(01-29-2014 12:45 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  this is only going to push schools to go back to focusing more on academics

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:I know many will not want to believe this, but the reality is the money stream is pretty much played out at this point

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:cable TV is on the brink right now and losing subscribers year over year for the first time in history and they really have no way to deal with it

comcrap is charging for exceeding bandwidth now


that's all I could stomach of what you think is an epic

If the players end up getting paid, I could see the recruiting process ending up just like the NFL draft with the college touch. Teams will give kids complete physical exams (drug tests included), invasive background checks and their own version of the Wonderlic. It will go from coaches pitching sunshine and rainbows to what many NFL athletes compare to a meat market. Though, the sunshine and rainbows pitch from coaches will remain and make it seem even dirtier. If they have to answer to the union when cutting said player, P5 teams will want to insure they are dedicating money to the right athletes.

(01-29-2014 03:09 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 11:18 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Players can have their scholarships not renewed for another year. It doesn't happen at an extreme level now. "Firing" someone is much easier and more socially acceptable.

That won't be so easy. Remember we're talking about unions here. All the player has to do is take the matter up with the union rep to try to get it reversed. It happens all the time, if you have a good and strong union like the cops, firefighters and emts do.

With that said recruiters better be sure that the player they want will be one that will produce for X number of years otherwise he'll just be playing the bench game and picking up his "stipend" with no chance for the coach to look for someone else because it would be expensive for the university to fight the appeal.

I can see the players union, if it comes about, getting concessions on transfer rules and multi-year scholarships which will create the problem you identified for the schools. Our own new FB coach came in and weeded out players he thought were either slacking or trouble makers. Under a multi-year scholarship rule, he couldn't do that. Many other new coaches do the same thing in order to create a better climate within their programs.

(01-29-2014 04:17 PM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote:  If the players end up getting paid, I could see the recruiting process ending up just like the NFL draft with the college touch. Teams will give kids complete physical exams (drug tests included), invasive background checks and their own version of the Wonderlic. It will go from coaches pitching sunshine and rainbows to what many NFL athletes compare to a meat market. Though, the sunshine and rainbows pitch from coaches will remain and make it seem even dirtier. If they have to answer to the union when cutting said player, P5 teams will want to insure they are dedicating money to the right athletes.

you just figured out my baby daddy momma comment.....deyz gonna want some moneyz.....now dammit

(01-29-2014 04:00 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:45 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  this is only going to push schools to go back to focusing more on academics

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:I know many will not want to believe this, but the reality is the money stream is pretty much played out at this point

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:cable TV is on the brink right now and losing subscribers year over year for the first time in history and they really have no way to deal with it

comcrap is charging for exceeding bandwidth now


that's all I could stomach of what you think is an epic

what makes you believe there are any new large revenue streams that have not been tapped out at the upper tier for conferences....the PAC 12 network and LHN failing to gain broad carriage shows that cable companies are pushing back and not just accepting new networks especially ones with high carriage fees

and again in the FUTURE at the top there will be more emphasis on academics and the fact that payouts are being somewhat based on APR shows that the schools at the top are willing to have academics come into play

and what in the hell does bandwidth (an internet factor) have to do with cable TV companies losing cable TV subscribers?.......that makes no sense at all

and comcast is hardly the arbiter of how internet providers will behave in the future as well....but alas TV subscribers were being discussed not internet

(01-29-2014 06:05 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 04:00 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:45 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  this is only going to push schools to go back to focusing more on academics

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:I know many will not want to believe this, but the reality is the money stream is pretty much played out at this point

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:cable TV is on the brink right now and losing subscribers year over year for the first time in history and they really have no way to deal with it

comcrap is charging for exceeding bandwidth now


that's all I could stomach of what you think is an epic

what makes you believe there are any new large revenue streams that have not been tapped out at the upper tier for conferences....the PAC 12 network and LHN failing to gain broad carriage shows that cable companies are pushing back and not just accepting new networks especially ones with high carriage fees

and again in the FUTURE at the top there will be more emphasis on academics and the fact that payouts are being somewhat based on APR shows that the schools at the top are willing to have academics come into play

and what in the hell does bandwidth (an internet factor) have to do with cable TV companies losing cable TV subscribers?.......that makes no sense at all

and comcast is hardly the arbiter of how internet providers will behave in the future as well....but alas TV subscribers were being discussed not internet

you really just showed your arse....and I ain't going to give you the diligence....but will give you your due....capiche?

