Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 68

Thread: A sports television thread

  1. #31
    If you pay for 3 months of Sling they will give you a Roku 2 or a discounted Appletv.

  2. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by NorthwestUteFan View Post
    If you pay for 3 months of Sling they will give you a Roku 2 or a discounted Appletv.
    Better to spend the $140 on a new AppleTV. I have an old and new. New one is a big leap, much better remote, better resolution, 7.1 sound compatibility, Siri (which if you have an iPhone allows HomeKit) etc


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #33
    Also, only the USC and ASu games are on FS1. You won't really need to keep the full package all season. That is something to keep in mind.

  4. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by NorthwestUteFan View Post
    Also, only the USC and ASu games are on FS1. You won't really need to keep the full package all season. That is something to keep in mind.
    You will if you want basketball games.

    You'll need Orange/Sports for ESPNU, PAC12 and ESPN News. (You do get access to the watch ESPN app)



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  5. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Diehard Ute View Post
    You will if you want basketball games.

    You'll need Orange/Sports for ESPNU, PAC12 and ESPN News. (You do get access to the watch ESPN app)



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    This is great news, because that app is much better than the Sling app.

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Mormon Mecca (North)
    Posts
    1,138
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post
    Actually, the current group puts a lot of other men their age to shame:

    Attachment 1780
    Damn, really? The LDS apostles in a sports television thread? This place is ridiculous. Cougarboard is this bad.
    Last edited by Devildog; 09-10-2016 at 09:28 AM.

  7. #37
    So what package do I need to get for all of my Utah needs? Orange plus sports?

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Diehard Ute View Post
    You will if you want basketball games.

    You'll need Orange/Sports for ESPNU, PAC12 and ESPN News. (You do get access to the watch ESPN app)



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Does the WatchESPN app come only with the Orange package, or is it part of the Sports pack?

    Also for some reason I can't sign up for the Blue package without the order also including the Orange. And then I have to add the Sports pack on top. At this rate the new Dish (pseudo) a la carte plans will be cheaper.

  9. #39
    I think the App comes with Orange, but you have to have the sports pack to get Pac-12/Fox Sports so it's kind of a moot point.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  10. #40
    No actually Fox Sports is only on Blue, can't be added to Orange. Fs1 is the only thing I really need to buy. I don't mind getting the Blue plus Sports pack, but was hoping that would include WatchESPN.

  11. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by SavaUte View Post
    So what package do I need to get for all of my Utah needs? Orange plus sports?
    The USC and Arizona games are on FS1, as are a number of basketball games. The PAC channels come with the Sports pack and FS1 is on Blue.

    It might be worth getting Orange+Sports, then either adding Blue for the weeks of USC/ASU then cancelling if Sling will prorate service for the month, or bite the bullet and get the Full Meal Deal for Sept 23 through Nov 10.

    Prob still cheaper than a sports bar.

  12. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by NorthwestUteFan View Post
    The USC and Arizona games are on FS1, as are a number of basketball games. The PAC channels come with the Sports pack and FS1 is on Blue.

    It might be worth getting Orange+Sports, then either adding Blue for the weeks of USC/ASU then cancelling if Sling will prorate service for the month, or bite the bullet and get the Full Meal Deal for Sept 23 through Nov 10.

    Prob still cheaper than a sports bar.
    So this is where it's a bit confusing with them.

    ESPN is only in Orange. Fox Sports is only in Blue.

    To get both you have to subscribe to Orange AND Blue, which is $40. But to get ESPNU you have to subscribe to the sports package as well.

    And on top of that if you only do Orange, you get one stream. You have to have Blue or Orange And Blue to get 3 streams.




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  13. #43
    I need to call them. It is too confusing.

    I actually just want *legal* access to the WatchESPN app, and will need to think of something else for FS1. I can very easily find illegal access to the app and feeds or borrow a friend's. It is only messy when I want to get them legally.

  14. #44
    This looks promising. For $35, you get all the college football you want (though I don't see the pac-12 network on there):

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.75732d6ae311

    That's a much better deal that Sling.

  15. #45
    Senior Member Scorcho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    right here, right now
    Posts
    1,117
    ESPN cutting $100 million in salaries (on air talent)

    http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/es...-talent-030617

    that NBA contract is killing this network
    Last edited by Scorcho; 03-06-2017 at 10:42 AM.

