Big Ten Network (BTN)

[BuckeyeNation27]

Originally Posted by CleveBucks

So basically it's the lowest of all the regional sports networks listed. Where's the problem again?

the quality of product.
the fact that fans of OSU and Michigan are being used to push the rest of the channel that will have basically nothing.

[OSUBuckeye4Life]

SportingNews.com

It's getting closer. The Big Ten Network will debut in August. And I'm excited, because it means more football will be on TV. Oh, and the face of televised football will change forever.
Continued....

[cincibuck]

Originally Posted by OSUBuckeye4Life

SportingNews.com

Interesting post. Brings in some issues I wasn't thinking about.

Hmmmm, Texas in the Big 10? And leave behind Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas A & M... I think that's a "no-brainer."

Far more logical would be for the Big 10 to reach out to Syracuse... East Coast, adds a lot of geography to the scope of things. Iowa for sure does not want Iowa State in the mix. I don't think Penn State wants Pitt in. Bringing in Syracuse would revive a great rivalry game for the Nittany Lions, one I'm sure they miss.

Academically Syracuse would make for a better fit too.

I hate the idea of the Big 10 becoming one of those Thursday night leagues. That has to be hell on teams who play on Saturday and then face another team on les than a week's preperations and I'm sure it would [censored] off the MAC that looks at those games as their only chance for prime time exposure. With the loss of that income those schools could be facing the end of their football programs period. Miami only averages about 15 to 16K at their games as is and that has to be one of the better figures in a league of schools in out of the way places.

[OmahaBeef]

Originally Posted by cincibuck

Interesting post. Brings in some issues I wasn't thinking about.

Hmmmm, Texas in the Big 10? And leave behind Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas A & M... I think that's a "no-brainer."

Far more logical would be for the Big 10 to reach out to Syracuse... East Coast, adds a lot of geography to the scope of things. Iowa for sure does not want Iowa State in the mix. I don't think Penn State wants Pitt in. Bringing in Syracuse would revive a great rivalry game for the Nittany Lions, one I'm sure they miss.

Academically Syracuse would make for a better fit too.

I hate the idea of the Big 10 becoming one of those Thursday night leagues. That has to be hell on teams who play on Saturday and then face another team on les than a week's preperations and I'm sure it would [censored] off the MAC that looks at those games as their only chance for prime time exposure. With the loss of that income those schools could be facing the end of their football programs period. Miami only averages about 15 to 16K at their games as is and that has to be one of the better figures in a league of schools in out of the way places.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt the talk of another school joining the Big 10, purely speculation? I find it difficult to believe that the Big 10 would be able reach out to another school to get them to join the conference so the Big 10 could have enough teams for a league title game. It would seem to me that a team would come to the Big 10 about joining the conference before the Big 10 would approach another team to join the Big 10. (Although I guess the reason why I'm writing this is to ask, is that how conference switches work?)

[OSU SPORTS]

Originally Posted by OmahaBeef

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt the talk of another school joining the Big 10, purely speculation? I find it difficult to believe that the Big 10 would be able reach out to another school to get them to join the conference so the Big 10 could have enough teams for a league title game. It would seem to me that a team would come to the Big 10 about joining the conference before the Big 10 would approach another team to join the Big 10. (Although I guess the reason why I'm writing this is to ask, is that how conference switches work?)

There are no plans to add another team to the Big Ten. It was just the writers "what if" proposition.

[cincibuck]

Originally Posted by OSU SPORTS

There are no plans to add another team to the Big Ten. It was just the writers "what if" proposition.

Omaha, sorry to confuse you. the article posed the Texas Question. The Big 10 already asked Notre Dame to join about ten years ago and, as I understand it, the deal was all but done until Notre Dame's students and alums got wind of it and threw a monumental hissy fit.

That leads me to conclude that the Big 10 is always thinking about changes... what if Northwestern left, what if Chicago wanted back in (that's thrown in just for the humor of it), what if Penn State wanted to be champions again and went back to the Big East where they could be?

One thing is for sure, the league can't afford to be static in its thinking even though they may seem to be static in public on such an issue.

[OSU SPORTS]

Originally Posted by jwinslow

Yep, OSU Sports looks like he was right on earlier in this thread (not sure if an apology or kudos are in order, but I'll just send both your way ).

