|
Oh drat that sucks....71 isn't that old.
|
#
?
May 27, 2024 18:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jul 27, 2024 14:41 |
|
|
He's with Jerry now.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2024 19:58
|
|
|
the bulls, white sox and blackhawks are creating a new rsn https://wgntv.com/news/chicago-news...ing-in-october/
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2024 17:26
|
|
|
I hope everyone likes even more gambling ads https://twitter.com/BSMStaff/status/1798092712467472785
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2024 22:37
|
|
|
Vertical Lime posted:the bulls, white sox and blackhawks are creating a new rsn Whoa, it's going to be OTA! I can watch Bulls games again (yay?). quote:CHSN is a joint venture among the Blackhawks, Bulls, White Sox and Standard Media and will reach most of Illinois, along with parts of Indiana, Iowa, Michigan and Wisconsin, pending league approvals, according to the network.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2024 12:52
|
|
|
This is extremely cool: ESPN+ and Sportsnet+ will have simulcasts of the Stanley Cup Finals in ASL. quote:Rather than traditional play-by-play calls, the ASL broadcast will feature descriptions of major plays, referee calls and rule explanations, among other commentary.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2024 19:14
|
|
|
Bird in a Blender posted:Whoa, it's going to be OTA! I can watch Bulls games again (yay?). More sports teams need to get back OTA, especially with the big deal league deals getting split up amongst streaming providers. Plus, OTA is great for sports vs a streaming service since you don't get near as many compression artifacts / delay. I watched the Indy 500 OTA this year and the picture was so nice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2024 20:09
|
|
|
PotatoJudge posted:More sports teams need to get back OTA, especially with the big deal league deals getting split up amongst streaming providers. Plus, OTA is great for sports vs a streaming service since you don't get near as many compression artifacts / delay. I watched the Indy 500 OTA this year and the picture was so nice. While OTA broadcasts will always run circles around any streaming option... there is no juice to squeeze for the producer outside of the ad buys for the program to be aired OTA anymore. It's the main reason ATSC 3.0 is having such a hard time getting a grip and being more readily adopted. Way too many guardrails and restrictions for no good reason just to watch anything OTA in ATSC 3.0 land. All you have to do is look at Canada's model for broadcast TV over the past 20+ years. It's a loving conglomerate monopolistic mess that's allowed to continue because no one pushes back and no one will provide any solution other than the status quo given. That's the direction broadcasters in the US want to go as well. Don't let them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2024 06:08
|
|
|
People watch poo poo on their phones, and I don't see Apple or Alphabet implementing ATSC 3.0.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2024 06:33
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/thedunkcentral/status/1798725130056777876?s=46&t=BHs6Pl38GJXGN2Y4xeriNA
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2024 16:10
|
|
|
PotatoJudge posted:More sports teams need to get back OTA, especially with the big deal league deals getting split up amongst streaming providers. Plus, OTA is great for sports vs a streaming service since you don't get near as many compression artifacts / delay. I watched the Indy 500 OTA this year and the picture was so nice. Yea I’m really hoping this works out. A combo of streaming and OTA gives everyone the option to watch.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 01:12
|
|
|
Bird in a Blender posted:Yea I’m really hoping this works out. A combo of streaming and OTA gives everyone the option to watch. I could see a lot of teams offering some games OTA in the future. The Mets have like 20 games syndicated and the Yankees had the same deal until Amazon bought the rights so now they’re on prime in that region. I feel like a lot of nba and nhl teams would benefit greatly by showing like 10 games a season OTA to remind their fan base without cable they exist. Like just choose games against bad or small market teams to show that would get low ratings on the RSN anyways. You’re a middle playoff caliber team, show some Saturday afternoon games against a lottery team on the local CW throughout the season. I have a few friends that check to see what random weekend Mets games are OTA in between staring into a loaded gun.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 09:26
|
|
|
The American Dream posted:I feel like a lot of nba and nhl teams would benefit greatly by showing like 10 games a season OTA to remind their fan base without cable they exist. This is the key detail that I always come back to regarding subscriptions and access to sports, and it’s also across borders too. Leagues can sell their games to cable/streaming platforms, but that’s putting a paywall up - duh - but it’s become accepted wisdom that you then lose out on showing the product as widely. Maybe this has been less an issue in the U.S. - higher distribution of basic cable means ESPN, TNT, etc are almost as good as OTA broadcast channels - but the squeeze is coming now as Amazon and the other OTT networks start getting games. I think in the case of MLB, NBA and NHL, having that small amount of local games also on a local affiliate would be huge. It’s what gets people in, and especially as the live experience gets more and more expensive, it’s key to getting a new generation of fan.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 09:39
|
|
|
harperdc posted:This is the key detail that I always come back to regarding subscriptions and access to sports, and it’s also across borders too. Leagues can sell their games to cable/streaming platforms, but that’s putting a paywall up - duh - but it’s become accepted wisdom that you then lose out on showing the product as widely. Maybe this has been less an issue in the U.S. - higher distribution of basic cable means ESPN, TNT, etc are almost as good as OTA broadcast channels - but the squeeze is coming now as Amazon and the other OTT networks start getting games. Absolutely. It's why the NFL has become so dominant as a television property.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 13:48
|
|
|
in 2005, England beat Australia in the Ashes in cricket, where all five games were shown on free TV and got absolutely massive (for England) ratings and more importantly casual interest in the game. So naturally, the powers that run English cricket saw those numbers, assumed that people will pay for it and threw all of England's home games on pay tv (all of England's away cricket was already paywalled). It took a last minute deal between various partners to get the 2019 ODI World Cup final, held in England mind you, between England and New Zealand on free TV. Premier League football has been paywalled since the league was created, although I think some of the pandemic, behind closed doors games were put on free TV, the Champions League used to be on free TV and is now paywalled. The FA Cup Final has to be shown on free TV and that's enshrined in law along with certain horse races, olympics, Wimbledon and other sports I can't remember. The Open Championship in golf used to be on the free-to-air (partially) protected list, but that's since moved behind the paywall with only highlights on the BBC. Have a wiki article on it
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 14:02
|
|
|
In the US I would actually be interested in how many people own & use OTA antennas vs have access to basic cable. Anecdotally it seems like OTA is the smaller pool.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 14:51
|
|
|
The dollars are a lot smaller on OTA broadcasts, which is why you see teams continually going with the RSN model (even though it's dead).
