• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

Herbstreit in the DOG house..

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
"Then why do you insist on continuing your idiotic line of reasoning?"
Because what's good for the goose is good for the gander, Akak...


"who's beating the dead horse?"
Looks like everyone still posting on this thread...


"You're the one coming over to a new board, and slamming long-time posters of good standing"
Hey, I'm only slamming long-timers who were slamming a short-timer for expressing what I believe to be a somewhat correct (if poorly-written) opinion.
"If you don't like us "fascist communities", then get out"
Naw, I think I'll stick around and fight the power
"If you want to be respected,"
Stop right there. If anyone here is looking for respect, you're in the wrong place: nobody here even goes by their real name (well, most don't :wink2: ).


Thanks to all for the warm welcome to BP, though! I'm off work now, but we'll get to football another time... Oh, and Go Bucks!:osu:
 
Upvote 0
"By the way, please explain to us just how someone can show a lack of objectivity by being too objective. "

DaveyBoy clarified this for me already, but note that I said Herbie shows a lack of objectivity toward our Bucks by trying to be too objective for a national audience. In trying to convince the non-Columbus crowd that he's no homer, he swings too far the other way and usually only allows himself to be negatively critical of OSU on GameDay.

But thanks again for displaying that veteran intelligence and class, Mili.
 
Upvote 0
DaveyBoy said:
...Immediately after the Sugar Bowl last year and again on Saturday, 12/4/04 in the College GameDay show. He said that OSU should have had to play USC in '02 and that LSU and USC should have squared off in '03......in order "decide it on the field".
Click to expand...

DaveyBoy, I don't think his statement about us having to play USC in post-season 2002 was anti-OSU, but rather meant to say the system should be set up to where more than two teams have a shot and that USC was as deserving as Miami was to play Ohio State...basicially saying that more than two teams were deserving of the title game. He repeated that same sentiment for last year's title game, where OSU wasn't even involved, so that tell's me he didn't make the comments about the 2002 title because he was biased against OSU. Now, I don't agree with him at all about 2002, seeing as USC lost twice, regardless if those losses were early in the season and how well they were playing at the end (teams could be able to overcome a loss during the season, but not two), but that doesn't mean that I don't think he was being objective in his opinions.
 
Upvote 0
KevinBuck said:
"By the way, please explain to us just how someone can show a lack of objectivity by being too objective. "

DaveyBoy clarified this for me already, but note that I said Herbie shows a lack of objectivity toward our Bucks by trying to be too objective for a national audience. In trying to convince the non-Columbus crowd that he's no homer, he swings too far the other way and usually only allows himself to be negatively critical of OSU on GameDay.

But thanks again for displaying that veteran intelligence and class, Mili.
Click to expand...
You know, this is a really cool place, Kevin, and believe it or not, we got your point. I'm not passing judgement on you but wouldn't this all be a bit better if you really tried to get Mili's point? I know you think you got it, but you didn't!

If Herbie is "swinging too far", then he is not being objective by definition. Objective is like pregnant, you are or you aren't, subjective is like temperature, it differs by degrees. If he is straying from the facts at all, then he is being subjective, not objective.
 
Upvote 0
KevinBuck said:
Buckinghorse and Oiler display exactly the kind of high-post-count self-righteous superiority that makes BN such a fascist community. Post counts mean nothing: they only expose how much time posters waste trying to display their own genius in an anonymous void. Heaven forbid someone with less than 1000 posts try to point out that some long-timers are beating a dead horse and being downright mean...

"Its for neither you nor I to decide the value of such an activity."

If it is indeed "for" those guys to argue to the death to prove an opposing viewpoint is idiotic, then the value of that activity is certainly within the realm of acceptable discussion for you and for I. :roll2:
Click to expand...
If you don't want to watch it turn off the TV, if you don't want to hear it turn off the radio, if you don't want to read it put the book down. If you don't like this site then don't come here. The only person with a right to tell other people what they can and cannot say is the person that owns and pays for the site (Clarity). You are not him, so i doubt anyone will pay attention to what you say. Just a a little advice. Oh yeah there is also an ignore feature to the site that you can use, it works very well.
 
Upvote 0
My God....


If I had a gun, I'd shoot the fuck out of this damn thread. Whole clip... bap bap bap bap bap bap bap bap bap

Penquin.. Kevin... I'm suing you both to get the parts of my life you and your idiotic rambling has taken from me. Better get counsel, guys. I'm not kidding. If a fat man can sue McDonalds, fuck it... I'm coming to get you bitches.
 
