My apologies if this has been discussed in earlier threads, but WTF? Why would this game not make the ABC or even ESPN slate? Not sure how everybody else feels, but I can't stand the watching games on BTN.
Support MGoBlog: buy stuff at Amazon
Rivalry game on BTN? Why?
October 15th, 2012 at 9:25 AM
#1
Rivalry game on BTN? Why?
October 15th, 2012 at 9:48 AM
#2
Big Teens? I pegged you as
Big Teens? I pegged you as more of an "amateur" guy.
October 15th, 2012 at 12:25 PM
#3
That's third on the list of
That's third on the list of classic blunders.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:28 AM
#4
Because Michigan State is a
Because Michigan State is a measly 1-2 in a bad conference and outside of the Big Ten, no one thinks Michigan is that great.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:30 AM
#5
Commenting to get to 100 so I
Commenting to get to 100 so I can +1 you, good sir.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:39 AM
#6
This is a dumb argument. It
This is a dumb argument. It is a rivalry. We haven't beaten them in 4 years. The coaching staff and team make a big deal out of this game. It is a big deal. Probably not in 3 years, but for now, yes.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:52 AM
#7
It is a big deal
It has always been a big deal, and it will continue to be. With the exception of a couple of years that were lopsided, State always plays very well and very tough in this game. It has always been a very difficult game for Michigan to win. State has beaten some very good Michigan teams. It is a backyard brawl and there are no records going into this game. This game is going to be a bitch to win and I can't wait to watch Team 133 do it.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:59 AM
#8
Agreed. It will always have
Agreed. It will always have some significance. It's a natural rivalry between the two largest schools in the state. Every state with two large major BCS schools considers those games rivalries, even if one team is consistently better
October 15th, 2012 at 10:22 PM
#9
Its not a rivalry in the traditional sense.
A rival goes both ways. They recruit our players, we only recruited 2 of their players and one was a long snapper. They cannot compete with us in any other sport other than woman's basketball. I forget the record but it was our record is something like 20-5 in both men and women's sports.
We do not compete for the same student either. Only 10% of moo u students could get into Michigan. US News a few years back said something like 50% of moo u students apped to Michigan but only 5% of Michigan students apped to moo u.
I could care less if we only played moo u every other year. I dont care about Eastern, Western, Central, Saginaw Valley or Ferris either. All of these schools are in the state of Michigan. The only difference is that moo u is in our conference which is why we want to win every conference game. So if moo u went to the Big East, no one would miss them.
ohio, on the other hand is more competitive in football anf all the other varsity sports. They have more Heisman winners and NC. We hold the overall series record. This is a natural rivalry. They are hicks and hillbillies that are in-bred. I personally hate them.
Lil brother, is just that. They wish they could be like us. Just read the RCMB and that will confirm it. ABC knows it is not a rivalry that is why they defered to air Nebraska vs Northwestern. I would prefer to see us on ABC every week but the moo u game is nothing special.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:09 AM
#10
Uhh no? There's no tie to
Uhh no? There's no tie to Iowa. It's just a team in our division that we play badly against. We have no connection to them. Michigan State is the largest school in Michigan. It's a natural rivalry whether we like it or not
October 15th, 2012 at 10:23 AM
#11
Until divisions, there was no
Until divisions, there was no connection except being in the Big 10 with us. They were the equivalent of Indiana for us. Even now with the tirefire they are and will continue to be as long as Frerentz is coaching, they are easily the least threat to us winning our division.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:56 AM
#12
Iowa under Ferentz is not a
Iowa under Ferentz is not a tire fire. That's Illinois. Or Purdue. Or Minny. Or Indiana if they had any tires in the first place.
Iowa under Ferentz is a solid, middle of the league team that will beat the conference powers when they have down years and pull the occasional upset against them at home. Every 10 years or so the stars will align and they'll go to the conference championship/play in a BCS game, etc. They will also lose a fair number of games they should win (CMU this year) because they play a grind it out type of game that results mainly in close scores. Given their very easy schedule (crossovers against Purdue, Indiana, Penn State @ Iowa), I think the division may come down to their visit this year. In fact, if they beat Penn State this week, they may very well come to Ann Arbor undefeated in the division (PSU, @ Northwestern, @ Indiana, Purdue). Now, we should win that game fairly handily, and I could see them dropping any of those, save Purdue
But that's far from a tire fire, even though the style will, at many points, be ugly.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:29 AM
#13
Iowa has only beaten Michigan
Iowa has only beaten Michigan thirteen times, and three of those have come since 2008. We play State a ton more (104 meetings compared to 57) and they have a better winning percentage (.307 to .228) and more wins than Iowa does against us (32 to 13). Not to mention EL and A2 are all of 65mi apart, or the fact that pretty much every Michigan guy we have on roster was heavily recruited by MSU.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:52 AM
#14
I understand your "lack of sparty love"
But really?? Iowa is a bigger game to Michigan than the MSU game?