(01-29-2014 06:05 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 04:00 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:45 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  this is only going to push schools to go back to focusing more on academics

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:I know many will not want to believe this, but the reality is the money stream is pretty much played out at this point

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:cable TV is on the brink right now and losing subscribers year over year for the first time in history and they really have no way to deal with it

comcrap is charging for exceeding bandwidth now


that's all I could stomach of what you think is an epic

what makes you believe there are any new large revenue streams that have not been tapped out at the upper tier for conferences....the PAC 12 network and LHN failing to gain broad carriage shows that cable companies are pushing back and not just accepting new networks especially ones with high carriage fees

and again in the FUTURE at the top there will be more emphasis on academics and the fact that payouts are being somewhat based on APR shows that the schools at the top are willing to have academics come into play

and what in the hell does bandwidth (an internet factor) have to do with cable TV companies losing cable TV subscribers?.......that makes no sense at all

and comcast is hardly the arbiter of how internet providers will behave in the future as well....but alas TV subscribers were being discussed not internet

Anyone cutting the cord is likely replacing their lost cable with streaming alternatives. Streaming takes tons of bandwidth. So, Comcast is charging extra for its internet customers that hog bandwidth.

I said it on another thread--content and delivery of TV entertainment costs money. The people providing those services will be paid one way or another.

The cable model offered bundles that allowed the greatest variety of programming ever assembled to be offered at a fairly reasonable price. Hundreds of networks tailored to virtually any interest are available. The price of offering that variety was subsidizing some products you probably never watch.

Yes, it will be cheaper to pay ala carte for a handful of networks. But you will likely pay a higher price per network. Additionally, many niche networks that you rarely watch will simply disappear. What we will likely end up with is higher prices, fewer choices, and metered internet usage that works more like an electricity bill (no more flat rate).

Maybe the union will chip in for stadium, practice facility upgrades, etc.

Or the players could just turn pro and see if fans watch players or their favorite team.

(01-29-2014 06:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 06:05 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 04:00 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:45 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  this is only going to push schools to go back to focusing more on academics

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:I know many will not want to believe this, but the reality is the money stream is pretty much played out at this point

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:cable TV is on the brink right now and losing subscribers year over year for the first time in history and they really have no way to deal with it

comcrap is charging for exceeding bandwidth now


that's all I could stomach of what you think is an epic

what makes you believe there are any new large revenue streams that have not been tapped out at the upper tier for conferences....the PAC 12 network and LHN failing to gain broad carriage shows that cable companies are pushing back and not just accepting new networks especially ones with high carriage fees

and again in the FUTURE at the top there will be more emphasis on academics and the fact that payouts are being somewhat based on APR shows that the schools at the top are willing to have academics come into play

and what in the hell does bandwidth (an internet factor) have to do with cable TV companies losing cable TV subscribers?.......that makes no sense at all

and comcast is hardly the arbiter of how internet providers will behave in the future as well....but alas TV subscribers were being discussed not internet

Anyone cutting the cord is likely replacing their lost cable with streaming alternatives. Streaming takes tons of bandwidth. So, Comcast is charging extra for its internet customers that hog bandwidth.

I said it on another thread--content and delivery of TV entertainment costs money. The people providing those services will be paid one way or another.

The cable model offered bundles that allowed the greatest variety of programming ever assembled to be offered at a fairly reasonable price. Hundreds of networks tailored to virtually any interest are available. The price of offering that variety was subsidizing some products you probably never watch.

Yes, it will be cheaper to pay ala carte for a handful of networks. But you will likely pay a higher price per network. Additionally, many niche networks that you rarely watch will simply disappear. What we will likely end up with is higher prices, fewer choices, and metered internet usage that works more like an electricity bill (no more flat rate).

thank you and it's really intertwined with this topic.....the masses really don't get how it's going to change

edit: .......just to clarify, I don't have the end result answer

(01-29-2014 06:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 06:05 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 04:00 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:45 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  this is only going to push schools to go back to focusing more on academics

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:I know many will not want to believe this, but the reality is the money stream is pretty much played out at this point

