Red Cast Really Sucks

[Aaron M. Griffin]

I don't see why Cornell, the ECAC, or the Ivy League do not negotiate agreements with national television networks so that alumni and fans do not have to tolerate subpar coverage from whomever provides the RedCast coverage.
...
I assume that in the Northeast that a network would gain appreciable ratings if it aired Hockey East and ECAC games each weekend.

I'm going to go out on a limb and take a wild guess that Ivy League hockey would garner fewer viewers than Ivy League football, which itself is competing for the title of most "They still have that??" responses. You and I like it, but it is simply delusional to think that there would be enough interest from the public to justify anything short of a huge donor stepping up year after year to PAY some cable network to broadcast our games.

I believe a competent internet streaming operation could be profitable or at least break-even, which is where we should focus our efforts. TV is a slowly-dying medium anyway: by the time cable broadcasters are begging to carry our games, no one will be watching anymore.

I agree with you almost entirely. I would prefer reliable, higher quality web streams than if a national network picked up Cornell/ECAC/Ivy games. Television as it is now, is becoming a thing of the past quickly. However, it seems that those who control RedCast care not about the quality of what they present. I just find it disheartening that RPI TV can present what I view as a stellar product while many of us cope with the comedy of errors that is RedCast. I doubt highly that RPI has more money within its university or fanbase to dedicate to its production than does Cornell. Even if RPI did, I cannot fathom it is proportionate to the extreme disparity in the output. I just presented what I said because it seems that nothing will happen unless some drastic actions are taken. Most of us are captive consumers.

IMO, you're completely overestimating the popularity of college hockey & ECAC Hockey in general, and Cornell Hockey specifically. I consider us lucky that ESPN & ESPN2 still air the Frozen Four games. I'd be willing to bet the ratings are very low compared to just about any mid-season NCAA basketball game.

I understand that the viewership of collegiate hockey and collegiate football cannot be considered anywhere near comparable. However, I do not think that there is no market for it though. I find it curious that NBC Sports has set aside a Friday night spot to showcase a collegiate hockey game each week. The fact that NBC Sports has decided to invest in such an endeavor implies that they think that there is an untapped market for a college hockey product. I don't think we should presume that the market cannot grow beyond the niche following that collegiate hockey has now. The success or failure of NBC Sport's Friday Night Ice will be very telling of the ability to grow the market for college hockey. My suggestion would be along the lines that NBC Sports would highlight one or two games regionally based as in, the East would watch an ECAC or HEA game while the Midwest/Mountain states would watch a WCHA/CCHA game.

[Aaron M. Griffin]

Aside, I still have not been able to get the Dartmouth game video. If anyone has video of the Bardreau OT goal, I'd love to see it...finally.

 Here you go!

I'd love to know why the band sounded out of tune during the broadcast.  Perhaps there is a delay which along with audio compression and processing causes this issue.  (I noticed it during the game and in the DVR replay.)

Thank you! The shot looks similar to the goal that Bardreau scored in the game at Princeton.

[Chris '03]

I consider us lucky that ESPN & ESPN2 still air the Frozen Four games. I'd be willing to bet the ratings are very low compared to just about any mid-season NCAA basketball game.

At least up through 2008, even the title game had never achieved higher than a 0.9 rating (1996, Colorado College vs. Michigan), a 1.04 cable rating (2002, Maine vs. Minnesota), a 3 share (1996, Colorado College vs. Michigan), and 899,000 households (2002, Maine vs. Minnesota).

By comparison, regular season college basketball games on ESPN this season have averaged a 0.9 rating and 1.363 million households.

Cornell vs. New Hampshire men's hockey Frozen Four semi-final in 2003?  0.1 rating, 0.1 cable rating, 0 share, 109,000 households.

While I don't dispute your point that any college basketball game will typically outdraw even the best college hockey game, it is a tad unfair to use a Thursday afternoon hockey game (morning in half the country!) to illustrate your point when basketball games are almost always played at times when people are actually at home.

