PDA

View Full Version : B1G Hockey: The Countdown Begins



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 [38] 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

blackswampboy
05-01-2013, 12:43 PM
They'll never change it. You're dreaming if you think they will. And until they do, I'll keep living here in the real, tangible world instead of using hopes and dreams as basis of my arguments. Which is what any rational, competent AD is doing.

Hey, World War III could happen and none of us could be here in 15 years. Should we discuss that possibility too?

guess I'm just a glass-half-full kinda guy, and you're glass-half-empty.
plus, you obviously enjoy paying for crap that somebody else says you should watch.

[longing for the old days when my basic cable provider gave me the CBC and Fox Sports Detroit, and I could watch HNIC and the Redwings. before they arbitrarily cut both, and stuck me with more unwanted crap.]

mnstate0fhockey
05-01-2013, 12:44 PM
guess I'm just a glass-half-full kinda guy, and you're glass-half-empty.
plus, you obviously enjoy paying for crap that somebody else says you should watch.

[longing for the old days when my basic cable provider gave me the CBC and Fox Sports Detroit, and I could watch HNIC and the Redwings. before they arbitrarily cut both, and stuck me with more unwanted crap.]

No, I'm just grounded in reality.

4four4
05-01-2013, 12:55 PM
Not going to argue about this, so I'll leave it at this. I think that article is absolutely ridiculous. Look at the monopoly on sports networking ESPN has had for years. Not to mention, a monopoly isn't really the right word for what the BTN is. As long as the BTN is on the basic tier for cable providers, and people keep paying subscriptions, the Big Ten will continue to collect revenue from it. And as much as Chris wants to complain about that, I don't see that changing anytime soon if ever.

You should really stop reading the crap Chris posts.

Correct. If people want to go to the subscription route I recommend they purchase a Roku or an Apple TV streaming device.

FlagDUDE08
05-01-2013, 01:01 PM
sure, it's possible that cable doesn't change for another xx years.
but the force of free markets is on the side of change. eventually. even if I can't tell my local provider that I don't want Bravo, some day I'll be able to switch to a provider who gives me more of what I really want. not the same ESPN, Lifetime, Oxygen filler that now goes coast-to-coast.
let's think big here.
although...when that happens, the BTN payoff will take a hit. the downside of economic freedom.
so it's a risk. if you're the AD, do you bank on that cable TV bubble every year?

One thing to understand is that it actually has to do with the television-providing conglomerates. The ESPN stations are of course owned by Disney (who also owns ABC and that family). Then you have Comcast (NBCs, Bravo, I think also Food Network), the CBS family (not sure who owns them, I think maybe Viacom who has the MTV and Nickelodeon networks), NewsCorp (all of the FOX stations), Turner, Sony, the list goes on. Each company is willing to sell you a station individually (average I think around $3 per station per set per month), or in order to maximize their revenue stream, they'll bundle it all up and give you a cheaper price. It's just like why the preloaded computers are much cheaper than the simple hardware and no OS: advertising.

blackswampboy
05-01-2013, 01:11 PM
Not going to argue about this, so I'll leave it at this. I think that article is absolutely ridiculous. Look at the monopoly on sports networking ESPN has had for years. Not to mention, a monopoly isn't really the right word for what the BTN is. As long as the BTN is on the basic tier for cable providers, and people keep paying subscriptions, the Big Ten will continue to collect revenue from it. And as much as Chris wants to complain about that, I don't see that changing anytime soon if ever.

oh, I see you've revised your post.

you've misread some things. nobody said that BTN is a monopoly. hell no.
the monopoly is in the cable industry--but we've beaten that to death already.

nobody is blaming BTN for negotiating a sweet deal with comcast. nope, I'd take that deal too.
the point is that contracts expire, industries change, and cable payoffs are a bubble deal. the cash is great now, but not reliable in the calculation to support a hockey program 5-10 years down the road. and you better believe that ADs are looking down the road when starting up expensive programs.
this is really not that complicated.

mnstate0fhockey
05-01-2013, 01:21 PM
oh, I see you've revised your post.

you've misread some things. nobody said that BTN is a monopoly. hell no.
the monopoly is in the cable industry--but we've beaten that to death already.

nobody is blaming BTN for negotiating a sweet deal with comcast. nope, I'd take that deal too.
the point is that contracts expire, industries change, and cable payoffs are a bubble deal. the cash is great now, but not reliable in the calculation to support a hockey program 5-10 years down the road. and you better believe that ADs are looking down the road when starting up expensive programs.
this is really not that complicated.

