Championship Drive Show

[QuattroCane]

I guess what it comes down to is this: you believe there is one — and only one — factor contributing to ESPN's loss in popularity. Other people think it's more than one.

No.

I think there is one major overriding factor.

And a bunch of hot air coming from Fox Sports and their agenda pushers.

You seem to keep moving the goal posts.

 

[Doppelganger]

And with this comment you lost whatever moral high ground you think you may have had.

By being honest?

OK.

It's only one of the most obvious distinctions between the two sides.

 

[jackbenimble71]

No, again. You don't even have a surface understanding of this issue.

It isn't a conservative vs. liberal thing.

It's an opinion vs. a vile opinion thing.

Curt Schilling didn't get fired for posting a conservative opinion.

Once you finally come to grips with that then you'll understand the issue. Until then you'll keep getting it wrong.

So, do you consider calling the sitting President of the United States a white supremacist to be an opinion or vile opinion? Just curious to hear the logic behind how you characterize a view.

Calling the sitting president of the US a white supremacist is a fact that can be fully supported with evidence.

The definition of a white supremacist is the following:

a person who believes that the white race is inherently superior to other races and that white people should have control over people of other races.

Tell me what evidence you have that substantiates this definition.

By the way, I'm not even a Trump supporter — ****, I didn't vote for the guy, but the over the top rhetoric is insane.

A black athlete kneels in a silent protest and the President sends out 18 tweets about it in a fit of rage calling it a disgrace.

When white supremacists rally in Charlottesville he calls them fine people.

I'll say this though.

Jamele Hill has a lot more evidence for her claim than the people on this thread have about ESPN.

And she could articulate hers better than them too.

your not that smart. has nothing to do with race. the snowflake athletes should not be kneeling. the president should be calling them out publicly.

Jamele Hill is a great example of promoting social justice instead of talent all because of the color of her skin.

 

[Genghis Cane]

You keep bringing up the "angry white men" point, but it's not just them: I know people, who come from all types of backgrounds, that get sick of politics and watch sports to escape it.

But those are not related.

Are those people claiming that they cancelled their cable subscription because ESPN has a supposed liberal bias?

The only people tweeting, whining and fretting about that are old white men.

I'd actually love to get a demographic count of this thread too. That would be interesting.

They don't care necessarily that there is a bias. They would just like to watch a sports network that is not intertwined with politics. They may not cancel their subscription, but they might change the channel if they see where the discourse is headed.

 

[Doppelganger]

When you dehumanize and marginalize those that disagree with you by generalizing them with terms like “vile” and “exclusive”, you have taken the discussion from a place of honest idea exchange, to a: “I’m right and I’m morally superior to you, therefore your opinion has no value” place.

How did I dehumanize them?

I stated a well-supported observation about the difference between liberal and conservative opinion.

One is more inclusive and one is more exclusive.

In this case Curt Schilling's was vile as well.

And this is ironic since what Curt Schilling did is the dictionary definition of dehumanize.

 

[Genghis Cane]

So in your opinion her statement about the President was accurate and factual, but not wanting men in the ladies room is not?

I think it's a bridge too far but she could argue it very strongly.

Much stronger than the "ESPN has a liberal bias" people could argue that.

I think this concession is very important. People, regardless of their political affiliation, should be able to agree about things that appear obvious.

 

[Doppelganger]

So Jemele Hill isn't an anchor on Sportscenter? That would be news to her and her employers.

Her entire career at ESPN was as an opinion person.

ESPN tried something different on Sportscenter and it's failing.

Every fact seems to be news to you.

 

[Doppelganger]

The NFL protests were not seen by everyone as a protest against police brutality, though.

So those people misread it or the protests weren't clear enough.

I don't see the relevance to this topic.

 

[Doppelganger]

By all accounts, Trump viewed the issue through a different lens — one that was critical of athletes choosing that venue/time to engage in protest.

So protests are fine as long as they don't upset your sensibilities.

Which is precisely the point of a protest.

It's a silly argument.

 

[Genghis Cane]

I guess what it comes down to is this: you believe there is one — and only one — factor contributing to ESPN's loss in popularity. Other people think it's more than one.

No.

I think there is one major overriding factor.

And a bunch of hot air coming from Fox Sports and their agenda pushers.