October 15th, 2012 at 2:29 PM
#15
it could be
the iowa game could be the bigger game this year... four-year grudge w/ msu notwithstanding.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:11 AM
#16
C'mon... you're being
C'mon... you're being deliberately obtuse. I'd be the first to agree with recognizing the Sparty inferiority complex, but comparing the Iowa game with the Sparty game is a dumb argument.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:38 AM
#17
Misopogon made the same
Misopogon made the same argument last year. It's only a "rivalry" because people in Michigan have to deal with Staee fans at work on Monday. If you live in Illinois, you're going to hear from Illinois and NW fans on Monday. If you live in Pennsylvania, then you are going to hear from PSU fans on Monday. That doesn't make them our rivals (even though Illinois fans would try to convince you otherwise). Yes, I want to beat them more than other teams in the Big Ten, but only because I hate hearing from them on Mondays. They are still behind OSU and ND, though, and how can you call your third-most-important game a rival?
The team needs to beat MSU for in-state recruiting. The same can be said about Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, etc.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:45 AM
#18
I think it depends a lot on
I think it depends a lot on when you were exposed to MSU. If you went to Michigan during a time where we stomped MSU yearly, I understand the rationale behind thinking they are solely an annoyance. Personally, I went to Michigan in the last few years where we haven't won a game. I am also an out-of-stater with no prior feelings towards MSU. Therefore, I feel a greater sense of rivalry with them than many of you and while I know the history of the matchups, it's hard to ignore what happened when I first started watching
October 15th, 2012 at 11:49 AM
#19
I'm a little less down on this rivalry than you...
but I can't disagree with a lot of what you're saying. I don't know how you can call MSU our third most important game, though. ND is basically a useless game unless we are on a MNC run or lose our division and are looking for an at-large BCS bid. Ohio is by far our biggest rival, but with the division setup being what it is, we can almost always go to the BTCG as long as we beat MSU and Nebraska, regardless of what happens in The Game.
MSU and Nebraska are our most important games annually, and I don't see how there's too much of a debate there. It sucks, but that's the alignment the Big Ten decided to go with.
October 15th, 2012 at 12:00 PM
#20
Maybe "most important" wasn't
Maybe "most important" wasn't the correct descriptor, but I'd say taken out of the context of effects on the post season, OSU and ND are the two games that people generally want to win the most.
October 15th, 2012 at 2:43 PM
#21
Yeah I don't disagree with that.
I just don't think it's an unimportant game; this weekend has a lot to do with whether this is a Rose Bowl season or a Capital One Bowl season.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:00 PM
#22
Thank you,
you're saying what I've been saying since the new 12 team B1G and divisional alignment formed.
I know UM has way more skin in the OSU and ND games than Nebraska and usually MSU, but the reality is that winning the division is where it starts, and that does change things. Different league now with different dynamic, though it will take time for that to sink in for some.
Nebraska has no "thing" about beating UM or MSU other than more often than not, we know it will mean playing in the B1G title game. Over time, rivalry intensities will shift based on that.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:15 PM
#23
We agree too much, I think.
Basically everything I've seen you write on division play I agree with, your last sentence especially.
October 15th, 2012 at 2:11 PM
#24
The difference is
Tackling Desmond in the endzone. Spartan Bob. Neck wrenchings. Comments from players and coaches. Yes, Illinois really hates us (their fans are so cute), but little of that carries to the field. MSU has won the second most games against us. That's why it's a bigger rivalry than those other Big Ten schools.
Auburn is the 5th best team all time in the SEC, but Alabama doesn't consider them the 5th most important game. Proximity matters.
October 15th, 2012 at 11:33 AM
#25
(No subject)
October 15th, 2012 at 10:28 AM
#26
This Rivalry matters less to some and more to others
Out-of-staters do not have the same distaste for MSU as in-staters. I'm sure everyone has their own feelings, but it is a general trend. On the other hand, everyone has to answer to other rivals. It is what it is. Has Indiana beaten us in 4 years? Are we a rival to them?
