|
On July 31 2009 05:36 tonight wrote:
He should of done it after he was done playing ball. Unless he is done playing?
I mean no team really wants him, he still thinks he's one of premier PGs in the league and like others have said, worth $10 mill.
On an unrelated note, Sebastian Telfair another standout bust is related to him...how to suck with great talent.
|
Starbury can still play just not at the level he thinks he can
|
Since nobody has mentioned tihs yet... Odom staying in LA at 4 years / 33 million. Team option for a 4th year too, so basically they are getting him at 3 years for ~8 million even though they initially offered him 3 years @ 9 million. Thanks for saving LA money Odom!
|
Waw. On some level this makes me happy - its rare to see teams THIS good play, so I feel fortunate. At the same time... would have loved a more wide-open season. Now LA are heavy favorites.
|
Wow, LA are definite favorites now
|
Fucking ESPN makes me so angry lately... so much insider only.
Bucher, Thrope, Ford, Sheridan, and Hollinger are now ALL Insider only... yay I get to read Adande (hate him), Broussard (retard), and Mark Stein (ok he's alright)...
Seriously this is so dumb.. ESPN just reduced the content available to non-Insider users by over 50%. Insider is only about $3 per year (or is it month?), how much profit could they possibly be making from this move... fuck I wanna read all these articles but can't. And I don't want to get Insider just because of the principle of it, I don't wanna give in to ESPN's bid to drive up profits, I"m sure they make enough money as it is.
|
On July 31 2009 06:33 Xeris wrote:
Since nobody has mentioned tihs yet... Odom staying in LA at 4 years / 33 million. Team option for a 4th year too, so basically they are getting him at 3 years for ~8 million even though they initially offered him 3 years @ 9 million. Thanks for saving LA money Odom!
According to sources, he's still guaranteed $27 million. If LA chooses not to exercise the option on 4th year, they owe him $2 million.
On on another note, screw insider!!!!
|
On July 31 2009 07:22 Xeris wrote:
Fucking ESPN makes me so angry lately... so much insider only.
Bucher, Thrope, Ford, Sheridan, and Hollinger are now ALL Insider only... yay I get to read Adande (hate him), Broussard (retard), and Mark Stein (ok he's alright)...
Seriously this is so dumb.. ESPN just reduced the content available to non-Insider users by over 50%. Insider is only about $3 per year (or is it month?), how much profit could they possibly be making from this move... fuck I wanna read all these articles but can't. And I don't want to get Insider just because of the principle of it, I don't wanna give in to ESPN's bid to drive up profits, I"m sure they make enough money as it is.
Yeah ok, it won't profit them at all but you can't pay for it. You can subscribe to the magazine AND get free insider for a year for $26. Please spare us the martyr act about your "principles." This isn't Fight Club. You're just cheap.
|
United States10774 Posts
|
On July 31 2009 07:59 radar14 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2009 07:22 Xeris wrote:
Fucking ESPN makes me so angry lately... so much insider only.
Bucher, Thrope, Ford, Sheridan, and Hollinger are now ALL Insider only... yay I get to read Adande (hate him), Broussard (retard), and Mark Stein (ok he's alright)...
Seriously this is so dumb.. ESPN just reduced the content available to non-Insider users by over 50%. Insider is only about $3 per year (or is it month?), how much profit could they possibly be making from this move... fuck I wanna read all these articles but can't. And I don't want to get Insider just because of the principle of it, I don't wanna give in to ESPN's bid to drive up profits, I"m sure they make enough money as it is. Yeah ok, it won't profit them at all but you can't pay for it. You can subscribe to the magazine AND get free insider for a year for $26. Please spare us the martyr act about your "principles." This isn't Fight Club. You're just cheap.
Uh no, see I wouldn't mind paying $26 for both the magazine and insider, that's cool, the magazine is a solid read, but charging 3 dollars for SOME of the website isn't anything special.
|
On July 31 2009 07:59 radar14 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2009 07:22 Xeris wrote:
Fucking ESPN makes me so angry lately... so much insider only.
