Miller & Deace on Crazy CFB Weekend, Jamie Pollard Conspiracy

[fsanford]

at the end of the day Deace is right, Oklahoma/Texas schools control the Big 12.

Its about money and while I don't agree with Pollard's platform, eventually the system will catch up with any school that does not have the abiility to put x number of eyeballs on the TV.

To say otherwise is putting ones head into the sand

ESPN/Fox dictate many things these days. And if Iowa plays Michigan State, with MSU's BCS bowl on the line, you can be sure any replay will lean in the favor of MSU, and those are the facts of big $$ college footlball

Its not a conspiracy thing its about business.

 

[deanvogs]

at the end of the day Deace is right, Oklahoma/Texas schools control the Big 12.

Its about money and while I don't agree with Pollard's platform, eventually the system will catch up with any school that does not have the abiility to put x number of eyeballs on the TV.

To say otherwise is putting ones head into the sand

ESPN/Fox dictate many things these days. And if Iowa plays Michigan State, with MSU's BCS bowl on the line, you can be sure any replay will lean in the favor of MSU, and those are the facts of big $$ college footlball

Its not a conspiracy thing its about business.

This is complete and total bullsh!t. Please explain to me then how the last 3 Big12 champions have been Okie St., Kansas St., and Baylor? 3 anemic at best programs that draw hardly any more fans to games than ISU does, and none of them are any kind of national brands at all, and none of them would be getting calls because it is a "business thing". If that is the case, the Big12 would have never allowed ISU to knock off Okie St. and keep them out of the national championship game. You can't have it both ways in your whacked out conspiracy theory or your "business" theory.

Furthermore please explain to me how this "grand conspiracy" or "business model theory" works when the beneficiary of the calls to keep ISU down are Kansas St. and Okie St.?? They are not the national brands that ISU say control the Big12. I have never heard anyone talk about the Big12 propping up Okie St. and freaking Kansas St.?? Plus why give Okie St. this call in this game, instead of 2011 when they could have gone to the NC game? The only call ISU can whine about that fits this narrative that ISU fans claim is happening is Texas last year. That is the only one for football, so this whole concept that the Big12 "fixes" these game concisely or unconsciously are bullsh!t, as 1 bad call doesn't equal a freaking conspiracy.

What a freaking whacked out fan base with total little brother syndrome and an major inferiority complex to boot. This just cements the loser mentality that permeates that entire football program. When you have players, coaches and the AD raging against a single call in a 17 point loss, you know that the wheels are completely off the tracks.

 

[deanvogs]

This is how you know Pollturd, Deace, and every Whiny, freaking crying, b!tching and moaning ISU fan is full of sh!t. If I were Bowlsby I'd pull out this tape to show how completely full of sh!t Pollturd is. If the Big12 is gonna fix games, they would have fixed the Okie St. game at ISU in 2011. This kept the Big12 out of the National Championship game. If this were about "business" then no way that official says this FG was no good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8rv24MFgpw

 

[HawkIPA]

This is how you know Pollturd, Deace, and every Whiny, freaking crying, b!tching and moaning ISU fan is full of sh!t. If I were Bowlsby I'd pull out this tape to show how completely full of sh!t Pollturd is. If the Big12 is gonna fix games, they would have fixed the Okie St. game at ISU in 2011. This kept the Big12 out of the National Championship game. If this were about "business" then no way that official says this FG was no good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8rv24MFgpw

This was prior to "the vote" though.

 

[deanvogs]

This was prior to "the vote" though.

I know your joking, but they are so all over the board with their whacked out theories. fsanford and other are trying to claim is is a "business" thing.....yet nothing at all points to that. How is Okie St. winning this year, but losing in 2011 to ISU good for "business"? How is ISU losing to K-State this year "good for business" when they are potentially keeping a team out of a bowl game in ISU?

The bottom line is ISU fans are whiners and losers, and grasp for anything to deflect and make it not "their fault". It is the Big12 "business" that is keeping them down, or the Big12 "conspiracy" keeping them down. The simple explanation is usually the correct one. Jamie Pollturd and Rhoads culture of losing is keeping this program down. Pollturd had the option of bringing in winners like Harbaugh, Briles, Kelley, and he opted for Chizik and then Rhaods. Yet Clown fans will put a statue of Pollturd up for voicing wacko conspiracy theories, all the while nobody cares that his hires, and his culture of losing are what is keeping the football program as one of the very worst in the country.

 

[CAARHawk]

At our core and from the start, we are all incredibly selfish. Typically, when you have kids, that gets leeched out of you a little bit at at time and also rams home how selfish we are from the get go, as children are the most selfish things on the planet...yet there are moments of clarity and when the light shines in It doesn't mean you won't help others, it means that the majority of motivations, actions, thoughts in life are based in self interest...not all, but I would wager most.

