More proof that ESPN hates us!

[18IsTheMan]

Check out this headline from our game against UT: "South Carolina surprises No. 5 Vols on late 3 by Ta'Lon Cooper".

Read that headline and you'd think we sank some miracle, half-court 3-pointer at the buzzer to get a 1-point win. You would not guess that we led by 9 points with 3 minutes to go in the game. It was UT who was hitting the miracle 3s to stay in the game.

Yes, we did surprise them, but not because of that shot.

Yes, this post in somewhat in jest, for those who are deaf to sarcasm. I do think the headline downplays our performance, though. It gives you the impression of a fluke win, and that was very much not the case.

 

[Evilchicken]

Omg, ESPN does not hate us. You’ll find anything to complain about! Get a friggin life bro!

Just kiddin

 

[Fried Chicken]

Sadly we’re not even important enough for ESPN to care one way or the other. There’s a headline because Tennessee lost. We’re irrelevant to them as of now, outside of women’s basketball.

I will say our fans seemed to irritate the College Football guys at ESPN when Corso predicted Spurrier would never win the SEC here. Sadly, he ended up being right. I felt we’ve never gotten much favorable coverage from them, outside of Lou Holtz, since then. Doesn’t help that Herbstriet became a huge Clemson dork. But I’d guarantee you were low on their favorite places to visit / teams to cover. I don’t think they particularly care much for our fanbase. When Spurrier had us playing well they had no choice.

I’ll even admit I had a conversation with Herbstriet the first time they came to Columbia. Blackout game. He was very nice but I pretty much just gave him a hard time about us beating Ohio State the previous season. He even talked about how embarrassing they were, specifically their lack of sportsmanship. Looking back on it, I bet he thought I was annoying .

 

[Deleted11512]

Yeah, that’s pretty wild. We led for the majority of the game. Like it or not, perception matters. Would have been nice for them to report what actually happened.

 

[GivEmDaSpurs]

Check out this headline from our game against UT: "South Carolina surprises No. 5 Vols on late 3 by Ta'Lon Cooper".

Read that headline and you'd think we sank some miracle, half-court 3-pointer at the buzzer to get a 1-point win. You would not guess that we led by 9 points with 3 minutes to go in the game. It was UT who was hitting the miracle 3s to stay in the game.

Yes, we did surprise them, but not because of that shot.

Yes, this post in somewhat in jest, for those who are deaf to sarcasm. I do think the headline downplays our performance, though. It gives you the impression of a fluke win, and that was very much not the case.

The bigger story here is that ESPN scrolled that Tennessee was under investigation for NIL the entire game and had a piece about it at halftime.

 

[FootballLVR]

We are in the SEC. The SEC/ESPN partnership is what pays some of the bills for our athletics. They aren't against us. We just weren't expected to win. It was a headline - not a complete game synopsis. Lighten up Francis.

 

[18IsTheMan]

We are in the SEC. The SEC/ESPN partnership is what pays some of the bills for our athletics. They aren't against us. We just weren't expected to win. It was a headline - not a complete game synopsis. Lighten up Francis.

Ahh, the "deaf to sarcasm" person I referenced in the OP. Nice to meet you!

However, as ESPN is, presumably, in the journalism business, they ought to be able to come up with headlines that are a bit more accurate.

 

[adcoop]

It's all about how you look at a headline. Even though we led most of the game, Cooper's late 3 is sort of what sealed it. Sports outlets are not going to talk about free throws.

 

[18IsTheMan]

It's all about how you look at a headline. Even though we led most of the game, Cooper's late 3 is sort of what sealed it. Sports outlets are not going to talk about free throws.

Obviously, as I said, the OP was partially in jest.

However, I think a more accurate headline would be "Fifth-ranked Vols go down as Gamecocks' Cooper hits late 3 to thwart Tennessee's late comeback attempt."

Though, really, the FTs were the bigger key. So the MOST accurate headline could read "Tennessee comeback falls short as Gamecocks hit late 3 and FTs to upset #5 Vols."

 

[atl-cock]

Win anyway.

 

[TooCocky]

None of this matters. The only thing that matters is NET rankings.
We’re 41st. There’s 32 auto bids. So if we don’t win the sec we’re going to have to keep winning. We have quite a few quad one games remaining as of now. Long as we don’t completely implode we’ll be fine. But if we lose a couple we shouldn’t then we’re going to be in trouble.

