chadlincoln wrote:Why go to ESPN? The Cafe is all you need.
Exactly, I can count on 1 hand how many times I've been to ESPN.com over the last 2 years or so.
I mainly just use The Cafe and if I want player stats then Yahoo is good enough for that. I might dibble around HardballTimes or FanGraphs but mainly just troll this place.....probably too much!
I can get into some Insider stuff but it asks for a login on others
It sounds like we are having a similar problem. The ESPN website is kinda screwy; at least on my PC. I have the same problem with the login when I am trying to download the Sunday Fantasy Focus Podcast. There will be times where I know I am logged in, and it tells me I'm not. So I put my name and password in; and it still does nothing and tells me I'm not logged in. Or it will let me log in successfully, and then after viewing a page or two it says I'm not logged in anymore. I have found ways around it, but it can get very frustrating. Personally I love the premium ESPN insider info, but then again I use a friend's account and don't pay for it. If I actually paid for the subsription I would be very unhappy with how their site works.
Me too, if I had to pay for it then I'd be a lot more persistent in bothering them about fixing it. It'll be the last time I try out an ESPN league at any rate.
It's 16 cents a day and you get the magazine, too. I dont think that's out of line. I waste a helluva lot more money per month on much stupider things, thats' for sure.
Agree 100%. This has bugged for a long time. ESPN.com has become progressively less accessible over the past four or five years.
I used to enjoy reading Neyer and Stark et al, back in like 2002 or so, when the site was largely free.
This “Insider” crapola has gone too far. ESPN is shooting itself in the foot, and alienating sizable fan populations with its high-priced and exclusionary tactics.
Ironically, I might pay for “Insider” Web access if it was $20 a year. But it’s $40 a year -- and includes 28 issues of “ESPN the Magazine.”
I need a sports magazine in my mailbox like I need gonorrhea. Thanks, but I’d rather save a tree. Others like it, great, just offer a choice.
Now I don’t begrudge certain media companies charging for content. Newspapers in particular are struggling to make up revenue lost from a 10-year decline in traditional advertising, and a lot of papers are in rather serious trouble. Journalism staffs have been trimmed, salaries stagnated, and the net result is a decline in the quality of coverage and the “watchdog” role of the press, not so much for sports, but local, national, and international news.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m under the impression that ESPN is a massively profitable enterprise. I don’t think there’s any justification here e.g., “We need Insider revenue to survive.”
Visiting ESPN.com these days is a waste of time. Not to mention that video that starts playing without your asking … hey ESPN, what about the guy sitting at the office? Just rude, inconsiderate, and arrogant.
SI, Sporting News, USA Today, and others are much more inviting. Vent over and out.
405z06 wrote:It's 16 cents a day and you get the magazine, too. I dont think that's out of line. I waste a helluva lot more money per month on much stupider things, thats' for sure.
It's not that much when you break it down that way but (and maybe you disagree) there are far better sports magazines out there and a majority of the insider material is fluff. I had it for a short while but never again. I still use ESPN for their stats and I like Page 2.
Maine has a good swing for a pitcher but on anything that moves, he has no chance. And if it's a fastball, it has to be up in the zone. Basically, the pitcher has to hit his bat. - Mike Pelfrey
405z06 wrote:It's 16 cents a day and you get the magazine, too. I dont think that's out of line. I waste a helluva lot more money per month on much stupider things, thats' for sure.
Sounds like a term life insurance ad... For only $1 a day you can have...
saemick wrote:I agree 100%. The fact that I have to pay for something that should be able to be read for free is absurd.
Why do you think you're entitled to read their content for free? Should newspapers and books be free as well? This same sense of entitlement is what leads people to download music/movies/etc. that they should be paying for. If you like the insider articles, pay the $0.16/day and read them, if you don't like them, then don't, but to imply that ESPN somehow owes you free access to all of their content is absurd.
Also, if I were an insider, and it cost $40/year but included a free subscription to ESPN the Magazine, I'd glady pay $60/year to keep from getting the magazine. What a horrible piece of crap rag that is.
Art Vandelay wrote:Why do you think you're entitled to read their content for free? Should newspapers and books be free as well? This same sense of entitlement is what leads people to download music/movies/etc. that they should be paying for. If you like the insider articles, pay the $0.16/day and read them, if you don't like them, then don't, but to imply that ESPN somehow owes you free access to all of their content is absurd.
Agreed 100%. Why in the world do people think that because it's online it should be free? This is a basic flaw in logic - this Internet, this website, the Ones and Zeros that go into making everything from digital movies to music to websites to ANYTHING costs someone money. Why should they give it to you for free? How does that work? Do they spend money to produce this stuff forever? Are they supposed to fork over their bucks from their Magic Money Tree so people can read a free article or listen to free music or whatever?
It amazes me that people seem to have no grasp of the fact that EVERYTHING on the Internet cost someone somewhere some money, and they have no clue that simple ad revenue does not cover EVERY bit and buck they spend.
I have been baffled by this concept for years now. People have this amazingly simple-minded sense of "I want it, but I don't want to have to pay for it." And when they do have to pay for something that someone is in the business of selling, they get offended.
Amazing.
Art Vandelay wrote:Also, if I were an insider, and it cost $40/year but included a free subscription to ESPN the Magazine, I'd glady pay $60/year to keep from getting the magazine. What a horrible piece of crap rag that is.
Agreed 100%. I actually get the magazine and I never, ever read it. It's a total waste of paper.
I actually kinda like ESPN the magazine, and I don't have a problem with them charging for their Insider info. I just don't think their website works very well.
san76er wrote:I actually kinda like ESPN the magazine, and I don't have a problem with them charging for their Insider info. I just don't think their website works very well.
See, this is the type of thing you keep quite! j/k
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by J35J » Fri Jun 22, 2007 3:38 pm 
j/k
