1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

mountain network /pac12 network...

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by sticketfan, May 18, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jun 23, 2012 #141 of 1671
    alevine1986

    alevine1986 Godfather

    329
    0
    Jul 10, 2007
    Agreed that Directv has a lot of eyeballs to lose if they don't add the Pac 12 Network. If we were talking about one PAC 12 channel vs the Longhorn Network, it would be a no brainer that the PAC 12 channel should be added ahead of the Longhorn Network. However, if your talking about adding all 7 channels and taking up 7 times the bandwidth the Longhorn Network would take, I'd say the arguement is about the same.
     
  2. Jun 23, 2012 #142 of 1671
    alevine1986

    alevine1986 Godfather

    329
    0
    Jul 10, 2007
    This is the one factor that neither of us know and the biggest factor, even ahead of where Directv will find seven open spots for all the PAC 12 channels.
     
  3. Jun 23, 2012 #143 of 1671
    WebTraveler

    WebTraveler Icon

    1,090
    5
    Apr 9, 2006
    Guys, again, each one of you needs to: (1) email directv, and (2) call the Office of the President's escalation folks at 1-866-785-5535 and tell them you want the Pac 12 Network.
     
  4. Jun 23, 2012 #144 of 1671
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Pretty simple, actually. They want the Longhorn Network to fail as they get nothing from it while it makes UT stronger if it succeeds. Both financially and as a recruiting tool.
     
  5. Jun 23, 2012 #145 of 1671
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Or maybe tell them you want the national channel fulltime and the others as game only channels.

    Or how about contacting the Pac 12 and telling them their fulltime seven channels makes no sense.
     
  6. Jun 23, 2012 #146 of 1671
    WebTraveler

    WebTraveler Icon

    1,090
    5
    Apr 9, 2006
    Are you looking for a silly fight? Sounds like it. Your comments are akin to calling your mama and telling her that her son is a degenerate. If you don't want to call then don't.
     
  7. Jun 23, 2012 #147 of 1671
    Devo1237

    Devo1237 Legend

    414
    15
    Apr 22, 2008
    Good point. I just emailed them...

    http://support.directv.com/app/ask

    And I haven't gotten into this much since it's clearly become an argument for and against peoples favorite teams, but the one thing I am really looking forward to is the increased coverage of the so-called "second-tier" sports, which the PAC-12 really excels in. For example, USC just won their 4th straight national championship in Men's Tennis and the game wasn't even televised! There was a crappy online feed, which was cancelled after the doubles point because the game had to move indoors for rain and they didn't have cameras. That's just pathetic. Steve Johnson is most likely the greatest men's college player in history and his exposure was almost non-existent. Any more coverage for these kinds of sports (for any conference) would be a great thing in my mind.
     
  8. Jun 23, 2012 #148 of 1671
    palmgrower

    palmgrower AllStar

    132
    3
    Jul 18, 2011
    PAC-12 volleyball is worth watching and covering
     
  9. Jun 23, 2012 #149 of 1671
    alevine1986

    alevine1986 Godfather

    329
    0
    Jul 10, 2007
    Several schools sell their third tier rights. Florida sells theirs to the Sunshine Network, several PAC 12 schools used to sell theirs to RSN's before the formation of the PAC12 Network, and several Big 12 schools sell theirs via PPV. All UT did was create their own network to show their third tier games. The Mets, Yankees, Indians, and Red Sox all formed their own RSN to show their games and there wasn't this huge backlash from petty rivals (I'm looking at you A&M and Tech).
     
  10. Jun 23, 2012 #150 of 1671
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    21,940
    1,011
    Nov 13, 2006
    This is why the pac12 formed all these channels and why it does make sense for Them to have all these channels.
     
  11. Jun 23, 2012 #151 of 1671
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    You wanted their reason. That is the reason. Most of the big XII schools are upset about LHN.

    And pretty funny coming from a met fan complaining that only the Yankee feed was available recently.

