Jump to content

Executive Producer of MASN says "nah, I'm good", jumps off sinking ship

interloper

By interloper
in Orioles Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Tony-OH
Tony-OH

Looking at the You tube content available for old orioles games, it's amazing they can't show some of these or do some research and actually show classic games like the Orioles-Brewers double header s

fansince71
fansince71

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/03/19/masn-orioles-peter-angelos/

spiritof66
spiritof66

I don't know about the "smarter" part, but I've posted several times my view that many of the Orioles' decisions are consistent with a plan to sell the team. My view about that has gotten stronger; I'

spiritof66 Hangout Grand Counsel

spiritof66

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, LookinUp said:

Can someone smarter than me tell me WTH is going on with MASN? 

I don't know about the "smarter" part, but I've posted several times my view that many of the Orioles' decisions are consistent with a plan to sell the team. My view about that has gotten stronger; I've started but haven't finished a longer post explaining why I think that, but here's the bottom line: the Orioles' strategy and tactics are consistent with either (a) the Angelos's plan to sell the team or a big chunk of it after Peter Angelos dies, or (b) the Angeloses' expectation that their financial situation upon Peter Angelos's death will force them to sell all or a large part of the team. The MASN decisions about spring training and dumping veteran broadcasters, saving a few dollars now and increasing MASN's short-run profits, without concern for the effect on fan interest, and then relenting a little when the situation gets so ridiculous that it leads to media attention and some embarrassment, fit right in.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
interloper Hangout Grand Counsel

interloper

Posted
  • Author
Posted
10 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Gotta hand it to @interloper, the thread title was pretty funny.

Haha. My disdain for this stupid, broken, half-assed sports network has really reached new heights this year. If folks want to place the blame squarely on the Angelos's for its failure, then I don't really have a great argument against that. It's clear they are going to have to pony up to the Nats and when they do MASN will be close to bankrupt. They can barely sustain partnerships to get the damn channels broadcast, the only broadcaster still involved worth a damn is Palmer and it remains to be seen for how long. They can't even get their s*** together for long enough to announce the pitiful 2 games they're broadcasting, and in fact it was "announced" by a MASN parody account on twitter like 24 hours before they finally got around to it. 

Their pre/post game shows are objectively bad, their in-game graphics are dated (PAPYRUS??), and they offer no real programming when the games aren't on. It had a few good years there but the thing is dead in the water and deserves to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aglets Hangout Grand Counsel

Aglets

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, spiritof66 said:

I don't know about the "smarter" part, but I've posted several times my view that many of the Orioles' decisions are consistent with a plan to sell the team. My view about that has gotten stronger; I've started but haven't finished a longer post explaining why I think that, but here's the bottom line: the Orioles' strategy and tactics are consistent with either (a) the Angelos's plan to sell the team or a big chunk of it after Peter Angelos dies, or (b) the Angeloses' expectation that their financial situation upon Peter Angelos's death will force them to sell all or a large part of the team. The MASN decisions about spring training and dumping veteran broadcasters, saving a few dollars now and increasing MASN's short-run profits, without concern for the effect on fan interest, and then relenting a little when the situation gets so ridiculous that it leads to media attention and some embarrassment, fit right in.

Couldn't it also be that they are slashing costs way down cuz MASN owes the Nats like $100M?   Isn't that at least equally as likely here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eddie83 Hangout Grand Counsel

eddie83

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, interloper said:

Haha. My disdain for this stupid, broken, half-assed sports network has really reached new heights this year. If folks want to place the blame squarely on the Angelos's for its failure, then I don't really have a great argument against that. It's clear they are going to have to pony up to the Nats and when they do MASN will be close to bankrupt. They can barely sustain partnerships to get the damn channels broadcast, the only broadcaster still involved worth a damn is Palmer and it remains to be seen for how long. They can't even get their s*** together for long enough to announce the pitiful 2 games they're broadcasting, and in fact it was "announced" by a MASN parody account on twitter like 24 hours before they finally got around to it. 

