Espn And Ravens Respect

[Jesse Conroy]

R-E-S-P-E-C-T find out what it means to me.

For years I have noticed that ESPN and its sports casters never give the Ravens any kind of respect. I was watching it today, and they were make fun of Harbaugh with his training methods, and they were saying how we would have a terrible year under .500 next season. Even when we dont have a bad year they talk bad about us. I know Boomer never picks us to win, even when we went 13-3 throughout that season he would pick against us. I have notice some respect occasionally, but most disrespect.

I dont have any type of source, if someone that agrees wants to post one.

But I am sick of it, anyone else agree, and notice this?

[neepo13]

I think most people will agree with you. It has been mentioned several times before. Thats why you shouldnt pay ESPN any mind, half the time they dont have a clue what they are talking about, anyways. They are to worried about who is dating who to actually sit down and analyze a roster.

[Jesse Conroy]

I think most people will agree with you. It has been mentioned several times before. Thats why you shouldnt pay ESPN any mind, half the time they dont have a clue what they are talking about, anyways. They are to worried about who is dating who to actually sit down and analyze a roster.

But other than espn, there arent many sports shows.

[neepo13]

But other than espn, there arent many sports shows.

Thats very true and in my opinion thats the only reason why they are the "world wide leader in sports".

[Jesse Conroy]

Thats very true and in my opinion thats the only reason why they are the "world wide leader in sports".

lol exactly, If I had all those channels that you have to pay for, I would watch those.. but I dont.

[justifythegame]

its not just ESPN, its almost all sports shows...courtesy of the Washington Redskins and their presence near md. Ravens are the least popular team in the nfl and it can also be attributed to the fact that we are one of the newest teams, aren't in a popular city like washington or dallas, and that we have no pretty boy flashy all star qb. and for some reason thats associated with sucking. we're just a physical football team that plays defense and pounds the football, and thats just not as "cool" or "popular" as who Tom Brady is dating. If it wasn't for Ray Lewis and his reputation as the best MLB and best D, alot of people wouldn't even recognize the Ravens as an actual team.

[theFRANCHISE]

The main reason why the national media at large (on television) seem to shortchange the Ravens is because the Ravens' style of football, since the team's inception in 1996, has always been about the defense.

Although the Tampa Bay Buccaneers' Super Bowl win popularized the slogan, "Defense Wins Championships," the media is more inclined to put a team on a pedestal with a high-octane offense.

Why do you think Al Davis is so in love with the vertical passing game and having rocket-armed QB's slinging the ball downfield to speedy deep threats?

Basically, a punishing defense is not what the general public would consider "marketable," since there's no flashiness to it. It's much easier to sell products with a QB, RB, or WR as the spokesman, than a DT or CB.

Let's face it -- in this A.D.D. generation, people want things to happen at the drop of the time. There is a constant need for action, and only the offense can deliver that, with touchdowns at the drop of a dime, and players juking defenders out of their shoes. The most the defense can do to "excite" the casual fan is deliver a punishing hit or make a circus catch of an interception.

So if you think about it, it makes perfect sense why ESPN and other news outlets don't seem to cut the Ravens any slack. The Ravens just don't play ball the way the rest of the league does.

And frankly, I don't care. As long as the Ravens have more points than the other team when the clock strikes 00:00, whether it be by one point or 21 points, I don't care. After all, wins come and go, so worry less about HOW you get them, and worry more about getting them, period.

[Sub-Zero]

i'll take Dilusional Networks for $1000 Alex

The MTV of sports. A bunch of hacks are paid to pose as sportscasters, analysts, or reporters to bring you the latest in the sports world. Athletes use this for their 15 seconds of fame. Fans use it, well because their isn't really much out there.

What is ESPN?

DING DING DING!! you are correct sir and that concludes our game

(jeopardy music plays)

truth is, ESPN is mainly a red sox/yankees/patriots network or whoever the hell is on top of their sport. I know better than to take these hacks seriously, I only watch it for breaking news or if their is a game on and im forced to watch it on here. otherwise it would be like watching MTV for its music

[Raven07]

in other words...espn is more like a sports station that shows its biasm openly and not afraid to show it or even deny it when appointed or addressed to the particular issue. its truly a rarity these days to find anyone who isnt biased towards any one side.....at least they show no biasm while they are working and doing what they do best, to say the least.

[neepo13]

i'll take Dilusional Networks for $1000 Alex

The MTV of sports. A bunch of hacks are paid to pose as sportscasters, analysts, or reporters to bring you the latest in the sports world. Athletes use this for their 15 seconds of fame. Fans use it, well because their isn't really much out there.

