2025 ATL Thread - Burnes to have TJ surgery

MikeIsGood · Post #1901 » by **MikeIsGood** » Wed Aug 20, 2025 1:01 am

**** ESPN, man.

Post #1902 » by **MickeyDavis** » Wed Aug 20, 2025 1:24 am

More ESPN ugh. But I don't watch any non Brewers baseball. Maybe a little World Series but then only if it's an elimination game.

JayMKE · Post #1903 » by **JayMKE** » Wed Aug 20, 2025 10:58 am

This realignment **** I’m seeing with the imaginary divisions is pissing me off

Post #1904 » by **ReasonablySober** » Wed Aug 20, 2025 3:08 pm

JayMKE wrote:This realignment **** I’m seeing with the imaginary divisions is pissing me off

I've seen a handful of proposals. The shakeups usually involve Pittsburgh going to the NL East, which would be fine with me. Another one I saw had the NL Central adding Minnesota, which I'd love.

But I just saw an asinine version on Fox that seemed like they messed with the entire sport for the sake of doing something radical. It had Milwaukee going back to the AL and forming a "Great Lakes Division" with Minnesota, Detroit, and Toronto. It would be nice from a team success standpoint, but I would hate to miss out on our existing Cubs and Cardinal rivalries.

Post #1905 » by **MickeyDavis** » Wed Aug 20, 2025 3:46 pm

Manfred has done some good things. But the proposed realignment is dumb.

MVP2110 · Post #1906 » by **MVP2110** » Wed Aug 20, 2025 4:29 pm

Is there any legitimate news to the realignment stuff? Or where is all this discussion coming from?

Post #1907 » by **MickeyDavis** » Wed Aug 20, 2025 4:39 pm

MVP2110 wrote:Is there any legitimate news to the realignment stuff? Or where is all this discussion coming from?

Manfred himself brought it up. He wants to expand by 2 and realign.

https://nypost.com/2025/08/18/sports/rob-manfreds-mlb-realignment-idea-being-met-with-harsh-reactions/

ETA, I understand that expansion fees go in the other owners pockets but both Florida teams should be moved before you add more teams.

Thunder Muscle · Post #1908 » by **Thunder Muscle** » Wed Aug 20, 2025 5:11 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:

Read on Twitter

Wow.

This is kind if insane. Not sure I love ESPN getting MLB TV. I would be good with Peacock getting Apple TV games. Curious how this all shakes out.

Post #1909 » by **MickeyDavis** » Wed Aug 20, 2025 5:16 pm

I love the Apple game although I've only watched the Brewers on it.

Post #1910 » by **ReasonablySober** » Thu Aug 21, 2025 4:16 pm

Read on Twitter

Fans of five teams getting screwed.

If the deal is signed, ESPN will have the full rights to in- and out-of-market games for five teams. The Cleveland Guardians, San Diego Padres, Minnesota Twins, Arizona Diamondbacks and Colorado Rockies are the clubs under MLB control. Fans would likely need to subscribe to ESPN either directly or through an operator, and then, for an added price, they would be able to receive their local teams’ games.

Post #1911 » by **MickeyDavis** » Thu Aug 21, 2025 4:35 pm

Interesting so if you have cable or YouTube TV or something that carries ESPN you'd have to pay extra for local games. If you didn't have cable or another carrier that has ESPN you'd have to buy ESPN through their app and then pay more for local games. Yuck. If the Brewers hadn't changed their mind and reupped with FD we'd be team 6.

MLB has made no secret that they want all teams included so as RSN deals expire they will move to this new model.

Post #1912 » by **ReasonablySober** » Thu Aug 21, 2025 4:42 pm

MickeyDavis wrote:Interesting so if you have cable or YouTube TV or something that carries ESPN you'd have to pay extra for local games. If you didn't have cable or another carrier that has ESPN you'd have to buy ESPN through their app and then pay more for local games. Yuck. If the Brewers hadn't changed their mind and reupped with FD we'd be team 6.

MLB has made no secret that they want all teams included so as RSN deals expire they will move to this new model.

If you're a fan of one of those five times it looks like you'd have to pay between $50 and $60 a month to watch your local games.

Ron Swanson · Post #1913 » by **Ron Swanson** » Thu Aug 21, 2025 4:44 pm

God I hate all this dumb ****. Take me back to the days of basic cable where I only had to worry about one annual payment/account and I got all the live sports I needed without having to sign up for 7 different streamers and monthly payments. This era of consumerism sucks.

Post #1914 » by **MickeyDavis** » Thu Aug 21, 2025 4:50 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
MickeyDavis wrote:Interesting so if you have cable or YouTube TV or something that carries ESPN you'd have to pay extra for local games. If you didn't have cable or another carrier that has ESPN you'd have to buy ESPN through their app and then pay more for local games. Yuck. If the Brewers hadn't changed their mind and reupped with FD we'd be team 6.

MLB has made no secret that they want all teams included so as RSN deals expire they will move to this new model.

If you're a fan of one of those five times it looks like you'd have to pay between $50 and $60 a month to watch your local games.

If you don't currently have ESPN then yes, $30 for ESPN and probably $20-$30 for local. If you do have ESPN you'd pay $20-$30.

Post #1915 » by **MickeyDavis** » Thu Aug 21, 2025 4:52 pm

Ron Swanson wrote:God I hate all this dumb ****. Take me back to the days of basic cable where I only had to worry about one annual payment/account and I got all the live sports I needed without having to sign up for 7 different streamers and monthly payments. This era of consumerism sucks.

