People don't remember ... but the ACC tried this crap too. It was also expensive, poorly done from a technology standpoint, and more impactful at pissing off fans than making them happy. I remember sending in a support email and it took them 3 different humans before somebody knew what Linux was, let alone that a customer might be using it.

If I were "in charge" at the CAA, I don't know that I'd have many better options though.

(05-08-2019 10:32 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  People don't remember ... but the ACC tried this crap too. It was also expensive, poorly done from a technology standpoint, and more impactful at pissing off fans than making them happy. I remember sending in a support email and it took them 3 different humans before somebody knew what Linux was, let alone that a customer might be using it.

If I were "in charge" at the CAA, I don't know that I'd have many better options though.

ESPN+ is the safe choice. You might not get much money and you lose the RSN ability, but it's a lot easier to convince your fans to spend $5 a month for a known quantity that offers a ton of recognizable sports options than $12 to $30 a month for a niche streamer with a bad reputation. Plus you have an outside chance at getting non-CAA fans to tune in if they're already in the app, particularly the cord cutters using ESPN+ as their primary college-sports carrier.

(05-08-2019 05:14 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(05-08-2019 10:32 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  People don't remember ... but the ACC tried this crap too. It was also expensive, poorly done from a technology standpoint, and more impactful at pissing off fans than making them happy. I remember sending in a support email and it took them 3 different humans before somebody knew what Linux was, let alone that a customer might be using it.

If I were "in charge" at the CAA, I don't know that I'd have many better options though.

ESPN+ is the safe choice. You might not get much money and you lose the RSN ability, but it's a lot easier to convince your fans to spend $5 a month for a known quantity that offers a ton of recognizable sports options than $12 to $30 a month for a niche streamer with a bad reputation. Plus you have an outside chance at getting non-CAA fans to tune in if they're already in the app, particularly the cord cutters using ESPN+ as their primary college-sports carrier.

Some conferences get local and regional TV with their ESPN+ deal.

(05-09-2019 07:26 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  

(05-08-2019 05:14 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(05-08-2019 10:32 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  People don't remember ... but the ACC tried this crap too. It was also expensive, poorly done from a technology standpoint, and more impactful at pissing off fans than making them happy. I remember sending in a support email and it took them 3 different humans before somebody knew what Linux was, let alone that a customer might be using it.

If I were "in charge" at the CAA, I don't know that I'd have many better options though.

ESPN+ is the safe choice. You might not get much money and you lose the RSN ability, but it's a lot easier to convince your fans to spend $5 a month for a known quantity that offers a ton of recognizable sports options than $12 to $30 a month for a niche streamer with a bad reputation. Plus you have an outside chance at getting non-CAA fans to tune in if they're already in the app, particularly the cord cutters using ESPN+ as their primary college-sports carrier.

Some conferences get local and regional TV with their ESPN+ deal.

Based on what I have read and heard from interviews with CAA/JMU people, it doesn't sound like that was an option for the CAA specifically. FloSports offered the best overall package as it related to A) an online presence, B) ability for individual schools to continue their RSN affiliations, and C) providing a source of income for the league and its schools (which will apparently be put into growing the basketball side of the league, but I am not 100% on if/how that happens).

Personally, I would rather have ESPN+ rather than FloSports since I have actually heard of ESPN. If we chose to go the "niche option" route, I would have rather seen something like Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, YouTube, etc. I know Delaware broadcasts some of their sports on YouTube, and JMU broadcasts some of theirs on Facebook. Neither is behind a monetary paywall, and the feeds have run without a hitch for me in the past. Hopefully Flo will have worked out the kinks in its system before the fall when the deal starts up. I am not holding my breath.

(05-09-2019 08:48 AM)AssyrianDuke Wrote:  Based on what I have read and heard from interviews with CAA/JMU people, it doesn't sound like that was an option for the CAA specifically. FloSports offered the best overall package as it related to A) an online presence, B) ability for individual schools to continue their RSN affiliations, and C) providing a source of income for the league and its schools (which will apparently be put into growing the basketball side of the league, but I am not 100% on if/how that happens).

So the football only members should go f*** themselves?

