[utenation]

This isn't a thread to try and change you're mind.. I was under the assumption that a majority of MWC fans were tickled pink about the contract in reference to overall apple to apple comparisons vs. the ESPN days..


I think a few UNLV fans have brought up some concerns and I'd like to hear about these gripes in more detail. Maybe we've missed something along the way? And maybe there's more than a few fans that are having second thoughts today?

I don't think the current contract is perfect but I think it's a slam dunk in opportunity and for payday(for what we're worth right now).

The only thing I ask for is, some support to your theory not just random hate noise..


So spill the beans, this is your tree of trust...

[ToddL18]

utenation, on 08 February 2010 - 11:33 PM, said:

This isn't a thread to try and change you're mind.. I was under the assumption that a majority of MWC fans were tickled pink about the contract in reference to overall apple to apple comparisons vs. the ESPN days..


I think a few UNLV fans have brought up some concerns and I'd like to hear about these gripes in more detail. Maybe we've missed something along the way? And maybe there's more than a few fans that are having second thoughts today?

I don't think the current contract is perfect but I think it's a slam dunk in opportunity and for payday(for what we're worth right now).

The only thing I ask for is, some support to your theory not just random hate noise..


So spill the beans, this is your tree of trust...

I personally like the MWC contract but a few things need to change and change drastically for me to be completely satisfied with it. 1 Our big games in football and basketball need to be nationally televised (CBS/FOX/ABC/ESPN).

We cannot and will not be taken seriously without having a national audience to atleast watch some of our games. AQ confernce (even the PAC10) all have that media outlet till we get it we will not reach our goals. This needs to be hashed out and I believe it could earn the conference and sponsors more money if we did it. I don't know why they haven't worked with CBS about this as they could definately do it a few times a year.


2. The conference as a whole needs to fire the on air personalitys not name Marious Payton and Tim Neverrette the rest of the announcers and color commentator sucks.

Payton and Tim get the pass because they always seemed the most informed and not bias out of the bunch. In all honesty when you listen to them it's clear they know what they are doing and enjoy doing it. I believe we need more on air personalities like that. Add in Molly Sullivan and we have a winning team. The fact remains that I don't believe enough of the people on the network take this job seriously enough.

3. We need to hire professionals who will take this job seriously and understand our teams. I know I may not be the average viewer of the mtn. But I can take most of the starters (basketball and football) on every team and a few of the bench players how come our announcers can't even get freaking names right. As for stats and information about the player they need to get more then the regular information. I can understand not knowing much out of conference but in conference they should know all the players, nicknames and quirks and not spew the same garbage as the media guides. Doug Gottlieb knew more about our freaking team then the so called professionals on our network. He did more in depth in his 3 games with us then any of the guys on our network. We need people who know both sports and will ad indepth information not to much to overwhelm the veiwer but enough to actually inform them and it needs to be different information every game.

4. Be professional and actually have stats around and stat check the ones you do use. This network doesn't do it and that to me bothered me then anything. I can handle a few homers on the network but as a whole we need update that as well as the look of the network it looks like some 8th graders video reports for his home team. Look I know people who make there home movies look more presentable then the MWC layout. It's not very nice to look at, user friendly or even in general well edited. I'm sure some of the grad students at UNLV can do a better job.

5. All games *major sport ones* that we play at home should appear on the network, NO excuses for this there isn't a reason in the world that is acceptable to not have this work. This needs to be fixed ASAP, I'd rather watch cream puff u vs MWC then a rerun of shows. I know we have to fill for content and I don't mind the Levelle Edward years of glory on just not when there's an actual game that I haven't seen.

