Would you vote them in?

[brett05]

Honestly man that's one of most insulting things I've ever heard leveled at a an athlete. Woods was a generational talent and was to the PGA what Michael Jordan was to the NBA. The media covered them because they were great, the media did not make them great although they certainly fed on the fact that people were enthralled to watch them both for the uniqueness of their games and the uniqueness of their personalities. Media creates nothing in and of itself.

What insult did I make?

 

[Parade_Rain]

That was always there. It was to draw the fringe in. Man you are tough today

Trollin', trollin', trollin'
Brett05 keeps on trollin'
Rawhide

 

[brett05]

Trollin', trollin', trollin'
Brett05 keeps on trollin'
Rawhide

and the irony continues...

 

[TC in Mississippi]

What insult did I make?

You basically said that Tiger Woods became a household name because the media deemed it so. That's not true. If it were they could grab any random schmo and make him popular. They can't. Tiger had a unique combination of extraordinary skill and dynamic personality that drew people in from the time he was a child. Nobody created that but him. The media grew the PGA, with the addition of casual fans, on the back of Tiger Woods. Not the other way around.

 

[brett05]

You basically said that Tiger Woods became a household name because the media deemed it so. That's not true. If it were they could grab any random schmo and make him popular. They can't. Tiger had a unique combination of extraordinary skill and dynamic personality that drew people in from the time he was a child. Nobody created that but him. The media grew the PGA, with the addition of casual fans, on the back of Tiger Woods. Not the other way around.

What would have happened if the media never covered it?

 

[brett05]

I have yet to see where this is not a symbiotic relationship between media, fans, and the athletes.

 

[Parade_Rain]

and the irony continues...

I don't think you know what irony means.

 

[Parade_Rain]

What would have happened if the media never covered it?

The media would have missed a big opportunity to make more money.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Going back to when baseball was young, the fans and sponsors covered the cost of the teams. People came out to the ball park to watch the teams play as a firm of entertainment. Newspapers reported what happened. They didn't create the game, the teams or the interest. Players and fans do that. The game can easily survive without dipsticks submitting blank ballots of HoF voting. Those dipsticks should be declared banned from covering baseball and the media would have to find someone else to cover the sport and they would do so with a different spirit.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

What would have happened if the media never covered it?

Now we've gone from the chicken and the egg to the "if a tree falls in the forest..." koan. Sigh. If it's something the fans want to see the media is almost forced to cover it or, as Parad Rain said, they lose out on making a lot of money which is the sole reason why they exist. By your reasoning there is some golfer out there that's not famous only because the media isn't covering him which is obviously not true.

I have yet to see where this is not a symbiotic relationship between media, fans, and the athletes.

No question it is a symbiotic relationship and I'm not arguing that the player doesn't benefit from media coverage in terms of the popularity of their sport, increased revenue, higher salaries, etc. The original point of this whole thing though was that this isn't about the media. People don't turn in to watch the talking heads, they turn on the talking heads to watch them talk about the players who without talent wouldn't be talked about. Assholes that make it all about them by turning in blank ballots and the like don't add anything at all to the sport. In the end it's always about the player and his talent.

 

[DanTown]

A couple quick points

1. It's not surprising that Bonds, etc got more percentage of the votes because BBWAA changed membership rules so anyone who was out of baseball at least 10 years wasn't allowed to vote. Basically that's the old guard of "protecting" the hall
2. The media doesn't create stories, they COVER them. The reason the media covers what they do is demand from the people. It's not like the media can create demand.
3. Everyone (media, fans, athletes, teams) all make a ton of money compared to 30 years ago to a ton of reasons

A) Cable TV blows up so now a person can watch any game in any city
B) ESPN comes along and proves that sports coverage is a necessity and should no longer be relegated to just the back end of the news
C) The internet allows fans to follow the sport they love in so much more detail than they ever could before
D) Sports rights become insanely more valuable as DVR kills the broadcast market and any live event becomes massively more important

 

[Parade_Rain]

As a note, Olney did not send in a blank ballot. He didn't send in a ballot...according to his twitter.

 

[brett05]

I don't think you know what irony means.

There are lots of words you think you know but you've shown otherwise.

 

[brett05]

The media would have missed a big opportunity to make more money.

And Tiger and golf in general would ahve made less and been far less popular.

 

[Parade_Rain]

And Tiger and golf in general would ahve made less and been far less popular.

But they still would have made it. The media is only there because a product is available to market. They cannot create the market. The talent creates the market. You think too highly of the media.

 

[Parade_Rain]

There are lots of words you think you know but you've shown otherwise.

Brett05 being Brett05.

 

[brett05]

Now we've gone from the chicken and the egg to the "if a tree falls in the forest..." koan. Sigh. If it's something the fans want to see the media is almost forced to cover it or, as Parad Rain said, they lose out on making a lot of money which is the sole reason why they exist. By your reasoning there is some golfer out there that's not famous only because the media isn't covering him which is obviously not true.

There are lots of golfers out there that are not getting covered even though they are great which is only known by those that follow the sport.

No question it is a symbiotic relationship and I'm not arguing that the player doesn't benefit from media coverage in terms of the popularity of their sport, increased revenue, higher salaries, etc.

Finally

The original point of this whole thing though was that this isn't about the media. People don't turn in to watch the talking heads, they turn on the talking heads to watch them talk about the players who without talent wouldn't be talked about. (Those) that make it all about them by turning in blank ballots and the like don't add anything at all to the sport. In the end it's always about the player and his talent.

I think you make a strawman assumption that the blank ballot was turned in because the voter wanted it to be all about them. You also assume that by turning in a blank ballot it does nothing for the sport. I don't like the blank ballot or the Pete Rose only ballot but I understand it. I see the wanting to make a change. I see the voter trying to add some definition to the voting/election process. And it gets much more conversation about the sport which as you know any publicity is good publicity and thus making a solid contribution to the sport. We definitely disagree here.

 

[brett05]

Brett05 being Brett05.

All yours PR

 

[Parade_Rain]

There are lots of golfers out there that are not getting covered even though they are great which is only known by those that follow the sport.

Tiger Woods before the famous incident was on his way to obliterating Jack Nicklaus' major wins record. As is Tiger will finish with 14 Major wins to Nicklaus' 18. There are no golfers current or on the horizon who are not getting covered because they are "great" golfers. The true greats of any game come along only so often.

 

[brett05]

Tiger Woods before the famous incident was on his way to obliterating Jack Nicklaus' major wins record. As is Tiger will finish with 14 Major wins to Nicklaus' 18. There are no golfers current or on the horizon who are not getting covered because they are "great" golfers. The true greats of any game come along only so often.

No, you are now saying sports are only popular if you are one of the five or so that transcend the game. That's simply not true.