***The Official Philadelphia Phillies 2013 Thread***

1…7677798182…85

Comments

  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 12,964
    $7.00 - cost for 2/15/14 for my Comcast.

    here's what I got:
    37 live men's college basketball games including 30 in crystal clear high definition on 3 TVs.
    2 local Philly area sports channels.
    All over-the-air free tv stations including access to Winter Olympics coverage including the great Men's Hockey USA-Russia game.
    5 music channels including one that showed PJ Lightning Bolt and PJ Twenty this evening.
    15 separate movie channels (granted 95% of the movies suck)
    the Weather Channel (only mention because this is NOT offered by DirectV
    Every major cable channel that shows all those reality TV shows.
    Internet service currently with 4 devices using it. which gives me access to even more college hoops game should I desire.
    Land line phone service.

    look at all that content I received today for the price of a Wawa lunch, a small to medium pizza, or the price of 1 beer at any philly pro sports game.

    and that's an unreasonable price???
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,598
    edited February 2014
    pjhawks said:

    $7.00 - cost for 2/15/14 for my Comcast.

    here's what I got:
    37 live men's college basketball games including 30 in crystal clear high definition on 3 TVs.
    2 local Philly area sports channels.
    All over-the-air free tv stations including access to Winter Olympics coverage including the great Men's Hockey USA-Russia game.
    5 music channels including one that showed PJ Lightning Bolt and PJ Twenty this evening.
    15 separate movie channels (granted 95% of the movies suck)
    the Weather Channel (only mention because this is NOT offered by DirectV
    Every major cable channel that shows all those reality TV shows.
    Internet service currently with 4 devices using it. which gives me access to even more college hoops game should I desire.
    Land line phone service.

    look at all that content I received today for the price of a Wawa lunch, a small to medium pizza, or the price of 1 beer at any philly pro sports game.

    and that's an unreasonable price???

    You cannot be this dumb. Nobody can. Go back and reread what we were talking about because you completely did not understand the conversation. You're making a fool of yourself and I actually feel bad for you at this point.
    Post edited by The Juggler on
    www.myspace.com
  • jamminpearls
    jamminpearls Posts: 7,078
    edited February 2014
    pjhawks said:

    $7.00 - cost for 2/15/14 for my Comcast.

    here's what I got:
    37 live men's college basketball games including 30 in crystal clear high definition on 3 TVs.
    2 local Philly area sports channels.
    All over-the-air free tv stations including access to Winter Olympics coverage including the great Men's Hockey USA-Russia game.
    5 music channels including one that showed PJ Lightning Bolt and PJ Twenty this evening.
    15 separate movie channels (granted 95% of the movies suck)
    the Weather Channel (only mention because this is NOT offered by DirectV
    Every major cable channel that shows all those reality TV shows.
    Internet service currently with 4 devices using it. which gives me access to even more college hoops game should I desire.
    Land line phone service.

    look at all that content I received today for the price of a Wawa lunch, a small to medium pizza, or the price of 1 beer at any philly pro sports game.

    and that's an unreasonable price???
    </blockquote
    Haha

    Go Birds!!!!
  • Cliffy6745
    Cliffy6745 Posts: 34,036
    Hahahhahha. That has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

    image
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,598
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Vw2CrY9Igs

    AMERICA!
    www.myspace.com
  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 12,964
    The Juggler said:

    pjhawks said:

    $7.00 - cost for 2/15/14 for my Comcast.

    here's what I got:
    37 live men's college basketball games including 30 in crystal clear high definition on 3 TVs.
    2 local Philly area sports channels.
    All over-the-air free tv stations including access to Winter Olympics coverage including the great Men's Hockey USA-Russia game.
    5 music channels including one that showed PJ Lightning Bolt and PJ Twenty this evening.
    15 separate movie channels (granted 95% of the movies suck)
    the Weather Channel (only mention because this is NOT offered by DirectV
    Every major cable channel that shows all those reality TV shows.
    Internet service currently with 4 devices using it. which gives me access to even more college hoops game should I desire.
    Land line phone service.

    look at all that content I received today for the price of a Wawa lunch, a small to medium pizza, or the price of 1 beer at any philly pro sports game.

    and that's an unreasonable price???

