"BTN Football and Beyond"

As the title reads, the BTN is already covering outside of the Big Ten w/this program. I knew this was going to materialize at some point, but it happened sooner than I had thought. So this morning I just realized Dinardo is talking about Oregon and Arizona St. Awesome.

This is exactly what I was hoping for ...eventually make this thing a direct competitor w/espn's college programming. No reason why it can't.

Also I love that UM/MSU is on the BTN this weekend. Next we need to get OSU/UM on the BTN and watch the BTN become a standard channel around the US more and more; and watch ever single B1G program drown in more money than they know what to do with.

On a side note I just saw an interview w/IU's AD and what their plans are. Well they have more money than ever now because of the BTN, so their longterm view is to throw money at the best coaches in America, best facilities, best dorms, etc, etc.

The B1G is down now, but nothing that money can't fix.

I think the BTN has come a long way since 2007. That first game, although I don't care to remember it, was awful, and not only because App St pulled off the upset.

They returned from commercials late, they had horrible camera angles. Their replays looked like they were bad splicing.

Now the productions are very similar, if not equal to ESPN. The studio that hosts the pregame show still looks a little amaturish, but maybe they are going for the minimalist look.

I prefer to watch the BTN pregame over ESPN game day. I do flip to game day on occassion, but I can't stand the constant ass kissing of the SEC.

I do think the BTN is getting ready for an upswing. UM is recruiting better, Ohio has Urban, don't like him but can't argue with his results. MSU should remain relevent for a while. Nebraska is Nebraska. They will always have winning teams, if not great. Wisconsin will be competative.

Can O'Brien navigate PSU through the storm? He seems like a class guy, but will he be able to recruit enough to stable the ship when they are losing so many scholarships?

But back to the original post, I like what the BTN is doing as well. Not to mention they still air volleyporn, I mean volleyball. LOL.

lol volleyporn

yes that should help ratings you would think ha. Anyway it has come a long way and is still amateurish in some ways but the coverage was terrible i recall as well. It's still not up to espn standards but it's getting close and yes anything is better than Gameday. I can't even stand Herbstreit anymore. The SEC is their bread and butter now.

Am I being politically uncorrect in saying I don't like a female calling a game?

I'm sorry, I just can't get used to it.

No i wouldn't say is politically incorrect..i've heard a lot of men say this including my dad; but it hasn't bothered me so much yet. Some of the sideline reporters have been awful though imo.

Well, I'm honestly AT most of the MIchigan games so it hasn't been a big deal for me.

I didn't mind Pam Ward so much. At least she let Speilman and then Bentley do most of the talking.

Beth Mowins on the other hand is unlistenable. Her voice is like fingernails an a chalkboard.

I also can't take Chris Martin's voice on BTN. He sounds like he swallowed a mouthfull of gravel.

I don't care for DiNardo's thoughts. Although he's not much worse than Holtz.

I know he's in the studio and not calling games. Just thought I'd add that.

Yeah, he's an ass. But he usually seems pretty fair to me.

He may be fair but he seems to be "fairly" wrong most of the time! lol

Anyways, I'll be at the game so I'm not too worried about the telecast! lol

THEstjoemfan wrote:

Am I being politically uncorrect in saying I don't like a female calling a game?

I'm sorry, I just can't get used to it.

No, there's nothing wrong with thinking that.

fishgoblue22 wrote:

I didn't mind Pam Ward so much. At least she let Speilman and then Bentley do most of the talking.

Beth Mowins on the other hand is unlistenable. Her voice is like fingernails an a chalkboard.

I also can't take Chris Martin's voice on BTN. He sounds like he swallowed a mouthfull of gravel.

Funny you mention Pam Ward. Even my own mother doesn't enjoy listening to a women broadcaster, and she loathed Pam Ward. Here's some political incorrectness: Mom would always say "Oh, God, we have to listen to this dyke all day?!?"

I still laugh thinking about. When I told her the news that ESPN dropped Ward she was pretty happy.

LMAO!!! And we stopped swearing because of her? lol! (I'm only joking of course!)

I love BT Network and all of the features they have.

Re Pam Ward, not my favorite or close to it, but she seems to work hard at it and I appreciate that. I'll get laughed at for this but I think her voice and Darryl "Moose" Johnson's (ex Dallas FB) who does NFL games, sound similar.

'shoes

Hahahahaha Pam and Moose!