Bucher, Thrope, Ford, Sheridan, and Hollinger are now ALL Insider only... yay I get to read Adande (hate him), Broussard (retard), and Mark Stein (ok he's alright)...
Seriously this is so dumb.. ESPN just reduced the content available to non-Insider users by over 50%. Insider is only about $3 per year (or is it month?), how much profit could they possibly be making from this move... fuck I wanna read all these articles but can't. And I don't want to get Insider just because of the principle of it, I don't wanna give in to ESPN's bid to drive up profits, I"m sure they make enough money as it is. Yeah ok, it won't profit them at all but you can't pay for it. You can subscribe to the magazine AND get free insider for a year for $26. Please spare us the martyr act about your "principles." This isn't Fight Club. You're just cheap.
Why would I pay $26 for bullshit? A) I don't want / never would read the magazine, and B) all the content that's insider only used to be free... so I'd now be paying $26 for something I used to be able to get for free. Does that make sense? Why would any moron want to do that? I'm a college student, $26 isn't necessarily a lot of money, but I'm not into throwing money away uselessly.
|
On July 31 2009 08:10 Xeris wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2009 07:59 radar14 wrote:On July 31 2009 07:22 Xeris wrote:
Fucking ESPN makes me so angry lately... so much insider only.
Bucher, Thrope, Ford, Sheridan, and Hollinger are now ALL Insider only... yay I get to read Adande (hate him), Broussard (retard), and Mark Stein (ok he's alright)...
Seriously this is so dumb.. ESPN just reduced the content available to non-Insider users by over 50%. Insider is only about $3 per year (or is it month?), how much profit could they possibly be making from this move... fuck I wanna read all these articles but can't. And I don't want to get Insider just because of the principle of it, I don't wanna give in to ESPN's bid to drive up profits, I"m sure they make enough money as it is. Yeah ok, it won't profit them at all but you can't pay for it. You can subscribe to the magazine AND get free insider for a year for $26. Please spare us the martyr act about your "principles." This isn't Fight Club. You're just cheap. Why would I pay $26 for bullshit? A) I don't want / never would read the magazine, and B) all the content that's insider only used to be free... so I'd now be paying $26 for something I used to be able to get for free. Does that make sense? Why would any moron want to do that? I'm a college student, $26 isn't necessarily a lot of money, but I'm not into throwing money away uselessly.
Ok, I'll bite. Where is the rule that states that everything that started free must stay free? This is America dude. Are you really that naive about how the world works? It seems to me from the tone of your post that getting access to these articles that you very much want to read would be easily worth $26 a year in absolute sense. And yes, I understand a college student's budget and a tendency for some people to become unreasonably frugal. I never paid for Insider while I was in undergrad for the same reason. I do now and I enjoy it without a second thought. Life's too short to complain about stuff like that, seriously.
|
It's like 3dollars a month if you buy it for a year or some shit. It's nonsense regardless. Like I said earlier someone is going to have to take one for the team and get an account and post the articles here or share it.
|
On July 31 2009 08:29 radar14 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2009 08:10 Xeris wrote:On July 31 2009 07:59 radar14 wrote:On July 31 2009 07:22 Xeris wrote:
Fucking ESPN makes me so angry lately... so much insider only.
Bucher, Thrope, Ford, Sheridan, and Hollinger are now ALL Insider only... yay I get to read Adande (hate him), Broussard (retard), and Mark Stein (ok he's alright)...