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:cable TV is on the brink right now and losing subscribers year over year for the first time in history and they really have no way to deal with it

comcrap is charging for exceeding bandwidth now


that's all I could stomach of what you think is an epic

what makes you believe there are any new large revenue streams that have not been tapped out at the upper tier for conferences....the PAC 12 network and LHN failing to gain broad carriage shows that cable companies are pushing back and not just accepting new networks especially ones with high carriage fees

and again in the FUTURE at the top there will be more emphasis on academics and the fact that payouts are being somewhat based on APR shows that the schools at the top are willing to have academics come into play

and what in the hell does bandwidth (an internet factor) have to do with cable TV companies losing cable TV subscribers?.......that makes no sense at all

and comcast is hardly the arbiter of how internet providers will behave in the future as well....but alas TV subscribers were being discussed not internet

Anyone cutting the cord is likely replacing their lost cable with streaming alternatives. Streaming takes tons of bandwidth. So, Comcast is charging extra for its internet customers that hog bandwidth.

I said it on another thread--content and delivery of TV entertainment costs money. The people providing those services will be paid one way or another.

The cable model offered bundles that allowed the greatest variety of programming ever assembled to be offered at a fairly reasonable price. Hundreds of networks tailored to virtually any interest are available. The price of offering that variety was subsidizing some products you probably never watch.

Yes, it will be cheaper to pay ala carte for a handful of networks. But you will likely pay a higher price per network. Additionally, many niche networks that you rarely watch will simply disappear. What we will likely end up with is higher prices, fewer choices, and metered internet usage that works more like an electricity bill (no more flat rate).

comcast is only one of many internet providers and in most areas people have a choice of internet providers (although with dish and direct TV they have a choice of TV providers as well)......but it is dish or direct TV (can't remember which) that is leading the charge against adding sports programming specifically especially ones that charge a high carriage fee and that is at any tier level of service which is why the PAC 12 network can't get on with that provider

and the internet is nothing like delivering electricity or natural gas or most other utilities so the idea that metered internet will come into play really does not hold water

the restrictions on bandwidth usage come about because of the physical limitations of the infrastructure (much more prevalent on cable vs DSL because of the shared last mile) and the cost to overcome those limitations continues to drop and along with that the competition from 4G and other wireless providers continues to increase and the ability of those providers to make more efficient use of and add more capacity to existing infrastructure increases as well

when same piece of fiber trenched in the ground can deliver 2X the amount of bandwidth for half the cost because of a few pieces of improved equipment there is no need to meter bandwidth

same with wireless when the same tower location with the same fiber backbone can deliver much more wireless capacity there is no need to move towards metered usage and to do so would be death for any provider that tried it

that is as opposed to electricity that you simply can't add a new spectrum of light in your routers (or transformers) to carry more current and you still have to generate the current to supply the end user and the inputs (fuel) to make that electricity continue to increase in cost

vs the internet where server farms are cheaper and cheaper to run because of shared servers, more efficient servers and again the increases in bandwidth from the same strands of fiber

the multiple stories about university fan attendance, major bowl attendance, (super bow attendance which is somewhat, but not entirely weather related) all in decline all leads to the fact that people have reached their limits of what they are willing to pay for sports programming live or on any form of medium and that hits the majors (or limits them) as much or more than anyone

and even if comcast is charging more for bandwidth usage that does not change the fact that people are ditching cable at a rate that exceeds people signing up for cable for the first time in history and as of now there is really not a standardized large scale mechanism for a conference or network to monetize sports viewers (there are smaller ones and espn, but none of those are on a major scale) and with first row and others many can watch all the sports programming they wish for free

and as of now most conferences have not really hammered out how they will monetize internet carriage either on their own or in partnership with a network

No offense to Todge but this person sure is long-winded. Seriously Todge do you think most of the posters here like to read so much? We're not in school anymore. Cut your answers and you'll probably get more responses. Just some friendly advice.

