Same crappy idea, new Fox attitude!!

[Flipper]

Fox has won the rights to broadcast the BCS games from 2006-2010.

Whoo-hoo we can see commercials for reality shows like "VD ISland" "The Judge is a Mule" and "My big, fat Oboxious Pimp" during the Rose Bowl!

[Falconfreak90]

Flip,

Is your avatar the dude from the Jim Rose Circus?

[1987alum]

I have to say that, in general, it's getting tougher and tougher to watch football on TV with my son. The games are fine, of course, but in between we get bombarded by the Coors Twins and body bags as promos for whatever CSI is on that week. I don't want my 7-year-old seeing that garbage if I can control it.

When we watch football, whenever they go to commercial break, I flip to the Weather Channel. So it doesn't matter to me if it's Fox ABC or whatever. They're going to put crap on in between game action anyway.

[Warthog]

Fox has won the rights to broadcast the BCS games from 2006-2010.

Whoo-hoo we can see commercials for reality shows like "VD ISland" "The Judge is a Mule" and "My big, fat Oboxious Pimp" during the Rose Bowl!

All while getting crowd shots of Malcolm in the Middle and the cast of "My big, fat, obnoxious Pimp" which debuts next february only on Fox! 8)

[Flipper]

No, my avatar is the "original" Sheik, pro wrestling's most hated villian until his death in ...I dunno when. I did a thread on his resemblance to Bill the Cat from Bloom County in the free for all forum. Too bad you missed it, we served drinks...

[Schadenfreude]

Fox has won the rights to broadcast the BCS games from 2006-2010.

Whoo-hoo we can see commercials for reality shows like "VD ISland" "The Judge is a Mule" and "My big, fat Oboxious Pimp" during the Rose Bowl!

Actually, ABC has retained the rights to the Rose Bowl. Fox gets the other three (soon to be four).

[Falconfreak90]

No, my avatar is the "original" Sheik, pro wrestling's most hated villian until his death in ...I dunno when. I did a thread on his resemblance to Bill the Cat from Bloom County in the free for all forum. Too bad you missed it, we served drinks...

Aw, I missed drinks???

[Flipper]

Really? So no commercials for "When Nicole Ritchie Attacks" during the grandaddy of them all? It's just as well, that show has more of a Fiesta Bowl feel...

[Dayons_Den]

I have to say that, in general, it's getting tougher and tougher to watch football on TV with my son. The games are fine, of course, but in between we get bombarded by the Coors Twins and body bags as promos for whatever CSI is on that week. I don't want my 7-year-old seeing that garbage if I can control it.

But the felons and drug abusers committing prosecutable (if thats a word) helmet to helmet violence and shots of drunken fans in masks and scantily clad cheerleaders is ok?

I"m not saying lets smut it up in kindergarten, but saying you can't believe what goes on during the commercials, while turnign a blind eye to the disgusting acts that taking place on the field, that anywhere else woudl be assault, is a bit naive if I can say so.

I love football and I love the Coors Light twins and I also love the fact that instead of claiming that the smut should be removed from TV you are inserting PARENTAL CONTROL (ingenious idea, you should look into getting a patent on it. . .hehe) by changing the channel.

[windycityfalcon]

Amen Dayon

[1987alum]

windycity & dayon:

Please don't insult me with these types of posts. It's the type of overzealousness and use of broad strokes that cheapens the discussion.

You'll see that I have, in fact, taken control by switching to a non-offensive channel during the commercial breaks. As for the helmet-to-helmet hits, etc., that's a lot easier to explain, since it falls within the rules of the games. Cheerleaders are typically a non-issue in college football, since they wear outfits that are less offensive than the Coors Twins.

You said: I"m not saying lets smut it up in kindergarten, but saying you can't believe what goes on during the commercials,"

But nowhere did I say that I couldn't believe what goes on during the commercials. I only inferred that I didn't like it, which is quite different.

You said: "While turnign a blind eye to the disgusting acts that taking place on the field, that anywhere else woudl be assault,"

I never said I was turning a blind eye to the acts on the field. I take great care to use football as a teaching tool with Noah, and do so with all sports. It's an opportunity to explain appropriate behavior in appropriate places, part of the abstract reasoning that comes with the early years of elementary school.

You said: "is a bit naive if I can say so."

And I would say that if I had said or inferred any of the things you said I did in that sentence, you are correct. Unfortunately, I didn't and you aren't.

You said: "I love football and I love the Coors Light twins and I also love the fact that instead of claiming that the smut should be removed from TV"

Again, no where did I say that these things should be removed from TV or even football games, for that matter. I simply said it was becoming more difficult to watch the games with my son. I'm sure there are many with more strident views that would make the argument that such material should be removed. I am not one of them. I've spent too much of my career battling for the First Amendment to change my tune.

You said: "you are inserting PARENTAL CONTROL (ingenious idea, you should look into getting a patent on it. . .hehe) by changing the channel."

I said that in my initial post (re: switching to the Weather Channel). As for the snide comment about the patent, it's uncalled for.

[windycityfalcon]

take it easy alum.. I think Dayon was making a comment more on the status of football and television and pop culture.. than what you do with your kid.. but I'm sure he'll defend himself in due time.
As for me, I applaud you for turning the channel during commercials.
Many parents use television as a babysitter.. and the fact that you're sitting down with your son on Saturdays and watching games together is commendable.

[transfer2BGSU]

1987alum - I don't think the patent comment was a slap at you. I think he was defintely commending you for taking the action you take in changing the channel. If only more parents would change the channel instead of complaining about it taking no actiona at all.

[Dayons_Den]

Whoa whoa, Alum, not meant to be a slap on you at all. It is just very interesting to me the state pop culture in general and the recent trend to point out the "obscene things" in the mainstream while turning a blind eye to the other parts (see my rant on the Terrell Owens MNF in the free for all).

I understand that you said you don't want them removed- thats what I commend you for, not taking your views outside the bounds of your television .. .

And Transfer is spot on I am commending you for turning the channel. By telling you to get a patent on it is noting that not enough parents are doing what you are doing, and that is Parenting.

So if you want to break it down to the gist of what I as getting to and regarding you specifically- I (personally, my opinion) think its funny people would "shield" youngins from something such as commercials that I agree are over the line, but don't mind in letting them watch a game played between oversized man-freaks that often carry things way to far from the normal bounds of the competition.

Thereby at the same time as I am "shaking my head" at your thought process, which is completely yours and I respect, I am also commending you for actually parenting and turning the channel, something too many parents don't do, instead they put the blame on the networks or the companies or the liberal media or whomever.

I would also insert the caveat (if that is how you spell it. . ) that I do not have children ... yet... and you could rendern all of my opinions as null and void since I cannot truelly comment on this till I am in that situation myself... which won't be anytime soon.

So, I hope I have made my thoughts and opinoins less murky and you can see that I am not trying to personally insult and actually that my points to add to a discussion of what is acceptable in mainstream America and the direction the country as whole society is moving and where parental control steps in. . .

[1987alum]

Dayon:

Thanks for the clarification. I'm sensitive on this subject because I go out of my way NOT to expect everyone else to handle what I consider parental obligations and responsibilities.

I agree that there's a fine line - if any line - between exposing kids to the freakish violence in football and a lot of the other insanity that's out there. For whatever reason, I guess I think it's an environment I feel comfortable enough with to use it as a teaching tool and bonding opportunity.

We had our first Tiger Cub meeting a few months back and the den leader had the kids fill out little "bios" - things like what's your favorite food, etc. Well, one of the questions was, what's your favorite movie. Noah had just watched Winnie The Pooh with his little sister, so he responded with a top-of-mind answer - Winnie The Pooh. His den-mate, also 7 years old, responded "Austin Powers." The mother smiled and shrugged her shoulders.

Did I find that apalling? Yes, I did. Do I think she failed her child by allowing him to watch this movie? Yes, I did. Does she have the right to allow him to watch this movie? Yes, she certainly does.

I've become concerned with the level of discourse I hear these days (not necessarily on AZZ). It seems that many people stake out a "you're either with me or against me" stance and assume an aggressive posture. Me, I think it's perfectly acceptable to say that I understand you're reasoning, but don't necessarily agree.

Anyway, back to football ...