Thursday, May 09, 2013
Former Cardinals OF Fernando Tatís Is Good at MS Paint… No, Really
(www.insidestl.com)
Former Cardinals outfielder Fernando Tatís once famously hit 2 Grand Slams in one inning and set a Major Leage record with 8 RBI in one frame but that may not be his biggest feat. Lately it seems that Fernando has been lighting up the world of graphic design and his all original creations are truly a sight to behold and the world needs to stand up and take notice.
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 2 of 2 pages
< 1 2Regards,
Tim
Regards,
Tim
Seems odd that MLB doesn't give a DC station the opportunity to air the game. The NFL Network does that for the home team market on the Thursday night games.
And yet last year they both signed 9 year extensions at almost twice the price of the contracts they're on now.
Go to a bar.
- excuse you, mister
i am not going to a *()^*(ing BAR at 12 NOON.
i don't even know what the eff bar would be showing a baseball game at NOON - not around here when there's something exciting like golf or watching paint dry
i could carry a sign in 3 languages saying - do NOT bother me i am watching the ballgame - and i would still get harrassed
mlb network is not on standard cable here in houston. i have no idea whether or not the new astros rsn is even going to be on standard cable. we are sure as **** not paying extra for more channels.
this putting playoff games on an inaccessible channel is bullshpit.
mlb.tv sometimes runs fine, sometimes it doesn't - has nothing to do with the speed of your internet - sometimes, they just have effups with their broadcasts. my mama has a subscription so she can watch the cards. it's great for watching the rerun of the other teams' braodcasts, if you want. but live, it is a problem. i have also been told it is a serious problem at hotels, not sure why.
* When they refused to respond to modest cash calls to invest in the club.
Better chance for the rest of us to get a table!
When I got home and checked prices around 4:30pm today the cheapest tickets were listed at something like $32 and now the cheapest tickets are $21.
Wow, too bad my girlfriend has to work or we might actually go for that price!
Cheapest seat is $39 for upper RF terrace
Correction-it is now down to $15 for SRO.
Go to a bar.
At 1 PM on a Wednesday?
MLB tried that in 1995, and they were deluged with protests from viewers who understandably wanted to see all the games played, not just one. The obvious solution this time would be for MLB to allow a local broadcast channel to pick up its feed, but that would be an act of public spiritedness that baseball wouldn't even begin to consider.
Thank you, Andy, for finally mentioning the Baseball Network debacle -- which, as is so often forgotten, was Bud Selig's responsibility. Baseball fans were very frustrated when four games were played simultaneously that year and aired regionally. There was a pretty damning Sports Illustrated article about Game 2 of the Mariners - Yankees series, an incredibly exciting game that could have helped baseball immensely after the strike, and which was seen by a very small television audience.
I don't mind the early afternoon start times. After all, the entire postseason (World Series) was played at that time for decades. I don't mind having the division series games on cable, either, though that's mostly because I have cable.
However, I can remember being very upset when the NBA disallowed local broadcasts of playoff games a few years ago.
Of course, as baseball chick alluded to, this is bad for the game in general. It's kind of hard to make new fans when your premier product is on a premium cable channel.
Seems to me a 5:30, 6:00, 8:30, 9pm setup solves the problem.
If you have 4 television networks, maybe. With two, you'll run into a problem if that 5:30 game goes a bit longer. Plus, you're not guaranteeing the broadcasting network that theirs is the only baseball game in that timeslot.
Seems to me that going back to the two division setup with only 4 playoff teams solves the problem.
[T]he ability to pay for only certain channels and options instead of having to spend 100 dollars or more a month on hundreds of channels he'll never visit.
This is the real problem, and it reaches far beyond the realm of baseball.
TBS/TNT solves the problem of timeslot and MLBN can always carry a game until another one is wrapped up.
Are people really not willing to go to a bar at noon/1PM on a weekday? Assuming you don't have to be at work what's the big deal? No one is saying you have to get hammered. I rarely drink and I love going to bars. Get some apps, have a soda and watch the game. I find if you are friendly and tip well bartenders are cool with it.
Having said that people shouldn't have to go to a bar to see a game. It's possible that people under 21 might enjoy the game and they can't go to a bar and just generally if people want to stay home and watch the game they should be able to.
