- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What constitutes "media darling" and hypathetical scenario?
Posted on 7/20/12 at 2:30 pm to H-Town Tiger
Posted on 7/20/12 at 2:30 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
To summarize your post, the "media darling" is the team or teams that are really good. In other words, they talk about the good teams, they don't just "pump" teams they like.
The point is the media shouldn't "pump" anybody, whether they're really good or not, yet they most assuredly do. You need look no further than the nonstop "pumping" for Bama last year to define a "media darling."
0
Posted on 7/21/12 at 1:34 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:No, that's not what I said. I said there are "media darlings" that they will pump as much as possible given even the slightest excuse, while other teams accomplishing far more get significantly less pub. LSU is becoming one of those teams. Bama and SC already are such teams. If you think LSU got a lot of good press last year, just imagine what SC or Bama (or god forbid, Notre Dame) would have gotten if they had gone 13-0 in dominating fashion against probably the toughest schedule in modern football history. Hell, the '05 SC team didn't do nearly what LSU did last year and got far more positive press and hype.
To summarize your post, the "media darling" is the team or teams that are really good. In other words, they talk about the good teams, they don't just "pump" teams they like.
The "media darling" status is just a modifier. Yes, the media will in general talk more about teams doing well than teams that aren't good enough to be nationally relevant. But among those who are doing well, some teams will get more attention than others. And those teams are almost always identifiable as the ones thought to draw more national audience interest. If ESPN thought that they could get better ratings talking about Idaho and Utah State than they could talking about Notre Dame and SC, we'd be seeing Gameday in Moscow instead of L.A. come October 6th.
What so many fans (of all teams) seem to have trouble grasping is that while the media is clearly, hugely and unapologetically biased towards some teams over others, the bias has little if anything to do with personal biases. It's all about the money which means it's all about the ratings. They pump the teams they think the audience wants to see pumped. They do that because if the national TV audience wants to tune in to hear about how awesome Bama and SC are, and all that channel is talking about is how Wisconsin or Mississippi State looked really good in their win over Purdue or Auburn, what is that audience going to do? Change the channel to a station that is talking about how awesome Bama and SC are. They would rather have the 150,000 people who are looking for stories on Wisconsin and Mississippi State changing the channel than the 20,000,000 people who are looking for stories on Alabama and Southern Cal. It's just that simple, and it has nothing to do with ESPN (or anyone else) "hating" LSU or any other school. It has to do with what they think the market wants.
Right now, that's working in our favor more than it's working against us.
Posted on 7/21/12 at 9:42 am to acarso1
Notre dame and bama have been good forever. They have fans that stretch larger than most other fanbases. They are media darlings based on the past. Bama just gets it alot more cus they are winning. Same goes for michigan and ohio state, USC. Notre Dame will go away once all the old folks who actually saw them win something relevant pass on. When talking about espn you really have reece davis from bama and a bunch of big 10/northern guys. Only recently you see palmer and pollock. Those guys werent shy ab letting everyone know where the real defenses are.
This post was edited on 7/21/12 at 9:50 am
Posted on 7/21/12 at 9:47 am to acarso1
quote:
What constitutes "media darling
Teams that win, win, win. (The only exception is Notre Dame.)
Teams that win and have major stars (Heisman candidates) and are really flashy (usually with great offenses) and a major program to begin with...have star status.
You win, you win impressively, you win with star players who are up for Heismans...you are going to be a media darling period. Racking up tons of points, throwing the ball, winning...Miami (80's), Florida State (90's), USC (00's)...you WILL be a media darling.
So if you want to be a media darling stop grinding it out...follow the blueprint of those teams.
This idea that the media just loves some schools w/o winning is idiocy and false...except for one, Notre Dame. Everyone else who gets major love from the media EARNED IT by winning and being frankly awesome to watch. Very few media and the public like hand-offs all day into the middle of the line and "smash-mouth" football. It's boring to write about.
This post was edited on 7/21/12 at 9:51 am
Posted on 7/21/12 at 11:12 am to acarso1
quote:
it seems bama did not become this full fledged "media darling" until Nick Saban showed up and they started winning again.
seems to me you are young and have no basis for this claim. bama had the bear. that's all that needs to be said. w/o him, their history is still good but not great. yes, the media likes them but they like LSU too.
also, i'm glad i'm not the only one that can't spell for shite. thanks.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News