Photo

Van Pelt leaving SVP & Russillo


  • Please log in to reply
74 replies to this topic

#61 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,295 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 14 May 2015 - 12:00 AM

Well I guess I didn't make it simple enough. They're free agents. You have the ability to offer whatever. Who would you be willing to offer more to? Who would get more on the open market?

 
I edited in a further answer to your question.


But again.... I thinks Simmons has slightly broader skills. I think those skills are slightly more 'valuable'...  but if you don't factor in the cost to obtain, it's a pointless discussion.


It's not pointless. It's a discussion about who brings more money in. That's the point and it's a key one in the context of this conversation.

Of course they're going to pay people based on what think they're worth, so if they're willing to pay Simmons much more, that suggests they think he brings in enough money to justify the additional cost. Obviously we aren't talking about paying Simmons exactly what he brings in while paying SVP a million less than what he brings in.

#62 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,295 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 14 May 2015 - 12:01 AM

Ok, so second highest.

#63 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 155,717 posts

Posted 14 May 2015 - 12:06 AM

Ok, so second highest.

 

It's not pointless. It's a discussion about who brings more money in. That's the point and it's a key one in the context of this conversation.

Of course they're going to pay people based on what think they're worth, so if they're willing to pay Simmons much more, that suggests they think he brings in enough money to justify the additional cost. Obviously we aren't talking about paying Simmons exactly what he brings in while paying SVP a million less than what he brings in.

 

So, it appears that others who were making less than him (maybe including SVP) were bringing in more money then him.

 



#64 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 155,717 posts

Posted 14 May 2015 - 12:17 AM

OTOH... a counter to the Big Lead from Awful Announcing:
http://awfulannounci...appen-next.html

@JimMiller

There were no significant negotiations going on between @BillSimmons & @espn; no $ requests from his side on table at all. #Simmons

 

Miller, who quite literally wrote the book on ESPN and is widely regarded as having the best sources and information at the network, doubled down again that it was not money in his article breaking down the divorce.

 


Simmons made a point of not putting forth any specific requests—a pre-emptive strike against ESPN trying to say later, “We were unwilling to meet his demands so we didn’t renew him.” But no dollar amounts were specified, and no actual back-and-forth negotiations went on.

Minus any set of definitive demands from the Simmons team, ESPN negotiators didn’t have much to say “no” to. Both sides retreated, then ESPN never re-engaged.”



#65 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,295 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 14 May 2015 - 12:19 AM

Ok, so second highest.

 
It's

not pointless. It's a discussion about who brings more money in. That's the point and it's a key one in the context of this conversation.


Of course they're going to pay people based on what think they're worth, so if they're willing to pay Simmons much more, that suggests they think he brings in enough money to justify the additional cost. Obviously we aren't talking about paying Simmons exactly what he brings in while paying SVP a million less than what he brings in.


 
So, it appears that others who were making less than him (maybe including SVP) were bringing in more money then him.


 


Others whose contact wasn't up yet. And that's lacking context, most importantly trying to parse out the individuals value from the situation they are in. Put any solid radio host(s) in the best time slots on national ESPN radio, and that show will bring in a lot of money. Of course if you have two hosts you have to split the salary, which is why Cowherd is likely worth so much. If we were to do media personality over replacement personality, Simmons would do much better than SVP IMO, and again, I like SVP. But I think a lot of people can do what he does without seeing a huge impact on the ratings. Maybe that won't be the case with the new show, we'll have to wait and see.

#66 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 155,717 posts

Posted 14 May 2015 - 12:23 AM

 
Others whose contact wasn't up yet. And that's lacking context, most importantly trying to parse out the individuals value from the situation they are in. Put any solid radio host(s) in the best time slots on national ESPN radio, and that show will bring in a lot of money. Of course if you have two hosts you have to split the salary, which is why Cowherd is likely worth so much. If we were to do media personality over replacement personality, Simmons would do much better than SVP IMO, and again, I like SVP. But I think a lot of people can do what he does without seeing a huge impact on the ratings. Maybe that won't be the case with the new show, we'll have to wait and see.

 




 



I pretty much agree with this, but if the discussion is who brings in more money in... well then an argument could be made that SVP was bringing in more money.

 

SVP is replaceable. So is Simmons.



#67 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,295 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 14 May 2015 - 12:27 AM

 

Others whose contact wasn't up yet. And that's lacking context, most importantly trying to parse out the individuals value from the situation they are in. Put any solid radio host(s) in the best time slots on national ESPN radio, and that show will bring in a lot of money. Of course if you have two hosts you have to split the salary, which is why Cowherd is likely worth so much. If we were to do media personality over replacement personality, Simmons would do much better than SVP IMO, and again, I like SVP. But I think a lot of people can do what he does without seeing a huge impact on the ratings. Maybe that won't be the case with the new show, we'll have to wait and see.
 