Seriously this is so dumb.. ESPN just reduced the content available to non-Insider users by over 50%. Insider is only about $3 per year (or is it month?), how much profit could they possibly be making from this move... fuck I wanna read all these articles but can't. And I don't want to get Insider just because of the principle of it, I don't wanna give in to ESPN's bid to drive up profits, I"m sure they make enough money as it is. Yeah ok, it won't profit them at all but you can't pay for it. You can subscribe to the magazine AND get free insider for a year for $26. Please spare us the martyr act about your "principles." This isn't Fight Club. You're just cheap. Why would I pay $26 for bullshit? A) I don't want / never would read the magazine, and B) all the content that's insider only used to be free... so I'd now be paying $26 for something I used to be able to get for free. Does that make sense? Why would any moron want to do that? I'm a college student, $26 isn't necessarily a lot of money, but I'm not into throwing money away uselessly. Ok, I'll bite. Where is the rule that states that everything that started free must stay free? This is America dude. Are you really that naive about how the world works? It seems to me from the tone of your post that getting access to these articles that you very much want to read would be easily worth $26 a year in absolute sense. And yes, I understand a college student's budget and a tendency for some people to become unreasonably frugal. I never paid for Insider while I was in undergrad for the same reason. I do now and I enjoy it without a second thought. Life's too short to complain about stuff like that, seriously.
Obviously I understand how these things work and I know there's no rule that says ESPN can't do it. But there's also no rule that says I can't complain about it. I'd rather complain and not read the articles.
|
On July 31 2009 08:38 Xeris wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2009 08:29 radar14 wrote:On July 31 2009 08:10 Xeris wrote:On July 31 2009 07:59 radar14 wrote:On July 31 2009 07:22 Xeris wrote:
Fucking ESPN makes me so angry lately... so much insider only.
Bucher, Thrope, Ford, Sheridan, and Hollinger are now ALL Insider only... yay I get to read Adande (hate him), Broussard (retard), and Mark Stein (ok he's alright)...
Seriously this is so dumb.. ESPN just reduced the content available to non-Insider users by over 50%. Insider is only about $3 per year (or is it month?), how much profit could they possibly be making from this move... fuck I wanna read all these articles but can't. And I don't want to get Insider just because of the principle of it, I don't wanna give in to ESPN's bid to drive up profits, I"m sure they make enough money as it is. Yeah ok, it won't profit them at all but you can't pay for it. You can subscribe to the magazine AND get free insider for a year for $26. Please spare us the martyr act about your "principles." This isn't Fight Club. You're just cheap. Why would I pay $26 for bullshit? A) I don't want / never would read the magazine, and B) all the content that's insider only used to be free... so I'd now be paying $26 for something I used to be able to get for free. Does that make sense? Why would any moron want to do that? I'm a college student, $26 isn't necessarily a lot of money, but I'm not into throwing money away uselessly. Ok, I'll bite. Where is the rule that states that everything that started free must stay free? This is America dude. Are you really that naive about how the world works? It seems to me from the tone of your post that getting access to these articles that you very much want to read would be easily worth $26 a year in absolute sense. And yes, I understand a college student's budget and a tendency for some people to become unreasonably frugal. I never paid for Insider while I was in undergrad for the same reason. I do now and I enjoy it without a second thought. Life's too short to complain about stuff like that, seriously. Obviously I understand how these things work and I know there's no rule that says ESPN can't do it. But there's also no rule that says I can't complain about it. I'd rather complain and not read the articles.
Ok then. I'll enjoy Hollinger's articles enough for the both of us.
|
United States22883 Posts
Just have your parents pay for it after your 2nd M3.
|
On July 31 2009 08:50 Jibba wrote:
Just have your parents pay for it after your 2nd M3.
hahaha
|
oh right... I have so much money I oftentimes forget how much I have ;(
|
On July 31 2009 08:46 radar14 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2009 08:38 Xeris wrote:On July 31 2009 08:29 radar14 wrote:On July 31 2009 08:10 Xeris wrote:On July 31 2009 07:59 radar14 wrote:On July 31 2009 07:22 Xeris wrote:
Fucking ESPN makes me so angry lately... so much insider only.
Bucher, Thrope, Ford, Sheridan, and Hollinger are now ALL Insider only... yay I get to read Adande (hate him), Broussard (retard), and Mark Stein (ok he's alright)...
