape of the Pats recording the Rams walk through.  It was reported to death.




There was a story about the one official pointing fingers at other officials.  It was reported to death.


Now there is a story of 150 phone calls between officials.  It was reported.   






I fail to see where anything was either ignored or underreported? 

I agree but not to the degree to what the Pats endured. You think the Ref scandal got even 1/3 the attention as the “spygate”? You can't be serious.

Listen, I understand ESPN is a partner/customer of this site so this probably isn’t the best place to post my negative opinions but what’s true is true.

Couple of thing.


NFL is bigger then the NBA.


A multiple time Super Bowl winner is bigger then an NBA official.





Both were reported to death. 

Couple of things back.


NBA is bigger then an NFL Team.


An NBA official manipulating games is bigger than a team scouting signals.



One was reported to death. the other swept under the rug because ESPN had an investment to protect.

The fact you're a Giants fan clouds your reality, It didn't happen to you so I don't think you were paying close enough attention.

Evidence.


There is evidence that the Pats broke the rules.

There is evidence of one official breaking the rules.


There is no evidence of the NBA manipulating games. 

but there's plenty of evideance he didn't act alone, and yet stern wants no part of an investigation, and i don't exactly see espn "we own NBA playoff games" going out on a limb and callign stern out.

every story ive seen for the last 6 months is "dounghy is a scum bag, clearly the league is ok."

this is the same network tha defended sterns akward "uh yea, so only him. no one else was involved, im 100% sure!" press conferance, now it turns out that was blatnetly unture, and a simply phone records check proved it, and now i can't find one criticle article.

if this crap happened in the NFL, there's be 300 "fire goodell" articles. I guess that "intensive, extensive, internal review" didn't include a PI to check the guys phone. what a joke.

[JSD]

One more thing, why would ESPN protect the NBA and kill the NFL? 


I have no doubt Monday night football gets much better ratings then the NBA games.

You keep on going back to this NFL VS. NBA thing that is irrelevant. The ESPN picks and chooses what the major story.

Why is this irrelevant?

While I don't purport to suggest that ESPN does everything perfectly (or that SpyGate wasn't necessarily overblown), your lack of willingness to consider the point wdleehi is making here confuses me.

Yes, ESPN has a partnership with the NBA.

ESPN also has a parternship with the NFL.

The NFL has clearly demonstrated itself throughout recent memory as being the far more lucrative enterprise.  A primary reason for this is because that's what people in this country are interested in.  The sad fact of the matter (and I hate to admit this) is that the NBA isn't exactly "killin' it" as far as nationwide intrigue is concerned in general.  Thus, it isn't fair to look at the actual amounts of coverage received by SpyGate and the ref scandal without thinking about them in terms of the proportions in which the sports are covered to begin with.  Good or bad, ESPN gives football far greater priority over basketball all the time.  That isn't because they have an agenda against the Patriots or in favor of the NBA; that's because they know what draws viewers at this point.

For what it's worth, you'll remember that ESPN cancelled its inordinately well-rated Playmakers series back in 2003 after just one season because of pressure applied by the NFL.

The network is not wholly subservient to the NBA by any stretch of the imagination.

No doubt, ESPN pursues agendas at times, but in this case, from the breadth of your comments on this thread, it seems that you may be far more guilty of said offense than is the Worldwide Leader.

-sw

Hell Yes I have an agenda against ESPN and I'm very passionate about this because I feel it was unjust.

ESPN covered the NBA with Facts and moved on.

ESPN covered the Patriots with facts and beat it over the head again and agian and again with opinion.

That's why I believe the comparison irrelevant.

[Roy Hobbs]

Click on this link, and look on the right-hand side of the page.  There are approximately 30 news stories about the Donaghy scandal, approximately 25 opinion articles, various other video and audio clips, etc.  Many of these are critical of the NBA and the league's role in officiating.