Thanks for the kind words. I've taken a step back from this thread as emotions are running high on this topic. I understand the feelings of fans that will be affected by the decisions involved. I support the BTN and hope they don't concede to the cable demands. A lot of fans don't realize the impact that basketball will have on the viewership in states like Indiana and Illinois and Michigan(MSU basketball). Football, at programs like Indiana and Illinois, take a back seat to basketball. With the influx of high quality coaches at OSU, Indiana, Minnesota and Purdue, the conference is attracting a lot of national attention. You already have Izzo at MSU, who is considered as one of the top coaches in the nation. The point is that there will be a premium demand to see Big Ten basketball in these states. The BTN will offer at least 105 games, that's huge for the first year of programming. By comparison, ESPN plus offered 100 games last year. The bottom line is that the Big Ten wants to eventually control their own destiny and not be dependent on ESPiN and other networks to deliver their own product. To me, that's a wise business decision. I want to see the profits go to the Big Ten, not end up in Bristol. Let me say one brief thing about programming. I have seen negative comments about the "off season" programing on the BTN. I would rather watch old OSU games on the BTN than a "spelling bee" on ESPiN. Again, I'm stepping back so others can vent their emotions(which I understand). Here is a comparison chart to see the impact of basketball

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/...ison-chart.pdf

[osugrad21]

Detroit Free

More about the Big Ten Network

June 26, 2007
A few tidbits that didn?t make it into today?s Big Ten Network story:
-- Rep. John Dingell?s entrance into the Big Ten Network controversy seems somewhat unusual.

After all, if he was that concerned, couldn?t he deal with Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany privately and get all his information? Of course not, because that wouldn?t allow him to use public pressure as his ally.

Though Dingell?s committee ? energy and commerce -- oversees telecommunications and could call for hearings, that seems a long-shot just to see a few more football games. It?s an example of a powerful man using his voice to try to sway a debate.

It?s not the first time for Dingell. In late March 2005, he sent a similar letter to the owners of WWJ-TV and UPN-50, asking why there were fewer over-the-air Detroit Tigers games.

The Tigers spent that season exclusively on cable.

-- It?s a fair point he?s making, wondering where all the free televised college football games have gone.


Cont...

[osugrad21]

Detroit Free

Do Michigan State fans care about the Big Ten Network?

Apparently not in the 15th District

June 26, 2007
Prompted by complaints from Wolverine fans in his district, Congressman John D. Dingell, D-Mich., sent a detailed letter to Big Ten commissioner James Delany on Monday asking for clarification about the ongoing negotiations with numerous cable operators about picking up the Big Ten Network by the start of football season.
In the letter, I counted three references to U-M and even one to Ohio State. At the end of the note, Dingell states, ?I am sure Wolverine and Buckeye fans alike will appreciate your candor.?

Nice to see a member of Congress looking out for fans? interests, even if they are Buckeyes. But the good member of Congress appears to have forgotten about the fans of another institution actually located in the state of Michigan ? not Ohio -- that also might be interested in the status of the Big Ten Network?s negotiations with cable operators such as Comcast or DISH Network, a school that probably produces more residents of his district than Ohio State.

Cont...

[BuckeyeNation27]

SMQ has done a good job of following this saga.

[WolverineTX]

Stew Mandel has a new piece posted on the subject.

[Thump]

Find a friend or bar that has DirecTV and quit bitching.

[holybuckeye33]

Originally Posted by Thump

Find a friend or bar that has DirecTV and quit bitching.

...or switch to Directv and make $50 the easy way...

[wolves2002]

If you do the math, here is what the Big Ten Network is asking Comcast for.

For subscribers in the Big Ten region: $1.10 X 5.7 million subscribers X 12 =

about $ 75 million per year.

Will Comcast lose enough subscribers to satellite to cost them $75 million?


I am a TW subscriber and if you look at basic cable as TW defines it, there is not much there. Channels 2-27. No ESPN, no Fox Sports, no STO, no CNN. You get local broadcast channels, WUAB, WGN, WTBS, shopping channels, History channel and HNN.

If I recall, there was no problem with adding STO. If the Big Ten would agree to the Standard tier like the Indians did rather than Basic, it would probably get done.

[Buck94]

If I recall, there was no problem with adding STO. If the Big Ten would agree to the Standard tier like the Indians did rather than Basic, it would probably get done.

You touch on a key point. This will be part of the negotiation process and is only the starting point. What both sides are saying right now regarding terms will not be how things are finally decided. This is obvious almost to the point that it does not need to be posted. But, it seems this process is forgotten by the supporters/detractors of both sides of the issue.