Gophers on TV (BTN games announced)

Donate To GopherHole
Gopher07

Gopher07

Captain of Awesome
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
9,008
Reaction score
15
Points
38
Per http://www.bigten.org/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/091614aac.html

On BTN:

12/19: vs Seattle (7pm)
12/27: vs UNC-Wilmington (TBD)
12/31: @ Purdue (TBD)
1/3: @ Maryland (11am)
1/13: vs Iowa (8pm)
1/17: vs Rutgers (11am)
1/20: @ Nebraska (7:30pm)
1/24: vs Illinois (1:15pm)
1/28: @ Penn State (6pm)
1/31: vs Nebraska (5pm)
2/7: vs Purdue (2pm)
2/12: @ Iowa (6pm)
2/15: @ Indiana (6:30pm)
2/18: vs Northwestern (8pm)
2/26: @ Michigan State (6pm)

On ESPN networks:

11/14: vs Louisville (6pm, ESPN)
11/26: vs St. John's (6pm, ESPNU)
11/28: vs Gonzaga/Georgia (TBD)
12/2: @ Wake Forest (6pm, ESPNU)
12/8: vs North Dakota (8pm, ESPNU)
1/6: vs Ohio State (8pm, ESPN)
1/10: @ Michigan (TBD)
2/21: @ Wisconsin (1pm, TBD)
3/5: vs Wisconsin (6pm, TBD)

On CBS Sports:
3/8: vs Penn State (TBD) *CBS Sports Wildcard Selection

Games not yet scheduled/scheduled for digital channels:

11/18: vs Western Kentucky (ESPN3)
11/20: vs Franklin Pierce (BTN Plus)
11/22: vs UMBC (BTN Plus)
12/5: vs Western Carolina (ESPN3)
12/10: vs Southern (ESPN3)
12/22: vs Furman (ESPN3)
 

Four Saturday home games, only one Sunday home game....progress.
 

CBS

It would be nice to get on CBS for a change.
 

Gopher07 said:
Per http://www.bigten.org/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/091614aac.html

On BTN:

12/31: @ Purdue (TBD)
1/3: @ Maryland (11am)
1/13: vs Iowa (8pm)
1/17: vs Rutgers (11am)
1/20: @ Nebraska (7:30pm)
1/24: vs Illinois (1:15pm)
1/28: @ Penn State (6pm)
1/31: vs Nebraska (5pm)
2/7: vs Purdue (2pm)
2/12: @ Iowa (6pm)
2/15: @ Indiana (6:30pm)
2/18: vs Northwestern (8pm)
2/26: @ Michigan State (6pm)

On ESPN networks:

11/26: vs St. John's (6pm, ESPNU)
11/28: vs Gonzaga/Georgia (TBD)
12/2: @ Wake Forest (6pm, ESPNU)
1/6: vs Ohio State (8pm, ESPN)

Games not yet scheduled:

11/14: vs Louisville
11/20: vs Franklin Pierce
11/22: vs UMBC
12/5: vs Western Carolina
12/8: vs North Dakota
12/10: vs Southern
12/19: vs Seattle
12/22: vs Furman
12/27: vs UNC-Wilmington
1/10: @ Michigan
2/21: @ Wisconsin
3/5: vs Wisconsin
3/8: vs Penn State
Click to expand...

The Louisville game is on ESPN at 6 CT.
 



Gopher07 said:
Per http://www.bigten.org/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/091614aac.html

On BTN:

12/31: @ Purdue (TBD)
1/3: @ Maryland (11am)
1/13: vs Iowa (8pm)
1/17: vs Rutgers (11am)
1/20: @ Nebraska (7:30pm)
1/24: vs Illinois (1:15pm)
1/28: @ Penn State (6pm)
1/31: vs Nebraska (5pm)
2/7: vs Purdue (2pm)
2/12: @ Iowa (6pm)
2/15: @ Indiana (6:30pm)
2/18: vs Northwestern (8pm)
2/26: @ Michigan State (6pm)

On ESPN networks:

11/14: vs Louisville (6pm, ESPN)
11/26: vs St. John's (6pm, ESPNU)
11/28: vs Gonzaga/Georgia (TBD)
12/2: @ Wake Forest (6pm, ESPNU)
1/6: vs Ohio State (8pm, ESPN)
1/10: @ Michigan (1pm or 2pm, ESPN or ESPNU)
2/21: @ Wisconsin (1pm, ESPN or ESPN2)
3/5: vs Wisconsin (6pm, ESPN or ESPN2)

On CBS Sports:
3/8: vs Penn State (TBD) *CBS Sports Wildcard Selection (whatever the F that means)

Games not yet scheduled/scheduled for digital channels:

11/18: vs Western Kentucky (ESPN3)
11/20: vs Franklin Pierce (BTN Plus)
11/22: vs UMBC (BTN Plus)
12/5: vs Western Carolina
12/8: vs North Dakota
12/10: vs Southern
12/19: vs Seattle
12/22: vs Furman
12/27: vs UNC-Wilmington
Click to expand...

Updated for ESPN and CBS conference schedule release.
 

DeathClutch said:
Updated for ESPN and CBS conference schedule release.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Disappointed that we don't have more than one (potential?) CBS game but at least we're well represented on the Worldwide Leader
 

Ope3 said:
It would be nice to get on CBS for a change.
Click to expand...

CBS College Sports is a separate cable channel. I think it's part of the cable sports package add on (a fairly cheap add on), but I'm not sure.
 

The most recent broadcast schedule on the university athletic site lists a few more new ones:

North Dakota: ESPNU
Seattle: BTN
UNC-Wilmington: BTN

In addition, Western KY, Western Carolina, Furman, and Southern are now listed as available on ESPN3 leaving only the exhibition, Franklin Pierce, and UMBC on BTN plus.
 



So 'BTN +' is basically the replacement for 'Gopher All Access' correct? I noticed when having to watch the MTSU game online thanks to BTN's brilliance. Anyone know the cost of this wonderful service? (Not that one can put a price on seeing a game vs Frank Pierce. Some things are priceless.)
 

BTN +

howeda7 said:
So 'BTN +' is basically the replacement for 'Gopher All Access' correct? I noticed when having to watch the MTSU game online thanks to BTN's brilliance. Anyone know the cost of this wonderful service? (Not that one can put a price on seeing a game vs Frank Pierce. Some things are priceless.)
Click to expand...

It's free if you already subscribe to BTN via cable or satellite.

On 2nd thought, I was referring to BTN2Go. I'm not sure if that's the same thing as BTN +.
 

Ope3 said:
It's free if you already subscribe to BTN via cable or satellite.

On 2nd thought, I was referring to BTN2Go. I'm not sure if that's the same thing as BTN +.
Click to expand...

It's hasn't been free in the past to stream games from the BTN site and I have my doubts they would change that.
 

Ope3 said:
It's free if you already subscribe to BTN via cable or satellite.

On 2nd thought, I was referring to BTN2Go. I'm not sure if that's the same thing as BTN +.
Click to expand...

Yeah, plus is extra even if you have accees to BTN.
 



howeda7 said:
So 'BTN +' is basically the replacement for 'Gopher All Access' correct? I noticed when having to watch the MTSU game online thanks to BTN's brilliance. Anyone know the cost of this wonderful service? (Not that one can put a price on seeing a game vs Frank Pierce. Some things are priceless.)
Click to expand...

That would be my guess. I've subscribed to this in the past, but I don't know if I will this year due to it only being necessary to see three games with terrible opponents. In the past, you could buy one month, but you had to remember to cancel it or else they would automatically charge you each month until you do.
 


The year is 2014. The average cable and satellite customer pays over $1,000 a yr for service, and we still need to pay extra for 6-10 games a year. Total Bull****!
 

station19 said:
The year is 2014. The average cable and satellite customer pays over $1,000 a yr for service, and we still need to pay extra for 6-10 games a year. Total Bull****!
Click to expand...

With you there. I can't wait for the major sports leagues to figure out streaming services that aren't tied to cable subscriptions (MLB and MLS have, but the rest are woefully behind). Good thing for the cable industry, as live sports are the major thing keeping the model alive, but bad for the rest of us.
 

Gopher07 said:
With you there. I can't wait for the major sports leagues to figure out streaming services that aren't tied to cable subscriptions (MLB and MLS have, but the rest are woefully behind). Good thing for the cable industry, as live sports are the major thing keeping the model alive, but bad for the rest of us.
Click to expand...

Actually I'm blaming the Big Ten and member schools.

I read somewhere, a few years ago, that sports/sports fans were a minor part of cable income, but they were the loudest.
 

Sharing my season tickets with my brother this season so that means some evenings at home on Gopher game nights. Will take some getting used to, but I won't mind going old school (listen to the radio broadcast) for the non-conference blowouts not airing on "regular" TV. Something I don't ever want to lose, the ability to enjoy a game on the radio & visualizing the play-by-play guy's description of the game.
 

SelectionSunday said:
Sharing my season tickets with my brother this season so that means some evenings at home on Gopher game nights. Will take some getting used to, but I won't mind going old school (listen to the radio broadcast) for the non-conference blowouts not airing on "regular" TV. Something I don't ever want to lose, the ability to enjoy a game on the radio & visualizing the play-by-play guy's description of the game.
Click to expand...

One of all radio play-by-play guys' great lines:

The Gophers (or whoever) are going left to right on your radio dial:)
 

SelectionSunday said:
Sharing my season tickets with my brother this season so that means some evenings at home on Gopher game nights. Will take some getting used to, but I won't mind going old school (listen to the radio broadcast) for the non-conference blowouts not airing on "regular" TV. Something I don't ever want to lose, the ability to enjoy a game on the radio & visualizing the play-by-play guy's description of the game.
Click to expand...

I still "watch" a lot of games on the radio in my office. A good radio broadcaster is the best. I like Grimm but he has a long way to go to match the smooth sound of Ray who could tell you the state of the game with the tone of his voice. Radio sports broadcast is a dying art I'm afraid.
 

station19 said:
Actually I'm blaming the Big Ten and member schools.

I read somewhere, a few years ago, that sports/sports fans were a minor part of cable income, but they were the loudest.
Click to expand...

That's surprising, given that the top per subscriber fees are from ESPN - by far - and expected to rise by a bunch in the next few years.

http://blogs.wsj.com/numbers/how-much-cable-subscribers-pay-per-channel-1626/
OG-AC140_TopTV__G_20140729144610.jpg


This is an older article (from 2010), but I suspect it remains true, and possibly more skewed as the rise in subscriber rates for ESPN outpaces that of general market (might have to access it through Google to get around the paywall): http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703915204575103902644589406

Consider: Of the $29 billion in fees SNL Kagan estimates will be paid by cable, satellite and phone companies for TV channels this year, excluding premium-movie outlets like HBO, 40% goes to sports cable channels. These include ESPN and its spinoffs and Fox Sports Net, whose parent News Corp. also owns The Wall Street Journal. The number doesn't include channels like TNT that air some sports.
Click to expand...

If leagues - like the B1G - figured out how to go direct to consumer through their own channels, and get more money, they would. With more of the populace cutting the cable cord to watch exclusively through online/streaming, you have to think they're thinking about it. But I imagine the cable companies will do a lot to keep them from doing so (like paying them $6.04 per subscriber), since live sports are one of the key reasons why people decide to keep cable and not switch to a purely streaming or digital access approach.
 

@07...... your graph shows what the cable companies pay to networks. Not where the cable companies make their money or what the volume of customers are interested in. You've got about 15 or 16 dollars on that graph(of which I don't get 3net and NFL. Which brings that down to less than 14 dollars a month. Meanwhile my bill(without boxes) is around $90 per month.
 

station19 said:
@07...... your graph shows what the cable companies pay to networks. Not where the cable companies make their money or what the volume of customers are interested in. You've got about 15 or 16 dollars on that graph(of which I don't get 3net and NFL. Which brings that down to less than 14 dollars a month. Meanwhile my bill(without boxes) is around $90 per month.
Click to expand...