I don't even know what this means. I don't watch Fox Sports. It is your opinion that there is "one major overriding factor," but again, unless you can supply legitimate empirical data to support this conclusion, then you're just like the rest of us: a guy with an opinion.

 

[Handsome Squidbum]

Remember when MTV primarily played music videos? Music was replaced by reality shows that drew viewers due to shock value. Espn used to be mostly highlights with anchors making wry comments. Could tune in and you would eventually see a clip of your team. Now, it's primarily people spouting opinions and giving hot takes. Everyone is Jim Rome. Nearly all of hot takers are unbearable. Skip Bayliss, Cowherd, Stephen Smith - all irritating. I dislike Dinich because she has "covered" the ACC for years and in nearly all her discussions about the Canes, she gets basic facts wrong - from who is injured to what a class a player is in. Yet despite her incompetence she gets promoted to host a college football discussion show. She absolutely didn't derserve it, but it's a social justice move by espn because if they put a guy in charge, the left would scream that it's sexism and espn should be boycotted. So espn placates the left by pandering and promoting an incompetent woman. I would like to think the left would be insulted by such obvious pandering and ask why they didn't pick the best qualified person, or at least a woman whose sports writing would justify the elevation to a weekly TV show. Instead we get a poor man's version of SMD, who can ask incisive questions like, "How did scoring a touchdown last year make you feel" and can retweet uncorroborated injury reports.

 

[Doppelganger]

Many black members of the armed forces, who fought and died for our country, disagreed with the protests as well, so does that make them white supremacists, too, because they were frustrated?

Turning the issue into one about the military was complete and utter subject-changing meant to rile up Trump's most ardent supporters.

Kneeling during the anthem has absolutely nothing to do with the military. Men in white wigs did as much for our freedom as any current member of the armed forces. Did the protests disrespect 18th century politicians, too?

 

[Doppelganger]

The term white supremacist or **** is thrown around way too loosely in this day in age. This is what should be debated.

Agreed.

But, again, Jamele Hill could articulate her position and support for it better than anybody could on the ESPN thing.

It's just wishful thinking by Fox Sports and others.

 

[Doppelganger]

You seem to keep moving the goal posts.

In what way?

You'd have to be blind to miss the obvious involvement of Fox Sports, Clay Travis, Barstool Sports, etc. in this.

 

[Genghis Cane]

The NFL protests were not seen by everyone as a protest against police brutality, though.

So those people misread it or the protests weren't clear enough.

I don't see the relevance to this topic.

Well, if athletes had chosen a different venue to demonstrate, then we probably wouldn't have had this issue, right? They decided to do it during the national anthem, which rendered an opportunity for their original intent to get obfuscated. What seems evident to you — someone who holds a different worldview than the President or others — is not clear to every other viewer.

Again, I don't care that they protested, but I am trying to get you to understand where other people's minds are at. If you don't appreciate that, I don't know what else to tell you. I'm trying to do this in the most civil manner possible.

 

[Doppelganger]

your not that smart.

But you are.

 

[Doppelganger]

the snowflake athletes should not be kneeling.

Yes, those snowflake football players who crash heads for a living.

Definitely more snowflaky than the guy who can barely move his beer-belly from the couch to the fridge during commercial breaks.

 

[Genghis Cane]

Many black members of the armed forces, who fought and died for our country, disagreed with the protests as well, so does that make them white supremacists, too, because they were frustrated?

Turning the issue into one about the military was complete and utter subject-changing meant to rile up Trump's most ardent supporters.

Kneeling during the anthem has absolutely nothing to do with the military. Men in white wigs did as much for our freedom as any current member of the armed forces. Did the protests disrespect 18th century politicians, too?

Maybe, or maybe the average person sitting at home watching took it to heart initially. I agree that it has nothing to do with the military, but the fact the protests occurs at that time and place, allows the issue to become clouded.

 

[Doppelganger]

They would just like to watch a sports network that is not intertwined with politics.

But where is politics intertwined with sports on ESPN?

We're deep into this thread and still nobody has been able to give an example.

 

[Doppelganger]

It is your opinion that there is "one major overriding factor," but again, unless you can supply legitimate empirical data to support this conclusion, then you're just like the rest of us: a guy with an opinion.

There's all kind of evidence for cord-cutting.

ESPN knows this too. They have the data.