(08-25-2015 09:25 PM)MemTiger90 Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:52 PM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:39 PM)mphsfan Wrote:  It is now more about TV sets than it is game attendance.

Sometime I wonder why we don't broadcast games with the home team (west) side as the background.

because the TV camera wires are run on the "home" side

Something as small as switching the camera to the other side would do WONDERS for our perception as a program. And it wouldn't be very expensive to re-wire the place. Tulane just did it for the same reason

It would be a major undertaking. We put in a "new" phone system during the expansion of the LB back in the late 80s which included the cabling for press box, communication from the press box to both sidelines as well as the office phones and other extensions throughout the stadium. A lot of that was done through conduit (at the time) that ran underground.

Most stadiums are set up for telecast from the west side. Tulane revamped their stadium so it may have been easy to set it up the other way during the reconstruction.

It's not that bad anyway, we should draw some good crowds this year.

(08-26-2015 11:47 AM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 09:25 PM)MemTiger90 Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:52 PM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:39 PM)mphsfan Wrote:  It is now more about TV sets than it is game attendance.

Sometime I wonder why we don't broadcast games with the home team (west) side as the background.

because the TV camera wires are run on the "home" side

Something as small as switching the camera to the other side would do WONDERS for our perception as a program. And it wouldn't be very expensive to re-wire the place. Tulane just did it for the same reason

It would be a major undertaking. We put in a "new" phone system during the expansion of the LB back in the late 80s which included the cabling for press box, communication from the press box to both sidelines as well as the office phones and other extensions throughout the stadium. A lot of that was done through conduit (at the time) that ran underground.

Most stadiums are set up for telecast from the west side. Tulane revamped their stadium so it may have been easy to set it up the other way during the reconstruction.

It's not that bad anyway, we should draw some good crowds this year.

If the cost would be too much and the city would refuse to help, move the team and the home fans to the other side of the field. However, they would have to wait until next year to do that since tickets for this year have already been sold.

(08-26-2015 11:47 AM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 09:25 PM)MemTiger90 Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:52 PM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:39 PM)mphsfan Wrote:  It is now more about TV sets than it is game attendance.

Sometime I wonder why we don't broadcast games with the home team (west) side as the background.

because the TV camera wires are run on the "home" side

Something as small as switching the camera to the other side would do WONDERS for our perception as a program. And it wouldn't be very expensive to re-wire the place. Tulane just did it for the same reason

It would be a major undertaking. We put in a "new" phone system during the expansion of the LB back in the late 80s which included the cabling for press box, communication from the press box to both sidelines as well as the office phones and other extensions throughout the stadium. A lot of that was done through conduit (at the time) that ran underground.

Most stadiums are set up for telecast from the west side. Tulane revamped their stadium so it may have been easy to set it up the other way during the reconstruction.

It's not that bad anyway, we should draw some good crowds this year.

I disagree. I attend home games and record them when televised to watch later. The visitor's side crowd looks pathetic on TV when compared to the crowd on the home side when you're at a game. It gives the average joe flipping channels a terrible perception of the program's support.

Crowds will be bigger this year but it still looks better to show the home side.

(08-26-2015 12:41 PM)tiger2000 Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 11:47 AM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 09:25 PM)MemTiger90 Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:52 PM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:39 PM)mphsfan Wrote:  It is now more about TV sets than it is game attendance.

Sometime I wonder why we don't broadcast games with the home team (west) side as the background.

because the TV camera wires are run on the "home" side

Something as small as switching the camera to the other side would do WONDERS for our perception as a program. And it wouldn't be very expensive to re-wire the place. Tulane just did it for the same reason

It would be a major undertaking. We put in a "new" phone system during the expansion of the LB back in the late 80s which included the cabling for press box, communication from the press box to both sidelines as well as the office phones and other extensions throughout the stadium. A lot of that was done through conduit (at the time) that ran underground.

Most stadiums are set up for telecast from the west side. Tulane revamped their stadium so it may have been easy to set it up the other way during the reconstruction.

It's not that bad anyway, we should draw some good crowds this year.

I disagree. I attend home games and record them when televised to watch later. The visitor's side crowd looks pathetic on TV when compared to the crowd on the home side when you're at a game. It gives the average joe flipping channels a terrible perception of the program's support.

Crowds will be bigger this year but it still looks better to show the home side.

Aren't all of the Kroger tickets on the visitor side for Missouri State? Not that this solves the problem. Just that the administration seems to be aware of it.

(08-26-2015 12:41 PM)tiger2000 Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 11:47 AM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 09:25 PM)MemTiger90 Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:52 PM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:39 PM)mphsfan Wrote:  It is now more about TV sets than it is game attendance.

Sometime I wonder why we don't broadcast games with the home team (west) side as the background.

because the TV camera wires are run on the "home" side

Something as small as switching the camera to the other side would do WONDERS for our perception as a program. And it wouldn't be very expensive to re-wire the place. Tulane just did it for the same reason

It would be a major undertaking. We put in a "new" phone system during the expansion of the LB back in the late 80s which included the cabling for press box, communication from the press box to both sidelines as well as the office phones and other extensions throughout the stadium. A lot of that was done through conduit (at the time) that ran underground.

Most stadiums are set up for telecast from the west side. Tulane revamped their stadium so it may have been easy to set it up the other way during the reconstruction.

It's not that bad anyway, we should draw some good crowds this year.

