birdog1960

I watched via apple tv - the feed was no where near hdtv broadcast quality. the new apple tv is $150.

there's a difference between understandable but technically flawed and indiscernible and unrecognizable as any language. as stated elsewhere, it speaks to the validity of "college" sports.

people who don't know when they are being insulted are weak minded.

whaley is not having a good week.

this kind of stuff makes me believe that hbo's "ballers" have some real insiders helping to write episodes. there are so many characters that can be paralleled in the league. cwatkin's appears to be a prime candidate. infinity credit line…and the financial graveyard that is nfl's stars history as collateral. i've no love for the financial industry but they know a losing bet more often than not. so how much is infinity to a banker?

can we all agree that this was a boneheaded move for someone with aspirations for major endorsement deals? the guy obviously finds high earnings a sign of success yet sabotages his own potential. i had to check out his pepsi deal. this http://www.tigernet.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=1473070 is what i found. i'm guessing he banked 1-2k for that one. the adidas deal was done before he became a bill along with carlos hyde. i'm guessing neither are being featured internationally to sell sneakers, shirts and sandals. you can't argue with a straight face that he's endeared himself to consumer product marketers that sell to the very people that he implicitly ridiculed. i see the loser here as watkins, not the people he tried to dump on.

then you should understand how much more difficult it is to resurrect your image than it is to initially build it.

from business insider: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/bills-wide-receiver-goes-instagram-163931566.html. was briefly on the front page of yahoo finance. I wonder if any adidas or pepsi c levels saw it.

oh boy...

I'm offended for buffalo fans that meet the description that Watkins disparaged.

yep. I bet that's what he intended. it's really insulting to point out that someone is lower profile than an nfl player. I know i'd be offended! i'm fine regardless. I couldn't care less what this guy thinks about anything. his opinion is worthless to me. now if he lives up to his draft ranking, that's worth something.

how is thew use of having blue collar job as an insult to anyone, not an insult to everyone with a blue collar job? It simply is. if you can't follow that reasoning then it's not worth continuing. there is nothing in his statement to suggest that this was what he meant. this is a quantum leap from what he wrote.

and for the last time, he criticized those people for their blue collar jobs. that was the substance of his insult. it wasn't that they were stupid or ugly or weak or uncoordinated. it was that they were in loser, low level jobs and at lowly societal levels. perhaps you could make an argument that he didn't realize that his words would convey this meaning but I doubt it's true. I think that's exactly what he meant.

wow. awesome. I bet the guys in the western new york bottling plant are psyched!

i'd say he just provided some pretty strong evidence of this.

and I suspect that outside of this forum, you are aligned with thevast majority of people. if nothing else, this was an incredibly stupid business decision. don't see him ever selling soup or mac and cheese on commercials, do you?

we will agree to disagree then. at any rate, it's bad behavior and it should be embarrassing to those associated with him. sadly, many of those people are probably defending him as well. that's not going to help him when statistically he's likely to be broke and doing some "little" job 3 years out of the league.

so when he denigrates those on instagram with little jobs, others with "little" jobs have no cause to be offended? of course they do. he's judging everyone that doesn't have an important job like catching footballs and running fast...

and you know this how? it amazes me that so many here rabidly hate writers that our critical of the bills but it's fine for a player to be critical of fans.

I would be willing to bet that he has acquaintances, family members and friends that meet his criteria for people with little, hopeless jobs. he's denigrating them as well. I can't believe people are defending him. he's a tool and a spoiled, immature fool. besides that, he's clearly not very bright..

from a nerd site: 54% of tweets on stream quality were negative. http://digiday.com/brands/despite-technical-problems-15-million-people-watched-yahoos-nfl-live-stream/ "Fifty-four percent of the tweets during the game were categorized as negative, according to data from Brandwatch. Some of that conversation centered around people complaining about the stream not being TV-quality, including freezing or jumping."

of course they are. the owners just made millions more. won't make a bit of difference. i'm sure all of the players that will eventually bid will be motivated to do better however. it's still likely to go to the highest bidder regardless of the quality they can deliver.

I expected better quality. simple as that. I thought the technology was further evolved. it's clearly not. but it's about money as always and I don't doubt that the nfl and the company that wins the bidding war to regularly stream games will conclude it's good enough for now for all of us lowly fans.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/10/yahoo-nfl-streaming-bills-jaguars-score-streaming-buffering-yahoo-exclusive-rights-fees-london-review-first-time. I think this review sums it up nicely. "it's was not as good as tv". plus the money implications are clearly spelled out. Why does anything happen in business? Money. The loot. Gettin’ paid. Though none of the major NFL network deals are up until 2021 (MNF on ESPN goes through then, the NBC, Fox and CBS packages go through 2022), this mostly successful telecast gives the NFL huge leverage the next time they go to the negotiating table. It’s not rocket science: Whenever there are more potential bidders, it’s good for the party auctioning things. And for a first try, this worked well and is only going to get better. Yahoo! proved that it, Google, Netflix, Amazon or whoever, could do this right now. And with that Thursday Night Football package that’s with CBS on a year-to-year basis right now, don’t be shocked it the courtship between the NFL and the Internet becomes more serious very soon..

I actually think it does mean it was a failure. it seems a significant percentage of viewers had problems. if Netflix had a similar percentage (based solely on anecdotal reports, I admit) how well do you think their biz model would be doing? I vudu offered conversion of your dvd's to hd and stored them digitally for you and they played back poorly for a sizeable number of customers, how doi you think that would work out. I'm a bit of a video hobbyist so the little things matter to me. as a sports fan, the issues involved in sports broadcast especially interest me. the video equipment and broadcast tech of just a few years ago had great difficulty resolving fast moving golf balls and hockey pucks (my gold standards for resolution and video processing). now, they do it damn well. but if a finite number of viewers can't reliably watch a slow moving football on a broadcast, then that's a fail. I just hope the pga or nhl don't decide to try google anytime soon.