Seriously this is so dumb.. ESPN just reduced the content available to non-Insider users by over 50%. Insider is only about $3 per year (or is it month?), how much profit could they possibly be making from this move... fuck I wanna read all these articles but can't. And I don't want to get Insider just because of the principle of it, I don't wanna give in to ESPN's bid to drive up profits, I"m sure they make enough money as it is. Yeah ok, it won't profit them at all but you can't pay for it. You can subscribe to the magazine AND get free insider for a year for $26. Please spare us the martyr act about your "principles." This isn't Fight Club. You're just cheap. Why would I pay $26 for bullshit? A) I don't want / never would read the magazine, and B) all the content that's insider only used to be free... so I'd now be paying $26 for something I used to be able to get for free. Does that make sense? Why would any moron want to do that? I'm a college student, $26 isn't necessarily a lot of money, but I'm not into throwing money away uselessly. Ok, I'll bite. Where is the rule that states that everything that started free must stay free? This is America dude. Are you really that naive about how the world works? It seems to me from the tone of your post that getting access to these articles that you very much want to read would be easily worth $26 a year in absolute sense. And yes, I understand a college student's budget and a tendency for some people to become unreasonably frugal. I never paid for Insider while I was in undergrad for the same reason. I do now and I enjoy it without a second thought. Life's too short to complain about stuff like that, seriously. Obviously I understand how these things work and I know there's no rule that says ESPN can't do it. But there's also no rule that says I can't complain about it. I'd rather complain and not read the articles. Ok then. I'll enjoy Hollinger's articles enough for the both of us.
if you have an account and aren't sharing the articles I'm going to suplex you off of a 200story building that freefalls into a pit of used needles filled with aids.
|
On July 31 2009 09:40 tonight wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2009 08:46 radar14 wrote:On July 31 2009 08:38 Xeris wrote:On July 31 2009 08:29 radar14 wrote:On July 31 2009 08:10 Xeris wrote:On July 31 2009 07:59 radar14 wrote:On July 31 2009 07:22 Xeris wrote:
Fucking ESPN makes me so angry lately... so much insider only.
Bucher, Thrope, Ford, Sheridan, and Hollinger are now ALL Insider only... yay I get to read Adande (hate him), Broussard (retard), and Mark Stein (ok he's alright)...
Seriously this is so dumb.. ESPN just reduced the content available to non-Insider users by over 50%. Insider is only about $3 per year (or is it month?), how much profit could they possibly be making from this move... fuck I wanna read all these articles but can't. And I don't want to get Insider just because of the principle of it, I don't wanna give in to ESPN's bid to drive up profits, I"m sure they make enough money as it is. Yeah ok, it won't profit them at all but you can't pay for it. You can subscribe to the magazine AND get free insider for a year for $26. Please spare us the martyr act about your "principles." This isn't Fight Club. You're just cheap. Why would I pay $26 for bullshit? A) I don't want / never would read the magazine, and B) all the content that's insider only used to be free... so I'd now be paying $26 for something I used to be able to get for free. Does that make sense? Why would any moron want to do that? I'm a college student, $26 isn't necessarily a lot of money, but I'm not into throwing money away uselessly. Ok, I'll bite. Where is the rule that states that everything that started free must stay free? This is America dude. Are you really that naive about how the world works? It seems to me from the tone of your post that getting access to these articles that you very much want to read would be easily worth $26 a year in absolute sense. And yes, I understand a college student's budget and a tendency for some people to become unreasonably frugal. I never paid for Insider while I was in undergrad for the same reason. I do now and I enjoy it without a second thought. Life's too short to complain about stuff like that, seriously. Obviously I understand how these things work and I know there's no rule that says ESPN can't do it. But there's also no rule that says I can't complain about it. I'd rather complain and not read the articles. Ok then. I'll enjoy Hollinger's articles enough for the both of us. if you have an account and aren't sharing the articles I'm going to suplex you off of a 200story building that freefalls into a pit of used needles filled with aids.
you sound charming, really you do, but no thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
36998
758
470
EPT