It makes sense that your bill is higher, the prices above are essentially wholesale and then they pass that cost (along with profit money and added costs for infrastructure upkeep, etc.) to the consumer. Whether or not those costs are fair is certainly up for debate.

But for the average person, about 40% of all channel fees - which are about $30 per month - are strictly for sports networks.

Guess my point is, there's a reason the cable companies are willing to pay through the nose for ESPN, especially now, and it's because they know (and ESPN knows) that without it, the average consumer won't pay for their service. And in turn, the leagues and cable channels know they can keep charging more because people will pay it.

If ESPN and other major sports entities (or the leagues themselves) were to successfully monetize and switch to a direct-to-consumer digital model, it would spell the end of cable TV as we know it. People - especially younger people - are increasingly cutting the cord and consuming digital and over-the-air content exclusively (from 4.5% to 6.5% of households in four years).

If sports were to do the switch, the flood of people away from cable TV would increase exponentially IMO, with an estimated 80% of households willing to pay for TV sports right now.
 

Holy Man said:
I still "watch" a lot of games on the radio in my office. A good radio broadcaster is the best. I like Grimm but he has a long way to go to match the smooth sound of Ray who could tell you the state of the game with the tone of his voice. Radio is dying I'm afraid.
Click to expand...

FIFY
 

Gopher07 said:
BTN Plus is not the same as BTN2Go. BTN+ is $9.95/month if you only want access to your school's games.

http://www.btn2go.com/packages?type=0

Gopher All Access still exists, presumably for games that would not even be picked up by BTN Plus: http://www.gophersports.com/collegesportslive/gopherallaccess.html
Click to expand...

Ugh. Paying for one or the other is bad enough. I would hope all the games that aren't on real TV will be on BTN + with Jed Nelson or whoever giving awful play-by-play. (No offense if he's a member here.)
 

Gopher07 said:
It makes sense that your bill is higher, the prices above are essentially wholesale and then they pass that cost (along with profit money and added costs for infrastructure upkeep, etc.) to the consumer. Whether or not those costs are fair is certainly up for debate.

But for the average person, about 40% of all channel fees - which are about $30 per month - are strictly for sports networks.

Guess my point is, there's a reason the cable companies are willing to pay through the nose for ESPN, especially now, and it's because they know (and ESPN knows) that without it, the average consumer won't pay for their service. And in turn, the leagues and cable channels know they can keep charging more because people will pay it.

If ESPN and other major sports entities (or the leagues themselves) were to successfully monetize and switch to a direct-to-consumer digital model, it would spell the end of cable TV as we know it. People - especially younger people - are increasingly cutting the cord and consuming digital and over-the-air content exclusively (from 4.5% to 6.5% of households in four years).

If sports were to do the switch, the flood of people away from cable TV would increase exponentially IMO, with an estimated 80% of households willing to pay for TV sports right now.
Click to expand...


There was a rumor that Google was going to bid mega-bucks for NFL Sunday Ticket, but DirecTV held onto it. It's probably the only thing keeping them alive.

There will eventually be a 'Netflix/Comcast' and/or 'DirecTV/Amazon' type merger that will usher this era in. You will pay one fee for your cable and streaming until such time everything is simply streamed. That is unless the Feds block this, which is probably likely.
 

Basically it comes down to way too many people paying for crap they don't want. Sherman should of taken down bundling a long time ago.

When I'm grumpy I take it out the cable company. One agent told me there was a large 'file' on me. If there is a game I want and need to pick up a network like espnu, I call and tell them I won't pay the $10 for one game. They then make a generous offer.

Do we really need 200 or 300 channels? Besides local(TC) I probably watch 8-10 channels. I don't 200 frickin channels.

Ahhhhhhhhhhh. I feel better now.:)
 

Lots of potential wins. Would love to see more on CBS as well.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom