• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

BCS Moving to ESPN in 2010 postseason

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
OHSportsFan9;1322842; said:
By "ESPN" do they mean ABC?

Because "ABC Sports" became ESPN a few years ago. All ABC broadcasts have ESPN logos, etc now.
Click to expand...

Nope - in the article, they're talking about ESPN on cable/satellite only.
 
Upvote 0
billmac91;1322689; said:
I don't really like the idea of more to power to ESPN....plus Mike Patrick could possibly call some of those games which instantly ruins some of the entertainment value...no matter how bad you think Brennamen and Charles Davis are.
Click to expand...

But we could hear all about BRIITTTTNAAAYYYY on 4th and 1 with the game on the line :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Seriously, the only hope I would have is that the commercial structure would stay the same at ESPN as it does for all their ABC prime time games (which is bad enough)...it seems like Fox games took about 7 hours to play.
 
Upvote 0
I think that ESPN has too much influence already and by giving them the broadcast rights to all of the BCS games would just add on to that influence. I don't think is a good idea but as Script said above "it's all about the money".
 
Upvote 0
BUCKYLE;1323289; said:
I haven't known anyone that didn't have cable or satellite since I was eleven, and that was my grandma.
Click to expand...

Agreed. If you want to watch football games and you don't have cable access by now, you haven't had much success watching those games to this point. To complain about it now is like finding out you're out of toilet paper only when it's too late: it sucks for you, but everyone else is laughing at you when you're gone.

Personally, I think that ESPN does a lot better job with the games than any other network. But they've also been able to hold entire teams' fanbases for ransom in the past. (Remember when they played Ohio State vs. whoever on ESPN-U?) They had the right to do that, of course. But it was pretty annoying. And I'm not worried that they might do that for a BCS bowl game (or any other bowl game, at this moment). But the fact that they can do that without any uprising from the peasants makes me want to see more games on other networks.
 
Upvote 0
I applaud any move away from Fox for no other reason than to avoid Barry Alvarez. I am convinced that Alvarez is Tressel's kryptonite, and but for his presence in the announcing booth for Fox in the last 2 championship games, we (1) would not have gotten blown out, and (2) would not have lost. This is not conjecture - a scientific study was done.
 
Upvote 0
LitlBuck;1323245; said:
I think that ESPN has too much influence already and by giving them the broadcast rights to all of the BCS games would just add on to that influence. I don't think is a good idea but as Script said above "it's all about the money".
Click to expand...

Thirded
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top