[Rita]

I consider us lucky that ESPN & ESPN2 still air the Frozen Four games. I'd be willing to bet the ratings are very low compared to just about any mid-season NCAA basketball game.

At least up through 2008, even the title game had never achieved higher than a 0.9 rating (1996, Colorado College vs. Michigan), a 1.04 cable rating (2002, Maine vs. Minnesota), a 3 share (1996, Colorado College vs. Michigan), and 899,000 households (2002, Maine vs. Minnesota).

By comparison, regular season college basketball games on ESPN this season have averaged a 0.9 rating and 1.363 million households.

Cornell vs. New Hampshire men's hockey Frozen Four semi-final in 2003?  0.1 rating, 0.1 cable rating, 0 share, 109,000 households.

While I don't dispute your point that any college basketball game will typically outdraw even the best college hockey game, it is a tad unfair to use a Thursday afternoon hockey game (morning in half the country!) to illustrate your point when basketball games are almost always played at times when people are actually at home.

I was in a "morning time zone" for that game and had a meeting that I just _could not_ skip. I could have gotten that rating up to 109,001 households (unless I was already counted for VCR-ing the game). :-P

[Beeeej]

I consider us lucky that ESPN & ESPN2 still air the Frozen Four games. I'd be willing to bet the ratings are very low compared to just about any mid-season NCAA basketball game.

At least up through 2008, even the title game had never achieved higher than a 0.9 rating (1996, Colorado College vs. Michigan), a 1.04 cable rating (2002, Maine vs. Minnesota), a 3 share (1996, Colorado College vs. Michigan), and 899,000 households (2002, Maine vs. Minnesota).

By comparison, regular season college basketball games on ESPN this season have averaged a 0.9 rating and 1.363 million households.

Cornell vs. New Hampshire men's hockey Frozen Four semi-final in 2003?  0.1 rating, 0.1 cable rating, 0 share, 109,000 households.

While I don't dispute your point that any college basketball game will typically outdraw even the best college hockey game, it is a tad unfair to use a Thursday afternoon hockey game (morning in half the country!) to illustrate your point when basketball games are almost always played at times when people are actually at home.

Really?  That's the argument that you took away from my post?

The first two paragraphs were the important part, and illustrate my point (or really, Rich's point) well enough.  The third was just for shits and giggles.

[TimV]

What else has Time Warner Cable got to do?  My suggestion to them (in total self interest, after all, we ARE the Center of the Universe):  Become the Cornell Broadcast Network.  Like the Notre Dame Broadcast Company (aka NBC) or the Sioux North Dakota Sports Network.  If they just did our games, they would show St Lawrence, Clarkson, Colgate, RPI and Union twice each, Niagara once or twice, RIT once.  Nobody cares about Canisius. Thats 12 games right there - with decreased travel and production costs from what they are doing now.Yeah! Who's with me???**]

[Chris '03]

I consider us lucky that ESPN & ESPN2 still air the Frozen Four games. I'd be willing to bet the ratings are very low compared to just about any mid-season NCAA basketball game.

At least up through 2008, even the title game had never achieved higher than a 0.9 rating (1996, Colorado College vs. Michigan), a 1.04 cable rating (2002, Maine vs. Minnesota), a 3 share (1996, Colorado College vs. Michigan), and 899,000 households (2002, Maine vs. Minnesota).

By comparison, regular season college basketball games on ESPN this season have averaged a 0.9 rating and 1.363 million households.

Cornell vs. New Hampshire men's hockey Frozen Four semi-final in 2003?  0.1 rating, 0.1 cable rating, 0 share, 109,000 households.

While I don't dispute your point that any college basketball game will typically outdraw even the best college hockey game, it is a tad unfair to use a Thursday afternoon hockey game (morning in half the country!) to illustrate your point when basketball games are almost always played at times when people are actually at home.

Really?  That's the argument that you took away from my post?

The first two paragraphs were the important part, and illustrate my point (or really, Rich's point) well enough.  The third was just for shits and giggles.

