Why is ESPN Ignoring the Reggie Bush Book? (Update)
College Football, ESPN January 11th. 2008, 10:03am
A cursory google search reveals that the recently-released Reggie Bush tome, Tarnished Heisman, which claims that Bush and his family received nearly $300,000 during his time at USC, garnered a mention in probably more than 200 newspapers across the country this week. Yahoo is blowing it out on the front page (with an excerpt), as is Sportsline, and Sports Illustrated. If the NCAA finds any wrongdoing, the book could end up costing USC its 2004 National title, and Reggie Bush could lose his Heisman Trophy.
So we found it strange that the book was completely ignored by ESPN until 4:27 am today … when it buried the story on the rail of the college football page, a convenient spot now that the season is over and nobody’s going there. How is this not front page news? We can all agree on one thing – if ESPN wants to make something a story, it can. And when it wants a story to disappear, it has that power, too. [UPDATE: A reader writes in: "David Cornwell is Bush's attorney. And unbelievably, Cornwell is a legal consultant for ESPN!] Anyone find it odd that when we ran a search for “Tarnished Heisman” on the ESPN home page, it revealed a mere three hits? According to that search, none of ESPN’s columnists have touched the story.
When we posted about the book Wednesday, we admitted to not caring about athletes getting money (players from sports that generate revenue deserve it), but getting your Heisman Trophy yanked (and maybe a National title, too) is definitely news. Does anyone else think something could be afoot? We just looked at the segments PTI and ATH ran Thursday, and it appears as if the book was not discussed (thought it may have been earlier in the week). How much power does Reggie Bush’s agent have? Or does USC have enough clout to steer ESPN away from the story?
60 Responses to “Why is ESPN Ignoring the Reggie Bush Book? (Update)”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.

January 11th, 2008 at 10:07 am
ESPN is so up USC’s ass it’s ridiculous. They are the Duke/UNC of college football for ESPN.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:09 am
Way too weird. There’s gotta be something going on. Get the ombudsman on it.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Maybe ESPN is relentlessly researching the facts before having any of their “analysts” jump to messy conclusions?
Haha yeah right.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:14 am
fuck the ombudsman…this is bullshit
if it was OSU or Florida or Oklahoma it would be rammed down out throats non stop. any difference between this story and espn non stop coverage of game of shadows???no not a thing
January 11th, 2008 at 10:16 am
if these allegations are true…what would the penalty probably look like?
what did Oklahoma have to forfeit when Rhett Bomar and that guard got caught?
probably not SMU death penalty, but some stiff shit id imagine.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:17 am
They were all over Carroll to ATL though… weird! I really just want an athlete to tell ESPN to go fuck itself. I totally agree with the point that if ESPN wants it to be news, it will be. If not, it won’t be. I have no idea why, but something is very strange about this, but whatever happens I just hope USC suffers on the field. I hate that team and how much praise it gets.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Here was have the quintessential problem of ESPN trying to balance both being a news organization while also having a financial stake in the popularity of the sports it covers…USC and college football is their meal ticket and you don’t shit where you eat
They’re quick to tell you how dismal NHL ratings are but you never heard a fucking word about how no one watches the NBA Finals any more
January 11th, 2008 at 10:19 am
@spence: Pretty sure the wins were removed from the records, but they didn’t have to forfeit, meaning the team(s) they beat didn’t get a W added to their records.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:21 am
As someone noted in the comments yesterday … ESPN was probably all over Carroll for a reason (his agent wanted to float NFL rumors, gauge interest on who might be interest, see his value as it pertains to controlling a team, etc)
January 11th, 2008 at 10:21 am
ESPN is evillllllllllllllllllllllll
January 11th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Nick P…thanks.
have to think that USC would lose their NC.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:23 am
One of the articles I read claims that the book hints (but doesn’t come right out and say) that USC coaches at least had some level of knowledge about the situation. I imagine this has to be influencing Carroll, because reports are he is still talking with Atlanta.
