(05-25-2017 12:09 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 11:53 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 08:59 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Only thing cord cutting will do in my opinion is move us from passive subscribers (ie. the aggregator whether it is Comcast, Direct, or Sling) pays the subscription fees to the aggregator's selection of networks out of a single fee to the customer, while the new model will likely involve the customer more often paying the fee directly to the network.

A network holding Nebraska football content I suspect is going to be just fine. I don't know that Rutgers and Maryland fan bases will have as many people motivated to pay up.

Providers like Sling and PS Vue have already negotiated contracts with the networks. HULU and UTube have started live streaming services. I get the BTN and the SECN through my PS Vuesubscription. The only thing that will change here is the method of signal delivery. I get 90 "quality"channels with all my sports, including all the ESPN channels, FS1/2, and even the NFL Network. This package costs me $34.99 monthly. No taxes, no cable boxes, dishes, or service repairmen. If you look hard enough, many, like XTV, are free. I doubt network/conference contracts suffer. Just providers who continue to use boxes and wires. DISH has Sling and DTV has DTV Now as streaming services. They see the cliff ahead.

The only true difference between traditional cable and satellite vs. Vue, Sling, DirectNow, etc., is who pays to get the signal into the house and who sells/leases the equipment to make that signal useful to a television.

It is a logical transition. In 1987 you had no use for the wire running into your home for any purpose other than the cable service. In 2017 most consumers are going to pay for the infrastructure needed to deliver the signal to their home because they want internet access regardless of their TV viewing habits.

I wonder if the cutting trend would be so pronounced if cable companies had made internet service an added amenity to subscribing instead of an additional revenue stream.

The networks will continue to reap huge profits. The difference is that the streaming providers have far less overhead to cut into profits. They will pay the price, if nothing else, to force cable/satellite companies down the drain. If PS Vue can sign contracts with the college networks, ESPN, FS, and the NFL Network and only charge me $34.99, why does the old hard-wire crowd have to charge $$90.00+ and then charge for equipment, HD, and a repair warranty to fix their own broken equipment? I had to pay $42.00 monthly for the equipment rental with DISH. Guess what DISH... I already own my DSL modem.

(05-25-2017 05:43 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  The other long-term advantage for the B1G in adding Rutgers and Maryland is their long-term ambition of eventually acquiring Virginia, UNC, Duke and/or Georgia Tech. South is where the future is, but in order to get there, they needed to go east.

they have a better chance getting ND than ever getting UNC

the issue with the Amazon's of the world is that they are likely to view any sports property like NFL Sunday ticket. it would only be available on their platform while the ESPN's of the world are looking to get the largest platform they can. i don't see any major league going all in with such a limited reach

(05-25-2017 09:00 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  Louisville is so glad that Maryland went to the Big Ten.

Indeed....

(05-25-2017 07:43 PM)mj4life Wrote:  the issue with the Amazon's of the world is that they are likely to view any sports property like NFL Sunday ticket. it would only be available on their platform while the ESPN's of the world are looking to get the largest platform they can. i don't see any major league going all in with such a limited reach

Okay, so the leagues just form an ala carte type subscription service directly through ROKU, Chromecast, Firestick, etc. outside of Sling, Amazon, or PSVue. ESPN charges my credit card monthly and I use my free ROKU account as the method of payment. Bottom line is it will be streaming through some method. It is cheaper and easier, and no taxes or contracts. DISH is bleeding badly now. The sky is falling. Streaming is the Henry Ford to Wells Fargo. No one said the leagues will not deal with the hard-wire providers, but the providers will either compete by lowering fees or die.

(05-25-2017 08:12 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 07:43 PM)mj4life Wrote:  the issue with the Amazon's of the world is that they are likely to view any sports property like NFL Sunday ticket. it would only be available on their platform while the ESPN's of the world are looking to get the largest platform they can. i don't see any major league going all in with such a limited reach

Okay, so the leagues just form an ala carte type subscription service directly through ROKU, Chromecast, Firestick, etc. outside of Sling, Amazon, or PSVue. ESPN charges my credit card monthly and I use my free ROKU account as the method of payment. Bottom line is it will be streaming through some method. It is cheaper and easier, and no taxes or contracts. DISH is bleeding badly now. The sky is falling. Streaming is the Henry Ford to Wells Fargo. No one said the leagues will not deal with the hard-wire providers, but the providers will either compete by lowering fees or die.