(05-09-2019 10:17 AM)ccd494 Wrote:  

(05-09-2019 08:48 AM)AssyrianDuke Wrote:  Based on what I have read and heard from interviews with CAA/JMU people, it doesn't sound like that was an option for the CAA specifically. FloSports offered the best overall package as it related to A) an online presence, B) ability for individual schools to continue their RSN affiliations, and C) providing a source of income for the league and its schools (which will apparently be put into growing the basketball side of the league, but I am not 100% on if/how that happens).

So the football only members should go f*** themselves?

Football only members gonna be stuck paying $90 bucks for 8 games. Sucks for them.

(05-09-2019 10:17 AM)ccd494 Wrote:  

(05-09-2019 08:48 AM)AssyrianDuke Wrote:  Based on what I have read and heard from interviews with CAA/JMU people, it doesn't sound like that was an option for the CAA specifically. FloSports offered the best overall package as it related to A) an online presence, B) ability for individual schools to continue their RSN affiliations, and C) providing a source of income for the league and its schools (which will apparently be put into growing the basketball side of the league, but I am not 100% on if/how that happens).

So the football only members should go f*** themselves?

That might just be the individual schools doing that, so I'm not sure. I read that from the JMU AD, so maybe it's just us doing it? Sorry for the confusion.

(05-09-2019 07:26 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  

(05-08-2019 05:14 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(05-08-2019 10:32 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  People don't remember ... but the ACC tried this crap too. It was also expensive, poorly done from a technology standpoint, and more impactful at pissing off fans than making them happy. I remember sending in a support email and it took them 3 different humans before somebody knew what Linux was, let alone that a customer might be using it.

If I were "in charge" at the CAA, I don't know that I'd have many better options though.

ESPN+ is the safe choice. You might not get much money and you lose the RSN ability, but it's a lot easier to convince your fans to spend $5 a month for a known quantity that offers a ton of recognizable sports options than $12 to $30 a month for a niche streamer with a bad reputation. Plus you have an outside chance at getting non-CAA fans to tune in if they're already in the app, particularly the cord cutters using ESPN+ as their primary college-sports carrier.

Some conferences get local and regional TV with their ESPN+ deal.

The MVFC uses ESPN+, which broadcasts all conference games and some OOC match-ups as well... an official with the NDSU athletic department stated that they do not receive anything from ESPN+ for the rights, but they do get their games broadcast so fans out of the local area can watch all their games.

However, NDSU has media rights agreements with state-wide NBC affiliates to produce and broadcast the games for about $400K/year plus I think some additional revenue sharing -- and they provide pre-game and half time shows, and a weekly coaches show as part of the deal. They also archive all the games on youtube for fans to re-watch, and they are posted about 24 hours after thee games are played.

Since I am paying for ESPN+ I really wish ESPN was paying for the rights to the games... but, they re getting revenue from their broadcast rights, so it all works out.

(05-09-2019 08:48 AM)AssyrianDuke Wrote:  

(05-09-2019 07:26 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  

(05-08-2019 05:14 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(05-08-2019 10:32 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  People don't remember ... but the ACC tried this crap too. It was also expensive, poorly done from a technology standpoint, and more impactful at pissing off fans than making them happy. I remember sending in a support email and it took them 3 different humans before somebody knew what Linux was, let alone that a customer might be using it.

If I were "in charge" at the CAA, I don't know that I'd have many better options though.

ESPN+ is the safe choice. You might not get much money and you lose the RSN ability, but it's a lot easier to convince your fans to spend $5 a month for a known quantity that offers a ton of recognizable sports options than $12 to $30 a month for a niche streamer with a bad reputation. Plus you have an outside chance at getting non-CAA fans to tune in if they're already in the app, particularly the cord cutters using ESPN+ as their primary college-sports carrier.

Some conferences get local and regional TV with their ESPN+ deal.

Based on what I have read and heard from interviews with CAA/JMU people, it doesn't sound like that was an option for the CAA specifically. FloSports offered the best overall package as it related to A) an online presence, B) ability for individual schools to continue their RSN affiliations, and C) providing a source of income for the league and its schools (which will apparently be put into growing the basketball side of the league, but I am not 100% on if/how that happens).

Personally, I would rather have ESPN+ rather than FloSports since I have actually heard of ESPN. If we chose to go the "niche option" route, I would have rather seen something like Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, YouTube, etc. I know Delaware broadcasts some of their sports on YouTube, and JMU broadcasts some of theirs on Facebook. Neither is behind a monetary paywall, and the feeds have run without a hitch for me in the past. Hopefully Flo will have worked out the kinks in its system before the fall when the deal starts up. I am not holding my breath.