I think the only real penalty will be taking wins away, possible even their three titles (i know i know they only won 1). If the school knew, then there may be scholarship/bowl penalties for the future.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:24 am
i’m gonna say espn is ignoring it because who freaking cares?
that’s not true. that’s why they should be ignoring it. they are actually ignoring it because they love usc like a child molester loves a 12-year-old. the point being, both loves are wrong and creepy.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:28 am
I’m not sure there’s any deep, dark conspiracy at work here.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:31 am
Spencer, which NC would they lose, I’m pretty sure they are at 5 in a row. You’re going to need to be more specific.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:32 am
ESPN hailed Bush as the next STAR! of the NFL. They have been touting him for years.
They are just saving face right now. At some point, they’ll have to seriously address it. This is the type of thing Bob Ley would have been all over back in they day. I wonder what happened to him?
Also, ESPN isn’t stupid. Maybe the book isn’t accurate and they are waiting to pounce on some other aspect around this. Who knows?
January 11th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Of course ESPN can bury a story. They helped bury what used to be considered the fourth major sport, in the NHL, so why not a simple news story in which they have no financial stake? Looking to ESPN for hard news is like looking to Stephen A. Smith for subtlety.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:33 am
I’m pretty sure hockey just buried itself.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Well, not only did ESPN bury this story. But, correct if I’m wrong, but most people, and I think TBL was among them, were treating the story as nothing but “cute” on Yahoo! No matter how hard anybody tries to use SI.com or Yahoo! Sports as their homepage, it’s ESPN.com that counts. And if the story isn’t there, we’re collectively skeptical. Bottom line, Yahoo! had this story first, more than a year ago. And they’re still not getting much love. I don’t think ESPN has much reason to favor USC. Aside from ABC’s contract to broadcast the Rose Bowl, there isn’t really anything there. And that’s a huge stretch. I think they’re not covering it because they didn’t break it. And because the amount of athletes receiving money is sort of like the number of baseball (and football) players experimenting with HGH. ESPN has limited journalistic integrity, so why start now?
January 11th, 2008 at 10:38 am
ESPN doesn’t want to admit the fact that they aren’t the lead coverage on this story, and it’s too late to put Pat Forde on the trail.
The closest ESPN has ever gotten to investigative journalism was Pat Tillman, and even that info was mostly copped from other sources.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:38 am
This would be awesome. If they lose their national championship that means they go from nearly having “three” national championships this decade to ACTUALLY having none.
It couldn’t happen to a better guy and a better school, and I mean that as sarcastically as possible.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:39 am
I bet once he catches wind of this, USC jumps to the the top of The Smash’s recruiting list!
January 11th, 2008 at 10:40 am
@Butters- I agree with the sentiment, but how many USC games did ESPN air. I dont think it was more than one. ABC is the real culprit. ABC aired over 3 USC games and is a national powerhouse. Come to think of it, lets just blame Disney, which owns ABC, which owns ESPN.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:43 am
And and ESPN are the same thing (ABC Sports actually doesn’t even exist anymore, it’s simply ESPN on ABC)
January 11th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Whoops…meant to say ABC and ESPN are the same thing
January 11th, 2008 at 10:48 am
For whatever reason, Reggie Bush has always enjoyed incredible media support, while Vince Young is mostly a grass roots, people’s champion.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:49 am
robert is that sarcasm? Vince Young has been treated with kid gloves by the media. He blows and they still try to tell people he is good.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:50 am
Look, ESPN ignored the Michael Vick story for as long as they could. Why? You saw MNF this season right? You saw the effect of not having Vick right?
That Company cares zilch about the Integrity of Sports. All they care about is their bottom line.
They feel USC is ratings gold and since none of the Networks have exclusive rights to them, they are making USC their sublime property. The only thing that keeps ESPN from an exclusive contract with the PAC-10 are Time difference logistics with the East coast.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:52 am
Everyone in the media worshipped Mike Vick until, you know, it turned out that he was running a doggie Auschwitz.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:59 am
The real question is, what’s going to happen to USC’s future? Sanctions? So what if they take away a title and a heisman. Everyone knows they won them and everybody knows that Michigan was in the Final Four. Reggie Bush existed and there’s nothing that can be done to change that. Will this encourage Carroll to get out of dodge?
