Realignment talk not going away

[SimonBolivar 10926]

9 minutes ago, Pasken said:

Streaming is annoying bc there aren't a lot of arrangements like this. Streaming from Apple is insanely easy and simple. No bullshit. It's hard for me to understand how so many ppl are insistent on freaking cable in 2023 but maybe I'm the crazy one.

MLS Season Pass is great on my Roku, but I'm not an Apple guy and on my phone they haven't finished the AppleTV app for Android yet which is super annoying to be watching sporting events from a browser on your phone in 2023.

[0xdeadbeef 1626]

5 minutes ago, Jasper_Jester said:

interesting on Apple TV thoughts/ So, do you all get ESPN+ free? because I bet ESPN is going to push as many big12 games to that service as they can now that they get all the Tier 3 content.

Serious question, do many/most people pay for streaming sports on the Internet?     

I'm not saying I use sportsurge.net, and similar sites, but a friend told me they have virtually every game. 

[billfromlaketravis 11359]

2 minutes ago, Jasper_Jester said:

interesting on Apple TV thoughts/ So, do you all get ESPN+ free? because I bet ESPN is going to push as many big12 games to that service as they can now that they get all the Tier 3 content.

I bundle ESPN+ with Hulu no ads, and Disney +. It’s $19.99 before taxes.

I think it works out to be ESPN+ for $5.99. It’s a very shitty app. It makes you do a 2 step verification every f***ing time you use it. The programming is usually terrible. Limited 30 for 30 docs, girl’s softball, rando MLB games. No NBA.

Yes there are Big 12 games on during football, basketball, and baseball season. I believe it also gives you access to some ACCN games. 

I do like the interface of the ESPN app. They put every game in a scrolling bar, and you browse by individual sports. But… everything is broadcast in 720p. 
 

The Fox Sports app broadcasts MLB, NFL, and top college games in 4k which is awesome. 

[Jasper_Jester 356]

6 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

I bundle ESPN+ with Hulu no ads, and Disney +. It’s $19.99 before taxes.

I think it works out to be ESPN+ for $5.99. It’s a very shitty app. It makes you do a 2 step verification every f***ing time you use it. The programming is usually terrible. Limited 30 for 30 docs, girl’s softball, rando MLB games. No NBA.

Yes there are Big 12 games on during football, basketball, and baseball season. I believe it also gives you access to some ACCN games. 

I do like the interface of the ESPN app. They put every game in a scrolling bar, and you browse by individual sports. But… everything is broadcast in 720p. 
 

The Fox Sports app broadcasts MLB, NFL, and top college games in 4k which is awesome. 

they have pro Kabaddi on ESPN+

[0xdeadbeef 1626]

6 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

 

Come on, Man.  Let's not exaggerate.

It was only 3.44 million fewer viewers. 

 

And Pac-x is losing their 2 biggest draws.  Change that Championship Game to  Utah vs Washington and it probably falls below the American Conference.  

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-football-tv-ratings/

 

 

[Jasper_Jester 356]

8 minutes ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

Serious question, do many/most people pay for streaming sports on the Internet?     

I'm not saying I use sportsurge.net, and similar sites, but a friend told me they have virtually every game. 

I don't break the law. But also the one game a year the Horns play football on LHN seems to be the only thing my friends say they can't get on Sportsurge.net. Is that ESPN tightening up the reigns on streaming?

[utee94 15745]

12 minutes ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

Serious question, do many/most people pay for streaming sports on the Internet?     

I'm not saying I use sportsurge.net, and similar sites, but a friend told me they have virtually every game. 

I can't speak for many/most people, but yes, every grown adult I know that cares enough about sports to watch them streaming, pays for them, rather than stealing them from pirated streams.

[Pasken 1309]

why the fuck was the pac 12 game at 8pm on a Friday night? 

[BigHornedLurker 1894]

29 minutes ago, PilotsError said:

I'm only 44 and I just won't stream sports.  Not even the Cowboys or Horns. It's such a pain in the ass, and I'm not unique among my friends.  I realize many of you do.

I predict numbers for the Apple subs to be below even the lowest predicted thresh hold.  Catastrophic.  

your picture makes you barely look 84 !

[Chewbacca 7730]

23 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

I'm 56, and I stream NBA League Pass.  It's dirt simple, and aside from the annoyances of blackouts (and if a game is broadcast on TNT or ESPN it won't be on League Pass) it's damned convenient.