  16. #46
    Just noticed that Ted Miller was one of those that got cut today. One of the few reasons I liked espn.com, and now he's gone. It's a shame really.

  17. #47

    A sports television thread

    They cut Chantel Jennings as well. Pretty much gutted their long term Pac-12 coverage. (With Gemmell leaving a few months ago)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  18. #48
    Andy Katz, no longer with ESPN


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  19. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Diehard Ute View Post
    Andy Katz, no longer with ESPN
    I always thought Katz was good for his connections but not so much for his writing or analysis. He always knew who was going where or what was happening. Maybe that's not so valuable anymore in a Twitter world. We all know who is going where and what is happening. We don't need Katz to break the story for us anymore. Just a half-baked thought that I'm sure SoCal will correct.

  20. #50
    Administrator U-Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    5,057
    The inside story about why the PAC-12 Networks isn't on DirecTV.

    TL;DR - Both sides have their own concerns and they couldn't agree.

    http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/08/2...otline-series/

  21. #51
    Senior Member Scorcho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    right here, right now
    Posts
    1,117
    while its not yet available to some igloo's in Canada its progress ...

    Jon Wilner
    Verified account
    @wilnerhotline
    2h2 hours agoMore



    major new distribution deal for the @Pac12Network, albeit in China: Alibaba will show 175 live events annually:

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic..._medium=social





    0 replies0 retweets2 likes
    Reply

    Retweet


    Like
    2
    Direct message



  22. #52
    Great news for China 🇨🇳


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

  23. #53
    Senior Member Scorcho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    right here, right now
    Posts
    1,117
    very good article on Larry Scott and the PAC-12 Network future

    http://www.sportcal.com/Insight/Interviews/116379

  24. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by Scorcho View Post
    very good article on Larry Scott and the PAC-12 Network future

    http://www.sportcal.com/Insight/Interviews/116379
    That is an interesting article, if not a bit solicitous of Scott. That said, as someone who lives in an area where the network is not available on cable packages and with physical limitations to get Dish, it seems a generation to wait until 2024 for the network to be untethered from cable or dish subscriptions so that I can simply pay them directly and watch.

  25. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Twin Falls, Idaho
    Posts
    3,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Scorcho View Post
    very good article on Larry Scott and the PAC-12 Network future

    http://www.sportcal.com/Insight/Interviews/116379
    I respect most of Scorcho's opinions. His assertion that this is a very good article is the rare one that misses the mark entirely. This is the article Larry Scott wants you to read to have you feel good about the direction the Pac-12 is moving in. At the same time, the word football appears all of five times in the story, all in cursory, afterthought tones.

    This story is not from a reputable sports journalism platform. SportCal is an England-based sports marketing firm that is in no way in touch with the struggles and frustration Pac-12 fans feel. Not a single outside source was spoken to on the record on this story. It's as fluffy as cotton candy and not worth your 10 minutes to read it.

  26. #56
    Senior Member Scorcho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    right here, right now
    Posts
    1,117
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalPat View Post
    I respect most of Scorcho's opinions. His assertion that this is a very good article is the rare one that misses the mark entirely. This is the article Larry Scott wants you to read to have you feel good about the direction the Pac-12 is moving in. At the same time, the word football appears all of five times in the story, all in cursory, afterthought tones.

    This story is not from a reputable sports journalism platform. SportCal is an England-based sports marketing firm that is in no way in touch with the struggles and frustration Pac-12 fans feel. Not a single outside source was spoken to on the record on this story. It's as fluffy as cotton candy and not worth your 10 minutes to read it.
    Jon Wilner was the one who referenced this article in his last blog. That is where I came across it.

    I readily admit that I am fascinated with the approach that the PAC 12 has taken in regards to sports programming. I'm intrigued by the forward thinking of not being a television entity but a content entity. I can see that by the time the next TV contracts roll around that the conference may have deals with ESPN, Fox along with Google, Twitter, Amazon and Facebook. While the PAC 12 may have sacrificed $$$ in the short term not being on Direct TV, I think they are the best positioned long term financially by owning their own content.

    i like to read about this stuff regardless of the source.