    You cannot be this dumb. Nobody can. Go back and reread what we were talking about because you completely did not understand the conversation. You're making a fool of yourself and I actually feel bad for you at this point.

    so you never said it was an unreasonable price we were paying and even showed an article comparing what we are paying to what they pay in France???? really, come on dude. did you already forget you did that? must have been too much fruity beer last night?

    go Creighton

    :))
  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 12,964
    The Juggler said:

    Jearlpam0925 said:

    You certainly are an idiot.

    ....it's that kind of thinking that allows things like this to h
    pjhawks said:


    as for charging too much I pay about $200 a month for cable (with the sports tiers, hbo starz, and 3 HD receivers), phone and internet combined and have had maybe 3 or 4 service problems in about 20 years. I really don't think that's unreasonable at all.



    this is the problem. you don't think it is unreasonable...because you don't know any better. and that is EXACTLY how comcast, verizon, and our government want you to be.

    did you know that people in other countries pay about a quarter of this for the same service? it's actually better service (especially regarding internet speeds and stuff) because there is more competition there, which encourages more innovation and lower prices. we are getting screwed in this country. people need to dig a little deeper and not accept the status quo.

    long read, but a worthwhile one:

    http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2014/02/comcast-time-warner-acquisition-competition-cable-internet-monopoly.html

    here's your exact post saying it was unreasonable. dope.
  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 12,964
    edited February 2014
    jamminpearls said:

    pjhawks said:

    $7.00 - cost for 2/15/14 for my Comcast.

    here's what I got:
    37 live men's college basketball games including 30 in crystal clear high definition on 3 TVs.
    2 local Philly area sports channels.
    All over-the-air free tv stations including access to Winter Olympics coverage including the great Men's Hockey USA-Russia game.
    5 music channels including one that showed PJ Lightning Bolt and PJ Twenty this evening.
    15 separate movie channels (granted 95% of the movies suck)
    the Weather Channel (only mention because this is NOT offered by DirectV
    Every major cable channel that shows all those reality TV shows.
    Internet service currently with 4 devices using it. which gives me access to even more college hoops game should I desire.
    Land line phone service.

    look at all that content I received today for the price of a Wawa lunch, a small to medium pizza, or the price of 1 beer at any philly pro sports game.

    and that's an unreasonable price???


    but let me guess you have some form of cable and you pay the price they set? if you think the price is unreasonable yet you still pay it you are fucking sap and a dope. it's moronic to think a price is unreasonable yet still pay it.
  • jamminpearls
    jamminpearls Posts: 7,078
    pjhawks said:

    jamminpearls said:

    pjhawks said:

    $7.00 - cost for 2/15/14 for my Comcast.

    here's what I got:
    37 live men's college basketball games including 30 in crystal clear high definition on 3 TVs.
    2 local Philly area sports channels.
    All over-the-air free tv stations including access to Winter Olympics coverage including the great Men's Hockey USA-Russia game.
    5 music channels including one that showed PJ Lightning Bolt and PJ Twenty this evening.
    15 separate movie channels (granted 95% of the movies suck)
    the Weather Channel (only mention because this is NOT offered by DirectV
    Every major cable channel that shows all those reality TV shows.
    Internet service currently with 4 devices using it. which gives me access to even more college hoops game should I desire.
    Land line phone service.

    look at all that content I received today for the price of a Wawa lunch, a small to medium pizza, or the price of 1 beer at any philly pro sports game.

    and that's an unreasonable price???


    but let me guess you have some form of cable and you pay the price they set? if you think the price is unreasonable yet you still pay it you are fucking sap and a dope. it's moronic to think a price is unreasonable yet still pay it.
    I have Comcast triple pay with DVR and sports package. It also comes with the premium channels,HBO,Cinemax,etc. I only pay 130 after taxes and charges. I'm not getting involved in this other then to say if everyone else see's it one way and you don't, maybe you should reevaluate your thinking. This isn't like the Howard,Carter topics,it's pretty cut and dry.
    Go Birds!!!!
  • Cliffy6745
    Cliffy6745 Posts: 34,036
    Dude, the specific dollar amount we currently pay was such a small aspect of what we are talking about. The point was other people pay less and get more than we do because of competition. Good god
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,598
    edited February 2014
    pjhawks said:

    The Juggler said:

    Jearlpam0925 said:

    You certainly are an idiot.

