Big Ten Media

[Red Five]

 

From an Athletic article today:

 

The Big Ten is also likely to add some sort of streaming option, a source told The Athletic, though it is not yet clear how it will be structured and whether or not Amazon or Apple will be involved. Both companies have significantly increased their investment in live sports programming in the past year. Another streaming candidate under consideration is Peacock, which is already part of NBC’s offerings, a different source said. That would make sense if NBC lands a Big Ten package as it is now expected to do so.

 

https://theathletic.com/3492372/2022/08/09/big-ten-espn-media-rights/

 

[Lorewarn]

I know there are possible ways this could play out that won't be perfect for everyone, and I don't want to have to sign up for more stuff either.

 

But, overall, this is about as good of news as you could possibly hope for as a fan of a B1G team. 

 

Three nationwide, network, over the air games per week is huge. These are free to all with an antenna, and that's nearly half of the conference games of that week. Then you have B1G and FS1/2 which most of us as sports fans are likely to have already.

 

There's a chance that the occasional game ends up paywalled behind a streaming only platform, but I think it's a very low chance overall, and a higher likelihood that those will be offered as supplemental options instead of exclusive ones.

[BigRedBuster]

7 minutes ago, Lorewarn said:

I know there are possible ways this could play out that won't be perfect for everyone, and I don't want to have to sign up for more stuff either.

 

But, overall, this is about as good of news as you could possibly hope for as a fan of a B1G team. 

 

Three nationwide, network, over the air games per week is huge. These are free to all with an antenna, and that's nearly half of the conference games of that week. Then you have B1G and FS1/2 which most of us as sports fans are likely to have already.

 

There's a chance that the occasional game ends up paywalled behind a streaming only platform, but I think it's a very low chance overall, and a higher likelihood that those will be offered as supplemental options instead of exclusive ones.

 

The bolded is the only way this would be good news.  If not, this would absolutely suck and we are back to pay per view.  And, the only way I see this happening is if it's with NBC and also shown on Peacock.  But....why would a game need to be supplementally shown on Peacock if it's already on a network everyone gets?

[Red Five]

Regarding streaming, NFL Thursday night football this year will be only available on Amazon.

[ColoradoHusk]

2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

The bolded is the only way this would be good news.  If not, this would absolutely suck and we are back to pay per view.  And, the only way I see this happening is if it's with NBC and also shown on Peacock.  But....why would a game need to be supplementally shown on Peacock if it's already on a network everyone gets?

Not everybody has an antennae or use an internet service like YouTubeTV to watch shows on their TV.   Many youths don't even have TV's, so they would use Peacock on their laptop or phone to watch NBC games.

[ECisGod]

Here's what ESPN has to say about it.

 

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/34374231/sources-big-ten-nears-media-rights-agreement-fox-cbs-nbc

 

I know the money is all about football, but if it means not having to listen to the horrible basketball announcers that ESPN has it is a HUGE plus in my book.  At this point the only thing I actually watch on ESPN if F1.

[Mavric]

2 minutes ago, Red Five said:

Regarding streaming, NFL Thursday night football this year will be only available on Amazon.

 

I had not heard that.  Interesting.

 

I'm sure there will be more of that all the time.

[Street Novelist]

2 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Yes.  I don't want to have to switch services (I use YouTubeTV also).  Or....even worse, sign up for several services just to be able to get all the games.  Then, we are basically back to the crappy pay per view BS we had in the Big 12.

 

Exactly! Which is why this is terrible news! Imagine having to sign up for several streaming services just to catch all of Nebraska's games. And having to pay for each service, at that. Now, we're literally back to pay-per-view. The way it is now is the best we can get. You don't need any streaming. Every Husker game is either on Fox, FS1, BTN or the ESPN/ABC family. This would f#&% everything up!

[Savage Husker]

3 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

I just wish they would actually realize how long a game is so that you're not forced to watch the ending of a game that is already decided while your game is starting on some random channel that you might not get.  Schedule them in a way that the game ends. Then, if you have a little bit of time, you can do a few interviews before you spill it over to the new game.  Or, spill it over and the announcers at that game give a few minutes lead in to it.  They typically start at 11:00 and 2:00.  Why not start the second game at 2:30 and give the networks time to finish one and move to the next?

