I think the ESPN 'Spurs Ban' is a real thing...

[Obstructed_View]

Mike and Mike have been talking about the Carmelo trade all day long, and there's no end of hand-wringing about what's 'wrong' with the NBA because everyone wants to go to the big market teams and the only teams that are contenders or relevant nowadays are big market teams like Chicago, New York, LA, Boston and Dallas.

?

Then they talked about the value of teams that can get a lucky draft pick and then are smart enough to build a good team around that player. They cited the most recent example: The Bulls getting Michael Jordan and putting Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant and Tony Kucoc around him.

??

Then Chris Broussard came on and talked about the top heavy NBA, but gave credit to well-run teams that manage to stay relevant in smaller or less-attractive markets. He listed, in order, Oklahoma City, Detroit (they won a title), Portland and Seattle.

???

Yes, ESPN's primary NBA expert mentioned a city that no longer has an NBA team as an example of a well-run team in a small market but didn't say "Spurs". In fact, they haven't mentioned San Antonio in two hours.

What's wrong with the NBA is ESPN. If they treated the NFL the same way, they'd have whined about how boring the Packers are and wondered aloud when Aaron Rodgers was going to go to the Cowboys. Can you imagine what the NFL would do to them if they'd complained about small market teams being in the Super Bowl?

[lefty]

San Antonio, IMHO, is a medium market, not small.

[Dick Marcinko]

You'd think some has to literally go out of their way to omit the Spurs organization. Surely they can't be that stupid. That being said, the Spurs always seem to fly under the radar.

[Obstructed_View]

San Antonio, IMHO, is a medium market, not small.

San Antonio's market goes to New Braunfels, and Austin's market goes to San Marcos. The two combined are about 12th in the nation. Facts have little to do with what ESPN wants. Apparently they don't like staying in the hotels to cover the team. There are no complaints about the market size of microscopic Las Vegas when they're talking about an NBA team moving there.

The Spurs are boring no matter what kind of game they play, but the Lakers and Celtics can play the most inept and terrible game 7 in the history of the sport and nobody even notices. Maybe ESPN employees can't be bothered to watch the games.

[Bill_Brasky]

The only time I want the Spurs to be talked up is in the playoffs. They can have their melo drama and talk about what Blake griffin had for breakfast for now.

[Halberto]

Guys... who.... fuckin.... cares?!


None of this has any effect on how the Spurs do. No matter what amount of attention we get we still have the best front office, coach and players in the league. We're the best organization in pro sports. Don't let this get your panties in a bind.

[Obstructed_View]

Guys... who.... fuckin.... cares?!


None of this has any effect on how the Spurs do. No matter what amount of attention we get we still have the best front office, coach and players in the league. We're the best organization in pro sports. Don't let this get your panties in a bind.

Spurs discussion board. The only panties in a bind are yours. It's fascinating that Chris Broussard would mention Seattle. Do you disagree?

[spurs_2108]

They did .mention Tim Duncan. Something along the line of getting good draft picks. Not 100 % tho

[Obstructed_View]

Must have been before I started working. I didn't hear a mention. It's not that I listen intently praying that they mention the Spurs, but there were several places where they searched for an example of a) an elite team, b) a small market team that wins and c) a team that's managed to stay relevant without free agents they came up with SEATTLE. It's laughably funny, and worthy of observation.

[Whisky Dog]

I somewhat enjoy ESPN's college basketball, college football, and NFL coverage. I can't stand their NBA coverage. Actually, other than the Spurs I truly hate the NBA. I hate everything about it and it's flash over substance attitude.

[Russ]

Skip Bayless is currently going crazy on a Spurs rant,

The topic was whether you need a superstar in the NBA to win. Bayless pointed to the Spurs as a team with an "aging Tim Duncan," a #28 draft pick at point guard and an undrafted FA as the best bench player. It takes brains not money, Skip said, you can beat the system.

Then Bayless just started screaming and venting his Spurs passione. :lol

[Brutalis]

ESPN has always passed over SAS along with my Hogs, no matter how good they do. But when either does real bad, it makes the headlines.

[JR3]

Brace yourself.... the spurs will win the title this year and all espn will talk about is the upcoming lockout and player salaries and Deron Williams going to New York... Kobe getting old.. ect.

[LongtimeSpursFan]

I somewhat enjoy ESPN's college basketball, college football, and NFL coverage. I can't stand their NBA coverage. Actually, other than the Spurs I truly hate the NBA. I hate everything about it and it's flash over substance attitude.


This. ESPN is good for only one thing...college football. Everything else sucks on their networks.

[silverblackfan]

I somewhat enjoy ESPN's college basketball, college football, and NFL coverage. I can't stand their NBA coverage. Actually, other than the Spurs I truly hate the NBA. I hate everything about it and it's flash over substance attitude.

I hadn't really thought much about it as a rabid Spurs fan, but yeah, I am pretty apathetic about the rest of the NBA. I really only like watching the Spurs play because of the LACK of hype and the team ball with low maintenance players.

[ohmwrecker]

The real question is:

How much are Pop and RC paying ESPN not to talk about them?

[johnsmith]

I'm not even a spurs fan and I'll be rooting for them this season more than anyone because I want ESPN to look like a bunch of fucks.

[spursfan09]

I like to cheer for the underdog, and usually the Spurs are it. They will be the underdog too this year. Even if they have homecourt all year and if they set some sort or record.

[honestfool84]

The real question is:

How much are Pop and RC paying ESPN not to talk about them?

THIS. +1

:lol

[guzmangm]

Brace yourself.... the spurs will win the title this year and all espn will talk about is the upcoming lockout and player salaries and Deron Williams going to New York... Kobe getting old.. ect.

Ha, right?

[Ryvin1]

Mike and Mike have been talking about the Carmelo trade all day long, and there's no end of hand-wringing about what's 'wrong' with the NBA because everyone wants to go to the big market teams and the only teams that are contenders or relevant nowadays are big market teams like Chicago, New York, LA, Boston and Dallas.

?

