PAC-12 Chaos | Page 17 | The Boneyard

PAC-12 Chaos

ConnHuskBask said:
How many boxes? That still is the main issue to me. At least when I formerly had cable it was something like an additional $15/mo. per box with dvr capability.

With yytv I have it on 3 tvs don't have clunky boxes or wires taking up space in my house at additional charge.
Expand ...
At this point, if you have home internet, why do you still have a cable box?
 
JMick said:
No more boxes if you don't want them. It's just a TV/chrome/firestick/whatever app. I can log in on my PC and watch too.
Expand ...

Interesting - didn't realize that was an option. I'll have to check with the providers in my area to see if they have that too. I believe my cable would be either Verizon or Optimum.

uconnyankee said:
At this point, if you have home internet, why do you still have a cable box?
Expand ...

I've had YouTube TV since like 2017 and when I got a log on to that I was paying for two boxes.

YouTube TV gave me every single UConn basketball and football game last season with the exception of the Central football game if memory serves. That along with the Giants is all I really care about these days.
 
Cable TV won't completely disappear anytime soon ---- there are large swaths of rural America who do not have high speed internet access --- or any internet access at all. That will have to be resolved before cable completely disappears. The broadcast networks all have their own versions of online streaming and as long as those streaming services are easily accessible, they should do just fine in the streaming world.

Let's assume its the future and everything is 100% streaming. The top college brands will demand the highest pay from the streaming services and those brands are increasingly being consolidated into the SEC and B1G. So those two conferences will always have an advantage.

The lesser schools in those conferences serve their purposes. Ohio State, Michigan, Alabama, Georgia.............they cannot compete for 12-0 seasons unless they have teams on their schedules like Indiana, Rutgers, Vanderbilt and Missouri. Those lesser teams serve their purpose to the P2. This will be even more important with further consolidation of the top brands to these two conferences.
 
.-.
JMick said:
Yeah I'm getting cable for $59.99/mo right now that has everything besides CBSSN. I'll be adding CBSSN for $8 during football season and then removing it again. I never thought cable would be cheaper but they're doing everything they can to survive.
Expand ...
I'll have to take a look into it
 
JMick said:
Yeah I'm getting cable for $59.99/mo right now that has everything besides CBSSN. I'll be adding CBSSN for $8 during football season and then removing it again. I never thought cable would be cheaper but they're doing everything they can to survive.
Expand ...

Who is your provider? I can only get Cox, nothing else in the service area and I'm at $300/mo for the all in TV package plus gig internet. It's insane and they won't back me down. I'm about to go to YTTV but I have a wife who doesn't understand how to use both remotes for apps & tv shows let alone that there won't be a cable box anymore.
 
huskymedic said:
Let’s add a little more noise to the process:

Expand ...


So everyone finds a home except Oregon State and Washington State and UConn gets the shaft again. Rule # 1 cannot be beaten.

If Oregon State and Washington State start adding teams to their version of the PAC conference which will now be G5, or should I say G6. maybe we can get a football only invite.
 
Last edited:
DCUconnfan said:
Who is your provider? I can only get Cox, nothing else in the service area and I'm at $300/mo for the all in TV package plus gig internet. It's insane and they won't back me down. I'm about to go to YTTV but I have a wife who doesn't understand how to use both remotes for apps & tv shows let alone that there won't be a cable box anymore.
Expand ...
Spectrum. I was up to $245/mo, switched to YTTV, got a promo to bring my cable back to spectrum and now I get cable and half gig internet for $120 after taxes and fees. There is no gig internet available by me, unfortunately.
 
.-.
FfldCntyFan said:
I'm waiting for the Fish of West Virginia to return.
Expand ...
I believe Fishy forgot the password to that account otherwise it would probably be turning out periodic funny content.
 
The cable bundle may not be completely on the outs as there is some innovation going on out there.

Our housing development signed up for this:

$83/month for:
500 Mbps speed no data caps
Modem/Router
125+ channels
3 premium channels HBO/Showtime/Cinemax
On Demand
2 DVR cable boxes
Adds ons can be purchased direct like sports packages (already includes the ESPN stuff/SECN. BTN, ACCN, and FS1), other premium channels, higher internet speed,...
I think the price is locked in for 2 years with max price increases in the future of 5%.
You are on your own for wiring your house if you haven't already.

