Social Feed

M
Last reply · posted in DISH Network Support Forum
What would be any advantage for Dish users, not like Dish is going to lay new fiber or copper lines.
I thought dish was going with their own wireless home internet
11 Replies · 2366 views
dweber
With the soon launch of the Hopper+ Dish customers will require internet service to use all the Google applications. So Dish has entered into a distribution agreement with AT&T to sell high speed internet. I wonder what sort of price break Dish customers will get on AT&T high speed internet. Living in the country I am stuck with Spectrum at $79.99 per month for 200 Mbps download and 10 Mbps upload.
M
With the soon launch of the Hopper+ Dish customers will require internet service to use all the Google applications. So Dish has entered into a distribution agreement with AT&T to sell high speed internet. I wonder what sort of price break Dish customers will get on AT&T high speed internet. Living in the country I am stuck with Spectrum at $79.99 per month for 200 Mbps download and 10 Mbps upload.
If AT&T isn't available now, then its not likely it will be anytime soon...Don't see Dish laying new lines
  • Like
Reactions: HipKat
Juan
If AT&T isn't available now, then its not likely it will be anytime soon...Don't see Dish laying new lines
Att would be laying new lines
M
Att would be laying new lines
Yes, if in a area that fiber is to be installed...Copper lines are left to die
Juan
Yes, if in a area that fiber is to be installed...Copper lines are left to die
No
Dish is only reselling existing att service
NYDutch
I don't understand the fuss, Dish has been packaging and reselling other providers Internet service for years, from DSL to cable to satellite.
Juan
I don't understand the fuss, Dish has been packaging and reselling other providers Internet service for years, from DSL to cable to satellite.
Yup...actually other providers have been bundling dish since then started
N
With the soon launch of the Hopper+ Dish customers will require internet service to use all the Google applications. So Dish has entered into a distribution agreement with AT&T to sell high speed internet. I wonder what sort of price break Dish customers will get on AT&T high speed internet. Living in the country I am stuck with Spectrum at $79.99 per month for 200 Mbps download and 10 Mbps upload.
I'd be surprised if there's any price break for combining DISH and AT&T Fiber/Internet. Because you don't even get a bundling discount for combining either DTV or DTV Stream with AT&T Fiber/Internet, and AT&T still owns 70% of DTV! AT&T Fiber is actually pretty darn price competitive to begin with and they seem to front-load any available discounts via Visa gift cards for new subs. (You get $300 or so of those when you sign up via att.com and get even more from Rakuten if you click through them as your referrer first.) They no longer even do a first-year discount on your monthly price, after which you price jumps up. Pricing now starts in most areas at a flat everyday regular price of $55/mo for 300/300 and that includes non-optional equipment rental and unlimited data. They're pretty serious about stealing away business from cable broadband.
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
N
This deal marks the second significant partnership between Dish and AT&T lately. Awhile back, the two struck a deal for Dish's cellular/wireless business (which includes brands like Boost and Ting, plus whatever Dish decides to brand their new home-grown one currently dubbed "Project Genesis") to primarily use AT&T's 4G/5G network while Dish builds out their own 5G network over the coming years. And now we have this reseller agreement for Dish to offer AT&T wired home internet service.

All this is leading up to Dish and AT&T announcing that they're going to merge their pay TV services: Dish and Sling on the one hand and DirecTV and DirecTV Stream on the other. They'll put all of them into a jointly owned private LLC with both companies getting to pick board members. Knowing Ergen, he'll prevail in ensuring that Dish has more control over the joint venture than AT&T (which shouldn't be that hard given that AT&T's current JV partner, private equity group TPG, only owns 30% of DTV but has day-to-day operational control). But the two companies will split the declining profits of the joint Dish/DTV group as satellite/cable TV sunsets over the next decade. By joining them together, they'll enjoy cost savings (e.g. combined billing, operations, customer support) and also eliminate each other's only direct competitor in satellite TV.

My guess is that this deal will be announced either this Dec. or early next year. The main worry that both sides have is that the federal government will try to block the merger, as they did 20 years ago in 2002. But obviously, times are different now, with both services bleeding subs and an increasing portion of US homes having multiple options for video entertainment via broadband. Still though, there will remain a small but significant slice of Americans, mainly rural and skewing elderly, whose only choices will be DTV or Dish, so a merger won't be good for those folks.

