Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by Athlon646464, Jun 29, 2013.
You quoted a woman's volleyball game he mentioned , but nonetheless it's been several close games.
My High School game was within one score all game, but it still was boring. I'd rather watch games between two ranked teams.
UCLA is ranked. A ranked team going to double OT is going to be interesting to most college football fans.
But UCLA isn't high ranked... kinda defeats what you said.
The only people who care about a #25 team possibly getting knocked off are fans of "others receiving votes" who hope their team moves up, but it is irrelevant to the playoff picture that most people are focused on.
It absolutely is not irrelevant to the playoff picture. The winner of the Pac 12 will likely be in the playoffs, and UCLA is one of those teams.
And there are lots of teams receiving votes with fans interested in those teams. There are also plenty of fans of teams ranked from about 20 and down who are interested in watching the teams in that range.
Don't be ridiculous here. Plenty of people would be interested in watching a top 25 team in a P5 conference go to double overtime. It kind of discredits your entire argument if you refuse to admit this is true.
It's kind of crazy for you guys to argue that every single game the Pac 12 network has ever aired is a dud that nobody cared about watching. The reality is that UCLA game was one of many Pac 12 network broadcasts that a lot of people would have liked to see. It was better than several of the games that everyone did get to see.
Huh? Maybe just you and ESPN care solely about the playoffs. This is college football, not the NFL. Every week there are games that mean something to a lot of people. Tell that to all those schools who sellout every home game, but won't make the playoffs.
And, tell that to the 128 FBS schools that won't make the playoffs. Why then should they even play out their schedules?
Plus, the playoff committee hasn't made it clear whether they will select "the four best teams" or if a school must win its conference to be considered. In that case, UCLA could make the conference championship game and win it to qualify for the playoffs.
I don't see where that's been said. And I understand if you played FB for AZ State, or were even an alumnus you might well want to see every game. Or many games. Or only if they're in the hunt, whatever. But for many college FB fans, there are more than enough good games from all conferences that fill up a weekend's worth.
So all the games where a sec team plays a bad sec team or a third level non fbs team no one wants to see either I guess.
That's only likely if it's Oregon - no other P12 really has a shot at the top 4 unless a whole bunch of other teams (about 10) tank. Nobody in the P12 North besides Oregon will have a chance and the South teams need a lot of help... the Utes lost to horrible Wazzou, Arizona St was demolished by average UCLA, and Arizona lost to a very average team in USC.
SEC will have a minimum 1 team in, possibly 2. FSU will be there undefeated. A 1 loss Notre Dame or TCU would possibly go in ahead of a P12, especially if Oregon falls again which is likely with their weak defense.
I'm talking about people aside from the UCLA/Colorado fans. Obviously fans of a team want to see them play, if they've already played their way out of bowl contention. But national interest in a #25 team sorry, but no.
Was there a lot of national interest in Minnesota losing to Illinois last weekend? Theoretically if Minnesota ran the table and beat Michigan State in the conference championship game they might have gone to the playoffs (probably no less likely as UCLA going, at least) But I'll bet there were as few non-B1G fans who cared about the Minnesota game as there were fans of other conferences who cared about the UCLA game.
The games with national interest in the Pac 12 mainly revolve around Oregon, with the Arizona teams garnering more attention this year. A 25th ranked team playing an also-ran is not on the national radar.
There's no such thing as "national interest" in college football. It's a regional sport. The South and parts of the Midwest love it. The vast majority of people living in the Northeast don't give a rat's behind about it, and the West has some pockets of interest.
What does your comment have to do with DirecTV not carrying the PAC 12 Network? I admit, the games of the most "meaning" (not by my definition, however) are carried by other channels other than the PAC 12 Net. But as a fan of the Conference and the schools that I have always followed, I want to have the chance to see ALL the games. I'm being denied that by D*.
And you're being denied other channels, too!
For some, FB is totally regional, but for others, it's nationwide. Still others don't give a fig about it in any form, anywhere.
Because someone was trying to make the argument that the Pac 12 Network is showing games of national interest. They're not, like almost all BTN or SEC Network games, they're of regional interest or interesting to the teams' fans only. The ones of national interest are being shown on Fox or ESPN.
No one is arguing that Pac 12 fans, or fans of a particular Pac 12 team, aren't losing out if they're Directv subscribers. But as keeps getting pointed out, if you're a big enough fan, you're probably going to have to drop Directv to get Pac 12 Network, because there isn't anything on the horizon that suggests either side will budge so the stalemate may go for years to come. Directv never picked up Comcast Philly, Dish never picked up MSG or YES, pretty sure no one will ever pick up the Dodgers Channel. It could be the same for Directv and Pac 12.
No two teams from The same conference should ever be in the four team playoff. Winning your conference should be a requirement.
Gotta disagree with this statement. I wanna see the best four teams regardless of conference affiliation. This year the SEC West appears to have the strongest teams in the country. Next year could be a different conference having great teams. This is not a win your conference and you're in the playoffs. At this point, strength of schedule is a major factor.
The PAC-12 Network, SEC Network, and Big 10 Network don't show scheduled big-time games, but they have the potential to show big time upset games. For example, the SECN would probably air Vanderbilt vs. Alabama or Northwestern vs. Michigan State. Fans who don't have that channel have the potential to miss some of the most memorable games of the season that they would likely hear the score about and tune over to that station.
Case-in-point: Appalachian State vs. Michigan was on B10 Network.
I'm with jagrim, too. SEC will likely deservedly have 2 in. Oregon will be there if they win out because everyone near the top still plays each other.
The SEC has the biggest hype machine in the back pocket - ESPN. I'm not sure that makes them the best league in the nation. There is some bad football played in that conference. See LSU/Ole Miss. LSU didn't even try on offense and won.
Sorry but if you are not the best in the conference then you don't deserve the right to prove you are better than teams you have not already played. No second chances.
It's amazing to me that everyone thinks all the other conferences have no teams good enough to compete. Heck if ole miss played in the pac12 they'd have a loss by now. It's pathetic how much ESPN pushes the sec and ditches the rest.
I don't care if ucla and usc aren't great this year. The reality is they wouldn't do any worse in the sec. Maybe even better because so many teams are way way over hyped.
And the idea you'd skip a team from another conference to give a second chance at it for a second place sec team is ridiculous.