When the condo board announced the bulk deal, I thought the deal was too good to be true, but that is the deal. I am now paying a little extra for some sports channels.

I asked the provider how they could do the deal. They said we are getting a bulk rate, billing is semi annual in advance with one bill going to the association which is much cheaper for the provider (we get charged through our HOA fees), they won't wire your house so they avoid that cost, standardization of equipment and services, and they got all of the housing complex where before some had DISH, some didn't have cable/internet, and some were internet only. Approximately 88% of the complex had internet and 60% had cable previously. Some people wanted to opt out of the deal, but the deal was 100% of the complex or no deal and the board voted to add the expense to annual dues.
 
Since the ACC GOR runs longer than the Big XII’s, you’d think the ACC would make a strong offer for the best of the Big XII (Kansas, TCU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State) and open up new markets and come back to ESPN for contract rejiggering. It would be hundreds of millions cheaper just based on GOR length. But FSU is likely in a Joker mindset of burning a mountain of cash just to watch the world burn.
 
Ultimately, value will ba rewarded...and value will be how many people watch your game.

Streaming only further solidifies that value statement.
 
.-.
Sports Illustrated article says that the B1G Presidents and Chancellors want to add all four - Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal. While the media partners only want two - Washington and Oregon.

Maybe another media partner can enter the picture to pay for Stanford and Cal? Maybe they get a lesser deal than Washington and Oregon will get? I get that Stanford and Cal don't move the needle for ratings, but that research money and collaboration is hard to turn down.


A source familiar with the Big Ten thinking said the conference’s presidents are more interested in adding all four schools, while the league’s media partners are more interested in a two-member addition of Oregon and Washington. While one league source cautioned “nothing is there” in terms of an imminent move, a second source said “a real proposal is going to take shape fast” regarding Oregon and Washington.
 
billybud said:
Ultimately, value will ba rewarded...and value will be how many people watch your game.

Streaming only further solidifies that value statement.
Expand ...

Hollywood has gone on strike because streaming companies are opaque and refuse to share their secret sauce. And as value changes in an instance, streamers have little reason to build anything consistent. It’s why you are will hardly ever see shows last more than 4 seasons on them.
 
billybud said:
Ultimately, value will ba rewarded...and value will be how many people watch your game.

Streaming only further solidifies that value statement.
Expand ...
Maybe. But the value is tied to who you play. FSU vs Wake isn't as good as Auburn Ole Miss. We know from the days of independent deals that they aren't worth as much. The value comes from a known schedule against quality opponents that also have good fanbases.

In order for us to get where you expect it will go, some of the schools in the top conferences will need to be relegated out. It really should look like the Premier League. 36 top programs. 4 schools get bumped out every year, 4 get promoted in. Will they accept that? Not likely.
 
Rufus said:
Sports Illustrated article says that the B1G Presidents and Chancellors want to add all four - Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal. While the media partners only want two - Washington and Oregon.

Maybe another media partner can enter the picture to pay for Stanford and Cal? Maybe they get a lesser deal than Washington and Oregon will get? I get that Stanford and Cal don't move the needle for ratings, but that research money and collaboration is hard to turn down.


A source familiar with the Big Ten thinking said the conference’s presidents are more interested in adding all four schools, while the league’s media partners are more interested in a two-member addition of Oregon and Washington. While one league source cautioned “nothing is there” in terms of an imminent move, a second source said “a real proposal is going to take shape fast” regarding Oregon and Washington.
Expand ...
This is why I didn't think the ACC would fall apart. There are quality programs, as good as any in the ACC at Football, who have no GOR issues. They also have the requisite AAU membership. The B1G is just more likely to go that way and never go past 20.
 
Rufus said:
Sports Illustrated article says that the B1G Presidents and Chancellors want to add all four - Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal. While the media partners only want two - Washington and Oregon.