Upvote 0
http://www.collegefootballnews.com/2004/Columnists/MZ/MondayMorningQuarterback.htm

By Matthew Zemek

<TABLE cellSpacing=7 width=301 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width="100%"></TD></TR><TR><TD width="100%">Past MMQs Nov 27 | Nov 20 | Nov 13 | Nov 6 | Oct 31 | Oct 24 | Oct 17 | Oct 10 | Oct 3 | Sept 27 | Sept 20 | Sept 13 | Sept 6</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Everyone has a final word about the accomplishments of the Big Three—the Trojans, Sooners and Tigers.

Today, Auburn folks are saying that they, like their team, cannot fully or genuinely celebrate their team’s magical 12-0 SEC Championship season. The reason? Anyone in the media who says that Auburn has much to celebrate is merely patting them on the back, complementing the Tigers gently and positively so they can just fade away while everyone moves on to the “real championship game” between the Sooners and Trojans. Auburn fans are of an opinion which holds that the same writers and broadcasters who are so evidently biased against them are now praising Auburn in a backhandedly belittling and malicious way, all in the attempt to sweep this BCS controversy under the rug.

I can see what Auburn folks mean after watching ESPN’s Gameday crew over the weekend; however, while understanding what Tiger fans are thinking, their charges are just not true. If you can simply realize that the BCS does not intentionally discriminate against any one team or conference (it screws everybody at some point), you’ll realize that there’s no institutional bias in the BCS or among the media members that talk about it.<?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O /><O:P> </O:P>

But first, let’s explain why Auburn fans feel belittled, and not comforted, at the sympathy they’ve been getting from college football commentators and columnists over the past 24 hours.

Watching Gameday operate over the weekend, one can see the two different ways in which sympathy could come across to a jilted Auburn audience. (And let’s face it: the Gameday boys are the main roundtable discussion group in college football. They set industry standards for media opinion, especially since they’re able to see each of the top teams in person, unlike beat writers chained to one team or broadcasters—CBS’ Todd Blackledge, for example—chained to one conference.)

Chris Fowler and Kirk Herbstreit have both bashed the BCS and its obvious flaws all year, so that point alone should have solved the bias issue, nipping it in the bud and assuring Auburn folks that both broadcasters felt Auburn’s pain. But once the BCS matchup was set between USC and Oklahoma, Fowler and Herbstreit both wanted to avoid creating a riot-type atmosphere of unrest and rebellion, a reasonable-enough measure for any journalist, but especially for TV commentators who—as a consequence of making on-site appearances at stadiums, need to be level-handed in a way writers don’t have to. Fowler and Herbstreit have very legitimate reasons to be a little bit politically correct about the sport they cover: first, their safety; second, they are the icons of college football commentators; third, they’re very well compensated for their work. This writer has none of those considerations to look out for… at least, not yet.

So it’s understandable that the younger Gameday boys (with Grandpa Lee Corso focusing on the cancellation of the Rose Bowl if Cal got excluded) would soft-pedal BCS criticism when the Orange Bowl matchup was essentially decided.

However, the ways in which Fowler and (especially) Herbstreit articulated their thoughts is what gave rise to the anger being felt in the Auburn community today. Fowler—who wrote a moving column on Thursday and opened up about the morality of college football, something this writer did as well over the past few days—stressed the pain the Auburn community felt. While acknowledging his personal opinion that USC and OU were the top two teams in the country, Fowler clearly and emphatically stated that Auburn felt hurt, and had a right to be hurt. He acknowledged that the sight of an SEC champion being left out of the big game did not feel right. Fowler showed a particular reverence for the prestige and honor associated with an SEC title, thereby balancing out his belief that the Trojans and Sooners were the best teams in the country. With Fowler, one could tell that while he approved of a USC-OU matchup in Miami, he was still not happy with the BCS.

But with Herbstreit, things were different.

Yes, the former Ohio State quarterback is still an exceptional commentator; he, like this columnist, has pushed for a selection committee much like the one used in the NCAA basketball tournament, and his football analysis is first-rate. However, Herbstreit’s youth sometimes makes the Buckeye reluctant to deliver criticisms in an overly harsh way.

While it was fully obvious to anyone who’s watched a whole season of Gameday broadcasts that Herbstreit disapproved of the latest BCS mess, the man they call Kirk clearly acquired a “let’s forget about this and move on” attitude when the USC-OU matchup became clear. Herbstreit’s mention of Auburn’s disillusionment was very perfunctory, and his emphasis on the supremacy of the Trojans and Sooners was rather pronounced and authoritative. In an attempt to generate positive excitement about what truly is a great matchup (the only problem is that other possible Orange Bowls involving Auburn, against USC or OU, would have also been truly great matchups), Herbstreit went too far, saying that the BCS worked.