October 15th, 2012 at 10:07 AM
#27
Artds,
Would you have said
Artds,
Would you have said the same for osu? That they weren't a rival because they owned us for almost a decade. Msu had more recent success against us whether we like it or not and it'd be crazy to say osu didn't matter to us back then.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:30 AM
#28
I'll be watching the game
I'll be watching the game from my seats in the Big House. So I'm not too worried about what channel it's on.
That being said, I'm grateful for BTN because it allows me to watch every single Michigan football game even though I live in Oregon now. Not to mention, all the basketball and occasional hockey games it allows me to see.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:33 AM
#29
Searched for this on the board
Haven't found a satisfactory answer yet.
Can I shell out like $2-5 and just watch this game on BTN2Go? Is there some way to do that I'm missing? I'm all for using the pirate tv sites, but I was trying to host a watch party and they flake out sometimes/have bad picture quality. I can hook my comp up to the TV, get good internet...just don't get BTN.
Help me out. What's the best way to do this?
October 15th, 2012 at 10:06 AM
#30
Sadly this isn't exactly
Sadly this isn't exactly true. I have AT&T Uverse with BTN, but they don't provide BTN2GO. Not sure why.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:39 AM
#31
I signed up for free
and watched the entire Purdue game live while away from my house. Didn't cost me a dime. You can even watch the replays if you miss the game entirely. Worked on my phone, laptop, and my samsung tablet with no "buffering" downtime. Good Luck!
October 15th, 2012 at 9:41 AM
#32
Method?
How did you do that? Tell me your secrets!
October 15th, 2012 at 9:46 AM
#33
First you have to create an
First you have to create an account on BTN2Go website. If you plan on using a mobile device you'll need to download the app from your respective store. Once you create an account, you have to verify your TV provider. I think you'll need your account number for that but I can't quite remember. Once you verify your provider, you have free reign to pilage BTN2Go for all your sporting needs free of cost. I may have missed a few details but I think that should get you going.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:49 AM
#34
Ok
So this is the problem...I don't have BTN through my cable provider, so I'm trying to access it a different way. Sorry if that wasn't clear in the OP.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:52 AM
#35
If you're hosting a party,
If you're hosting a party, maybe one of your guests or friends who does get BTN can sign in temporarily so everyone can watch?
Just a suggestion because all you need to do is sign in with my Verizon/Comcast/etc. email on btn's website, could be a simple thing for someone to help you out with.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:57 AM
#36
A bunch of people have it
But they have it on Comcast, which BTN2Go doesn't work with. Has anyone successfully logged in with comcast?
October 15th, 2012 at 10:16 AM
#37
I've signed up through
I've signed up through DirecTV by way of my parents account number, in all honesty I find the pirate streams to be better than the BTN feeds.
Also, curse you mortgage lender for not getting me into my new house/ so I could switch providers and watch on DirecTV myself.
October 15th, 2012 at 1:45 PM
#38
Justin.TV
Justin.tv is another way you can watch almost any game. People live broadcast their feed. A quick search of the live feeds usually turns up one or two of the games you're looking for. It's available through your web browser, or apps on iOS and Android.
EDIT: Link = http://www.justin.tv/
October 15th, 2012 at 10:41 AM
#39
If you end up having to use
If you end up having to use a pirate site, be sure to use some sort of ad blocking software. Someone in a thread a week or two ago mentioned Ad Block for Chrome. It's a free ap and it works like a charm. It makes a huge difference. I was able to watch an entire game with just a few minor hiccups. The only problem was, I couldn't figure out how to make it full screen, but then again, I was at my prime dealing with technological innovations about 20 years ago, so I'm probably just missing something simple, like a "picture go big" button.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:33 AM
#40
I would
rather have a 3:30 BTN start than a noon ESPN family of networks start. This means two things: 1) I can enjoy the noon games win or lose, as losing a noon game erases any interest i had in watching any other football, and 2) I am assured a male play by play announcer. These two things make me happy.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:59 AM
#41
i like your second reason
i like your second reason
October 15th, 2012 at 9:36 AM
#42
I don't know why it's on BTN,
I don't know why it's on BTN, but I do know that I am sick to fucking death of 3:30 games.
The only other Big Ten game worth watching is also on at 3:30. As usual, the dumbfucks that make up the schedules have ensured that nobody can watch both games. It also means that you can't watch South Carolina at Florida either. I guess this will be yet another weekend where I don't bother watching any shitty noon football games.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:37 AM
#43
Doesn't the BTN get to choose some games?
I may be remembering incorrectly, but I thought the BTN could choose certain games throughout the year, so they made sure each team was on its network a certain number of times.
