This got a hearty laugh.
Werder is easily replaceable. Look up fungible asset in dictionary and you see Ed Werder's pic.
@jaycrawfordespn
This makes all the sense in the world for MLB and really is an acknowledgement that MLB Networks' offerings have and will assuredly continue to outstrip ESPN coverage for baseball. I mean Kenny was at ESPN for years. Robert Flores is alright.
He will be picked up by MLBN in a cocaine heartbeat. I will bet my life on that.
Werder has carried enough water for the NFL and the Cowboys in particular that he'll be taken care of. Stark will also end up fine as he is very highly thought of in and around baseball.
Golic Sr. signed a new contract and will be paired with Trey Wingo for ESPN Radio's morning show.
@JarrettBell
Yeah, what's wrong with the people you're supposed to report about being the ones paying your salary?
If it wasn't better at covering baseball than ESPN there would be a huge problem since that's literally all it covers. Good take though.
Thx. I hadn't heard. They were awful together. And I like both separately
What will impact the bottom line more? Ed Werder not getting a scoop on Tony Romo or replacing SAS with someone that will probably cost $1.5M and get people less riled up about sports? I'm going to guess the latter. And why the fuck would someone take a paycut? Congrats if you're morally principled enough to do so but that's an absurd notion.
I have no idea who Michelle Beadle is or if this actually applies to her, but generally speaking this seems like a fair point (i.e, the media never thinks twice about calling for a firing).
I'm not even going to tell you where this came from, but I've seen this list cited elsewhere as well:
No idea how the ratings would be or who owns all of this content, but as someone raised on ESPN who is purportedly well within the target demo yet has long since given up on all non-game content, I'd definitely be more likely to come back at times if I knew I could flip it on and catch, for example, the Jordan flu game and the like.
Is this actually true? I mean, I think it's obvious that SAS-style content drives a lot more revenue than normal beat reporting, but it seems to me like they could just get any schlub to spout ridiculous "hot takez" 24/7. But ESPN obviously has the numbers/surveys/etc. and I don't so they must think people like SAS himself (as opposed to nameless SAS replacement) bring something more to the table. Just seems odd that ESPN isn't taking into account individual reputation when it comes to reporting (e.g., Jayson Stark) but is when it comes to the hot takez stuff.
Jemele Hill + Connecticut
It is not ideal no doubt for a variety of reasons. But the availability of those networks and the hours of programming they have plus the massive pocketbook ( thanks ESPN for those rights fees) make MLB NFL NBA and NHL networks logical places for guys like Stark and the many others to apply to.
This is a popular take, but I don't know about that. It does take a little bit of skill, I think, to spout ridiculous takes in an effective, somewhat entertaining way. SAS, love him or hate him, seems to be pretty good at it. I mean Shannon Sharpe and Skip are trying hard, but they can't even come close. All clowns may be clowns, but not all are funny. I have no doubt that if ESPN lets SAS go, somebody else will show him the money.
I guess he'll have to just go back to being a disbarred lawyer. Instead of a disbarred lawyer giving shitty analysis on teevee.
@thebiglead
And that's about the time they tried to go sort of "hyper local," too. It was good content for awhile....Reiss & Edes in particular. But I don tknow about other markets. And then they started to make the locals less local.
My comment was in direct reference to the quote nattysez provided. That quote was bigoted
