KARE 11 on 11/16/2011 Wed Night Why the U of M can't win in FB

Donate To GopherHole
W

wait!what?

Active member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
3,179
Reaction score
0
Points
36
The KARE Extra is an expose with Mike Pomerantz 'Why MN can't Win in BT football.' Seriously.
 


Perk isn't the main reporter? Color me disappointed.
 

I may have to watch it. I suspect it will be the usual "they haven't won, therefore, they will not," which isn't any reason at all.
 

Prediction: the teaser ("Why the U CAN'T win") is just that: a teaser. The actual story will present no analysis as to why they can't win and will simply re-hash recent history. I doubt they will even definitively conclude that the U 'can't' win, but rather will come down making some wishy-washy statement.

Local news (local news EVERYWHERE) is absoloutely lousy journalism. Substance and quality reporting that would actually INFORM viewers is a distant second to inflammatory, over-the-top, alarmist headlines designed merely to ATTRACT viewers.
 


Can we wait until 10:20 (approx) on Wednesday to comment on the story?
 

It's the same old story, we're already seen it before.
 

This will likely be a re-hash of old material and a complaint that TCF was built

For the Gophers when the Vikings are still fighting for a new stadium, you can bet your last dollar
with all of the complaining about that in the media that this stadium angle will play a role in
this KARE11 extra and why did TCF get built for the Gophers "You know not deserving blah blah blah" when Ziggy can't get Ziggy world built so he can charge $40.00 to $50.00 bucks a car to park. Sid still bitches on his show about the stadium weekly and how that will never make one bit of difference. He is wrong for those of us that attend games TCF is already 10 times better the fan experience than being in the Metrodome and it is not even close.

That and they will play up the Randy Shaver angle that the top players and recruits in Minnesota never stay home to play for the Gophers and always leave. Let me guess they will include the Davidson kid as this years example and he will be counted as a Minnesota kid that always leaves, failing to mention he has lived here all of six months, or last years Seantrel Henderson debacle, instead of highlighting any that do stay like Eric Decker or Thomas Tapeh and ask them what there experience was like. They will likely interview the usual ex-coaches maybe Mason for a segement likely a cameo by Tim Brewster,
or some other ex-position coaches. It will be the same re-hashed ideas and angles without really adding anything new. Just tell everyone the Gophers will suck will always suck and can't win that about sums this deal up.
 

wait!what? said:
The KARE Extra is an expose with Mike Pomerantz 'Why MN can't Win in BT football.' Seriously.
Click to expand...

Ah, good. Another sports story by Pomerantz. I hope it's as good as the one he did fawning all over Nishioka. He really nailed that one.
 



It's the media-they must be negative towards the Gophers. Badger Belle will probably tell us all about the BADger program and how wonderful it is.

Please correct me if I am wrong but I think we lost only one Minnesota kid to sconnie last year and none to iowa. This year I don't think any Minnesota kids have committed to either of those hick schools.
 

I'll be shocked if it's a total bash piece by Pomerantz. He does still have to sit down with Kill a couple of more times to do Gopher Football Weekly.
 

Breakin' The Plane said:
I'll be shocked if it's a total bash piece by Pomerantz. He does still have to sit down with Kill a couple of more times to do Gopher Football Weekly.
Click to expand...

I would be surprised if Jerry Kill doesn't sit down with Mike as part of this, with his solution.

Also, maybe Alverez, Patterson and others might be featured.
 

tap said:
Please correct me if I am wrong but I think we lost only one Minnesota kid to sconnie last year and none to iowa. This year I don't think any Minnesota kids have committed to either of those hick schools.
Click to expand...

That is correct, but in fairness, neither school has offered many Minnesota kids recently:

2011
Sconnie: 2 (Marz, Crawford-Tufts)
Iowa: 0

2012
Sconnie: 1 (Pirsig)
Iowa: 3 (Pirsig, McDonald, Johnson)
 



to clarify. in the teaser you saw did they use the term "can't" or "why they haven't"? guess it could make a difference in the tone and outlay of the piece pomerantz is presenting.

either way, i am guessing it will be another woefully under-researched and poorly put together piece about the U of M by the local media. the local media here is a joke when it comes to fairlyand appropriately covering the U of M. as it is infested with wisky/becky badger transplants -- as well as from other rivals schools -- who deep down don't really want to see the U of M do well in anything or care to give them a fair shake in reporting. and therefore don't care to or take the time to cover the U of M in a professional and unbiased manner.

case in point. another unfair and unnecessary "the U of M sucks", "the U of M can never be successful so we should just settle" hit-piece. as this one appears to likely be. completely unnecessary, unfair and frankly untrue.

and some of the local media types (and media ball-washers on this board) wonder why most U of M fans hate their pompous media asses so much?!
 