(01-29-2014 07:13 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 06:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 06:05 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 04:00 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:45 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  this is only going to push schools to go back to focusing more on academics

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:I know many will not want to believe this, but the reality is the money stream is pretty much played out at this point

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:cable TV is on the brink right now and losing subscribers year over year for the first time in history and they really have no way to deal with it

comcrap is charging for exceeding bandwidth now


that's all I could stomach of what you think is an epic

what makes you believe there are any new large revenue streams that have not been tapped out at the upper tier for conferences....the PAC 12 network and LHN failing to gain broad carriage shows that cable companies are pushing back and not just accepting new networks especially ones with high carriage fees

and again in the FUTURE at the top there will be more emphasis on academics and the fact that payouts are being somewhat based on APR shows that the schools at the top are willing to have academics come into play

and what in the hell does bandwidth (an internet factor) have to do with cable TV companies losing cable TV subscribers?.......that makes no sense at all

and comcast is hardly the arbiter of how internet providers will behave in the future as well....but alas TV subscribers were being discussed not internet

Anyone cutting the cord is likely replacing their lost cable with streaming alternatives. Streaming takes tons of bandwidth. So, Comcast is charging extra for its internet customers that hog bandwidth.

I said it on another thread--content and delivery of TV entertainment costs money. The people providing those services will be paid one way or another.

The cable model offered bundles that allowed the greatest variety of programming ever assembled to be offered at a fairly reasonable price. Hundreds of networks tailored to virtually any interest are available. The price of offering that variety was subsidizing some products you probably never watch.

Yes, it will be cheaper to pay ala carte for a handful of networks. But you will likely pay a higher price per network. Additionally, many niche networks that you rarely watch will simply disappear. What we will likely end up with is higher prices, fewer choices, and metered internet usage that works more like an electricity bill (no more flat rate).

comcast is only one of many internet providers and in most areas people have a choice of internet providers (although with dish and direct TV they have a choice of TV providers as well)......but it is dish or direct TV (can't remember which) that is leading the charge against adding sports programming specifically especially ones that charge a high carriage fee and that is at any tier level of service which is why the PAC 12 network can't get on with that provider

and the internet is nothing like delivering electricity or natural gas or most other utilities so the idea that metered internet will come into play really does not hold water

the restrictions on bandwidth usage come about because of the physical limitations of the infrastructure (much more prevalent on cable vs DSL because of the shared last mile) and the cost to overcome those limitations continues to drop and along with that the competition from 4G and other wireless providers continues to increase and the ability of those providers to make more efficient use of and add more capacity to existing infrastructure increases as well

when same piece of fiber trenched in the ground can deliver 2X the amount of bandwidth for half the cost because of a few pieces of improved equipment there is no need to meter bandwidth

same with wireless when the same tower location with the same fiber backbone can deliver much more wireless capacity there is no need to move towards metered usage and to do so would be death for any provider that tried it

that is as opposed to electricity that you simply can't add a new spectrum of light in your routers (or transformers) to carry more current and you still have to generate the current to supply the end user and the inputs (fuel) to make that electricity continue to increase in cost

vs the internet where server farms are cheaper and cheaper to run because of shared servers, more efficient servers and again the increases in bandwidth from the same strands of fiber

the multiple stories about university fan attendance, major bowl attendance, (super bow attendance which is somewhat, but not entirely weather related) all in decline all leads to the fact that people have reached their limits of what they are willing to pay for sports programming live or on any form of medium and that hits the majors (or limits them) as much or more than anyone

and even if comcast is charging more for bandwidth usage that does not change the fact that people are ditching cable at a rate that exceeds people signing up for cable for the first time in history and as of now there is really not a standardized large scale mechanism for a conference or network to monetize sports viewers (there are smaller ones and espn, but none of those are on a major scale) and with first row and others many can watch all the sports programming they wish for free

and as of now most conferences have not really hammered out how they will monetize internet carriage either on their own or in partnership with a network

....newest member of the sj club......

furthest I got.....

"comcast is only one of many internet providers and in most areas"

you have no clue about outlying areas and how streaming is the key.....you should've been a politician or lawyer.....never re-elected with disbarment as the next step

(01-29-2014 07:13 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 06:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 06:05 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 04:00 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:45 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  this is only going to push schools to go back to focusing more on academics

