Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Who is falling for the Peacock Wildcard bullshitt

Jmac

By Jmac,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Harbingers Grand Master

Harbingers

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, Bear Hands said:

Comcast/NBC execs need to know by now that Peacock isn't gonna happen.  

But I guess they're trying again after Disney bought Comcast's (NBCUniversal's) remaining Hulu stake. 

So now NBC is trying their darnest to push Peacock and no one is biting.  They're gonna keep trying.  Prepare for more annoying sh*t

 

Two words about last night game. Taylor Swift. They banked on all the swifties paying for peacock to broaden the market. They didn’t give a poo about actual football fans. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bear Hands Grand Master

Bear Hands

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Harbingers said:

Two words about last night game. Taylor Swift. They banked on all the swifties paying for peacock to broaden the market. They didn’t give a poo about actual football fans. 

It’s a much larger deal than Swift. People are overblowing how much the NFL and networks are hyping her or whatnot. So what, they show her in a booth like they do with owners for a few seconds during a game. It’s really not a big deal.

She’s become arguably the most successful music star in history from a monetary standpoint. She’s in that Garth Brooks/The Beatles/MJ tier when it comes to sales, tours and cultural impact. As a guitarist, not my cup of tea but I say, so what, it’s really overblown IMO.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Harbingers Grand Master

Harbingers

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Bear Hands said:

It’s a much larger deal than Swift. People are overblowing how much the NFL and networks are hyping her or whatnot. So what, they show her in a booth like they do with owners for a few seconds during a game. It’s really not a big deal.

She’s become arguably the most successful music star in history from a monetary standpoint. She’s in that Garth Brooks/The Beatles/MJ tier when it comes to sales, tours and cultural impact. As a guitarist, not my cup of tea but I say, so what, it’s really overblown IMO.

Oh I agree on all fronts but I think you are underestimating swifties or what ever they are called.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PanthersATL Veteran

PanthersATL

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Harbingers said:

Two words about last night game. Taylor Swift. They banked on all the swifties paying for peacock to broaden the market. They didn’t give a poo about actual football fans. 

Peacock paid $110m to air the game before Kelce and Taylor started dating

Link to comment
Share on other sites
top dawg Grand Master

top dawg

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, 45catfan said:

I will not subscribe to Prime or Peacock to watch a football game.  Even if it means missing a Panthers game in the future, no dice.

Not gonna lie. I love Prime on its own merits. TNF is just icing on the cake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, Davidson Deac II said:

I cut all my streaming services.  I may sign up for Apple when Masters of the Air comes on, but the cost of all of them was getting ludicrous. 

Also, at one point in time, boxing was one of the biggest sports in the US.  Millions watched Sugar Ray Leonard or Ali on network TV.   But all their main events were PPV.  Don't get me wrong, boxing had a lot of problems, but PPV is one of the reasons that it is no longer a major sport.  

NFL should take that lesson to heart. 

Yeah, but UFC essentially took boxing out didn’t?  And UFC uses essentially the same PPV format boxing did. 

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

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • CRA
      Good film breakdown of Young. Good and bad. Film examples

      By CRA · Posted

      Bryce isn't a risk-taking gunslinger.  That's just QB DNA.  No one has ever said that is what we were drafting when we went that route.  That's my point.  That's not Bryce. Can you make Alex Smith throw deep? Sure.  He will occasionally.  In the reverse, can you ask Brett Favre to just take the easy layups? Sure.  He can in moments.  But in the end, they are what they are.  as I have said, Canales probably could win more games with PJ Walker.  And Bryce is a better overall QB than PJ.  PJ Walker would also have much worse games mixed in that Bryce would.   
    • CPF4LIFE
      Good film breakdown of Young. Good and bad. Film examples

      By CPF4LIFE · Posted

      From what i see, Canales offense requires a QB that is willing to take chances to maximize the offense. XL is also the kind of receiver that needs a qb to be risky to bring out his full potential. Its just a matter of if Bryce is gonna be that QB.
    • CRA
      Good film breakdown of Young. Good and bad. Film examples

      By CRA · Posted

      Baker just played how Baker played.... everywhere but here. He is a risk taking gunslinger.  Always has been.  And last year was asked to be what he was.   Geno Smith was the best deep ball passer in the NFL his comeback season.  Wasn't even close that year.  Again, that's the type passer Canales has always been around in the offenses he has been part of.  The pass game that compliments the stubborn run is the deep chunk play pass game.   And that was his first investment with XL.  My continued point, is the same as going into last season.  It's a bad marriage going in.  The QB doesn't fit the scheme.  Again.  Carrol/Fox/Ron....all paired up their boring football with risk taking QBs.  And again, I'm fine if that is where we are going.  It's not my preference but that's not my argument.  I'm saying if we are doing that, we need a QB that matches it.     
×
×
  • Create New...