Big Ten Network (BTN)

[bux_k_a]

Ditto here in Dayton. ESPN News is 112, Classic is now 113 and ESPNU is 114 leaving Channel 28 open and in-between ESPN2 (27) and FSN (29). And we know that BTN is 49% Fox owned. I'm still hopeful for next week but I'll be at the Shoe anyway.

GO BUCKS!!

 

[Fungo Squiggly]

Ohio State on TV
Insight strikes deal with Big Ten

Thursday, August 30, 2007 3:35 AM
By Bob Baptist


THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

One domino down, two to go. ...

Looks like I'm headed to my folks house for a couple games!

 

[jlb1705]

No my parents live in cincy and it was announced a few weeks ago. As of sept 1st TW in cincy is adding ESPN U though. I think it is going up into the 100 area to, near where they put ESPN classic. I was looking at the new llineup when I was home last weekend.

Ah, thanks for the clarification.

 

[OSU SPORTS]

Here is the list of HD channels currently being tested on the new satelite. Elizabeth Conlisk informed me that the BTN(HD) should be on in mid September(no firm date). There are 80 HD channels in this cluster, more to follow Scroll down the posts to find the list


DirecTV Confirms 2007 HD channel additions. - Page 30 - AVS Forum

 

[cincibuck]

I generally support the idea behind BTN. It was one way to address the advantage that Notre Dame has in a dedicated national network for all home games... which allows the Irish to schedule the academies and still get national exposure for a tier 2 game.

If OSU weren't playing YSU, Akron and Kent State they could enjoy at least regional coverage. Unless there's a possible upset in the making those three games won't draw dick in the market outside of Ohio.

In that sense buckeye fans are up against it. It's not a very good product to sell for a national marketer (T-W Cable) In fact there is only one game offered by the Big 10 this week that has the hope of drawing outside the market and that's Wisconsin - Washington State.

From a schedule point of view, this was a weak year to push the idea... imagine if the league were dangling, OSU - Texas, Michigan - Notre Dame and Penn State - Nebraska and saying sign or go fuck yourself.

What intrigued me about the BTN was the chance for the schools other than OSU - Michigan - Penn State to get some semblence of top three money and exposure for their programs. In that sense I saw it as a way to save Northwestern and help Indiana. Indeed, those two schools especially have the most to gain from a successful BTN program and the top three the most to lose if it tanks.

 

[martinss01]

I, for one, say kudos to the cable companies. While I don't think they're particularly wonderful, they have stood their ground to this network despite heavy fan pressure. Having 4-5 games of football and 15-20 basketball games (which were all free before) isn't worth the increased cost for subscribers. I love OSU as much as anyone, but the BTN is greedy.

yay... wooo... yippie... frickin skippy doo da day.. why is it that i the consumer once again must pay for their "glorious stand"? im sick and tired of having to deal with other peoples incompetance. these two entities have failed miserably to come to some form of an agreement. which impacts me directly btw. not only does neither side give two shits about us. they are actively using us as a pawns in their ignorant little game of piss in the other guys wheeties. if they gave a crap about any of us both sides would have cooperated with eachother from the get go, both sides would have found a reasonable comprimise and none of us would be having this discussion right now because there would be absolutely nothing to talk about.

but you feel free to pat the guy on the back who is barely aware you even exist.

despite heavy fan pressure

you realize your giving props to a company for ignoring their customer base right?

 

[jwinslow]

I, for one, say kudos to the cable companies. While I don't think they're particularly wonderful, they have stood their ground to this network despite heavy fan pressure.

They worked to exploit fan pressure as well. The comcast BTN special (aka smear campaign) shown the other night was apparently a disgrace.

Having 4-5 games of football and 15-20 basketball games (which were all free before) isn't worth the increased cost for subscribers.

But its worth the $10 increase for new premium packages from the endless b10 football fans, right? The cable company wallets thank you for your stance.

All of those games were NOT free before, unless you lived directly in the local team's market. This is a much cheaper alternative to ESPN gameplan for out of state b10 fans.

I love OSU as much as anyone, but the BTN is greedy.

Both sides are greedy. You seem to have bought into one side's manipulative propaganda, but rejected the others.

 

[buckeyefool]

They worked to exploit fan pressure as well. The comcast BTN special (aka smear campaign) shown the other night was apparently a disgrace.
But its worth the $10 increase for new premium packages from the endless b10 football fans, right? The cable company wallets thank you for your stance.

All of those games were NOT free before, unless you lived directly in the local team's market. This is a much cheaper alternative to ESPN gameplan for out of state b10 fans.Both sides are greedy. You seem to have bought into one side's manipulative propaganda, but rejected the others.

He is probally on a cable providers bankroll shomhow.

 

[matcar]

yay... wooo... yippie... frickin skippy doo da day.. why is it that i the consumer once again must pay for their "glorious stand"? im sick and tired of having to deal with other peoples incompetance. these two entities have failed miserably to come to some form of an agreement. which impacts me directly btw. not only does neither side give two shits about us. they are actively using us as a pawns in their ignorant little game of piss in the other guys wheeties. if they gave a crap about any of us both sides would have cooperated with eachother from the get go, both sides would have found a reasonable comprimise and none of us would be having this discussion right now because there would be absolutely nothing to talk about.

but you feel free to pat the guy on the back who is barely aware you even exist.



you realize your giving props to a company for ignoring their customer base right?

Not really. Nationwide, there are a majority of people who are not fans of Big Ten football. So they are not ignoring them in this case.

 

[buckeyefool]

Not really. Nationwide, there are a majority of people who are not fans of Big Ten football. So they are not ignoring them in this case.

If you look at the qoute he took it that despite the fact that people are asking for it, the cable companies are not putting it on. So he wasn't talking about the people who they claim don't want the channel.

 

[jwinslow]

Here is the list of HD channels currently being tested on the new satelite. Elizabeth Conlisk informed me that the BTN(HD) should be on in mid September(no firm date). There are 80 HD channels in this cluster, more to follow Scroll down the posts to find the list

Any idea if they are recording the games in HD before the satellite launch, and will air them as replays later?

 

[jwinslow]

Not really. Nationwide, there are a majority of people who are not fans of Big Ten football. So they are not ignoring them in this case.

The cable companies can't afford 0.10 for those out of market customers, when they air endless channels of little interest to the average consumer?

 

[matcar]

The cable companies can't afford 0.10 for those out of market customers, when they air endless channels of little interest to the average consumer?

We can debate endlessly what and how cable and sat companies come up with their channel lineups and never get anywhere. My simple point is that you can just as easily argue that a cable company IS taking up for their constituents considering that the majority of viewers (factoring in women, homes outside of B10 country etc) nationwide probably don't care about the channel.

 

[buckeyefool]

We can debate endlessly what and how cable and sat companies come up with their channel lineups and never get anywhere. My simple point is that you can just as easily argue that a cable company IS taking up for their constituents considering that the majority of viewers (factoring in women, homes outside of B10 country etc) nationwide probably don't care about the channel.

So because they are women they don't care about football? Maybe you can start you own thread or something and hang out with your sexist ideas.

 

[IronBuckI]

First of all. These games would not be free. They would likely not be televised. I have been to more than one game, in the 90's, that was radio only. The Indiana game last year. The BTN games this year. Would likely either not be televised or only shown ESPN plus (another company that charges cable companies and networks to carry their games). I don't think that what the BTN is asking is all that unreasonable. The cable companies are taking a stand on a system that is already gouging it's customers for channels that they don't want.