Maybe another media partner can enter the picture to pay for Stanford and Cal? Maybe they get a lesser deal than Washington and Oregon will get? I get that Stanford and Cal don't move the needle for ratings, but that research money and collaboration is hard to turn down.


A source familiar with the Big Ten thinking said the conference’s presidents are more interested in adding all four schools, while the league’s media partners are more interested in a two-member addition of Oregon and Washington. While one league source cautioned “nothing is there” in terms of an imminent move, a second source said “a real proposal is going to take shape fast” regarding Oregon and Washington.
Expand ...

There is no research money and collaboration with the B10. That isn’t what the Big 10 Alliance does. Ohio State has important research partnership alliances, but they come outside of any direct B10 header. Midwest Regional Network is one, and it involves Michigan, Purdue, Michigan State, Dayton, Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Case Western, etc.
 
JeepCSC said:
There is no research money and collaboration with the B10. That isn’t what the Big 10 Alliance does. Ohio State has important research partnership alliances, but they come outside of any direct B10 header. Midwest Regional Network is one, and it involves Michigan, Purdue, Michigan State, Dayton, Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Case Western, etc.
Expand ...

They collaborate on virtually everything. They even have annual B1G conferences on various functionalities of a university, such as career services. They are a part of the B1G Cancer Consortium and other top research initiatives.
 
.-.
HuskyHawk said:
Maybe. But the value is tied to who you play. FSU vs Wake isn't as good as Auburn Ole Miss. We know from the days of independent deals that they aren't worth as much. The value comes from a known schedule against quality opponents that also have good fanbases.

In order for us to get where you expect it will go, some of the schools in the top conferences will need to be relegated out. It really should look like the Premier League. 36 top programs. 4 schools get bumped out every year, 4 get promoted in. Will they accept that? Not likely.
Expand ...

People watch top teams....last season, 4 million watched Michigan-Indiana and it wasn't for the quality of the match up.

Almost 2 million watched Clemson murder Boston College...and 2.42 million watched FSU vs Wake Forest
 
JeepCSC said:
There is no research money and collaboration with the B10. That isn’t what the Big 10 Alliance does. Ohio State has important research partnership alliances, but they come outside of any direct B10 header. Midwest Regional Network is one, and it involves Michigan, Purdue, Michigan State, Dayton, Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Case Western, etc.
Expand ...
Yes, agree. No one is sharing research money unless there are collaborative research grant applications.

The great value in the CIC is not in sharing grants but rather in establishing benchmarks across the conference. Those are very difficult to do otherwise unless you have something like an academic/athletic conference (in this case the CIC) sharing internal numbers and processes. Colleges without such setups are forced to rely on external reviewers which are quite costly. It's very convenient to have land grant/flagship state universities handing over information about departmental funding in order to establish benchmarks at each university. Sounds like a small w/ regard to athletics (i.e. it's not make or break) but a pretty big thing inside universities, since the benchmarks are the things against which everything else is assessed.
 
Rufus said:
They collaborate on virtually everything. They even have annual B1G conferences on various functionalities of a university, such as career services. They are a part of the B1G Cancer Consortium and other top research initiatives.
Expand ...
Yes, all these things are great, BUT---they're not sharing research grant money which is what the prior post implied.
 
CL82 said:
I believe Fishy forgot the password to that account otherwise it would probably be turning out periodic funny content.
Expand ...

I forgot the password to that and even to the email address I used for it
 
Fishy said:
I forgot the password to that and even to the email address I used for it
Expand ...
It's a shame because it was gold. The "soulful miner" was the best.
 
Rufus said:
They collaborate on virtually everything. They even have annual B1G conferences on various functionalities of a university, such as career services. They are a part of the B1G Cancer Consortium and other top research initiatives.
Expand ...

The Big Cancer Consortium, like the B10 Alliance, is a sharing initiative (office supplies, specimen results). It isn’t a research-funding endeavor. No university is making handfuls of research money because of the B10. Case in point, Rutgers was 31st in NSF expenditures in 2014. They are now 45th.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,306
Messages
4,562,342
Members
10,457
Latest member
caw2


Top Bottom