Wait a minute: you can’t suggest a number of policy changes relative to the BCS and college football’s overall postseason scheme, but then say—at the end of the season, when the big game’s matchup is announced—that this same misguided and broken system worked. Herbstreit created the impression that the BCS formulas neatly and fully coincided with his views, and that it worked like a charm as a result. However, this point stands in marked contrast to everything Kirk said about the BCS’ flaws over the course of the whole season.

Herbstreit (like Fowler) has good reason to not inflame controversy; yet, he shied away from many of his remarks over the course of the season, while Fowler was at least candid and consistent enough this past weekend to reassert the broken nature of a system that just didn’t feel right, and in fact never felt right throughout the fall of 2004. Herbstreit didn’t need to bend over backwards and say how much he hated the BCS—he didn’t need to inflame already raw emotions. All Kirk needed to do—while legitimately pumping up the USC-OU Orange Bowl, something he is supposed to do as a popular TV commentator—was to say up front that the BCS is a broken and unfair system. Having made that point for the umpteenth time, Herbstreit could then say—with a straight face and with more journalistic integrity—that USC-OU was a great matchup that luckily happened to coincide with his views.

What this whole explanation boils down to is that while Fowler and Herbstreit both panned the BCS all year long, Fowler gave a nod to the Auburn community on the final weekend of the year, a legitimate acknowledgment of the Tigers’ frustration and of the brokenness of the BCS. Herbstreit—while having much the same view as his colleague—decided, in a political move, to swallow his criticisms in order to pump up the Orange Bowl and not create an extra storm cloud of controversy over the game.

On the merits and content of their viewpoints, Fowler and Herbstreit are relative equals. Herbstreit, and the media at large, hardly hold any kind of institutional bias, just like the BCS system itself. But by swallowing some of his criticism in an attempt to be politically correct, Kirk created the appearance of not seeming to care about Auburn’s plight. When viewed in that light, one can understand why his praise of Auburn seemed hollow.

But look at the bigger picture: the same man who insists that a selection committee is needed for NCAA football does not simultaneously believe that the BCS is a good system that is fair to all parties involved in major college football. Herbstreit does feel for Auburn, but as a nod to the two teams who will play in Miami, the former quarterback wanted to congratulate Bob Stoops’ and Pete Carroll’s teams. That was the innocent but genuine purpose of Herbstreit’s clipped remarks about Auburn, in tandem with his effusive comments about the USC-OU Orange Bowl.

So whether you watched the BCS discussion shows—and the opinions within them—from a West Coast, Southern, or Central Plains perspective, please understand that no matter what the team or region, the BCS system is biased against everyone. The Gameday broadcasters, on the other hand, are biased against no one. Whether it’s the computers or the media, and whether the debate concerns the national championship game or an at-large BCS bowl bid, biases run in all directions and affect all conferences at some point in time. At a time when anyone and everyone in college football is quick to level a charge of bias against the BCS and the media that talks about it, the reality is that bias exists in very short supply. The BCS is an equal-opportunity heartbreaker, and the media are equal-opportunity praisers who know they won’t win over audiences by raining on any one team’s parade.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeyeskickbuttocks said:
My God....


If I had a gun, I'd shoot the fuck out of this damn thread. Whole clip... bap bap bap bap bap bap bap bap bap

Penquin.. Kevin... I'm suing you both to get the parts of my life you and your idiotic rambling has taken from me. Better get counsel, guys. I'm not kidding. If a fat man can sue McDonalds, fuck it... I'm coming to get you bitches.
Click to expand...
ohhhhhh. internet tough guy :lol:
 
Upvote 0
herb

OilerBuck said:
It's getting taken out of context. Herbie was responding to a question about the ineffectiveness of our offense and he posed a question about it's effect on recruiting. He said that he didn't know that he could sell the program to a big time offensive recruit. I totally agree. I didn't see any problem with what he said, but there have been major twists on peoples words recently. All Buckeyes are up in arms.
Click to expand...
Look No ones getting taken out of context.Did you not read his words ? That was a "QUOTE FROM HERBIE HIM SELF". He meant what he said.. and now he regrets it. I like both the University and Herbie but come on if I had to choose between the two, I know that at the end of the day I'm with the University of OSU.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top