They were good enough for the ACC until they got their network. Last week was the end of their relationship. Would Raycom work for CUSA?

I would rather we do almost anything than what we are currently doing with our media rights. I actually think CUSA gets less TV exposure than all the other FBS leagues and in MBB we get less in Nashville than the OVC and the Atlantic Sun just to name a few Mid Majors.

(03-19-2019 09:15 PM)BlueRaiderBoy Wrote:  I would rather we do almost anything than what we are currently doing with our media rights. I actually think CUSA gets less TV exposure than all the other FBS leagues and in MBB we get less in Nashville than the OVC and the Atlantic Sun just to name a few Mid Majors.

You're right. And yet somehow Judy remains employed. Its unbelievable.

(03-19-2019 08:56 PM)Rabonchild Wrote:  They were good enough for the ACC until they got their network. Last week was the end of their relationship. Would Raycom work for CUSA?

Raycom has a hand in the ACC Network; they're going to produce games and be a digital partner.

Unless you can take TV rights back to the 80s when syndicated TV was a lot more attractive, I don't see it working. Not sure if it's the biggest money winner, but for convenience it'd make sense for CUSA to put everything on one online platform, be it ESPN+ or someone else, and be done with it.

https://awfulannouncing.com/ncaa/raycom-...tball.html

Raycom Sports is done aside from producing games for ESPN on the new network and serving as the ACC’s digital partner.

I thought the Sinclair deal was the right deal for C-USA, but it never really amount to much when it was all said and done.

(03-20-2019 07:58 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  I thought the Sinclair deal was the right deal for C-USA, but it never really amount to much when it was all said and done.

Stadium could be so much more if Sinclair wasn't dumb. It's going the same way that ASN went. They could have been the CUSA's main TV partner. They have a boatload of time to fill and very little content. Facebook/Stadium could have been y'all's #2 outlet. Stadium could have aired 2 football games per day on Saturdays on their TV outlet and 2 on Facebook. Work in a Friday night game every once in a while and CUSA's major needs would be covered in Football. If the Cure Bowl or Arizona Bowl ever hooks up with Stadium they'll be better off than on CBSSN

Give me Netflix all day. Let them cover production costs for the rights and have them put everything on there. Just being on the home screen of Netflix on a Saturday would get more eyes on us than we have had the last 10 years combined. No one is going to be banging down the door to offer us AAC money. It is peanuts and scraps from either EPSN+, Facebook, Stadium, CBSSports, and BeIN.

Netflix has yet to dip their toe into sports broadcasting. Seems like they would rather spend hundreds of millions on oddball shows that few people watch than spend a couple of million on sports content.

(03-20-2019 07:05 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  https://awfulannouncing.com/ncaa/raycom-...tball.html

Raycom Sports is done aside from producing games for ESPN on the new network and serving as the ACC’s digital partner.

STADIUM is basically the new Raycom--though their affiliate network is not nearly as well established as Raycoms when it comes to getting consistent air time on key networks in major markets. Had they won in their bid to grab the Fox-RSN's---they would have been very much like Raycom by getting a 24-7 cable presence in bunch of major markets.

Stadium still has the ability to be a major factor in sports but they have to do it right.

They have the distribution online they need (Website, Apps, Facebook, PlutoTV) and are in a decent amount of markets for their OTA broadcast. They just have to make the right exclusive deals. Airing Ultimate Frisby league is cool and all, but that's Ocho level. An exclusive partnership with CUSA would be a step in the right direction. Getting bowl deals too.

Stadium needs on DirecTV and Dish. They were recently added to SlingTV which is a step in the right direction.

But for "real TV" they need more than sub-channels in 480p to be noticed.

(03-20-2019 12:46 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  Stadium needs on DirecTV and Dish. They were recently added to SlingTV which is a step in the right direction.

But for "real TV" they need more than sub-channels in 480p to be noticed.

That's up to the individual station. Stadium is 99.9% of the time a subchannel and will not be 1080. However their website, OTT Apps, PlutoTV, and Sling stream are all HD.


I have witnessed an OTA station flip over to their Stadium feed (moved from subchannel to main feed) for an event. Which would probably work itself into any major deal a conference would work with them since Sinclair owns dman near every affiliate that stadium is on.

Just for the CUSA footprint STADIUM is OTA in these:

Norfolk-Portsmth-Newpt Nws
San Antonio
Nashville
Birmingham
Huntington
Charlotte
Dallas-Ft. Worth
El Paso
Houston
West Palm Beach
Biloxi-Gulfport





Plus a LOT of major cities where CUSA alumns live. It just makes sense to me for CUSA/Stadium to work together a lot more.

I think there is definitely an opportunity for Sports Syndication, but there is not much money to be made from it. The ACC kept Raycom around out of tradition in their previous deal and took a paycut for it. Once the SEC and Big 10 started pulling away in revenue, the ACC realized they couldn't take that cut anymore and thus made the deal ESPN to get the ACC Network.

Going all in or mostly in on Syndication/Streaming is one way to do it, but there is not much money there. Stadium/Sinclair is the only one really syndicating games so they would require most of the inventory in order to really make it worthwhile

(03-20-2019 12:54 PM)Yosef Himself Wrote:  

(03-20-2019 12:46 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  Stadium needs on DirecTV and Dish. They were recently added to SlingTV which is a step in the right direction.

But for "real TV" they need more than sub-channels in 480p to be noticed.

That's up to the individual station. Stadium is 99.9% of the time a subchannel and will not be 1080. However their website, OTT Apps, PlutoTV, and Sling stream are all HD.


I have witnessed an OTA station flip over to their Stadium feed (moved from subchannel to main feed) for an event. Which would probably work itself into any major deal a conference would work with them since Sinclair owns dman near every affiliate that stadium is on.

Thats why I felt like STADIUM getting those Fox-RSN's could have been huge. That would have given them a 24-7 cable network in over 20 of the top TV markets in the nation. That would have been a nice foundation from which to build the rest of the syndicated network.

clt would like to be streamed on espn plus, but no one knows how to sign up.

(03-20-2019 07:05 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  https://awfulannouncing.com/ncaa/raycom-...tball.html

Raycom Sports is done aside from producing games for ESPN on the new network and serving as the ACC’s digital partner.

That's what I thought, there was plenty of ad revenue for ACC match ups even the lower tier ACC. I don't think even CUSA top tier could match that ad revenue.

(03-20-2019 09:12 AM)Yosef Himself Wrote:  

(03-20-2019 07:58 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  I thought the Sinclair deal was the right deal for C-USA, but it never really amount to much when it was all said and done.

Stadium could be so much more if Sinclair wasn't dumb. It's going the same way that ASN went. They could have been the CUSA's main TV partner. They have a boatload of time to fill and very little content. Facebook/Stadium could have been y'all's #2 outlet. Stadium could have aired 2 football games per day on Saturdays on their TV outlet and 2 on Facebook. Work in a Friday night game every once in a while and CUSA's major needs would be covered in Football. If the Cure Bowl or Arizona Bowl ever hooks up with Stadium they'll be better off than on CBSSN

^^^^THIS^^^

I thiought they were really going places when they bought the Tennis Channel. I thought they would convert that to the primary nationwide ASN outlet. Nope. Even the networks they own outright pushed ASN to the sub-channels. Their strategy for ASN and STADIUM seems so uncoordinated and piece meal. There is an opportunity to fill that hole Raycom left behind---but Im not sure they know how to capitalize on the opportunity. Still---if they somehow end up with those Fox RSN's it will be a game changer for them.

(03-20-2019 09:12 AM)Yosef Himself Wrote:  

(03-20-2019 07:58 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  I thought the Sinclair deal was the right deal for C-USA, but it never really amount to much when it was all said and done.

Stadium could be so much more if Sinclair wasn't dumb. It's going the same way that ASN went. They could have been the CUSA's main TV partner. They have a boatload of time to fill and very little content. Facebook/Stadium could have been y'all's #2 outlet. Stadium could have aired 2 football games per day on Saturdays on their TV outlet and 2 on Facebook. Work in a Friday night game every once in a while and CUSA's major needs would be covered in Football. If the Cure Bowl or Arizona Bowl ever hooks up with Stadium they'll be better off than on CBSSN

I can't stand Facebook/Stadium, or any other games being displayed on Facebook. More often than not I have some kind of issue getting the game up onto the TV, and when I get it going decently, I still can't ever get it to cover the entire screen. It is not even worthy of being called a second rate TV production in my book.

ESPN+ was easily the most consistent viewing option this season. I'm also OK with CBSSN, BEIN Sports, or Stadium, but most of the games were not available on those carriers. I understand the concerns of people that don't have CBSSN or BEIN Sports in their cable package.