I didn't revise anything. And really, have no interest in going round-and-round on this topic. We get it, you don't like paying for networks you don't watch. Problem is, I think you'll be stipuck with that for the forseeable future unless you switch to a Internet streaming device.

As far as the Big Ten and BTN go, I don't think there is any rational reason to worry about diminishing revenues. In fact, I think the revenues will only continue to grow.

You're right about one thing. it really isn't that complicated. I'll leave it at that.

4four4
05-01-2013, 01:28 PM
Since, my wife decided to get rid of cable( I mean we decided to get rid of cable.) I wish the BTN would have their own channel on Roku and Apple TV it would make my life easier. ;)

blackswampboy
05-01-2013, 01:30 PM
I didn't revise anything.
I'll leave it at that.

wrong. you revised multiple posts.

Last edited by mnstate0fhockey; Today at 12:40 PM.
Last edited by mnstate0fhockey; Today at 01:38 PM.

I don't mind a friendly debate, but that's impossible when you keep changing what you said. lol.
unlike you, I really will leave it at that.

mnstate0fhockey
05-01-2013, 01:38 PM
wrong. you revised multiple posts.

Last edited by mnstate0fhockey; Today at 12:40 PM.
Last edited by mnstate0fhockey; Today at 01:38 PM.

I don't mind a friendly debate, but that's impossible when you keep changing what you said. lol.
unlike you, I really will leave it at that.

I'm typing from an iPad and the auto-correct keeps changing my words. I've made minor grammatical changes, or clarified my thoughts, but the substance of my posts hasn't changed.

Honestly, not sure why this even matters. If you quote me in your replies to me, you'll see exactly what you are replying to.

Going to move on before this discussion becomes even more bizzare.

5mn_Major
05-01-2013, 01:43 PM
the point is that contracts expire, industries change, and cable payoffs are a bubble deal. the cash is great now, but not reliable in the calculation to support a hockey program 5-10 years down the road. and you better believe that ADs are looking down the road when starting up expensive programs.
this is really not that complicated.

That is true. But keep in mind that the reason this is an issue is that cable has a stranglehold on TV. As a result, they could push down channel payouts. But that dominance shouldn't last that long either. As other channels increase, BTN's bargaining position will strengthen, not weaken. Couple that with a blue sky opportunity to grow televised college hockey with the pro hockey crowd in the midwest, northeast and Canada to much, much greater interest than it is today.

Future trends can go both ways.

pgb-ohio
05-01-2013, 02:17 PM
But...at some point all those programs had to sign over their rights to the conference, and everyone split the money from that. So why wouldn't the same apply to hockey? I dunno, if I was Iowa or Nebraska or Purdue I'd be pretty ****ed that I'm sharing my baseball money with Wisconsin but Wisconsin is swanning off with $2 million in hockey money that I don't get.

Now that I think about it, though -- maybe the baseball schools ARE getting money that Wisconsin's not (like maybe from the College World Series), and we just don't know about it. I think we need more information than just an unsourced tweet that says we're getting $2 million.Interesting question on Wisconsin baseball; wish we had the additional info.

As others have argued, though, the other sports that have any realistic chance of operating at a surplus are offered by all member schools. If anyone can think of another example beyond the single case of Wisconsin opting out of Baseball, please speak up.