No, the media isn't getting all jazzed up that Donaghy made some phone calls because, even though they look bad, there's no real evidence of wrong-doing.  Maybe this could be a bigger story than it is, but look on other sites; it isn't a big deal there, either.

I'm sure Bill Simmons will have something to say about this.   

Also, didn't "Outside the Lines" just do a big story this week about how the line between refs and players is too blurred?  ESPN seemed very critical of the NBA in that piece.

[JSD]

The Pats were caught breaking a rule.  They were punished.  It was news.  All sports media reported it to death. 




One official was caught breaking the rules.  He was punished.  All sports media reported it to death. 




There was a story there might be a tape of the Pats recording the Rams walk through.  It was reported to death.




There was a story about the one official pointing fingers at other officials.  It was reported to death.


Now there is a story of 150 phone calls between officials.  It was reported.   






I fail to see where anything was either ignored or underreported? 

I agree but not to the degree to what the Pats endured. You think the Ref scandal got even 1/3 the attention as the “spygate”? You can't be serious.

Listen, I understand ESPN is a partner/customer of this site so this probably isn’t the best place to post my negative opinions but what’s true is true.

Couple of thing.


NFL is bigger then the NBA.


A multiple time Super Bowl winner is bigger then an NBA official.





Both were reported to death. 

Couple of things back.


NBA is bigger then an NFL Team.


An NBA official manipulating games is bigger than a team scouting signals.



One was reported to death. the other swept under the rug because ESPN had an investment to protect.

The fact you're a Giants fan clouds your reality, It didn't happen to you so I don't think you were paying close enough attention.

Evidence.


There is evidence that the Pats broke the rules.

There is evidence of one official breaking the rules.


There is no evidence of the NBA manipulating games. 

but there's plenty of evideance he didn't act alone, and yet stern wants no part of an investigation, and i don't exactly see espn "we own NBA playoff games" going out on a limb and callign stern out.

every story ive seen for the last 6 months is "dounghy is a scum bag, clearly the league is ok."

this is the same network tha defended sterns akward "uh yea, so only him. no one else was involved, im 100% sure!" press conferance, now it turns out that was blatnetly unture, and a simply phone records check proved it, and now i can't find one criticle article.

if this crap happened in the NFL, there's be 300 "fire goodell" articles. I guess that "intensive, extensive, internal review" didn't include a PI to check the guys phone. what a joke.

TP. The only explanation could be that NFL is has hiring ratings

The double standard is awful.

[JSD]

Click on this link, and look on the right-hand side of the page.  There are approximately 30 news stories about the Donaghy scandal, approximately 25 opinion articles, various other video and audio clips, etc.  Many of these are critical of the NBA and the league's role in officiating.

No, the media isn't getting all jazzed up that Donaghy made some phone calls because, even though they look bad, there's no real evidence of wrong-doing.  Maybe this could be a bigger story than it is, but look on other sites; it isn't a big deal there, either.

I'm sure Bill Simmons will have something to say about this.   

Also, didn't "Outside the Lines" just do a big story this week about how the line between refs and players is too blurred?  ESPN seemed very critical of the NBA in that piece.

Oh Please, "Donaghy" or "referee" is in the title of everyone of them.

show me the,

"Stern Should be forced to resign"
"A decade of Tarnished basketball"

ESPN should be ashamed for what they did to the Patriots. It's that simple.

[Steve Weinman]

The Pats were caught breaking a rule.  They were punished.  It was news.  All sports media reported it to death. 




One official was caught breaking the rules.  He was punished.  All sports media reported it to death. 




There was a story there might be a tape of the Pats recording the Rams walk through.  It was reported to death.




There was a story about the one official pointing fingers at other officials.  It was reported to death.


Now there is a story of 150 phone calls between officials.  It was reported.   






I fail to see where anything was either ignored or underreported? 

I agree but not to the degree to what the Pats endured. You think the Ref scandal got even 1/3 the attention as the “spygate”? You can't be serious.

Listen, I understand ESPN is a partner/customer of this site so this probably isn’t the best place to post my negative opinions but what’s true is true.