Being sensitive to the regulatory risk, I suspect AT&T and Dish won't want to announce the deal during the lead-up to election season. Too risky, as political candidates may denounce the deal as a talking point on the campaign trail, possibly whipping up public sentiment against the deal and increasing the chances that the FCC or DOJ would move to block it, or failing that, apply concessions to protect rural consumers from price gouging (which they absolutely should do, IMO).

So that's why I think the deal gets announced after election season is over. Announce it between Thanksgiving and Christmas, when the public is thinking about other things, not so much politics and big business. Or maybe the deal doesn't get hammered out until early 2023. At any rate, I think they'd want to have the deal completed and fully operational before 2024, when once again the country is back in election season, but an even bigger one because the presidency will be on the line.

The other option would be to wait until 2025 but that's too risky for a number of reasons. Depending on who wins the White House, the next admin may be more, not less, likely to try to stop a joint venture merger deal. And in the meantime, both sides will have seen millions more satellite subscribers cancel service. If a deal wasn't announced until Dec. 2024, it would likely be close to a year, let's say fall 2025, before the joint venture would be fully operational.

And Dish, in particular, would find fall 2025 to be getting dangerously close to the time when their current satellite fleet will no longer be sufficient to sustain nationwide service with those hundreds of local channels. Their sats only have an expected fuel supply of 15 years and all but one of their current 11 sats will have hit or exceeded 15 years of service by the end of 2026 (maybe a bit sooner, can't exactly recall). Dish will need to be making alternate arrangements for customers well before that date. Sure, it's possible, even likely, that some of their sats will exceed the stated 15-year lifespan, but depending on that is kind of like continuing to drive down the interstate when your gas gauge is on empty as opposed to taking the next exit you see and refueling. Neither Dish nor DTV will shoulder the huge expensive of building and launching another satellite because it just no longer makes financial sense given the dwindling numbers of sat TV subs they have. But DTV has a younger satellite fleet than Dish and theirs should remain operational into the early 2030s -- by which point, cable TV may no longer exist as we know it anyhow and, even if it does, the number of Americans who want to receive it via satellite would likely be so small that they would no longer constitute a viable nationwide business anyhow.

So clearly the answer is that a combined Dish/DTV joint venture will shift to broadband-based delivery of service where possible (e.g. DTV Stream) while shifting their dwindling combined base of satellite customers over to the DTV satellite fleet, which will last them long enough until the whole satellite TV business dies.

So, in summary, both services are bleeding subs and need to join forces to reduce costs and competition. There's some risk of political backlash leading to the federal government trying to stop a merger, or place conditions on it that AT&T and Dish wouldn't like. To reduce the risk of that, they'll want to announce the deal outside of election season, which at this point in American life is basically all year every even-numbered year. So their choices come down to a 2023 merger or a 2025 merger. But waiting until 2025 is undesirable for both sides -- undesirable for DTV because they're losing subs faster than Dish and may well be the smaller of the two by then; undesirable for Dish because they're losing satellites sooner than DTV and will be under the gun to address that problem by then. So expect Dish and DTV, along with their streaming siblings, to merge in 2023, with the deal announced as soon as this Dec.

Edit: One last point suggesting a 2023 merger is that AT&T's current JV partner in owning/running DTV, the private venture group TPG, is rumored to have only committed to a 3-year timeframe on that situation. They formed that JV in Aug. 2020.
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
M
No
Dish is only reselling existing att service
Yes I agree, I see no advantage to the customer
S
Last reply · posted in The Chit Chat Club
The title was to catch everyone's eye lol! But it is a thought I've been having as I dev a Roku app for a client. You see many MAAANY years ago I got really interested in cable TV channels and even chatted with a regional carrier, Insight about what it took to get a channel number. It was surprisingly easy although prohibitively expensive.



You could petition, reserve a high channel number, they monitored performance and if they liked you, you'd get lower channel number overtime and cut into ad overlays.



Roku has a similar setup. Make an app, if it has a strong, original linear component you could get channel assignment on The Roku Channel.



As mixed as my feelings are on the current media landscape, I can't help but feel a little excited interest when I scope out the apps in the Roku store.
1 Replies · 19 views
navychop
Hmmm. I think Roku will last. But will Firestick? With their backing, I guess so. Apple TV STB? Of Course. Walmart? Seems someone ought to go, but with their backing?….

