All The College Championship Football Games Games Are On Pay TV.

[JEFF9K]

How do you feel about all the college championship football games being on ESPN rather than on broadcast TV?

Most of these schools receive tax money. Should they be allowed to sell their games to the highest bidder rather than putting them on "free" TV, where all taxpayers can watch them?

When you pay for cable TV you are helping to support right wing propaganda in the form of Fox News Channel. That's only one of the reasons for getting rid of cable.

I called my Congressperson to complain.

[tularetom]

1. I have Dish - they no longer carry Fox

so there is that.

[Calista241]

74. Temporarily anyway.

No way Dish would go without the Fox viewership long term.

[tularetom]

81. Maybe for you, but I'm perfectly happy that they're gone

And I'll enjoy it as long as it continues.

[msongs]

2. its a wonderful world full of meaningful things to when the TV is off :-) nt

[JEFF9K]

3. That's true.

[joeglow3]

58. Area Man Constantly Mentioning He Doesn't Own a TV

http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-constantly-mentioning-he-doesnt-own-a-tel,429/

[LiberalElite]

96. I hardly watch mine -

I'm on DU all the time. Not sure if I'm better off.....

[SickOfTheOnePct]

4. You complained to your Congressman over where football games are being shown? n/t

[JEFF9K]

16. Public universities are answerable ...

to our elected representatives.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

22. Not really

Public universities are state institutions, not federal. And most federal funding for universities goes for R & D.

No one is owed the right to watch a college football game on broadcast TV.

[JEFF9K]

26. It's a "public good" issue.

And our elected officials at different levels of government have leverage to apply.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

38. Watching football is a "public good" issue?

Yeah, I'm sure our elected officials will get right on that.

[JEFF9K]

48. For many people, their sports teams ...

are the most important things in their lives.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

50. If their sports team is the most important thing in their lives

they should get basic cable and watch the championship games.

[JEFF9K]

82. Not everyone can afford basic cable, Rush.

And some people boycott cable because of constantly increasing rates; large, unfair late fees; support of Fox News; etc.

You are a Democrat?

[rusty fender]

101. Basic cable doesn't get you ESPN

I get basic cable because the over-the-air digital signal in my area is very weak. The $70 digital antenna I bought can't pick up the digital signal of 2 of the broadcast stations and of many minor stations.

In order to get ESPN, Comcast requires that I pay for 140 channels, almost all of which I do not need or want. So, for the ESPN that I do want, I would have to pay over $40 extra/month.

So there's that

[yeoman6987]

42. Lol

You clearly forgot your sarc tag

[brooklynite]

43. Well, all the important Congressional issues have been dealt with.....

[JEFF9K]

83. Congress intervened on the issue of NFL blackouts.

Remember?

[aikoaiko]

5. Im fine with it -- cable has the best tv.

[JEFF9K]

12. The best picture quality is on broadcast TV.

[Takket]

33. Everything is digital now. There is no discernible difference.

[JEFF9K]

36. There is no intermediary with broadcast TV.

So it has the best quality picture, provided the antenna and TV tuner are bringing it in.

[aikoaiko]

60. I meant the best content.

I haven't watched broadcast TV in 20 years.

[JEFF9K]

84. You are a Democrat and don't watch PBS?

[aikoaiko]

86. Of course I do, but the content on AMC, Showtime, and HBO is the best TV has ever seen.

But yes Frontline is a great show too

[Blue_Adept]

91. Since when did PBS because the purity point?

The only time I watch PBS is when I had little kids that wanted to watch some of the kids programming there.

Nothing else on the channel generally appeals to me, nor has it over the years since I was a kid myself.

[Capt. Obvious]

95. Only Republicans fail to watch Antiques Roadshow

[Blue_Adept]

99. That's probably the one show they watch

since they're trying to figure out which of their old mother's stuff might be worth something to sell off.

[JEFF9K]

102. The highbrow content appeals to smart people.

Which is Democrats.

[former9thward]

92. Given the PBS ratings

I guess you would want to purge tens of millions of Democrats because they are not watching it.