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 14:57
|
|
|
Bear in mind that local stations are also accessible via basic cable and that's often used especially in places where OTA signals won't reach a station's nominal broadcast area (e.g. mountains in the way). So the reach of those stations is more than just people with antennas. IIRC there are even FCC rules about cable carriers being required to carry certain local stations.TheWevel posted:The dollars are a lot smaller on OTA broadcasts, which is why you see teams continually going with the RSN model (even though it's dead). Were the RSN dollars ever really there, or were they just coasting on VC/cheap loans and hoping the teams would keep paying more and more money? I feel like a lot of the problems with media today are the result of more people chasing after smaller pieces of a shrinking pie. Xerol fucked around with this message at 15:00 on Jun 7, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 14:58
|
|
|
A lot of people simply don’t realise it’s a thing anymore, because cable and streaming services have convinced them that it’s something that costs money. I’m from the UK and have lived in the US for the last 8 years, so the difference in how things work between the two countries has always interested me. As posted above, the UK model really is designed to put as much distance between the viewer and coverage as possible, and it’s gross. I’m of the firm belief that (at least partial) local team and national team coverage should be accessible for everyone. So, I’ve always dug that my local NFL team’s Sunday games will always be available over antenna, and the first year of our MLS team was on local TV too. I’m more a hockey fan, so it kinda sucks that’s behind a paywall, but when I got here having all 82 games covered by the same team was great. Now of course that’s even more split up between services than it was, but we get the rare game on local TV. It’s definitely better than being a soccer fan in the UK, at least. Trying to find the USMNT soccer games was sad, it’s one of the few sports the US competes with the rest of the world so sticking them on a streaming service nobody cares about is lame.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 15:02
|
|
|
Lockback posted:In the US I would actually be interested in how many people own & use OTA antennas vs have access to basic cable. Anecdotally it seems like OTA is the smaller pool.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 15:08
|
|
|
Xerol posted:Were the RSN dollars ever really there, or were they just coasting on VC/cheap loans and hoping the teams would keep paying more and more money? I feel like a lot of the problems with media today are the result of more people chasing after smaller pieces of a shrinking pie. They were definitely there. The RSNs collected money from the MVPDs even if nobody watched the channel because of where they were in the cable packages. The RSN fee that everyone hates gets charged times millions of cable subscribers. The Comcast/Diamond stalemate is because Comcast wants to move the Bally Sports networks to a separate tier, and if Diamond allowed that, they'd have to renegotiate all their other MVPD contracts. Diamond would definitely fold at that point. Also- keep in mind that most RSNs have the highest ratings in an entire TV market during their live game broadcasts, so ad sales are just icing on the cake. Ad revenue is still significantly less than retrans revenue. edit: less cable/satellite subscribers = less retrans dollars. team payrolls have been going up, and teams were using rsn retrans dollars to cover salaries TheWevel fucked around with this message at 15:17 on Jun 7, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 15:12
|
|
|
Xerol posted:Were the RSN dollars ever really there, or were they just coasting on VC/cheap loans and hoping the teams would keep paying more and more money? I feel like a lot of the problems with media today are the result of more people chasing after smaller pieces of a shrinking pie. Basically yes but more in depth sorta. The RSNs that have gone under have shown that the actual games themselves have been profitable, for the most part. So in that sense paying leagues for rights to show games is a positive ROI. I think the issue has been they've all been counting on some kind of sticky effect, getting big numbers for post game shows or whatever. And that really hasn't happened.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 15:14
|
|
|
Lockback posted:In the US I would actually be interested in how many people own & use OTA antennas vs have access to basic cable. Anecdotally it seems like OTA is the smaller pool. My family lives in NJ/NY area and we actually didn't get basic cable IIRC until after 9/11 because we lost the ability to get most of the OTA channels. Though I recently bought one and while it's not bad for the price of 'free', I can only get NBC at random times of day and ABC works most of the time but will randomly just lose signal for a few seconds.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 16:50
|
|
|
harperdc posted:This is the key detail that I always come back to regarding subscriptions and access to sports, and it’s also across borders too. Leagues can sell their games to cable/streaming platforms, but that’s putting a paywall up - duh - but it’s become accepted wisdom that you then lose out on showing the product as widely. Maybe this has been less an issue in the U.S. - higher distribution of basic cable means ESPN, TNT, etc are almost as good as OTA broadcast channels - but the squeeze is coming now as Amazon and the other OTT networks start getting games. I think we all know the cliche answer by now is “that’s the next guy’s problem.” And is cable being nearly the same as OTA really true anymore with the ubiquity of cord cutting? I’m curious if there’s a growing trend of kids not watching games and exclusively consuming sports through social media? Or is there a statistically significant number of boomers who share their cable logins with their kids/grandkids that’s helping prop up interest? I love baseball, but not enough to pay for cable. Especially when that would be the only reason for having it. We get MLB.tv through T-Mobile, but I’d never pay for it because I live in-market for the teams I like, so I get my fix from random games and it’s been years since I’ve consistently watched my actual rooting interest. My kids aren’t quite old enough to be interested in pro sports, but I’m curious what team they’ll gravitate towards if they end up caring. Am I laying a foundation for future Yankee fans??