Well, I suppose we could always have our own: TWIN CITIES SPORTS MEDIA SPECIAL here on GH. We will tear apart the local sports media personalities who have been around for 10...20...30...40...years or longer. We can bash 'em...trash'em and make fun of everything about them.

Or, we can lay down and just "take their crap...and try to pretend that they aren't any where NEAR as nasty as the east coast jerk sports media personalities are.

Let's see what they try to do and then come out swinging at them and their kind.

Sounds like fun to me!!!!!!!

; 0 )
 

supadupafly said:
to clarify. in the teaser you saw did they use the term "can't" or "why they haven't"? guess it could make a difference in the tone and outlay of the pice.
Click to expand...

I think this is very important honestly. If it's a true historical look at why the U can't seem to win in football, with a Jerry Kill "exclusive" going into bits of why he thinks we've been failing and then going into why things will change, then I see no problem.

If it is just a simple bash piece, like some have said, why would Pomerantz do that kind of piece and then do Gopher football with Kill every week? My guess is he takes a more positive view on it, I just can't see how he could do Kill like that when he's hosting a show with him.
 

Monty519 said:
I think this is very important honestly. If it's a true historical look at why the U can't seem to win in football, with a Jerry Kill "exclusive" going into bits of why he thinks we've been failing and then going into why things will change, then I see no problem.

If it is just a simple bash piece, like some have said, why would Pomerantz do that kind of piece and then do Gopher football with Kill every week? My guess is he takes a more positive view on it, I just can't see how he could do Kill like that when he's hosting a show with him.
Click to expand...

one would hope right? but unfortunately, i trust very few in this market when it comes to fairly and accurately reporting on the U of M. considering this is coming out of a station (KARE 11) where i personally think the sports director (randy shaver) has little to no class and is a complete d-bag, i am bound to be suspect of its potential tone and fairness towards the U of M.

there are a lot of unfair hidden (and even unhidden) biases that some of the local sports reporters and news directors have towards the U of M.

we'll see, i guess.
 

The impact of the Wacker era really did a number on perception of the Gophers. For decades, the longest streak of seasons where the Gophers had not won at least half of their regular season games was 2. There were three losing seasons between 1957 and 1959. There were four consecutive losing seasons between 1969 and 1972. There were again three consecutive losing seasons between 1978-1980 and between 1982 and 1984.

But in the 1990's, the wheels didn't just fall off the wagon, the wagon exploded. The Gophers had eight consecutive losing seasons between 1991 and 1998. I think that desert of the 90's has more to do with the perception that the Gophers have not merely not been good enough to win the conference title since 1967, but has in fact been truly awful that entire time. The Gophers have been for the most part mediocre over this stretch. Had their been as many bowl games as there are today, the Gophers would have gone to bowl games 20 out of the last 44 seasons. Of course, mediocre doesn't win championships, you have to have a breakout season now and then, people will forget about poor seasons for an occasional great season.

Of course, the only thing that will really work to change perceptions is to win. A NYD game, a division championship or a Big Ten title will wash a lot of the Wacker era out of people's minds.
 

I hope Reusse can weigh in and give us his opinion.
 

In spite of all the challenges, with no championships in 45 years, Minnesota is still third in championships and with Illlinois 3 behind, they will likely continue to be third for at least another 10-20 years - Amazing.

To bad Bierman didn't quit 3 years earlier and they hire Bud Wilkinson instead of hiring OSU's castoff. The Gophers might never have missed a beat.
 

badgergopher said:
In spite of all the challenges, with no championships in 45 years, Minnesota is still third in championships and with Illlinois 3 behind, they will likely continue to be third for at least another 10-20 years - Amazing.