  27. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Twin Falls, Idaho
    Posts
    3,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Scorcho View Post
    Jon Wilner was the one who referenced this article in his last blog. That is where I came across it.

    I readily admit that I am fascinated with the approach that the PAC 12 has taken in regards to sports programming. I'm intrigued by the forward thinking of not being a television entity but a content entity. I can see that by the time the next TV contracts roll around that the conference may have deals with ESPN, Fox along with Google, Twitter, Amazon and Facebook. While the PAC 12 may have sacrificed $$$ in the short term not being on Direct TV, I think they are the best positioned long term financially by owning their own content.

    i like to read about this stuff regardless of the source.
    We're forward thinking ourselves out of relevance.

    I'm as much a fan of the sports TV biz as anyone, or at least I make it a point to stay current. But we're seven years into life in the Pac-12 and six with Pac-12 nets and the $$$ gulf between us and the Big 10 and SEC is widening. We're well into the long term, and there's nothing to suggest the money is going to get better anytime soon. Our best assistants are taking similar jobs in other leagues. We're losing more and more top recruits outside the footprint. The Pac-12 network is part of the problem in our slow descent into irrelevancy. This story is nothing more than Larry talking about things few people care about. And what's so great about content if nobody's watching it? ... https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/21/p12n-xxxxx/

  28. #58
    Senior Member Scorcho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    right here, right now
    Posts
    1,117
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalPat View Post
    We're forward thinking ourselves out of relevance.

    I'm as much a fan of the sports TV biz as anyone, or at least I make it a point to stay current. But we're seven years into life in the Pac-12 and six with Pac-12 nets and the $$$ gulf between us and the Big 10 and SEC is widening. We're well into the long term, and there's nothing to suggest the money is going to get better anytime soon. Our best assistants are taking similar jobs in other leagues. We're losing more and more top recruits outside the footprint. The Pac-12 network is part of the problem in our slow descent into irrelevancy. This story is nothing more than Larry talking about things few people care about. And what's so great about content if nobody's watching it? ... https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/21/p12n-xxxxx/
    I think we are arguing 2 different things?

    If PAC-12 Fandom were anywhere near Big 10/SEC levels, I would agree with you. Those conferences deserve to make more based on simple supply and demand. The market has dictated the PAC-12 pecking order and unfortunately the PAC-12 is better aligned with the Big XII and ACC.

    Maybe I'm wrong, but I maintain that owning its own content will be valuable financially for the PAC-12 in the future years. A Direct TV contract with the PAC-12 would only yield another 1-2 million per school. It helps, but the gap is still wide. Unless you can somehow shift population and passion from East to West, I don't see an answer.

  29. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Twin Falls, Idaho
    Posts
    3,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Scorcho View Post
    I think we are arguing 2 different things?

    If PAC-12 Fandom were anywhere near Big 10/SEC levels, I would agree with you. Those conferences deserve to make more based on simple supply and demand. The market has dictated the PAC-12 pecking order and unfortunately the PAC-12 is better aligned with the Big XII and ACC.

    Maybe I'm wrong, but I maintain that owning its own content will be valuable financially for the PAC-12 in the future years. A Direct TV contract with the PAC-12 would only yield another 1-2 million per school. It helps, but the gap is still wide. Unless you can somehow shift population and passion from East to West, I don't see an answer.
    We need to expand our brand nationally, yet we keep limiting ourselves to regional interests -- the 6 channels, courting local/regional cable deals instead of DirecTV among them.

    I agree that there are limitations based on geography and time zone constraints. Which makes our emphasis on the Olympic sports more restrictive. And who cares about China? Maybe first Larry should find a way to get more league games done before 11 p.m. EST before figuring out how to promote the league in foreign markets. Our TV efforts are a disaster, and recruits are taking notice.

  30. #60
    Don't know if this was posted:

    Some ADs grumble about Pac-12 Networks’ payouts, distribution

    https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/art...s-10910339.php

    Utah athletic director Chris Hill said he hasn’t been satisfied with the network either in its payouts or distribution. “From the ADs’ standpoint, we expected more,” he said ...

    But those advances haven’t stemmed the criticism. The inability to land DirecTV, in particular, “is making the gap bigger and bigger” in comparison with the other conference networks, said Utah’s Hill.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •