(08-27-2017 12:42 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  CBSSN? They don't even participate in Nielsen ratings. People are cutting the cord and companies are not willing to dish out big bucks for sports like they used to. ESPN has a ton of channels and their own Web channel where plenty of games are put. Why would you want less channels for less events?

Maybe you don't like ESPN, but they're great for college sports. Whether you're a P5 or G5 fan. No other channel is gonna pay big bucks for G5 or mid major content. Why would they?

(08-27-2017 11:38 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  And why does every single tv network known to man sell their collective souls for an NFL contract?

(08-27-2017 03:01 PM)Renandpat Wrote:  We just started year 5 of FS1 and it's clear that even with half of the B1G football rights, they don't really care otherwise they wouldn't have cut their digital division to the bone and laid off the writing staff. The execs know their challenge was somewhat successful financially but gap in subscription fees is just too wide.

(08-27-2017 03:17 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(08-27-2017 11:38 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  And why does every single tv network known to man sell their collective souls for an NFL contract?

What a extremely dumb question.
http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2017/01/most-watched-sporting-events-2016-nfl-olympics-world-series-nba-college-football/

(08-27-2017 03:40 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Well with more customers cutting and shaving the cord, the OTA networks will be more prominent.
Look for Stadium to start taking a bit of the sports world with their OTA stations and the free streaming platforms in a few more years.

(08-27-2017 06:36 PM)spenser Wrote:  Noone, all the P5s are either going to have there own conference Networks(same for pro sports) or have a Network through Espn like ACC and SEC.

EsPN then needs content for main and ESPN2 so the G4 + AAC will continually have ESPN use their right to match any other Networks offer.

(08-27-2017 02:23 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(08-27-2017 12:42 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  CBSSN? They don't even participate in Nielsen ratings. People are cutting the cord and companies are not willing to dish out big bucks for sports like they used to. ESPN has a ton of channels and their own Web channel where plenty of games are put. Why would you want less channels for less events?

Maybe you don't like ESPN, but they're great for college sports. Whether you're a P5 or G5 fan. No other channel is gonna pay big bucks for G5 or mid major content. Why would they?

I'm not saying ESPN & all of its channels are bad. It's the fact that ESPN has very little competition that IS bad. I'll give you one good example of monopoly & how competition actually helped to improve the product: Jefferson-Pilot Sports aka Raycom Media used to have a near monopoly on SEC games and SEC fans hated it with a passion!!! Back in the 80's & 90's, it was not uncommon to see profanity either before or after JP Sports or even JP!! First, came CBS televising games which helped some, but what finally killed off JP Sports, aka Lincoln Financial, aka Raycom Media's SEC coverage was ESPN's creation of the SEC network, which is far superior to old JP Sports coverage. This is what competition does, and ESPN, the very network I'm complaining about, actually helped to significantly improve the product, a very good thing!! I just want to see someone challenge ESPN to make things even better.
Check out the below video to see how bad JP was.

(08-27-2017 03:27 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(08-27-2017 03:17 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(08-27-2017 11:38 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  And why does every single tv network known to man sell their collective souls for an NFL contract?

What a extremely dumb question.
http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2017/01/most-watched-sporting-events-2016-nfl-olympics-world-series-nba-college-football/

I know it gets really good ratings, but the quality of play is just kinda meh for me. I actually prefer college football and I'm a fan of a G5 school in addition to being a fan of a couple of P5 schools.

Hey JRSec, remember those old JP Sports SEC games? I still remember a "Dave Rowe & his Rowe's rewind" blecchh!!

(08-27-2017 02:23 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(08-27-2017 12:42 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  CBSSN? They don't even participate in Nielsen ratings. People are cutting the cord and companies are not willing to dish out big bucks for sports like they used to. ESPN has a ton of channels and their own Web channel where plenty of games are put. Why would you want less channels for less events?

Maybe you don't like ESPN, but they're great for college sports. Whether you're a P5 or G5 fan. No other channel is gonna pay big bucks for G5 or mid major content. Why would they?

I'm not saying ESPN & all of its channels are bad. It's the fact that ESPN has very little competition that IS bad. I'll give you one good example of monopoly & how competition actually helped to improve the product: Jefferson-Pilot Sports aka Raycom Media used to have a near monopoly on SEC games and SEC fans hated it with a passion!!! Back in the 80's & 90's, it was not uncommon to see profanity either before or after JP Sports or even JP!! First, came CBS televising games which helped some, but what finally killed off JP Sports, aka Lincoln Financial, aka Raycom Media's SEC coverage was ESPN's creation of the SEC network, which is far superior to old JP Sports coverage. This is what competition does, and ESPN, the very network I'm complaining about, actually helped to significantly improve the product, a very good thing!! I just want to see someone challenge ESPN to make things even better.
Check out the below video to see how bad JP was.