Further proof...we're now FBS in name only

[apollo]

The MAC is playing right into the Big 5's trap. The MAC can't afford to put any more money in football than they already do. Unfortunately MAC ADs and presidents highly overestimate the value of playing Tuesday night games and a low level bowl game that no one is really watching anyway.

By dumping all this money into football, the MAC hamstrings their other sports. This helps the Big 5 maintain dominance in all the non revenue sports as well.

The one thing that really surprises me is that they still allow these mid major schools to flat out lie about their attendance. Having sponsors buy tickets for pennies on the dollar or (my all time favorite Christopher story) just taking money out of other sports budgets mid year and buying our own football tickets to meet attendance.

If the MAC got smart they would simply spend a little more reasonably with football and the result would be the same in terms of bowl appearances and TV. Bending over backwards to "compete with the Big 5" won't work anyway, so why not try to build up your other sports and actually compete regionally and nationally? Kent is the one school who has done this by making FB less of a priority and the results have been there. The rest of the MAC would be smart to follow Kent's plan.

[FalconTurf]

The conspiracy reason I have that says the Big 5 want mid-major football is that mid-week games are not their cup of tea. ESPN and Vegas needs those games. They don't want to fill that niche with Northwestern vs. Rutgers on a Wednesday in November but that's who gets it if BG and NIU aren't playing.

[mscarn]

Bending over backwards to "compete with the Big 5" won't work anyway, so why not try to build up your other sports and actually compete regionally and nationally? Kent is the one school who has done this by making FB less of a priority and the results have been there. The rest of the MAC would be smart to follow Kent's plan.

It all depends on what the goals are, and football seems to be the driver of all of collegiate athletics. It (and to a lesser extent basketball) is the only thing that garners attention and acclaim for a school nationally, and I say that as a follower and admirer of the Olympic sports. A few hundred people know that Kent has an outstanding golf program whereas over three million people watched the BG/Pitt bowl game last year. If BG doesn't build the Sebo Center and maintain a competitive operating budget that likely doesn't happen. The MAC would rather be 7th in the pecking order in football instead of 1-2 in the other sports because football is the attention-garnering giant that it is.

[Falcon137]

The MAC is playing right into the Big 5's trap. The MAC can't afford to put any more money in football than they already do. Unfortunately MAC ADs and presidents highly overestimate the value of playing Tuesday night games and a low level bowl game that no one is really watching anyway.

By dumping all this money into football, the MAC hamstrings their other sports. This helps the Big 5 maintain dominance in all the non revenue sports as well.

Yawn. 1.11 million people watched BG in the Camellia Bowl going against an NFL game and not kicking off until 9. That is more than people watching than any, A10, Big East, WCC, or MVC game will have this year.

Akron's soccer program is one of the best in the country despite being held down by MAC football. Same goes for Miami, WMU, and BG hockey, Kent golf. Those are off the top of my head.

[Schadenfreude]

I think this might be the tipping point. With a Smart-TV and Antenna along with this product, I may be cutting the cable cord:

http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/05/media/d ... index.html" target="_blank

Seven out of Bowling Green's 12 regular season games were either on ESPN3 or ESPNU. My understanding is that ESPN3 is only available to people through the permission of a participating cable television company. So I'm not sure this is going to work for us.

(Bowling Green had four games on ESPN2, which would be available through Sling. The Western Kentucky opener was on the CBS Sports Network)

[Flipper]

>>>Snip<<<<

. Would I pay a pirate in the Netherlands or some other far away land with lax copyright protections 15 per month for an ESPN roku channel? Possibly... and if there's enough people like me out there ESPN would be forced to pick between $15 and nothing...that may not force ESPN to come down to $15,...but it might get them to $20. And that may be more palatable. Hockeystreams.com is the model for that type of arrangement...you pay for content..but the NHL doesn't see a dime of it.

>>>>snip<<<<.

Good God almighty...did I call that or not?

Been seriously looking at buying two more Roku's and cutting cable tv...this will make it extremely tempting.

So far as the increased $$$ to staffs go...it's just another step in the arms race of college football. You can only hang so many flat screens in the locker rooms, buy so many kettlebells, Hammer strength machines and bumper plates, you can't put field turf down on every inch of campus, so you may as well start blowing money on assistant coaches.