Then they talked about the value of teams that can get a lucky draft pick and then are smart enough to build a good team around that player. They cited the most recent example: The Bulls getting Michael Jordan and putting Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant and Tony Kucoc around him.

??

Then Chris Broussard came on and talked about the top heavy NBA, but gave credit to well-run teams that manage to stay relevant in smaller or less-attractive markets. He listed, in order, Oklahoma City, Detroit (they won a title), Portland and Seattle.

???

Yes, ESPN's primary NBA expert mentioned a city that no longer has an NBA team as an example of a well-run team in a small market but didn't say "Spurs". In fact, they haven't mentioned San Antonio in two hours.

What's wrong with the NBA is ESPN. If they treated the NFL the same way, they'd have whined about how boring the Packers are and wondered aloud when Aaron Rodgers was going to go to the Cowboys. Can you imagine what the NFL would do to them if they'd complained about small market teams being in the Super Bowl?


What I love is when you watch a recap of a Spurs game on ESPN.com and all the talk and highlights are of the other team, and as an aside they mention that the Spurs won the game, then they close with a final highlight of the other team dunking sometime during the game.

[BlackSwordsMan]

They mentioned spurs yesterday on sportsnation.

[MannyIsGod]

Same thread, different day. ESPN ignored the Spurs yesterday, they are ignoring them today, and they will ignore them tomorrow. These threads are more redundant than any trolling in the NBA forum, IMO.

[MannyIsGod]

Also, ESPN's formula works really well for them, wouldn't you say? They talk about the topic that get them the largest ratings. Thats never going to be the Spurs. Just learn to Neal with it.

[tlongII]

Mike and Mike have been talking about the Carmelo trade all day long, and there's no end of hand-wringing about what's 'wrong' with the NBA because everyone wants to go to the big market teams and the only teams that are contenders or relevant nowadays are big market teams like Chicago, New York, LA, Boston and Dallas.

?

Then they talked about the value of teams that can get a lucky draft pick and then are smart enough to build a good team around that player. They cited the most recent example: The Bulls getting Michael Jordan and putting Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant and Tony Kucoc around him.

??

Then Chris Broussard came on and talked about the top heavy NBA, but gave credit to well-run teams that manage to stay relevant in smaller or less-attractive markets. He listed, in order, Oklahoma City, Detroit (they won a title), Portland and Seattle.

???

Yes, ESPN's primary NBA expert mentioned a city that no longer has an NBA team as an example of a well-run team in a small market but didn't say "Spurs". In fact, they haven't mentioned San Antonio in two hours.

What's wrong with the NBA is ESPN. If they treated the NFL the same way, they'd have whined about how boring the Packers are and wondered aloud when Aaron Rodgers was going to go to the Cowboys. Can you imagine what the NFL would do to them if they'd complained about small market teams being in the Super Bowl?

Seattle? Really?

[Old School 44]

Just keep winning.

If we see it as Spurs fans, imagine how the Spurs players view it.
They may say the right things in front of the cameras about "flying under the radar" and "who cares", but I'd guess, the lack of recognition gets to them a little bit. It's a chip on their shoulders, which is a good thing. So to the media, I say just keep giving the Spurs bulletin board material, and we'll just keep winning.

[spursfan09]

But isn't this a reaction to the fact the Spurs themselves are not media oriented or friendly?

I'm just saying Spurs don't do themselves any favors either.

I just think they don't care.

[Spurminator]

What's wrong with the NBA is ESPN. If they treated the NFL the same way, they'd have whined about how boring the Packers are and wondered aloud when Aaron Rodgers was going to go to the Cowboys. Can you imagine what the NFL would do to them if they'd complained about small market teams being in the Super Bowl?

My issue with them is not so much the lack of Spurs coverage, but they have definitely introduced and belabored the TV ratings aspect of certain teams' success into sports discussion. In doing so, they have detrimentally impacted ratings for certain "less desirable" match-ups. If I were David Stern, they would never get the broadcast rights to the NBA after what they've done the last 8 years.

Fortunately the NBA and other leagues have created their own networks and will gradually syphon away game broadcasts and viewers from ESPN. I never watch or listen to ESPN analysis or highlight shows anymore. If I want NBA highlights and discussion, NBA-TV is the place to go. Same for MLB and NFL.

[Obstructed_View]

My issue with them is not so much the lack of Spurs coverage, but they have definitely introduced and belabored the TV ratings aspect of certain teams' success into sports discussion. In doing so, they have detrimentally impacted ratings for certain "less desirable" match-ups. If I were David Stern, they would never get the broadcast rights to the NBA after what they've done the last 8 years.

Fortunately the NBA and other leagues have created their own networks and will gradually syphon away game broadcasts and viewers from ESPN. I never watch or listen to ESPN analysis or highlight shows anymore. If I want NBA highlights and discussion, NBA-TV is the place to go. Same for MLB and NFL.

Yeah I don't know if I made this point clear, but I really don't think the NFL would allow a network that carries them to bad-mouth ratings for one of their teams like they did for the entire 2007 NBA postseason.

[Obstructed_View]

Seattle? Really?

Did you read the sentence after the part you bolded? Yes, he actually said "Seattle". That was basically the catalyst for this thread that their most popular NBA analyst was searching for an example of competetive teams from non-major markets and came up with Seattle before he said San Antonio.

[Russ]

ESPN crew just told Skip Bayless that since they couldn't mention the name Spurs, perhaps they could call them the "San Antonio Skips."

Laughter.

Jay Crawford tells Skip the "SA Skips" has a nice ring to to it.

"About five rings to it," replies a smiling Skip.

[honestfool84]

^^ :lol awesome.

[ATXSPUR]

I have mixed feelings about Bayless. I love him for his Spurs passion but hate him for his hatred of the University of Texas football program.

[Bill_Brasky]

I have mixed feelings about Bayless. I love him for his Spurs passion but hate him for his hatred of the University of Texas football program.
I love him for both of those reasons but hate him at times because he has a tendency to have retarded opinions other than those two things.

