GRIPE: No Major Bowl Games Broadcasted Over The Air

I have had ESPN in the past and recently had it this year, but due to a dispute with DirecTV based on poor satellite reception, I currently do not have ESPN.



I was sorely frustrated to learn that very few bowl games would be broadcasted on the traditional networks of ABC, CBS, and NBC. It made for a very disappointing New Year's day not to be able to watch the Rose Bowl or the Fiesta Bowl. (Yes, I could have probably found them online somewhere, but online feeds are never very reliable.)



Was I the only one who has this gripe this season? Are there others who felt the same way?



I sent emails to both ABC and ESPN complaining about the way the bowl games were handled this season. The only response I got was ESPN bragginga bout how they reach 100 million house holds.



I would be curious to know if their ratings were down this season as compared to last year when the games were on the major networks.

Actually the Rose Bowl had the highest rating of any non NFL game in the history of cable television. (Heard Kirk Herbstriet on the radio this morning coming to work).



I hope you will have ESPN next year to watch most of the BYU games...however, if you don't want to pay for ESPN you can go to ESPN3.com. I have watched several games on my computer at work and have rarely had a problem. My only issue is with the screen saver (pops on every 5 minutes and I can't change it...locked by our IT dept). I just have to move the mouse once every 5 minutes. Works pretty good.

Ball4 wrote:
Actually the Rose Bowl had the highest rating of any non NFL game in the history of cable television. (Heard Kirk Herbstriet on the radio this morning coming to work).



I hope you will have ESPN next year to watch most of the BYU games...however, if you don't want to pay for ESPN you can go to ESPN3.com. I have watched several games on my computer at work and have rarely had a problem. My only issue is with the screen saver (pops on every 5 minutes and I can't change it...locked by our IT dept). I just have to move the mouse once every 5 minutes. Works pretty good.

Although it was the highest rated non-NFL football broadcast in cable history, it was Aldo the lowest rated Rose Bowl. Not a coincidence that the lowest rated game was also the first rose bowl cable broadcast.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

ThrowbackBlue wrote:

Actually the Rose Bowl had the highest rating of any non NFL game in the history of cable television. (Heard Kirk Herbstriet on the radio this morning coming to work).



I hope you will have ESPN next year to watch most of the BYU games...however, if you don't want to pay for ESPN you can go to ESPN3.com. I have watched several games on my computer at work and have rarely had a problem. My only issue is with the screen saver (pops on every 5 minutes and I can't change it...locked by our IT dept). I just have to move the mouse once every 5 minutes. Works pretty good.

Although it was the highest rated non-NFL football broadcast in cable history, it was Aldo the lowest rated Rose Bowl. Not a coincidence that the lowest rated game was also the first rose bowl cable broadcast.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Thanks for the information. The next queston is do they make more money carrying it on ESPN or on ABC. I would think the advertising revenue would be higher on ABC.

100 percent gripe here! We do not get cable or sattlite and so we are totally freezed out. A sign of the times though I guess....

It is pretty silly how few games come on network TV during the bowl season. It's also silly how many bowls ESPN broadcasts. Do any other sports channels even televise a bowl game?



Once ESPN bought the BCS bowls it was over. Cable is the new OTA.



I've managed without cable now for almost 10 years, but I'll be getting it in the summer so I can get as many BYU games as possible.

I noticed the same thing. I currently have the Dish network "family package" which has CSTV or its current itteration as the only sports programming channel, and was suprised that I only got the Notre Dame game on New Years day. I remember in the past having multiple bowl game options on both cable an network programing in the past. And, as a result of the new lineup....I spent my entire new years day cleaning the garage, taking down the Christmas lights, and doing things with the boys rather than watching TV... so I guess I'm glad for that? :whistle:



I'll be moving to the ESPN tier come September, but in the interrim, I've enjoyed putting 10 bucks in my pocket every month (atually 30 bucks from my previous package) I've long said that I should pay less for TV than I do for fast offerings, but that's just me....

check the tea leaves my friends.



IMHO professional sports is going the way of the nobles. There's a reason why the NFL has 15 year waiting lists for season tickets and why they cost over 6 figures at Cowboys, Yankees and other stadiums. They have a product with very high demand, which means they are going to price out most of the common man.



heard it hear first. It's goign to be a noble-man's sport and no one without serious means is going to be able to go or watch in the next 20 years.Hope y'all like gamecasts.

I don't like this either. Fortunately my Internet provider gives me access to ESPN3. I just plug my computer into my TV and get enough sports to keep me from paying a cable bill.

pikoi wrote:
I don't like this either. Fortunately my Internet provider gives me access to ESPN3. I just plug my computer into my TV and get enough sports to keep me from paying a cable bill.

