Bias in the (Sports) Media?

If you haven't already noticed, my alma mater is Iowa State University in Ames, Iowa. While I was at ISU the football team was good (rarely) and bad (mostly). During this same time I realized that no matter how good the Cyclones got (this was rare) that the national sports media would never give us any credit. It seems to be the unspoken rule at the beginning of each season that teams like Iowa State will be bad, and teams like Nebraska should always start out in the top 25. Never did this distinction show more clearly than when ISU absolutely destroyed Nebraska at home in 2002 (I think) and earned a spot in the top 10. SportsCenter went on and on about how Nebraska had screwed up and Iowa State had capitalized and on and on - they never "admitted" that Iowa State, was, uh... actually good!

Well, anyway, I was watching Ohio State blow Iowa out of the water this afternoon, and the same rule applies to Iowa - no matter how horribly they play. Drew Tate, the Iowa quarterback, in his first few plays of the game threw two complete passes and two near interceptions. He was the preseason "Big 10 player of the something" and it seems inconceivable that he is, in fact, not very good.

After this dismal series, the commentator on ABC rambled on and on about how he is a conservative player and he makes good but safe plays at the beginning of games and yadda yadda... Drew Tate ended up playing an awful game and Iowa lost badly to the Buckeyes. It got so bad that when Iowa was losing by at least 21 points with 9:00 left in the 4th quarter that the commentators spoke about how Iowa might "have a chance to get back in this thing" and that Iowa "just needed a few more good plays." Are you kidding me?

It just goes to show that reporters in the national media don't necessarily report the news - they report how they think things should play out based upon their own biases.

And yes, this applies even to the national sports media.