    ....it's that kind of thinking that allows things like this to h
    pjhawks said:


    as for charging too much I pay about $200 a month for cable (with the sports tiers, hbo starz, and 3 HD receivers), phone and internet combined and have had maybe 3 or 4 service problems in about 20 years. I really don't think that's unreasonable at all.



    this is the problem. you don't think it is unreasonable...because you don't know any better. and that is EXACTLY how comcast, verizon, and our government want you to be.

    did you know that people in other countries pay about a quarter of this for the same service? it's actually better service (especially regarding internet speeds and stuff) because there is more competition there, which encourages more innovation and lower prices. we are getting screwed in this country. people need to dig a little deeper and not accept the status quo.

    long read, but a worthwhile one:

    http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2014/02/comcast-time-warner-acquisition-competition-cable-internet-monopoly.html

    here's your exact post saying it was unreasonable. dope.
    is this really that difficult? why don't you actually take a few minutes and read that article... or read the one jp posted? here it is again:
    http://business.time.com/2013/01/09/is-broadband-internet-access-a-public-utility/

    my point is simple. everyone in this country is paying 3 to 4 times more than the rest of the world (developed countries obviously) for a lesser service. you seem to be overjoyed by this fact for some reason. a lot of areas in this country have no other choice. some do...i have a choice in my area, but the other company offers essentially the same product, the same poor customer service, for the the same high fucking price. monopoly/duopoly--depends where you live. either way, the consumer loses.

    and your 7 dollar per day example earlier?....that's about what some people pay for 2 weeks worth of service elsewhere.
    Post edited by The Juggler on
    www.myspace.com
  • Cliffy6745
    Cliffy6745 Posts: 34,036
    http://gizmodo.com/how-comcast-twc-will-end-your-all-you-can-internet-buff-1523899968/@sarah-hedgecock

    So this is the stuff I have an issue with. My issue comes in with this stuff, not the acquisition as a whole
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,598
    trip down memory lane about the phils failed rebuild during the 80's. fun read. names like jeltz, stone, hayes, schu, carmen, and gross will make you both smile, and puke up your breakfast at the same time though:

    http://www.thegoodphight.com/2013/11/1/5050378/the-phillies-rebuild-of-the-mid-80s-the-revolution-will-not-be
    www.myspace.com
  • JK_Livin
    JK_Livin South Jersey Posts: 7,365
    I can still picture Gary Redus blowing Don Carmen's perfect at SF.
    Alright, alright, alright!
    Tom O.
    "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
    -The Writer
  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 12,964
    The Juggler said:

    trip down memory lane about the phils failed rebuild during the 80's. fun read. names like jeltz, stone, hayes, schu, carmen, and gross will make you both smile, and puke up your breakfast at the same time though:

    http://www.thegoodphight.com/2013/11/1/5050378/the-phillies-rebuild-of-the-mid-80s-the-revolution-will-not-be

    that brings back a lot of memories. boy did those teams from 84-92 suck. bad prospects and sorry retread veterans.

    it's those years why I am very cautious when people say we should be starting guys like Galvis over Rollins.
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,598
    pjhawks said:

    The Juggler said:

    trip down memory lane about the phils failed rebuild during the 80's. fun read. names like jeltz, stone, hayes, schu, carmen, and gross will make you both smile, and puke up your breakfast at the same time though:

    http://www.thegoodphight.com/2013/11/1/5050378/the-phillies-rebuild-of-the-mid-80s-the-revolution-will-not-be

    that brings back a lot of memories. boy did those teams from 84-92 suck. bad prospects and sorry retread veterans.

    it's those years why I am very cautious when people say we should be starting guys like Galvis over Rollins.
    they were actually pretty good in 1986....would have been a wild card if it existed then.