[WildcardManu]

i have mixed feelings about bayless. I love him for his spurs passion but hate him for his hatred of the university of texas football program.

spurs > ut

[Seventyniner]

I think the lack of media attention for the Spurs is less a function of market size, and more an inevitability given the demeanors of Pop and Duncan, which permeate the franchise. No arrests, no fights, no fines, no suspensions, not even any bulletin board material. Fans may not like having to sift through 50 videos and articles to find one that mentions the Spurs, but that's ESPN's M.O.

+1 to Spurminator. NBATV >>>>>>>>>>> ESPN for actual objective, in-depth coverage.

[ATXSPUR]

spurs > ut

Since this is a Spurs forum, I'm going to keep my opinion on that one to myself. I will say THIS though. Spurs > UT Basketball, Baseball, Swimming, Gymnastics, Softball, and pretty much every other sport that isn't football.

[Budkin]

I think the Spurs just make major media outlets angry because they just keep winning year after year.

[xellos88330]

Well, I would wonder what would happen if the Spurs somehow managed to get to 70 wins. Do you all think that could turn their heads? Oh, or just go undefeated in the playoffs?


I know these are farfetched, but just wondering what the ESPN's reaction would be to it.

[Obstructed_View]

I think the lack of media attention for the Spurs is less a function of market size, and more an inevitability given the demeanors of Pop and Duncan, which permeate the franchise. No arrests, no fights, no fines, no suspensions, not even any bulletin board material. Fans may not like having to sift through 50 videos and articles to find one that mentions the Spurs, but that's ESPN's M.O.

+1 to Spurminator. NBATV >>>>>>>>>>> ESPN for actual objective, in-depth coverage.

ESPN and the NBA are working pretty hard to pimp the team in Oklahoma City, which is basically the Spurs ten years ago.

[Fpoonsie]

Spurs discussion board. The only panties in a bind are yours. It's fascinating that Chris Broussard would mention Seattle. Do you disagree?


Seattle? Really?

Yeah, that is pretty funny that they'd list BOTH Seattle AND OKC and not, at least at some point, find the error in their logic.

[Man In Black]

Selective Mutism OV. It's Selective Mutism because they choose to purposely not talk about the Spurs.

[703 Spurz]

Mike and Mike have been talking about the Carmelo trade all day long, and there's no end of hand-wringing about what's 'wrong' with the NBA because everyone wants to go to the big market teams and the only teams that are contenders or relevant nowadays are big market teams like Chicago, New York, LA, Boston and Dallas.

?

Then they talked about the value of teams that can get a lucky draft pick and then are smart enough to build a good team around that player. They cited the most recent example: The Bulls getting Michael Jordan and putting Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant and Tony Kucoc around him.

??

Then Chris Broussard came on and talked about the top heavy NBA, but gave credit to well-run teams that manage to stay relevant in smaller or less-attractive markets. He listed, in order, Oklahoma City, Detroit (they won a title), Portland and Seattle.

???

Yes, ESPN's primary NBA expert mentioned a city that no longer has an NBA team as an example of a well-run team in a small market but didn't say "Spurs". In fact, they haven't mentioned San Antonio in two hours.

What's wrong with the NBA is ESPN. If they treated the NFL the same way, they'd have whined about how boring the Packers are and wondered aloud when Aaron Rodgers was going to go to the Cowboys. Can you imagine what the NFL would do to them if they'd complained about small market teams being in the Super Bowl?

You mean Mike and Mike actually talked about something non-NFL? A shocker. But then they don't really go too in depth in any other sports. Talking about Carmelo Anthony isn't exactly inside information. Mike and Mike are a fucking joke when it comes to news. They only ever speak about the typical shit you'd hear at the water cooler at work.

I don't give a shit about hockey but they never mention that. If they talk about baseball you know it'd be all about the Yankees, Sawx, or Phillies. NBA? Heat, Lakers, Celtics is about it.

[gospursgojas]

Guys... who.... fuckin.... cares?!


None of this has any effect on how the Spurs do. No matter what amount of attention we get we still have the best front office, coach and players in the league. We're the best organization in pro sports. Don't let this get your panties in a bind.

Honestly...I do.

The 'flying under radar' shit is old.

[703 Spurz]

Honestly...I do.

The 'flying under radar' shit is old.

How does a team even fly under the radar? The other 29 NBA teams are well aware of the Spurs 46 wins so far. They don't need ESPN or any other asshat radio host to tell them.

There is no such thing as flying under the god damn radar.

[wontstartdumbthreads]

Shouldn't toilet paper be subject to the same rules as juice in the fridge? Don't pour juice and then put the carton back in the fridge with a quarter ounce left. Likewise, people shouldn't just leave one square of toilet paper on the roll.

[DesignatedT]

I saw them talkin about us on First take or whatever.

[Man In Black]

The perception won't change until either someone or something makes that change.
The 4-letter continues to suck.

[Obstructed_View]

You mean Mike and Mike actually talked about something non-NFL? A shocker. But then they don't really go too in depth in any other sports. Talking about Carmelo Anthony isn't exactly inside information. Mike and Mike are a fucking joke when it comes to news. They only ever speak about the typical shit you'd hear at the water cooler at work.

I don't give a shit about hockey but they never mention that. If they talk about baseball you know it'd be all about the Yankees, Sawx, or Phillies. NBA? Heat, Lakers, Celtics is about it.

They put off NFL shit to talk about the Carmelo trade and what's wrong with the NBA because they have superstars migrating to a few big market teams. So it was basically at least two hours of straight NBA. They had several guys on as guests and talked NBA.

[Cheese]

walt disney owns ESPN.go figure...this means they are walt disney.people need to get a grasp on who walt disney was.

ESPN will cater to a certain demographic.and the spurs aren't as sexy as the overblown superteams..

[mingus]

There's a lot that's wrong with the way the NBA is potrayed and analyzed on ESPN. They can't market the NBA worth a damn.

[Cheese]

all by design...to fuck with spurs fans minds.also not at all surprised.they know how to create a storyline and drama.what better way than to paint the harmless spurs, (other than winning),as somehow the bad guy.

its all mind control and manipulation by the media,especially ESPN.