But in general, the principle of nothing ventured, nothing gained should apply. Those shouldering the expenses upfront are responsible for any financial losses that result; why shouldn't the same schools keep any gains that are realized? The non-hockey schools have never been asked to help the rest of us cover past operating losses from hockey. Nor would such a request have been appropriate. If all members are putting money on the table, providing competition, staging games, etc.; then "share and share alike" should apply. Just because you're not winning games doesn't mean you're not contributing to the common effort. But if you don't field a team at all... well, you get the idea.

pinch
05-01-2013, 02:20 PM
Since, my wife decided to get rid of cable( I mean we decided to get rid of cable.) I wish the BTN would have their own channel on Roku and Apple TV it would make my life easier. ;)

You don't need Roku or Apple TV, you need a new wife

giwan
05-01-2013, 02:50 PM
BTN is being stated as a money boon. Curious who watches BTN and what is it that you watch?

Clifton
05-01-2013, 02:54 PM
BTN is being stated as a money boon. Curious who watches BTN and what is it that you watch?

Beyond the Barbasol ads, not too much.

mnstate0fhockey
05-01-2013, 02:59 PM
BTN is being stated as a money boon. Curious who watches BTN and what is it that you watch?

Hockey. The occasional football or basketball game (not a huge fan of either sport). Occasionally a special they have on.

badger79
05-01-2013, 03:07 PM
BTN is being stated as a money boon. Curious who watches BTN and what is it that you watch?

Football, basketball, hockey (when it's on). The Journey (which is a really well-done behind-the-scenes show). I watched the Wisconsin spring game which they showed live this year.

I like BTN's highlight shows too, for football and basketball. I remember when Wisconsin played Duke at the Kohl Center in basketball, and we won and the ESPN highlights were all "DUKE DUKE DUKE DUKE" (which...I don't know what I expected). There was like one highlight focusing on what Wisconsin had done right. Turn to BTN and it's all about Wisconsin.

WiscDC
05-01-2013, 03:58 PM
BTN is being stated as a money boon. Curious who watches BTN and what is it that you watch?

Sometimes I'll tune into The Journey. Other than that, it's only specific games that I want to watch. Usually that means hockey (UW or otherwise), UW football or basketball, and the occasional football/basketball game that is on BTN and I'd rather watch than those on CBS or the ESPN networks. In the spring, I'll watch some lacrosse, though only 3 Big Ten teams (not including Maryland) have it, and it's not of the same magnitude as on the east coast, especially the mid-Atlantic, where I'm from. I sometimes like watching some baseball, but the Big Ten isn't nearly as big/good in baseball as other leagues (so there isn't as much of a spectacle to watch and enjoy as a neutral fan, the way I watch some college hockey games), and Wisconsin doesn't have a team. I tend to end up watching Major League Baseball over a Big Ten game.

I'd like to see more shows like The Journey for other sports. Especially hockey. Because, you know, college hockey! (and videos/shows produced by the Big Ten Conference are usually pretty cool)

Edit: Volleyball, too, on occasion. If it's in Madison, I'm probably at the Field House, not watching on TV.

ExileOnDaytonStreet
05-01-2013, 04:21 PM
I'm mostly just interested in sports networks for actual live sports programming.

Beyond that, I might watch a highlight show, but the only one I really make an effort for is when I'm at the gym and I can put on NBCSN's The 'Lights on the treadmill's mini-TV.

My only interest related to BTN at this point is whether the Nielsen ratings people are tracking my box, so they can record it when I change the channel after a game is still tied after overtime.

ETA: I explicitly avoid EPSN at all costs (even online), unless its to watch a live sporting event. Absolutely zero SportsCenter, First Take, PTI, etc. I've complained about those shows too much to continue watching them.

5mn_Major
05-01-2013, 04:23 PM
BTN is being stated as a money boon. Curious who watches BTN and what is it that you watch?

i wasn't too interested in the last couple of years. But it grows on you. You watch one game...then another...then you find yourself seeing whats on.

A year ago...I only watched local team basketball. This year I have found myself watching basketball from other teams in the big ten, hockey, football (which I'd never really had time for before) and even wrestling. Not that I watch that much...but its easily in my top 5 now.

blackswampboy
05-01-2013, 04:35 PM
BTN is being stated as a money boon. Curious who watches BTN and what is it that you watch?

I've caught my 85-year-old dad watching women's volleyball. even though he's a hawkeye, that's not why he watches... (is there a smiley for lechery?)