sonofbutz Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I noticed the the commentary was biased....we won am i correct.... the Giants lost..... every time they beat us..the last 6 times in a row they replayed highlights over and over after the Giants dragged us through the mud. So i watched NFL Network....ESPN... & even Direct Tv Red Zone...No highlights... But if the Gnats would have beaten us Midget highlights all night...... Anyone else notice this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrifNick21 Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 It's always like this. I'm not shocked. HOWEVER, Redskins won today, so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No_Pressure Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I recall watching ESPN do a re-cap of football games one time years ago with a Bears fan friend of mine. They literally showed the highlights from every game around the league extensively and then when it came to our highlights from a game that we won, they played about 3 or 4 big play highlights for the other team and only one for our team, which wasn't even the game clinching score, it was the game tying one. My friend said to me holy crap, if I hadn't of read the box score when they flashed it on the screen I'd have thought the Redskins lost that game...why did they only spend a few seconds talking about the skins? He hadn't noticed it before and I hadn't pointed out what I thought was a lopsided view of our team. This was in 2005 when we were on a roll at the end of the year and he was astounded and asking me "does the media do that on purpose? You'd almost think they had to be doing that on purpose..." The next week rolled around and the same thing happened basically. He was more enraged about it than I was because he had no idea it was going on. The NFL network highlights for our game left out one of our touchdowns, instead the last highlight they showed was Grossman being sacked and fumbling, thats just how the NFL network does it though, I've never liked their quick highlights for any game/team. Fact is, news sources don't want to talk about the Redskins. Why? If you don't know the answer to that, I don't really know if you would be prepared to hear such an answer. If we go out there this season and turn in a winning season, make the playoffs, and maybe go back and do it again or do it better next season...well I think they'll be showing our highlights as much as the Patriots, Packers, Steelers. The only thing that pisses me off if that the Cowboys are entirely mediocre and media sources are all over their balls, but thats just the nature of a frontrunner team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenspandan Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Fact is, news sources don't want to talk about the Redskins. Why? If you don't know the answer to that, I don't really know if you would be prepared to hear such an answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No_Pressure Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 If one doesn't know the Redskins aren't talked about in the media because they've sucked for the better part of 19 or so years, then the person in question would likely not be prepared to hear the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 If one doesn't know the Redskins aren't talked about in the media because they've sucked for the better part of 19 or so years, then the person in question would likely not be prepared to hear the truth. We aren't the only team that has sucked and other have sucked worse. Why then did they show all the highlights from the other games except ours? That is what you said. So if the Lions won a game they wouldn't show all their highlights either? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins4ever Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Only a few people, namely Marshal Faulk, and a few others, picked the Redskins to win this game. Most of these so-called experts are not realizing that this is a Mike Shanahan coached team. A Shanahan coached team comes to play. Certain pieces have been placed on the team, and it's better than last season. If the Redskins play every game like they did today, they can at least end up as a 11-5 or 12-4 kind of team. They sure looked like it today! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rpredskins Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 NFL Network (and radio) gives relatively equal coverage, which makes sense since every game is their product. They also have the best pre-game show, they have informed football analysis and they behave intelligently unlike Fox. Don't expect much from ESPN but the Redskins are a big market so it could be worse. NBC didnt even show highlights of some of the games (I cant remember which- might have been 9ers and Seahawks). They basically treat it like college football where the "good" teams get all the coverage and bad teams are an afterthought and upsets seem to always have asterisks or excuses. This is of course extremely dumb given how often upsets happen in the NFL and how quickly teams turn themselves around, sometimes over the course of a season or a week. Part of it is that the season just started and the media is trying to fit this weekend's results into the storylines they created over the past 7 months. Soon this season will develop its own personality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKINS FAN #56 Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 NFL Network (and radio) gives relatively equal coverage, which makes sense since every game is their product. They also have the best pre-game show, they have informed football analysis and they behave intelligently unlike Fox. Don't expect much from ESPN but the Redskins are a big market so it could be worse. NBC didnt even show highlights of some of the games (I cant remember which- might have been 9ers and Seahawks). They basically treat it like college football where the "good" teams get all the coverage and bad teams are an afterthought and upsets seem to always have asterisks or excuses. This is of course extremely dumb given how often upsets happen in the NFL and how quickly teams turn themselves around, sometimes over the course of a season or a week.Part of it is that the season just started and the media is trying to fit this weekend's results into the storylines they created over the past 7 months. Soon this season will develop its own personality. Couldn't have been said any better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussieskin Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 i like listening to mike and mike at least they are fair in the way they talk about the skins, the skins will go a long way this year, Romo sits to pee cost the girls again, and the NFC East is starting to power up or least the eagles and us are, the giants look they will struggle for a bit and the girls are in for a long year by the look of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 If the Redskins