[Man In Black]

Is Duke Basketball sexy?
All Teams 1-5 in the NCAA's lost last week yet Duke goes to #5 and San Diego State, who still only has 1 loss to a Top 10 team in BYU at BYU, just moves to #4? Yeah...whatever.

The Golden State Warriors play a fast-paced sexy brand of basketball. Okay, it's losing basketball but it's still fun to watch.

There is a perceived media bias because the bias really exists. In the grand scheme, that doesn't prevent the Spurs from winning titles, but what it does do is that them first portraying the Spurs as boring and then not saying anything additional until the Spurs make them by winning playoff series', means that no casual fan will have an easy way to discover what we already know, that Spurs basketball is both winning and exciting basketball.


Someone once asked Lisa Leslie why the WNBA doesn't get enough coverage, it's sad I'm using her statements as a compare and contrast but she makes a valid point.

"I think the NBA has stepped up to the plate by allowing us to have the WNBA," she continued. "What more could you ask from David Stern?"

So who is to blame, if anyone? Is it possible that the league has reached its peak within a niche audience or is there really some entity we can point the finger at for its lack of national regard?

"It's really more the media," Leslie told FanHouse. "It's ESPN. It's the TNTs of the world ... though, really, TNT has done a better job, I have to admit. They've covered the WNBA really well, if you have (NBA TV). But ESPN is probably the main focus that drives our sports. Ninety-five percent of sports, you know you can find it on ESPN.

"Maybe if we had a place [on ESPN] you would be more informed," Leslie pointed out.

[wontstartdumbthreads]

Is Duke Basketball sexy?
All Teams 1-5 in the NCAA's lost last week yet Duke goes to #5 and San Diego State, who still only has 1 loss to a Top 10 team in BYU at BYU, just moves to #4? Yeah...whatever.

The Golden State Warriors play a fast-paced sexy brand of basketball. Okay, it's losing basketball but it's still fun to watch.

There is a perceived media bias because the bias really exists. In the grand scheme, that doesn't prevent the Spurs from winning titles, but what it does do is that them first portraying the Spurs as boring and then not saying anything additional until the Spurs make them by winning playoff series', means that no casual fan will have an easy way to discover what we already know, that Spurs basketball is both winning and exciting basketball.


Someone once asked Lisa Leslie why the WNBA doesn't get enough coverage, it's sad I'm using her statements as a compare and contrast but she makes a valid point.

The WNBA doesn't get enough coverage because people don't want to see it. It's hard enough to get interested in watching Pacers vs. Pistons, much less an inferior product. The gap in the skill set between the men and women is so vast that it's just not enjoyable to watch. And most of them aren't very pretty.

[Cheese]

Is Duke Basketball sexy?
All Teams 1-5 in the NCAA's lost last week yet Duke goes to #5 and San Diego State, who still only has 1 loss to a Top 10 team in BYU at BYU, just moves to #4? Yeah...whatever.

The Golden State Warriors play a fast-paced sexy brand of basketball. Okay, it's losing basketball but it's still fun to watch.

There is a perceived media bias because the bias really exists. In the grand scheme, that doesn't prevent the Spurs from winning titles, but what it does do is that them first portraying the Spurs as boring and then not saying anything additional until the Spurs make them by winning playoff series', means that no casual fan will have an easy way to discover what we already know, that Spurs basketball is both winning and exciting basketball.


Someone once asked Lisa Leslie why the WNBA doesn't get enough coverage, it's sad I'm using her statements as a compare and contrast but she makes a valid point.

true.a difference between college and nba.more money.its interesting that about any nba fan pretty much ignores anything about the spurs.until you as a spurs fan brings it up.why?media manipulation.

theres no way anyone ignores the lakers,knicks,celtics,all large markets and fan bases being 46-10 in this day and age.to add to that,all you have to do is turn on your tv and media manipulation is oozing from every pore from anything and everybody whos mouth is running.not only ESPN,BUT especially ESPN.

its all by design.

[Man In Black]

Is it by design that they complain about low ratings when the Spurs kick everyone's asses on the way to winning a title? If it's Spurs-Celtics, the intensity would be higher than the level we saw when it was Spurs-Pistons. That would be amazing. If it's Spurs-Heat, just to watch the Spurs precision play and depth take down that the big 2 and 1/2 would be fun and a big FU to the 4-letter. If it's Spurs-Magic, that would be a ratings killer but again, it ain't about market size, it's about what you do DURING the season that helps people see a story. You don't have to create a story, I mean hell, that's all they did the entire All-Star Weekend. Rather than just let the event play itself out, they skewed everything towards the way that they wanted it to be.


Again, the NFL does it right. They don't give a fuck about market size, they promote team over individuals and then when teams win, they don't talk about who's got the better pedigree or who's stadium has the most luxury suites or any of that shit, and if you as a media partner try to take it that way, they simply tell you to not to. END OF STORY. That right there is real power and protecting your brand.

The only thing that was important about what Leslie said is that 95% statement.

"It's really more the media," Leslie told FanHouse. "It's ESPN. It's the TNTs of the world ... though, really, TNT has done a better job, I have to admit. They've covered the WNBA really well, if you have (NBA TV). But ESPN is probably the main focus that drives our sports. Ninety-five percent of sports, you know you can find it on ESPN.

"Maybe if we had a place [on ESPN] you would be more informed," Leslie pointed out.

[Cheese]

Is it by design that they complain about low rating when the Spurs kick everyone's asses on the way to winning a title?

Again, the NFL does it right. They don't give a fuck about market size, they promote team over individuals and then when teams win, they don't talk about who's got the better pedigree or who's stadium has the most luxury suites or any of that shit, and if you as a media partner try to take it that way, they simply tell you to not to. END OF STORY. That right there is real power and protecting your brand.