To bad Bierman didn't quit 3 years earlier and they hire Bud Wilkinson instead of hiring OSU's castoff. The Gophers might never have missed a beat.
Click to expand...

i know it is all hypothetical in nature, but who knows right?! i do remember reading somewhere that bud wilkinson sincerely wanted to return to his alma mater and coach the golden gophers before he eventually ended up at oklahoma. he got to the point where he didn't want to wait around any longer for his old college ball coach, bernie bierman, to retire. of course who knows what happens with bud wilkinson at the U of M. does it play out like it did at oklahoma? who knows. but at the time minnesota was already an established national football power and oklahoma was nothing, so there is a decent chance wilkinson has some similar success at minnesota in the 50's that he had at oklahoma during that time.

but man, what a transition that would have been huh?! from a football coaching legend and hall of famer like bernie bierman to another eventual coaching legend and hall of famer in bud wilkinson.
 

Fun stat about Wilkinson at Oklahoma:

He didn't lose his first conference game until his 13th season as head coach. They were 61-0-2 in the Big 6/7/8 from 1947-1958.
 

supadupafly said:
i know it is all hypothetical in nature, but who knows right?! i do remember reading somewhere that bud wilkinson sincerely wanted to return to his alma mater and coach the golden gophers before he eventually ended up at oklahoma. he got to the point where he didn't want to wait around any longer for his old college ball coach, bernie bierman, to retire. of course who knows what happens with bud wilkinson at the U of M. does it play out like it did at oklahoma? who knows. but at the time minnesota was already an established national football power and oklahoma was nothing, so there is a decent chance wilkinson has some similar success at minnesota in the 50's that he had at oklahoma during that time.

but man, what a transition that would have been huh?! from a football coaching legend and hall of famer like bernie bierman to another eventual coaching legend and hall of famer in bud wilkinson.
Click to expand...

I see no reason why it wouldn't have worked here. It was still a single platoon game then so I don't think it was a talent thing, I think it was coaching. After all, people are still doing the Oklahoma drill!
 

What's bizarre is that the general population forgets that we've been decent here in the not-so-distant past.

We won 10 games with Mason, we've gone to numerous bowl games and even went to two bowl games under Brew. Things were bad last year, and they were bad again this year, but we haven't always been this bad, even in the last 10 years.

We've gone to 9 bowl games since 1999, we've finished in the top 25 twice, etc. I'm not saying we are a great program or even a good program, I am just saying that how can anyone make a statement that a program CANT win when things haven't been nearly as bad as the general population thinks.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
What's bizarre is that the general population forgets that we've been decent here in the not-so-distant past.

We won 10 games with Mason, we've gone to numerous bowl games and even went to two bowl games under Brew. Things were bad last year, and they were bad again this year, but we haven't always been this bad, even in the last 10 years.

We've gone to 9 bowl games since 1999, we've finished in the top 25 twice, etc. I'm not saying we are a great program or even a good program, I am just saying that how can anyone make a statement that a program CANT win when things haven't been nearly as bad as the general population thinks.
Click to expand...

There is a perception that the Gophers have bee perennial cellar dwellers for decades, which just isn't true. The Gophers have been mostly mediocre, mostly middle of the pack. The 90's were devastating to the perception of the Gophers.
 

RodentRampage said:
There is a perception that the Gophers have bee perennial cellar dwellers for decades, which just isn't true. The Gophers have been mostly mediocre, mostly middle of the pack. The 90's were devastating to the perception of the Gophers.
Click to expand...

Also a 1-11 team, 3-9 team, horrible embarrassments like the 03 Mich game, 05 Wisconsin game, and 08 Iowa game. This year has made fans continue to think we have "always" been terrible.

I totally agree the bad way outweighs the decent to couple great moments in the last 10-12 years when it comes to public perception.
 

OK is an interesting story. Few states were hammered as hard as OK during the Depression and the dustbowl. The state realized it needed to market itself and chose to improve its football program and oddly enough- a musical. It worked. The term 'Okie" left the lexicon and people associate the state with college football and an awesome musical.
 

It wasn't a hatchet job. It was fair and matter of fact. Many of the people here probably knew most of the issues he addressed, but I suspect that it was news to many casual observers.
 



You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom