šŸˆ Danny Kannell, Heather Dinich, et all can STFU

Sgt. Lincoln Osiris

Sgt. Lincoln Osiris

Lead farmer
Member
We'll hear:

"LSU obviously isn't who we thought they were, they were beat handily by Arkansas after losing to Alabama...Arkansas"

"That home loss to Ole Miss tho"

Etc...

Everybody likes stats and metrics... right, Kannell? Right, Dinich?

Here's the most GLARING stat for all the blatant Bama-hating media d!cks...


@AndrewJBone: RT @SEC_Chuck: Eight of Alabama's 10 opponents so far this season are bowl eligible - leads SEC and nation with five Top 25 wins.
Click to expand...

Sent from my ASUS ZenFone 2E using Tapatalk
 
planomateo said:
Honestly, who gives a **** what Danny says...

I don't why Bama fans keep complaining about him. He's an idiot, he proves it every damn time he opens his mouth and fans keep stating the obvious. There is an old saying that goes something like this "never argue with a stupid person, someone might confuse you with one".
Click to expand...
I'd like to NGAF, but every time I see his face on ESPN, I want to punch my TV.

Sent from my ASUS ZenFone 2E using Tapatalk
 
Danny Kannell showed how much of a joke he was after the Tennessee game. "Anyone that thinks Alabama is a top ten team is an idiot" (or something along those lines)... then the very next day he posts his top ten on Twitter and Alabama is number ten.
 
TG1JAY said:
its not Alabamas fault they kill depth, heart, and motivation of other teams after they "beat" them
if i remember correctly we have played 4 opponents that were in the top 5 or top 10 at the time of game.
Click to expand...
Coach Bryant expressed pride many times in the tendency of teams to lose or play poorly the week after playing Bama. He took it as an objective indication of how formidable his Bama teams were.
 
He has made himself relevant on ESPN because he knows how to troll as mentioned above. Personally it doesn't matter what an old hack of a QB has to say about a bunch of 18-22 year old kids. I'm to the point where I don't even watch ESPN outside of games because I know all the BS that comes with Galloway and Kannel. Win and we're in, that's all we need to focus on, not some analyst that makes a living riling fans up. They're all like weathermen, can be right 25% of the time and still remain employed. They're allowed to backtrack and take that hindsight view while continuing to reinvent themselves.
 
BamaFan334 said:
He has made himself relevant on ESPN because he knows how to troll as mentioned above. Personally it doesn't matter what an old hack of a QB has to say about a bunch of 18-22 year old kids. I'm to the point where I don't even watch ESPN outside of games because I know all the BS that comes with Galloway and Kannel. Win and we're in, that's all we need to focus on, not some analyst that makes a living riling fans up. They're all like weathermen, can be right 25% of the time and still remain employed. They're allowed to backtrack and take that hindsight view while continuing to reinvent themselves.
Click to expand...

I think they put Kanell/Dimbitch/Galloway out there in part to counter the perceived SEC/Bama bias - especially now that Rece is the new college football kingpin of ESPN. I'm not convinced they even share the views they blabber. It's scripted and it placates the non-SEC crowd. Nobody wants to hear Beth Mowins call a game either, but they're gonna force their brand of diversity on you whether you like it or not.
 
All of ESPN is a brand of a content provider. They have the rights to broadcast most of the games through the content delivery providers like ABC, Time Warner, Comcast, DirecTV, Dish, Cox cable, and many other companies that make money off of the content. Making money is important for the schools.

There is an emerging technology that is going to bypass this method and deliver content to the individual person. It is the internet and there are already apps to broadcast. If ESPN doesn't provide content that we the people want to get, they are going to find themselves without an audience. We are working on a crowd broadcasting system that uses individual cell phone cameras and merges them into a stitched game. It is in the future and if the end user likes it it will take over how we watch sports. The challenges are going to be getting schools to authorize it. We plan to start with venues that are not getting any broadcast now like your local high school games. The content has to be something that we want to watch. You will hear more about it soon.
 
ABC is owned by the same company as ESPN, hence why they share commentary teams and the graphics are all the same... ESPN isnt going anywhere especially considering how most conferences have contracts with them going through the 2020s. The internet is going to do nothing but strengthen ESPN especially with the fact that they can air even more games than what is shown on TV with ESPN3 on the net.
 
planomateo said:
Agree with you @RollllTide!, ESPN could be on the outside looking in if they get bypassed. They have alot of influence though.

@Birdman37 might want to pull up a chair and listen to what @RollllTide! is saying, he's in the industry. Plenty of "too big to fail companies" have failed. ESPN is no different.
Click to expand...

Yes, companies like CNN, ABC, CBS are already feeling the loss of revenue vs internet content providers like Netflicks, etc., All of us are watching less TV and more content on tablets, ipads, larger phones etc. I watched the BAMA GA game online live. Just think if you will when a crowd of 30 or 40 smart phones can broadcast to a website and it is merged by time and content to have a crowd version of watching a game. It will be like a live twitter or facebook app. At first people will use it as a supplement to the game, but as technology improves the content providers like ESPN will add it to their programing. Unless the big media companies stop us with law suits about the rights to broadcast live events this way, it is coming. The technology is here. Just about a million more lines of code.
 
Even if the cable/satellite providers start the fail, ESPN will not be one that fails. You're right that more and more people are cutting the chord with options like Netflix, Sling, Hulu Plus, and now even HBO going the HBONow route (you can pay $15 a month to stream HBO even if you dont have it on your cable), but regardless live sports (especially football) is still BY FAR the most watched LIVE television out there. And if ESPN decides to stream their content live via the internet with options like that of Netflix or HBO (in fact I think Sling already offers certain ESPN channels) then that would probably cripple cable but ESPN is still going to be making all the money. As easy as it is sometimes to watch illegal streams those streams suck most of the time and often times fail or crap out so getting a cheaper and legal stream will still make them ass loads of money. So either way Disney wins again.
 
Back
Top Bottom