Wow, what a masculine, positivist, individualist perspective. There is a large body of social psychological theory that ascribes to this self-interest motivation perspective. But most of these studies come from research conducted by EuroAmerican males in Western countries. There is plenty of other research focusing on feminine, non-western, collectivist cultures that paint a very different picture.

How many times have you wondered why your wife is worried about what someone else thinks? Ever think she might be really just concerned about how someone else feels and how there could also be implications for others, i.e., kids, etc. Do you ever look at your wife and think, "She is just more kind than me?"

Do you think doctors and other aid professionals are risking their lives going into Ebola ravaged areas for selfish reasons?

Our country preaches radical individualism and capitalism. Each of these is an extreme self-interest perspective. But they are just ideologies, not the foundation of natural existence. The education, religion, media, and other influences that have constituted your identity are steeped in this ideology to the extent that you see the ideology as natural, but that doesn't make it so.

Tahlequah is a stones throw from you. Really spend some time learning about Cherokee history and culture. Then come back and say that the average Cherokee was primarily selfish prior to having it beat into them.

Your use of kids as an example is problematic on a number of grounds. Kids are born without the ability to walk. Does that mean not walking is our natural state? As kids in our culture develop, they are indoctrinated in individualist, capitalist ideology. When they exhibit behavior associated with this ideology we say, "look, it's natural." That kind of thinking lies at the very heart of an ethnocentric perspective.

 

[HomerChampless]

This has gotten side tracked... has entered the realm of politics, hasn't it?

Take the Ebola situation.. Has the US medical establishment been altogether giving in their attitudes toward bringing Ebola patients to the US to cure them or manufacture a cure? Or is it hubris? That the US medical establishment feels it's the only agency in the world that has the facilities to stave off Ebola? Is it both? How will the US medical establishment feel if Ebola spreads in the US because of said involvement?

CAARHawk, when your wife worries how someone else thinks, is she concerned about others or is she concerned she doesn't displease others, or both?

There are definitely political applications, here. When a political group, for example, wishes to stop the 'suffering' of another group(s), is this a desire to stop all suffering or just this one group(s)? Would said political group be, for example, willing to inflict suffering on another group(s) to ease the suffering of the primary group(s)?

I'm talking about narcissism. Being more interested in yourself when you start actions that satisfy your desires and beliefs.

I would side with those who believe self interest is the main instigator in all actions. Deace is a Libertarian, no doubt. Libs' political philosophy is based on self interest and is, in part, why Deace made the comment he did. He understands it. He lives it. IMO, most everyone else does, too.

 

[ICHawk24]

This was prior to "the vote" though.

I don't know why the B12 would implement a conspiracy because ISU was the lone dissenting vote on an 8th official. The motion still passed, the rest of the conference probably didn't give a crap that ISU voted that way.

 

[HawkStrand]

I love to listen to deace talb cfb - he really knows his stuff...I don't think he's always right, but he often points out angles that would not have occurred to me.

When he is in certain moods, he does seem to try a little too hard sometimes to stretch his sports opinions into his wider worldview...usually with pretty flimsy results, but that is just my opinion.

One point he did hit pretty hard that I disagree with regards to humans being motivated strongly by self interest...on a certain level, I think that is true, but at the same time you can't ignore the wider picture which shows humans as a species to be the most sophisticated collaborators in the known universe.

It seems to me that Deace can't think outside of Christianity, either.

I'm like, wait, it's not a conspiracy but "we're fallen" (to quote Deace) so we blame each other out of self interest? Wut?

I don't know. I'd rather not listen to Deace's proselytizing; I prefer sports announcers to stick to sports. Leave issues of theology to the theologians ... I think he generalizes and mischaracterizes most Iowa fans. He's hearing those who shout the loudest, not the majority.

 

[CAARHawk]

This has gotten side tracked... has entered the realm of politics, hasn't it?

Take the Ebola situation.. Has the US medical establishment been altogether giving in their attitudes toward bringing Ebola patients to the US to cure them or manufacture a cure? Or is it hubris? That the US medical establishment feels it's the only agency in the world that has the facilities to stave off Ebola? Is it both? How will the US medical establishment feel if Ebola spreads in the US because of said involvement?

CAARHawk, when your wife worries how someone else thinks, is she concerned about others or is she concerned she doesn't displease others, or both?

There are definitely political applications, here. When a political group, for example, wishes to stop the 'suffering' of another group(s), is this a desire to stop all suffering or just this one group(s)? Would said political group be, for example, willing to inflict suffering on another group(s) to ease the suffering of the primary group(s)?

