[wilbur_the_goose]

I think it's officially time for a channel number reorg.

Reasons:
1. Sports are all over the place - for example, put NBC Sports Net near the Golf Channel.
2. News channels are all over the place.
3. Shopping channels are all over the place.
4. etc....

I know the old story about CNN paying for 202/204 and ESPN paying for 206, but I'm doubting that's true anymore

What do you think? Is it time for a shuffle like we had when USSB sold out to D*?

 

[dpeters11]

Would series links automatically follow?

 

[webby_s]

While I totally agree with you and hope it happens, I am just finally remembering what channels are what.

With DVR's this day and age channel numbers seem less important but I do agree that I think it's needed. If anything just change a few, like you said CNN/ESPN. Put NatGeo Wild next to NatGeo, stuff like that.

I would sure bet Series links would follow (it would follow the network/show not channel) but again this isn't going to happen ANY TIME soon, if at all.

 

[Steve]

What do you think? Is it time for a shuffle like we had when USSB sold out to D*?

I agree. Almost 5 years ago, with the coming of the HD channels, I asked a similar question. About 75% of the voters were in favor of a re-shuffle.

 

[damondlt]

While I do agree it wouldn't hurt, none of you must not have ever had cable. Because their idea of order is throw the HD channels together and Premiums together. And thats IT!
Out of Cable, Directv and Dish

Directv is the most organized. Dish is also very close, might even be the same now since I've left them.

If they just put ESPNs and NFL ,MLB,NHL Tennis and so on in the 600's and then Cnn in the Upper 300's with the rest of the news channels.
That would be a very orgaized list.

 

[JoeTheDragon]

I think it's officially time for a channel number reorg.

Reasons:
1. Sports are all over the place - for example, put NBC Sports Net near the Golf Channel.
2. News channels are all over the place.
3. Shopping channels are all over the place.
4. etc....

I know the old story about CNN paying for 202/204 and ESPN paying for 206, but I'm doubting that's true anymore

What do you think? Is it time for a shuffle like we had when USSB sold out to D*?

well ESPN is near NHL,NFL,MLB net and NBA TV Now NBCSN should move near there. Big ten and cbs sports can stay near the RSN's. (big ten is RSN like)

 

[JoeTheDragon]

While I do agree it wouldn't hurt, none of you must not have ever had cable. Because their idea of order is throw the HD channels together and Premiums together. And thats IT!
Out of Cable, Directv and Dish

Directv is the most organized. Dish is also very close, might even be the same now since I've left them.

If they just put ESPNs and NFL ,MLB,NHL Tennis and so on in the 600's and then Cnn in the Upper 300's with the rest of the news channels.
That would be a very orgaized list.

The 600's don't have room for ESPNs and NFL ,MLB,NHL Tennis.

Even more so with the new RSN's coming (room for missing RSN's) and pac12.

 

[SamC]

1. Sports are all over the place - for example, put NBC Sports Net near the Golf Channel.

You are right. BUT, ESPN actually gives a price break for channel placement. They even dictate the order the 4 ESPNs are in. In a perfect world, all national sports channels would be in the low 600s, followed by the regional sports channels.

2. News channels are all over the place.

Same answer. CNN, the former market leader, dictated the channel position. Again in a perfect world, it would be grouped in the mid 300s like the others.

3. Shopping channels are all over the place.

Like all thinking persons, I delete and block all shopping channels.

 

[dcowboy7]

Dont want a change.

I have a favorites list of 70 channels so doesnt take long to channel guide thru them all.

Even if you group all the sports channels together there will still be sports showing up on channels not in the grouping like when TNT, TBS have games so all the games really arent together anyway.

 

[Boston_bill]

eh, I have no issues remembering where my favorite channels are.

 

[damondlt]

The 600's don't have room for ESPNs and NFL ,MLB,NHL Tennis.

Even more so with the new RSN's coming (room for missing RSN's) and pac12.

Well they would, if they would drop some of the unused alternate channels. There is way to many! But I know you can't be number one in sports with only 3 MSG Alternates instead of 6

Incase they forgot Dish doesn't even have MSG so not sure what they are worried about LOL!:lol:

 

[Davenlr]

I think it's officially time for a channel number reorg.

Comcast just did that here. It is really nice having all the channels in order.
They just left the original channel mapping (channels all over the place) below 1000, and duplicated all the HD channels only, starting at 1000, in groups of 1000. Locals are 1000-1099, News from 1100-1199, etc. Its really nice. I just block everything below 1000, then selectively enable the few non-HD channels in the <1000 range I want to watch.

My HTPC actually lets me take all its inputs (DirecTv, Comcast, FTA satellite), and create my own remapping. I can make any channel any number I want, but just remapped the DirecTv channels to match Comcasts.

 

[trainman]

Channel numbers don't matter as much in a world where DVR usage is continually increasing (since the name of the show/event is much more important than the channel number).

 

[mreposter]

Directv does a pretty good job of organizing their channels and has occasionally moved channels around. For instance, Bravo was moved awhile back to better reflect it's change into more of a female-targetted programmer, so now it sits next to E!.

The comments about CNN and ESPN being out of alignment pop up all the time, but there's never been any indication that Directv is going to move them.

And don't forget, QuickTune lets you easily access up to nine of your favorites just by hitting the up arrow on your remote. It may be tough for some families to agree on just nine, but it's a place to start.

 

[wilbur_the_goose]

honestly, I just want to see all the sports channels in the guide together. I know I can have a custom list with just these channels, but that's not what I'm looking for.

Of course, we could do what my 1997-era D* RCA box did - color code the shows by program type.

 

[Baldmaga]

I think I was one of the few people on Earth who enjoyed getting the new cable lineups in the mail and seeing how fast I could memorize the new lineups.

 

[dpeters11]

While I do agree it wouldn't hurt, none of you must not have ever had cable. Because their idea of order is throw the HD channels together and Premiums together. And thats IT!

Some like having the HD channels separated. I hate it, but know someone that prefers it to the DirecTV method.

 

[Jimmy 440]

The lineup now as it is works for me.I have no problem with it.Maybe put WGN down in the 240s with TBS & TNT.I thought that CNN & the ESPN's are where they are due to contracts ?

 

[PK6301]

You are right. BUT, ESPN actually gives a price break for channel placement. They even dictate the order the 4 ESPNs are in. In a perfect world, all national sports channels would be in the low 600s, followed by the regional sports channels.

Same answer. CNN, the former market leader, dictated the channel position. Again in a perfect world, it would be grouped in the mid 300s like the others.

Like all thinking persons, I delete and block all shopping channels.

How do I block the shopping channels? There are way too many of them..

 

[PCampbell]

I think ESPN and CNN have it in there contract to be where they are. back when directv moved the channels last time ESPN and CNN did not move.