The only thing that was important about what Leslie said is that 95% statement.

well of course it is.people enjoy a nice drama.all the tv shows have them,even the comedy ones at some point.i think they (the media),realize theres nothing they can do about the spurs winning,but they CAN control perception.

and in fact if the spurs DO win they are perceived as somehow evil.i dont claim to know everything,but i would think market size would matter because thats the demographic they target, other wise every time kobe bryant takes a shit we wouldnt know about.ever wonder how it seems like ESPN almost appears to be ROOTING for the lakers,yankees,celtics,etc?theres a reason.

[Cheese]

the nfl is different in that it doesnt have to rely on huge fan bases like the nba.its a much more popular sport.so they dont have to manipulate as much,but even they arent perfect.

and some point a player or team is getting jobbed.the profit the NFL has is beyond belief.but i believe theres still a lot of manipulation and media mind controlling going on even there.

[Man In Black]

San Francisco is Market size #6 with the Golden State Warriors, but we don't really see them all that much despite the fact that they have the highest scoring back-court in the league. They're in a large market and they play exciting basketball, but we don't see them much or hear about them. Why not? So it's not just market size. Is it their record? Okay so they're not making the playoffs, but as of today, neither are the Clippers, but because one guy could dunk over the HOOD of a car, they're now must-see TV? Why? Who chooses that? The network or you?

[SpurAddict561]

They would still be talking about how great the other teams are even if we were in the Finals up 3-0.

lol

Remember how much they were still talking about Lebron before we gave him the sweep

"This could be the first time ever a team has come back from 3-0" hahahahha

[phxspurfan]

You guys do realize San Antonio is HELLA OLD, don't you?



I mean, their franchise player (TD) is a dinosaur, and their two other good players are getting up there. Parker isn't that old, but he's been playing in the L since before he was 20 so I'm talking old here as in old to the viewers' eyes.

ESPN (and the NBA) hype the young players or players in their prime, not counting Kobe (who is arguably just past his prime but still dominant). Guys like Duncan and Manu won't get much love because they don't draw national audiences. They are old; if not in years, then in basketball mileage.

When I talk with my friends or in fantasy leagues, everyone is all about the younger guys, because they are more exciting and interesting. Get used to it...

Exciting now (even though maybe not as good/will never be as good):

Wade/James/Bosh/Durant/Westbrook/Melo/Amare/CP3/Kobe/Gasol/Bynum/Odom/Griffin/Monta Ellis/Curry/Noah/Rose/etc etc

Exciting up until about 2 years ago, but old now and considered washed up:

Nash/Manu/Duncan/Vince Carter/Billups/Yao/

Shock value/celebrity status/drama:

Artest/Birdman/DWill/Parker (until he broke up with Eva)/Melo
Gallinari


You only have so many minutes in a segment on a show that has to cover all sports news, so somebody on that list will get left out...









The NBA is a business. The guys at ESPN (and probably the NBA) all visualize thousands of people shutting their TVs off or changing the channel every time the Spurs are featured, because they are boring. It's like a Cardinals game in the MLB. Nobody cares about the Cardinals except for people in St. Lous who love them or the towns in middle America that hate them. People care about LA, NY and other teams on the coasts usually.

We can be Spurs fans and like their style of play, but we have to recognize that the NBA is a business and the exposure will go to whatever sells the most tickets, jerseys and gets the most hype.

[Cheese]

San Francisco is Market size #6 with the Golden State Warriors, but we don't really see them all that much despite the fact that they have the highest scoring back-court in the league. They're in a large market and they play exciting basketball, but we don't see them much or hear about them. Why not? So it's not just market size. Is it their record? Okay so they're not making the playoffs, but as of today, neither are the Clippers, but because one guy could dunk over the HOOD of a car, they're now must-see TV? Why? Who chooses that? The network or you?

ESPN chooses what they want you to see.and they work hard at ingraining things into peoples domes.so they are good at making it "seem" like YOU chose it.of course they can't endorse every team that has a large market,then people would get bored and wouldn't watch.they know when and where to pick their spots.

the clippers have blake griffin,and thats all they talk about anymore these days,BUT thats all they need.they don't need or care about the clippers.the clippers DO in fact play in LA,so they really don't need any more reason to talk about the clippers other than blake griffin.

[trypldubl]

ESPN has turned into more Entertainment Tonight/MTV/E! then CNN or Fox news and their writers are more like Star Magazine and US Weekly. They are more into catering to the casual fan. The fan that wants to pretend that they know what they are talking about (laker fan) when having a conversation with another fan either casual or hardcore. ESPN is all about making money and creating news. They know that these casual fans are laker, celtic, and heat (now) fans and want to hear about them or whatever is the sexy story or hot topic (Melo/Blake).

Then they complain about how the Spurs bring bad rating when they are in the finals. A lot of casual fans turn into the finals...well if the only teams that you push are the Lakers, Lakers, Lakers, then Celtics, Cavs/Heat then when they don't make it to the finals then what do you expect? If you don't push other teams or players then the casual fan does not know who they are and there is no real interest in the team.

I like to see what they do when the lakers fall off in a few years and they have to have the Thunder or some other team in the finals. Oh, I forgot they are getting Dwight Howard and Deron Williams in 2012. Problem solved.....now that I thing about it....the west is turning into the East now and if the lakers get those players then get ready for lakers in the finals every year.

Either way its not going to change anything or anytime soon. So real NBA fans just have to deal with it.

[ALVAREZ6]

There's a lot that's wrong with the way the NBA is potrayed and analyzed on ESPN. They can't market the NBA worth a damn.
I agree, but I also think it's difficult to.

NBA vs. NCAA hoops

NBA:
82 game drawn out pointless season where the goal is to coast and survive injury
Playoffs: Take almost 2 months to complete...very slow process
Fans: FUCKING LAME (stadiums half empty to begin with, 25% composed of clueless moms, girlfriends, and kids)

NCAA:
Shorter, 26-ish game season, every game is a relatively important game.
Playoffs: Short amount of time, win or go home
Fans: bunch of hyped college kids + alumni + general fans




The NBA is just lame, it can't be as popular to the NFL or other leagues where every game matters and where the stadiums are packed and loud. There just isn't a huge following with the NBA, even though as big as the league's market is, it is very spread out and unconcentrated. Only the top 4-5 teams in the league typically command sell out, loud ass arenas, and even then they aren't even that loud at all.