If we do the above I think the MWC will be a great network and contract we will also be able to distribute it better because people would want to watch it. It should be promoting our teams and our agenda not just a singular schools or persons. In all we've made good strides but until that is fixed I really won't think the contract is 100% successful. The thing is we need a media outlet to promote us and if it does a good enough job people will start doing it as well. 90% of the time perception is more important then reality and if we continue to act like a small fish in a big pond instead of a big fish in a big pond we will be comming out last. Look at the SEC and how well there format works, I say we do that. We can claim the same stuff those conference do our numbers look almost identical, yet we don't.

[Yoda]

I don't get the mtn so I have no comments but I did have a question.

It sounds like most of Todd's complaints could be solved with more money. Assuming that's correct, then what accounts for the lack of money? Is it disappointing distribution (ie: no Dish Network and I'm not sure what the cable distribution is?) or is it just this sucky economy? I suppose that the sucky economy could impact distribution as well but I was thinking in terms of advertising revenue, etc.

My point is, if it is the economy, then as the economy turns around will most of those problems go away?

Yoda out...

[Rosegreen]

Some posters in the other thread were seemingly twisting or getting the idea that I hated the contract. I don't, I mean when you look at the WAC contracts and some of the non-bcs conferences contracts, our conference does pretty well comparably. That being said, I think that we could do hell of a lot better.

1. Nationally televised games with either CBS/FOX/ABC/ESPN/NBC?, I'm tired of seeing marquee matchups on Versus/CBSC/Mtn. Makes us look small time, and not a lot of households get those channels. I asked a bartender downtown Denver, to put on the Mtn to watch a football game, he gave me a blank stare, and didn't know what the hell I was talking about.


2. Our channels need better presentation, announcers need to know the teams and be unbiased. I'd like to see better content from the Mtn because to me it all seems kind of amateurish and reminds me of high school news production.

There is going to have to be a lot of improvement in terms of exposure to the casual fan, the general public. We need to get some games nationally televised, if the MWC is serious about being a AQ School.

[Italics]

ToddL18, on 08 February 2010 - 11:55 PM, said:

I personally like the MWC contract but a few things need to change and change drastically for me to be completely satisfied with it. 1 Our big games in football and basketball need to be nationally televised (CBS/FOX/ABC/ESPN).

What, Versus isn't good enough for you?

Sometimes I think CBS-CS is a decent deal. Then I see what other games they play when it's not MWC games. Then I feel crappy about the contract.

[son of a gun]

Italics, on 09 February 2010 - 03:02 AM, said:

What, Versus isn't good enough for you?

Sometimes I think CBS-CS is a decent deal. Then I see what other games they play when it's not MWC games. Then I feel crappy about the contract.

Which is why I am glad I get the Mtn. Though it really would be nice if we could say, get at least the rivalry games or something on National TV.

[ToddL18]

Italics, on 09 February 2010 - 03:02 AM, said:

What, Versus isn't good enough for you?

Sometimes I think CBS-CS is a decent deal. Then I see what other games they play when it's not MWC games. Then I feel crappy about the contract.

Versus is nice and I don't mind it, it's just not big enough yet to be the main distrupter that we all thought it could be. It's growing really nicely but it needs to expand alot more for it to be an espn like place. The contract is good money wise and a nice start for what it is but without that national component it's a little empty.

[rrlobo]

IMO, The current contract is just fine. I get to watch all the games I care about and the analysis is great. I am a Lobo fan and I would rather watch other MWC games, when the Lobos aren't playing, than some random ACC or BIg Ten (etc) game on ESPN. I don't like being told by ESPN that the greatest college basketball rivalry is Duke & UNC. You can nitpick about the announcers, etc. but I'm sure if you played really close attention to any game you'll find that those kinds of mistakes happen even on ESPN with ACC teams. One change I would like to make is to make sure that The MTN/CBS CS/VS is available to everyone in the MWC on a basic package and in HD. It would also be nice to have the possibility to stream the games on the web from theMTN etc.

[Sib]

seeing lots of games is high times, seeing them in sd is low times, mwc needs to have a deal that lets the games be aired if networks are fighting and +++++.