Well, the games were played in the stadium that was built with all that public money. If you're arguing that the use of public money should dictate the scheduling of events in that stadium and the broadcast of those events to the local populace, wouldn't that allow more people to watch the game and possibly not fill the stadium. Or not.
Or do you mean that a private business has civic pride implications and as a sporting team and event, that civic pride takes precedence over all existing business contracts and dealings? Hard to say other than you want the game on TV so everyone can watch and not have to be inconvenienced in any way.
Call in sick. Your world won't end and your company won't fold. It's sure as hell a lot better for lots of other people (school kids) than games that end after midnight. "Think about the lawyers" isn't any more convincing than "think about the children".
And BTW if you haven't noticed it by now, the Nats' game 4 will start at 4:00 while the Reds begin at 1:00. And if the Nats-Cards goes to a fifth game, it'll be in prime time (8:30) while the Yankees-O's are set for 5:00. So it's not as if the Nats are being singled out for any particular sort of mistreatment.
I didn't know this. Pretty archaic of the FCC in this case. The internet model of paying one entity for bandwidth and another for content is much better. Cable and telco companies are extremely wrapped up in financing elected officials, so I am not confident that the best solution is the likely solution.
I'm self-employed as a defender of earth from aliens. My contract requires 24/7/365.
Hardly unusual behavior in the District of Columbia.
Someone with a better understanding of the business of cable can probably explain this but I have a sense that if we went to an a la carte model the price wouldn't change much, the options would. I would think the infrastructure of delivering cable requires a certain cost and that, not the channels themselves, is what is driving the pricing. Right now I have several hundred channels of which I watch about 20. If I wanted to select the 20 I watch and only those 20 what would the cost be per channel? I would expect it to spike making my cable package roughly the same cost it is today.
I think in my lifetime this model is going to come into vogue though. I think at some point we're going to see a total blend of cable and internet so that when I turn on my TV I'll simply be turning on my browser and if I want to watch Fringe rather than tuning to channel 508 I'll go to www.fox.com. I think the a la carte model will work then with certain channels requiring log ins and the ultimate cost to be similar to what I pay today.
You probably shouldn't be posting here. Remain at your post!
Carriage fees (the money cable providers pay channels) are pretty expensive, and my understanding of the industry is that they're largely responsible for cable rates being as high as they are. This is a list of cable channels and their carriage fees from 2009. The fee listed is what the cable/satellite provider paid the network per subscriber per month. Three years ago, cable companies were paying $6.50 a month for every household they served, just for the right to transmit ESPN and FSN. Add another $0.50-$1.00 a month for each of ten channels like TNT, Disney, USA, and CNN, and things begin to spiral from there.
Obviously those rates are negotiable. When Fox launched their business channel several years ago, for instance, they gave cable companies a break on the FNC carriage fee if they agreed to carry Fox Business.
I agree with you about the consequences of a la carte programming, though. I think many people would end up spending about the same amount and getting less channels. Niche networks would have to jack their prices up sky high to make up for lost revenue.
An example: I love Fox Soccer Channel. Most people don't. I've switched cable companies because my previous provider didn't renew its contract to carry FSC. In an a la carte situation, I'd absolutely order Fox Soccer. If 95% of their current households dropped the channel, which seems likely, they'd have to make up that revenue somehow. That somehow would come out of my pocket.
I wouldn't subscribe to The Tennis Channel. Maybe my neighbor would. Maybe the guy next to him would subscribe to The Outdoor Network, and someone else would subscribe to BET Jazz. We'd all be paying out the wazoo for those specific channels because most people would drop them like they're Josh Hamilton and niche networks are a popup in Game 162.
7014 Columbia Pike, Annandale, VA , (703)941-7665
I have never been there and have no interest, financial or otherwise in this establishment.
5250 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA
Ravensworth Shopping Center
You can do it! Blow off work! Blow off work!
In BBC's case, and I'm sure others, the fact that she has children in whose care she has been entrusted kind of makes for a dealbreaker. It's one thing to watch the game at home while the lil'uns watch Phineas and Ferb in the next room. It's another to tell them not to touch the passed out man in the corner.
True. On the other hand kids are cheap drunks. Slip them a whiskey in the first inning and they'll be asleep by the third. That's just good parenting.
Page 2 of 2 pages
< 1 2You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.