What is ESPN?

DING DING DING!! you are correct sir and that concludes our game

(jeopardy music plays)

truth is, ESPN is mainly a red sox/yankees/patriots network or whoever the hell is on top of their sport. I know better than to take these hacks seriously, I only watch it for breaking news or if their is a game on and im forced to watch it on here. otherwise it would be like watching MTV for its music

VVWP.

[ragnorok99]

I think Franchise pretty much nailed it, but I'll add a couple of my thoughts:

--ESPN is a business. The Ravens have a relatively small fanbase when you compare it to the Steelers, Cowboys, Packers, Patriots, and so on. This frees ESPN up to take shots at the Ravens without pissing off too many viewers, and it's a double whammy when they can pander to the larger crowd by laughing at the smaller (case in point: the Steelers' anniversary celebration game, when they invited Bradshaw in to make fun of the Ravens and slurp the Steelers).

--Many of their writers/analysts have ties to other teams, whether it be from their beat-writing days or from their time as a player. So you get people like Merril Hoge, an former Steeler, making (probably) biased picks. Someone correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I don't know of any major ESPN faces that have Ravens ties other than Sage Steele, who doesn't do all that much. I don't really know of a way to fix this--if I played for or wrote about a team, I'd probably be biased in their favor, too.

I try to watch Comcast SportsNet over ESPN as often as I can, but they're Redskins-centric so it's slim pickings. Still choose their Wizards game coverage over ESPN's any day of the week--I'll be watching Wizards-Celtics on Comcast tonight, both to stick it to ESPN and listen to better commentators.

[Nightman]

For good Ravens coverage, I'll have to wait until football season starts and then turn on MASN, the Official Network of the Ravens, for the RAVE TV shows such as Wired, The coaches show (If there doing one for John Harbaugh), Ravens Report and Purple Passion. I also like Touchdown Baltimore with Tom Davis and Bruce Laird. The radio show I rely on weekly on WNST is the Saturday Ravens show, while its not perfect it will hold me until football season starts.

[justifythegame]

how does sage steel have ties with the Ravens?

[theFRANCHISE]

how does sage steel have ties with the Ravens?

She was a former broadcaster on Comcast SportsNet for roughly three or four years (maybe more, correct me if I'm wrong) and regularly covered the Ravens (and sometimes Redskins) before getting the call from ESPN.

[Raven07]

for not only good Raven Coverage, but widely considered to be the best Raven Coverage out there right now.....i think all people would have to do here is just take a wide gander at RaveTV. because for the most obvious of reasons.....they have the best coverage of the Baltimore Ravens and i love it. not too mention WBAL on Ravens Game Day with Jerry......he is one whom also keeps the Raven Flame Alive and well.

[minford]

I'm going to go ahead and play devil's advocate on this one. True, the Ravens are one of the least popular teams in the NFL so that is a strike against us, but all that means is we get less press. We had two Monday night games last year with a nice sprinkling of Sunday night games (one of those games turned into the highest rated non-superbowl game of all-time).

1.) You seriously can't expect the Ravens to be showered with praises after going 3-13 and getting a new coach. To think otherwise is delusional. Respect in the NFL is earned, not based on history.

2.) The Ravens have never had a good offense in recent years and with defenses improving across the board, you can't expect such a subpar offense to be a serious contender. Yeah Jamal's 2000+ rushing year was awesome but 1-dimensional offenses don't mean a damn thing come playoffs. (New England Passtriots, anyone?)

3.) Blaming Redskins fans for lack of Ravens love is laughable. If the Bengals moved to Columbia don't think for a second any of you wouldn't try and do what you're claiming the Skins fans are doing to us.

4.) ESPN's preseason power rankings had us in the top 3. During the 13-3 season our average position on the power rankings was #3. That looks like a lot of love to me. And Don't tell me Berman didn't pick us to win games that season. You don't climb to the #3 spot (actually, I think we got as high as #2) and be picked to lose.

5.) The reason ESPN reports on teams with high powered offenses is because they win, and yes, are exciting. What made New England so special this year? Their insane offense! But they report on teams with brutal defenses just as much, its just that there are fewer teams that rely so heavily on defense as we do so naturally we're going to see more coverage on the offensive-based teams than the defensive based ones, a fact that many of you see as a slight against our style of play. Its not.

Stop whining children.

[neepo13]

I'm going to go ahead and play devil's advocate on this one. True, the Ravens are one of the least popular teams in the NFL so that is a strike against us, but all that means is we get less press. We had two Monday night games last year with a nice sprinkling of Sunday night games (one of those games turned into the highest rated non-superbowl game of all-time).