[Coastie]

Some great comments have already been made on the problems on the national level of how The Mtn is perceived as being small time. It is. Even CBS Sports with "CBS" in their name feels like a speciality channel instead of mainstream. Sorry, but ABC and ESPN have a huge headstart in the minds of football fans on where to tune in to watch. When you get a big time MWC football game, such as last years TCU-Utah, why not show it on ESPN too as well as The Mtn???? I'm sure there is contract problems with such a simulcast, but it would be nice if MWC officials had a little flexability and have the option of showcasing the league.

And on a personal note, I don't live in the MWC footprint, and I never will unless the MWC can talk the Ducks and Beavers into leaving the PAC-10 to join a better football conference ( ). For other stupid reasons I will never get satellite, and I doubt my cable company will ever cover the Mtn because the market probably isn't there. So I'm basically screwed. Why can't I subscribe to The Mtn over the internet and watch that channel any time I want. I don't subscribe to anything on the internet such as Scout, or Rivals, or ESPN Insider, etc., only because what I'd like from those sites is free. I don't have a problem paying extra for something I want, I just haven't found anything that I want for the extra money. This I would pay for.

[Big Frog II]

Our current TV contract is a good start. Like anything else, it needs to always be in a state of improvement. We knew leaving ESPN was not going to be perfect, but it wasn't the death throes predicted by others outside our conference. We need to continue to fight to get the mtn picked up by more providers. We need to work with CBS to get some of our premier games on the main network.

Overall we are making great strides. Not having a game on a weekday this year in football was heaven. Our attendance was up, and we set an all-time record for the Utah game since it was on a Saturday. The ADs talked about getting control of their schedules, and I think they have made great strides in doing so all because of the current TV contract.

Whatever anyone says, the current TV contract does not seem to affect the rankings of our football and basketball teams.

[Headbutt]

We only need three things to take us big time, and they have already been mentioned.

1. Big games on CBS. If they're serious about this little cable network they own, they should do this.

2. On air personalities. Agree on Payton and Neverett. Bates isn't too bad. TC is painful.

3. Broadcast quality. The best thing about the CSUvWYO game the other night was that the orange jerseys finally proved that the mtn. really isn't in black and white.

[Killerfrog in the Kitchen Sink]

The contract is ideal for football. Mostly Saturday games is huge for development of our fanbases and Versus and CBS-CS do a fine job, with capable crews and solid HD broadcasts, for the most part. Having a MWC centered network with preview shows, highlight shows, coaches shows is also huge for growing interest and a knowledgeable fan base. National exposure is a negative, but there are the nonconference games like BYU/OU, bowl games and as TCU and Utah have shown, if you're good, you get exposure and attention.

Basketball is a different issue. There are so many games on, its easier to get lost in the shuffle. I'd love to play a few games on ESPN or an over the air channel, but even if there was interest on their part, there just aren't that many desirable windows open. Late night games are an option, but the conference specifically wanted to avoid those, as they aren't fan friendly.

I think our best option is to see how the NBC/Comcast thing works out and ride that growth wave rather than take the scraps ESPN can feed us (even if they wanted to or could). Luckily, college basketball is a postseason sport- most fans don't really look too much outside their conference or schools until the conference tourneys. And the committee has specific criteria and stats they are looking at- TV exposure really doesn't matter there.

[Brew_Poke]

Online steaming like we were promised so I could ditch cable/satellite altogether. Sports is the only reason I pay those jokers 80 bucks per month...that's a lot of Pabst.

[NorCalCoug]

The lifeblood of an athletic program is the fans and donors. The current contract is GREAT for diehard MWC fans and donors. They get 1st priority. The average Joe fan doesn't benefit the MWC and the conference isn't going to dramatically grow its fanbase by playing at weird times on off nights on ESPN. I do agree that it would be nice to have a better nat'l platform for our marquee games BUT not at the cost of those games being played on Tuesday, Wednesday, or Sunday. The Saturday game timeslots allotted the MWC PLENTY of nat'l exposure by making many marquee games this year the site for ESPN Gameday.