 

[Deleted11512]

It's all about how you look at a headline. Even though we led most of the game, Cooper's late 3 is sort of what sealed it. Sports outlets are not going to talk about free throws.

"Ta'lon Cooper drains late 3 as South Carolina fends off late UT rally to upset #5 Tennessee in Knoxville." That would have bee much more fitting.

 

[Deleted11512]

None of this matters. The only thing that matters is NET rankings.
We’re 41st. There’s 32 auto bids. So if we don’t win the sec we’re going to have to keep winning. We have quite a few quad one games remaining as of now. Long as we don’t completely implode we’ll be fine. But if we lose a couple we shouldn’t then we’re going to be in trouble.

Yeah, just win the one's you're supposed to win from here on out, and we're good. BUT, perception matters. So being undervalued in the AP COULD lead to a lower seeding.

 

[adcoop]

"Ta'lon Cooper drains late 3 as South Carolina fends off late UT rally to upset #5 Tennessee in Knoxville." That would have bee much more fitting.

I get it that the OP was in jest, but just feel that worrying about editing a sports headline when we won the game is a little OCD and highlights what a lot of fans of opposing teams say about us (that we have an inferiority complex). ESPN got the we won the game part right. After that, why do we even care?

 

[USC2USC]

Check out this headline from our game against UT: "South Carolina surprises No. 5 Vols on late 3 by Ta'Lon Cooper".

Read that headline and you'd think we sank some miracle, half-court 3-pointer at the buzzer to get a 1-point win. You would not guess that we led by 9 points with 3 minutes to go in the game. It was UT who was hitting the miracle 3s to stay in the game.

Yes, we did surprise them, but not because of that shot.

Yes, this post in somewhat in jest, for those who are deaf to sarcasm. I do think the headline downplays our performance, though. It gives you the impression of a fluke win, and that was very much not the case.

I dont think they hate us but I do think its interesting. There is so much internet journalism now that is become really lazy. So the tone in a piece skews towards perception, reputation, etc. Media and public relations at the univeristy can do work to improve this but that part of our AD function is pretty lame....or almost non-existent. CU AD does a great job with this.

I saw another national article after the UK game where the headline was we "survived" the Cats. Huh? It was a blowout.

 

[18IsTheMan]

I dont think they hate us but I do think its interesting. There is so much internet journalism now that is become really lazy. So the tone in a piece skews towards perception, reputation, etc. Media and public relations at the univeristy can do work to improve this but that part of our AD function is pretty lame....or almost non-existent. CU AD does a great job with this.

I saw another national article after the UK game where the headline was we "survived" the Cats. Huh? It was a blowout.

Survived that game? lol, that's rich.

Another headline for the UT game said something to the effect that UT only lost because they played poorly.

 

[Slim Chickens Gamecock]

I would rather fly way under the radar and never repeat the 2nd half vs AL debacle. If we hype us too much there always seems to be a collapse. Sad but true.

 

[Maccmaine12]

Check out this headline from our game against UT: "South Carolina surprises No. 5 Vols on late 3 by Ta'Lon Cooper".

Read that headline and you'd think we sank some miracle, half-court 3-pointer at the buzzer to get a 1-point win. You would not guess that we led by 9 points with 3 minutes to go in the game. It was UT who was hitting the miracle 3s to stay in the game.

Yes, we did surprise them, but not because of that shot.

Yes, this post in somewhat in jest, for those who are deaf to sarcasm. I do think the headline downplays our performance, though. It gives you the impression of a fluke win, and that was very much not the case.

You can tell that they don’t even watch the games tbh

 

[1vagamecock]

Check out this headline from our game against UT: "South Carolina surprises No. 5 Vols on late 3 by Ta'Lon Cooper".

Read that headline and you'd think we sank some miracle, half-court 3-pointer at the buzzer to get a 1-point win. You would not guess that we led by 9 points with 3 minutes to go in the game. It was UT who was hitting the miracle 3s to stay in the game.

Yes, we did surprise them, but not because of that shot.

Yes, this post in somewhat in jest, for those who are deaf to sarcasm. I do think the headline downplays our performance, though. It gives you the impression of a fluke win, and that was very much not the case.

Since when has reporting been accurate?
Journalists are lazy (not all), but I don't expect any reporting to be accurate in this country anymore.

 

[ConwayGamecock]

WHat I want to know is, what are we all gonna do with all of this tonnage of proof on ESPN Hate-age???????

 

[Deleted11512]

WHat I want to know is, what are we all gonna do with all of this tonnage of proof on ESPN Hate-age???????