What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Still Complaining About ESPN...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gurtholfin
  • Start date Start date
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

joecct said:
Silly question, but what's the IOC rule on TG athletes? Do they compete based on chromosomes or what they want to be identified as?

Think Eastern European "women" shotputters in the 60's.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that go by what your genetics classify you as... I believe there was a controversy surrounding a "female" runner at the Asian Games... That is the only mention I can recall of this situation...
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

joecct said:
Silly question, but what's the IOC rule on TG athletes? Do they compete based on chromosomes or what they want to be identified as?

Think Eastern European "women" shotputters in the 60's.
Click to expand...

According to Wikipedia

Newer rules permit transsexual athletes to compete in the Olympics after having completed sex reassignment surgery, being legally recognized as a member of the sex they wish to compete as, and having undergone two years of hormonal therapy (unless they transitioned before puberty).[10] These controversies continued with the 2008 Olympic games in Beijing.[11]
Click to expand...
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

bigmrg74 said:
36 bucks a month for the tripe that is ESPN? Who besides sports bars can afford to and want to afford that??
Click to expand...

I'd pay $36/mo for all the FoxSports channels, probably. Twins/etc in summer, college hockey in winter. Other than that? GTFO.
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

Brenthoven said:
I'd pay $36/mo for all the FoxSports channels, probably. Twins/etc in summer, college hockey in winter. Other than that? GTFO.
Click to expand...
Seriously.

It's not as if the cable companies would drop their monthly fees by a single penny.
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

LynahFan said:
Seriously.

It's not as if the cable companies would drop their monthly fees by a single penny.
Click to expand...

You would see a LOT of worthless/marginal channels disappear. Right now:

1. Get the big channels you want, and get to watch a show or two on the crappy ones: $x
2. Go a la carte and choose the 5 channels you want: $x + y

So, why go a la carte, if you're the AVERAGE person?
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

I've been saying for years that a la carte is a bad choice for consumers. Especially if said consumer wants ESPN.

No one's cable bill is going down if we go a la carte.
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

dxmnkd316 said:
I've been saying for years that a la carte is a bad choice for consumers. Especially if said consumer wants ESPN.

No one's cable bill is going down if we go a la carte.
Click to expand...

HBO through my cable TV provider was $14.99/month. HBO Now, as an a la carte option through Apple TV is $14.99, but that's a separate situation from normal cable TV networks.

Most cable channels could work on a model such as Netflix, where it's $8/month (I think) to provide a few original shows and then essentially get re-run rights to other shows. You might see a few station families, like the NBC cable network families (USA, SyFy, Bravo, etc.) would have to package together to sell along that same model. It would also dilute Netflix as you'd see more networks opting not to provide streaming rights to their products, and would likely be written into the contracts of new shows where the production company is some third party or another.
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

St. Clown said:
HBO through my cable TV provider was $14.99/month. HBO Now, as an a la carte option through Apple TV is $14.99, but that's a separate situation from normal cable TV networks.

Most cable channels could work on a model such as Netflix, where it's $8/month (I think) to provide a few original shows and then essentially get re-run rights to other shows. You might see a few station families, like the NBC cable network families (USA, SyFy, Bravo, etc.) would have to package together to sell along that same model. It would also dilute Netflix as you'd see more networks opting not to provide streaming rights to their products, and would likely be written into the contracts of new shows where the production company is some third party or another.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that sounds awful.
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

dxmnkd316 said:
Yeah, that sounds awful.
Click to expand...

I think that depends upon your viewing choices. If you like a large lineup of shows or the few shows you like are spread across unaffiliated networks, it's not going to look good for you. If you only like a couple shows or networks, then you'd end up doing well with the change.
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

Showtime is offered thru Hulu for $8.99/mo. Same price as getting it thru cable, I believe.
CBS is offering its own streaming service for $8.99/mo. (Unlike the other broadcast networks, it is not affiliated with hulu). It has some older shows as well as newer ones. Probably not worth it considering Netflix and hulu offer way more for the same price.
PBS streaming is free.

Cord cutting saves money, even without resorting to illegal measures, as long as 1) you have good access to OTA signals, 2) you're willing to go back to 80s era access to sports depending on your local blackouts.
 
Last edited:
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

CBS streaming sucks, dont do it...completely worthless.
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

dxmnkd316 said:
I've been saying for years that a la carte is a bad choice for consumers. Especially if said consumer wants ESPN.

No one's cable bill is going down if we go a la carte.
Click to expand...

Oh, I don't know. I think mine would go down. Most of the big ones are of no interest to me. I'd go without ESPN, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, MTV, Comedy Central...There are a bunch of high dollar channels I'd have no interest in. Give me the local channels, Food Network, FX, TNT, History, HGTV, Discovery, AMC, BBC America and Fox Sports North, and I'd be set, along with my existing Netflix and HBO subscriptions.
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

I would probably just get the four networks, Comedy Central, FXX, and then a sports package of NBCSN, ESPN/2/U, FS1/2/local and MLBN.

I guess my fear would be Viacom saying I need Nickelodeon and mtv and fox saying I need FX and Fox News, etc. Will it really be a la carte or will it be company a la carte?
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

I'd get the Fox Sports (hopefully all of them but FSN is the big one) for sports (Gopher hockey and Twins baseball) and maybe FX and AMC. Possibly another channel or two in there, but that is very doubtful. I already watch the majority of NFL games at the local watering hole, and I've done that for 10+ years, so there's no additional cost-saving/expenditure there, really.

I don't really watch TV series, and lately, the ones I do watch I can get on Amazon Season Pass, or I wait until Netflix has them. Both ways have saved me a ton of money overall, compared to cable.

As for channels like ESPN? I go to the internet for highlights I really need to see, etc.
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

Touching tribute to Chris Fowler on CGD. I'm going to miss him but I'm glad he's still going to be part of the college gameday even if it's not on College Gameday.

So far Davis has been doing a pretty good job.
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

Not a complaint, unless it doesn't live up to what we've come to expect of the E:60 series, but E:60 on Travis Roy this Wednesday at 8pm Eastern.
 
Re: Still Complaining About ESPN...

MinnesotaNorthStar said:
Also not a complaint...

Scott Van Pelt destroys entertainment media for their coverage of Lamar Odom
Click to expand...
And Van Pelt is wrong, simply wrong. It doesn't matter to X% of people in this country, and an even greater percentage of people on this planet, however many that may end up being, that he played basketball in the NBA. A great number of people only knew about him through that TV show. I only knew of him through that TV show because I don't care about the NBA.

Is the fact that he was an NBA player who found himself also being famous for playing a role on the Kardashian show (he could've opted out of appearing on it) ended up where he did through personal demons any worse than some person who gained fame strictly through being on that same show? Why does being an NBA player place him upon a pedestal or someone else permanently stuck with his head buried in a puddle of mud? There's no difference, it's still a man found barely alive while passed out in a Nevada brothel. And people report upon the incident using the lens through which they see the world. It's not better or worse, it's just different. To say otherwise is an emotional response geared toward personal biases.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top