If you look at the slate this week, it's not a very appealing week, even for the weak Big 10. Ohio State, the top ranked team, is playing Purdue (who has gotten crushed its last two games) and other contenders (e.g, Nebraska and Wisconsin) play Northwestern and Minnesota, two low profile teams.
So UM-MSU is the "big" game, and maybe BTN picked it and the networks were like, "Eh, neither team is in the Top 20 -- you can have them."
October 15th, 2012 at 9:51 AM
#44
When BTN was first launched
When BTN was first launched (not sure how things have changed) they used to get third pick after ABC and ESPN of which game to broadcast and one week per year they were given the second pick from that weeks games. I am too lazy to research if this is still the case, but I assume it is.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:52 AM
#45
I think you may be right
It seems like the big Michigan - MSU rivarly has been on BTN more often than not. I thought this was because BTN gets a few "good ones" a season, and ABC / ESPN doesn't feel this game gets enough national interest versus other choices on the same weekend. (Seems like Penn State rubbernecking is the in thing from national point of view this season, and the rest of the non-BCS ranked B1G is not worth watching.)
The upside is it further fuels Sparty's inferiority complex.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:05 AM
#46
I'm assuming that ABC/ESPN
I'm assuming that ABC/ESPN chose the Nebraska-Northwestern game as their #1 choice (which is defensible: large Nebraska fan base, kind of an elimination game in the division, big upset last year, sure to have offensive fireworks) and that the BTN utilized one of their opportunities to move up in the selection priority to grab MSU-UM.
The only confusing thing is that the OSU-Purdue game is also an ABC simulcast, I'm not sure if the BTN can ever choose before an ABC broadcast. Regardless of the regionality of the MSU-UM game, I would think it would draw more viewers than OSU vs. a completely dead Purdue team.
October 15th, 2012 at 11:52 AM
#47
Down here
people from outside the B1G, when they talk about Big Ten, it is generally about how much the Big Ten sucks, is Penn State going to become a crater, and looks like the Buckeyes would be B1G champions if they could play in the post season.
Exhibit A for the 1st point: Michigan was wiped off the map on national TV between Alabama and the ND interception fest. Now that we are into the conference schedule, there is nothing left that matters to see until maybe The Game. (If we get there, even the B1G championship game will be a joke because of Penn State and Ohio, and all those other "leaders".)
Nebraska and Wisconsin each have imploded nationally and within the conference. Everyone else has always been "who dat?". The only thing left of interest to watch are the ambulances, fire trucks and morgue vehicles around Penn State, and whether Ohio wins out (thus further shaming the entire B1G).
October 15th, 2012 at 9:37 AM
#48
Don't care what channel it is on,
As long as it doesn't rain I am happy. I am still thawing out from Saturday.
October 15th, 2012 at 2:02 PM
#49
My two part plan kept my comfy all day on Sat
1. Gortex
2. Drambuie
October 15th, 2012 at 9:38 AM
#50
I dont like it because it
I dont like it because it implies that it isn't a particularly interesting game, and the production and announcers are a bummer. OTOH, I like being able to watch on btn2go and to get replays online. Either way, beat Staee.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:46 AM
#51
MSU lost to Iowa. If they
MSU lost to Iowa. If they would have won, ABC/ESPN.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:59 AM
#52
are you referring to ABC
are you referring to ABC switching to Michigan-Illinois in the 4th quarter of the Red River Blowout? Or did they switch away from Michigan to something else (maybe the Oregon State game) where you live? I got the entire Michigan game in Chicago.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:09 AM
#53
I had friends in Wisconsin
who said that ABC switched away from the Michigan game after the 3rd quarter without telling them that the game could still be found on ESPN.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:19 AM
#54
In Columbus
they switched over to the BY Who - Oregon State game. Understand the switch because of the blowout.
October 15th, 2012 at 12:06 PM
#55
In Cleveland
In Cleveland they switched to BYU - Oregon State. I was at the UM/Ill game but only got to re-watch 3/4 of it on the DVR.
October 15th, 2012 at 12:47 PM
#56
Being where I am
I guess ABC considered it the Illinois game and left it on network television. Woo.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:42 AM
#57
It's a rivalry game that has
It's a rivalry game that has minimal interest outside of Michigan and maybe Ohio. I haven't looked at the schedule for this week, but it's understandable to not put it on ESPN.