[JEFF9K]

103. I don't approve of purges.

[former9thward]

116. No, you are just questioning whether someone is a Democrat

who doesn't watch PBS. Tens of millions of Democrats do not watch PBS in the real world.

[JEFF9K]

117. Prove it.

[former9thward]

119. Look at the PBS ratings.

In the real world, not yours.

[yuiyoshida]

6. There may come a time when all

sporting events are on PAY-per-View TV. When that day comes, only a select few will be able to afford it.. I hope that day never comes, but I am afraid it will be sooner, rather than later.

In the mean time, Radio is available. I catch all the Giants games on KNBR Radio during the baseball season as I don't have a TV set and refuse to buy one.

[JonLP24]

9. They would have done that a long time ago if they felt they'd make more money that way

[yuiyoshida]

11. Maybe they know if they did that

and alienated some of their fan base, there would be a financial backlash that would probably be ugly.

[JonLP24]

21. That is a very likely factor

Another is the $$ advertisers are willing the shell out to networks then which carries out the contract bids to the right to host games. AT&T & Directv merger hinged on the NFL Sunday Ticket deal which they payed a whopping amount but it isn't a great service in-comparison to NBA League pass. Sunday Ticket only gives out the live out-of-market games morning & afternoon games and only a 30 minute replay (on the advanced which means more $$ consumers have to shell out) available only for Tuesday & Wednesday). League Pass lets you re-watch any game (Full or 15 minute condensed). You can't watch the ESPN/ABC or TNT broadcasts live but you can watch them later but you also can't watch any of the local NBA teams ever thru the League Pass.

Media consolidation with the SEC, Big Ten, and Pac-12 which gives them more power over the games to negotiate contracts with providers. SEC Network through social media encouraged fans to give Directv backlash over negotiations hitting a wall and you wouldn't believe the outrage when the outrage should have been directed at the media consolidators. Similar with ESPN which providers pay one of the highest per subscriber payment if not the highest and the reason is if there is an ever an ESPN blackout the outrage would be epic.

There is a bit of a alienating going on for higher $$ just the current model & consolidation is more profitable than PPV.

[JEFF9K]

13. Radio is good option.

That's where the games were back in the day.

[yuiyoshida]

17. Besides I love listening to

John Miller...

[JEFF9K]

39. The best broadcasters are on the radio.

Some cities have long-term love affairs with their favorites.

[Calista241]

75. That day is bssicly already here.

My pro football team of choice is the Atlanta Falcons. Luckily, I still live in Atlanta so I can see them free of TV every weekend.

If I lived outside of Georgia and wanted to watch the Falcons on Sunday, I'd have to buy the NFL service. The free games are only for local teams.

That being said, there will always be some free sports content to generate interest from potential new viewers / fans. And pay per view might not be all bad either, we'd get to really have a faster game with no programmed commercials. Depends on the price.

[Travis_0004]

7. I dont mind since I have ESPN.

I dont mind them selling games to the highest bidder since football programs are expensive and the profits help fund other sports

[JEFF9K]

18. Their profits would be only slightly less huge ...

if the games were on broadcast TV. And college coaches don't need to earn $10,000,000.00 per year.

[JonLP24]

8. What actually bothers me

is people making money off the backs off their labor. NCAA makes billions in revenues.

That bothers me more than taxpayers, which they receive back from the revenues generated by the sport.

On the other point, the media consolidation bothers me more but everybody is consolidating somebody else driving up the prices so its only fair everyone else in the media game starts consolidating.

[Initech]

115. What bothers me is not just The money issue.

I'm bothered by fake, greedy for profit "universities" like National University, University of Phoenix, and Westwood College sponsoring bowl games played by two real universities. It's a giant "fuck you" to real higher education if you ask me.

[onenote]

10. Should the schools just give the rights away to "free tv"?

And not make the millions and millions those rights are worth? How is this supposed to work? Should the games be on public television without commercials? Who pays for producing the telecasts if there are no commercials sold?

To be sure, some members have been complaining about the migration of sports programming from over the air broadcast stations to cable networks for years -- not just college, but professional.