Couple of thing.


NFL is bigger then the NBA.


A multiple time Super Bowl winner is bigger then an NBA official.





Both were reported to death. 

Couple of things back.


NBA is bigger then an NFL Team.


An NBA official manipulating games is bigger than a team scouting signals.



One was reported to death. the other swept under the rug because ESPN had an investment to protect.

The fact you're a Giants fan clouds your reality, It didn't happen to you so I don't think you were paying close enough attention.

Evidence.


There is evidence that the Pats broke the rules.

There is evidence of one official breaking the rules.


There is no evidence of the NBA manipulating games. 

but there's plenty of evideance he didn't act alone, and yet stern wants no part of an investigation, and i don't exactly see espn "we own NBA playoff games" going out on a limb and callign stern out.

every story ive seen for the last 6 months is "dounghy is a scum bag, clearly the league is ok."

this is the same network tha defended sterns akward "uh yea, so only him. no one else was involved, im 100% sure!" press conferance, now it turns out that was blatnetly unture, and a simply phone records check proved it, and now i can't find one criticle article.

if this crap happened in the NFL, there's be 300 "fire goodell" articles. I guess that "intensive, extensive, internal review" didn't include a PI to check the guys phone. what a joke.

Who is it that keeps saying the league is ok?

That certainly hasn't seemed to be the case on the occasions when I've (intentionally naively) written that I talk myself into believing the league is okay because until there is indisputable evidence, I'd rather believe what I want to believe.

I'm not sure the MSM -- or a good portion of our membership (or the country) -- see it that way.

-sw

[wdleehi]

When did Stern break the rules? 

[Steve Weinman]

Click on this link, and look on the right-hand side of the page.  There are approximately 30 news stories about the Donaghy scandal, approximately 25 opinion articles, various other video and audio clips, etc.  Many of these are critical of the NBA and the league's role in officiating.

No, the media isn't getting all jazzed up that Donaghy made some phone calls because, even though they look bad, there's no real evidence of wrong-doing.  Maybe this could be a bigger story than it is, but look on other sites; it isn't a big deal there, either.

I'm sure Bill Simmons will have something to say about this.   

Also, didn't "Outside the Lines" just do a big story this week about how the line between refs and players is too blurred?  ESPN seemed very critical of the NBA in that piece.

Oh Please, "Donaghy" or "referee" is in the title of everyone of them.

show me the,

"Stern Should be forced to resign"
"A decade of Tarnished basketball"

ESPN should be ashamed for what they did to the Patriots. It's that simple.

To whom is the analogy for Stern in the NFL?

Stern didn't cheat.

Goodell didn't cheat, and I have no recollection of folks calling or his resignation.  Am I missing a link here?

Were there calls for Belichick's resignation?

While I don't think he should have resigned, it's hard to complain about those who did re-sign.  After all, he did cheat.  As in, he knowingly broke the rules.

-sw

[BballTim]

The Commissioner sent out a league directive, warning teams they would be punished severely if they taped other team's signals.  The Pats received such memo.  The Pats violated such directive.  They lost a first round pick because of it.

I'm not sure why people insist that the Pats didn't do anything wrong.  It's understandable why this was a big story:  the undefeated team, led by a coach that has a tendency to be a bit of a jerk, directly and knowingly violates a directive from the new disciplinarian Commissioner.  The Commissioner thought it was a huge deal, by fining both the team and Belichek and taking away a #1.  I don't blame the media for their reaction (except for Tomase, if he really did print that story without a reliable source).

The Donaghy thing got huge attention at the time.  Since then, though, the FBI hasn't found any involvement from either other refs or the NBA itself.  When allegations have been made (against Bavetta, against Foster), the media has reported it, but without proof, and without NBA action, it's hard for them to justify spending weeks on the same non-story.

The MEMO

"Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game. "

Why not just say:

"Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is strictly prohibited"?

So the ACT is okay. the location wasn't!?