I've been streaming for over 5 years & just got into the pay tv option with ps vue. my point is that i don't see any league giving exclusive rights to amazon like the acc has with espn. they may give some type of package but will want to keep their options open

If the bundle revenue drops too much ESPN has massive advantages over Amazon or Netflix.
Brand recognition, working relationships with the leagues, experience reselling their content, plenty of experience in production and presumably enough content that they can slice and dice and offer numerous packages like an all ESPN, just college football, just a conference, package for month, or a week or a day.

I think it is far more likely that if Amazon wants to get into sports that they would likely license from ESPN than bid against ESPN.

(05-25-2017 04:46 PM)ken d Wrote:  I'm not buying the idea that Rutgers will "come back" under a new administration. That would imply they were ever good for more than a very short while in both football and basketball. They have been arguably one of the worst D-I athletic programs of the last fifty years.

That being said, the B1G can, and maybe already has, reap some benefit from their addition of Maryland and Rutgers. Since the advent of the CFP, there have been 21 playoff or access bowl games, and the B1G has appeared in 10 of them, more than any other conference, including the vaunted SEC. They also have the most different teams (6) to appear in a playoff or access bowl.

Some teams help their conference by being consistent winners, others by being consistent losers. The bottom half of the B1G may be as bad as any of the P5 conferences, but that helps their top half a lot. And that's where the money is.

Yeah I guess a decade is a very short while. Jealousy at it's finest.

(05-25-2017 09:00 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 04:46 PM)ken d Wrote:  I'm not buying the idea that Rutgers will "come back" under a new administration. That would imply they were ever good for more than a very short while in both football and basketball. They have been arguably one of the worst D-I athletic programs of the last fifty years.

That being said, the B1G can, and maybe already has, reap some benefit from their addition of Maryland and Rutgers. Since the advent of the CFP, there have been 21 playoff or access bowl games, and the B1G has appeared in 10 of them, more than any other conference, including the vaunted SEC. They also have the most different teams (6) to appear in a playoff or access bowl.

Some teams help their conference by being consistent winners, others by being consistent losers. The bottom half of the B1G may be as bad as any of the P5 conferences, but that helps their top half a lot. And that's where the money is.

Yeah I guess a decade is a very short while. Jealousy at it's finest.

Rutgers and Maryland were good choices for the B1G. Every program has peaks and valleys. I remember Kansas and Mizzou going 10-1 in the Big XII. lol The conferences are in this for the long haul.

I always seen Maryland as a good fit for the Big10 when they were in the ACC. I'm still having a hard time with Rutgers in the BIG 10, not because of where they are in athletics or anything, it just wasn't that big time program I would have expected them to grab. Everytime i hear the name Rutgers i still think Big East. (Old habits are hard to break) They were a worthy pick though. Over time I think both will excel.

(05-25-2017 08:25 PM)mj4life Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 08:12 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 07:43 PM)mj4life Wrote:  the issue with the Amazon's of the world is that they are likely to view any sports property like NFL Sunday ticket. it would only be available on their platform while the ESPN's of the world are looking to get the largest platform they can. i don't see any major league going all in with such a limited reach

Okay, so the leagues just form an ala carte type subscription service directly through ROKU, Chromecast, Firestick, etc. outside of Sling, Amazon, or PSVue. ESPN charges my credit card monthly and I use my free ROKU account as the method of payment. Bottom line is it will be streaming through some method. It is cheaper and easier, and no taxes or contracts. DISH is bleeding badly now. The sky is falling. Streaming is the Henry Ford to Wells Fargo. No one said the leagues will not deal with the hard-wire providers, but the providers will either compete by lowering fees or die.

I've been streaming for over 5 years & just got into the pay tv option with ps vue. my point is that i don't see any league giving exclusive rights to amazon like the acc has with espn. they may give some type of package but will want to keep their options open

It will not be exclusive rights. Any streaming service can cut a deal with the networks, just like the cable/satellite providers do now. No monopoly here. Several streaming companies already have signed deals with ESPN and the other sports networks. I guess if you live in a cave and do not have wifi you might stay with wired service, but that will be a very few.