But the bottom line of every study that has been done is that for the audience that is most interested in sports programming, the migration of events to cable networks has meant a dramatic increase in the number of events available to be viewed.

[JEFF9K]

14. "Public TV" is not the same as "broadcast TV."

And the amount of money offered by broadcast TV is substantial.

[onenote]

24. So you don't mind Fox or Disney or Comcast NBCU making money by broadcasting the games

just their making money putting the games on cable.

And you don't mind the schools making a lot money, just making more than they could make by only licensing for broadcasting.

[JEFF9K]

27. The networks offer substantial money to carry the games.

I'm against any pay TV outlet carrying the games.

[Bluenorthwest]

70. But you won't have cable because FoxNews is on cable, but you'd like Fox Network, same owners, to

get favored nation deals to broadcast the games because you want to watch them? Is that about it? It's about Fox and principles, unless the games are free then Fox is fine and supporting that outfit with regulations that favor it is fine? You dig broadcast Rupert but not cable Rupert? You'll pitch in to his left pocket, just not the right one?

[JEFF9K]

90. Broadcast Rupert isn't blatant propaganda.

And he loses money when I eschew cable for broadcast TV.

[Go Vols]

87. When you live 60 miles or a little less

from the broadcast source,no antenna is going to pick up free TV,its all pay TV out here in the sticks.

Although many channels that used to broadcast on VHF,few do anymore but kept the VHF channel name that they no longer broadcast on.

[spooky3]

19. In addition, taxpayers supply < 20% of the budget in many of those state subsidized schools.

And, if the revenues are well-managed, then payments from TV reduce the amounts the universities need to get from other sources to operate.

I think the big "free" networks (e.g., NBC) would also pay fees to the university or the NCAA for broadcast rights. However, they probably did not figure the viewership would be large enough to be worth paying them and were willing to pay less than ESPN was.

[dflprincess]

15. The Minnesota Gophers' game was carried on one of the local stations

though, with the advent of digital, all TV is pay TV because the only way to get decent reception is with cable or dish. We discovered with my Mom's TV, the tuners you can buy are nearly useless.

[JEFF9K]

20. I get perfect reception with a $35.00 antenna.

Maybe it depends on where you live. I'm in a big city. My sister is 30 miles from the big city and she too gets perfect reception with a cheap antenna. Check reviews on Amazon.

[dflprincess]

25. Mom lived in the metro area

and we bought both the tuner and antenna. The TV would work pretty well for a while and then the tuner would need to reset (though one of the local stations was always fuzzy). Mom was in her 80s and something of a techno-phobe so she eventually just stopped watching TV at all because she got tired of messing with it. And she refused to let me pay for even the least expensive cable package for her.

Maybe it was the age of her TV - another thing she wouldn't let me replace to see if a new one would work better.

[JEFF9K]

28. I have a TV with a built-in tuner.

TVs are getting bigger and better and cheaper. I would insist on buying her a new TV. Tell her she DESERVES it. It's psychology, and it always works for me.

[dflprincess]

46. I did try that

But I'm afriad it's a moot point now as Mom has died (I should have been clearer about that). While I miss her she was 88 and went while she was still independent and that's what she had hoped for.

[JEFF9K]

49. Sorry to hear that.

My mother, too, died recently.

[dflprincess]

114. I'm sorry to hear about your Mom.

We're never ready to lose them no matter how old we or they are.

[exboyfil]

23. I dropped extended cable and saved $500/yr

No I don't miss the championship games. I could go to a bar to watch them if I cared enough which I don't.

Now having a farm system with a sham educational system for the revenue sports at universities. Yes I have a problem with that.

[KingCharlemagne]

29. The whole system of semi-professional sports melded onto higher education is

an insult to anyone with a brain.

Speaking of brain, my Dad lives in Lawrence, KS and he's fond of regaling me with news that new assistant profs of math and physics at the U. of Kansas (you know, the ones with a Ph.D. and possibly a post-doc) earn in the vicinity of $60-75,000/year, while the head football and basketball coaches earn at least $1 million\year with other financial perks also thrown in. All this for advanced playground supervision. It's Kansas, so what are you gonna do? Even so, I'll bet those pay disparities are replicated at all the big colleges and universities.

