Way to go ESPN
Yesterday I posted Mark May's comments that he made on a radio show regarding his "inside sources" told him that Rich would be going to Clemson or UT after Michigan Brokered a deal for him to go there. Well, check this out:
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3735939
Looks like Mark was WAY WAY off base. What gives? Is there some sort of haterade being drunk over at ESPN that makes them want to doom our program? Where is the journalistic credibility over there?
Instead of everyone focusing on firing Rich they should focus on getting rid of clowns like May, Herbie, and Speilman who have all openly made comments that are way off base and could hurt the program.
When will ESPN stop letting their reporters spread nonsense?
December 1st, 2008 at 7:55 AM ^
Just because someone who is employed by ESPN says something, it doesn't mean ESPN was reporting it. He had a bad lead, probably heard some sort of rumor and said it on his radio gig. ESPN was really embarrassed after the Herby fiasco, they don't let their people report sources that can't be verified.
December 1st, 2008 at 8:19 AM ^
you work for ESPN, or just hold Disney stock?
May is only popular (read:known) because of being a college football analyst at ESPN, so any of his comments represent the views of ESPN. I guess you can believe that his "source" said to not air those comments on ESPN, but his radio show. It's possible, but unlikely.
I think that May and co say stupid false rumors about a lot of programs, but we only pay attention to the Michigan related ones.
December 1st, 2008 at 8:28 AM ^
First of all, I think he's known for being a really great offensive lineman with the Redskins.
So, whatever you say on this board represents the views of your employer? I think you're just being a little overly biased.
I love that people think these guys sit around making rumors up, like "Let's fuck with Michigan today... then tomorrow we'll tell people Bob Stoops is going to become the head coach at Miami of Ohio!!" They have sources who have information, sometimes it's right and sometimes it's not. When Brian posts something that turns out to not be true, do we call him a liar? No, we understand his source was wrong.
December 1st, 2008 at 10:32 AM ^
There are several "ESPN personalities" that make comments off the air. John Kruk was on a radio show last year lamenting against ESPN forcing him to pick the Yankees to win the AL East last year during the early part of the season when they were well behind the leaders. When Kruk told them he wouldn't, they told him he had to say something "bold and edgy." So instead of picking the Yankees to win the East, he picked the Pirates to win the NL Central.
Blah blah blah, Kruk is also only known for his baseball analysis, but he said something outside the ESPN sphere, Mark May can say whatever he wants outside of ESPN as well. He chose not to, so I can't blame ESPN squarely for this. (ESPN is still stupid though).
December 1st, 2008 at 10:14 AM ^
don't be naive. yeah, by mark may (an employee for espn) reporting a leak/story then you can claim ESPN was reporting it. mark may doesn't work for himself, he works for espn. if i go into work and fuck something up for our clients, that would be my responsibility but ultimately my company would be accountable for it. now i don't think espn hates us b/c every fan thinks espn hates their school but it is getting ridiculous how many absurd false stories come out of their employees(i.e. herbie reporting on les to mich, mark may on richrod to clemson, etc). at what point do you tell your employees that speculation does not equal certainty?
December 1st, 2008 at 10:29 AM ^
Just because he works for ESPN doesn't mean that ESPN is liable for everything that he does. The difference is that if you "go into work and fuck something up" you are at your place of employment working for your employer as an employee, whereas Mark May was not at his place of employment working for his employer as an employee when he made the comments.
December 1st, 2008 at 10:33 AM ^
Was this in his job at ESPN? No. He didn't say it on ESPN, on ESPB.com, etc. If I say something racist on this board, for example, that has nothing to do with my job. He was not there as ESPN's Mark May, he was there as the radio show's college football analyst.
It's like saying "Spielman says he hates Michigan on the radio, never let him broadcast our games!!!" When Spielman says "Michigan eats donkey cock" on ESPN, then that will be an issue.
December 1st, 2008 at 11:19 AM ^
dude chill out. i have no idea where he said it. but if he did say it on air, or on espn radio then yeah, espn is accountable for what their employees say. what he does in his free time is his own business. how do you not understand that? but like i said, i didn't read his comments so if he said it outside of espn then no, they aren't liable for what he said. but if it was on air they are. are you not accountable for anything where you work? does you company let you say/do stupid shit without any accountability attached to it?
December 1st, 2008 at 11:27 AM ^
He said it on some awful sounding sports talk show in Arizona where he apparently serves as their college football "analyst" on Monday's and does NFL picks with the hosts.
December 1st, 2008 at 12:01 PM ^
Actually you're the one that needs to chill out. Brodie knew what he was talking about because he was familiar with the situation. This has been discussed in another thread. The fact that you didn't know it was not on ESPN is on you, not Brodie or the OP of this thread. You know, since we're talking about accountability and what not...
December 1st, 2008 at 12:56 PM ^
alright this is dumb. but every fan associates mark may with espn, so either directly or indirectly his actions can reflect his work at espn. anyway, i already mentioned that every fan thinks espn hates their school.
December 1st, 2008 at 12:41 PM ^
Here's how he was introduced:
"college football insider and analyst, from ESPN, ESPN's college gameday,... Mark May."