THAT is funny shoes!

I dunno. I'm too "old school" I guess.

I don't mind women announcers doing women's basketball or volleyball.

I'm gonna get myself in trouble here........

fishgoblue22 wrote:

I think the BTN has come a long way since 2007. That first game, although I don't care to remember it, was awful, and not only because App St pulled off the upset.

They returned from commercials late, they had horrible camera angles. Their replays looked like they were bad splicing.

lol, you made me remember some of the early basketball games, when, at least a couple times a game the cameraman would pan too far to the right or left and the camera shot wouldn't include the basket as the ball went in. I didn't mind that much though, because I knew that I wouldn't be seeing most of those games without the BTN. It wasn't that long ago, that I'd say less than 50% of the BB games were televised.

DiNardo and a couple of his colleagues were showing up completely unprepared as recently as last year it seemed, regarding schemes and game plans. I don't remember how it came up, but Dinardo revealed that their crew just relaxed on bus trips from state to state, instead of reviewing game film; but then realized that it would be a great idea to use the trip to watch film.

I was kind of appalled after hearing this...if they want to be competitive they need to at least watch all the games -which all take time.

fishgoblue22 wrote:

I think the BTN has come a long way since 2007. That first game, although I don't care to remember it, was awful, and not only because App St pulled off the upset.

They returned from commercials late, they had horrible camera angles. Their replays looked like they were bad splicing.

Now the productions are very similar, if not equal to ESPN. The studio that hosts the pregame show still looks a little amaturish, but maybe they are going for the minimalist look.

I prefer to watch the BTN pregame over ESPN game day. I do flip to game day on occassion, but I can't stand the constant ass kissing of the SEC.

I do think the BTN is getting ready for an upswing. UM is recruiting better, Ohio has Urban, don't like him but can't argue with his results. MSU should remain relevent for a while. Nebraska is Nebraska. They will always have winning teams, if not great. Wisconsin will be competative.

Can O'Brien navigate PSU through the storm? He seems like a class guy, but will he be able to recruit enough to stable the ship when they are losing so many scholarships?

But back to the original post, I like what the BTN is doing as well. Not to mention they still air volleyporn, I mean volleyball. LOL.

Not many here follow Hockey although with the creation of the B1G TEN HOCKEY CONFERENCE starting next year I'm pretty sure that quite a few will. That being said the BTN's hockey coverage is absued. Horrible camera work, no replays, only one-=camera angle, piss-poor production, the frigging announcers (when they're not just using a student broad-cast and "trying" to synch it up) aren't even at the games most times. I remember a couple years ago when sparty hosted Michigan in the CCHA playoffs, the announcers didn't even go to the game, they did their play-by-play and color commentary from the studio in Chicago! Hockey fans have tried to be patient just thinking that, "It has to get better, they're learning". Well it has been 6 years now and they haven't learned a damn thing, go to http://www.uscho.com/ and ask around and they'll tell ya.

You are right 2nd, it is horrible. But, on another note, at least the hockey is being televised. Rarely was before.

Great point, 2nd.

Hoping we see a lot of UofM hockey this year on BTN. Not being in Detroit, I don't get the games that are televised on FSN Detroit, unless they stream them on their site live as well.

It's frustrating to watch on the BTN. I've gotten to the point where I'll find a game treaming online instead of watching it there. Of course that was when I was living in Bay City and my computer was right next to my TV so I could easily switch the feed to my HDTV. Now they are in different rooms so I'll be watching any online feed on my little computer monitor, that will suck. Ah heck, I'll just go to the games. The 10 minute drive is doable, 2 hours, not-so-much...

If BTN is going big time, I hope they get some big-time talent to call the games. Mostly, they're terrible. Just sayin'.

dwoody wrote:

If BTN is going big time, I hope they get some big-time talent to call the games. Mostly, they're terrible. Just sayin'.

No argument here.

Oh boy. So many things to comment on.

1. I appreciate the BTN much more during basketball season. During football season, I hope every week that our game won't be on there. I'm sorry but the majority of the announcers are awful. That is my main beef. My minor beef is with the audio because the network drowns out the crowd noise. If we score a touchdown on ABC, you'll notice it's much louder than if we score on BTN. I know that sounds like nitpicking but come on. We only get 12 college football days a year, so I don't feel guilty being picky.

2. I don't ever see BTN growing to compete with the likes of ESPN, not just during college football season but any sports season.