Also, ESPN loves the SEC
October 15th, 2012 at 9:44 AM
#58
My biggest complaint with BTN
My biggest complaint with BTN is the noise they make every time they drop the down and distance on the screen, it sounds like someone going "whooo"
Anyone else notice this? If not, I'm sorry, you won't be able to watch the games again in peace.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:51 AM
#59
It's too late! Enjoy!
It's
It's too late! Enjoy!
It's meant to be some sort of hydraulic noise, as if some sort of mechanical force is driving the wizardy.
Pay no attention to the Tim Doyle behind the curtain.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:44 AM
#60
Perhaps it isn't quite as
Perhaps it isn't quite as interesting outside the state of Michigan.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:56 AM
#61
As a rule, I'd disagree.
As a rule, I'd disagree. Florida-Florida State was must see when both teams were good; Okl-Okl St; Tex-Okl; Alabama-Auburn; Texas - Texas A&M; even Pitt-West Virginia. A lot of regional rivalry games have national interest when both teams are good.
Maybe what's baked into your statement is the fact that neither team this year is viewed nationally as particularly good, which I'd concede.
October 15th, 2012 at 12:37 PM
#62
I don't think me meant that
I don't think me meant that UM-MSU is never interesting nationwide, just that 2012 UM-MSU isn't, just like years where OU-OKSt or UF-FSU aren't contenders, less people watch nationally.
October 15th, 2012 at 9:45 AM
#63
This is a good business decision
I suspect this is a good business decision for varied reasons:
- MSU is stumbling, having lost two in a row.
- UM & MSU are not even 100 miles apart, and are of little interest outside of the State of Michigan.
- My guess is the TV people have run the numbers, and the projected viewership fell below other possible games.
- The fact that this was a late decision (game time and TV network) indicates that it was being considered, at least until MSU lost this week.
- Even Michigan, which is improving, has lost two, and is barely in the top 25.
- How many regional games do you choose to watch outside of Michigan - MSU? Would you watch OK - Oklahoma State? Kansas - Kansas State? Texas - Texas A&M? Illinois - Northwestern? Iowa - Iowa State? For a regional game to be of significant interest, it helps when both teams are highly ranked, or at least ranked. Florida - Florida State, or Alabama - Auburn or USC - Stanford might be of more interest. This year, Ohio State - Cincinnati are both doing well.
- Isn't the BTN promised a marquee game or two?
October 15th, 2012 at 9:54 AM
#64
No Matt Millen
Has it been so long? Have we all forgotten?
Is BTN really the WORST possible thing that could happen to this game?
October 15th, 2012 at 10:03 AM
#65
Further
Further proves that the Big Ten sucks and MSU is not relevant to a national maybe even regional audience.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:12 AM
#66
Who cares what network
It's on just win
October 15th, 2012 at 10:17 AM
#67
In the absence of any good
In the absence of any good national game, I'm guessing that Disney chose Nebraksa-NW because of the likelihood that the game will see a lot of points scored.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:22 AM
#68
I don't mind games on BTN at
I don't mind games on BTN at all. The commecial breaks are much much shorter than on ABC.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:53 AM
#69
The breaks are shorter and
The breaks are shorter and the BTN also doesn't consider themselves the attraction instead of the game. The BTN understands that you tune in becuase of the game. ESPN thinks that you tune in because of ESPN.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:25 AM
#70
Agree,
If Michigan v. Illinois can be on ABC, then so can this game.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:30 AM
#71
Regional rivalry
Nobody outside the two fanbases gives a crap about this game.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:34 AM
#72
Bottom line here is that
Bottom line here is that Nationally, this game is not that important vs. the other games of the day, or not that interesting. Nebraska vs. Northwestern the big guys at ABC Sports want more. Also, the BTN gets a few picks per year that they can go before the ABC pick. Perhaps - this is a game BTN wanted to show over the others - they knew there would be big interest in the UM side. Remeber, NBC's highest rated College Football game was UM @ ND this year - 1/2 of NBC's teams don't change - so we know that it isn't the Irish drawing the attention.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:42 AM
#73
Sarcasm? From you, Shoe? I
Sarcasm? From you, Shoe? I don't even know you anymore.
October 15th, 2012 at 11:06 AM
#74
I'm shocked, I tell you. Shocked.
Your winnings, sir.
October 15th, 2012 at 11:15 AM
#75
I care Shoe. I care
I care Shoe. I care deeply.
Others here on the board may brush off the importance of your television viewing choices but I am NOT one of them. Even now as I write this from my desk at work my partner just stuck his head in the office to ask "Did MGoShoe get his Michigan/MSU watching plans settled yet?" You see - even though I live in Ohio I have alerted all my friends, family and co-workers to your plight and they too have started a mini candlelight vigil to ensure your ability to watch the game when you want and how you want isn't diminished in any way.
