No live BTN broadcast for the Spring Game.
- Thread starter northeastNebraska
- Start date
I think the reason is there are a number of B1G spring games that day at that time and BTN chose to broadcast Ohio State's. NU could probably have gotten ours televised if we were willing to move it to another time, but the Athletic Department didn't want to. I am fine watching on BTN2GO and they will probably have a delayed broadcast later.
It's interesting. I have a hard time coming up with a reason why both parties shouldn't want to make a live broadcast happen.
Maybe BTN is having a classic Minnesota/Fordham curling match from 1996 they didn't want to move.
If you hooked up with one of them, despite whatever other great qualities she may have, you know she could sweep (real fast).
Other than the great money that NU will accrue, the BTN has turned out to be mostly a disappointment. I wonder if it will even continue for many more years on cable systems in areas distant from Nebraska, like here in AZ.
I'm sorry. How is BTN a disappointment? Could you elaborate? I just wish it was standard instead of something I have to pay extra for here in Texas. If the game will be on BTN2Go I don't see what the problem is. Two spring games at the same time. Wouldn't you broadcast the one that had the better rankings? Just run the game from your PC to your television set via some cables (HDMI) and voila!
BTN kicks as. No more PPV, non-ESPN talking heads, the occasional NU story or classic game, and yes, even the occasional non-football sport... Not sure what else you could want out of a conference network. If we want even more NU football coverage we can start winning big again. There are some annoying things about it, but really we have so much more NU content because of BTN than we would otherwise. Furthermore, $$$$$$$.
Which is great for me so as I have a conflict that day. Nobody cares what the score is or "who wins". Its all about getting to see some live scrimmage action of some guys you might not otherwise get to see.
Who do you think pays for all this coverage of non-revenue sports? I want everything for free, but this is a lot better than in the past. And no, I do not pay for BTN Plus as it's beyond my budget.
Finally the voice of reason. I hate when people moan about companies charging money for content. Would you walk into a restaurant and cry when they charge you for a drink? When you walk into a store do you complain when they charge you for toilet paper? Media is also in the business of making money, whether people like that or not.
Well seems how I already pay more just for BTN its a scam to get you to pay extra. You must be a Corporate America fan. They get you to pay it because you will, not because they need you too. I definitely dont expect everything for free as I work hard for what I have. Im guessing you will next say Im a Bernie supporter and turn this shit show into a political thread.
Boxes werent you just whining or complaining because you have to pay extra for BTN down in beloved Texas? But thats ok and me saying Im not a fan of paying a second time for BTN Plus is not ok? Nowhere did I whine or complain just not a fan. But I do it because I love watching them play.
I apologize if I offended you. I am not anything you just said. I live outside the BTN footprint. I have to pay $8.99 for some stupid sports package just to get BTN. For my money I get BTN, a lot of PAC12 channels and lots of soccer leagues that I hate. In fact, I almost never have time or the energy to actually watch BTN. I wish they would have all the other sports that few people watch or my team because I am a die-hard Husker fan. However, I realize that it takes money to pay for somebody to man that camera, to send someone to cover an event, to buy the equipment to get this all on the air. So, I just said the truth to "Why are they charging me extra?" Nothing political my friend.
I apologize if I offended you. I am not anything you just said. I live outside the BTN footprint. I have to pay $8.99 for some stupid sports package just to get BTN. For my money I get BTN, a lot of PAC12 channels and lots of soccer leagues that I hate. In fact, I almost never have time or the energy to actually watch BTN. I wish they would have all the other sports that few people watch or my team because I am a die-hard Husker fan. However, I realize that it takes money to pay for somebody to man that camera, to send someone to cover an event, to buy the equipment to get this all on the air. So, I just said the truth to "Why are they charging me extra?" Nothing political my friend.
This is a very different topic and one I agree with. Cable companies have been scamming people due to the "bundling" of channels that no one wants. That is something that should come to an end. As long as you're not complaining because a network charges for content you want (that is called capitalism), then I'm OK with this argument.
I believe there will come a time in the very near future where people will have the ability to choose and pay for exactly the type of programming they want to see. It may backfire on some though, as I imagine the opportunity to pay per show will be higher than a bundled offering, but at least the offering should exist.
I'm all for government regulations forcing the unbundling of channels. I understand the desire to cut the cord. I'm thinking more about it every day. It's unfair to make me pay for 200 channels of crap just to get the 20 I actually might watch. Sling TV looks like something I would do, but they don't offer my local Fox Sports channel (Rangers, Stars, Mavericks) nor BTN.
Again, donohues17 got me wrong. My feeling is that BTN is fair in charging extra for little watched programming. It costs something to send a crew there to cover it.
Similar threads