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 16:51
|
|
|
The recurring theme in all of this is that people want to watch sports on their tvs but they don't want to pay for it. How is that a sustainable business model for anyone involved?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 16:57
|
|
|
I wouldn’t say no to free subsidized by commercials like the old days, but I’d pay to watch my team - just not $100+/mo for cable in order to access the RSN.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 17:05
|
|
|
I would gladly pay the equivalent carriage fee directly to MASN to be able to stream it but I'm not giving comcast $100+ a month to get MASN + 358 channels I will never watch.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 17:34
|
|
|
TheWevel posted:The recurring theme in all of this is that people want to watch sports on their tvs but they don't want to pay for it. How is that a sustainable business model for anyone involved? Works great for the NFL. Not everyone can be the NFL but in the NBA, ABC and NBC just paid billions to be able to show NBA games. Some of it is on their cable/streaming networks but they will be putting a bunch on OTA too and feel its worth spending that much to do it. I think there's still a market for that to an extent. Now, I don't know if 100% OTA for local games will work outside of the NFL, but Sunday TIcket/League Pass has shown people will absolutely pay. I think if they offered local games on somehting like league pass, gave people x number of games OTA and kept the thing easy to access I feel like you'd be able to put together an offering where everyone gets a nice slice and it keeps the sport growing. It does mean going to war with both desperate RSNs and cable companies though, which is easier said than done.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 18:05
|
|
|
wbd still has money to spend on some sort of sports rights https://x.com/Variety/status/1799149220651286959 https://x.com/andrewmarchand/status/1799166120013791447?s=46&t=odljLqwE90uULWwdGVE0cg Vertical Lime fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Jun 7, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2024 20:06
|
|
|
Dinosaurs! posted:I’m curious if there’s a growing trend of kids not watching games and exclusively consuming sports through social media? I push back on this because of any other reason than ITS FREE and on devices they already have. I reject that it’s mostly because people have shorter attention spans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2024 14:00
|
|
|
I think it has less to do with attention span and more a lot of sports have a lot of downtime and cutting that fat is pretty understandable
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2024 14:58
|
|
|
is this meaningfully different than people who followed sport by watching SportsCenter or Baseball Tonight
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2024 15:04
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:I think it has less to do with attention span and more a lot of sports have a lot of downtime and cutting that fat is pretty understandable Makes sense. MLB has the condensed game videos which reduces the whole game to 20 minutes. NFL games are infamously around 15 minutes of actual action. NHL extended highlights with every goal are about 10 minutes. People don't want to deal with unnecessary crap if they can help it. All killer, no filler.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2024 17:31
|
|
|
My thought was it being an access issue rather than attention span, but I guess they’re two sides of the same coin.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2024 12:01
|
|
|
posted this in the MLB N/V thread, thought I'd link it here. Would you like the British call of the double play that ended the second London game between the Mets and Phillies? Of course you would https://x.com/MLBWalk_Offs/status/1799859923070976302 I think Simon Brotherton's call of the World Series a few years ago for BBC Radio was as good, but I don't seem to be able to find the audio of it anywhere
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2024 00:16
|
|
|
I would watch that any day, such fun
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2024 03:24
|
|
|
Although whoever is doing colour is awful
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2024 03:24
|
|
|
I'm not sure how accurate all this is, but I did enjoy the read: https://uproxx.com/dimemag/stephen-a-smith-andraya-carter-wnba-first-take-caitlin-clark-video/
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2024 04:16
|
|
|
https://x.com/espnpr/status/1800529006774911066?s=46
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2024 16:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jul 27, 2024 14:41 |
|
|
https://x.com/AndrewMarchand/status/1800961239209660899
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2024 20:06
|
|