(05-26-2017 02:59 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 08:25 PM)mj4life Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 08:12 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 07:43 PM)mj4life Wrote:  the issue with the Amazon's of the world is that they are likely to view any sports property like NFL Sunday ticket. it would only be available on their platform while the ESPN's of the world are looking to get the largest platform they can. i don't see any major league going all in with such a limited reach

Okay, so the leagues just form an ala carte type subscription service directly through ROKU, Chromecast, Firestick, etc. outside of Sling, Amazon, or PSVue. ESPN charges my credit card monthly and I use my free ROKU account as the method of payment. Bottom line is it will be streaming through some method. It is cheaper and easier, and no taxes or contracts. DISH is bleeding badly now. The sky is falling. Streaming is the Henry Ford to Wells Fargo. No one said the leagues will not deal with the hard-wire providers, but the providers will either compete by lowering fees or die.

I've been streaming for over 5 years & just got into the pay tv option with ps vue. my point is that i don't see any league giving exclusive rights to amazon like the acc has with espn. they may give some type of package but will want to keep their options open

It will not be exclusive rights. Any streaming service can cut a deal with the networks, just like the cable/satellite providers do now. No monopoly here. Several streaming companies already have signed deals with ESPN and the other sports networks. I guess if you live in a cave and do not have wifi you might stay with wired service, but that will be a very few.

i agree that streaming is the future, i'm just not in the camp that amazon or google is going to kill any of the big cable channels that have valuable content. espn is either going to get money from the isp's, mobile carriers,iptv services or direct from the consumer.

(05-25-2017 09:00 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 04:46 PM)ken d Wrote:  I'm not buying the idea that Rutgers will "come back" under a new administration. That would imply they were ever good for more than a very short while in both football and basketball. They have been arguably one of the worst D-I athletic programs of the last fifty years.

That being said, the B1G can, and maybe already has, reap some benefit from their addition of Maryland and Rutgers. Since the advent of the CFP, there have been 21 playoff or access bowl games, and the B1G has appeared in 10 of them, more than any other conference, including the vaunted SEC. They also have the most different teams (6) to appear in a playoff or access bowl.

Some teams help their conference by being consistent winners, others by being consistent losers. The bottom half of the B1G may be as bad as any of the P5 conferences, but that helps their top half a lot. And that's where the money is.

Yeah I guess a decade is a very short while. Jealousy at it's finest.

Yes, a decade is a short while. And Rutgers didn't even have that. During that "decade" Rutgers finished the season in the Top 25 exactly once. They had a good stretch, relative to their past, for 5 or 6 years. And what, exactly, would I be jealous of? I haven't played football in more than 50 years.

(05-25-2017 06:06 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 05:43 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  The other long-term advantage for the B1G in adding Rutgers and Maryland is their long-term ambition of eventually acquiring Virginia, UNC, Duke and/or Georgia Tech. South is where the future is, but in order to get there, they needed to go east.

Money can repair a lot of things, but I have a tough time seeing peace and love between UMD and ACC target schools. And alumni and fans from both sides have EVERY right to not want to associate with the other again. Both sides were obnoxious, and doesn't just change.

When I was in school there, Maryland already had a somewhat rocky relationship with the other ACC schools. I always thought they were a flight risk I used ot say on this very board, back when the Big East was still a solid conference, that if there was an ACC school they could convince to leave, it would be Maryland.

(05-26-2017 05:21 AM)mj4life Wrote:  i agree that streaming is the future, i'm just not in the camp that amazon or google is going to kill any of the big cable channels that have valuable content. espn is either going to get money from the isp's, mobile carriers,iptv services or direct from the consumer.

The irony is, if the entire country switched to streaming tomorrow, the entire internet would probably collapse. Signal compression isn't there yet, to allow anything close to a majority of people to stream as their primary source of content. Cable may be in trouble in some fronts, but currently it is still by far the most effecient use of the current infrastructure in terms of delivering the signal. My guess is in time, cable will swallow the pill and just cut some of the costs. The lastthing we need are to have every house in America wired for two services no longer in use (phone and cable)

(05-26-2017 01:39 AM)StinkyDuck Wrote:  I always seen Maryland as a good fit for the Big10 when they were in the ACC. I'm still having a hard time with Rutgers in the BIG 10, not because of where they are in athletics or anything, it just wasn't that big time program I would have expected them to grab. Everytime i hear the name Rutgers i still think Big East. (Old habits are hard to break) They were a worthy pick though. Over time I think both will excel.