Me too. Games are so scattered now it sucks.

I posted a link on the Bucks board to a different Athletic article about the ESPN launch tomorrow.

ESPN's direct to consumer platform debuts tomorrow. Very good article in the Athletic if you subscribe that explains everything.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6560777/2025/08/19/jimmy-pitaro-espn-streaming-app-launch-netflix/

$30 a month, it will be going up to $36 a month. They have bundling options with Disney and Hulu. It will have all content from all of the current ESPN channels and extra stuff (lots of gambling content). Stuff like NFL RedZone will be added once that deal is approved sometime next year.

If you currently have ESPN you will be able to access all of this extra content at no extra charge. The exception right now is YouTube TV, they are still negotiating with ESPN.

You can bet that ESPN, which already charges providers $15 per subscriber, will be upping that and it will be passed along to consumers.

One last thing not in this article but discussed on the Brewers board. MLB currently owns the local rights to 5 teams and starting next season those 5 teams local broadcasts will only be available at an additional charge through ESPN. So you have to have ESPN, either through an operator or the standalone service and then pay EXTRA for your local games. MLB has plans to have all teams on this platform as their deals expire with RSN.

For the Bucks and the NBA I've seen no such plans to have all teams local broadcasts under ESPN control so far. I don't know when the Bucks deal with FD expires but it's going to be real interesting to see what's next. The Suns started broadcasting games on a local channel and offering it on their own streaming service for those you can't access the local broadcast.

Also, if the Brewers eventually move to this, and they will, you'd have to pay for Brewers and then pay for whatever the Bucks are doing. You won't get both under the same umbrella as you do now.

Post #1916 » by **ReasonablySober** » Thu Aug 21, 2025 4:59 pm

MickeyDavis wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
MickeyDavis wrote:Interesting so if you have cable or YouTube TV or something that carries ESPN you'd have to pay extra for local games. If you didn't have cable or another carrier that has ESPN you'd have to buy ESPN through their app and then pay more for local games. Yuck. If the Brewers hadn't changed their mind and reupped with FD we'd be team 6.

MLB has made no secret that they want all teams included so as RSN deals expire they will move to this new model.

If you're a fan of one of those five times it looks like you'd have to pay between $50 and $60 a month to watch your local games.

If you don't currently have ESPN then yes, $30 for ESPN and probably $20-$30 for local. If you do have ESPN you'd pay $20-$30.

Either way, the fans are getting royally screwed. If you're a Twins fan you watched them through a traditional cable or streaming package that carried Bally Sports Minnesota, or you just got the standalone Bally Sports app and paid around $15 a month. Now no matter what you're either paying for an expensive monthly cable package AND the Twins package, or you're spending $30 for ESPN plus $20-$30 a month for the Twins package.

Not a chance in hell would I ever do either.

Post #1917 » by **MickeyDavis** » Thu Aug 21, 2025 5:02 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
MickeyDavis wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:
If you're a fan of one of those five times it looks like you'd have to pay between $50 and $60 a month to watch your local games.

If you don't currently have ESPN then yes, $30 for ESPN and probably $20-$30 for local. If you do have ESPN you'd pay $20-$30.

Either way, the fans are getting royally screwed. If you're a Twins fan you watched them through a traditional cable or streaming package that carried Bally Sports Minnesota, or you just got the standalone Bally Sports app and paid around $15 a month. Now no matter what you're either paying for an expensive monthly cable package AND the Twins package, or you're spending $30 for ESPN plus $20-$30 a month for the Twins package.

Not a chance in hell would I ever do either.

Agreed. I don't advocate finding illegal streams, they are glichy and unpredictable, but I understand why some have to do it.

The nice thing about YouTube TV is you can split it with someone, at least until they stop it. But I know people who've had it a long time and share it with no problem.

Thunder Muscle · Post #1918 » by **Thunder Muscle** » Thu Aug 21, 2025 6:28 pm

I’m kind of confused how this is all going to shake out. I get ESPN through DirecTV Stream so I think I’m good…but I struggle to think my Directv Stream will get me everything else I get currently through ESPN+ (like NHL games) or the full MLB TV package.

Post #1919 » by **ReasonablySober** » Fri Aug 22, 2025 2:56 pm

Catcher Samuel Basallo and the Baltimore Orioles are finalizing on an eight-year, $67 million contract extension, sources told ESPN, locking up one of the top prospects in baseball less than a week after his major league debut.

Basallo, who turned 21 nine days ago, is the No. 4 overall prospect in baseball, according to ESPN's Kiley McDaniel. He jumped from Low-A to Double-A as an 18-year-old, reached Triple-A last year just after his 20th birthday and crushed Triple-A pitching this season, hitting .270/.377/.589 with 23 home runs in 76 games before his promotion.

A slugging left-handed hitter who was signed out of the Dominican Republic in 2021 for $1.3 million, Basallo is regarded by a number of evaluators as the best hitter in the minor leagues this season and has impressed in his short time in the big leagues. The deal, once completed, will begin next season and includes a club option as well. It can max out at $88.5 million and is the largest pre-arbitration extension for a catcher.

Love seeing these pre-Arb extensions.

Eeavers57 · Post #1920 » by **Eeavers57** » Fri Aug 22, 2025 3:55 pm

Makes me very curious now about what they do with Quero. Would probably be less value due to injury concerns but good two-way catchers don't grow on trees. Not saying Quero is "good", and admittedly haven't watched him at all, but box score wise looks like he is bouncing back well from injury.