Perhaps San Diego is ready for a new head coach after their impending playoff exit?
January 11th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Maybe Yahoo blowing it out on their front page has something to do with them breaking the story about the supposed house deal a few years ago. Maybe Sports Illustrated having it on their front page has something to do with them paying homage to their former editor who wrote the book. Of course not, because ESPN is all that is evil in this world. Rage against the machine, man…….rage against the machine. ESPN made Reggie Bush a star, ESPN is protecting USC, ESPN was in the grassy knoll, ESPN shot Roger Rabbit, ESPN……
January 11th, 2008 at 11:02 am
ESPN framed Roger Rabbit
/fixed
January 11th, 2008 at 11:02 am
Yay, a sane minded person like me, good to see you on here Darrell
January 11th, 2008 at 11:31 am
ESPN ate my balls.
January 11th, 2008 at 11:36 am
To those that believe ESPN is above this kinda thing, please explain their basis for not mentioning it anywhere? Obviously this is news, so why wouldn‘t ESPN cover it?
BTW, I completely disagree with this statement
players from sports that generate revenue deserve it
College athletes ARE compensated, its called a scholarship.
January 11th, 2008 at 11:47 am
Tarnished Heisman my ass. This is the story I care least about in all of college football
January 11th, 2008 at 11:50 am
ESPN doesn’t want to cover the story because they don’t want to alienate its audience, which is young and, by and large, loves USC.
ESPN is also afraid that same audience because it loves Reggie Bush. If they report the story, Reggie might not cooperate with them! He may not give them the next scoop, and he might not agree to be his next Sunday Conversation!
I completely agre with mmonast. Could you even imagine if an SEC school did this? Hell, ESPN conducted its own investigation into Tennessee? Remember that?
It would be hilarious if the NCAA took away the only legitimate title that USC won (2004). That would leave USC with the 2003 title–the media title. How appropriate would that be?
January 11th, 2008 at 11:52 am
Oh yeah, and ESPN never likes to report on the release of books that accuse athletes of improprieties.
Signed,
Barry Bonds
January 11th, 2008 at 11:56 am
And everyone who thought that the Pete Carroll story was a bullshit diversion is right too. Anyone who thought he was serious about going to one of the three historically worst-managed and fan-supported teams in the NFL was full of shit. I told you months ago TBL that ESPN was going to keep ignoring this story. I was right. Sorry for the trople-post, but I feel very strongly for this as an LSU fan.
January 11th, 2008 at 11:59 am
ESPN’s audience is young and by and large, loves USC? Where are the numbers to substantiate this? Where does college football rate amongst “young” people in general in this country?
January 11th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Here’s my problem with the conspiracy angle: ESPN, which is closely tied w/ MLB, has been all over the various steroids stories (i.e., Bonds, Mitchell Report, Clemens, etc).
January 11th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
ESPN, who has a broadcasting contract with the Big 10, had a writer absolutely hammer Ohio State after the National Championship game (Forde).
January 11th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
I don’t work in television anymore, so I have don’t have access to numbers that prove my point. But I only offer this proof. The audience most covets is in its teens and twenties. And the amount of positive coverage USC gets on the network is sickening. And that amount of coverage is reserved for the other “favored” teams (Yankees, Notre Dame, Cowboys, Michigan, Lakers, etc.). You know as well as I do that these teams are not inherently more important than others. But they are covered like they do because there is an insatiable demand for news on these teams by a large segment of its core audience. Sure, some of that is sparked by some fans’ outright hatred of these teams. But it’s mostly because they’re popular.
You should relax. I’m not suggesting there’s an ESPN conspiracy. I don’t think the USC president runs the puppet strings at the network. I’m suggesting that this is what happens when a supposed “sports news” organization lets focus groups and fan loyalty determine what does and doesn’t get covered.