[exboyfil]

30. A chart showing highest paid state employee

shows almost everyone is either a football or basketball coach. That being said these same universities also basically fund the entire sports budgets with the revenues from men's football and basketball (even after paying the high salaries to the head coaches). It is the smaller schools that actually have to send money to those varsity sports.

[mythology]

47. The evidence for that for the vast majority of schools is sketchy at best

http://thedailybanter.com/2014/10/upon-review-college-football-giant-waste-money-schools/

… there’s actually a kind of hierarchy among the top-tier football programs. According to Jeff Benedict and Armen Keteyian, authors of The System: The Glory and Scandal of Big-Time College Football (2013), figures from the 2010-11 academic year show that only 22 of the 120 top-tier football programs broke even or made a profit. That means that while these big-time teams generate millions of dollars of revenue, the cost of running such programs usually exceeds that revenue. To put that more starkly, even within the so-called top tier, 82% of college football teams actually take away money from the university’s budget, rather than generate net revenue.

[exboyfil]

59. I guess you can cook the books

but neither Iowa nor Iowa State (neither known as powerhouses) take general revenue funds for their sports programs. The smaller Northern Iowa does (which I have a problem with). When the Regents complained about Ferentz's contract, the sports program told them to go away since the dollars were coming in from private donations. The irony is that they later wanted to fire him, but could not afford it (some of the very same people who told the Regents to pound sand were the ones wanting Ferentz's head).

[Travis_0004]

31. Those coaches win games and make money

Some of the schools with the highest paid coaches make the most money.

If they did not recuit top coaches they would probably see revenue fall if their team was not as competitive.

[JEFF9K]

34. It's all relative.

They should all earn much less, and have fewer highly-paid assistants.

If they want super big money, there's always the NFL. But, in some cases, they are leaving the "pros" for bigger college contracts!

[JEFF9K]

32. It's a reality that lots of people ...

get great enjoyment from watching their favorite college football team. Lots of these people are elderly or disabled and on fixed incomes. They can't afford cable or Dish.

Universities don't need the few extra dollars they get from putting their games on cable. They don't need $50,000,000.00 coaches or their millions of dollars worth of assistants.

[Takket]

37. What you are really upset about is...

Universities being run as for profit enterprises, and the consequences of that reality run wayyyyyyy beyond college football games.

[JEFF9K]

51. No, that's not what I'm upset about.

No offense, but your comment is very Republican.

[tokenlib]

35. On behalf of all who can no longer afford even basic cable or satellite..I agree with you.

If any of our state and federal tax dollars go to these supposed public schools, it is a shame that to watch a college football game is restricted to haves and have nots.

I don't like it either...

[Takket]

40. Espn paid for the right to broadcast these games

http://www.usatoday.com/story/gameon/2012/11/21/espn-reaches-deal-broadcast-fbs-playoff/1720001/

They pretty much won the bid fair and square. Keep in mind that Disney owns ABC and ESPN. maybe you should be asking disney why the games aren't on ABC.

[onenote]

45. the answer is that they make more money on ESPN than on ABC

The audience size when the BCS championship game was on broadcast tv weren't significantly higher in the years preceding the move of that game to ESPN, which occurred in 2011 -- so the ad revenues from the cable version and broadcast version aren't that different. But cable operators pay ABC between $1 and $2 per subscriber for the right to carry "free" tv, but they pay in the neighborhood of $5 for the right to carry ESPN.

[JEFF9K]

52. Maybe public institutions should act in the public good.

[Takket]

78. They are acting in the public good.

Universities making more money means better facilities/professors, etc. Watching a football game on broadcast TV is a public luxury, not something essential to life.

[JEFF9K]

104. Luxuries and essentials ...

aren't the only categories.

[yeoman6987]

41. I have been watching all day.

No big deal. Most have ESPN.