    galvis...haha..........jp crawford is this team's next short stop if all goes well.
    www.myspace.com
  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 12,964
    The Juggler said:

    pjhawks said:

    The Juggler said:

    trip down memory lane about the phils failed rebuild during the 80's. fun read. names like jeltz, stone, hayes, schu, carmen, and gross will make you both smile, and puke up your breakfast at the same time though:

    http://www.thegoodphight.com/2013/11/1/5050378/the-phillies-rebuild-of-the-mid-80s-the-revolution-will-not-be

    that brings back a lot of memories. boy did those teams from 84-92 suck. bad prospects and sorry retread veterans.

    it's those years why I am very cautious when people say we should be starting guys like Galvis over Rollins.
    they were actually pretty good in 1986....would have been a wild card if it existed then.

    galvis...haha..........jp crawford is this team's next short stop if all goes well.
    yea '86 they weren't bad but the Mets were awesome so it never felt like you had a chance.

    hopefully Crawford can be that in the future but he has only played rookie ball to this point out of high school. long way to go to being a full time starting major league shortstop. galvis will most likely have to bridge that gap.
  • JK_Livin
    JK_Livin South Jersey Posts: 7,365
    Lets not forget about the 94-2000 years.
    Alright, alright, alright!
    Tom O.
    "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
    -The Writer
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,598
    pjhawks said:

    The Juggler said:

    pjhawks said:

    The Juggler said:

    trip down memory lane about the phils failed rebuild during the 80's. fun read. names like jeltz, stone, hayes, schu, carmen, and gross will make you both smile, and puke up your breakfast at the same time though:

    http://www.thegoodphight.com/2013/11/1/5050378/the-phillies-rebuild-of-the-mid-80s-the-revolution-will-not-be

    that brings back a lot of memories. boy did those teams from 84-92 suck. bad prospects and sorry retread veterans.

    it's those years why I am very cautious when people say we should be starting guys like Galvis over Rollins.
    they were actually pretty good in 1986....would have been a wild card if it existed then.

    galvis...haha..........jp crawford is this team's next short stop if all goes well.
    yea '86 they weren't bad but the Mets were awesome so it never felt like you had a chance.

    hopefully Crawford can be that in the future but he has only played rookie ball to this point out of high school. long way to go to being a full time starting major league shortstop. galvis will most likely have to bridge that gap.
    crawford is the future. he could be our top prospect come this time next year (already 3rd in most places). rollins has a vesting option and will probably be back for 2015. so hopefully crawford is ready in 2016 or sooner.
    www.myspace.com
  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 12,964
    The Juggler said:

    pjhawks said:

    The Juggler said:

    pjhawks said:

    The Juggler said:

    trip down memory lane about the phils failed rebuild during the 80's. fun read. names like jeltz, stone, hayes, schu, carmen, and gross will make you both smile, and puke up your breakfast at the same time though:

    http://www.thegoodphight.com/2013/11/1/5050378/the-phillies-rebuild-of-the-mid-80s-the-revolution-will-not-be

    that brings back a lot of memories. boy did those teams from 84-92 suck. bad prospects and sorry retread veterans.

    it's those years why I am very cautious when people say we should be starting guys like Galvis over Rollins.
    they were actually pretty good in 1986....would have been a wild card if it existed then.

    galvis...haha..........jp crawford is this team's next short stop if all goes well.
    yea '86 they weren't bad but the Mets were awesome so it never felt like you had a chance.

    hopefully Crawford can be that in the future but he has only played rookie ball to this point out of high school. long way to go to being a full time starting major league shortstop. galvis will most likely have to bridge that gap.
    crawford is the future. he could be our top prospect come this time next year (already 3rd in most places). rollins has a vesting option and will probably be back for 2015. so hopefully crawford is ready in 2016 or sooner.
    best case scenario sure but this franchise has been very slow to bring up younger players. Crawford will barely be 21 years of age in 2016. Hopefully he is the exception and can step right in at that point. where is scheduled to play this year? still A ball?
This discussion has been closed.

Categories