January 11th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
update
It’s still front page news on si.com
It’s still front page news on foxsports.com
It’s still front page news on Yahoo! Sports (no surprise there)
It’s still front page news on cbssportsline.com
What’s ESPN.com’s top story in the “news” section right now? You guessed it: Pete Carroll may still be interested in the Falcons job
January 11th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
And to the412, if ESPN really gave a shit about steroids, why isn’t ESPN giving us wall-to-wall coverage of what’s happening with Marion Jones right now? Why aren’t they giving SportsCenter Specials about her? You know why: because she doesn’t play for the Yankees, and America largely doesn’t give a shit
January 11th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
It is one the front page in the college football section. I think there just happen to be bigger stories at the moment (e.g., Marion Jones got 6 months).
January 11th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Bingo.
January 11th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Yeah, but Marion Jones in that little box in the corner of the front page. Another hype piece about Romo, Favre, Brady, and Manning is apparently more newsworthy.
January 11th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
BTW…my point was that ESPN will make a big stink about steroids in baseball despite their obvious investment in that product.
January 11th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
And the “doesn’t give a shit” angle makes me angry. I give a shit about Reggie Bush accepting money, but they won’t cover it because I’m in the minority? Because people like him?
January 11th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
They’re in the business of providing news that the greatest # of people are interested in. I don’t think it’s a matter of people liking Reggie Bush. I may be dead wrong and there may very well be someone at the WWL who has some interest in burying this story (beyond a lack of interest), but I just don’t think that’s the case here.
January 11th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
I stopped holding ESPN to high credibility standards on journalism a long time ago. People should follow suit. Your life just seems more clear after doing so.
January 11th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Who likes Reggie Bush?
If they play fantasy football they certainly don’t.
January 11th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
This guy. And, TBL’s girl.
January 11th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Meanwhile, Mario Williams was an absolute beast with 14 sacks in the regular season
January 11th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
412 is right. I think ESPN just realizes that no one cares. So you strip Bush of his Heisman, I”m sure he’ll cry himself to sleep on all that money. I don’t think VY or Leinart really miss it anyway, so it’s not like you’re triumphing over the corruption by taking it away and retroactively giving it to Rudy or something. Besides, those two probably received Booster money too.
And let’s strip USC of those wins they had. Because Bush getting paid made it so all those wins never happened. It’s just a stupid story that really isn’t going to lead to anything except USC possibly losing scholarships. LA DI DA. Their college is in California, their players do well in the draft. There’s no reason to think that losing scholarships is really going to affect their recruiting capabilities.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
… Because it wasn’t written by John Amaechi?
January 11th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
cbh49er Says:
Who likes Reggie Bush?
If they play fantasy football they certainly don’t.
In my points per recpetion league he’s actually pretty serviceable. Overall though, he might be the most hyped, overrated player to come in to the NFL since – geez name it – Bosworth, Raghib Ismail, Klingler, Ware, Saalam, Im sure this list could grow – but we all thought he was special. I know I felt hook, line and sinker with all that Gale Sayers talk. Hell, he’s not even Duece. You know what gets me, they (namely Mike Francesa) call the guy small – in some of those commercials, the kid looks jacked! Certainly hes the same size as Emmitt…
January 11th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Why should the school be punished? USC, Carroll, or alumni didnt pay Bush. This was some 2-bit fool getting screwed on a handshake deal. Who the fuck makes a triple-handshake-half-hug deal for $300,000 anyways? A: a dipshit. Yeah dude, let’s open up that Reggie Bush Soul Food restaurant chain, real soon.
January 11th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Why does ESPN talk steroids in Baseball? Because those numbers tell them that people like Baseball teams….not Baseball….People could not care less as to the plight of BASEBALL, they care about their teams….ESPN does not give a rass about Baseball, they care about Yankees and Sox. Where the numbers are at.
Why are they on the Carroll to Falcons(or any other team), story? Because the sooner they get the info out there, the sooner USC brass puts pressure on him and he has to break of talks before they reach a positive course.
The reason they are ignoring the Bush story is to minimize the outcry, thus the walls closing in on Carroll, and the shame on the NCAA that can result in greater sanctions and the loss of said coach who will not stick around under a sanctioned program.
Cause it’s not just USC, it’s USC AND Carroll that is sexy to ESPN….Before Carroll they were non existent so why mess with fate.