What I won't don't want to do is piecemeal a sport (say, college football) and have to subscribe to 4-5 different services in order to catch this or that game.  

Be glad you're not a Nuggets or Avs fan.  I've been having to illegally stream for the last 2 years to watch their games.  I'm over having to do that.  Would love to be able to pay for a streaming service.  Currently Vudu is the only option and that is something like $80/month.  Not gonna pay that.

[BurntOrange&White 39655]

28 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

I'm 56, and I stream NBA League Pass.  It's dirt simple, and aside from the annoyances of blackouts (and if a game is broadcast on TNT or ESPN it won't be on League Pass) it's damned convenient.

What I won't don't want to do is piecemeal a sport (say, college football) and have to subscribe to 4-5 different services in order to catch this or that game.  

The annoying part is having to go between 2-3 apps to watch games 

[tx ind 6999]

1 hour ago, Crockett said:

If this is true, Utah is screwed.

[Chewbacca 7730]

21 minutes ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

Serious question, do many/most people pay for streaming sports on the Internet?     

I'm not saying I use sportsurge.net, and similar sites, but a friend told me they have virtually every game. 

That site sucks ass, but sometimes is your only option.

[Chewbacca 7730]

8 minutes ago, Pasken said:

why the fuck was the pac 12 game at 8pm on a Friday night? 

Because they didn't want to go up against the SEC, B1G or B12?

[Evil Bill Obrien 3190]

20 minutes ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

Serious question, do many/most people pay for streaming sports on the Internet?     

I'm not saying I use sportsurge.net, and similar sites, but a friend told me they have virtually every game. 

Hypothetically of course... I would occasionally use sportsurge or the like to watch regular season Astros/Rockets games just because ATT Sportsnet is literally the only channel I would ever possibly want to watch that isn't included in YoutubeTV...which I mostly happily pay for (god damn price increases). If it was an option to add on to YTT I would gladly do it. Other than that get ESPN+ bundled with Verizon and thats pretty much all the sports I would ever want to watch besides ATT Sportsnet...

[thunderlounge 7757]

27 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

I'm still on cable because Comcast is my only choice (other than Starlink) for high speed internet.  If I could cut that without giving Musk money, I'd cut the cord and do something like YouTube TV or similar.

 

24 minutes ago, Jasper_Jester said:

might be cheaper to just get the cable and pick a streamer instead of paying for that Xfinity box. But, depends on what channels you need/want. We have super fast internet alternatives so we come in way under what Comcast is charging for TV for the things we watch.

 

EDIT typo

My cable bill was $315/mo for all channels, and internet. 
 

Dropped the cable, and internet on it’s own is $100.

To keep the same access I had, the only additional streaming service I picked up was YoutubeTV.

It doesn’t have the RSN’s but a few other options do.

Worth saving $150/mo. 

[Chewbacca 7730]

Just now, thunderlounge said:

 

My cable bill was $315/mo for all channels, and internet. 
 

Dropped the cable, and internet on it’s own is $100.

To keep the same access I had, the only additional streaming service I picked up was YoutubeTV.

It doesn’t have the RSN’s but a few other options do.

Worth saving $150/mo. 

Yeah, I probably need to do the math on what I really watch.  I'm sure I could save similar amounts of money.  

[thunderlounge 7757]

Just now, Chewbacca said:

Yeah, I probably need to do the math on what I really watch.  I'm sure I could save similar amounts of money.  

I also already had some streaming services, but keeping those didn’t change anything.

 

[BurntOrange&White 39655]

 

[BurntOrange&White 39655]

 

[Jasper_Jester 356]

 

5 minutes ago, thunderlounge said:

 

My cable bill was $315/mo for all channels, and internet. 
 

Dropped the cable, and internet on it’s own is $100.

To keep the same access I had, the only additional streaming service I picked up was YoutubeTV.

It doesn’t have the RSN’s but a few other options do.

Worth saving $150/mo. 

yeah, I meant drop the cable and keep just the internet. Cable TV is way too expensive. 

 

Does HuluTV have your RSN? I think it is roughly identical in price to YouTube TV

[Chewbacca 7730]

14 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

And herein lies the issue with Pac 12 leadership.  There isn't any, and it shows.  

[thunderlounge 7757]

12 minutes ago, Jasper_Jester said:

 

yeah, I meant drop the cable and keep just the internet. Cable TV is way too expensive. 

 

Does HuluTV have your RSN? I think it is roughly identical in price to YouTube TV

I think they do, but have to double check. Hulu also has History, but not AMC. YTTV has AMC, but not History.