I disagree. I attend home games and record them when televised to watch later. The visitor's side crowd looks pathetic on TV when compared to the crowd on the home side when you're at a game. It gives the average joe flipping channels a terrible perception of the program's support.

Crowds will be bigger this year but it still looks better to show the home side.

BINGO. Say, we have 35,000 at a game. 25,000 is on the home side. So when someone watches our game and sees 10,000 people on a side that holds darn near 30,000, it's looks horrible.

(08-26-2015 12:41 PM)tiger2000 Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 11:47 AM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 09:25 PM)MemTiger90 Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:52 PM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:39 PM)mphsfan Wrote:  It is now more about TV sets than it is game attendance.

Sometime I wonder why we don't broadcast games with the home team (west) side as the background.

because the TV camera wires are run on the "home" side

Something as small as switching the camera to the other side would do WONDERS for our perception as a program. And it wouldn't be very expensive to re-wire the place. Tulane just did it for the same reason

It would be a major undertaking. We put in a "new" phone system during the expansion of the LB back in the late 80s which included the cabling for press box, communication from the press box to both sidelines as well as the office phones and other extensions throughout the stadium. A lot of that was done through conduit (at the time) that ran underground.

Most stadiums are set up for telecast from the west side. Tulane revamped their stadium so it may have been easy to set it up the other way during the reconstruction.

It's not that bad anyway, we should draw some good crowds this year.

I disagree. I attend home games and record them when televised to watch later. The visitor's side crowd looks pathetic on TV when compared to the crowd on the home side when you're at a game. It gives the average joe flipping channels a terrible perception of the program's support.

Crowds will be bigger this year but it still looks better to show the home side.

And I think they do as much as they can. I noticed last year that during plays they kept the cameras at a low angle but every now and then you saw an end zone shot or the camera following a kick or punt and you see the space on the east side.

Back in the day, before they expanded the stadium, a crowd of 30,000 looked very respectable.

(08-26-2015 12:48 PM)Tigers2B1 Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 12:41 PM)tiger2000 Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 11:47 AM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 09:25 PM)MemTiger90 Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:52 PM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  because the TV camera wires are run on the "home" side

Something as small as switching the camera to the other side would do WONDERS for our perception as a program. And it wouldn't be very expensive to re-wire the place. Tulane just did it for the same reason

It would be a major undertaking. We put in a "new" phone system during the expansion of the LB back in the late 80s which included the cabling for press box, communication from the press box to both sidelines as well as the office phones and other extensions throughout the stadium. A lot of that was done through conduit (at the time) that ran underground.

Most stadiums are set up for telecast from the west side. Tulane revamped their stadium so it may have been easy to set it up the other way during the reconstruction.

It's not that bad anyway, we should draw some good crowds this year.

I disagree. I attend home games and record them when televised to watch later. The visitor's side crowd looks pathetic on TV when compared to the crowd on the home side when you're at a game. It gives the average joe flipping channels a terrible perception of the program's support.

Crowds will be bigger this year but it still looks better to show the home side.

Aren't all of the Kroger tickets on the visitor side for Missouri State? Not that this solves the problem. Just that the administration seems to be aware of it.

Yep. Those tickets are planned PRECISELY where they need to be. And I know who is 100% responsible for it.

You can not put the cameras on the opposite side from the press box. Talk about 55 yard lines and fumbled shoes.....

(08-26-2015 11:51 AM)Swearingen20 Wrote:  If the cost would be too much and the city would refuse to help, move the team and the home fans to the other side of the field.

If our coaching staff is half as smart as I think they are, they would be against that. For hot weather day games, there is significant advantage in being on the west side. The team on the east side has the sun in their faces and is hotter. Late in the game, the west side is actually shaded (home field advantage).

(08-27-2015 07:37 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 11:51 AM)Swearingen20 Wrote:  If the cost would be too much and the city would refuse to help, move the team and the home fans to the other side of the field.

If our coaching staff is half as smart as I think they are, they would be against that. For hot weather day games, there is significant advantage in being on the west side. The team on the east side has the sun in their faces and is hotter. Late in the game, the west side is actually shaded (home field advantage).

good point --- plus you have to wonder about the logistics of it all. With fans with their sight lines and/or ass groves not being exactly the same as the west side. Plus, w/ the sun, it can be hot.

(08-27-2015 07:37 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 11:51 AM)Swearingen20 Wrote:  If the cost would be too much and the city would refuse to help, move the team and the home fans to the other side of the field.

If our coaching staff is half as smart as I think they are, they would be against that. For hot weather day games, there is significant advantage in being on the west side. The team on the east side has the sun in their faces and is hotter. Late in the game, the west side is actually shaded (home field advantage).

I hate sitting on the visitors side because of the sun. However, that might be the only other option if putting the cameras on the other side is not an option. The only other thing I can think of is putting our band, visiting band, our student section and ALL of the Kroger tickets on that side that will be in view of the cameras. The good news is Bowen and Dr Rudd seem to work on the little things too, so hopefully this will not be a problem in the years to come.......and having a good product on the field helps too.

(08-27-2015 08:09 AM)Swearingen20 Wrote:  The good news is Bowen and Dr Rudd seem to work on the little things too....

I hope they will get around to the "little thing" of getting the school colors consistent and back in line with the intentions of the Class of 1912 and the professional brand standard consultants. It is weak leadership to allow Nike to call the shots on that.