My ISP doesn't provide ESPN3, although they have a partnership with Comcast. :~(

CougarPeasant wrote:
I sent emails to both ABC and ESPN complaining about the way the bowl games were handled this season. The only response I got was ESPN bragginga bout how they reach 100 million house holds.

Maybe this is too logical, but from my understanding ESPN may reach 100 million house holds, but shouldn't ABC be able to easily reach at least that many homes as well? Thinking about it, ABC should be available to nearly every American citizen and possibly then some. If they really want to make it "available", then put it OTA in America, and if necessary market it to cable / satellite overseas if there is enough interest to warrant it.



Just my thinking.

I find it strange that someone that frequents a sports message board wouldn't have espn. I'm sure you have your reasons, but espn has become a necessary evil and I suggest you change your tune prior to next football season. (If it's a financial thing, then that's a different matter entirely. While things here are extremely tight we are stuck in a satellite contract for another year-luckily--or unluckily, as my wife would claim)

byutx wrote:
I find it strange that someone that frequents a sports message board wouldn't have espn. I'm sure you have your reasons, but espn has become a necessary evil and I suggest you change your tune prior to next football season. (If it's a financial thing, then that's a different matter entirely. While things here are extremely tight we are stuck in a satellite contract for another year-luckily--or unluckily, as my wife would claim)

Although I don't have ESPN, I do have satellite radio and get WAY more out of ESPN radio than the channel due to TV viewing limitations (i.e. not enough hours in a day and a long commute time) But last weekend is one of those time where we see the trade off.....

byutx wrote:
I find it strange that someone that frequents a sports message board wouldn't have espn. I'm sure you have your reasons, but espn has become a necessary evil and I suggest you change your tune prior to next football season. (If it's a financial thing, then that's a different matter entirely. While things here are extremely tight we are stuck in a satellite contract for another year-luckily--or unluckily, as my wife would claim)

There was someone on another board last week complaining that they had been invited over to a friend's house to watch the Rose Bowl in their home theater room (HD, 168 inch projection screen, etc). Then the friend finds out the game is on ESPN and not ABC so they had to cancel. I don't know why you would have a home theater and then not have cable or satellite. Seemed very odd to me.

kitic77 wrote:

I find it strange that someone that frequents a sports message board wouldn't have espn. I'm sure you have your reasons, but espn has become a necessary evil and I suggest you change your tune prior to next football season. (If it's a financial thing, then that's a different matter entirely. While things here are extremely tight we are stuck in a satellite contract for another year-luckily--or unluckily, as my wife would claim)

There was someone on another board last week complaining that they had been invited over to a friend's house to watch the Rose Bowl in their home theater room (HD, 168 inch projection screen, etc). Then the friend finds out the game is on ESPN and not ABC so they had to cancel. I don't know why you would have a home theater and then not have cable or satellite. Seemed very odd to me.

It's all about the movies!

I fear that there will be some disappointed next year when people are shut out of BYU games.

Ungoy wrote:

I sent emails to both ABC and ESPN complaining about the way the bowl games were handled this season. The only response I got was ESPN bragginga bout how they reach 100 million house holds.

Maybe this is too logical, but from my understanding ESPN may reach 100 million house holds, but shouldn't ABC be able to easily reach at least that many homes as well? Thinking about it, ABC should be available to nearly every American citizen and possibly then some. If they really want to make it "available", then put it OTA in America, and if necessary market it to cable / satellite overseas if there is enough interest to warrant it.



Just my thinking.

THat's the reply I got so I responded telling them that ABC is available to 300 million people just in the US alone. Still waiting for a response.

byutx wrote:
I find it strange that someone that frequents a sports message board wouldn't have espn. I'm sure you have your reasons, but espn has become a necessary evil and I suggest you change your tune prior to next football season. (If it's a financial thing, then that's a different matter entirely. While things here are extremely tight we are stuck in a satellite contract for another year-luckily--or unluckily, as my wife would claim)

Uhhhh, did you read my original post? Although I have DirecTV, I have no reception and am in dispute with them right now. Otherwise, I would have been able to watch the games. I didn't realize that the games would not be available OTA like they've always been in the past.

stuckinbig10country wrote:
I fear that there will be some disappointed next year when people are shut out of BYU games.

In what way? Because ticket prices will rise? Or because of the TV deal with ESPN?



I'm curious to see how BYU vs Oregon St will be broadcast. If the PAC-12 TV partner (Fox?) decides not to broadcast the game can BYUtv send their HD truck to broadcast it? I doubt Fox would allow that.



The other problem comes with playing MWC teams away--those games will be on the Mtn. So, don't cancel your Mtn tier on cable yet, I guess.