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:I know many will not want to believe this, but the reality is the money stream is pretty much played out at this point

exactly the opposite at the top

Quote:cable TV is on the brink right now and losing subscribers year over year for the first time in history and they really have no way to deal with it

comcrap is charging for exceeding bandwidth now


that's all I could stomach of what you think is an epic

what makes you believe there are any new large revenue streams that have not been tapped out at the upper tier for conferences....the PAC 12 network and LHN failing to gain broad carriage shows that cable companies are pushing back and not just accepting new networks especially ones with high carriage fees

and again in the FUTURE at the top there will be more emphasis on academics and the fact that payouts are being somewhat based on APR shows that the schools at the top are willing to have academics come into play

and what in the hell does bandwidth (an internet factor) have to do with cable TV companies losing cable TV subscribers?.......that makes no sense at all

and comcast is hardly the arbiter of how internet providers will behave in the future as well....but alas TV subscribers were being discussed not internet

Anyone cutting the cord is likely replacing their lost cable with streaming alternatives. Streaming takes tons of bandwidth. So, Comcast is charging extra for its internet customers that hog bandwidth.

I said it on another thread--content and delivery of TV entertainment costs money. The people providing those services will be paid one way or another.

The cable model offered bundles that allowed the greatest variety of programming ever assembled to be offered at a fairly reasonable price. Hundreds of networks tailored to virtually any interest are available. The price of offering that variety was subsidizing some products you probably never watch.

Yes, it will be cheaper to pay ala carte for a handful of networks. But you will likely pay a higher price per network. Additionally, many niche networks that you rarely watch will simply disappear. What we will likely end up with is higher prices, fewer choices, and metered internet usage that works more like an electricity bill (no more flat rate).

comcast is only one of many internet providers and in most areas people have a choice of internet providers (although with dish and direct TV they have a choice of TV providers as well)......but it is dish or direct TV (can't remember which) that is leading the charge against adding sports programming specifically especially ones that charge a high carriage fee and that is at any tier level of service which is why the PAC 12 network can't get on with that provider

and the internet is nothing like delivering electricity or natural gas or most other utilities so the idea that metered internet will come into play really does not hold water

the restrictions on bandwidth usage come about because of the physical limitations of the infrastructure (much more prevalent on cable vs DSL because of the shared last mile) and the cost to overcome those limitations continues to drop and along with that the competition from 4G and other wireless providers continues to increase and the ability of those providers to make more efficient use of and add more capacity to existing infrastructure increases as well

when same piece of fiber trenched in the ground can deliver 2X the amount of bandwidth for half the cost because of a few pieces of improved equipment there is no need to meter bandwidth

same with wireless when the same tower location with the same fiber backbone can deliver much more wireless capacity there is no need to move towards metered usage and to do so would be death for any provider that tried it

that is as opposed to electricity that you simply can't add a new spectrum of light in your routers (or transformers) to carry more current and you still have to generate the current to supply the end user and the inputs (fuel) to make that electricity continue to increase in cost

vs the internet where server farms are cheaper and cheaper to run because of shared servers, more efficient servers and again the increases in bandwidth from the same strands of fiber

the multiple stories about university fan attendance, major bowl attendance, (super bow attendance which is somewhat, but not entirely weather related) all in decline all leads to the fact that people have reached their limits of what they are willing to pay for sports programming live or on any form of medium and that hits the majors (or limits them) as much or more than anyone

and even if comcast is charging more for bandwidth usage that does not change the fact that people are ditching cable at a rate that exceeds people signing up for cable for the first time in history and as of now there is really not a standardized large scale mechanism for a conference or network to monetize sports viewers (there are smaller ones and espn, but none of those are on a major scale) and with first row and others many can watch all the sports programming they wish for free

and as of now most conferences have not really hammered out how they will monetize internet carriage either on their own or in partnership with a network

Metered internet already exists. The guy who owns the last mile of cable/wire/pipe leading into the home always gets paid. The truth is the current internet system would instantly collapse if everyone was streaming all their television entertainment. Even now, Netflix is often unusable in many areas during peak usage times.

The answer is increasing capacity---but that's not cheap. The internet providers will build that extra infrastructure capacity---but they will expect to earn the money back somehow. Nothing is free. My guess is that when the system begins to bog down with too many streamers, the internet companies will begin to move toward metered usage as a way to bridge the gap until they can significantly improve capacity. When that happens, the increased costs will slow the jailbreak from cable.

