MU new conference and TV

[Benny B]

The issue that topper is eluding to is more related to the possibility of Fox not spending the cash to send cameras, production, on-air talent, etc. to Milwaukee for the Marquette v. SE Louisiana. ESPN has these resources already while Fox does not.

Disagree.  Wholeheartedly.

Fox Sports has just as much (if not more) of a presence in Milwaukee currently than ESPN.  In fact, most of their equipment is already in the BC on every MU game day right now.

[M@RQUETTEW@RRIORS]

The current TV situation is literally one of the best things about MU hoops. I haven't missed a game all year. If you have DirecTV, and pay a modest $12 a month, you literally get every single game.

It would be a HUGEEEEEE dissapointment if this does not continue with the new conference.

Depends on where you live.  From my standpoint its absolutely the WORST TV situation there can possibly be.  The situation that I am in there have literally been 2 games I can watch unless I want to break the law.

[MUMonster03]

It will definitely be interesting to see how it shakes out because MASN has ESPN News broadcasting on their channels sometimes as well. I believe MASN will want to keep the Big East/C7 since it is one of their staple non baseball season programming. As I mentioned earlier we are getting MU versus Seton Hall tomorrow on MASN just because it is a Big East game, it essentially serves as ESPN3 on network TV for this area.

[🏀]

Disagree.  Wholeheartedly.

Fox Sports has just as much (if not more) of a presence in Milwaukee currently than ESPN.  In fact, most of their equipment is already in the BC on every MU game day right now.

You are correct, poor example on my part, I forgot Milwaukee is serviced by FSWisconsin. However, Fox Sports will also need to service every other team in the conference as well. That is a lot of resources to have sitting in Omaha, Chicago, Richmond, DC, Philly, Providence, New Jersey and New York (being areas not currently covered by a regional Fox Sports)

However, they will have Milwaukee, St. Louis, Indy and Ohio covered.

[🏀]

If Fox Sports does cover all the OOC games, maybe they'll pick up Jim McIlvaine for broadcasting.

[🏀]

And we can all agree, one huge positive about moving away from ESPN is no more Len Elmore.

[jficke13]

And we can all agree, one huge positive about moving away from ESPN is no more Len Elmore.

What do you mean? He's a junkyard dog out there. Nobody can spot a player from New York City quite like he can.

[TallTitan34]

And we can all agree, one huge positive about moving away from ESPN is no more Len Elmore.

Don't be so sure.  If we play in an ESPN televised pre-season tournement there's always the threat of Len.  

Plus I believe he did our round of 32 game against Syracuse a couple years back on CBS owned truTV.

[The Lens]

Let's remember that News Corp is probably leading media company in the world.  While we see ESPN3 every day due to ESPN's market advantage in the US, I doubt this is a forgotten piece to the puzzle for FOX.

Here is one of the their online soccer presences, very similar to ESPN:

http://www.foxsoccer2go.com/

[🏀]

Don't be so sure.  If we play in an ESPN televised pre-season tournement there's always the threat of Len.  

Plus I believe he did our round of 32 game against Syracuse a couple years back on CBS owned truTV.

[Benny B]

You are correct, poor example on my part, I forgot Milwaukee is serviced by FSWisconsin. However, Fox Sports will also need to service every other team in the conference as well. That is a lot of resources to have sitting in Omaha, Chicago, Richmond, DC, Philly, Providence, New Jersey and New York (being areas not currently covered by a regional Fox Sports)

However, they will have Milwaukee, St. Louis, Indy and Ohio covered.

Equipment is one issue; having a distribution outlet in that market is another.

But as for the equipment, it's all portable and Fox already has equipment "bases" in Chicago, Philly, DC, NY and NJ.  Even in outer-lying areas like Omaha, if you already have distribution (FSN Midwest) and people who are going to watch Jays basketball, Fox isn't going to care what it would to cost to send a semi-trailer up from Kansas City for a few hours.

Don't underestimate Fox Sports' resources.... they can go anywhere, anytime, and probably more economically than anyone else.  Don't forget that between MLB, NBA, NFL, and NHL (not to mention, the BTN and all of the other college programming they already do down south and out west), Fox and its affiliates likely produce more original sports content than anybody else in the country... even ESPN.

[🏀]

Equipment is one issue; having a distribution outlet in that market is another.

But as for the equipment, it's all portable and Fox already has equipment "bases" in Chicago, Philly, DC, NY and NJ.  Even in outer-lying areas like Omaha, if you already have distribution (FSN Midwest) and people who are going to watch Jays basketball, Fox isn't going to care what it would to cost to send a semi-trailer up from Kansas City for a few hours.

Don't underestimate Fox Sports' resources.... they can go anywhere, anytime, and probably more economically than anyone else.  Don't forget that between MLB, NBA, NFL, and NHL (not to mention, the BTN and all of the other college programming they already do down south and out west), Fox and its affiliates likely produce more original sports content than anybody else in the country... even ESPN.

+1. Well noted.

I defer to you as winner.

[JakeBarnes]

Blackout rules, in all of their forms, are asinine.

Agreed.  Back when I lived near the airport I would get blacked out of Cubs games on MLB.tv despite no access to Comcast Sports Net.  If I had lived 3 blocks over, I would have been out of the blackout area.  Also, ask Vegas how they feel about blackout rules for baseball.

[TallTitan34]

Don't underestimate Fox Sports' resources.... they can go anywhere, anytime, and probably more economically than anyone else.

Like the comical Paradise Jam last season.

[Benny B]

Like the comical Paradise Jam last season.

Sometimes when I say economically, I mean economically.

[kryza]

I also like that we can watch games on ESPN3 currently. But I'd almost guarantee that Fox will create a similar service. I currently watch soccer matches on foxsoccer2go.com. It's basically like ESPN3 but just for soccer. It works well and the quality is great.

They can easily add bball games to that service when they get rights to them.

The cable companies know that people want to stream stuff to their computers. They would be very dumb if they didn't go after that extra potential revenue...especially after spending a half a billion dollar of the rights to them.

[rocky_warrior]

Here is one of the their online soccer presences, very similar to ESPN:

http://www.foxsoccer2go.com/

I'm no soccer fan, so this is the first time I've looked at that site, and the best part it that they're marketing it to the CONSUMER and not trying to force the provider (Comcast, etc.) to pay extra money for it (ala ESPN3).  I think 90% of MU fans that want to see games would pay for ESPN3 if that option was available (the remaining 10% always being freeloaders), but ESPN would rather try to strong arm the providers.  If Fox keeps this model, every MU fan willing to pay for it could get the stream.  $20/month isn't bad for MU games, way less then I spend for a single visit to the bar

[marquette20]

Isn't espn3 free for any college student? This is a great idea since most of teh events on the site are college athletics so this brings up the question Would or could fox sports do that too

[mu_hilltopper]

You realize that with any modern tv and an hdmi cord that you can get online for $5, you can watch any Internet video on you TV set.

Uhhh .. yes.  I have a couple of HTPCs in my home.  What's your point?