Let's be realistic folks, the major Nat'l carriers have their prime time slots filled with BCS programs and they will not push them to the side for the MWC. We get the table scrap timeslots with those networks. Sad but true. We're not there yet as a conference to demand large enough viewing numbers.

[DefendTheStreak]

I think that UNLV would play every 9:00 pm basketball game you could give us. Those games, even after the glory years were pack with lots of enthusiasm.

1. I've only seen it mentioned briefly, but they have to something about the content. The "Life and Times" of insert your favorite old school coach here is great once maybe twice, but the repeating of those shows over and over is awful. A few times I've know that real games were being played and the .mtn was repeating some clip show.

2. All the games need to be on. What the point if our own network is going to cherry pick the conference. There aren't many of us, but I wanted to watch the UNLV vs Wyoming football game this year.

3. We need to be able to sell off our high profile games to other networks for better distribution. Just from this year there were 4 football games that needed to have a national audience. There was a national audience, but because we cannot figure out the correct distribution of the product we lose out. Basketball is not as big a deal, there are enough games that eventually you'll play a team on ESPN and get picked out like that. Or in UNLV's case we'll go play in a national tournament,ie Hawaii, that gets picked up by ESPN. The Big 10 does this; I don't know why we don't.


How many of you go to that channel if you know your not playing a live game?

[Metropolis777]

The contract has pretty much achieved its initial goal. The whole purpose of leaving ESPN was to regain control of the MWC schedule and to get MWC games to MWC fans' TV sets.

I say "pretty much" because I think distribution is still lacking in a few key areas. The mtn. is still not on Charter cable in Fort Worth or Time Warner in Dallas. It is also only in limited distribution in San Diego. There's been no movement on either front. Ever since the DirecTV/mtn. deal, it's as if Comcast/MWC doesn't care about getting any further exposure for the mtn. To me, that's a fatal mistake. Comcast and the conference need to be selling the mtn. in the DFW and San Diego markets until a deals are done. Additionally, it would seem to be in Comcast's best interests to sell the mtn. to as many of its own markets as possible. If nothing else, every Comcast subscriber west of the Mississippi should be able to access the mtn. at least via higher tier packages.

The new goal is national exposure. I call this the new goal rather than a problem because we did not even attempt to address this when the original deal was signed. Everyone knew that by leaving ESPN we would be losing most of our national exposure. The goal now is to find a real national outlet for BYU-Utah, TCU-Utah, TCU-BYU, Navy at Air Force, etc. There are a lot of complicated problems with achieving this goal. The offer is quietly on the table to play on CBS occasionally. The big problem is that CBS must cater to the SEC (for obvious reasons) and is hell bent on showing only geezer programming on Saturday nights. That leaves ONLY the 10 AM MST timeslot available for MWC games. While 11 AM CST for TCU home games is okay, 10 AM MST for multiple games at BYU or Utah is probably unacceptable. The other viable option at this point is to sell those 8 games to ESPN rather than Versus. While ESPN has shown a growing interest in buying some of those games, it is not enough to justify the control they seek over them. ESPN wants to buy the games prior to them being scheduled. If that happens, you will invariably see ESPN moving what would be classic Saturday matchups to Wed, Fri, and Sun nights.


At this point, my solution would be to concede to a few early kickofss and put the Utah at TCU or BYU at TCU (depending on the year) matchup on CBS with an 11 AM CST kickoff and put the BYU-Utah matchup on CBS with a 10 AM MST kickoff on either the Fri or Sat after Thanksgiving. Having 2 games on CBS each year as lead-ins to the SEC would get our foot in the door. At that point, we can try to prove that we're worthy of a night timeslot on CBS competing against ABC primetime football.