(05-25-2017 09:54 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 09:00 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 04:46 PM)ken d Wrote:  I'm not buying the idea that Rutgers will "come back" under a new administration. That would imply they were ever good for more than a very short while in both football and basketball. They have been arguably one of the worst D-I athletic programs of the last fifty years.

That being said, the B1G can, and maybe already has, reap some benefit from their addition of Maryland and Rutgers. Since the advent of the CFP, there have been 21 playoff or access bowl games, and the B1G has appeared in 10 of them, more than any other conference, including the vaunted SEC. They also have the most different teams (6) to appear in a playoff or access bowl.

Some teams help their conference by being consistent winners, others by being consistent losers. The bottom half of the B1G may be as bad as any of the P5 conferences, but that helps their top half a lot. And that's where the money is.

Yeah I guess a decade is a very short while. Jealousy at it's finest.

Rutgers and Maryland were good choices for the B1G. Every program has peaks and valleys. I remember Kansas and Mizzou going 10-1 in the Big XII. lol The conferences are in this for the long haul.

And both those schools lock up DC to NYC for you. Perfect sense.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(05-26-2017 02:59 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 08:25 PM)mj4life Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 08:12 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 07:43 PM)mj4life Wrote:  the issue with the Amazon's of the world is that they are likely to view any sports property like NFL Sunday ticket. it would only be available on their platform while the ESPN's of the world are looking to get the largest platform they can. i don't see any major league going all in with such a limited reach

Okay, so the leagues just form an ala carte type subscription service directly through ROKU, Chromecast, Firestick, etc. outside of Sling, Amazon, or PSVue. ESPN charges my credit card monthly and I use my free ROKU account as the method of payment. Bottom line is it will be streaming through some method. It is cheaper and easier, and no taxes or contracts. DISH is bleeding badly now. The sky is falling. Streaming is the Henry Ford to Wells Fargo. No one said the leagues will not deal with the hard-wire providers, but the providers will either compete by lowering fees or die.

I've been streaming for over 5 years & just got into the pay tv option with ps vue. my point is that i don't see any league giving exclusive rights to amazon like the acc has with espn. they may give some type of package but will want to keep their options open

It will not be exclusive rights. Any streaming service can cut a deal with the networks, just like the cable/satellite providers do now. No monopoly here. Several streaming companies already have signed deals with ESPN and the other sports networks. I guess if you live in a cave and do not have wifi you might stay with wired service, but that will be a very few.

I really don't notice the difference any more. I rarely use OTA anymore. I stream even regular ESPN. Even streamed the Super Bowl. In 10 years this will be how 75% watch TV.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

They keep PSU happy because those games are good for recruiting and donations. That's why they were added. As such, they're fulfilling their role, and they were both good adds.

(05-26-2017 11:54 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  They keep PSU happy because those games are good for recruiting and donations. That's why they were added. As such, they're fulfilling their role, and they were both good adds.

Locking up the DC/Baltimore/Philly/NYC market is the overwhelming reason.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(05-26-2017 11:58 AM)panama Wrote:  

(05-26-2017 11:54 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  They keep PSU happy because those games are good for recruiting and donations. That's why they were added. As such, they're fulfilling their role, and they were both good adds.

Locking up the DC/Baltimore/Philly/NYC market is the overwhelming reason.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I don't know that they are "locked up," as those schools don't have the same market appeal in their own markets as similar land grant/primary universities. But they certainly add a good market presence, that may grow in time.

(05-26-2017 12:02 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(05-26-2017 11:58 AM)panama Wrote:  

(05-26-2017 11:54 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  They keep PSU happy because those games are good for recruiting and donations. That's why they were added. As such, they're fulfilling their role, and they were both good adds.

Locking up the DC/Baltimore/Philly/NYC market is the overwhelming reason.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I don't know that they are "locked up," as those schools don't have the same market appeal in their own markets as similar land grant/primary universities. But they certainly add a good market presence, that may grow in time.

Markets work both ways. Thwe teams in the market have to play games against someone. So what happens when Michigan plays at Rutgers or Penn State? Is local i interest heightened when Ohio State plays at Maryland? By having 3 B1G schools in the area will east coast alumni pay more attention to B1G games period? It's the largest population block in the country. Even a piece of it is huge.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk