Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bronco7454

I don't get these people who are upset that Boise State's bowl game will be on

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, bornontheblue said:

I am hearing more and more people pissed that they can't watch the game because it is streaming. Excuse me, but I thought this was 2021! FFS it's almost 2022. 

I cut the cord years ago. 

Here's what might bother me about streaming that bowl game:

  • Can they handle the traffic?  BYU played a basketball game broadcast exclusively on Facebook Live a few years ago.  Their system couldn't handle so many people trying to watch the game, and most of the first half of the game wasn't watchable.
  • Do the camera crews have experience broadcasting sporting events?  Will the cameras capture all the relevant action on and off the field?
  • Commercials.  I'm spoiled with DVR and have a hard time watching any programming with commercials that can't be skipped over.  I'll watch tonight's BYU-USU game on BYUtv through the Roku.  The BYUtv app used to have DVR-like capability that would allow me to start the game late and skip the commercials.  Now I have to wait until the game is over to skip commercials, so I won't start watching the game until I'm confident it's already over.  Which means I also have to stay away from any other shows or message boards during the game from which I might inadvertently find out the results.
  • Exposure - maybe the social media promotion for this game will more than compensate for this, but not being on a traditional TV network means it will lose out on any casual viewers flipping through channels or otherwise perusing the sports offerings from their TV provider.

I wouldn't complain about anything except if the audio/video quality is subpar or the camera work sucks.  Or if the commentators are ill-prepared or not very knowledgeable about the sport. Or...

I would probably complain. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Pelado said:

Here's what might bother me about streaming that bowl game:

  • Can they handle the traffic?  BYU played a basketball game broadcast exclusively on Facebook Live a few years ago.  Their system couldn't handle so many people trying to watch the game, and most of the first half of the game wasn't watchable.
  • Do the camera crews have experience broadcasting sporting events?  Will the cameras capture all the relevant action on and off the field?
  • Commercials.  I'm spoiled with DVR and have a hard time watching any programming with commercials that can't be skipped over.  I'll watch tonight's BYU-USU game on BYUtv through the Roku.  The BYUtv app used to have DVR-like capability that would allow me to start the game late and skip the commercials.  Now I have to wait until the game is over to skip commercials, so I won't start watching the game until I'm confident it's already over.  Which means I also have to stay away from any other shows or message boards during the game from which I might inadvertently find out the results.
  • Exposure - maybe the social media promotion for this game will more than compensate for this, but not being on a traditional TV network means it will lose out on any casual viewers flipping through channels or otherwise perusing the sports offerings from their TV provider.

I wouldn't complain about anything except if the audio/video quality is subpar or the camera work sucks.  Or if the commentators are ill-prepared or not very knowledgeable about the sport. Or...

I would probably complain. 

I cut the chord  and streamed every game I’ve watched since that was an option. I have never had poor audio or video issues 

All the major live TV streaming options have a DVR option. I never use it, but it’s there. 
 

Casual boomer viewers  may miss out when flipping through the channels, sure but that TV viewership model is ancient news. In 5 to 10 years streaming will be the primary option for all media content, especially sports  if it isn’t there already. Traditional media delivery options would be  be dead already but boomers love their cable/satellite services. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2021 at 4:29 PM, SDSUfan said:

You simply need to add a Roku stick or Amazon Fire stick to your arsenal if you don't have an app enabled TV.  They cost  abut $30.00 and  you access to "apps"  such as Stadium, Barstool and others.  You need a wireless LAN also.  Many are free, others charge a monthly rate. Most are far less expensive than a cable package.  Right now my provider, Spectrum, is offering Their app for 1/3 the cost of their cable service. 

It's the 21st century, man. 

It's all ball bearings now.... ( obscure movie reference,)

If you have a recent (Smart) TV you may already have the ability to load apps and may not need a Roku or other.

You can really save yourself some money by dumping cable and using apps.

I get your point.. Everyone's needs are different. But I don't worry about what my cable bill costs. Having everything I need and want in one place is how I roll.  And yes, all my tech in my house is top of the line for what I need.

If I was worried about cost, I might consider your ideas. So thanks for the suggestions. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, utenation said:

I get your point.. Everyone's needs are different. But I don't worry about what my cable bill costs. Having everything I need and want in one place is how I roll.  And yes, all my tech in my house is top of the line for what I need.

If I was worried about cost, I might consider your ideas. So thanks for the suggestions. 

 

If you are still using cable/Satelite you are ancient news man. 
 

I can’t believe people are so stubborn about tiis. Boomers are scared to death of streaming, lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bornontheblue said:

If you are still using cable/Satelite you are ancient news man. 
 

