Consider the Following: Sports

 I am a faithful fan of the California Golden Bears . I watch Bears football through thick (and it has been very thick as of late), and thin. But when they lose, and subsequently lose bowl game hopes, it begins to become tough to care about any college football. Whereas an Alabama Crimson Tide fan can constantly be involved in their teams season and games, I am forced to continuously hope that Stanford will lose, simply out of spite. And as I have watched my fanhood wither this season, so has my interest in college football games other than #1 v. #2 matchups... Until last night. At around 3:30 (on the west coast), I texted an acquaintance of mine: " Wisconsin Michigan St ? ur house?" At this point I will concede that this was a high-profile game, and being a sports fan, it does make sense that I would be interested in this game, but it was my subconscious Badger disposition that struck me as odd as the game unfolded. I found myself hoping that Russell Wilson would make ...

Many famous philosophers have hypothesized that, as advertised, ESPN is truly The Worldwide Leader in Sports. And who am I, or anyone with no knowledge of the world of sports broadcasting, to say otherwise. From Monday Night Football, to prime-time games, to a newly-acquired Wimbledon contract, ESPN has certainly created a near monopoly on sports broadcasting. The two cable channels, as well as the online ESPN3.com, and the oft forgotten ESPNU (channel 788 for all you Comcast aficionados), are often the subject of my mid-afternoon gaze. It seems that ESPN has created what I have always wanted, a guaranteed source of sports commentary amidst the regular drudgery of flipping through cable television. Yet it is this easy dependence that is a blessing and a curse of the TV world. In the first of many in a series of posts with the title Addiction , I will examine the television version of heroin, otherwise known as Sportscenter. To many, Sportscenter is either an unknown term, or ...