I'm talking about narcissism. Being more interested in yourself when you start actions that satisfy your desires and beliefs.

I would side with those who believe self interest is the main instigator in all actions. Deace is a Libertarian, no doubt. Libs' political philosophy is based on self interest and is, in part, why Deace made the comment he did. He understands it. He lives it. IMO, most everyone else does, too.

Yes, we are sidetracked. But I just like to rib Jon sometimes. He knows this.

I wouldn't call it politics. I am not promoting one ideology over another, just saying ideology is not natural.

Now, when you move the discussion from one person who goes to work in an NGO or other group trying to deal with the Ebola problem to a Government response, you are talking politics. That is something in which I am just not all that interested. Do I believe that most politicians operate mostly from self-interest? Yes. Do I think politicians are very representative of humanity as a whole? No.

The question about my wife is interesting. It took a long time for me to switch my perspective from seeing it from a masculine self-interested perspective. My thought was, "Why do you care what they think of you? They don't really matter much to you." However, over time by paying attention and really trying to understand her I have come to see that her concern was more about not creating discord, because it has social implications beyond her self-interest and she can do a fairly good job of tracing out those implications for me if I care to listen.

 

[herky01]

I find the podcasts to be quite entertaining. I think Deace's sports analysis is very good. However, I think his non-sports analysis is a little off. I don't know how anyone can say they don't believe in conspiracies. A point-shaving incident involving just one player and one guy in Vegas is a conspiracy by definition.

 

[SteveGarvey]

So Deace takes a shot at Iowa fans while discussing the Jamie Pollard situation. I'm not sure how Iowa has ANYTHING IN THE WORLD to do with the Jamie Pollard situation. Can anyone enlighten me?

Jon, does it bother you that Steve Deace is insulting Iowa fans the way he is? You are one of the biggest Iowa fans of all...you have a Hawkeye website, and that is how you make a living! You can't disassociate yourself from the demographic that he is describing and insulting. DOESN'T THAT **** YOU OFF that he says things like that????? You were chuckling the entire time he was ranting. Why was that funny to you?

Look, I've listened to a lot of these Podcasts. I listen to gain perspective that I may not have arrived at on my own. I'm not against differing viewpoints, but Jon you are getting completely run over by Deace on each and every Podcast. Just rename them "Jon Miller introduces his blow-hard, know-it-all friend Steve Deace" Podcast. That's basically what happens. I'm much more curious to hear what YOU have to say. I'd enjoy these podcasts a lot more if you brought in someone like Pat Harty, Rick Brown, Mike Hlas, etc....

Steve Deace is very controversial. He infuses a lot of his own beliefs (and political leanings) at the expense of insulting the majority of listeners (as he did on this podcast). He can be brash, rude and downright uncivil at times. He justifies this because he is a "Christian". He even mentions that in this podcast.

Look if he is a "Christian", then I need to find a different religion. I've got a lot of other adjectives that would better describe him.

I do respect that he is your friend and you have your reasons for that, but this is a Hawkeye Website for HAWKEYE FANS! Why in the world would you bring someone on here that insults us?

Judge ye not lest ye be judged.

Just giving you that friendly reminder. You know, since you're a Christian and all.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

Sounds like their podcast gets a ton of traffic. The two of them love to do it for now. So why on earth would they stop because of a vocal minority not enjoying it? To interject politics into this as others have it'd be like Fox News shutting down shop due to the minority wanting them to even though they own the ratings... I highly doubt Jon and Steve are trying to please and entertain everyone They aren't playing to a radio crowd so they have the freedom to do what they want. If you don't like it just don't listen. Pretty darn simple.

Listening to it and then complaining is just as good to them as those that listen and do like it. I enjoy their back and forths and I don't get all bent out of shape cause of someone elses allegiance to other schools. That's what makes sports fun. How boring would it be if every one bowed down to the same team?

Steves point about Iowa fans complaining about officials to that extent is true to his personal experience. Who is anyone here to say otherwise. He was the one taking those calls and hes communicated with a ton of fans as has Jon over the years on and off the air I'm sure. I know fans that are just as he described and I know level headed ones too. It is what it is. Getting all defensive over it and then pointing to other fan bases is just petty.

 

[528646]

The podcast is great radio (if you can still refer to it as such!)...Deace I felt just got a little overextended trying to stretch a sports topic into his wider worldview. Not to say he can't do that if he wants to, just saying in my opinion it felt a little like a reach & ill-informed by a faulty understanding of Darwin (which is not unique to Steve by any stretch).

http://m.phys.org/_news192693376.html