Right there with you on that. Seemed like it was usually an ACC blowout dragging on right up to the start of that 2:30 CT game.  

[Lorewarn]

2 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

But....why would a game need to be supplementally shown on Peacock if it's already on a network everyone gets?

 

@ColoradoHusk nailed it. In that scenario, Peacock would be for people on tablets, phones, laptops, etc. that are some combination of not owning an antenna, not owning a tv, not having cable or a cable alternative, etc. 

 

 

46 minutes ago, Street Novelist said:

 

Exactly! Which is why this is terrible news! Imagine having to sign up for several streaming services just to catch all of Nebraska's games. And having to pay for each service, at that. Now, we're literally back to pay-per-view. The way it is now is the best we can get. You don't need any streaming. Every Husker game is either on Fox, FS1, BTN or the ESPN/ABC family. This would f#&% everything up!

 

 

Can you like....calm down a bit?

 

We are not literally back to pay-per-view. The deals aren't even finished or announced yet, so we don't know where we are. Even if half our games are on Peacock and Paramount+, that's at most $30 total for the three months of football and you can cancel or start anytime. Pay-per-view games were at minimum $30 for one game, and that was 20 years ago. 

 

You know ESPN, BTN and FS1 aren't free, right? All of our games on Peacock and Paramount+ would be significantly cheaper than all of our games on ESPN and FS1.

[Dogs In A Pile]

4 hours ago, ColoradoHusk said:

I use YouTubeTV so I basically use internet streaming for network TV.  I would be bummed if I would be forced to go to Paramount+ or Peacock to catch football games.

 

Yeah, but without access to high speed internet service streaming anything really isn't an option for me.

[ColoradoHusk]

2 hours ago, Lorewarn said:

 

@ColoradoHusk nailed it. In that scenario, Peacock would be for people on tablets, phones, laptops, etc. that are some combination of not owning an antenna, not owning a tv, not having cable or a cable alternative, etc. 

 

 

 

 

Can you like....calm down a bit?

 

We are not literally back to pay-per-view. The deals aren't even finished or announced yet, so we don't know where we are. Even if half our games are on Peacock and Paramount+, that's at most $30 total for the three months of football and you can cancel or start anytime. Pay-per-view games were at minimum $30 for one game, and that was 20 years ago. 

 

You know ESPN, BTN and FS1 aren't free, right? All of our games on Peacock and Paramount+ would be significantly cheaper than all of our games on ESPN and FS1.

You are correct that the streaming services like Peacock or Paramount+ would not be a huge expense for most people. However, there would be a lot of fans who wouldn’t know how to get those apps or streaming services. Also, between the major channels and the BTN, I don’t think there will be many (or ant) games exclusively on Peacock or Paramount+. The conference will figure out a way to put them on BTN before it goes to a full streaming service. 

[teachercd]

5 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

You are correct that the streaming services like Peacock or Paramount+ would not be a huge expense for most people. However, there would be a lot of fans who wouldn’t know how to get those apps or streaming services. Also, between the major channels and the BTN, I don’t think there will be many (or ant) games exclusively on Peacock or Paramount+. The conference will figure out a way to put them on BTN before it goes to a full streaming service. 

I wonder how this also impacts bars that will show the game.

 

Back in the day, PPV for a bar was crazy expensive like 5,000 for a UFC/Boxing/Big game type thing.  

[ColoradoHusk]

3 minutes ago, teachercd said:

I wonder how this also impacts bars that will show the game.

 

Back in the day, PPV for a bar was crazy expensive like 5,000 for a UFC/Boxing/Big game type thing.  

It won’t impact bars at all!!! All of the games will be on Fox/FS1/FS2/CBS/NBC/BTN, with the very slight chance of a game on CBS Sports Network or USA Network.  I would be shocked if there are football games exclusively on Peacock or Paramount+. 

[teachercd]

1 minute ago, ColoradoHusk said:

It won’t impact bars at all!!! All of the games will be on Fox/FS1/FS2/CBS/NBC/BTN, with the very slight chance of a game on CBS Sports Network or USA Network.  I would be shocked if there are football games exclusively on Peacock or Paramount+. 

Nice!!