They need to shorten that lame ass season, otherwise it's gonna be the same old shit that no one cares about.

[z0sa]

The journalistic media has an obligation to be honest.

Omitting the best team in the NBA from discussions consistently for increased $$ is patently dishonest and fraudulent.

Stop watching and listening to ESPN, and everyone else. Start demanding a much better product that isn't geared towards the suckers.

all the sports stations suck. Local broadcasts of the game by Fox or Kens are always 100 million times better, for example. 10x more replays, the commentators actually talk about the current game and the players almost exclusively, and no political NBA mumbo jumbo for the retarded casual fan.

The incredulous lack of replays on the major networks so they can pimp their commentators' personalities and sponsors is laughable, yet everyone just keeps drinking it up like they actually bring something cutting edge.

Reminds me of the NBA forum. Mostly stupid trolls and shticks that tons of idiots actually buy into, laugh at, and get offended by without ever realizing the reality of the situation.

[Obstructed_View]

If all 16 of us Spurs fans stopped paying attention to ESPN, nobody would notice. Maybe ESPN and the NBA are conspiring to drive down interest in the Spurs in the hopes that they can be moved to Las Vegas. If the Spurs were in any danger of leaving San Antonio I bet there'd be no shortage of cities clamoring for them.

[z0sa]

More than we spurs fans should notice that the Spurs have been omitted from discussion. I don't watch ESPN, ever, so I actually can't make a judgment on their coverage of the Spurs. But if such omission is occurring as described, fans of the game should be outraged.

perhaps I'm right and simply way late. Only idiots and casual fans watch/listen to espn anyway, so they've lost no ratings with their anti-basketball fluffery.

regardless, their obscene lack of journalistic standards is sickening.

[Obstructed_View]

I just can't imagine Ron Jaworski writing off a team with the best record in the NFL as "washed up" or "finished" or "old" and keeping his job.

[Booharv]

Mike and Mike have been talking about the Carmelo trade all day long, and there's no end of hand-wringing about what's 'wrong' with the NBA because everyone wants to go to the big market teams and the only teams that are contenders or relevant nowadays are big market teams like Chicago, New York, LA, Boston and Dallas.

?

Then they talked about the value of teams that can get a lucky draft pick and then are smart enough to build a good team around that player. They cited the most recent example: The Bulls getting Michael Jordan and putting Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant and Tony Kucoc around him.

??

Then Chris Broussard came on and talked about the top heavy NBA, but gave credit to well-run teams that manage to stay relevant in smaller or less-attractive markets. He listed, in order, Oklahoma City, Detroit (they won a title), Portland and Seattle.

???

Yes, ESPN's primary NBA expert mentioned a city that no longer has an NBA team as an example of a well-run team in a small market but didn't say "Spurs". In fact, they haven't mentioned San Antonio in two hours.

What's wrong with the NBA is ESPN. If they treated the NFL the same way, they'd have whined about how boring the Packers are and wondered aloud when Aaron Rodgers was going to go to the Cowboys. Can you imagine what the NFL would do to them if they'd complained about small market teams being in the Super Bowl?

I'm amazed you listen to Mike & Mike more than anything else.

[z0sa]

Yes, it is crazy that the NBA actually promotes this shitty, individual/personality driven angle.

[phxspurfan]

If all 16 of us Spurs fans stopped paying attention to ESPN, nobody would notice. Maybe ESPN and the NBA are conspiring to drive down interest in the Spurs in the hopes that they can be moved to Las Vegas. If the Spurs were in any danger of leaving San Antonio I bet there'd be no shortage of cities clamoring for them.

The Seattle Spurs...hmmm

[Obstructed_View]

I'm amazed you listen to Mike & Mike more than anything else.

They talked basketball for a change. I had it on while I was working. If the omissions weren't so laughable I wouldn't have even started the thread.

[LakerHater]

Local all-star rating highest in nation (http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursnation/2011/02/22/local-all-star-rating-highest-in-nation/)

[Obstructed_View]

They'd best keep that up and make sure to sell out every game if they want to keep the team in town. They aren't getting any help from anyone else.

[ALVAREZ6]

The journalistic media has an obligation to be honest.

Omitting the best team in the NBA from discussions consistently for increased $$ is patently dishonest and fraudulent.

Stop watching and listening to ESPN, and everyone else. Start demanding a much better product that isn't geared towards the suckers.

all the sports stations suck. Local broadcasts of the game by Fox or Kens are always 100 million times better, for example. 10x more replays, the commentators actually talk about the current game and the players almost exclusively, and no political NBA mumbo jumbo for the retarded casual fan.

The incredulous lack of replays on the major networks so they can pimp their commentators' personalities and sponsors is laughable, yet everyone just keeps drinking it up like they actually bring something cutting edge.

Reminds me of the NBA forum. Mostly stupid trolls and shticks that tons of idiots actually buy into, laugh at, and get offended by without ever realizing the reality of the situation.

You're damn right. Keep buying and watching FOX product then. I hopefully will soon enough when I have enough money to be spending on whatever.

[carina_gino20]

Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he were sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to.

[PublicOption]

they bitch and complain about the spurs. but come apart at the seams to throw many at the college team 90 miles north???

fucking weird.

[manufan10]

The journalistic media has an obligation to be honest.

Omitting the best team in the NBA from discussions consistently for increased $$ is patently dishonest and fraudulent.

Stop watching and listening to ESPN, and everyone else. Start demanding a much better product that isn't geared towards the suckers.

all the sports stations suck. Local broadcasts of the game by Fox or Kens are always 100 million times better, for example. 10x more replays, the commentators actually talk about the current game and the players almost exclusively, and no political NBA mumbo jumbo for the retarded casual fan.

The incredulous lack of replays on the major networks so they can pimp their commentators' personalities and sponsors is laughable, yet everyone just keeps drinking it up like they actually bring something cutting edge.

Reminds me of the NBA forum. Mostly stupid trolls and shticks that tons of idiots actually buy into, laugh at, and get offended by without ever realizing the reality of the situation.