 




I pretty much agree with this, but if the discussion is who brings in more money in... well then an argument could be made that SVP was bringing in more money.
 
SVP is replaceable. So is Simmons.


I highly doubt that he was bringing in more money. He's also not nearly as coveted as Simmons from everything I've read. Simmons is viewed as more of a revenue driver from what I gather than the vast majority of other sports media personalities.

#68 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 155,717 posts

Posted 14 May 2015 - 12:36 AM

I highly doubt that he was bringing in more money. He's also not nearly as coveted as Simmons from everything I've read. Simmons is viewed as more of a revenue driver from what I gather than the vast majority of other sports media personalities.

 

Simmons was a vanity project for ESPN, who didn't really generate any revenue for them. I highly doubt Simmons vehicles were more profitable for ESPN than SVP / Russillo...  and if you think SVP was more easily replaceable in his position, or that any radio show on ESPN would generate revenue.... yeah, I would agree. But you said the discussion was who brings in more money. If that is the discussion, then SVP was probably the answer.

Someone is going to pay Simmons a boatload of money for having 10% of ESPN.com's audience, even though ESPN.com's audience and ESPN's promotion were clearly extremely important in Grantland's growth.

And I'm glad that will happen. He will put out good content, and hire others who will do the same. Some site will significantly improve in terms of content, or he will create his own vehicle and add another interesting voice.

 



#69 SportsGuy

SportsGuy

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,979 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 14 May 2015 - 04:36 AM

Who knew Weber would be so sensitive about Simmons. :)

#70 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,295 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 14 May 2015 - 06:09 AM

I highly doubt that he was bringing in more money. He's also not nearly as coveted as Simmons from everything I've read. Simmons is viewed as more of a revenue driver from what I gather than the vast majority of other sports media personalities.

 
Simmons was a vanity project for ESPN, who didn't really generate any revenue for them. I highly doubt Simmons vehicles were more profitable for ESPN than SVP / Russillo...  and if you think SVP was more easily replaceable in his position, or that any radio show on ESPN would generate revenue.... yeah, I would agree. But you said the discussion was who brings in more money. If that is the discussion, then SVP was probably the answer.


Someone is going to pay Simmons a boatload of money for having 10% of ESPN.com's audience, even though ESPN.com's audience and ESPN's promotion were clearly extremely important in Grantland's growth.


And I'm glad that will happen. He will put out good content, and hire others who will do the same. Some site will significantly improve in terms of content, or he will create his own vehicle and add another interesting voice.


 


Grantland may be a vanity project, but Simmons by himself is not.

#71 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,295 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 14 May 2015 - 06:13 AM

Who knew Weber would be so sensitive about Simmons. :)



The reason this has had so many posts recently is because of Stoner's position on what is more valuable. And perhaps me being argumentative. Perhaps. I should have just gone to bed.

#72 DJ MC

DJ MC

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,680 posts
  • LocationBeautiful Bel Air, MD

Posted 14 May 2015 - 03:23 PM

Others whose contact wasn't up yet. And that's lacking context, most importantly trying to parse out the individuals value from the situation they are in. Put any solid radio host(s) in the best time slots on national ESPN radio, and that show will bring in a lot of money. Of course if you have two hosts you have to split the salary, which is why Cowherd is likely worth so much. If we were to do media personality over replacement personality, Simmons would do much better than SVP IMO, and again, I like SVP. But I think a lot of people can do what he does without seeing a huge impact on the ratings. Maybe that won't be the case with the new show, we'll have to wait and see.


I don't want to make a separate thread, and really this could go in the National thread instead of here, but since you brought up Cowherd Deadspin has mentioned a rumor recently that he's looking to leave to go into political talk-radio.


@DJ_McCann

#73 Cisc-O's

Cisc-O's

    Back by no demand

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,087 posts
  • LocationFresh Prince of .......

Posted 14 May 2015 - 03:36 PM


I don't want to make a separate thread, and really this could go in the National thread instead of here, but since you brought up Cowherd Deadspin has mentioned a rumor recently that he's looking to leave to go into political talk-radio.

Fox is his next step....


<p>I am pretty sure Shack is thinking of PBR.

#74 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 16 May 2015 - 12:54 PM

It has been. Don't know if he will be moving to LA.  I kind of doubt it.

Isn't it the 1 AM show with Verrett and Everett, the only SC that broadcasts from LA?

 

The current midnight show is Flores/John Anderson, I thought was in Bristol, could be wrong though.


  • BSLChrisStoner likes this
@levineps

#75 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 155,717 posts

Posted 16 May 2015 - 01:03 PM

Isn't it the 1 AM show with Verrett and Everett, the only SC that broadcasts from LA?

 

The current midnight show is Flores/John Anderson, I thought was in Bristol, could be wrong though.

 

Ahh, think you are right.

Flores and Anderson have been tinkering with a SC format change... they take off the ties, and give more commentary. Would imagine SVPs version will be an extension of that.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors


 width=