1.) You seriously can't expect the Ravens to be showered with praises after going 3-13 and getting a new coach. To think otherwise is delusional. Respect in the NFL is earned, not based on history.

2.) The Ravens have never had a good offense in recent years and with defenses improving across the board, you can't expect such a subpar offense to be a serious contender. Yeah Jamal's 2000+ rushing year was awesome but 1-dimensional offenses don't mean a damn thing come playoffs. (New England Passtriots, anyone?)

3.) Blaming Redskins fans for lack of Ravens love is laughable. If the Bengals moved to Columbia don't think for a second any of you wouldn't try and do what you're claiming the Skins fans are doing to us.

4.) ESPN's preseason power rankings had us in the top 3. During the 13-3 season our average position on the power rankings was #3. That looks like a lot of love to me. And Don't tell me Berman didn't pick us to win games that season. You don't climb to the #3 spot (actually, I think we got as high as #2) and be picked to lose.

5.) The reason ESPN reports on teams with high powered offenses is because they win, and yes, are exciting. What made New England so special this year? Their insane offense! But they report on teams with brutal defenses just as much, its just that there are fewer teams that rely so heavily on defense as we do so naturally we're going to see more coverage on the offensive-based teams than the defensive based ones, a fact that many of you see as a slight against our style of play. Its not.

Stop whining children.

1) No one expects praise for a 5-11 season but it would be nice if the media stopped making this team out to be one of the worst in the NFL. Compared to other under .500 teams, the Ravens have a lot going for them.

2) True the Ravens never have great offense but like it or not they dont always need alot of offensive production to win the games. In 2006, the Ravens won 13 games with that sub- par offense. And were still the underdogs and picked to lose against the Steelers at home, when they were 8-2 and the Steelers were under .500. If thats not disrespect, when the team deserves respect, I dont know what is.

3) I cant disagree with that. Although, I dont think anyone was actually blaming Redskins fans. I think what was said is that its easy for major sports networks to get away with being bias against certain teams in certain areas because certain other team's fan bases are much larger.

4) ESPN's preseason power ranking had little to nothing to to with them giving us respect. If I am not mistaking the preseason before 2006, they had us in the bottom 10. So, as far as I am concerned that was just to saving face.

5) Offense sells but defense wins championships. 5 of the last 8 superbowls were won because of great defensive play but still the only guy raving about great defense is Bill Cowher. The fact of the matter is the media does not care about teams that win games on defense, they just dont. Teams like that are not "sexy" to them, and we are one of them. High powered offenses win games and thats why they get so much press, have you ever heard of the Bengals, Rams or Saints? The Bengals, Rams and Saints all suffered major injuries last year just like we did but because they have "sexy" offenses they get more respect than an injury riddled defensive team, like us. The bias is there and it will not be denied.

I guess when your winning you dont really care that you are not getting any respect from the media but when you have a sour taste in your mouth like we do it matters.

[Raven07]

and sometimes (most of the time in our case) having less Press, Less attention and overall less of the public eye watching or bearing down on us is certainly a great thing to have. im sure that alot of teams would love to be the type to "fly under the radar" as such as us. but seeing how most of them do not...well then...i guess its just bad luck.

and ima just take a gander at these

1) yea that is true about that...having a losing record and/or a losing season definately puts a damper on whats to follow suite....and we went 5-11 not 3-13 lol. if you remember even after we won the Superbowl in 2000, we really didnt get the "publicity" that we thought we deserved...and if you look around the league right now as well in the past, teams like the Patriots and what not.....they could have a losing season and they'd still get an overload of Publicity "what went wrong?!?!" or "what do they need to do to get back" and whatever else they can think of. it just come with the people whom are calling it and i guess the area.

2) i think you mean the Ravens havent had a "good" offensive unit overall in recent years...the 2006 ravens stand as one of the levels of potential that this team has within itself and if we have everyone healthy enough to do so. if i remember correctly....NFL total access was referring to our offense that year as "respectable" and what not. thus is why i think that with the new changes on this new Ravens Team, there is a re-newed sense on Life and a new lease on a multitude of things...all of which are pointing in the positive direction here. plus we have a proven guy in Cameron that's calling the offensive shots now.....and he's had a great deal of success where ever he has gone. didnt matter what team or how...or what level it was at...college of NFL...he got it done. and thats something to look forward to for the future.

3) i think its a little bit of half and half here...seeing how it was the Redskins fans whom started this "fued" over us and how they think we "stole" their fans from them...well las time i checked reality....everyone was free and everyone had their own oppinions...thus everyone is doing what they do on their own accord. thus making this "whining" from the Redskins fans......un-realistic.

