ESPN: Sports Network as Political Party, Complete with Talking Points

 First, the good news must be admitted. ESPN has the most professional game production, feature documentaries, hosts, analysts, play-by-play announcers, camerawork, graphics, and sets of any cable sports network. Overall, the network is smooth as glass.
 Second, the bad news must not be ignored. Like many major corporations, ESPN is run like a major mainstream political party (take your pick), complete with spin in its self-interest, bias, and weekly, if not daily, talking points to put them and their allies in the best light and casting opponents, both real and perceived, in the worst light imaginable.
 First, ESPN presents spin to protect its friends and partners, business and otherwise. The predominant opinion voiced by ESPN talking heads supports the NCAA and the BCS system. Why? The network has a multi-million dollar deal for broadcasting BCS bowl games. It also has hundreds of hours of regular-season NCAA sports programming. One of ESPN's missions is to prop up the sanctity of the NCAA, promoting the health of college sports participation and viewing.
 Second, ESPN Northeast and Midwest bias rears its ugly head more often than not when dismissing non-BCS conferences in the West like the WAC and the Mountain West. Its love of all things UConn is understandable, being headquartered in Bristol, but its love of Notre Dame and Ohio State and Texas is less comprehensible.  That is, until one understands the enormous ties between the BCS, NCAA, and those three schools. Who at ESPN is asking for the resignation of Ohio State AD Gene Smith? Would you believe nobody? Who at ESPN called for a criminal investigation into the death of the student videographer at Notre Dame during a team practice during high winds? Would you believe nobody? Who at ESPN ridiculed Texas football coach Mack Brown for his embarrassing tear-stained plea for more poll votes to get his Longhorns a BCS bid at the expense of a more deserving Aaron Rodgers-led Cal-Berkeley in 2004? Would you believe nobody? Who at ESPN supported USC in its appeal to reduce NCAA sanctions this spring? Would you believe nobody?
 Third, ESPN's use of combative talking points on a weekly or daily basis has never been more apparent than in its recent disparagement of Texas A&M and its quiet support of Texas and the Big 12. Bleacher Report  writer Michael Taglienti summed it up best in his "Why ESPN Is Afraid of A&M" article. Like both major political parties, the network realizes that the best defense is a good offense. When your position is indefensible, (and defending UT's Longhorn Network as a fair use of media is just that), you attack the opposition on any grounds.
 Unbelievable as it may sound, ESPN ironically attacked Texas A&M for having too much pride and being selfish. Really? Was Colorado hubris-ridden and selfish for joining the Pac-10/Pac-12? Was Nebraska hubris-ridden and selfish for joining the Big 10? No. Colorado and Nebraska saw the writing on the wall: they were sick of a Texas-dominated Big 12 appeasing the Longhorns to the extent that they were agreeable to allowing a Longhorn Network to come to fruition. It was bad enough that the conference championship game had been permanently moved to the Dallas region. 
 It is UT's hubris and selfishness that is ruining the Big 12. The Pac 12 has extremely fair revenue sharing. The Big 10 has fair revenue sharing. The Big 12 has inequitable revenue sharing. The conference grew more tilted towards the Longhorns in 2010 when, in desperate eleventh-hour fashion to keep them from bolting, they caved to UT's demands for its own network. Oklahoma and Texas A&M, in particular, were steamed at the prospects of high school games and a weekly Big 12 conference game being shown on the Longhorn Network.
 Texas overplayed its hand, like Chuck Yeager pushing the envelope. ESPN is fully invested in the Longhorn Network. ESPN has to defend Texas the best way it knows how: attack schools that are fed up with the UT bullying. Coach Bob Stoops is noncommittal towards OU's future in the Big 12. Still, OU is not in ESPN's crosshairs yet, because the school hasn't taken any formal action to leave the conference.
 No doubt, ESPN leveraged pressure on SEC presidents to reject A&M's bid to join. No doubt, ESPN producers and executives are high-fiving each other, thinking the crisis is over. They can notch another unjust victory. But can they?
 On Monday, the A&M Board of Regents gave A&M President R. Bowen Loftin the autonomy to seek the best conference alignment available. If the SEC is slow to act, there is always the Big East or Pac-12, one happy to establish a travel partner for TCU and the other happy to establish a media and recruiting footprint in Texas (well, USC and Oregon recruit there already). Who else is in A&M's corner? Don't be surprised if the Texas Legislature endorses A&M's shift, especially since rising political star and state governor Rick Perry is an A&M graduate.
 ESPN is saying A&M could be the ogre, the catalyst for Conference Realignment, Phase Two. Really? Anybody with a three-digit IQ knows college football power conferences will morph into four or five super- conferences with at least 16 members each, regardless of who starts it. There will be good endings (probably BYU) and sad endings (probably Iowa State), but the change is going to come. Who promoted the change? Directly or indirectly, the networks and their dollars did.
 If the Big 12 is a casualty of Conference Realignment, Phase Two, who is the guilty party? Look no further than the offices and studios in Bristol, Connecticut for financing the Longhorn Network and mimicking the University of Texas with bullying tactics to deride and slander any opponent of its selfish plans.