(07-02-2018 06:16 PM)JRsec Wrote: (07-02-2018 06:09 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote: Great as a 'Bama filibustering propagandist. However, other SEC schools are invested in the SECN as well. Would it harm him to say the words Mississippi State or Vanderbilt a bit more often and not in a condescending way? A get some of those callers of the air. Some of it is trashy and not fit for anything associated with academia.
I'm in complete agreement with you here and said so before his first show. I want the callers to be alumni and not veterans of the Jerry Springer show. I wanted Tony Barnhardt who would be a fabulous host. He needs to have guests from the sports industry to talk about pertinent issues and then take serious callers who want to talk about the topic of that specific hour.
I also think our presidents should insist in slow time that tours of each school which highlights the its academic endeavors and social life need to see air time. There's your benefit in recruiting. ESPN doesn't even have to be responsible for production as each of our schools could do their own. Just some thoughts. I would like to hear yours?
JRsec, you were too quick in replying. I didn't get a chance to correct a couple of spelling errors before you posted. Incidentally, that was the last day I used that old, troublesome smartphone.
Yes, I termed PF a 'Bama propagandist, and stand by it. There was no intent to disparage the Tide's long history of some extraordinary accomplishments. That was not the point.
Where there is an issue, is the balance in coverage during his program, doesn't exist. Sure, they all get mentioned in one way or another, but focus is overwhelmingly about Alabama. All SEC members are invested; not just to exist and covered as fb opponents for Alabama.
The trash talk callers may be popular with a certain demographic, but it adds nothing of cognitive substance to the discussion. I heard enough, and am not amused what Larry, Phyllis, or what some Dave thinks, or anyone else that may have never set a foot in a college classroom.
I do give PF credit for having some quality guests, i. e. other sportscasters and writers, ADs and coaches, former and current athletes, conference office officials, and others that have useful and interesting information to share.
Certainly, at times PF can drop some tidbits that are quite informative. He has his contacts, and can be a mouthpiece for some insiders to get information into the public domain they don't want to say themselves.
Posters can argue this, but I view PF can rip on a struggling coach in a way that seems a bit mean-spirited. In some situations, coaching personnel may be doing their best given the circumstances; and only makes finding success much more difficult with the inflaming criticism. I often wonder, how the impacted SEC school feels about this venue media attack? While this is going on, Nick Saban is presented as some type of saintly figure. That is quite annoying when repeated multiple times on each show. Again, nothing offensive to Nick Saban; he has had outstanding success at Michigan State, LSU, and Alabama.
The minority callers, not associated with Alabama, often speak of PF's bias. Balanced coverage is not there, and he dismisses or shrugs it off when it is presented to him repeatedly by some decent-sounding listeners. I am not including the nasty callers that speak enraged, and treated by the broadcast as entertainment of which PF plays them for the obvious ignorance they show. PF does usually very well when he is part of panels, and chooses to talk more encompassing pertaining the SEC.
You mentioned a few features I would like to see included. I shall repeat some and others.
* Well-done profiling of campuses in the SEC. This could include admissions and recruiting, orientation, programs of study, interviewing administrations and faculty, favorable data and statistics, speaking to a variety of students, building tours, residence and dining halls, intramurals and other student activities including the band and cheerleading. Visit the medical and veterinary medicine schools. Note research activity and accomplishments. Coverage of famous alumni can be interesting. Yes, let each campus do their timed submissions. Some SEC schools have excellent studios, equipment, and personnel, to produce quality videos/film.
The BTN is very experienced at this and it is shown frequently.
* Bring in quality guests more frequently.
* If they want debates, have them; but be professional and not just partisan fans yapping.
* Go out of the home studio more often. Perhaps do the program with enhanced rotation on campuses.
* I like this. Some will complain. Interview and/or visit competing conferences and profile them, in a nice way, of course. Know what others are doing positively.
* Screen callers based on substantive questions or insight they may have. Not because they are a repeated caller and being drunk and/or excessively emotional is entertaining and amusing. Why should the at-large audience care how many "beers" has had for the day? How is this valuable to the SEC?
* During the recruitment period, give all SEC members coverage as to their interests, needs, and accomplishments.
* Rotate panels of SEC coaches and ADs, having them discuss rule changes, shared problems and frustrations, athlete safety matters, or whatever topic is pertinent at the time.
* Have assistant coaches weigh-in more frequently. Many of them are looking for advancement and would relish being heard.
* If there must be open-lines call-in from uncouth fans or whatever, maybe limit such to two hours one day a week, not five days a week, off and on for four hours.
Still, keep such well-monitored and upgrade the dialogue.
It is suppose to be about higher education and their athletic programs, after all.