+1

As for the bold part, I hate that when there is a questionable call, neither TNT or ESPN will show the replay. I'm left wondering whether it was a good call or not. More often than not, FSN will show numerous replays and angles to give us a better view of what happened on the questionable call, and we as fans can determine whether it was a good call or not.

[Bito Corleone]

The good people over at ESPN do everything in their power not to show any Spurs highlights, but I find it hilarious that when they are showing highlights of almost any other team they have no problem digging through the footage to make sure it is against the Spurs. At least the Spurs find their way on to ESPN in one way or another.

[jimo2305]

lol this is what i've been saying for the longest but ppl were saying i was full of shit back then.. it's so obvious it's not only ESPN.. i kid you not.. i actually get shocked / surprised when theres footage of a spurs player in a highlight reel not being dunked on or crossed over..

but with all that said.. ive come to learn i'd have it no other way.. our team goes out there and wins games.. we dont need all that national spotlight hooplah distracting us and what not.. i know those teams respect us on the court and give us their best shot.. and that's where it should end

[TampaDude]

ESPN crew just told Skip Bayless that since they couldn't mention the name Spurs, perhaps they could call them the "San Antonio Skips."

Laughter.

Jay Crawford tells Skip the "SA Skips" has a nice ring to to it.

"About five rings to it," replies a smiling Skip.

:toast

[UnWantedTheory]

ESPN crew just told Skip Bayless that since they couldn't mention the name Spurs, perhaps they could call them the "San Antonio Skips."

Laughter.

Jay Crawford tells Skip the "SA Skips" has a nice ring to to it.

"About five rings to it," replies a smiling Skip.
:lmao :toast

[LoneStarState'sPride]

ESPN crew just told Skip Bayless that since they couldn't mention the name Spurs, perhaps they could call them the "San Antonio Skips."

Laughter.

Jay Crawford tells Skip the "SA Skips" has a nice ring to to it.

"About five rings to it," replies a smiling Skip.

This is fucking GOLD.

+5

[vander]

I can't stand their NBA coverage. Actually, other than the Spurs I truly hate the NBA. I hate everything about it and it's flash over substance attitude.

Hear, hear :toast

watching the likes of Lebron or Melo (or Shaq back in his day) play basketball is almost painful. watching highlights of dunks is about as exciting as watching highlights of home runs :wakeup

[ShoogarBear]

Mike and Mike

There's your problem, and it has nothing to do with the Spurs.

I haven't listened to them in about three years, but unless they've changed their m.o., Mike and Mike are the absolute worst sports show on the air when it comes to the NBA. 95% of all their reporting on it has always been negative ("oh, the ratings suck!", "oh, it's unwatchable!"), and then they'd go back to talking about baseball and football for the rest of the show. Those assholes regularly used to bring in DICK VITALE as their NBA "expert".

If they're talking about the league, I guarantee it's only because big market Chicago and New York have become relevant again.

[ALVAREZ6]

There's your problem, and it has nothing to do with the Spurs.

I haven't listened to them in about three years, but unless they've changed their m.o., Mike and Mike are the absolute worst sports show on the air when it comes to the NBA. 95% of all their reporting on it has always been negative ("oh, the ratings suck!", "oh, it's unwatchable!"), and then they'd go back to talking about baseball and football for the rest of the show. Those assholes regularly used to bring in DICK VITALE as their NBA "expert".

If they're talking about the league, I guarantee it's only because big market Chicago and New York have become relevant again.

lol

M&M is definitely the absolute worst sports show period, not just the NBA. But like you, I also have not watched in quite some time...probably at least 3 years.

[Darkwaters]

ESPN is all about the money. They're not a non-profit sports reporting agency. They don't care about the truth. They care about:

A) What is popular.
B) What they can popularize.

Just watched the highlights of the Thunder/Clippers game from last night. It went something like this:

"Blake Griffin, Blake Griffin, alley oop to Griffin, Blake Griffin, Blake DUNK!!!!1!!!, Blake Griffin, Blake <ejaculation> Griffin, Blakkkkkkkke. Thunder win 111 - 88"

Same story. Fuck the four letter.

[greyforest]

Spurs are the only team that could be the underdog AND have the best record.

[howbouthemspurs]

ESPN is gay

[Man In Black]

PTI yesterday questioned if NBA players left Small Markets for Large Markets, if that's bad for the NBA? Do Wilbon & Kornheiser talk about it, with Wilbon saying that teams like Utah, Portland, & San Antonio are good for the NBA, that they are what makes the league so competitive. It's 5 minutes of straight NBA talk where Kornheiser at the end says, and I quote,
"Teams in the NBA better start looking at the Minnesota TWINS model of building a team of solid players who make it to the playoffs year after year."
So they talk hoops for 5, but he ends it by using a BASEBALL team, when we all know there is a team in South Texas that multiple ORGANIZATIONS in the league are trying to emulate.
Fuck you 4-letter and the people you give mouthpieces to who can't do anything other than parrot your craving for ratings.

[PublicOption]

The good people over at ESPN do everything in their power not to show any Spurs highlights, but I find it hilarious that when they are showing highlights of almost any other team they have no problem digging through the footage to make sure it is against the Spurs. At least the Spurs find their way on to ESPN in one way or another.


I have noticed that too,:rollin

[4down]

NPR just joined the fray guys - A 2 minute segment on basketball, and all it was was the Melodrama, MIami, Boston, LA, and NY. They talk about how NFL and MLB have nine champs each since 2000 and NO MENTION of the SPURS!!! WHATSOEVER!!! Time to fire off some angry emails to Renee Montagne!!!!! :ihit:ihit:ihit:flipoff

[GrandeDavid]

If the Spurs keep up their dominance these jabbering talkers will eventually be forced to give them props. But as a fan, I think its awesome because, here we go again, the Spurs are somewhat flying under the radar.

[Obstructed_View]

Four titles, three hall of famers, and the best record in the NBA doesn't get them props, or even a mention, so unless they win the next two or three in a row, don't hold your breath.