Off brands have, as probably expected, very short lives.
K
Pub Member / Supporter Lifetime Supporter
Last reply · posted in TV Shows
Season 2 order already in hand:

'Star Trek: Starfleet Academy' Renewed for Season 2, Tatiana Maslany to Guest Star in Season 1

I've not been optimistic about this show based on what I've read so far. Seems to be aimed at a younger audience. Interesting though that Tatiana Maslany will have some sort of role.
94 Replies · 3691 views
harshness
Females wearing any clothing is unthinkable on Ferenginar.
  • Like
Reactions: Foxbat
long_time_Dish
Females wearing any clothing is unthinkable on Ferenginar.
Was never a huge of the Ferengi-centric episodes in Trek...
Jimbo
Was never a huge of the Ferengi-centric episodes in Trek...
Me either ...
They turned out to be a Poor adversary ....
Foxbat
They got their proper due on "Deep Space Nine"
  • Like
Reactions: long_time_Dish
long_time_Dish
They got their proper due on "Deep Space Nine"
And too many episodes centering on/around them as well...
JSheridan
Lifetime Supporter
Last reply · posted in DISH Network Support Forum
I know HipKat said that they were working on conversions but we got the official news yesterday right from Dish that starting next month all DMA's will be on the western arc, and all customers will be assigned to that. That's gonna mean a lot of customers around here aren't gonna get Dish unless there are exceptions. Too many mountains and trees.
155 Replies · 4281 views
Foxbat
Unless Dish acquires DirecTV and its mid-USA satellite slots, I may not have Dish Network to reach 40 years. Or, I guess we could buy a new house…
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
S
Even if you are broadcasting old SD-only shows, I would think advertisers would still want their commercials to look good.
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
Jimbo
Even if you are broadcasting old SD-only shows, I would think advertisers would still want their commercials to look good.
Advertisers on SD channels are probably Far and Few, very hard to find, they have very few viewers to watch them.
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
Mister B
Advertisers on SD channels are probably Far and Few, very hard to find, they have very few viewers to watch them.
I watch mostly SD channels (H&I, Start and ION, etc.). There are plenty of advertisers, this time of the year it is mostly Medicare Advantage plans, auto extended warranties and the occasional walk-in-tub. They know who is watching.
Jimbo
I watch mostly SD channels (H&I, Start and ION, etc.). There are plenty of advertisers, this time of the year it is mostly Medicare Advantage plans, auto extended warranties and the occasional walk-in-tub. They know who is watching.
Not many are watching.
Majority are watching the same shows in HD or 4K
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
S
Unless Dish acquires DirecTV and its mid-USA satellite slots, I may not have Dish Network to reach 40 years. Or, I guess we could buy a new house…
have charlie buy you a new house :biggrin :clapping
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
T
Well, I didn't immediately think of broadcast, where there are all kinds of digital "subchannels"- I remember back when digital broadcast began that supposedly the 6mhz channel would likely support just 1 HD program and that the added subchannels would likely have to remain SD. I don't watch enough broadcast to know. Are there a lot of the subchannels in SD-only, and how do they do that, like are they in 4:3 or some kind of low-res widescreen?
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
Foxbat
have charlie buy you a new house :biggrin :clapping
Unfortunately, I don't think my social proximity to Charle Ergen provides any special perks. Maybe if Foxbat, Jr. were to marry his daughter…🤞🏻🤣
S
Unfortunately, I don't think my social proximity to Charle Ergen provides any special perks. Maybe if Foxbat, Jr. were to marry his daughter…🤞🏻🤣
that would be one hell of a convo :biggrin.
  • Haha
Reactions: charlesrshell
SuperDish_Fan23
Last reply · posted in DISH Network Support Forum
Why are ViP922s So rare? like its crazy how ebay has none, i checked everywhere, also, i got a ViP222k now, which is actually activated!
35 Replies · 1085 views
S
I looked for wrecked trains on ebay and those are hard to find too!
Almighty1
I remember this in the news too...

Bobby
I remember this in the news too...

That is a misnomer. In the old days you subscribed to telephone service. That included the telephone line and one telephone. An extension cost $1 a month extra. So that $14,000 over 42 years was for the service not the leased telephone. There is no way they paid $28 a month for 42 years for a leased telephone.
SuperDish_Fan23
Why are ViP922s So rare? like its crazy how ebay has none, i checked everywhere, also, i got a ViP222k now, which is actually activated!
Whoever still has their 922, please let me know i just wanna see photos of the ui and other stuff
S
Whoever still has their 922, please let me know i just wanna see photos of the ui and other stuff

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wL6dsORmXg
T
Slicker guides never did much for me
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
Almighty1
That is a misnomer. In the old days you subscribed to telephone service. That included the telephone line and one telephone. An extension cost $1 a month extra. So that $14,000 over 42 years was for the service not the leased telephone. There is no way they paid $28 a month for 42 years for a leased telephone.
Good point as part of that time mentioned was before I was even alive.

