WyoNation.com

Looks like the conference is definitely looking into doing a streaming only package for games. I got a survey in my email asking what type of streaming services and devices I use. Also asked about preferred kick-off/tip-off times.

I would definitely pay for a MW streaming service!

Just filled it out as well. I think it would be a good thing to have; we are starting to get to the point where more people have internet than have cable/satellite. Also, I think it would be easier to raise money than through normal TV deals.

Took the survery. I certainly hope they are going to add live streaming. My suggestion in the comments was for a Mountain West Conference Network app that could be added to Amazon TV, Roku, Apple TV, etc. I would easily pay $100+ annually for a MWC streaming so I could watch every game live.

Cornpoke wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 4:30 pm Took the survery. I certainly hope they are going to add live streaming. My suggestion in the comments was for a Mountain West Conference Network app that could be added to Amazon TV, Roku, Apple TV, etc. I would easily pay $100+ annually for a MWC streaming so I could watch every game live.

I'd pay ~$100 for it too. Happily

$100 ? Too much. Especially for next year. Especially since I already have a hefty cable bill. Especially since the streamers/university/MWC could make it on the advertising revenue.

I said $50 would be acceptable. Considering subscriber fees charged by ESPN, Fox Sports, and others I think that would be a fair price.

I think to do one of these, they need to have a per-game, per-sport and per school option.

I don't want to pay for access to UNLV volleyball or Boise State baseball. Let me pick what I want to watch.

I would love to be able to pick games but would pay for a conference channel if the quality of production was decent. Although I would hope there would be some sort of contract with ESPN/FS1.

Maybe this will allow us to get better times for games. More afternoon and less 830 pm games. Could help generate allot more ticket sales.

But what would the numbers look like? Less TV $/National exposure but more attendance? Would it actually be a net increase? Legit question as I have no idea

I also said $100 since it looked like it included all sports. This is only if you get the game regardless of what tv channel it ends up on. Luckily, I get most of them on HuluTv except for the old Root channels but that’s where the ole VPN helped out. I pay for nhltv and I get pissed when it’s blacked out because it’s on the NHLchannel nationally which isn’t on hulutv. I like the direction the MW seems to be looking.

BJC wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 6:43 pm I would love to be able to pick games but would pay for a conference channel if the quality of production was decent. Although I would hope there would be some sort of contract with ESPN/FS1.

This would be another major key.

I follow D2 sports, because that's what my alma mater plays. Our conference streams everything for free. Another conference in the region charges for streaming, like $10 a day or something. I caved in for one nonconference game, thinking since I'm paying for it that I'd get a quality broadcast. Nope. The paid broadcast was no better than what I watch for free in my conference, if not worse. Waste of money.

I would love less 8:30 pm games but I also love keeping the lights on. I'm not sure that a streaming option is going to be financially viable although I certainly am not in the know of the ins and outs of income streams in the conference. I just know we played the 8:30 games for a reason.

pokefanchaz7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:02 pm I just know we played the 8:30 games for a reason.

Yeah, because ESPN told us that's when you're playing.

If we were getting 4k to 5k more people per game because of better start times and a piece of the streaming revenue I think it would make up for the loss in ESPN money. The big issue would be less national exposure. That being said, nothing beats a packed stadium on a Saturday afternoon.

I would imagine that there would still be an option for a deal with ESPN, CBS, etc. where they would still be able to televise any game they might find intriguing (big matchups, MWC Championship, etc.), but all games would still be on the streaming service.

No sense in completely locking out the networks if they want to televise a few games.

joshvanklomp wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:25 pm

pokefanchaz7 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:02 pm I just know we played the 8:30 games for a reason.

Yeah, because ESPN told us that's when you're playing.

I'm just saying that ESPN told us we were playing at that time but the reason we complied was we needed the money from those games.

I guess I am just a fossil in this day and age. I like games on cable so I can DVR'em and watch at my leisure, fast forwarding through commercials and long play stoppages. I already pay too much for that privilage, don't want to pay more for streaming. I like college hockey too, but since the only way to watch them is to pay for streaming the only games I get to see are the conference playoffs and frozen four when they are on cable.

ZapPoke wrote: ↑Thu Apr 12, 2018 3:26 pm I guess I am just a fossil in this day and age. I like games on cable so I can DVR'em and watch at my leisure, fast forwarding through commercials and long play stoppages. I already pay too much for that privilage, don't want to pay more for streaming. I like college hockey too, but since the only way to watch them is to pay for streaming the only games I get to see are the conference playoffs and frozen four when they are on cable.

Easy fix. Ditch cable and satellite save $70+ per month with streaming only. Unless you like 120 channels of stuff you don’t watch