Iceland12
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2008
- Messages
- 24,758
- Reaction score
- 2,421
- Points
- 113
We've had some good discussions on how the promotion of College Football by ESPN, local announcers, National "opinion makers" etc. have taken a big time turn to the negative. Maybe it's not longing for the "good old days". Maybe as some have proposed it's been a marketing plan all along. Here's a good, and long, opinion piece on just that.
The media and the power brokers of college football think they are onto something in nurturing a rising tide of friction, envy, and hate in the college football fan eco-system. Hate has long been an underrated tool for anyone looking to make people watch, care, and pick a side in sports: see LeBron's turn from hero to heel with the help of ESPN.
It makes sense at face value. A fan passionate about 1 team may only follow 1 team, but make that fan loathe a handful of teams and suddenly that fan has a rooting interest in many more games and teams. I'll use my alma mater, Ohio State, to articulate how well the racket works.
Ohio State fans used to only hate Michigan. Other teams, games, and news within the conference were somewhat interesting, but not required. Outside of the conference, most fans would tune out unless it was a major story of national interest.
Then came two BCS title game losses and the rise of the SEC's superiority and, boom, 12 14 more schools to hate. But it doesn't stop there.
While it was the SEC fans with their chant, a head scratcher for most sports fans who don't cheer the NL West or AFC East when one of their member teams has a breakthrough, the media cracked the code of capitalizing on this regional zeal.
The regional tribalism of college football give a blanket of security that loudmouth analysts, voters, writers, bloggers, and radio personalties to throw out any disparaging comment they want knowing that they are likely safe from any accountability.
AP writers can vote a team number one even after losing a game. If any team had a good season, it was deemed they would have "3-5 losses in the SEC" although Texas A&M and Missouri seemed to have not imploded as believed. Hypothetical arguments abound in college football that nobody cares about anywhere else - "If so and so played so and so, they'd lose by 2 touchdowns." It's unprovable, but yell it loud enough and people will take your hot take seriously.
The net effect was the experience of being a college football fan got (worse) because the shared interest of college football was no longer something that brought people together, but something that started arguments and nurtured ill will towards other schools, conferences, and regions...
Here's the link to the rest of the article.
http://www.awfulannouncing.com/2014...-of-college-football-fandom-is-a-science.html
The media and the power brokers of college football think they are onto something in nurturing a rising tide of friction, envy, and hate in the college football fan eco-system. Hate has long been an underrated tool for anyone looking to make people watch, care, and pick a side in sports: see LeBron's turn from hero to heel with the help of ESPN.
It makes sense at face value. A fan passionate about 1 team may only follow 1 team, but make that fan loathe a handful of teams and suddenly that fan has a rooting interest in many more games and teams. I'll use my alma mater, Ohio State, to articulate how well the racket works.
Ohio State fans used to only hate Michigan. Other teams, games, and news within the conference were somewhat interesting, but not required. Outside of the conference, most fans would tune out unless it was a major story of national interest.
Then came two BCS title game losses and the rise of the SEC's superiority and, boom, 12 14 more schools to hate. But it doesn't stop there.
While it was the SEC fans with their chant, a head scratcher for most sports fans who don't cheer the NL West or AFC East when one of their member teams has a breakthrough, the media cracked the code of capitalizing on this regional zeal.
The regional tribalism of college football give a blanket of security that loudmouth analysts, voters, writers, bloggers, and radio personalties to throw out any disparaging comment they want knowing that they are likely safe from any accountability.
AP writers can vote a team number one even after losing a game. If any team had a good season, it was deemed they would have "3-5 losses in the SEC" although Texas A&M and Missouri seemed to have not imploded as believed. Hypothetical arguments abound in college football that nobody cares about anywhere else - "If so and so played so and so, they'd lose by 2 touchdowns." It's unprovable, but yell it loud enough and people will take your hot take seriously.
The net effect was the experience of being a college football fan got (worse) because the shared interest of college football was no longer something that brought people together, but something that started arguments and nurtured ill will towards other schools, conferences, and regions...
Here's the link to the rest of the article.
http://www.awfulannouncing.com/2014...-of-college-football-fandom-is-a-science.html
