Jump to content
namssa

MW considers cutting the TV cord

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, UNLV2001 said:

One thing that might work in UNLV's favor is what happens with the new NHL team TV - If LV can land something like Fox Sports Utah, then maybe UNLV and some regional schools could get air time.

So far I've heard nothing as to what TV deal the Golden Knights might have.........but with the NHL team as the main flagship team, UNLV FB BB BB might piggy back and even some College of Southern Nevada sports could get some spots & even the AAA baseball team gets some air time in the summer months.

You're much too optimistic. This conference is dog excrement for your school and mine and will never be anything else at least unless Hairball leaves.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SleepingGiantsFan said:

You're much too optimistic. This conference is dog excrement for your school and mine and will never be anything else at least unless Hairball leaves.

Yes - I am hoping for a new regional sports channel similar to Fox Sports San Diego...........but it's a long shot 

Not sure any commissioner could fix the TV revenue problem affecting the MWC and all the conferences 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brew_Poke said:

Sports networks are why people are cutting the cord.  You think making a new boutique sports network with very limited national appeal is the way to go forward?  It sounds like throwing good money after bad.

Maybe but 100% streaming is akin to waiving a white flag and shouting "OK, WE ADMIT IT! WE'RE JUST A STEP FROM FCS STATUS AND WE KNOW IT!"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, UNLV2001 said:

Yes - I am hoping for a new regional sports channel similar to Fox Sports San Diego...........but it's a long shot 

Not sure any commissioner could fix the TV revenue problem affecting the MWC and all the conferences 

It wouldn't do you any good anyway as a member of the MWC. For one hoops season when SDSU was headed out of this mess, a bunch of our hoops games were televised on the new Lakers network. Then Hairball stepped in and put the kibosh on that. (He's such an asswipe.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MWC Tex said:

???...they already do.  The Big 10 Network digital platform makes a lot more $$ than we'll ever make due to the size of the fans base.  They already have a digital network of some sort but they are more focused on their own TV conference network right now. 

We are ahead of the game already and while we may not make P5 type money, we'll still have the potential to make a good deal of money and get the nice start times to fans to attend the game.  The best thing is that we would control the network ourselves and not depend on CBS/ESPN or whoever to run/own it like a TV network. 

K

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, UNLV2001 said:

I agree that TV $$ will decline............and TV $$ will go to the few top programs and not much to lesser programs...............still in the pecking order of college sports the MWC is not a plus revenue conference and will be getting cents on the dollar vs the old TV days 

The MWC isn't the only conference that will see a major $$ decline, pretty much the entire non-P5 will see drastic declines with maybe some games being used as filler for off nights and late Eastern Time time slots.

I could see BSU FB being one of the few MWC programs to get actual TV $$ because ESPN can get them on Thursday & Friday nights - ESPN with BSU & BYU has their western, late night eastern filler games, they don't need much more................then the rest of the MWC will try to gather as many pennies as possible on some streaming system or just streaming on CI / MWC Network.

If major network TV $$ declines, the real losers could be the B10/ Pac12 networks because if the major TV outlets concentrate on the P5, those networks will lose some games & the G5 will be left to streaming from their own campus AV studio's - Major TV could fill the time slots they need with just P5 games...........they really don't need the G5 unless they want those weeknight FB games the MAC, SunBelt, BSU & BYU provide 

I think TV revenue will decline dramatically to even the big programs. TV will end up back to picking up games as seasons progress to shore up viewership and ratings. Another thing schools need to look at in the mean time is having rights to blackout zones and paywalling those suckers too. I'd be all for televised Wyoming games being blacked out in a 100 mile radius, then UW having all streaming rights and charging 12 bucks to watch it on line in the blackout zone.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

Maybe but 100% streaming is akin to waiving a white flag and shouting "OK, WE ADMIT IT! WE'RE JUST A STEP FROM FCS STATUS AND WE KNOW IT!"

Which isn't what anyone is advocating...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Wyovanian said:

I think TV revenue will decline dramatically to even the big programs. TV will end up back to picking up games as seasons progress to shore up viewership and ratings. Another thing schools need to look at in the mean time is having rights to blackout zones and paywalling those suckers too. I'd be all for Wyoming games being blacked out in a 100 mile radius, then UW having all streaming rights and charging 12 bucks to watch it on line in the blackout zone.

