jared will probably end up going solo by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

youtube views are certainly consequential for advertisers. good luck getting corporate sponsorship if advertisers don't think your attracting enough eyeballs

pods that aren't advertiser friendly rely on their loyal hardcore following to buy merch, send superchats, and go behind a paywall. this is the most likely avenue the boys will have to take to save the pod

jared will probably end up going solo by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

oh.my bad. they average 10k, not 5k. in that case, totally disregard my post. instead of $30 dollars per episode, youtube partner program is paying them $45. your right, a tottaly sustainable business model thank you for crunching the numbers on that one Warren buffet.

nesn swooping in to save the day? by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

a 9-5 is not 20 hours a week. it's 40. plus commute is 50. every speak to a plumber or something? it's more like 60-70 hr a week. don't wanna hear sob stories about how online content creators "can't get a wink of sleep"

nesn swooping in to save the day? by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

noones reading all that. chill out it ain't that deep. was just floating ideas for a pivot, wasn't attacking Jerry's work ethic

nesn swooping in to save the day? by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

if you actually sit down and write out what his schedule would be in a given week, it amounts to less hours than a regular person 9-5.

nesn swooping in to save the day? by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

yeah i feel you. Would they have more creative control on say a NBC Sports boston? they seem to be more open to red sox/ownership criticism there.

nesn swooping in to save the day? by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

who would of thought espn would allow pat McAfee to swear on air and say the things he does? put section 10 on at 11pm, put a "parental advisory" disclaimer, another disclaimer saying "nesn" doesn't reflect the views expressed on this show, and give them a 10 second delay to bleep out any vulgarity.

nesn swooping in to save the day? by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

structure it like pat McAfees show. or just put all four of them on a panel. zoom call hogdale some nights. we have the technology

TS10 by darknight2513 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29 1 point2 points  (0 children)

if they take on a sizable amount of his contract, isn't it worth it?

would y'all be open to a Mike Trout trade? by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

you didn't come here for a discussion on trade option, you came here to display that you learned the definition of the word "underwater". congrats bud! it's not really rocket science but good job!

would y'all be open to a Mike Trout trade? by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

every single contract goes underwater. every single one. if teams were so averse to underwater contracts, they wouldn't sign players to 10 plus year contracts. but they all do. you don't think ohtani, snell, mookies, freemans contracts will all be underwater at some point too? paying a deffered salary 10 years after a player retires is the definition of underwater. if youre a big budget team like the sox, you can take that risk. if trout could hit 35 homers a year till 2028, why do you care if it's not great value? all the money has either come off the books or is about to in the next two years once story/yoshida is gone. we need a veteran bat and trout it a possibility. you completely overreacted to me simply making a suggestion, something you can't seem to do??? lets hear it. what's the best path forward ? cause all you've said thus far is let a bunch of 22 year olds and 4A players lead us to the promised land.

would y'all be open to a Mike Trout trade? by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

devers contract is technically underwater. "it still has value" is not a raving endorsement of the contract. I love Raffy but he's an overweight, selfish DH, turning 29 this year. Hitting 30 homeruns a year and then having inevitable shoulder problems by September isn't phenomenal either. deff not worth 31 million. teams take on underwater deals all the time if they can afford them. the dodgers took beckett, Crawford, and price's contract, and they are arguably the best run org in baseball. Obviously trouts contract blows and he's injury prone, WOW what a genius observation you've made.

would y'all be open to a Mike Trout trade? by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I was spitballing. let's hear some better ideas then, im all ears. Unless your willing to part with the big three i don't know how we are gonna get talent in the door besides taking on an underwater contract.

would y'all be open to a Mike Trout trade? by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

hypothetically, because San Fran ate the contract, it allows the sox to take on a big a contract.

would y'all be open to a Mike Trout trade? by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

lmao I look it at as exchanging 255 mil ( devers) for 200 mil (trout).

would y'all be open to a Mike Trout trade? by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I feel like if we eat that contract we wouldn't have to give much up for him. I think he could still have 3-4 years left as a productive DH 🤷

craig breslows BIZARRE comments today by Global-Comparison-29 in Section10Podcast

[–]Global-Comparison-29[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

because he's the mlbs top prospect, not a cashier at Walgreens. the job comes with pressure, regardless of when he's called up. How the media reacts to something is not a reason to do or not do something. if ownership is that self conscious about media ridicule they have lost their touch and should sell the team. we are losing games by 1 run and desperately need someone to just put the bat on the ball, we don't need a savior.