I can’t believe people are so stubborn about tiis. Boomers are scared to death of streaming, lol 

I'm really trying to be nice about this. And I'm not a boomer. I mean isn't it good enough that I like what I have and I'm 100% content? It's seems all the streamers are looking for is a way is to save a buck. Good for them.  But I don't need to save a buck on TV options. LOL. I'm not trying to shove cable down your throat or "convince" you my way is best. Everyone is different. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, utenation said:

I'm really trying to be nice about this. And I'm not a boomer. I mean isn't it good enough that I like what I have and I'm 100% content? It's seems all the streamers are looking for a way to save a buck. Good for them.  But I don't need to save a buck on TV options. LOL. I'm not trying to shove cable down your throat or "convince" you my way is best. Everyone is different. 

You are right, I was kinda rude. I’m sorry. 

its not a cost issue that makes steaming superior to satelite/cable but that is definite benefit. I mske a good living too , but I still like value for the money I spend. 
 

its about convenience and quality. On you tube tv you can get some big games streamed in 4k, I’m pretty sure traditional companies don’t want to use up bandwidth to do that. I can watch on My iPad, or my 65 inch tv, I can watch on a road trip while my wife is driving. if I’m traveling I don’t have to rely on the hotels shitty tv. It’s just a superior option for what  I need. I can use the apps on my Xbox, on my PC In my office  it just much more convenient. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, bornontheblue said:

I cut the chord  and streamed every game I’ve watched since that was an option. I have never had poor audio or video issues 

All the major live TV streaming options have a DVR option. I never use it, but it’s there. 
 

Casual boomer viewers  may miss out when flipping through the channels, sure but that TV viewership model is ancient news. In 5 to 10 years streaming will be the primary option for all media content, especially sports  if it isn’t there already. Traditional media delivery options would be  be dead already but boomers love their cable/satellite services. 

I've been streaming through Roku - and other means - for at least a decade. 

Back before all the NCAA tournament games were broadcast nationally, I would hook up my laptop to the TV so I could stream the BYU game without having to worry about CBS cutting to a different game.  I also convinced the managing partner at my employer at the time to let me set up the tournament streaming to the projector in the conference room, saying that we would all be more productive (and it would be less of a drain on the office broadband) if we could watch in there.

That Facebook Live game I mentioned earlier was the biggest audio/video problem I remember - and it was with a new provider who apparently hadn't adequately tested the loads they would experience during the game.  That might also be the case for the Barstool website/app/whatever.  Are they truly prepared for the volume they'll experience on game day?

I've subscribed to pretty much all the live TV streaming services in the past, so I'm not exactly a novice about this stuff.  Some are better than others when it comes to DVR capability.  For example, with Hulu TV and Playstation Vue, it wouldn't allow me to pause or to skip over commercials on certain channels like ESPN.  I think they were just piggy-backing off of ESPN's streaming platform.  That may have changed - it's been a while since I subscribed to Hulu TV.  And Playstation Vue doesn't exist anymore.

But, as I understand it, this game will not be available on most of those major live TV providers (except Sling), so this streamed game may not have DVR tools available for the viewers using the Barstool website or app.

As to the casual viewers - I'll still record and/or watch games from other teams that I see are being broadcast over the air on my Tablo or on Sling/Youtube TV/Fubo/whatever I have at the time.  Most of the time, those are not games I'm seeking out, but I'll find myself watching them because I have some interest and easy access.  There may be lots of other people like me, who will watch a game in which they have mild interest if it's easy to access.  There are dozens of us, at least.

Barstool seems to be trying to increase the interest enough that people will be willing to do more to view it.  That may end up resulting in higher viewership than relying on the casual viewers.  But that growth is at the expense of casual viewers rather than in addition to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, bornontheblue said:

its about convenience and quality. 

Everything I have is set up for 4K with unlimited On Demand options. . DVRs and TVs. I have a gig speeds on internet. Just upgraded to a faster modem. It's lightening fast and can load up as many devices as you can throw at it and works flawlessly. 

I'm not lacking on quality. And as mentioned, super convenient for me. One bill. Autopay. Forget about it.....

 

Johnny Depp Forget About It GIFs | Tenor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, utenation said:

Everything I have is set up for 4K with unlimited On Demand options. . DVRs and TVs. I have a gig speeds on internet. Just upgraded to a faster modem. It's lightening fast and can load up as many devices as you can throw at it and works flawlessly. 

I'm not lacking on quality. And as mentioned, super convenient for me. One bill. Autopay. Forget about it.....