[utenation]

Someone asked why our biggest rivalry game(s) were on the Mtn rather than than CBSCS or Versus.. They were up until last year... Last year was the first year, we were full power with DirecTV on the Mtn and they wanted to flood the channel with ratings and exposure...It worked, I think. Clearly, going forward, those games need to be on the bigger channels..

People have talked about selling off our premier games to Fox or ESPN. Do we know what they would offer? Would they bump us ahead of traditonal B6 conference games or would we get left over spots like before? Wouldn't this cause problems with those conferences that have contracts with those networks?


Get on CBS-Main? Wouldn't the SEC have an issue with their games being taken up by the MWC? Would CBS give us prime time slots or as Metro said would we be left with early start times that wouldn't work well for 99% of MWC teams?


Is Versus a bad gig(other than distribution issues)? I don't think so.. Their HD product is as good as ESPN and I think their production has came miles since they switched from a hunting channel.. 60-70 million homes? Versus saw a 33% increase in ratings in 2008, while Fox and ESPN declined. I'll check 2009 numbers in a minute.. The P10 and the B12 think Versus is good enough for their conference and realize it might be a growing option and an alternative to ESPN.


I think we need to improve the talent on the Mtn but realize that someone will always be unhappy with the crew. Quality? How many of you people watched the Mtn in day one in 2005? Do you really think it hasn't improved since then? We are moving to full HD and that is a big cost for a new network.. I heard a figure of $33,000 extra per game just for equipment. Do we lease equipment or did we buy HD equip? How much does a complete setup of full HD cost to buy to cover all our games? I don't know but HD is not cheap..

Overall, I think the Mtn is improving on track after 5 years but still has work to do.


Another thing we need to ask ourselves about selling off our primetime games is, is our attendance up to snuff for those games? Do we want the nation to see half full stadiums on ESPN or ABC, CBS? A few MWC teams sellout for every game but I think we still have work to do in the attendance dept... I see packed houses for most primetime games on the big networks....

[Rosegreen]

utenation, on 09 February 2010 - 11:03 AM, said:

Another thing we need to ask ourselves about selling off our primetime games is, is our attendance up to snuff for those games? Do we want the nation to see half full stadiums on ESPN or ABC, CBS? A few MWC teams sellout for every game but I think we still have work to do in the attendance dept... I see packed houses for most primetime games on the big networks....

All I know is that TCU would have really exposed our conference with their sell-out vs Utah on National TV. They were rocking and rolling in the stands. I was very impressed and they looked like a big time school.


Stuff like that irks me a little, I don't want to settle for small time gigs. If we want to become a power conference, we need to be on TV and accessible to the average joe that isn't a hardcore fan. The current deal is great for people like us on this forum, because we are passionate about our schools...but we need to expand our brand to more people.

[DefendTheStreak]

Most of the marquee games are sellouts or near sellouts. This goes for both football and basketball.


On the flip side:

UNLV vs UNM is a sellout this week and it's the first time in a long time that the T&M has sold out two games in a row. We've got two top twenty five team competing for only the third time in our conference history and it's fantastic that all the fans can see it. There's no way this game gets picked by ESPN or CBS main. Without our partnership with the .mtn only a select few fans in New Mexico and Vegas would be able to see the game.

[Rosegreen]

DefendTheStreak, on 09 February 2010 - 11:32 AM, said:

Most of the marquee games are sellouts or near sellouts. This goes for both football and basketball.


On the flip side:

UNLV vs UNM is a sellout this week and it's the first time in a long time that the T&M has sold out two games in a row. We've two top twenty five team competing for only the third time in our conference history and it's fantastic that all the fans can see it. There's no way this game gets picked by ESPN or CBS main. Without our partnership with the .mtn only a select few fans in New Mexico and Vegas would be able to see the games.

Pretty much, that's an area that needs to be addressed.