October 15th, 2012 at 4:25 PM
#76
I don't care, but
wanted to mention that BTN2Go needs to get picked up by more cable companies.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:36 AM
#77
Easy
As I predicted this year, Sparty was extremely overrated going in, and are a 7-5 team at best. Sparty has played so badly that ABC doesn't consider the game worthwhile, leaving BTN their opening to exercise their option on this game.
I hope Michigan proves ABC right by hanging 50 on Sparty.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:54 AM
#78
We're Not Hanging 50 On Sparty
That would be nice, but if we've learned anything about MSU thusfar is that their defense is good enough to keep them in any game they're playing. I believe we win this week, because we're the better team, but it won't be another 30+ point rout that we've enjoyed the past two weekends.
That said, I'm completely confident in being able to fire up a victory cigar around 7:15 PM this Saturday night.
October 15th, 2012 at 5:31 PM
#79
I plus one'd
But with a qualifier - I agree with the not scoring 50, though performing and unjinx by disassociating with the victory cigar complete confidence
October 15th, 2012 at 10:44 AM
#80
I have a question?
If you have dish can you still call them and order the BigTen Network just for a day? My dad did this the other year and they charged him 5 dollars or something. Does anyone know if this is possible??
October 15th, 2012 at 10:46 AM
#81
Since MSU isn't ranked, it
Since MSU isn't ranked, it garners little interest outside of the two fanbases.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:54 AM
#82
I don't like BTN announcers
I don't like BTN announcers but it is what it is. It might not just be a UM/MSU factor but a Big Ten factor, seeing that the conference looks about as bad this year as it's ever been. Even if MSU had beaten Iowa, I didn't think we would get ABC for this game.
Not that I want to remember the game but wasn't the 2009 game on BTN? The one where Forcier threw the interception in the end zone in overtime.
The networks for past UM/MSU games:
ESPN on ABC - 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011
ABC - 1987, 1989, 1990, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005
ESPN - 1988, 1991, 1994, 1997, 2002, 2006
CBS - 1985, 1986
BTN - 2009, 2012
October 15th, 2012 at 10:50 AM
#83
Not sure how everybody else
Not sure how everybody else feels, but I can't stand the watching games on BTN.
So don't. Go online and buy a ticket. From what I'm reading, Spartan fans are shedding their tickets to avoid having to sit through the comeuppance in Ann Arbor this weekend. Prices online are falling, so pick a pair or seats and come out and watch the game live.
October 15th, 2012 at 10:58 AM
#84
You do realize that not
You do realize that not everyone lives in Michigan?
October 15th, 2012 at 10:56 AM
#87
quality of BTN broadcasts
unfortunately, abc/espn regional coverage is also fairly poor. certainly the announcers are comparable - derek rackley and danny kannel(?sp) appear to be familiar with the teams but are very green and do not add much. although, i find myself correcting and scoffing at their comments which is fun. actully, everything is fun when your team is ahead by a lot.
October 15th, 2012 at 11:03 AM
#88
The main issue for me are the
The main issue for me are the announcers/analysts calling the games. They all suck pretty bad and it makes games harder to deal with. The B10 network definitely does well enough to afford some top notch people to get the job done. I don't care if they have a B10 background or not, get some quality in those booths.
October 15th, 2012 at 11:03 AM
#89
The good thing about the BTN,
The good thing about the BTN, they won't stop covering the game if it gets out of hand. I came home Saturday from work hoping to catch some of the second string. Instead I found BYU vs Oregon State.
October 15th, 2012 at 12:17 PM
#90
Agreed.
Went to the kitchen Saturday and came back to a different game. Thought the wife had changed it trying to be funny. I had to buy flowers today for yelling at her.
October 15th, 2012 at 11:18 AM
#91
Really??
Some people are never satisfied now your bitching about the commentators? Who even listens to BTN commentating just push mute and listen to the radio broadcast, better yet don't even watch the game just wait for the espn highlights since your so concerned about commentating
October 15th, 2012 at 2:16 PM
#92
You mad guy?
Chill out bro. Some people feel the commentary is below average. If you don't feel the same way, cool. That's your opinion, but you can't be mad at people with higher standards/expectations for how they want to view and listen to the game.