What was your argument, then? Because it sure seems to me that it's "any college basketball game will typically outdraw even the best college hockey game."

[KeithK]

I consider us lucky that ESPN & ESPN2 still air the Frozen Four games. I'd be willing to bet the ratings are very low compared to just about any mid-season NCAA basketball game.

At least up through 2008, even the title game had never achieved higher than a 0.9 rating (1996, Colorado College vs. Michigan), a 1.04 cable rating (2002, Maine vs. Minnesota), a 3 share (1996, Colorado College vs. Michigan), and 899,000 households (2002, Maine vs. Minnesota).

By comparison, regular season college basketball games on ESPN this season have averaged a 0.9 rating and 1.363 million households.

Cornell vs. New Hampshire men's hockey Frozen Four semi-final in 2003?  0.1 rating, 0.1 cable rating, 0 share, 109,000 households.

While I don't dispute your point that any college basketball game will typically outdraw even the best college hockey game, it is a tad unfair to use a Thursday afternoon hockey game (morning in half the country!) to illustrate your point when basketball games are almost always played at times when people are actually at home.

Really?  That's the argument that you took away from my post?

The first two paragraphs were the important part, and illustrate my point (or really, Rich's point) well enough.  The third was just for shits and giggles.

What was your argument, then? Because it sure seems to me that it's "any college basketball game will typically outdraw even the best college hockey game."

I think that's pretty much the argument. The ratings data for the title game (played at a much more reasonable hour/day for TV) do tend to back this up.

As much as it owuld be nice to have Cornell hockey on TV all the time I'm more than happy dealing with mediocre TV and radio in return for always being able to get tickets to any tournament game I want, pretty much for face value.  You can't do that if college hockey becomes a ratings powerhouse.

[RichH]

What else has Time Warner Cable got to do?  My suggestion to them (in total self interest, after all, we ARE the Center of the Universe):  Become the Cornell Broadcast Network.

I know you're being partially tongue-in-cheek, but guess which ECACHL school's logo happens to be featured on the front page of the TWCS website? Not us. http://twcs.tv/

Hamilton is less than 40 miles from their offices in E. Syracuse, so maybe it just seems like they're more in the "Syracuse market" than Ithaca is.  Or maybe there are Raider alumni on their marketing/web team. I've always had the impression they go to Starr and even Achilles more than they come to Lynah.

[Jim Hyla]

What else has Time Warner Cable got to do?  My suggestion to them (in total self interest, after all, we ARE the Center of the Universe):  Become the Cornell Broadcast Network.

I know you're being partially tongue-in-cheek, but guess which ECACHL school's logo happens to be featured on the front page of the TWCS website? Not us. http://twcs.tv/

Hamilton is less than 40 miles from their offices in E. Syracuse, so maybe it just seems like they're more in the "Syracuse market" than Ithaca is.  Or maybe there are Raider alumni on their marketing/web team. I've always had the impression they go to Starr and even Achilles more than they come to Lynah.

I believe Colgate pays them to broadcast some games, Clarkson has done that for some games as well. Colgate football is much more important here than is Cornell. And if someone wonders what TW has better to do than Cornell hockey, well how about SU basketball. They broadcast games not carried by national TV. That's slightly more profitable than our hockey.

People keep bringing up RPI TV, but as I understand it, they can't carry games live. Why? Probably because sports other than hockey are webcast, and RPI TV can't do that. Some of us always seem to forget that Redcast is more than Men's Hockey. That costs money. You can't just cherry pick the sport we like and say put all your money into that. If you want better webcast, then someone, or ones, will need to put up some money. Maybe we could get someone to help get better cameras, but more than that, doubtful.

[Chris '03]

People keep bringing up RPI TV, but as I understand it, they can't carry games live. Why? Probably because sports other than hockey are webcast, and RPI TV can't do that. Some of us always seem to forget that Redcast is more than Men's Hockey. That costs money. You can't just cherry pick the sport we like and say put all your money into that. If you want better webcast, then someone, or ones, will need to put up some money. Maybe we could get someone to help get better cameras, but more than that, doubtful.

