Red Cast Really Sucks

[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.  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).

Yes, I think it was an alum.

[ScrewBU]

So do you guys get your money back when this happens?

Edit: Apparently eLynah thinks the above message is SPAM. That's weird.

This is their response to the complaint they have pathetic service...  I think I will wait til the last game of the year and then ask for a full refund for poor service


We apologize for the inconvenience. We are currently experiencing technical difficulties and we are working with the school to resolve the issue. If you would like us to cancel and refund your subscription, please let us know.
 
SIDEARM Streaming Support

The only way to get rid of these scumbag shysters would be to find out the connection between Cornell and whoever is running this scam company.  I guarantee that's what's going on and until that information is surfaced both sides are going to turn a blind eye.

[ScrewBU]

So do you guys get your money back when this happens?

Edit: Apparently eLynah thinks the above message is SPAM. That's weird.

This is their response to the complaint they have pathetic service...  I think I will wait til the last game of the year and then ask for a full refund for poor service


We apologize for the inconvenience. We are currently experiencing technical difficulties and we are working with the school to resolve the issue. If you would like us to cancel and refund your subscription, please let us know.
 
SIDEARM Streaming Support

The only way to get rid of these scumbag shysters would be to find out the connection between Cornell and whoever is running this scam company.  I guarantee that's what's going on and until that information is surfaced both sides are going to turn a blind eye.

Oh and no video tonight, BTW (at least not as of now.)

[Jordan 04]

So do you guys get your money back when this happens?

Edit: Apparently eLynah thinks the above message is SPAM. That's weird.

This is their response to the complaint they have pathetic service...  I think I will wait til the last game of the year and then ask for a full refund for poor service


We apologize for the inconvenience. We are currently experiencing technical difficulties and we are working with the school to resolve the issue. If you would like us to cancel and refund your subscription, please let us know.
 
SIDEARM Streaming Support

The only way to get rid of these scumbag shysters would be to find out the connection between Cornell and whoever is running this scam company.  I guarantee that's what's going on and until that information is surfaced both sides are going to turn a blind eye.

Do the other 500-odd schools with Sidearm share this same myster "connection"?

[Ben]

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.

The university has already cherry-picked some sports to be covered, why can't they improve the technical infrastructure for one (or two) of the already-chosen sports?

[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.

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."

That was my argument, or rather, it was Rich's argument.  But the two Saturday championship games I cited were more than enough to illustrate it, and neither of those was "a tad unfair."  As I said, the pathetic numbers for the Thursday Cornell semi were just for shits and giggles in case anyone wondered how we performed.

[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.

The university has already cherry-picked some sports to be covered, why can't they improve the technical infrastructure for one (or two) of the already-chosen sports?

As I said before, I'm sure they can and I'm sure it's money. I feel like a broken record.::bang::

[Ben]

You can't just cherry pick the sport we like and say put all your money into that.

As I said before, I'm sure they can and I'm sure it's money. I feel like a broken record.::bang::

Uhhhh.....

[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.

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.

The university has already cherry-picked some sports to be covered, why can't they improve the technical infrastructure for one (or two) of the already-chosen sports?

As I said before, I'm sure they can and I'm sure it's money. I feel like a broken record.::bang::

It's not necessarily a function of more money though. It's a function of resource allocation. You can spend $10 on ten sports or $50 on two. You've still only spent $100.

[marty]

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.

The university has already cherry-picked some sports to be covered, why can't they improve the technical infrastructure for one (or two) of the already-chosen sports?

As I said before, I'm sure they can and I'm sure it's money. I feel like a broken record.::bang::

It's not necessarily a function of more money though. It's a function of resource allocation. You can spend $10 on ten sports or $50 on two. You've still only spent $100.

Aren't some of us asking for $9 to be spent on 9 sports and $19 to be spent on hockey?

Title IX?

[css228]

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.

The university has already cherry-picked some sports to be covered, why can't they improve the technical infrastructure for one (or two) of the already-chosen sports?

As I said before, I'm sure they can and I'm sure it's money. I feel like a broken record.::bang::

It's not necessarily a function of more money though. It's a function of resource allocation. You can spend $10 on ten sports or $50 on two. You've still only spent $100.

Aren't some of us asking for $9 to be spent on 9 sports and $19 to be spent on hockey?

Title IX?

Once the infrastructure is in place it can just as easily be used for Women's hockey. The sport that doesn't make sense from that perspective is football

[Ben]

Once the infrastructure is in place it can just as easily be used for Women's hockey. The sport that doesn't make sense from that perspective is football

Schoellkopf --> Football, Sprint Football, Men's and Women's Lacrosse. Would be worth it to me.

[TimV]

Marty, I think Title IX applies only to participation and equal opportunity for women in athletics.  It doesn't apply to sports promotion or coverage.  Of course, that won't preempt an outcry from the relatively small cadre that follows women's sports.

[dag14]

Actually, the NCAA monitors coverage of men's and women's sports and whether they are comparable.  Ads placed by sports info, quality of programs, etc.  So while a woman may not file a Title IX action if her webpage is inferior to that of a male athlete in an equivalent sport, the NCAA recertification review look at an institutions commitment to women's teams in this context.

[TimV]

Those kinds of things are more threat than substance.  When's the last time you saw Notre Dame or Alabama women in a broadcast?