hockey fund raiser

[CowbellGuy]

I don't believe they are offering anything other than (spotty) streaming of the radio feed. While other services were promised, none are actually available.

At this point, I don't believe it's my place to pursue this issue any further. I doubt they would listen to anything I have to say anyway. I would hope the other parties more directly involved (player parents, etc.) would take it upon themselves to bring these issues up with the administration.

[Al DeFlorio]

I'm beginning to think you're a shill for "our friends in Athletics," CUlater. Before you write something like this:  "But the service for which we're asked to pay includes more than just play-by-play of the men's hockey games. Don't they provide more things overall than were available overall in 2001-2002?", why don't you find out whether what you're writing is bullshit?

You are either extraordinarily gullible or just incapable of critical thinking.  Let's hear what some of these "more things overall" are.  The answer you will quickly find, is nothing Cornell-related.  You should inform yourself of the facts before putting forth an argument.  On the other hand, if you think it's a big deal to listen to Miami football or the like...

[Al DeFlorio]

I just read JTW's postings, and see nothing charging Athletics with acting "nefariously," just stupidly.

[jd212]

Just because he's stating his opinion it doesn't mean you have to agree with him. It's no fairer to castigate him for expressing his opinion about the nature of your protest than it is for him to express disapproval with your protest.  And as for telling him to butt out, that's not fair, either. It's an open forum for discussion, and if the thread were restricted only to people who agree with your point-of-view, where would the discussion be? I believe he stated his comment about what the service provides as a question, not as misinformed factual statement.  And the service *is* supposed to provide coverage of other Cornell sports. Just happens that right now there is no football or lacrosse. Whether it does or not is not his fault. I'm sorry, Al, but you sound like the sore loser here. Sometimes I feel like I'm reading the American Idol discussion board....

[ugarte]

I don't disagree with you, Al - but I think JTW's post provides analytical support for some other posts that do.  We're on the same side here; I'm afraid that this is going to devolve into a linguistic analysis of prior posts.

And Age, I never said that you should post everything you here; I'm sure that the parents appreciate that you are discreet. I even thanked you for the information, which I really do appreciate.  I'm just not the sort to take being called "oblivious" lying down.

[Al DeFlorio]

big red apple wrote:

We're on the same side here...

I agree.  I'm just trying to keep us there.;-)

And I think JTW's there, too, and don't want to see him "labeled" incorrectly.

[CUlater \'89]

Clearly, there is value-added for alumni of more than one university (or who live with alumni from other universities) that are also members of the College SportsPass family; adding Cornell to the family makes the cost of the subscription that much less per game/event.  Also, I don't think we had the "GameTracker" option last year for basketball.  Also, it seems that we are getting more pre-game and post-game coverage of the hockey games this season (or is that only due to Adam's increased coverage?) And finally, there was an expectation at the time the AD made the decision (and there continues to be an expectation by subscribers) of access to video and audio highlights for some sports.  Other than the technical glitches, have we lost anything that was available last year on audio?

So, if I remember correctly that I didn't have the GameTracker option for the men's hoops games last year, that's at least one thing more than last year.  And the AD thought we'd be getting access to highlights, it seems.  And there may be other additions of which I am unsure.  So, based on the information the AD had at the time it made its decision, it seems there was a basis for thinking that, overall, listeners would be getting something more for their money (without even considering the one-stop shopping element and the expectation of technical competence).  So although I would prefer to have free audio of the hockey games, I understand why the AD made the decision it made.

Yes, we are right now getting less than what was promised. And that's a problem that RealNetworks and the AD need to address, either by providing those services or giving a partial refund.  But it is unfair to accuse the AD of acting stupidly when it made this decision -- unless you think it should have known that some of the promised things wouldn't be provided or that there would be technical problems from time to time (I'm assuming there are more this season than last season, but who knows for sure?).

[jtwcornell91]

The inferiority to which I'm referring is the complete lack of video for home games.  Last year we had a video feed which was (by the end of the season) synced with the radio webcast.  This year, for no good practical reason, we do not.  And if we ever get it from RealNetworks, it will be RealVideo rather than QuickTime, which the last time I checked was of much worse quality.  CULater, did you actually watch any of the games on the HockeyCam last year?  Can you honestly say that what anyone is getting this year is better than that?

[ugarte]

Got to disagree with you, CULater: the one thing that we clearly had last year, and clearly don't this year, is the beloved hockeycam.  Whatever the reason, they gave up free streaming audio and video for pay-service streaming audio.  Bad move.  

And there was audio for bball, football and lacrosse last year (even though the lacrosse feed was terrible).  Gametracker is nice, I guess, but a fairly silly doodad compared to video.

