Originally Posted by dskillz
The issue is that ESPN and sports journalists used to just cover sports news. Now ESPN thinks of ratings more than coverage. Remember back in the day When sportscenter used to show highlights of every single game, regardless of who it was? Whether it was Yankees/Red Sox or Pirates/Reds, we got highlights of every single game along with the boxscore. Then shortly before the ABC purchase, they shifted to doing a decent job only covering the big media teams. So no other team mattered and were a punchline.
With that said, the Texans haven't helped themselves at all in the way they are covered. No winning seasons, a qb that was more known more for sacks than TDs, passing on 2 ultra-hyped players for one who had one good college career. The 7-9 season was a gift and a curse. Even with all the sacks, the Texans were picked by alot of journalists to breakthrough the next season and be a playoff contender. Many eyes were on the Texans and then the 2-14 curse hit hard for everyone to see.
To change the perception and coverage, the Texans are going to have to do something on the field. It isn't like the Texans are being picked on un-fairly. Have you forgotten the 'Aints', the 'Bungles', the 'Seachickens', the 'Goats', the 'Yucs'? All nicknames for teams doing poorly. When all those teams did well, the articles turned from pointing and laughing to pointing and praising. Same thing will happen here if we can put a good product on the field.
Okay, so what you are saying is journalism should be name calling? And that the only way to get a reasoned analysis of your team is to win? I'm not saying I want people to just say awesome things about the team, but is it possible for their to be more coverage than just punchlines?
One newspaper town and AP service. Not a good combination for interesting analysis of your team.