More on cord cutting:
 

 

[NCMountaineer 99]

16 minutes ago, Jasper_Jester said:

 

yeah, I meant drop the cable and keep just the internet. Cable TV is way too expensive. 

 

Does HuluTV have your RSN? I think it is roughly identical in price to YouTube TV

Depends on who the RSN is. If it's Bally/Sinclair then no, they don't have them, at least not the last time I checked. Which is a pain in the ass when I want to watch my NHL team since the only option I have for that is using a VPN and ESPN+ to claim I'm somewhere I'm not that's not blocked by blackout restrictions. 

['stache 21772]

I pay for the Hulu/Disney+/ESPN+ package. That deal alone is a lot easier sell to sports fans since its just a few extra bucks for ESPN+. I bought it to watch OSU baseball games. Killers of the Flower Moon is going to probably going to be a decent bump for Apple+. But if the PAC is going to be an additional subscription within Apple+, fuck that, not enough people care I don't think. Also, will subscriptions be tied to the program you support so that UO and UW can get a larger cut?

[Gidnik 3251]

 

 

[BurntOrange&White 39655]

3 minutes ago, Gidnik said:

 

 

It was scheduled to be an executive session anyway. I’d be interested to see if anymore get scheduled and the inevitable public meeting. 

[Jasper_Jester 356]

9 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I pay for the Hulu/Disney+/ESPN+ package. That deal alone is a lot easier sell to sports fans since its just a few extra bucks for ESPN+. I bought it to watch OSU baseball games. Killers of the Flower Moon is going to probably going to be a decent bump for Apple+. But if the PAC is going to be an additional subscription within Apple+, fuck that, not enough people care I don't think. Also, will subscriptions be tied to the program you support so that UO and UW can get a larger cut?

honestly I don't get why the MLS on Apple + is an extra. It should be content to drive people to the platform. Prime isn't charging extra for the football game on Thursdays.

I get Apple + with my phone deal and it has some good content. Not sure I ever would have paid for it though

I'd probably even watch the MLS games if they were not an additional tier. But I view it as more like MLBTV or NFL Access, Apple+ is just the venue to access the subscription.

This could be a workable deal if the PAC content is used to draw traffic and both Apple and the schools share the bounty if there is one. Seems like a hard no for any school if it is a paid subscription service that you need Apple+ just to access. I guess I'm not sure why that would ever be a thing for a nonPro league. 

 

[USC Traveler 488]

1 hour ago, Pasken said:

Streaming is annoying bc there aren't a lot of arrangements like this. Streaming from Apple is insanely easy and simple. No bullshit. It's hard for me to understand how so many ppl are insistent on freaking cable in 2023 but maybe I'm the crazy one.

I dropped cable after the cfb season ended.  Still have spectrum for broadband (no other good choices locally for high speed).

Wife and I are going to Croatia for five weeks, so I'm canceling the account entirely.  Did the same thing the last few years.

When we get back, I start over as a new customer b/c it's been more than a month.  Get broadband and cable bundle at an intro price.

 I like having cable during CFB season so when SC is on the road or not playing, I can set up shop and have four games going at once, flipping back and forth between them with no lag, and able to go back and see what I missed on the other games.

Never watch a commercial, and on those crazy cfb days when there are a bunch of great games and huge upsets, it's pretty epic to watch everything unfold across the country in different conferences, especially as it gets deeper into the season and playoff spots are on the line.

Edited August 1, 2023 by USC Traveler

[Samson's Wig 3181]

1 hour ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

 

 

 

Kind of amazing the Big 12 had that kind of draw for TCU v. KSU.   Based on that sole data point, it seems like they may be okay when the dust settles.  Hard not to imagine two better-known programs, even if they're not blue bloods, driving that number up significantly. e.g. Tech v. BYU or something.

[Texas Wahoo 3383]

16 minutes ago, Jasper_Jester said:

honestly I don't get why the MLS on Apple + is an extra. It should be content to drive people to the platform. Prime isn't charging extra for the football game on Thursdays.

I get Apple + with my phone deal and it has some good content. Not sure I ever would have paid for it though

I'd probably even watch the MLS games if they were not an additional tier. But I view it as more like MLBTV or NFL Access, Apple+ is just the venue to access the subscription.