October 15th, 2012 at 11:32 AM
#93
Worst Time Slot Possible
I, unfortunately, have a good friends wedding at 4pm CST and will be able to catch about 30 minutes of it. A noon kick (11am here) would have been perfect, a late game and I could have it on at the reception somehow, but 330 has me missing almost all of it.
As a kick in the nuts, it's on BTN, so I can't even stream it on the WatchESPN app due to BTN's non-agreement with Comcast. DVR is just not the same...no way I can hold off until Sunday to find out the results.
October 15th, 2012 at 12:05 PM
#94
Friends don't let friends
Friends don't let friends marry during CFB season.
October 15th, 2012 at 12:52 PM
#95
I too have a friend's wedding
I too have a friend's wedding that day, a friend who graduated from Michigan, a friend who was an athlete at Michigan, a friend whose father was a captain of the Michigan football team and an assistant coach under Bo. A friend who grew up in Michigan, so he appreciates the UM-MSU rivalry. And obviously, most of the wedding party went to UM and most of the guests are either M or MSU fans.
How did this happen? It's a story, but includes women having too much power. Wedding was supposed to be on the UMass game, but had to be changed. Unfortunately, shit happens. Plan a summer wedding and this never would have been an issue.
October 15th, 2012 at 11:33 AM
#96
In Canada its tough to get
In Canada its tough to get BTN, my cable provider has it, but how they set it up you only get one game as there is only one BTN channel slot. Just can't see paying 10 dollars extra per month for a package where I have to hope Michigan is the game in question. Not to mention the other crappy channels they bundled with it. So i guess i'll be firstrow'n it and porting it to the tv via VGA cable. Ahhh technology.
In conclusion, Canadian telecommunications suck.
October 15th, 2012 at 12:06 PM
#97
I believe our game is on all
I believe our game is on all the slots at 3:30. So if you can get one, you've got them all.
October 15th, 2012 at 3:53 PM
#98
Thank you sir
Thank you sir
October 15th, 2012 at 11:41 AM
#99
I don't see what's wrong with it
The BTN is good for the conference, so I want them to do well. I wish they had a few more of the headline games. Sometimes it feels like a bit of an afterthought.
October 15th, 2012 at 11:46 AM
#100
Worst thing about watching
Worst thing about watching BTN games for me, by far, is the annoying sound effect they play whenever the down and distance graphic drops down below the score. It's this mechanical whir that is both entirely unnecessary (do they really need to draw attention to information that is already displayed on the field as well?) and overused (probably 50+ times per game).
October 15th, 2012 at 12:40 PM
#101
Who Gets What...
So, I did some looking and it turns out that BTN is in fact the second-tier provider in the conference television agreement, rather than the third as I said in a post yesterday. In any event, the conference does still get some airplay nationally - ABC will air OHIO / Purdue at noon, and ESPNU picked up Minnesota Wisconsin. ESPN2 gets Nebraska and Northwestern at 3:30, and of course, we're on BTN then. BTN also took Penn State and Iowa at 8 PM.
It should be noted that some of the games that were first-tier pickups are probably games that will get bigger audiences. For example, ESPN took LSU and Texas A&M for their noon game, and ABC took South Florida and Louisville at 3:30 PM, so if we were going to end up on the bigger network, I imagine it would have been there, but of course, Louisville is ranked higher in the polls than we are. I am not sure if that goes into the decision, although I have to think that, if they are catering to more casual fans who do follow the polls, it might. I am pretty sure the relative lack of national interest is MSU - particularly a 4-3 MSU - is a big part of it too.
October 15th, 2012 at 12:53 PM
#102
Northwestern - Nebraska was
Northwestern - Nebraska was ABC's tier one choice. It's mirrored on ESPN2, for areas that show USF - Louisville. UM-MSU was the BTN's second tier selection. I don't know why they slotted the game at 330 rather than noon, though.
October 15th, 2012 at 12:12 PM
#103
National Appeal is still pretty large
Coming from New York, the weekly slate is usually pretty weak. I can't believe that the UM/MSU alumni base can't generate better ratings than a random Big 12 or SEC matchup.
October 15th, 2012 at 12:19 PM
#104
There's something baffling to
There's something baffling to me about a lot of this thread: why would it matter to ESPN how important this game is in Michigan? They aren't the Michigan Sports Network or Fox Sports Detroit--they need at least a regional audience, if not national. Outside of the Chicago alumni base and Toledo, out-of-state interest in MSU football is nil. I have never, since I moved back to Cincinnati, seen a bar flying a State flag during football season. Or seen a State bumper sticker. Or met a State fan, if you exclude the parents of a current State player (who weren't State fans until their son decided to play there).