This is not a ""was spygate" cheating?" I already know that answer (absolutely not)

This is a thread about the malice from ESPN toward the Pats and the double standard it showed during the Ref scandal because of their stake.

  The act of videotaping doesn't seem to be the issue, the fact that they might have access to the videotape during the game is the issue.

[JSD]

The Commissioner sent out a league directive, warning teams they would be punished severely if they taped other team's signals.  The Pats received such memo.  The Pats violated such directive.  They lost a first round pick because of it.

I'm not sure why people insist that the Pats didn't do anything wrong.  It's understandable why this was a big story:  the undefeated team, led by a coach that has a tendency to be a bit of a jerk, directly and knowingly violates a directive from the new disciplinarian Commissioner.  The Commissioner thought it was a huge deal, by fining both the team and Belichek and taking away a #1.  I don't blame the media for their reaction (except for Tomase, if he really did print that story without a reliable source).

The Donaghy thing got huge attention at the time.  Since then, though, the FBI hasn't found any involvement from either other refs or the NBA itself.  When allegations have been made (against Bavetta, against Foster), the media has reported it, but without proof, and without NBA action, it's hard for them to justify spending weeks on the same non-story.

The MEMO

"Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game. "

Why not just say:

"Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is strictly prohibited"?

So the ACT is okay. the location wasn't!?

This is not a ""was spygate" cheating?" I already know that answer (absolutely not)

This is a thread about the malice from ESPN toward the Pats and the double standard it showed during the Ref scandal because of their stake.

  The act of videotaping doesn't seem to be the issue, the fact that they might have access to the videotape during the game is the issue.

It was proven they did not have access during the game...

[Roy Hobbs]

To repeat:

Also, didn't "Outside the Lines" just do a big story this week about how the line between refs and players is too blurred?  ESPN seemed very critical of the NBA in that piece.

Watch that piece, and tell me that ESPN doesn't dare to say anything negative about the officiating.

[BballTim]

The Commissioner sent out a league directive, warning teams they would be punished severely if they taped other team's signals.  The Pats received such memo.  The Pats violated such directive.  They lost a first round pick because of it.

I'm not sure why people insist that the Pats didn't do anything wrong.  It's understandable why this was a big story:  the undefeated team, led by a coach that has a tendency to be a bit of a jerk, directly and knowingly violates a directive from the new disciplinarian Commissioner.  The Commissioner thought it was a huge deal, by fining both the team and Belichek and taking away a #1.  I don't blame the media for their reaction (except for Tomase, if he really did print that story without a reliable source).

The Donaghy thing got huge attention at the time.  Since then, though, the FBI hasn't found any involvement from either other refs or the NBA itself.  When allegations have been made (against Bavetta, against Foster), the media has reported it, but without proof, and without NBA action, it's hard for them to justify spending weeks on the same non-story.

The MEMO

"Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game. "

Why not just say:

"Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is strictly prohibited"?

So the ACT is okay. the location wasn't!?

This is not a ""was spygate" cheating?" I already know that answer (absolutely not)

This is a thread about the malice from ESPN toward the Pats and the double standard it showed during the Ref scandal because of their stake.

  The act of videotaping doesn't seem to be the issue, the fact that they might have access to the videotape during the game is the issue.

It was proven they did not have access during the game...

  How did they prove that? Was the person that did the filming physically prevented from coming into contact with anyone else in the organization?

[fmf2]

On a broader perspective, if ESPN gave unfairly uneven coverage of Spygate in comparison to Donaghy because it has a vendetta against Belichick and a vested interest in protecting the NBA, then wouldn't the following also be true:

1. ESPN would have underreported other embarrassing stories revolving around the NBA such as the Knicks under Isiah, the brawl in Detroit and Kobe's rape trial.

2. ESPN would have been very sparse in their positive coverage of the Patriots over the past few years.

3. Spygate was only a major national story because ESPN made it so/ other media outlets did not make a big deal out of it.

Jsaad, are you arguing that these are also true?