Where the money's at.

[Jolly]

Listening to a Saints podcast the other day and caught a really interesting tidbit. The two guys on the podcast were discussing all things Saints, but before they finished, the conversation lurched over into how sports media was changing. Both guys were young guys, still working their way up in the biz.

Both agreed that writing for websites such as SBNATION couldn't put groceries on the table or pay the rent. Even writing for better paying sites in new media, such as The Athletic, would barely buy baloney. Interestingly enough, newspapers still paid enough to barely scrape by, but those jobs were very scarce.

For the last year or so, most their income had come from podcasts and YouTube. And then it happened. The explosion of on-line gaming.

Suddenly, every betting site in the known world wanted film studies and team information, either for in-house odds tweaking, or proprietary information for the site's bettors. The pay is much, much better.

How much better? One of the guys was finally able to get married. The other guy, who is married and has one child, was able to buy a home.

I find that interesting. Wonder if it's just a temporary phenomenon?

[Mik]

Interesting. Journalism has always been primarily a labor of love. Not very many folks made a great living. Maybe this can change at least the sports side of that.

[Copper]

@jolly said in Where the money's at.:

Wonder if it's just a temporary phenomenon?

The house always wins

In order to sustain the industry, they have to keep people addicted without getting too greedy.

[LuFins Dad]

I can't and won't gamble on sports. While I get that it drives interest up for the casual fan, I just can't and am worried about the impact that gambling can have.

I've even turned my back on Fantasy Football...

[LuFins Dad]

If I did gamble on sports, I would definitely take the Steelers to beat the 12 point spread in Sunday night's game. I would also take the moneyline at $500 for Pittsburgh to win straight up.

[Mik]

I'd take the Steelers and 12 too. But like you I am not a gambler. Not on sports, not in casinos. I enjoy horse racing every now and then, but I take 420 to gamble with. $2 a race, and when it's gone, it's gone. It's entertainment.

[LuFins Dad]

@mik said in Where the money's at.:

I'd take the Steelers and 12 too. But like you I am not a gambler. Not on sports, not in casinos. I enjoy horse racing every now and then, but I take 420 to gamble with. $2 a race, and when it's gone, it's gone. It's entertainment.

I used to go to a harness racing track with my Mom & Dad when I was 11-12. I had a pretty decent little handicapping system, too. My dad would bet my picks strictly on a show ticket and I'd typically walk out $15-20 ahead...

[Mik]

I grew up around a harness track. My dad was a teller occasionally. I do much better picking harness races than thorougbreds.

[Copper]

@mik said in Where the money's at.:

I grew up around a harness track.

We used to go to the harness track in Foxboro it was at the present location of Gillette Field - Pats home field. It is gone now.

I think it was on Thursday that they had Grocery Night for the jockey's wives.

As long as they didn't get too greedy it was OK if the jockeys told their wives the results before the race happened. And the wives made grocery money. Of course it wasn't talked about, right out in the open.

At least that was the rumor, I never saw any proof. But the old guys would curse Grocery Night if they didn't like a result on Thursday night.