While reports from the family's case focused entirely on the equipment rental charges, media records show that Ester Strogen originally started by paying $29.95 per quarter ($9.98 per month) in the 1960s for her combined telephone connection.
The actual base cost for standard residential telephone service over a 42-year period (spanning roughly 1964 to 2006) reveals how basic connection costs evolved compared to the equipment rental fees:

Historical Phone Service Rates
  • 1960s – 1970s Base Rate: Standard local phone service was heavily subsidized and tightly regulated under the Bell System monopoly. A basic landline package with unlimited local calling typically cost between $5.00 and $10.00 per month.
  • 1980s – 2000s Post-Deregulation Rate: Following the AT&T divestiture in 1984, base line service rates steadily climbed due to the introduction of subscriber line charges, touch-tone fees, and local infrastructure adjustments. By 2006, basic flat-rate local residential phone service hovered around $15.00 to $25.00 per month (excluding long-distance packages and taxes).
The True Lifetime Service Bill

Assuming an average baseline connection fee of roughly $12.00 a month over that 42-year span, the line connectivity itself would have realistically accumulated to approximately $6,000 in raw cash payouts.
When you bundle the actual service costs together with the escalating equipment rental fees, the total cumulative out-of-pocket phone expenses over those four decades easily crossed $12,000 to $14,000. Long-distance phone calls—which were billed entirely by the minute back then and could cost up to 15 to 30 cents per minute—would add significantly more to that historical total depending on usage.

The widely publicized calculation stems from a viral news story from 2006 involving a widow named Ester Strogen. Her family discovered she had been continuously leasing two rotary dial telephones from AT&T for 42 years.
The total cost—which actually came out to more than $14,000 by the time the lease was canceled—was calculated based on the following legacy telecom structure:
  • The Monthly Fee: At the time her granddaughters discovered the charges, the ongoing leasing fee was $29.10 per month for the two outdated phones.
  • The Math: Over 42 years (504 months), paying roughly $24 to $30 a month accumulates to between $12,000 and $14,600 ($29.10 × 504 months = $14,666.40).
Why did this happen?
Prior to the landmark breakup of AT&T ("Ma Bell") in 1984, consumers were legally not allowed to own their phones; they were required to lease them directly from the phone company.
When the laws changed and phone ownership became legal, AT&T spun off its rental division into a company called QLT Consumer Lease Services. Millions of customers, particularly elderly individuals who were used to seeing a single unified phone bill, simply never realized that the small recurring "equipment lease" line-item could be canceled by buying a cheap phone at a retail store.

Yes, leasing absolutely cost that much in reality, and the math is entirely accurate. However, the calculations performed by the family did contain one major historical nuance: they multiplied the final 2006 rate across all 42 years, which means the actual total cash paid out was likely a bit lower.
The original viral story focused on 82-year-old widow Ester Strogen from Canton, Ohio, who paid $29.10 a month for two black rotary phones until her family intervened in July 2006.
The reality behind how the cost reached that staggering total breaks down into two distinct phases:

Phase 1: The Historical Base Rate (1960s – 1984)

When Strogen first got the phones in the 1960s, renting was a legal mandate and cost a fraction of the 2006 price—usually just a few dollars a month.
  • The "Insurance" Mirage: In exchange for that fee, Ma Bell promised free, lifetime maintenance. If the phone broke, they replaced it instantly at no extra cost.
  • The Cost-Plus Reality: Because these solid-state phones were built like tanks out of heavy plastic and steel, they almost never broke. Consumers paid a continuous premium for decades for a repair service they rarely used.
Phase 2: The Deregulation Rate Hikes (1984 – 2006)

After AT&T was forced to break up its monopoly in 1984, the rental side of the business was shifted to Lucent Technologies and later a legacy holding company. To maximize profit off a shrinking customer base, they steadily increased the monthly rental fees over the next 20 years.
  • By 2006, the rental cost had quietly ballooned to roughly $14.55 per phone per month.
  • When the family discovered the $29.10 monthly charge, they looked back at the 42-year span and estimated the collective loss at over $14,000.
Even adjusted for historical inflation—where $2 a month in 1964 had the purchasing power of roughly $20 today—Ester Strogen and hundreds of thousands of other elderly Americans realistically paid thousands of dollars out-of-pocket for standard desk phones they could have purchased at retail for $10.