(01-30-2014 08:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 07:13 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 06:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 06:05 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 04:00 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  exactly the opposite at the top


exactly the opposite at the top


comcrap is charging for exceeding bandwidth now


that's all I could stomach of what you think is an epic

what makes you believe there are any new large revenue streams that have not been tapped out at the upper tier for conferences....the PAC 12 network and LHN failing to gain broad carriage shows that cable companies are pushing back and not just accepting new networks especially ones with high carriage fees

and again in the FUTURE at the top there will be more emphasis on academics and the fact that payouts are being somewhat based on APR shows that the schools at the top are willing to have academics come into play

and what in the hell does bandwidth (an internet factor) have to do with cable TV companies losing cable TV subscribers?.......that makes no sense at all

and comcast is hardly the arbiter of how internet providers will behave in the future as well....but alas TV subscribers were being discussed not internet

Anyone cutting the cord is likely replacing their lost cable with streaming alternatives. Streaming takes tons of bandwidth. So, Comcast is charging extra for its internet customers that hog bandwidth.

I said it on another thread--content and delivery of TV entertainment costs money. The people providing those services will be paid one way or another.

The cable model offered bundles that allowed the greatest variety of programming ever assembled to be offered at a fairly reasonable price. Hundreds of networks tailored to virtually any interest are available. The price of offering that variety was subsidizing some products you probably never watch.

Yes, it will be cheaper to pay ala carte for a handful of networks. But you will likely pay a higher price per network. Additionally, many niche networks that you rarely watch will simply disappear. What we will likely end up with is higher prices, fewer choices, and metered internet usage that works more like an electricity bill (no more flat rate).

comcast is only one of many internet providers and in most areas people have a choice of internet providers (although with dish and direct TV they have a choice of TV providers as well)......but it is dish or direct TV (can't remember which) that is leading the charge against adding sports programming specifically especially ones that charge a high carriage fee and that is at any tier level of service which is why the PAC 12 network can't get on with that provider

and the internet is nothing like delivering electricity or natural gas or most other utilities so the idea that metered internet will come into play really does not hold water

the restrictions on bandwidth usage come about because of the physical limitations of the infrastructure (much more prevalent on cable vs DSL because of the shared last mile) and the cost to overcome those limitations continues to drop and along with that the competition from 4G and other wireless providers continues to increase and the ability of those providers to make more efficient use of and add more capacity to existing infrastructure increases as well

when same piece of fiber trenched in the ground can deliver 2X the amount of bandwidth for half the cost because of a few pieces of improved equipment there is no need to meter bandwidth

same with wireless when the same tower location with the same fiber backbone can deliver much more wireless capacity there is no need to move towards metered usage and to do so would be death for any provider that tried it

that is as opposed to electricity that you simply can't add a new spectrum of light in your routers (or transformers) to carry more current and you still have to generate the current to supply the end user and the inputs (fuel) to make that electricity continue to increase in cost

vs the internet where server farms are cheaper and cheaper to run because of shared servers, more efficient servers and again the increases in bandwidth from the same strands of fiber

the multiple stories about university fan attendance, major bowl attendance, (super bow attendance which is somewhat, but not entirely weather related) all in decline all leads to the fact that people have reached their limits of what they are willing to pay for sports programming live or on any form of medium and that hits the majors (or limits them) as much or more than anyone

and even if comcast is charging more for bandwidth usage that does not change the fact that people are ditching cable at a rate that exceeds people signing up for cable for the first time in history and as of now there is really not a standardized large scale mechanism for a conference or network to monetize sports viewers (there are smaller ones and espn, but none of those are on a major scale) and with first row and others many can watch all the sports programming they wish for free

and as of now most conferences have not really hammered out how they will monetize internet carriage either on their own or in partnership with a network

Metered internet already exists. The guy who owns the last mile of cable/wire/pipe leading into the home always gets paid. The truth is the current internet system would instantly collapse if everyone was streaming all their television entertainment. Even now, Netflix is often unusable in many areas during peak usage times.

The answer is increasing capacity---but that's not cheap. The internet providers will build that extra infrastructure capacity---but they will expect to earn the money back somehow. Nothing is free. My guess is that when the system begins to bog down with too many streamers, the internet companies will begin to move toward metered usage as a way to bridge the gap until they can significantly improve capacity. When that happens, the increased costs will slow the jailbreak from cable.

I actually find Netflix being a problem in unusual hours....but I live in missippy....and you're right....comcrap just capped at 300gb/mo not long ago and you now have to pay extra once exceed.