I could see the major TV networks doing to the P5 what they did to the NFL..........letting the networks pick the games they want as the season goes on rather than set a season long schedule before the seasons starts............this means bigger more meaningful games will be on TV in prime time slots and other games will be left for conference networks or in the case of G5's for streaming or "take it or leave it 8 pm ET starts on Wed. Thurs. or Friday's 

My thinking is it might be best for the MWC to try to hook up with a couple of regional sports channels that have coverage in the MWC footprint & then if games aren't picked up do the streaming thing like the set up the MWC has now.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, UNLV2001 said:

I could see the major TV networks doing to the P5 what they did to the NFL..........letting the networks pick the games they want as the season goes on rather than set a season long schedule before the seasons starts............this means bigger more meaningful games will be on TV in prime time slots and other games will be left for conference networks or in the case of G5's for streaming or "take it or leave it 8 pm ET starts on Wed. Thurs. or Friday's 

My thinking is it might be best for the MWC to try to hook up with a couple of regional sports channels that have coverage in the MWC footprint & then if games aren't picked up do the streaming thing like the set up the MWC has now.

It'll pretty much be a hybrid of all of that. We're experiencing a paradigm shift in live broadcasting right now. If people thought the realignment of the past decade has been wild, wait until this all shakes out. It's not going to be an earthquake though. More like a glacier changing course...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wyovanian said:

It'll pretty much be a hybrid of all of that. We're experiencing a paradigm shift in live broadcasting right now. If people thought the realignment of the past decade has been wild, wait until this all shakes out. It's not going to be an earthquake though. More like a glacier changing course...

Being that a majority of students now and five years ago rarely subscribe to cable or satellite and will continue the trend, the bigger shift is that cell phone and data plans are getting to be unlimited with no cap.  That is the bigger change for people watching sports and tv shows. No need for cable or home internet.  The trouble for ESPN watch and 3 is that they won't capture that market because they require a cable provider.  

This is where we are already ahead of others with our digital network.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, MWC Tex said:

Being that a majority of students now and five years ago rarely subscribe to cable or satellite and will continue the trend, the bigger shift is that cell phone and data plans are getting to be unlimited with no cap.  That is the bigger change for people watching sports and tv shows. No need for cable or home internet.  The trouble for ESPN watch and 3 is that they won't capture that market because they require a cable provider.  

This is where we are already ahead of others with our digital network.

Exactly. There is a multitude of market forces at work that are everything from direct to tangential to live sports broadcasting. Lots of fractal considerations, if there is such a thing. The deliciousness of life is it's unpredictability...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎13‎/‎2017 at 10:31 AM, NorCalCoug said:

Given Thompson's stellar track record optimizing the MWC's TV situation, I don't see how this could go wrong...  

I think it's obvious that the MWC partnering with CUSA on Facebook is the first step.

It's just too bad that you aren't bringing in revenue from FACEBOOK.

hqdefault.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, FormerFrog said:

I think it's obvious that the MWC partnering with CUSA on Facebook is the first step.

It's just too bad that you aren't bringing in revenue from FACEBOOK.

hqdefault.jpg

One thing is for sure. MW and AAC make the same money from their streaming games. Only difference is there is no limit to who can view or share a twitter or Facebook match. Unfortunately the same isn't true for ESPN3 feeds which will only ever be viewed by ESPN subscribers who care enough about the match up to login and then deal with clunkiness of trying to watch more than one game. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet, nothing changes the fact that a Facebook or Twitter feed to a game is more accessible than an ESPN3 stream. If we're at the streaming level where you basically aren't being paid for the content why allow it to be streamed through a keyhole(ESPN sub requirement)? If it's not a paid broadcast wouldn't Exposure be number #1 priority?

Now consider who can share their game with friends and family on the worlds largest social media platform and who can't? 

#onyourside #aacisbetterbutyouarestilldumb

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, AztecSU said:

And yet, nothing changes the fact that a Facebook or Twitter feed to a game is more accessible than an ESPN3 stream. If we're at the streaming level where you basically aren't being paid for the content why allow it to be streamed through a keyhole(ESPN sub requirement)? If it's not a paid broadcast wouldn't Exposure be number #1 priority?

Now consider who can share their game with friends and family on the worlds largest social media platform and who can't? 

#onyourside #aacisbetterbutyouarestilldumb

 

YOU NEVER GIVE AWAY FREE CONTENT.

IT SETS A BAD TONE FOR UPCOMING NEGOTIATIONS.

VERY BAD...

AS IN "beIN" LEVEL BAD (WHICH IS YOUR PARTNER CONFERENCE'S PARTNER)

MARK MY WORDS, THE CUSA AND MWC WILL SHARE beIN.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...