This could be a workable deal if the PAC content is used to draw traffic and both Apple and the schools share the bounty if there is one. Seems like a hard no for any school if it is a paid subscription service that you need Apple+ just to access. I guess I'm not sure why that would ever be a thing for a nonPro league. 

 

I believe Apple TV+ subscribers got a discount on MLS, like $80 for the season instead of $100 for non-subscribers, but you do not have to have a subscription to subscribe to MLS. 

[BurntOrange&White 39655]

19 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

I believe Apple TV+ subscribers got a discount on MLS, like $80 for the season instead of $100 for non-subscribers, but you do not have to have a subscription to subscribe to MLS. 

Who is going to pay $100 for pac?

[PilotsError 2282]

4 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Who is going to pay $100 for pac?

 

It's going to be a contest between this and CNN+ as to who will end up with the least amount of subscribers.  

[BurntOrange&White 39655]

This is how you know it’s a dog shit deal

 

 

[Trey3216 15325]

36 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

Kind of amazing the Big 12 had that kind of draw for TCU v. KSU.   Based on that sole data point, it seems like they may be okay when the dust settles.  Hard not to imagine two better-known programs, even if they're not blue bloods, driving that number up significantly. e.g. Tech v. BYU or something.

BU/OSU the year before had similar numbers.   If anything, the new Big XII will be interesting, competitive football that is a wild ass ride every year

[BurntOrange&White 39655]

This is pretty good

 

 

[Jasper_Jester 356]

8 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

This is pretty good

 

 

meh, I wouldn't subscribe to upside down and backwards caleb's tik tok comedy channel. 

[Uncle Nate 2097]

 

[Francisco 2.0 32333]

 

 

 

[Uncle Nate 2097]

I laughed harder than I expected at this one…

 

 

[Richard Kimball 1492]

12 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

 

Yormark to AZ prez Robbins:

"You come here on the day of my daughter's wedding, and ask me to kill a conference for you..."

[Jabberwocky 1666]

 

[FartingDreamer 138]

This is like dragging on longer then being stuck watching Le Miserable with a painfully full bladder...

[LTbear 4160]

FSU ain't messing around. I was shocked how open they were about wanting to challenge the GOR ("it's the least of our worries").

[Vertigo 20267]

1 hour ago, Samson's Wig said:

Kind of amazing the Big 12 had that kind of draw for TCU v. KSU.   Based on that sole data point, it seems like they may be okay when the dust settles.  Hard not to imagine two better-known programs, even if they're not blue bloods, driving that number up significantly. e.g. Tech v. BYU or something.

Most likely it is because the game came down to the wire and there were playoff implications. I would be willing to bet that it is a bit of an outlier in terms if what kind of interest there is in general.

 

Baylor/Ok state the year before had a similar ending on 4th down to win the game.

Edited August 2, 2023 by Vertigo

[bullet 1596]

16 minutes ago, Vertigo said:

Most likely it is because the game came down to the wire and there were playoff implications. I would be willing to bet that it is a bit of an outlier in terms if what kind of interest there is in general.

 

Baylor/Ok state the year before had a similar ending on 4th down to win the game.

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2021-college-football-tv-ratings-page/

[Sbbruin 21733]

19 minutes ago, LTbear said:

FSU ain't messing around. I was shocked how open they were about wanting to challenge the GOR ("it's the least of our worries").

I just don’t get how the think they can break the GOR without massive compensation.  

[nunna yo bizness 1687]

4 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

I just don’t get how the think they can break the GOR without massive compensation.  

Fraud.  See a few pages back.

[USC Traveler 488]

2 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

I just don’t get how the think they can break the GOR without massive compensation.  

Their lawyers apparently think they have a fraud case against the ACC due to Swofford and the conference knowingly misleading them with false statements and revenue projections.

If they really announce a 2024 departure from the ACC in the next two weeks, we're going into realignment overdrive.

2024 already has USC/UCLA and UT/OU on the move.  IF FSU and a bunch of other ACC schools go BIG/SEC also, combined with the first year of the 12 team playoff and the WAC10 potentially disintegrating, CFB is going to look like an entirely different world.

Wild times.

[LTbear 4160]

15 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

I just don’t get how the think they can break the GOR without massive compensation.  

The way he was talking, I think they may feel that if it costs them a couple hundred million or more, so what - they'd be down that much from the lost revenue (in comparison to B1G or SEC) anyways. So get a spot in a different conference, leave knowing you'll come out even over the course of the time you had left in the GOR, and then sue or see if the ACC totally crumbles so you don't have to pay anyway.