ESPN doesn't realize that Bama is in the SEC

2,619 Views | 19 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by fatdad84ag
agent-maroon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

The Cougars represented the Big 12 in their first season in the conference by adding to the SEC's misery. Only Tennessee advanced to the Sweet 16 out of the SEC's eight teams in this tournament.
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/39804678/houston-outlasts-texas-ot-advance-ncaa-tournament

ESPN doing ESPN things.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
20ag07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yea, a low level editor fked up.

Pretty sure ESPN is well aware of who Bama belongs to.

But I guess it made you feel better to find a typo, and attach an agenda to it?

Must be a boring night to start a thread dedicated to attaching an editorial mistake to an entire network.
agent-maroon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's a pretty big mistake to make when it appears that the author was looking to make a dig on the SEC.

Better question - do YOU feel better now?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
20ag07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

That's a pretty big mistake to make when it appears that the author was looking to make a dig on the SEC.
Nope, victim.

Nothing about that article was digging at the SEC.

It doesn't even have a byline. "ESPN News Services".

That's essentially an AI bot.

Get over your victim complex.

If there's anything you should know, it's that the upper levels of ESPN have no interest in digging the SEC.

Stop looking for stupid tiny things to be mad about.
agent-maroon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Look, we're all going to be OK here. I'm more shaking my head at ESPN's ineptitude than feeling like a victim. But I'm curious how you don't think that "adding to the SEC's misery" isn't an attempt to insult the SEC. If you're going to make a statement like that then you should at least have your facts straight.

And if it's an AI bot writing the article then how is that any better?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
20ag07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

But I'm curious how you don't think that "adding to the SEC's misery" isn't an attempt to insult the SEC. If you're going to make a statement like that then you should at least have your facts straight.
That quote is no where in the link you posted.

Post the screenshot if it is.

Otherwise, you are being dramatic, and trying to stir up victim feathers (of some who won't actually read, but love a victim mob).

That "ESPN take" simply doesn't exist. So produce it.

(If anything, ESPN has been under fire for carrying the SEC's water that the tournament should change to allow more P2 schools in over small schools, even though we've largely been ****ting the bed).
Fquin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That ESPN take did actually exist. It cannot be reproduced because they caught their mistake and rewrote the whole story.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
My favorite laugh of the night was when Hefner was identified as from The Netherlands.
94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
agent-maroon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

OK Texans boy.

We didn't lose this game because of him.

You might could even say we were as close as we were because of him.

But go ahead and conflate some **** bc you're mad.
https://texags.com/forums/7/topics/3451779/replies/67237914


Quote:

I have 2 degrees from A&M and have yelled for the Ags from my season tix for 10 straight years.

I just don't wear a tin foil hat and live my life in fear of the "boogeyman".

Or keep crying about things that can't be changed.
https://texags.com/forums/5/topics/3450931/replies/67207706


Quote:

Stop making stuff up, you whiny exaggerator.

They are getting paid to let ESPN out of a contract early where they were owed future revenue, but the much much much bigger number is that TX is forgoing their SEC share for 2024-2025. So this just to help bridge that gap.

How is this in anyway a massive payday????

And the old 14 teams get more money, because ESPN is paying a pro rata increase to the league for the 16 teams, but it only has to be split 15 ways.

Maybe try understanding what you read, instead of looking for ways to be victimized.
https://texags.com/forums/5/topics/3450931/replies/67203527


This poster seems to have a pattern. What a strange, pathetic shtick to be trolling the boards with.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
jrdaustin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
agent-maroon said:

Quote:

OK Texans boy.

We didn't lose this game because of him.

You might could even say we were as close as we were because of him.

But go ahead and conflate some **** bc you're mad.
https://texags.com/forums/7/topics/3451779/replies/67237914


Quote:

I have 2 degrees from A&M and have yelled for the Ags from my season tix for 10 straight years.

I just don't wear a tin foil hat and live my life in fear of the "boogeyman".

Or keep crying about things that can't be changed.
https://texags.com/forums/5/topics/3450931/replies/67207706


Quote:

Stop making stuff up, you whiny exaggerator.

They are getting paid to let ESPN out of a contract early where they were owed future revenue, but the much much much bigger number is that TX is forgoing their SEC share for 2024-2025. So this just to help bridge that gap.

How is this in anyway a massive payday????

And the old 14 teams get more money, because ESPN is paying a pro rata increase to the league for the 16 teams, but it only has to be split 15 ways.

Maybe try understanding what you read, instead of looking for ways to be victimized.
https://texags.com/forums/5/topics/3450931/replies/67203527


This poster seems to have a pattern. What a strange, pathetic shtick to be trolling the boards with.
Wow! I now have visions in my head of a pathetic keyboard warrior sitting in his mama's basement getting an endorphin boost with every insulting post.

We sure have some strange types, here.
bigfooticus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The espin bot apparently realized the XII was almost down to their last hope in ISU had UH not pulled that out
20ag07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Strange and pathetic is running to TexAgs to create a thread to correct a mistake that has nothing to do with A&M in an article so insignificant on ESPN that it doesn't even have a byline.

Yeah, there are some weird types here.
Ol Jock 99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Easy explanation:

AggieDub04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
So, just to be clear, a senior writer who has been at ESPN for over a decade and mostly covers football didn't pay attention and published a story with a note that, did indeed, seem to suggest that he didn't realize Alabama was both in the SEC and made the sweet 16. This was part of a sentence in which he noted the misery of the SEC. Then someone comes out and starts victim blaming because they have nothing constructive to add to the conversation before ESPN corrects the story?

Sounds like a normal Texags Monday.
Ol Jock 99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It was a throw away comment on an article about a different game posted after midnight. Sloppy? Sure. Proof of a vast ESPN conspiracy again the SEC? Ha.
agent-maroon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
20ag07 said:

Strange and pathetic is running to TexAgs to create a thread to correct a mistake that has nothing to do with A&M in an article so insignificant on ESPN that it doesn't even have a byline.

Yeah, there are some weird types here.

It was literally in the middle of the first ESPN recap article about our game with Houston. That's why I was reading the article.

Serious question - did you actually read the article or did you just keep checking until they made the inevitable correction so you could make the claim that it never existed and then demand that I post a screenshot? Because I was the one trying to "create drama", right?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
agent-maroon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ol Jock 99 said:

It was a throw away comment on an article about a different game posted after midnight. Sloppy? Sure. Proof of a vast ESPN conspiracy again the SEC? Ha.

Just to be clear my "ESPN doing ESPN things" comment was not meant to advance a conspiracy theory, but rather to comment on their occasional incompetence. Not verifying that Tennessee really was the only SEC team left in the tournament when Alabama had literally just won their game with GCU and advanced to the Sweet 16 is a pretty major screw up for a professional full time sports network IMO. You may feel differently, but my opinion has nothing to do with tinfoil hats...
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Muy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
20ag07 said:

Yea, a low level editor fked up.

Pretty sure ESPN is well aware of who Bama belongs to.

But I guess it made you feel better to find a typo, and attach an agenda to it?

Must be a boring night to start a thread dedicated to attaching an editorial mistake to an entire network.


Odd take
EliteZags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Big 12 and Big 10 only have 2 teams in
fatdad84ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And the conferences that were down this year?
Big East still has 3 and ACC has 4.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.