From here it's probably the most invisible of the 12 B1G schools. Maybe Iowa comes close.
October 15th, 2012 at 12:23 PM
#105
My issue is simple. RCN in
My issue is simple. RCN in Boston simply does not carry the BTN. It does not exist in their channel lineup in this area. Not in the premium, sports or any other package. Which basically means I either change my cable service for maybe 3 days a year, or watch a crappy illegal stream or go to a bar.
I really wish the BTN would stream the damn thing online and allow people to buy packages. I would gladly pay for that. Just seems like they are leaving money on the table given that they have already made the infrastructure investment to support Btn2Go.
October 15th, 2012 at 12:28 PM
#106
My guess
they're willing to leave that money on the table because they'd rather have people like you they can use to pressure RCN to carry the network.
It sucks, but I think that's what's going on.
October 15th, 2012 at 3:19 PM
#107
The model you're talking
The model you're talking about is intuitive, economical, and efficient, which is why it doesn't exist (outside of Netflix). The cable companies should be entirely obsolete now that technology allows content providers to reach the consumers directly, but their influence is too well-entrenched for them to let themselves be marginalized. Because it's the cable companies who pay the networks for the right to carry their channels, they put strict restrictions on the networks' ability to offer their content through other means. That's why no TV network provides a way for customers to subscribe to their stream directly and cut out the middle man.
The TV networks are also not entirely stoked about the idea of cutting out the cable companies and creating a free market system, since many of them have multiple channels and they can freely move programming between channels because the cable companies carry all of their channels (e.g., ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN Classic, ESPNU, etc). If they allowed the consumer to subscribe to a single stream a la carte, they would face the pressure of ensuring that in each time slot, they're airing the most popular programming possible for that time of day.
October 15th, 2012 at 1:17 PM
#108
You are familiar with the
You are familiar with the dumpster fire that is the B1G, correct? We have literally zero representation in the BCS top -25. Not a single team. Conferences we have that ini common with: Mac, Sun-Belt, WAC... Yep, that about sums it up.
October 15th, 2012 at 1:46 PM
#109
If someone would be so kind and answer my question
If you have dish can you still call them and order the BigTen Network just for a day? My dad did this the other year and they charged him 5 dollars or something. Does anyone know if this is possible??
October 15th, 2012 at 2:13 PM
#110
Well, for dishnetwork..
Its free to upgrade and $5 to downgrade your package. So you can upgrade to a higher package on saturday for free and then downgrade after a day. You will pay $5 + cost diff for upgraded package for a day. Hope this helps
October 15th, 2012 at 1:58 PM
#111
It's not unprecedented for
It's not unprecedented for the Michigan-MSU game to be aired on BTN. I remember that the '09 MSU game was aired on BTN.
On a related note, does anyone know how it's determined which games air on ESPN/ABC and which games air on BTN?
October 15th, 2012 at 2:12 PM
#112
I don't know about college
I don't know about college football specifically, but i do work in the broadcast rights business (MLB-related) so can provide some insight. For baseball at least each broadcaster is given first choice to games based on a rotating priority system (ESPN may have top choice one week, but last choice the next.) they then choose the games they want to broadcast an then the other broadcasters choose among which games are left (it is actually much more complicated than this as there are many other factors, including how much money each broadcaster is paying for their rights, etc., but I'm just trying to make it simple for explanation purposes). I imagine something similar happens in CFB - so either BTN ha a high priority this week and choose M-MSU or ESPN passed on the game. This is just my speculation from what I've dealt with in baseball.
October 15th, 2012 at 2:11 PM
#113
As bad as sports announcers
As bad as sports announcers are in general, the BTN announcers always find some way to be worse than the rest. Just painful to listen to. Luckily I'll be at the game.
October 15th, 2012 at 6:02 PM
#114
Because nobody outside of
Because nobody outside of Michigan give a shit about this game.
October 15th, 2012 at 7:56 PM
#115
About Farmers...
Thank one next time you eat.
October 15th, 2012 at 8:32 PM
#116
Stop whining.
Stop whining...this isn't the first Michigan/MSU game on BTN...and it's regional interest anyway.
October 16th, 2012 at 12:43 AM
#117
Whats the best shirt for the
Whats the best shirt for the little brother beatdown this weekend and what store can I purchase it at? Gonna be north and have to get it last minute.
October 16th, 2012 at 9:43 AM
#118
Can we just agree and be glad
Can we just agree and be glad that DISH/BTN finally got their deal done in time for this game!