The exact out-of-pocket dollar amount Ester Strogen paid over those 42 years was never publicly determined, as neither AT&T nor the family had access to monthly billing records stretching all the way back to the 1960s.
The figures reported in the media are entirely mathematical estimates based on the 2006 rate. The two primary numbers used to define the "cost" are:
  • The Stated Media Total: More than $14,000.
  • The Exact Family Formula: $14,666.40. This was derived by taking her final recorded bill of $29.10 per month and multiplying it across the full 42 years (504 months).
What the True Cash Cost Likely Was

Because AT&T did not charge $29.10 a month back in 1964, the true historical cash sum she handed over was lower than $14,000. In the 1960s and 1970s, basic phone lease fees were generally bundled into standard service or itemized at just $1.00 to $2.00 a month per phone.
If we realistically assume she paid lower base rates for the first 20 years before the post-1984 deregulation price hikes took effect, a realistic estimate of the actual cash paid is between $5,000 and $7,000.

The Real Cost When Adjusted for Inflation

While the family's $14,000 calculation overestimates the raw cash paid, it actually underestimates the true economic damage when factoring in the time value of money.
Paying $2.00 a month for equipment in 1964 sounds minor, but due to severe inflation during the 1970s, those early single dollars had the purchasing power of roughly $20.00 each in 2006 terms. If you adjust every historical lower monthly payment upward to account for inflation, Ester Strogen realistically lost the equivalent of well over $15,000 in modern purchasing power by renting instead of buying.
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
S
Slicker guides never did much for me
me either. sometimes it seems like things disappear when they start changing sh*t around :biggrin
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
S
I looked for wrecked trains on ebay and those are hard to find too!
you would be better off looking in ca for a train wreck to nowhere :biggrin :p
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
jcrandall
Staff member HERE TO HELP YOU!
Last reply · posted in DIRECTV Programming Forum
So...DirecTV advertises the Choice package with 95+ bonus channels for Satellite customers. You don't want 90+ of the 95...

Excluding PPV, premium networks, infomercial, shopping, religion, and non-English programming, there are 7 channels on satellite that are not on streaming:
NFL Network, MavTV, FE TV, Free Speech, NASA, INSP, and Pursuit. I'm pretty sure a couple of those are public interest that they have to carry to meet an FCC quota on satellite.

I hope they get called out for this advertising because that is ridiculous. One big network, NFL, will probably get added to streaming when their next agreement comes up, and the rest are likely very low viewership.

What about streaming, what do you get extra with the Choice package that isn't on Satellite:
Two stations - one of which is an internet TV - Fox Weather, and Heros & Icons (a diginet). Nothing special here to look at either.

If they cleaned up a couple of their agreements, added a few public interest stations to streaming, they could probably have their lineups match. It's close now, if you take out all the garbage on satellite that they earn money on. If they can sell infomercials on satellite, why can't they on streaming, seems like a miss. A bigger miss, including those stations in the "bonus channels just for satellite customers." Pretty sad marketing right there.

1681344805401.png


Attached is a comparison sheet of satellite vs streaming for the three main packages if anyone is interested.

MOD EDIT: See Post #3 for an up to date list of what channels are available on sat but not on streaming/internet, see Post #21 for an up to date list of what's available in the app for streaming customers, but not for sat customers.
243 Replies · 31857 views
K
WNPX/28 Nashville (The new home of the Predators) and WMYD/20 Detroit (the new home of the Pistons) are testing on the stream server.
harshness
One might get the impression that what DIRECTV does, or doesn't, is becoming far less consequential than it used to be.
M
One might get the impression that what DIRECTV does, or doesn't, is becoming far less consequential than it used to be.
K
WPLG/10 Miami is now available to stream customers

The CW stations WCWW/25 South Bend and WBKP/5 Marquette are testing on the stream server

Last week they also added a bunch of CW stations that are still not available to sat customers:
WETM-DT/19 Elmira
WJET-DT/25 Erie
KLFY-DT/11 Lafayette LA
KARD-DT/15 Monroe
WVBT-DT/44 Norfolk
WTWO-DT/3 Terre Haute
WFXV-DT/34 Utica
KFDX-DT/4 Wichita Falls
M
Well, that was fast ! DTV Stream brought back WTCN's HD signal today.

I have to assume the station signing up a week ago as the Miami Heat affiliate here (to carry their games) did the trick. NBA magic !!!