[CUlater \'89]

JTW:  From what has been said here before, the lack of video coverage this year has nothing to do with the move to a pay-service (although I also understand that even if HockeyCam were permitted, it would not be linked to the audio feed).  I think someone once said that OCSN would have no problem with HockeyCam being used right now.  So I look at the "pay service" issue as separate from the HockeyCam issue.  But, as you suggest, it only makes sense that since Cornell is now in a relationship with RealNetworks for an unknown time period that RealVideo of the hockey games (and other games) become part of the subscription package, linked with the audio coverage.  I would love to see some lacrosse this spring.  Why the AD hasn't availed itself (or can't avail itself) of that opportunity, I'm not sure, but all of our letters to the AD should suggest that it do so for this season or next (if it remains tied to the College Sports Pass system).

[Al DeFlorio]

Sorry about that, Jason.  Football, hockey, basketball, and lacrosse were all broadcast last year.  Contrary to the bullshit from Athletics, there's nothing new under the sun this year.  Sorry.

The premise of CUlater's entire first paragraph in that posting is that something's better now.  Otherwise it says nothing.  Fact is, there is nothing better.  Why post it without finding out the facts first?

To make it clear to you, Jason, I take offense not at all with whatever CUlater wants to do or not do with his money, or why.  But if he's going to take me and others to task--call us childish, tell us what we're doing is a wrong, tell us we think we're entitled to something we're not--when no one has ever claimed that--he should at least know the facts before mouthing off.  He obviously doesn't.  What's worse is he's parroting the PR pap that came from Athletics that has never had basis in fact--which pap, by the way, was a major contributor to the discontent of many of us.

Lastly, I suspect all of us who are withholding our support from Athletics in response don't feel especially happy about being put into that position, or about saying "no" to Mike and his players.  But we believe it's the right thing to do.  We are entitled to that.  Go back and read Melissa's original posting.  Do you really think she needs to be badgered by someone who apparently doesn't even understand the situation?  Have you seen anyone here tell those who have elected to give that they were wrong, or acting stupidly, or any such thing?  I haven't.

If CUlater wants to put forth a case here as to why we all should start writing checks to Athletics, he's welcome to.  But he'd better not tell me I'm acting like a child, that what I'm doing is "wrong," or that I think I'm "entitled" to something when I have no such misconception.  And he'd be wise not to insult me by trying to convince me with inaccurate assertions and false promises gleaned from Athletics department press releases.

[Al DeFlorio]

Gametracker was available for home football games last year.  I don't know about basketball.  I can't stand the punishment involved in listening to Cornell basketball, so I wouldn't know.

Gametracker was free last year.  It's free this year--as is LiveStats for home hockey games.  The highlight of this year's Gametracker season was the Towson game, when Gametracker declared the game over after Cornell scored on its first OT possession and proceeded to go home.

[jtwcornell91]

To be fair, the primary source of last year's free audio feeds (as opposed to the CHA's backup server and Age's audio on the HockeyCam) was not available this year.  Athletics apparently concluded it was impossible to find an alternative source of free broadcasts.  The fact that they came to this conclusion without asking the guy who was actually providing free A/V webcasts is one of many reasons we feel they screwed up.  Of course it's not Athletics that has to pay for their screwup, it's the fans.

[CUlater \'89]

Again, I'm sorry that I thought this was a discussion of the relative merits of giving or not giving, rather than a board in which we all must state our position and then post no further.  I believe we should continue to contribute and, as a result, I am trying to convince others to do so.

Part of my argument for why I think we should all continue to contribute to the team is that it seems to me that when one withholds funds that might otherwise go to assist the team, one is harming the very thing one cares about, just because one didn't get one's way.  That is how some children act when they take their balls home, denying themselves and their friends the opportunity to have fun, merely because they didn't get their way.

I believe that underlying some people's arguments here is that, subconsciously, they believe they are entitled to free audio coverage just because we had it before.  My apologies to those of you withholding contributions because the quality of the pay-service is not up to snuff; but if one is withholding contributions (and in the past withheld contributions) merely because one now must pay to hear Cornell audio on the web, then you are in effect saying that you believe you are entitled to free access to the audio feed.

And I think I've already made it clear that I believe you can't condemn the AD for its choice on the basis of the results, unless the AD knew or should have known what those results would be at the time it made its decision. We should challenge the AD (and RealNetworks) because of the results.

[Al DeFlorio]

"but if one is withholding contributions (and in the past withheld contributions) merely because one now must pay to hear Cornell audio on the web, then you are in effect saying that you believe you are entitled to free access to the audio feed."

You are simply hopeless, I regret to say.  Age, can we have an "ignore" function?