[Lord_Byron]

I think this might be the tipping point. With a Smart-TV and Antenna along with this product, I may be cutting the cable cord:

http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/05/media/d ... index.html" target="_blank

Seven out of Bowling Green's 12 regular season games were either on ESPN3 or ESPNU. My understanding is that ESPN3 is only available to people through the permission of a participating cable television company. So I'm not sure this is going to work for us.

(Bowling Green had four games on ESPN2, which would be available through Sling. The Western Kentucky opener was on the CBS Sports Network)

Correct. All part of the equation. Do I continue cable for 25 hours of BG football? Probably cheaper just to go to three games in person.

What this does do for me is change the decision process for the first time.

[hammb]

I think this might be the tipping point. With a Smart-TV and Antenna along with this product, I may be cutting the cable cord:

http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/05/media/d ... index.html" target="_blank

Seven out of Bowling Green's 12 regular season games were either on ESPN3 or ESPNU. My understanding is that ESPN3 is only available to people through the permission of a participating cable television company. So I'm not sure this is going to work for us.

(Bowling Green had four games on ESPN2, which would be available through Sling. The Western Kentucky opener was on the CBS Sports Network)

Only correction would be that ESPN3 is actually available through deals cut with your ISP, not your TV provider. Typically these are one in the same, and in some cases you must have both to get ESPN3, but just thought I'd put it out there, that it's tied to ISP, not your TV provider.

Although in the case of our largest ISP in NW Ohio (Time Warner Cable) you only have access to ESPN3 if you also have a TV package through them that includes ESPN. Other ISPs do not hold you to that same standard.

That was my big question of this sling service. Knowing, that some ISPs are not going to give you ESPN3 if you cut TV, will they reach a deal with ESPN to provide that content to the subscribers of this service? It's not a deal breaker for me since I do not currently get ESPN3 anyhow, but I'm curious if going this route would actually give me MORE of what I want than what I currently get while also lowering my bill by about 80%

The one dealbreaker for me will likely be MLB.tv and it's blackout policy decisions. They were talking about lifting their blackout policy, and if they did that I'd be going to this sling service as soon as it's available. It's really a no brainer...even if I have to pay to up my bandwidth a bit (which I shouldn't have to).

[hammb]

I will say from what reading I could find on the SlingTV service it's a big step in the right direction for everybody involved.

The biggest issue with live sports for those of us that enjoy watching regular season baseball, NBA, NHL, etc are going to be the existing contracts with the local sports networks. Those contracts are what keep the blackout restrictions going. I went a few years with no Tigers baseball, and I really badly missed it, but if this thing takes off I'm going to be put in a very tough place. I love my Tigers games, but I cannot really see spending an additional $80/month, year round, just so I can have the games all summer. Games that I enjoy watching, but rarely sit down and watch all 9 innings...

[Schadenfreude]

My understanding is that ESPN3 is only available to people through the permission of a participating cable television company.

Only correction would be that ESPN3 is actually available through deals cut with your ISP, not your TV provider.

Great catch.

[Flipper]

For many...myself included...they're the same bundled up entity

[apollo]

The MAC is playing right into the Big 5's trap. The MAC can't afford to put any more money in football than they already do. Unfortunately MAC ADs and presidents highly overestimate the value of playing Tuesday night games and a low level bowl game that no one is really watching anyway.

By dumping all this money into football, the MAC hamstrings their other sports. This helps the Big 5 maintain dominance in all the non revenue sports as well.

Yawn. 1.11 million people watched BG in the Camellia Bowl going against an NFL game and not kicking off until 9. That is more than people watching than any, A10, Big East, WCC, or MVC game will have this year.

Akron's soccer program is one of the best in the country despite being held down by MAC football. Same goes for Miami, WMU, and BG hockey, Kent golf. Those are off the top of my head.

Great! So because 1.11 million people watched the bowl game, we'll see a big jump in ticket sales, merchandise sales, and enrollment next year right?
In reality we probably lost at least another $150,000 from travel expenses and lack of ticket sales that usually comes out of the bowl allotment.
I'm not saying the MAC should dump football, I just think they should spend less on it. We are nothing more than a little sideshow to the Big 5 and ESPN.

[hammb]

For many...myself included...they're the same bundled up entity

I realize.

I just think in a discussion about cutting cable TV to move towards online streaming media it's an important distinction.

[Lord_Byron]

More information on SLING TV posted yesterday.

http://www.cnet.com/news/sling-tv-every ... d-to-know/" target="_blank

[Globetrotter]

A head coach in our conference took a demotion to become an offensive coordinator at an SEC school.