Manhole Eunuchsbane

NFL Offseason: What's a Chris Collins Worth?

147 posts in this topic

My personal view is the one that Spencer Hall put out - which is that you can very easily get, like, 90% of the entertainment value of football games while not watching any at all now. Between fantasy apps,  twitter alerts that show you highlights at real time, discussion groups and reactions you get basically all of the highs and lows and don't have to turn on a damn thing. 

And let's face it, watching a football game is often dull from minute to minute. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, sperry said:

 

I live in Oklahoma, where pretty much everything is the oil and gas business, and the same things happen. When times are good, like 5 years ago, these companies fatten up. And there's a good reason for it, as every company is flush with cash and needs to expand to capitalize on high prices, so they get into bidding wars for talent. But it goes past it's logical extreme.  My old roommate at the time was a perfect example. Great dude, and capable worker, but he was in a non-engineering role with a fortune 100 player in the industry, was 27 years old and making $90k a year working 40 hours a week, and getting a golf membership paid for. Those numbers don't add up when the price of oil cuts in half.  Exxon went from 486 billion in revenue in 2012 to 246 billion in 2016.  ESPN is suffering the exact same type of thing.

Pretty fair comparison to oil except does anyone expect ESPN / cable to boom again?

To me ESPN is just the new MTV. They had a great innovative idea , expanding it's content way beyond what it's core viewership wanted and rode it to the end, now it's dead/dying.

I can't see how anyone didn't realize ESPN paying billions upon billions to broadcast stuff was going to work long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dbunting said:

Pretty fair comparison to oil except does anyone expect ESPN / cable to boom again?

To me ESPN is just the new MTV. They had a great innovative idea , expanding it's content way beyond what it's core viewership wanted and rode it to the end, now it's dead/dying.

I can't see how anyone didn't realize ESPN paying billions upon billions to broadcast stuff was going to work long term.

 

Sports are more popular than ever, they just need to figure out a better way to monetize. People are more comfortable than ever with the subscription model, so I don't think that's the issue either. While they were being subsidized by the people out there who had no interest in sports, that subsidy was likely allowing the avid sports fan to be undercharged. There worry has to be just getting cut out by the leagues. I mean, in 10 years will the NFL need broadcast partners?  Why wouldn't they just sell tiers of streaming packages, where you could do: just your favorite team's game every week >>> the old model of the 3 network games, plus Thursday, Sunday, and Monday night games >>> Every game Sunday ticket style. I guess that there are probably enough old people out there who will refuse to learn technology that they will want to keep television games alive for a while, but that has to end relatively soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

My personal view is the one that Spencer Hall put out - which is that you can very easily get, like, 90% of the entertainment value of football games while not watching any at all now. Between fantasy apps,  twitter alerts that show you highlights at real time, discussion groups and reactions you get basically all of the highs and lows and don't have to turn on a damn thing. 

And let's face it, watching a football game is often dull from minute to minute. 

Pretty much. IIRC the average NFL games has something like 11 minutes of actual action spread out over the course of 3 hours. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sperry said:

 

A lot of people seem to think treating non-whites and gay people with dignity is "political."

Word

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Pretty much. IIRC the average NFL games has something like 11 minutes of actual action spread out over the course of 3 hours. 

yeah.  Doesn't the average QB have the ball in his hands for like 4 minutes per game or something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The dipshit leagues have also been cutting off their nose to spite their faces re: gambling.  Still not sure why they've been fighting that battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.