3. I'm certainly not happy that the UM/MSU game is on BTN but I'll live. It's happened once before and I guess there's other big games on that day. However, UM/OSU will never, EVER be on BTN. The mere thought of that game not being on ABC, as it has been now every year since 1987, doesn't seem possible.

4. Pam Ward is surprisingly very knowledgeable when it comes to all kinds of sports. My main issue with her was always her monotone voice. If she were a teacher, her students would have to physically harm themselves to stay awake in class. She called the 49-3 game over Sparty in 2002 and just hearing her try to yell, "touchdown Michigan!" was probably one of the most awkward things I've ever heard. I personally don't have a problem with female broadcasters that know their game. But they have to have a decent enough voice to broadcast. At least Beth Mowins has levels that can change if something big happens. Instead of play by play, Pam Ward is better suited to be a color analyst since they talk less. During basketball season, Dorris Burke does color commentary for games on ESPN2 and I think she does a good job.

WolverineHistorian wrote:

1. I appreciate the BTN much more during basketball season. During football season, I hope every week that our game won't be on there. I'm sorry but the majority of the announcers are awful. That is my main beef. My minor beef is with the audio because the network drowns out the crowd noise. If we score a touchdown on ABC, you'll notice it's much louder than if we score on BTN. I know that sounds like nitpicking but come on. We only get 12 college football days a year, so I don't feel guilty being picky.

2. I don't ever see BTN growing to compete with the likes of ESPN, not just during college football season but any sports season..

Well, WH, will the beef with the lack of audio be "atoned for" after the clinching TD over MSU Saturday, when a certain fan goes running, screaming, down the street??? (Hehe...)

As for your second point, I could not agree with you more...and doubt many people would. ESPN is a global entity; covers everything from American sports to the tennis grand slams to (sometimes) Euro-soccer.
Not only is the Big Ten confined to twelve given teams in the USA, but it doesn't cover any sport which
those schools don't field teams/participants in. Heck, I've even seen polo on ESPN...! The BTN will never come close to challenging the power of ESPN. Not in the foreseeable future, anyway.

Oops, should have read, "...doubt many people wouldn't".

michmike wrote:

WolverineHistorian wrote:

1. I appreciate the BTN much more during basketball season. During football season, I hope every week that our game won't be on there. I'm sorry but the majority of the announcers are awful. That is my main beef. My minor beef is with the audio because the network drowns out the crowd noise. If we score a touchdown on ABC, you'll notice it's much louder than if we score on BTN. I know that sounds like nitpicking but come on. We only get 12 college football days a year, so I don't feel guilty being picky.

2. I don't ever see BTN growing to compete with the likes of ESPN, not just during college football season but any sports season..

As for your second point, I could not agree with you more...and doubt many people would. ESPN is a global entity; covers everything from American sports to the tennis grand slams to (sometimes) Euro-soccer.
Not only is the Big Ten confined to twelve given teams in the USA, but it doesn't cover any sport which
those schools don't field teams/participants in. Heck, I've even seen polo on ESPN...! The BTN will never come close to challenging the power of ESPN. Not in the foreseeable future, anyway.

Oh, no doubt.

The SI's and Yahoo's of the world have poured millions, if not billions, in to simply trying to compete with them on the Internet.

Then you've got the local sports outfits, your FSD Detroits, Chicago Sports Net, etc. that have tried for years to compete on television and are only semi-successful because they focus on the local outfits. It'll be interesting to see what kind of dent that new NBC Sports channel will put into ESPN's ratings, but I wouldn't bet on it being anything significant.

ESPN came in and CREATED a new market. They weren't trying to penetrate an already-exisitng one. They created the first 24/7 sports channel. And no other company even tried competing with them until the last decade or so. That gave ESPN at least 20 years to put an absolute STRANGLEHOLD on the market.

And in my opinion, that grip will never loosen.

But if the BTN ever put any effort into hockey they could corner the market. Hockey gets no respect, I'm ok with that. It is well known that ESPN hates hockey. Oh well, it won't happen.

Not sure ESPN hates hockey, they just haven't done well with it ratings-wise. John Buccigras is a huge hockey guy.

'shoes

Trust me, when spelling bee's get aired over the NCAA Hockey Tournament they hate hockey....

The NCAA Hockey Tournament is more exciting than the bouncy-ball tournament but the world will never know because of ESPN's stance on Hockey.