To me, he is making comments as an ESPN analyst for a radio show, even though it wasn't on espn. He is representing espn.
December 1st, 2008 at 1:06 PM ^
I would disagree with that. The mention of ESPN is being used to provide Mark May credibility for his appearance, not to attribute his comments to ESPN.
December 1st, 2008 at 9:19 AM ^
Is a penisface. End of discussion.
December 1st, 2008 at 11:48 AM ^
ESPN has an ombudsperson who reviews all messages received from viewers about concerns about ethical conduct of their employees. I sent in a report after the Herbie- Les Miles fiasco last year and recently sent one in about Herbie and Chris Spielman talking smack before the M-OSU game.
My beef with Herbie is he shows up on Saturday's in the Home Depot booth with Chris and that demented SOB Lee Corso and looks like Mr. Objective Boy Scout. He's far from that on his weekday radio call in show in Columbus.
I would recommend going to ESPN's site and looking for the ombudsperson link (her name is Lee Ann) and filing a report.
Whenever Mark May is identified on TV or radio he is identified as an ESPN analyst so he has some responbility to speak objectively and factually.
December 1st, 2008 at 1:23 PM ^
What's a thoughtful, pragmatic comment doing in this thread? Shoo, erudite one. The masses are, at present, disinclined to appreciate your mastery of nuance and fair appraisal of the complexities inherent in the topic of media subjectivity.
Now, where were we? Oh, right: Harold Godwinson, this one's for your eye!
December 1st, 2008 at 1:04 PM ^
I don't care what Herbie and Spielman say off the air; that's their business. Not to put the two groups on the same level, but do you think that Tom Brokaw and Dan Rather don't have their own views on politics and global issues? Okay, so Spielman and Herbie actually give their analysis and opinion in some cases whereas a journalist is supposed to objectively report the news. Still, Spielman and Herbie do a fine job and I think that Herbie is one of the better CFB analysts out there. If he's biased at all, it's really in favor of the Big 10.
What Mark May said was a little more serious. I wouldn't go nuts over it, but it was irresponsible journalism that probably could be labeled as slander or libel, since it would have an effect on recruiting and/or RR's reputation, which already isn't the best.
December 1st, 2008 at 3:57 PM ^
Herbie & Spielman voiced their pleasure about Michigan's difficulties this year ON THE AIR on a sports station in Columbus the week of the OSU-M game. By talking smack on the air is the same reason Keith Olberrman and Chris Mathews got demoted by NBC weeks before the election. If you are going to be a journalist you have to be fair, balanced and objective all of the time while you are on a broadcast anywhere.
Getting back to Herbie, he went live with the Les Miles to Michigan story last year with one source that he said at the time was credible but ESPN later investigated and said this source was not enough and then blamed the College Game Day producer. Do you think any OSU booster wanted to see Les Miles come to Michigan to make us a "damn strong football team"? I don't think so. Herbie reported this to blow up any chance of Miles coming to Michigan on a day LSU was playing an important game on their schedule. Herbie never beat Michigan in his career so he should be ineligible to talk smack. In that 1993 game he was on his back more than a newlywed on his/her honeymoon.
Never, ever trust a fucking Buckeye. Never.
December 1st, 2008 at 4:49 PM ^
Wow, it is amazing the sensitivity that some of you Wolverines fans display (notice I said only "some" of you). First, one of you actually contacted the ombudsman at ESPN? Seriously? And to those that think Herbie reported the Les move to Michigan as an effort to derail that marriage, that view is simply delusional.
Here is what most likely happened: Herbie had a source he felt was at least somewhat reliable and thought he had a college football-related scoop. You know, something well within the context of his job. He then reported the information after clearing it with the producer, believing it newsworthy. Then it turned out to be wrong, as sometimes "inside" information is. Simple and devoid of any conspiratorial intentions.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:03 PM ^
I'm not sensitive but I've been raised to know what bullshit is. Herbie did not do his job and ESPN exposed that. They said his single, solitary source was not enough when he went live with that information. In journalism it's called ethics and I've learned that not everyone has them. ESPN needs to get Chris Fowler two side kicks for Game Day who are legit- Corso and Herbie both hate Michigan.
If Desmond would have pulled the same trick if OSU was hiring a coach, the ESPN ombudsperson's email box would have melted with all the mail she would have received. OSU fans are nuts...just listen to Romey, The Herd or Scott Van Pelt on ESPN radio.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:09 PM ^
This is just retarded.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:54 PM ^
So you are saying these washed up jocks who venture into sportscasting because they look good and can string two sentences together despite all the head trauma they have incurred, can just make things up (May) or deliver information over the airways that lack reliable sources (Herbie)?
If you believe that then I have some swamp land to sell you in Whitmore Lake.
I won't even bring up Lou Holtz's comment where he connected Hitler to RR regarding leadership. Jemele Hill (now with ESPN who was at the FREEP) used a Nazi reference last year and got three unpaid days off. Holtz does the same thing and does not even get a good old Catholic school wrist slap.
Slowly pull your head forward and extend your neck and back so you can get your head out of your ass pal. This is not retarded; it's just above your ability to understand.