4)i think alot of people are not basing what their oppinions and thoughts on the power rankings because that part of it all..is or at least should be fair....i think that its what the analysts and people abroad have been saying or in this case "not saying" about the Ravens that causes this to happen or occur.

5) i think the issue here is not that "other teams with a lower calibur type style of play or whatever, dont get the type of recognition they deserve" i think its more so along the lines of "those so called 'hiigh powered teams' get far far too much of it, thus making reports basically the same over and over again day after day, year after year".....it would be nice to see a change of that occurance......i mean because for the past 6-7 years its been basically nothing but Patriots Patriots Patriots. thats when they lose players, pick up players, win games, lose games.....its all the same deal with them as times goes on. so yea.....it would be nice to see a tad bit of the "change of heart" instead of the same ol same ol stuff.

[minford]

1) No one expects praise for a 5-11 season but it would be nice if the media stopped making this team out to be one of the worst in the NFL. Compared to other under .500 teams, the Ravens have a lot going for them.

2) True the Ravens never have great offense but like it or not they dont always need alot of offensive production to win the games. In 2006, the Ravens won 13 games with that sub- par offense. And were still the underdogs and picked to lose against the Steelers at home, when they were 8-2 and the Steelers were under .500. If thats not disrespect, when the team deserves respect, I dont know what is.

3) I cant disagree with that. Although, I dont think anyone was actually blaming Redskins fans. I think what was said is that its easy for major sports networks to get away with being bias against certain teams in certain areas because certain other team's fan bases are much larger.

4) ESPN's preseason power ranking had little to nothing to to with them giving us respect. If I am not mistaking the preseason before 2006, they had us in the bottom 10. So, as far as I am concerned that was just to saving face.

5) Offense sells but defense wins championships. 5 of the last 8 superbowls were won because of great defensive play but still the only guy raving about great defense is Bill Cowher. The fact of the matter is the media does not care about teams that win games on defense, they just dont. Teams like that are not "sexy" to them, and we are one of them. High powered offenses win games and thats why they get so much press, have you ever heard of the Bengals or Saints?

I guess when your winning you dont really care that you are not getting any respect from the media but when you have a sour taste in your mouth like we do it matters.

1.) Under .500 teams have only one way to go, so from that point of view, they all have a lot going for them. I will admit the Ravens have a better outlook than the other .500 teams.

2.) I would like to point out that the Steelers were on something like a 4-0 run and were defending superbowl champs. Also I don't think anyone called us underdogs in that game, and if people picked the Steelers to win it was not by a large majority.

3.) From this screen I can't check who said it, but somebody did blame the Redskins. Edit: It was justifythegame. That comment was meant expressly for him. I know youre smarter than that Neeps.

4.) I don't know how being ranked consistantly at number 3 throughout that season isnt being respected.

5.) I knew this would come up. The Bengals and the Saints did not have high powered offenses last year, so they don't fall under my blanket statement of offenses winning (which is an exaggeration but holds true to a good extent).

[neepo13]

1.) Under .500 teams have only one way to go, so from that point of view, they all have a lot going for them. I will admit the Ravens have a better outlook than the other .500 teams.

2.) I would like to point out that the Steelers were on something like a 4-0 run and were defending superbowl champs. Also I don't think anyone called us underdogs in that game, and if people picked the Steelers to win it was not by a large majority.

3.) From this screen I can't check who said it, but somebody did blame the Redskins. Edit: It was justifythegame. That comment was meant expressly for him. I know youre smarter than that Neeps.

4.) I don't know how being ranked consistantly at number 3 throughout that season isnt being respected.

5.) I knew this would come up. The Bengals and the Saints did not have high powered offenses last year, so they don't fall under my blanket statement of offenses winning (which is an exaggeration but holds true to a good extent).

1) I will agree but tecnically all of them can still go down.

2) I'll check that and get back to you.

3) Agreed.

4) I think ESPN was trying to save face because prior to that season they bashed unmercifully.

5) You didnt qoute me after my edit. My point was that the Bengals, Saints, and I added Rams all had their seasons affected by injuries like ours and they played as bad if not worse then we did but because they have the potential to be high powering offenses, and they do, they get more respect then a team that wins games by playing great defense and controling the ball, like us. When speaking of the Rams and Saints the "experts" give them the benefit of the doubt because they had major players go down in 2007. But we dont get the same benefit of the doubt even though we to had major players out with injury in 2007, to.