play every game like they did today, they can at least end up as a 11-5 or 12-4 kind of team. They sure looked like it today! Defensively I agree but there were a lot of dropped passes on offense and the OL didn't look very good. The Giants defense was missing about 1/2 of their starters and besides the OL getting blown up by the extra defenders the Giants sent the only time the Redskins offense was really shut down was because of the dropped balls. A lot of dropped passes and weak OL is just going to increase the chances that Grossman has to take and his turnovers will increase against better defenses. The Dallas, St. Louis, and Eagles games will give us a good idea of how it's going to work out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aireskoi Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I was listening to Sirius in the car after the game and they covered each game with audio from some of the best plays. When they got to us they just said we beat the giants and gave the score. They then went on to the next game, played an audio clip and talked about it for a few seconds. I swear we were the only game to get glossed over. I didn't listen all night, just for about an hour. Not the regular programming, which is more balanced, just the recap show on Sunday night. BTW, cant wait to hear what Shine has to say for himself now that Rex "If he's the answer then I don't know the question" Grossman outplayed and beat his boy Eli "Superbowl champion" Manning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No_Pressure Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 We aren't the only team that has sucked and other have sucked worse. Why then did they show all the highlights from the other games except ours? That is what you said. So if the Lions won a game they wouldn't show all their highlights either? They do skip those teams on highlights or show highlights for the "better" teams they play against and lose. We don't necessarily notice it that much because we're focused on when we get to see our team do something good. Think of the massive coverage the Lions and 49ers get. They don't. Neither do we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mania Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I noticed the the commentary was biased....we won am i correct....the Giants lost..... every time they beat us..the last 6 times in a row they replayed highlights over and over after the Giants dragged us through the mud. So i watched NFL Network....ESPN... & even Direct Tv Red Zone...No highlights... But if the Gnats would have beaten us Midget highlights all night...... Anyone else notice this. Halftime showed the interception, touchdown of Ryan Kerrigan. Of course that was NBC. Monday Night Football on ESPN will not show anything. I hope I'm wrong, but I can't stand ESPN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Levi Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The Nation magazine is picking football these days?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyfar Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 There's always going to be posts like this. Until the Skins are a Super Bowl champion or top tier playoff contender they are going to be second fiddle and get this type of treatment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sellersfan Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I think in some respects the Skins have made the media execs a little gun shy about having us on the tube. The swinging gate game, or the home game versus the Eagles last year do not make for compelling television. Yet they were national televised games. 4-12, or 6-10 teams dont get national games very often. Because the NFC east has the largest media market we end up getting more exposure than other teams with similar records. Just need to keep improving so we aren't embarassed when we are the feature game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brutality Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Not that I disagree that the media is biased towards us, but a lot of people picked us to upset the Giants in articles I read so I can't really agree with this thread. The football media world hates us though so we'll get no love till we win games on a consistent basis and they can deny us no longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIXX99 Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Ok kids, get your hard hats on cause I'm about to drops some knowledge. Let's look at this from the media perspective, over the past, let's say, five years, have the Redskins had consistent games where we had multiple highlight worthy plays in a game on a fairly consistent basis? Have we had a league-wide respected play-maker on offense or defense that makes big plays on a consistent basis? Portis, was a big threat but he would beat teams over the course of a game, Moss would get lost for games at a time in between huge games, Cooley was consistent but TE catches don't have the sex appeal the media wants. Now take all that and add in the fact that we have embarrassed ourselves on MNF and other Prime-Time games (excluding the Monday Night Miracle and a few others), a new coach and QB every 2-3 years, an owner that wanted to buy a fantasy football team, big name signings that tanked, and inconsistent performances from week to week. We haven't been a "sexy" story for the media in a time where media is evolving and only wants a big headline, a controversy, or a winner. So the fact that the media gives us the cold shoulder from time to time on a highlight show or picks us to lose a game it's not really a bias or a conspiracy against the Redskins, it's just a media system. And really who cares if they are "against us"? You know what can fix that? Winning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PortisBetts Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Ok kids, get your hard hats on cause I'm about to drops some knowledge. Let's look at this from the media perspective, over the past, let's say, five years, have the Redskins had consistent games where we had multiple highlight worthy plays in a game on a fairly consistent basis? Have we had a league-wide respected play-maker on offense or defense that makes big plays on a consistent basis? Portis, was a big threat but he would beat teams over the course of a game, Moss would get lost for games at a time in between huge games, Cooley was consistent but TE catches don't have the sex appeal the media wants. Now take all that and add in the fact that we have embarrassed ourselves on MNF and other Prime-Time games (excluding the Monday Night Miracle and a few others), a new coach and QB every 2-3 years, an owner that wanted to buy a fantasy football team, big name signings that tanked, and inconsistent performances from week to week. We haven't been a "sexy" story for the media in a time where media is evolving and only wants a big headline, a controversy, or a winner. So the fact that the media gives us the cold shoulder from