[JEFF9K]

53. This isn't REPUBLICAN UNDERGROUND, for God's sake!

[SickOfTheOnePct]

57. Oh FFS

If people aren't up in arms about college football being on pay TV, we're Republicans?

Congrats to you on having such a good life that THIS is your biggest concern.

[RandiFan1290]

65. It's called 'Trolling' nt

[JEFF9K]

106. You might want to look up the definition of "trolling."

[JEFF9K]

105. "Cheerleading" and "up in arms" aren't the only choices.

[yeoman6987]

63. And????

[Codeine]

68. Stop it. You're being transparent and silly. nt

[SickOfTheOnePct]

44. To answer the original question

I have no problem with it at all. The schools should make as much money as possible, and if that means cable, then so be it.

[JEFF9K]

54. Rush Limbaugh agrees with you.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

55. I wouldn't know

since I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh...

[oldandhappy]

56. Was just listening to OSU vs Alabama free on the radio.

[JEFF9K]

93. I caught the end of the game.

They must have separate broadcasts for Alabama fans and Ohio State fans. As an Ohio State fan I was happy to listen to the Ohio State broadcasters.

[oldandhappy]

98. Glad for you

I grew up on Woody Hayes football, smile. Am still a buckeye even tho I live in CA now.

[ChazII]

61. I now have Direct TV but

feel the games should be on broadcast television. I would not call my Congress critter to complain.

[JEFF9K]

108. You won't take a minute to express the view that you expressed here?

Calling a congressperson is no big deal.

[bluestateguy]

62. espn is only sort of pay tv

A lot of standard cable packages already include espn, and many apartment complexes already cover basic or even standard cable.

In any event, your logic is weak. So any institution that receives even a nickel of tax money has to be on broadcast tv instead of cable?

If there is a solution to this, it is to require cable companies to sell a la carte cable packages, allowing customers to choose every channel they get. I'd be the first to opt out of Fox, and conservatives I'm sure would opt of of msnbc.

[Capt. Obvious]

67. But there are many families

who will need to decide between feeding their children or having cable.

How many children went hungry so that their families could see THE Ohio State pull off that upset? Too many to call this the greatest nation on Earth.

[JEFF9K]

110. Publically supported institutions ...

shouldn't wring the last possible penny from contracts at the expense of the people.

[JEFF9K]

111. I'm talking about the specific case of college football.

Millions of people can't afford ANY form of pay TV. They are the people that Democrats are supposed to look out for. No?

[joeglow3]

118. So, college football is a necessity and not a luxury?

[nilesobek]

64. I think it all depends

on various factors. For a long, long, long time championship games were always broadcast on free analog TV. I have to listen to the Seahawks on radio because I abandoned TV long ago and refuse to pay for it.

College games have the public aspect, in that the taxpayer helps put on the spectacle but does not profit from the broadcast rights. These championship games used to be a rallying point for the populace, no matter what socio-economic background they came from. They are lightning rods of regionalism, and even nationalism. Now its all about money.

Not too sure how I feel about it.

[Capt. Obvious]

66. Only a Republican would not see this as the civil rights issue of our day

[Calista241]

76. Fewer people than ever are watching tv.

I'd be worried more about net neutrality and Civil justice issues than the nuances of cable versus broadcast TV.


http://time.com/3615387/tv-viewership-declining-nielsen/

[JEFF9K]

112. How is it "civil rights?"

[NutmegYankee]

69. I know how you feel.

I'm strictly an antenna TV watcher. Granted, now that broadcast TV is 1080i, it's pretty sweet.

At least the NFL games are still on broadcast.

[AngryAmish]

71. Since when do public universities act in the public interest?

Thet act in the interest of their employees.

[DrDan]

72. I long for the days when we (the D's) did not make an issue out of every little life-burp

Sometimes we should just accept those minor, little irritants that occur in our lives hourly and get on with our lives.

Complaining to one's congressman about issues like this seems like overkill to me. I would much rather have his time spent on important issues - like why do auto manufacturers favor right-handed drivers for their positioning of ignition switches. Shouldn't everyone be treated equally.

