Plus, I haven't even heard your response acknowledging/attempting to contradict my clearly correct point that he wasn't fired because he wasn't profitable.
Simmons may be suicidal. He's lost his gravy train and his Malcolm Gladwell induced boyfriend Daryl Moron is making a fool of himself.
He literally had the idea for the whole series. Now wait. You're first thought was to ask me which of them he's directed. To my knowledge he has directed none of them. You said he has nothing to do with 30 for 30. He founded it. It was his idea. It's hard for me to imagine a way that you could respond to this in your typical condescending fashion given how completely wrong you are, but please, don't let that stop you from trying.
He started it, like how do you not get that. "Currently" doesn't matter. Currently Steve Jobs has nothing to do with Apple, your logic is dumb.
If the series was his concept, then he obviously had "something to do with it", arguing past that is arbitrary.
We aren't discussing value. Hat says he has nothing to do with it. We show him that Simmons started it. Yall say he currently has nothing to do with it. Logic would dictate when you start something you perpetually have something to do with it because without you it would not exist.
You keep arguing value. It's silly. All their personalities are practically without value. People aren't tuning in to see Bill Simmons or Jalen Rose or Doug Collins. Sure they listen/watch Mike & Mike or Colin Cowherd but if ESPN replaced them tomorrow they'd be just fine. So maybe Grantland isn't a cash cow, I'm sure other affiliated sites such as 538 aren't doing much either for their bottom line either.
Let's do a quick recap: 1. People argue Simmons is worthless and that ESPN would be doing a disservice to shareholders by renewing his contract at his current salary or even a higher salary. People argue Simmons brings in less revenue than his salary, which is the MAIN reason he was let go. Response: I show that ESPN bankrolled his main venture (Grantland) and that ESPN was more than willing to accept the likely possibility that the venture would turn absolutely zero profit. Thus, the smart people are right, he was fired for the things he's said, which continued to irk the ESPN brass. 2. I say Simmons is responsible for some of ESPN's best content. People laugh at me. Hat says I'm crazy, and that Simmons isn't responsible for live games, OTL or 30 for 30. I show that 30 for 30 was Simmons focking idea, its creation is quite literally his doing. Droski continues this idiotic "value" argument, which has already been proved incorrect. Then some folks make the argument that Simmons doesn't currently have anything to do with 30 for 30, which is really funny because it's his god da** creation. This is a valuable lesson on how to not let your opinion of someone impair your ability to think. Thanks for playing.
I assure you Doug Collins and jalen rose aren't making $4 mil a year. Chris Berman probably is. Why do you think that is? In what world does a business pay people $4 mil a year to people "practically without value." Certainly not a company as notoriously cheap as ESPN. Obviously Simmons is worth more than jalen rose to ESPN. Or at least was till he started launching products that lost millions. I despise mike and Mike, but their program makes a fortune. If you think they couldn't get away with calling goodell without balls you are kidding yourself.
