I’ve heard a lot of ugliness out of ESPN announcers about the Tigers. And certainly out of a lot of fans. I can’t say that I agree with Rose 100%, but I wasn’t paying much attention to the media during the Metro days. But it’s gotten way out of hand in the last few years with most of them acting surprised that Memphis wins.

As for C-USA–yeah, it’s not the conference it used to be. I can’t blame the schools who’ve moved up and left us behind. I’ve heard that the main culprit is the football team, but I don’t know that for sure.

Mark wrote:
“. . . words don’t win basketball games, predictions don’t put any points on the board . . .”

Which is why I wonder if he should be blaming the Media for Memphis’ fall from the top spot.

I thought it was a loosely called game (in Memphis’ favor) and UT wasn’t firing on all cylinders, so the fact that it was close is not proof of much.

That being said, I do think that hype and distractions (and the other psych. aspects) are a bigger factor in college sports than in the pros, and that is one reason I think they are more interesting. Memphis should probably be happy that they won’t be carrying the undefeated-season-monkey come tourney time.

“You could take the Memphis team as it is, put them in Duke jerseys, change John Calipari’s name to Mike Krzyzewski, and you would have an instant media darling.”

Written by someone who does not understand Duke’s appeal. I think if the Memphis starting five were wearing Duke blue (they are, kinda, when you think about it) the media would start to question The Rat’s recruiting and the alumni would ask him to take a urine test.

Why do folks hate Memphis so much?

Ned, I disagree–those refs were clearly in favor of UT. There were some really flagrant missed calls. Not that any more fouls being called would have helped us at all…

Ha! Lesley, yes we could argue all day about that . . .

But I don’t think people “hate” Memphis; like GM pointed out, the reason Memphis doesn’t get the “love” that Duke does is not rank prejudice . . . rather, it is based on legitimate factors like proven integrity in recruiting and educating and discipline and success. At least that’s what my Duke alum father in law tells me.

ah, don’t ye go puttin words in me mouth, lad. It isn’t so much prejudice as classism. Duke has of course had a number of Black athletes. It’s just that those guys are “their kind of people,” or at least Coach K’s kind of people. Considering that UNC and Duke often compete for the same players, I really can’t say too much, lol. But we aren’t classists!!!

“Prejudice” isn’t a racial word necessarily, and not as I used it.

What you have to recall about ESPN’s “experts” is they will go love and praise whatever team is winning. So, while I am soaking up the sudden love for the Vols, I’m fully expecting them to turn on us at any moment.

I watched some of ESPN early Saturday. and there was a lot of praise for Memphis early in the day. Several announcers broke down why Memphis would win and picked them.

Then UT wins…and suddenly, it’s all love for the Vols. You can almost see them back-pedalling right there on-screen.

Should UT lose tonight, they will go from ESPN’s new favorite to the “see, told you so” in under ten seconds.

Also, just to help Leslie out here, I think Memphis had a high RPI than NC or Duke last I saw. I know UT was one and Memphis three headed into Saturday’s game.

I agree, Michael; I think sports broadcasting is akin to political reporting–there needs to be a storyline to keep you interested, and much of what they say is just to keep us watching. Building up one side, diminishing another; then vice versa, just to create “interest.” It is always a little amusing to watch game broadcasters trying to find hooks in the midst (and certainly at the end) of a game where the result has the air of inevitability.