time to time on a highlight show or picks us to lose a game it's not really a bias or a conspiracy against the Redskins, it's just a media system. And really who cares if they are "against us"? You know what can fix that? Winning. i couldnt agree more. My issue is that they still show highlights of teams that were 2-14 or 3-13 and always consistently skip the skins, even when we are 6-10 and better then some teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIXX99 Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 i couldnt agree more. My issue is that they still show highlights of teams that were 2-14 or 3-13 and always consistently skip the skins, even when we are 6-10 and better then some teams. The 2-14 teams and the like are still a story though. You get the number one pick race, the "will they go win-less" story, the head coach fired/in comes the interim guy story. Good is entertaining, bad is entertaining, mediocrity is boring. And they get highlights because even though they may lose every game when (insert big name draft pick on crappy team) makes a big touchdown play and the (insert crappy team) get win number 2 in week 16 it's a better story to show and talk about than the middle of the pack teams that foot tooth and nail with another middle of the pack team on the same day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Ok kids, get your hard hats on cause I'm about to drops some knowledge. Let's look at this from the media perspective, over the past, let's say, five years, have the Redskins had consistent games where we had multiple highlight worthy plays in a game on a fairly consistent basis? Have we had a league-wide respected play-maker on offense or defense that makes big plays on a consistent basis? Portis, was a big threat but he would beat teams over the course of a game, Moss would get lost for games at a time in between huge games, Cooley was consistent but TE catches don't have the sex appeal the media wants. Now take all that and add in the fact that we have embarrassed ourselves on MNF and other Prime-Time games (excluding the Monday Night Miracle and a few others), a new coach and QB every 2-3 years, an owner that wanted to buy a fantasy football team, big name signings that tanked, and inconsistent performances from week to week. We haven't been a "sexy" story for the media in a time where media is evolving and only wants a big headline, a controversy, or a winner. So the fact that the media gives us the cold shoulder from time to time on a highlight show or picks us to lose a game it's not really a bias or a conspiracy against the Redskins, it's just a media system. And really who cares if they are "against us"? You know what can fix that? Winning. Pretty much agree, the media is not so much biased against the Redskins as biased to good entertainment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 NFL Network (and radio) gives relatively equal coverage, which makes sense since every game is their product. They also have the best pre-game show, they have informed football analysis and they behave intelligently unlike Fox. Don't expect much from ESPN but the Redskins are a big market so it could be worse. NBC didnt even show highlights of some of the games (I cant remember which- might have been 9ers and Seahawks). They basically treat it like college football where the "good" teams get all the coverage and bad teams are an afterthought and upsets seem to always have asterisks or excuses. This is of course extremely dumb given how often upsets happen in the NFL and how quickly teams turn themselves around, sometimes over the course of a season or a week.Part of it is that the season just started and the media is trying to fit this weekend's results into the storylines they created over the past 7 months. Soon this season will develop its own personality. No way to prove your wrong but the OP is correct about this The coverage on that game to me was biased Sure they showed the game but they didn't show many Skins highlights They didn't show us scoring. they didn't show the FG block, they favored the Giants as far as the videos go And the talk wasn't about us coming back. it was about them being injured If any one thinks this isn't the way it is going to be all season then you don't realize the situation The national media said this was a 3 or 4 win team before a single game was played Media asshats have egos as big as the players they report on And if you think they are about to come out saying how they were wrong forget about it Not until they are forced too. Its us against the world. And that's exactly how I want it to be Hope Zona's favored this next game up...more fuel for the damn fire. Burn it down Remember it's us against the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I saw highlights all morning on multiple networks. (ESPN, NFLN, etc.) Also a ton of praise for Rex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIXX99 Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 No way to prove your wrong but the OP is correct about thisThe coverage on that game to me was biased Sure they showed the game but they didn't show many Skins highlights They didn't show us scoring. they didn't show the FG block, they favored the Giants as far as the videos go And the talk wasn't about us coming back. it was about them being injured This gives me a good example to kind of bring the point I am trying to make home. The 10 year anniversary of 9/11 the New York Giants are going up against the media appointed cellar-dwellers of the NFC East and personal ***** of the Giants for the past six match-ups. There is gonna be NOTHING bigger than the "injury ridden" Giants issuing a beat down to the Redskins on national tv to make New York proud on the somber anniversary of 9/11. They get the pre-game shot of a teary-eyed Brandon Jacobs (Not that I have anything against him being emotional, I'm not making light of the situation at all) do they show the entire Redskins team going up to hold the flag? Barely. Game starts, we come out flat and the Giants are rolling with the deep bombs. Joe Buck and Troy Aikman are licking their chops because this game is going exactly how they want it to. We come out second half, Kerrigan makes the pick we go up. The FOX crew is sweating it. We get some more shots of Justin Tuck cheering on from the sidelines and are reminded of how the Giants have multiple injuries. Sack, strip, fumble. Time for Eli Manning to take the game over. Wait, no? OK a field goal will do. Blocked! Who blocked it? FOX isn't gonna show you but lets cut to a grumpy Tom Coughlin instead of showcasing a moderately rare play in the NFL. You get the idea, you watched the game. So my point is, of course the coverage was biased. Because of the obvious reasons regarding 9/11 and because the Giants were the favorite going into the game. Yesterday was a unique situation from a broadcast standpoint so this can't justify the years this has gone on but that's my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.