Their pre/post game shows are objectively bad, their in-game graphics are dated (PAPYRUS??), and they offer no real programming when the games aren't on. It had a few good years there but the thing is dead in the water and deserves to be.

I think they deserve most of this criticism. All these RSN’s don’t have much in the way of quality programming except for the the games. That said showing the same classic games again and again gets old. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
interloper Hangout Grand Counsel

interloper

Posted
  • Author
Posted
50 minutes ago, andrewochs615 said:

Angelos Family

Sure, but MLB, the Nats, the cable networks, and the head people that work at MASN all share some blame as well. COVID was the stiff breeze that blew over the house of cards. It's just a poorly managed entity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
spiritof66 Hangout Grand Counsel

spiritof66

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Aglets said:

Couldn't it also be that they are slashing costs way down cuz MASN owes the Nats like $100M?   Isn't that at least equally as likely here?

I'm not following this. The owner of the Orioles ordinarily would want to make decisions that will improve the team's success on the field and increase the team's value by maximizing its long-term ability to earn profits. Sometimes those two things are in conflict, and a team faces a difficult decision.

It's my view from the outside, shared by others on this board, that the Orioles' recent decisions about MASN don't make sense financially, and are likely to undermine the long-term profitability of the team. I don't see how that view is affected by money owed to the Nats (and I've long forgotten how much it is), but maybe I'm just missing the point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Posts

    • Baseball fandom
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By Baseball fandom · Posted

      I've made it clear that if they don't sign Santa and Burnes I'm ok with it as long as the money is allocated to other players they feel that fits their profile better .You know you have people on here like SG who only hears what he wants to hear. I need to learn to ignore that guy. 
    • Baseball fandom
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By Baseball fandom · Posted

      Oh mr know it all. Who most times is wrong. Lol
    • DrinkinWithFermi
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By DrinkinWithFermi · Posted

      I also think Santander will age better than Trumbo, despite my repeated comparisons of the two players. But I don't know that he will age better than Trumbo and all of the other one dimensional sluggers who were enjoying the retired millionaire sports star lifestyle by their mid-30s, and I don't want the Orioles to be on the hook when the world finds out in 2 or 3 years. Re-signing Santander to a 4 year, $80 million dollar deal is something the DD/PA regime would have done. Hopefully the ME/DR regime is smarter than that (and I think they are). 22nd percentile is really bad, man. And it's unlikely to improve in his 30s.
    • Moose Milligan
      Hyde Hot Seat

      By Moose Milligan · Posted

      Looks like Baseball Fandom was at the game today!
    • Sydnor
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By Sydnor · Posted

      But that is not what you said. You said he’s a bad fielder, just not quite Trumbo-tier. Thus, you were stating he is close to as bad a fielder as Trumbo was, which is not correct. Generally speaking, no player makes up the loss of offensive value with defensive value as the age. It is usually one of the first things to go. I was not making any sort of argument that he was going to make up declining offense with defense, just pointing out that you made a preposterous statement.
    • Hallas
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By Hallas · Posted

      At least relative to the rest of the league Santander has an interesting profile because he is comfortably above-average at making contact; his whiff rates are much better than Trumbo's so he's not really as much of a TTO player as you would think.  This gives him hope that he will age a little bit better than someone like Trumbo.  Though he's still got a good shot of being out of the league in 3 years.
    • forphase1
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By forphase1 · Posted

      It's not the money, it's the years.  I wouldn't mind signing him for a year or two, even at what I'd consider to be stupid money.  But what I DON'T agree with is signing him for any more than 2-3 years as I don't think he's going to age well.  And I expect him to get more than 3 years from someone, so I'm a hard pass.  Can we afford him?  Money wise, sure.  But I don't want to see us stuck with him 4-5 years down the road when his skillset has greatly diminished, but he's still playing every day because we owe him a lot of money and a lot of loyalty.  Let some other club take that risk, get the QO pick and move on.  

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...