[Metropolis777]

utenation, on 09 February 2010 - 12:03 PM, said:

Get on CBS-Main? Wouldn't the SEC have an issue with their games being taken up by the MWC? Would CBS give us prime time slots or as Metro said would we be left with early start times that wouldn't work well for 99% of MWC teams?

Absolutely the SEC would have issues with us impeding on their turf. That's why we would have to concede to some poor kickoff times in order to prove to CBS that we're worthy of a little more attention. The tough part is that college football fans have been conditioned to not tune into ABC, NBC, or CBS before 2 PM EST. So, those 10 AM MST and 11 AM CST broadcasts aren't necessarily going to grab the big exposure that we expect. But, it's a start.

utenation, on 09 February 2010 - 12:03 PM, said:

Is Versus a bad gig(other than distribution issues)? I don't think so.. Their HD product is as good as ESPN and I think their production has came miles since they switched from a hunting channel.. 60-70 million homes? Versus saw a 33% increase in ratings in 2008, while Fox and ESPN declined. I'll check 2009 numbers in a minute.. The P10 and the B12 think Versus is good enough for their conference and realize it might be a growing option and an alternative to ESPN.

It is and it isn't. The fact still remains that it's a niche channel that a ton of people don't know about. The average fan still doesn't know where to tune in for the MWC's premier games. That's a legitimate problem. Additionally, the DirecTV fiasco hurt the TCU at BYU game this year substantially in terms of exposure. If Versus really does become NBC Sports and they grab a little more content from NBC (i.e. a ND game) then Versus is a great gig. At this point, it's 50/50.

utenation, on 09 February 2010 - 12:03 PM, said:

Another thing we need to ask ourselves about selling off our primetime games is, is our attendance up to snuff for those games? Do we want the nation to see half full stadiums on ESPN or ABC, CBS? A few MWC teams sellout for every game but I think we still have work to do in the attendance dept... I see packed houses for most primetime games on the big networks....

This is a legitimate concern. That's why I proposed only a few specific games Utah-BYU is huge period. I guarantee that any Saturday edition of BYU/Utah at TCU will sell out. And, the Navy at Air Force game has national reach with usually at least 85% capacity. These 4 games are showcase games to help bring the conference to the masses. Add Boise to the mix and you have 7 total games to showcase (including TCU/Boise, BYU/Boise, and Utah/Boise). If the other teams start to bring in the crowds and talent on the field, they can become showcases too.

[utenation]

Rosegreen, on 09 February 2010 - 11:30 AM, said:

All I know is that TCU would have really exposed our conference with their sell-out vs Utah on National TV. They were rocking and rolling in the stands. I was very impressed and they looked like a big time school.


Stuff like that irks me a little, I don't want to settle for small time gigs. If we want to become a power conference, we need to be on TV and accessible to the average joe that isn't a hardcore fan. The current deal is great for people like us on this forum, because we are passionate about our schools...but we need to expand our brand to more people.

TCU was 4th in the BCS Polls Pre-Bowl... I think that's the highest a Non AQ team has ever climbed pre bowl.. Tell me how being on a "Big Time Gig" would have improved that in 2009?

[utenation]

As promised, here's some TV ratings for 2009 for some of the bigger channels(surprised to see no Fox numbers)... ESPN and CBS were up and Versus was down in total audience... I'm sure the DirectV issue hurt their numbers last year.. Versus was about flat on rating. I'm actually surprised the numbers weren't worse.. The DirecTV issue cut about 11 million homes off Versus' total package.


ESPN's overall average was solid on both ESPN 1 and 2. The question always remains with ESPN. What type of coverage would we get and what is the net benefit of their exposure?


Food for thought

[mattsarz]

Brew_Poke, on 09 February 2010 - 11:35 AM, said:

Online steaming like we were promised so I could ditch cable/satellite altogether. Sports is the only reason I pay those jokers 80 bucks per month...that's a lot of Pabst.

+1. Its a lot of Labatt's Blue too.