[gospursgojas]

If yall watched the OTL peice on Gary Neal, after the segment Bob Ley had chris mannix on and talked a little spurs...
It went kinda like this:

BL: "why dont the spurs get more attention? Will they finally get thier due if they win a championship this season?"

CM: "I think they have to win one more championship. They...."

BL: "THEY'VE WON 4 CHAMPIONSHIPS!"

CM: cliche small market excuse

[mingus]

a couple hours ago on first and ten they had Terry Porter on and he mentioned the Spurs when the host was basically trying to direct the basketball talk to LA.

the host asks Porter "who do you think are the top teams in the West blahblah Lakers blahblahblah Lakers blahhh?" and Porter goes on to talk about the Spurs. before they let Terry go the host says," well, it looks like it's going to be Lakers vs. Boston again" when Terry didn't even say that. all he said was LA was the team to beat until someone knocks them off.

i don't care though. the Spurs win and they're in the mix year after year proving everybody wrong. basically everyone at ESPN is a Lakers fan, whatever. The hate for SA runs deep in every Lakers fan, as demonstrated by posters on this site, and it's no different for the guys over at ESPN. If the Spurs beat LA this year, it'll get even worse. i doubt the guys at ESPN next year will even mention them 1/2 as much as they have this year, which is close to nothing.

[mingus]

the Spurs dont need press. they have the banners and that's all that matters.

[jimo2305]

one of the topics on sportsnation just now was 'are the spurs wildly underrated'

michelle colin and chris broussard (ya i know) discuss about it..

i'll paraphrase:

chris says: spurs are old, boring to watch and thats why they're not getting much interest from fans in the media.. also goes on to say duncan has declined and manu has been struggling lately..
colin for the most part agrees..
michelle defends us slightly by saying we've still got the best record or something like that..

they go to the polls and 68% says yes we're underrated..

meh..

[jimo2305]

one of the topics on sportsnation just now was 'are the spurs wildly underrated'

michelle colin and chris broussard (ya i know) discuss about it..

i'll paraphrase:

chris says: spurs are old, boring to watch and thats why they're not getting much interest from fans in the media.. also goes on to say duncan has declined and manu has been struggling lately..
colin for the most part agrees..
michelle defends us slightly by saying we've still got the best record or something like that..

they go to the polls and 68% says yes we're underrated..

meh..

[BlackBellamy]

The good people over at ESPN do everything in their power not to show any Spurs highlights, but I find it hilarious that when they are showing highlights of almost any other team they have no problem digging through the footage to make sure it is against the Spurs. At least the Spurs find their way on to ESPN in one way or another.

Exactly! When we are presented, it is rarely as the heroes. Every storyline needs it's foil, it's heel, and the Spurs seem to fulfill that role, at least as far as ESPN is concerned.

[Obstructed_View]

Yeah, I don't think it's a Spurs ban. Chris Broussard is just colossally bad at his job. He said the Spurs "aren't any fun to watch" they "don't have a charismatic star" "They're old" and "Manu is on the decline". The guy is just a dumbass. He just hates having to stay in San Antonio to cover them. I understand that Colin Cowherd is a Laker fan, so he's going to be defensive, but for someone who puts "NBA Expert" on his W2 to deny that any other team with this record would be on a nightly "70 win watch" is just a moron.

[Budkin]

Yeah, I don't think it's a Spurs ban. Chris Broussard is just colossally bad at his job. He said the Spurs "aren't any fun to watch" they "don't have a charismatic star" "They're old" and "Manu is on the decline". The guy is just a dumbass. He just hates having to stay in San Antonio to cover them. I understand that Colin Cowherd is a Laker fan, so he's going to be defensive, but for someone who puts "NBA Expert" on his W2 to deny that any other team with this record would be on a nightly "70 win watch" is just a moron.

Broussard is a fool but ESPN has been begging him for analysis ever since he broke the LeBron James to Miami story. Unfortunately for us, it means we have to see him much more, and hear his shitty takes and ignorance of the NBA.

[Obstructed_View]

Okay, belief in the ban is back on. Jeff Van Gundy was amazingly negative toward the Spurs tonight, from saying the flagrant on Parker wasn't anything, to the Manu "flops so much he shouldn't get calls" thing. There were several more where I couldn't believe it was the same JVG that's been at ESPN for years.

[gospursgojas]

Okay, belief in the ban is back on. Jeff Van Gundy was amazingly negative toward the Spurs tonight, from saying the flagrant on Parker wasn't anything, to the Manu "flops so much he shouldn't get calls" thing. There were several more where I couldn't believe it was the same JVG that's been at ESPN for years.

WTF were you even watching the game on ESPN? Im 100% with you on how obvious ESPN's refusal to recognize the Spurs is.

SO fuck them, Im not watching them for anything NBA.

[Obstructed_View]

What was my alternative to ESPN? I'm in Dallas.

[gospursgojas]

What was my alternative to ESPN? I'm in Dallas.

Ah...I undastand.

[Manu20]

Okay, belief in the ban is back on. Jeff Van Gundy was amazingly negative toward the Spurs tonight, from saying the flagrant on Parker wasn't anything, to the Manu "flops so much he shouldn't get calls" thing. There were several more where I couldn't believe it was the same JVG that's been at ESPN for years.

lol was thinking the same thing.........but I guess he was just pimping the Thunder because they were the underdog??

[ajballer4]

The biggest thing is right before the game the sportscenter anchor next to John Anderson which I believe was Steve Levy but I get him confused with another guy all the time. Anyway he said coming up next on espn we have 46-10 league leading spurs that's a pretty good record and the 36-19 (I think) record which is just a phenomenal record and he got really excited about the thunder

[EricB]

Its a losing battle.


Its annoying but, what the hell are you gonna do.

[Sleepy_Floyd]

The highlights of tonight's game aren't up yet on ESPN's Xbox Live service thingy, yet every other NBA game's highlights are up, including the LA/Portland game which aired AFTER the Spurs game. To be fair though the ESPN Xbox thingy is crap :rolleyes