Or the station engineer took care of the problem after hearing about it.
  • Like
Reactions: KyL416
D
WNPX/28 Nashville (The new home of the Predators) and WMYD/20 Detroit (the new home of the Pistons) are testing on the stream server.
Channel 28 Nashville hasn't been added so far, correct?
K
WNPX Nashville and WMYD Detroit were added to stream about 2 months ago.

They also now have PRDTRS/651 for those in Predators territory outside of the Nashville DMA and PISTONS/663-2 for those in Pistons territory outside of the Detroit DMA.
TheForce
Supporting Founder Pub Member / Supporter
Last reply · posted in The Phone & Tablet Zone
Apple Fall Hardware Event takes place today, September 9, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. PT / 1:00 p.m. ET. It marks the debut of new CEO John Ternus and the expected reveal of Apple's first foldable phone.
132 Replies · 1450 views
comfortably_numb
Can't remember if I've posted this yet..


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfL5seXJyWU
  • Haha
Reactions: slow_poke_pete
Foxbat
If you ponied up for an iPhone Duo, keep it away from anything other than your soft, fleshy fingertips. No fingernails, no dust, sand, dirt, or other particulate matter. And don't bend it more than it needs to. Zack has destroyed $2,000 of Apple hardware to get those views, which should cover his expenses.
​
  • Like
Reactions: comfortably_numb
comfortably_numb
No fingernails, no dust, sand, dirt, or other particulate matter

And definitely no medieval chain armor!
  • Haha
Reactions: Foxbat
harshness
medieval chain armor
Aka "mail" or "maille".
Foxbat
IFixIt has published their Teardown and they had some positive things to say about the iPhone Duo. It still showed some dust ingress into the hinge assembly but seemed otherwise well-sealed.
​

But with a considerable number of reports of the main screen dying with similar failures, AppleCare+ should be a no-brainer for this phone.
S

most carriers do. that's why they send updates that slow phones down!! i buy unlocked phones no effect to me
S
IFixIt has published their Teardown and they had some positive things to say about the iPhone Duo. It still showed some dust ingress into the hinge assembly but seemed otherwise well-sealed.
​

But with a considerable number of reports of the main screen dying with similar failures, AppleCare+ should be a no-brainer for this phone.

hope you have apple care a screen job is 1000.00 :oops:. can we say over priced garbage!!!
meStevo
Lifetime Supporter
Last reply · posted in The Sports Section
Schedule drops tomorrow. Mandatory mini camps in June. Hall of Fame game August 6th.
127 Replies · 2305 views
  • Like
Reactions: Jimbo and dfergie
rvvaquero
Jerry Jones and Jimmy Johnson had an argument about who was responsible for the dynasty building of the early 90's Cowboys.

The rest of us figured it out in about 3 years, Jerry has had over 30 years but still can't admit it. It's all he lives for, to show everyone he can put together a winner. I don't think he can. His kids only know what he taught them.
Y
Jerry Jones and Jimmy Johnson had an argument about who was responsible for the dynasty building of the early 90's Cowboys.

The rest of us figured it out in about 3 years, Jerry has had over 30 years but still can't admit it. It's all he lives for, to show everyone he can put together a winner. I don't think he can. His kids only know what he taught them.
Johnson built it, but without the Herschel Walker trade, it never happens.
  • Like
Reactions: b4pjoe
b4pjoe
Johnson built it, but without the Herschel Walker trade, it never happens.
Jerry made himself General Manager after he bought the team but make no mistake Jimmy engineered that trade. As well as a lot of others at the time.
rvvaquero
Jimmy Johnson is a football guy. Jerry Jones is a marketer (hustler).

When I see a football player get a 15 yard penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct (like taunting) in a close game, I often wonder what he was thinking. Was he thinking, I'm doing everything I can to make this a better team and help win a championship? Or, was he saying to himself, I want everyone to notice how great I am?

Johnson inspires one, Jones the other.
  • Like
Reactions: b4pjoe and Mike0616
meStevo
Got to unfurl and hold the flag at Allegiant for the anthem today - amazing experience.
  • Like
Reactions: Mike0616 and Foxbat
TWiT Tech Podcast Network
· posted in TWiT Tech Podcast Network
0 Replies · 6 views
TWiT Tech Podcast Network
· posted in TWiT Tech Podcast Network
0 Replies · 12 views
TWiT Tech Podcast Network
· posted in TWiT Tech Podcast Network
0 Replies · 2 views