Sure you can. Cornell, and other schools, have just decided that it's important for sprint football parents to have the same quality streaming experience as hockey fans. The merits of that position are debatable. And it's not as if sports have all been treated the same with Redcast either. For a few years football was streamed free thanks, I think, to some CFA $$. Slopetv does or did broadcast basketball games for free in competition with Redcast.

[Jim Hyla]

People keep bringing up RPI TV, but as I understand it, they can't carry games live. Why? Probably because sports other than hockey are webcast, and RPI TV can't do that. Some of us always seem to forget that Redcast is more than Men's Hockey. That costs money. You can't just cherry pick the sport we like and say put all your money into that. If you want better webcast, then someone, or ones, will need to put up some money. Maybe we could get someone to help get better cameras, but more than that, doubtful.

Sure you can. Cornell, and other schools, have just decided that it's important for sprint football parents to have the same quality streaming experience as hockey fans. The merits of that position are debatable. And it's not as if sports have all been treated the same with Redcast either. For a few years football was streamed free thanks, I think, to some CFA $$. Slopetv does or did broadcast basketball games for free in competition with Redcast.

You proved my point, if you have a benefactor then you can do it differently. It required money to stream free football and for SlopeTV to do their broadcasts. If someone wants to put money into hockey, it could be upgraded.

[jtwcornell91]

What else has Time Warner Cable got to do?  My suggestion to them (in total self interest, after all, we ARE the Center of the Universe):  Become the Cornell Broadcast Network.  Like the Notre Dame Broadcast Company (aka NBC) or the Sioux North Dakota Sports Network.  If they just did our games, they would show St Lawrence, Clarkson, Colgate, RPI and Union twice each, Niagara once or twice, RIT once.  Nobody cares about Canisius. Thats 12 games right there - with decreased travel and production costs from what they are doing now.Yeah! Who's with me???**]

FWIW, TWC-Rochester broadcasts all RIT home games live.  I presume RIT pays them to do this.

[Al DeFlorio]

What else has Time Warner Cable got to do?  My suggestion to them (in total self interest, after all, we ARE the Center of the Universe):  Become the Cornell Broadcast Network.  Like the Notre Dame Broadcast Company (aka NBC) or the Sioux North Dakota Sports Network.  If they just did our games, they would show St Lawrence, Clarkson, Colgate, RPI and Union twice each, Niagara once or twice, RIT once.  Nobody cares about Canisius. Thats 12 games right there - with decreased travel and production costs from what they are doing now.Yeah! Who's with me???**]

FWIW, TWC-Rochester broadcasts all RIT home games live.  I presume RIT pays them to do this.

IIRC, Cornell did this with home football games back in the Hofher era or thereabouts with one of the ESPN channels showing the games and Sean McDonough doing the play-by-play.

[jtwcornell91]

What else has Time Warner Cable got to do?  My suggestion to them (in total self interest, after all, we ARE the Center of the Universe):  Become the Cornell Broadcast Network.  Like the Notre Dame Broadcast Company (aka NBC) or the Sioux North Dakota Sports Network.  If they just did our games, they would show St Lawrence, Clarkson, Colgate, RPI and Union twice each, Niagara once or twice, RIT once.  Nobody cares about Canisius. Thats 12 games right there - with decreased travel and production costs from what they are doing now.Yeah! Who's with me???**]

FWIW, TWC-Rochester broadcasts all RIT home games live.  I presume RIT pays them to do this.

IIRC, Cornell did this with home football games back in the Hofher era or thereabouts with one of the ESPN channels showing the games and Sean McDonough doing the play-by-play.

IIRC this was funded by an alum.  The games were on something like Sports Channel America, which had the advantage (over TWC) that it was available anywhere in the country if you (or your local sports bar) had the right sort of dish.  We watched a bunch of them in Santa Barbara (or at least tried to; the people who ran the sports bar were pretty good at screwing with us).