[bigwillq]

73. I'm fine with it (nt)

[malaise]

77. There's a great text book by George Sage -Power and Ideology in American Sport

He points out that sport operates in the interest of the dominant class.

It is not just that these team are funded with tax payer money - so are the stadia.

[alarimer]

79. I do have an issue with this.

This was also true of baseball playoffs (in fact, there are very few baseball games shown on regular tv at all during the season).

I take great issue with the blackout rules as well.

Professional sports teams get massive public subsidies for their stadiums. While also charging exorbitant sums to attend games. They should be forced to give back in some way.

Now I've figured out alternative means to watch, because I refuse to pay extortionate prices for non-competitive cable packages.

I have problems with college football in general, including the exploitation of those athletes (their "education" is largely a joke- they are essentially professionals but not getting paid for it and risking great, lifelong health problems), the coaches' ridiculous salaries, the use of public funds and tuition (to the extent that it happens) for football and other elite sports programs.

I would prefer we get rid of the fiction that these are amateur athletes and start treating college football and basketball as minor league professional teams. Divorce them entirely from the education system.

[dembotoz]

80. noticed that pissed me off but fuck em

will live without

[sendero]

85. That's the best option....

.... although there are foreign websites that stream games (basketball for sure, not sure about other sports) that work pretty well and pretty inexpensively if you know how to and can connect your computer to your TV.

Personally I find the amount of money people pour into watching sport to be astounding. But they are free to spend their cash as they like as am I

[tabbycat31]

88. Considering sports drive up the cost of TV

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/columnist/hiestand-biz/2013/02/28/espn-cable-tv-regional-sports-networks-verizon-fox/1947197/

http://www.xconomy.com/national/2013/10/18/please-keep-paying-80-month-cable-can-enjoy-cheap-tv/

https://medium.com/off-the-field/why-our-cable-bills-are-getting-so-expensive-1d7043ed024b

http://www.thewrap.com/cable-bill-battle-subscribers-providers-carriage-fees/

(I could provide more, this is just a sample).

ESPN is the most expensive cable channel to run on basic cable (last time I had TV, I had a lower tier package and they had it). There are so many people I know who would opt out of ESPN if the cable companies offered channels on an a la carte basis (as much as I love baseball, I wouldn't pay extra for it considering it's on in so many businesses and I can get scores, etc online. I can even follow it online on Gameday).

Even if you don't have pay TV, there's always a bar that's going to be airing the game and you can follow by other means (radio, online, etc). When the Yankees got into a dispute with Cablevision, I watched some games at sports bars, but mostly I listened to them on the radio. I survived.

There are many things worthy of a complaint to Congress, but IMO sports on TV is not one of them.

[JEFF9K]

94. Complaints about the NFL blackout rule were successful.

And EVERYONE benefited.

[tabbycat31]

97. Everyone?

Not everyone follows football and I had no idea about it (not a football person). NFL fans benefited? Perhaps (I don't know enough to comment about it).

[Capt. Obvious]

100. No, not everyone

Just fans in Florida and other suckbag locales that don't support their home teams enough to buy tickets.

There are some areas that have their playoff games blacked out for crying out loud.

Those teams should be moved to L.A. or even London.

[Go Vols]

89. There are websites

that show every sporting event around the world for free if you look hard enough.

[JanMichael]

107. I think is sucks and I hate ESPN/ABC for doing it.

Scum corpo shits.

[X_Digger]

109. Didn't we have a similar conversation last week, about malls?

Something about 'because mall developers get tax breaks, they should be open to public demonstrations, even if they are private property'..

I'll ask you a similar question to one that I posed in that other thread- what percentage of public funding should cause a school to lose the right to sell coverage of their games? 1% 10% $0.01?




And for the record, I don't give a flying fuck if they have the games on the moon- I think it's kind of stupid to watch grown men dress up in costumes and play kids games.

[JEFF9K]

113. You are not a sports fan ...

so maybe you can't understand the feelings of fans who "live-and-die" with their teams. There are millions and millions of them.

It IS stupid, when you think about it, but so is much of life.