ESPN+ was willing to pay for CAA rights but only if they had exclusitivity. Too many CAA schools had RSN/Local TV deals they wanted to continue. So if they wanted $$ Flo was the only one willing to pay. They could have used other streaming services like Facebook Watch or Twitch but they would not be compensated like Flo is doing for them

(05-06-2019 01:16 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(05-06-2019 12:45 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  I don't see how this alienates fans. They are getting another way to watch. It's not like the CAA is pulling games off ESPN and making fans pay to watch them. Plus, if a major network wanted a game they could easily buy it from FLO/CAA.

$12.50 a month for CAA and ESPN + is $5 and has a lot more conferences and content. Which one would appeal to more users?

Apples and oranges. You can't compare a dedicated conference network to a multi-conference network. That's like comparing the SECN to ESPN. The Flo deal has 300 games including 50 football and 90 mens basketball. How many CAA games were on ESPN+?

There are no details on what the ESPN+ offer, if any, was. I can't imaging $5 per month covers cost so the conferences/schools were not getting any money. At least this way the CAA gets some revenue.

I would be more concerned about the technical issues that others have outlined.

It's about the only way the CAA was going to get any revenue.

Failed conference as it is.

Interesting article about this deal from the Charleston newspaper...

https://www.postandcourier.com/sports/ca...c7b6c.html

(05-13-2019 12:01 PM)sctvman Wrote:  Interesting article about this deal from the Charleston newspaper...

https://www.postandcourier.com/sports/ca...c7b6c.html

Quote:The conference will also use the revenue from FloSports to buy more games on CBS Sports Network. Instead of each school receiving between $50,000 and $75,0000 a year, the conference decided to invest that money to broadcast men’s basketball games on a national level with CBS Sports Network. The CAA will have eight nationally televised games on CBS Sports Network during the 2019-2020 season.

On the one hand, that's probably a smart move in that a member school will get more bang out of their buck from one or two CBSSN basketball games than they would a relatively small payout. On the other hand, the CAA would be wise to ensure that every school gets at least one CBSSN appearance; if you're a school whose games are on Flo but you get neither a TV game nor money for your trouble, you're not going to be happy. Plus what of the football affiliates? Either they're broadcasting their games on Flo for free, or only full members will have their football games there.

CBSSN isn’t rated by Nielsen and is really behind on being viewed outside of the home. No app like ESPN, FoxSportsGo, etc. Not sure how buying telecasts on a network that is almost barely visible is a smart idea.

(05-15-2019 06:12 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  CBSSN isn’t rated by Nielsen and is really behind on being viewed outside of the home. No app like ESPN, FoxSportsGo, etc. Not sure how buying telecasts on a network that is almost barely visible is a smart idea.

CBS Sports Network is a lot easier to view than it once was. If you have a cable/satellite login you can watch the channel on the CBS Sports app. While they do not have an official roku channel you can now cast it to your roku or your chromecast with the touch of a button

DCUnited had another Flo Sports broadcast issue. The end of the game was not seen. This is the third similar statement issued by the team this season.

https://twitter.com/dcunited/status/1133094283421126656

(05-27-2019 03:13 PM)Renandpat Wrote:  DCUnited had another Flo Sports broadcast issue. The end of the game was not seen. This is the third similar statement issued by the team this season.

https://twitter.com/dcunited/status/1133094283421126656

Someone on twitter had a great line that they should have this screen with a CAA logo ready for launch

(05-27-2019 03:13 PM)Renandpat Wrote:  DCUnited had another Flo Sports broadcast issue. The end of the game was not seen. This is the third similar statement issued by the team this season.

https://twitter.com/dcunited/status/1133094283421126656

As a DCU out of market fan I was mad that ESPN+ never showed the DC broadcast. But after reading the twitter complaints every single game, I’m glad I get to watch via ESPN+ so I know I’ll have the entire stream to watch.

https://twitter.com/svertelney/status/11...5976471554

Football schedule has been announced. 52 CAA football games will air on FloSports. At least 6 from every team in the CAA.

https://caasports.com/news/2019/7/17/mor...-2019.aspx