 

Johnny Depp Forget About It GIFs | Tenor

How much do you pay for all of that? 
 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, utenation said:

I'm really trying to be nice about this. And I'm not a boomer. I mean isn't it good enough that I like what I have and I'm 100% content? It's seems all the streamers are looking for is a way is to save a buck. Good for them.  But I don't need to save a buck on TV options. LOL. I'm not trying to shove cable down your throat or "convince" you my way is best. Everyone is different. 

For me it is about increased content and options compared to price.  I'm certainly not going to knock you for liking your set up though.

Youtube.tv is better than my prior cable subscription for live T.V. More flexible, easy to use, unlimited DVR, all the cable channels, robust sports package without paying extra.  60 bucks.  Hulu, Netflix, Paramount+, Amazon Prime all together adds up to $95, let's call it 100 bucks.  Could add the disney+ bundle to Hulu for $7 more.

That is simply way, way, way more content for less than traditional cable, with all the benefits and thensome of traditional cable due to Youtube.tv.  

I get you have everything you want in an easy way one stop thing, and that is worth value to you, no judgement.  Certainly something to be said for 1 bill as opposed to my 6.  For me it is not about saving a buck though, it is about increasing the content available to me exponentially while paying less.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care about Barstool in particular, don't really keep up with them. But having a streaming-only bowl that nobody's going to watch is chintzy, it's minor-league, it speaks volumes about Hair's leadership.

Notice how all of the AAC's bowls are on TV. They have more P5 matchups than us, too, even though they were a joke this year outside of Cincinnati.

0mK6pGK.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BoiseStateOfMind said:

I don't care about Barstool in particular, don't really keep up with them. But having a streaming-only bowl that nobody's going to watch is chintzy, it's minor-league, it speaks volumes about Hair's leadership.

Notice how all of the AAC's bowls are on TV. They have more P5 matchups than us, too, even though they were a joke this year outside of Cincinnati.

Geography plays a huge role in bowl opportunities.  Most bowls are in the Eastern and Central Time zones and prefer schools  from those time zones as they are more likely to travel and draw eyes.

MWC is in a hard spot.  We could certainly do better I think.  Just lack of bowls this side of the divide.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BoiseStateOfMind said:

I don't care about Barstool in particular, don't really keep up with them. But having a streaming-only bowl that nobody's going to watch is chintzy, it's minor-league, it speaks volumes about Hair's leadership.

Notice how all of the AAC's bowls are on TV. They have more P5 matchups than us, too, even though they were a joke this year outside of Cincinnati.

Yeah they said in 1993 that the Internet would just be a fad , and was just for geeks. 
 

Cmon Man, this isn’t 1998. The methods of distributing entertainment is changing . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Geography plays a huge role in bowl opportunities.  Most bowls are in the Eastern and Central Time zones and prefer schools  from those time zones as they are more likely to travel and draw eyes.

MWC is in a hard spot.  We could certainly do better I think.  Just lack of bowls this side of the divide.  

It is not like some of those bowls haven't tried with the MWC.  The Liberty Bowl lined up a great matchup for the MWC Champion many years ago, but the conference wouldn't travel to the game.  Ditto for the Independence Bowl.  The MWC has had opportunities, but they just don't have the loyal fanbase to make the trips.  Air Force is about the only one that draws there and it isn't due to traveling, just to the number of former Air Force members in those areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, East Coast Aztec said:

Way to join us millenials, technologically.  There are actually quite a few free apps on Roku that are nice.  Outdoor, various history, nature, old school tv and cartoon channels.  Definitely poke around the "search channels" section, you will probably find something you like for free to go along with your paid streaming apps

And add the porn channels to it like us Gen Xers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, bornontheblue said:

My daughter pulled the "Ok Boomer" line on me a couple years ago when all the kids were saying that. I was like what the +++++ did you just call me? 

I had to educate her that there is this generation called Gen X that hated the boomers before hating the boomers was cool. 

 

Millennials.

God love em.’

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, masterfrog said:

It is not like some of those bowls haven't tried with the MWC.  The Liberty Bowl lined up a great matchup for the MWC Champion many years ago, but the conference wouldn't travel to the game.  Ditto for the Independence Bowl.  The MWC has had opportunities, but they just don't have the loyal fanbase to make the trips.  Air Force is about the only one that draws there and it isn't due to traveling, just to the number of former Air Force members in those areas.

None of their ties would travel back west for a similar bowl, either.  It's not loyal fan bases that lost those bowls, it's simply geography.  ACC fans never traveled for shit to Boise.  Miami brought like 1000, BC like 800.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, halfmanhalfbronco said:

None of their ties would travel back west for said bowls either.  It's not loyal fan bases that lost those bowls, it's simply geography.

You say that, but I see plenty of Eastern fans at the Rose Bowl and Fiesta Bowl every year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...