[minford]

5) You didnt qoute me after my edit. My point was that the Bengals, Saints, and I added Rams all had their seasons affected by injuries like ours and they played as bad if not worse then we did but because they have the potential to be high powering offenses, and they do, they get more respect then a team that wins games by playing great defense and controling the ball, like us. When speaking of the Rams and Saints the "experts" give them the benefit of the doubt because they had major players go down in 2007. But we dont get the same benefit of the doubt even though we to had major players out with injury in 2007, to.

Yeah, I missed your edit, which supports your argument better.

I had this long complex idea half-way typed out and decided to say fudge it and will condense it like this: no fan thinks their team is getting enough respect. I'm sure theres some Rams fan who is thinking the media hyped all the Ravens injuries but didn't hype their own injuries enough. Our situation isn't unique.

This may just be an agree to disagree point of contention but a lot of the other things said here are just plain malarky.

Edit: Somebody else brought up the ESPN newscaster bias that lots of the anchors are from other teams. Well, Shannon Sharpe is one of the biggest names out there and where did he play? But more importantly: The Ravens are a new organization, they haven't been around long enough to have the same number of star alum anchors as other teams!!

[rayvenfan_52]

Its always true that they talk about teams with better offense. But I dont know why they talk about the Patriots defense. Their defense is WACK. The only reason why their teams defense did what they did is because of the offense. Like for instance whenever the offense ran the score up. The other teams offense threw away their gameplan and decided to try nd get big plays for touchdowns. It never worked in their favor when their offense couldnt step it up as much. Like say for instance again is when they played the Eagles, Ravens, Jets, Colts, and then the Giants at the end. The Patriots defense had nothing compared to what our team and the other teams did to the Pats offense. The thing that messed up some of them and us was trying to put a score on the board.....

[neepo13]

Yeah, I missed your edit, which supports your argument better.

I had this long complex idea half-way typed out and decided to say fudge it and will condense it like this: no fan thinks their team is getting enough respect. I'm sure theres some Rams fan who is thinking the media hyped all the Ravens injuries but didn't hype their own injuries enough. Our situation isn't unique.

This may just be an agree to disagree point of contention but a lot of the other things said here are just plain malarky.

Edit: Somebody else brought up the ESPN newscaster bias that lots of the anchors are from other teams. Well, Shannon Sharpe is one of the biggest names out there and where did he play? But more importantly: The Ravens are a new organization, they haven't been around long enough to have the same number of star alum anchors as other teams!!

Agree to disagree. But I have to tell you, Shannon Sharpe is hardly biased towards the Ravens. I think Rod Woodson would have been a better example because he tends to give us the benefit of the doubt, even when we dont deserve it and he's usually in favor of us. Shannon Sharpe is Pro-Bronco all the time, even when they suck, and he's only Pro-Raven when we are good.

[ragnorok99]

Edit: Somebody else brought up the ESPN newscaster bias that lots of the anchors are from other teams. Well, Shannon Sharpe is one of the biggest names out there and where did he play? But more importantly: The Ravens are a new organization, they haven't been around long enough to have the same number of star alum anchors as other teams!!

Shannon played in Denver for most of his career. Yeah, he did great things for the Ravens, but I consider him a Bronco, like most other NFL fans. Plus, I'm pretty sure he works for CBS, not ESPN.

And to clarify, I wasn't really complaining that the Ravens don't have enough "reps" in the media, I was merely pointing out a possible cause of bias.

[justifythegame]

2.) I would like to point out that the Steelers were on something like a 4-0 run and were defending superbowl champs. Also I don't think anyone called us underdogs in that game, and if people picked the Steelers to win it was not by a large majority.

3.) From this screen I can't check who said it, but somebody did blame the Redskins. Edit: It was justifythegame. That comment was meant expressly for him. I know youre smarter than that Neeps.

the reason i mention it is because it directly affects me. i live in md but near the suburbs of DC, around here if you wear a Ravens jersey you get beat up, if you have the guts to wear one down to DC you get shot lol. you can wear whatever jersey you want...except a Ravens or Dallas jersey...which makes no sense since the ravens dont even play in their division. my guess is that they're just jealous of our team and we compete with them in md for fans.

so when i say they get no respect in regards to this aspect at least, i can attest that the Ravens are vilified at least in this area...but its ok to be pats fan around here tho which really makes me .

[Jesse Conroy]

for not only good Raven Coverage, but widely considered to be the best Raven Coverage out there right now.....i think all people would have to do here is just take a wide gander at RaveTV. because for the most obvious of reasons.....they have the best coverage of the Baltimore Ravens and i love it. not too mention WBAL on Ravens Game Day with Jerry......he is one whom also keeps the Raven Flame Alive and well.

Well I am not talking about those shows, just ESPN... I do enjoy those shows though...