I'm afraid I agree with the Outkick the Coverages of the world about Around the Horn. It really got preachy and social justice-y for the past 5 years or so.
I feel like there’s something to be said about a big difference (as an outsider who doesn’t gamble admittedly), between a random ESPN suit talking lines, parlays etc, and someone like Barstool guys and Bill Simmons, who talked about this stuff a lot before there was money in it, talking about it in terms of authenticity.
Felt like there was a missing motivation in the baseball/basketball discussion: It's just easier to talk about basketball in soap opera terms and that makes it a) easier for casual fans to dip in and out of without knowing what happened in the games they didn't watch and b) easier prey for ESPN's filler content. Basketball has smaller teams, the stars matter more (impossible to imagine a Mike Trout situation where the best player in the league for multiple years fails to ever make the playoffs), the court is smaller and more intimate, player movement matters more, etc.
Gambling is a great topic, I am glad you have the freedom to discuss it honestly, Ethan. Another good topic that ESPN is afraid to touch is taxpayer subsidies for sports.
I keep on planning to cancel my subscription but you reel me in every other week or so😀
I watched a twitter video of a third base coach point vlad guerrero jr in the direction of a girl with a big sign for him. jogged over, picked her up for a picture, everyone loved it.
it's tough to imagine between the kid and athlete pre game interaction and home runs, web gems, 100 mph strikeouts someone can't make something entertaining. i believe it is an undersupplied market and youtube or mlb technologies will figure out a way to improve the narrative around mlb.
I would add that Penn’s original error was thinking they could gain significant market share primarily through marketing-led growth. They were using white-labelled software for their platform and betting odds that put them at a product disadvantage to DK & FD. The second was branding their sportsbook with their media partners, that have polarizing public perceptions.
I am not against typical brand awareness advertising from sportsbooks, but I find some of the current marketing schemes repulsive. The BS football podcasts feel more like a FD infomercial, with his MDP segments being especially odious. I had to stop listening a couple years ago as it had gotten so ridiculous.
Both of you made a good point about how gambling affects peoples enjoyment of games. Before Nico killed my 1200+ games watched in a row Mavs fandom, the unpredictability of a game involving a team I cared about was more than enough entertainment value. Leagues' embrace of gambling meant transforming many genuine fans into thrill junkies which can be supplied by any number of avenues.
I think the single-men-got-time issue and the how-much-freedom-is-too-much issue are in a sense answers to each other’s questions. If people are gainfully preoccupied, perhaps their gambling (or drug use) will skew towards the more “positive,” “social” side; and if not, then perhaps it will skew self-destructive.
How then to gainfully preoccupy the youth? Ya got me! But I think we’ll know when the time-and-place is right for full liberalization of vice by looking more broadly at people’s quality of commitment to their life projects.
I wish I could have bet on Kalshi that Strauss would bring up (and agree with) that garbage Simmons take.
Definitely one negative article once a month is the same thing as 24 hours of coverage saying you have no clutch gene cause you lost to the nuggets in January.
I'm afraid I agree with the Outkick the Coverages of the world about Around the Horn. It really got preachy and social justice-y for the past 5 years or so.
I feel like there’s something to be said about a big difference (as an outsider who doesn’t gamble admittedly), between a random ESPN suit talking lines, parlays etc, and someone like Barstool guys and Bill Simmons, who talked about this stuff a lot before there was money in it, talking about it in terms of authenticity.
Felt like there was a missing motivation in the baseball/basketball discussion: It's just easier to talk about basketball in soap opera terms and that makes it a) easier for casual fans to dip in and out of without knowing what happened in the games they didn't watch and b) easier prey for ESPN's filler content. Basketball has smaller teams, the stars matter more (impossible to imagine a Mike Trout situation where the best player in the league for multiple years fails to ever make the playoffs), the court is smaller and more intimate, player movement matters more, etc.
Gambling is a great topic, I am glad you have the freedom to discuss it honestly, Ethan. Another good topic that ESPN is afraid to touch is taxpayer subsidies for sports.
I keep on planning to cancel my subscription but you reel me in every other week or so😀
https://youtu.be/UPw-3e_pzqU?si=mTqzlXzSnoYBqgIi
It feels like MLB and ESPN, if they had any creative energy, could market a selected handful of MLB stars to the national audience.
Not just Ohtani and Judge. There’s Soto, Vladdy, Tatis. Paul Skenes is very well known to the TikTok crowd. My younger son loves Elly De La Cruz.
The game has gotten much more personality driven, especially the younger players. Why not build it up rather than walk away?
I watched a twitter video of a third base coach point vlad guerrero jr in the direction of a girl with a big sign for him. jogged over, picked her up for a picture, everyone loved it.
it's tough to imagine between the kid and athlete pre game interaction and home runs, web gems, 100 mph strikeouts someone can't make something entertaining. i believe it is an undersupplied market and youtube or mlb technologies will figure out a way to improve the narrative around mlb.
Joe’s best appearance yet.
I would add that Penn’s original error was thinking they could gain significant market share primarily through marketing-led growth. They were using white-labelled software for their platform and betting odds that put them at a product disadvantage to DK & FD. The second was branding their sportsbook with their media partners, that have polarizing public perceptions.
I am not against typical brand awareness advertising from sportsbooks, but I find some of the current marketing schemes repulsive. The BS football podcasts feel more like a FD infomercial, with his MDP segments being especially odious. I had to stop listening a couple years ago as it had gotten so ridiculous.
Both of you made a good point about how gambling affects peoples enjoyment of games. Before Nico killed my 1200+ games watched in a row Mavs fandom, the unpredictability of a game involving a team I cared about was more than enough entertainment value. Leagues' embrace of gambling meant transforming many genuine fans into thrill junkies which can be supplied by any number of avenues.
I think the single-men-got-time issue and the how-much-freedom-is-too-much issue are in a sense answers to each other’s questions. If people are gainfully preoccupied, perhaps their gambling (or drug use) will skew towards the more “positive,” “social” side; and if not, then perhaps it will skew self-destructive.
How then to gainfully preoccupy the youth? Ya got me! But I think we’ll know when the time-and-place is right for full liberalization of vice by looking more broadly at people’s quality of commitment to their life projects.
I agree that these gambling apps are completely insidious. Gambling addiction has the highest suicide rate of any compulsive disorder
I wish I could have bet on Kalshi that Strauss would bring up (and agree with) that garbage Simmons take.
Definitely one negative article once a month is the same thing as 24 hours of coverage saying you have no clutch gene cause you lost to the nuggets in January.