    And comparing MLB to college sports where the conference usually reigns supreme shows how little you know of the dynamics of the two sports.
     
  12. Jun 23, 2012 #152 of 1671
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Bull. Look at BTN. They have a many schools and maybe more sports teams. The PAC 12 model does not work. You realize that all BTN games are available everywhere yet the PAC 12 network will only show local games with their setup plus one national game which may be the local game?

    It makes no sense whatsoever. There is not enough programming.
     
  13. Jun 23, 2012 #153 of 1671
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Yeah. They need seven channels to do that. BTN covers tons of volleyball with one channel.
     
  14. Jun 23, 2012 #154 of 1671
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    No. I am a realist. No dog in the fight. PAC 12 is full of hubris and did not think this through.
     
  15. Jun 23, 2012 #155 of 1671
    espnjason

    espnjason Armchair Referee

    529
    2
    Sep 30, 2008
    You are not going to compare channels that show over 130-210 games over a course of a full calendar year to a major school that doesn't show even a third of that much, are you? If Texas were to put ALL of their football, Men's basketball, and baseball games and then supplement with their choice of Olympic sports, they may have gained greater distributorship at least within Texas.

    But in all honesty, I don't know another RSN that is built around a single college and I don't think USC could even pull that off. At least the Pac-12 Network is more likely to succeed due to the coterminous nature of all the colleges involved, all the markets they will serve, and a plethora of events that would be televised.
     
  16. Jun 23, 2012 #156 of 1671
    maartena

    maartena Hall Of Fame

    2,828
    9
    Nov 1, 2010
    They have the bandwidth to place about 12 HD stations right this very minute, and if they remap everything to go to 6 HD per transponder instead of 5, that number may easily double.

    So they do HAVE the room to place 7 PAC12 stations + 2 L.A. RSN's, it just leaves very little room for anything else, and they will have to leave room for future market changes.
     
  17. Jun 23, 2012 #157 of 1671
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Wasn't televised because NO ONE CARES. Television is good at putting on things that draw audiences.
     
  18. Jun 23, 2012 #158 of 1671
    maartena

    maartena Hall Of Fame

    2,828
    9
    Nov 1, 2010
    Well, at this moment we know this:

    1) 4 major cable providers have signed deals with PAC12, for the main station and 1 or 2 of their local stations.
    2) PAC 12 has all the broadcast rights, and they cannot go anywhere else.
    3) The President of PAC12 has hinted it is an all or nothing deal.

    So now DirecTV has the choice:

    1) No PAC12, lose lots of customers.
    2) PAC12, retain lots of customers.
    3) Negotiate some sort of in-the-middle deal with just the main station, lose only SOME customers.

    Either way, this will either cost money and bandwidth, OR customers, and DirecTV might have to find a middle ground somewhere.
     
  19. Jun 23, 2012 #159 of 1671
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    So you are reporting that the PAC 12 is being a roadblock because they do not know how to negotiate. Or they do not understand satellite delivery. So, by all means, let us kowtow to the PAC 12 by cajoling directv. Makes sense to me.

    And the cable systems only carry the local channel. Yeah, that is all or nothing. What about all the programming that USC fans won't see in Utah? Those are the arguments I am hearing. College sports are not totally regional. Not as much as pro sports.
     
  20. Jun 23, 2012 #160 of 1671
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    21,940
    1,011
    Nov 13, 2006
    Look at the local first.

    500 games a year that where not on before will be now, plus over 350 that where on all along. That's about an extra 80 games per year per channel to start with. How do you suppose they go from about 60 games on a regional channel to 140 without having their own rsns to avoid conflicts with other teams in pro sports?

    As for your national comment there will be many more than one game a week that will be national. Your still only looking at football. The PAC 12 is looking at all sports. They will be playing basketball games almost every day of the week now for starters. I would not be surprised that as time goes on they will show more and more every year too. this is jot like what the big ten did.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page