fromolwyoming
Well-known member
Every MWC conference game and home game that is not televised.ragtimejoe1 said:
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!
Let's be the first...
- Thread starter ragtimejoe1
- Start date
ragtimejoe1
Well-known member
fromolwyoming said:
Excellent. So we have the means and content. I guess the question then becomes, could we get the entire MWC streamed channel on something like Netflix, Hulu, or whatever and is it worth the effort since it is available at themwc.com.
Who commentates the internet only games?
WestWYOPoke
Well-known member
ragtimejoe1 said:
I'll offer mine and Wyo1016's services. We may not be Dave & Kevin but I don't think we would be too far off either.
Wyo2dal
Well-known member
Here is the problem of going after Netflix it's too confined to a small population and forces you to keep sitting at your computer. Let's face it 1 out of 1000 ( rough guess ) people have their Computer hooked directly up to their TV.
On top of all of this Streaming through Netflix or any of the other things means either you are watching the game after it's aired and not live. So who wants to be 1 week behind all year along with Pokes games?
If you are talking about just having a great College Sports library that I agree with. Netflix or Amazon would be great to catalog years of College games.
On top of all of this Streaming through Netflix or any of the other things means either you are watching the game after it's aired and not live. So who wants to be 1 week behind all year along with Pokes games?
If you are talking about just having a great College Sports library that I agree with. Netflix or Amazon would be great to catalog years of College games.
ragtimejoe1
Well-known member
I have Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, Google Play etc. through my DVD player. Many game consoles can get it as well.
Where I think you are right about Netflix specifically, is that when the NFL was trying to leverage the Thursday night games, they floated the idea of streaming live to Netflix. Netflix said not interested in sports (about a year ago, I think).
Google Play, Hulu, or other is probably a better option. I'm not sure how much they would charge to stream something live or what capabilities they have in that regard.
Where I think you are right about Netflix specifically, is that when the NFL was trying to leverage the Thursday night games, they floated the idea of streaming live to Netflix. Netflix said not interested in sports (about a year ago, I think).
Google Play, Hulu, or other is probably a better option. I'm not sure how much they would charge to stream something live or what capabilities they have in that regard.
hithere
Well-known member
Since this is all fantasy land anyway, it would be great if when Joe Glenn retires, UW would get in on this: http://www.coachescabana.com/index.html
Although Dave and Kevin are the best.
Although Dave and Kevin are the best.
Wyo2dal
Well-known member
Hulu or Amazon since they are directly linked into Smart TV's would be the best options but none of those companies do live feeds because of the Money required.
It's all about Money the MWC TV Network didn't go under because of financial backing it went under because broadcasting games in HD to a non existent television Market probably had them operating in the red. Sure they could have expanded outside of the comcast footprint or could have been smart enough to actually pair up with more than one TV partner it might have survived.
Fact of the matter is the only way something like this works is if the conference foots the bill again not happening or someone with vision and deep pockets steps up. I don't think you will ever see live streaming through those companies because the cost to do it would not be offset by what they would make.
It's all about Money the MWC TV Network didn't go under because of financial backing it went under because broadcasting games in HD to a non existent television Market probably had them operating in the red. Sure they could have expanded outside of the comcast footprint or could have been smart enough to actually pair up with more than one TV partner it might have survived.
Fact of the matter is the only way something like this works is if the conference foots the bill again not happening or someone with vision and deep pockets steps up. I don't think you will ever see live streaming through those companies because the cost to do it would not be offset by what they would make.
ragtimejoe1
Well-known member
That is kind of what I'm getting at, though. It sounds as if we already live stream. Many live stream even Spring games. Thus, it can't cost that much to live stream games over the internet.
The question is how much would it take to go to one of those others. I think Roku is not necessarily lala land--especially for an entire conference.
Here are there sports channels already and many do live streaming....
https://www.rokuchannels.tv/channels/sports/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
We already do live streaming, so it would just be synching our content. The question is price, obviously.
The question is how much would it take to go to one of those others. I think Roku is not necessarily lala land--especially for an entire conference.
Here are there sports channels already and many do live streaming....
https://www.rokuchannels.tv/channels/sports/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
We already do live streaming, so it would just be synching our content. The question is price, obviously.
Pretty soon Ap's for our TV will be just like we have on our smartphones. Just simply go to the "TV app store" and download it. The MWC could and should provide an app that streams all games. Simple as that. Problem is the archaic cable rules have not kept up with the times.
OrediggerPoke
Well-known member
Wyo2dal said:
I would say that most people that stream through netflix use a device that allows streaming straight to the TV (i.e. Roku, Apple TV, etc...). I bought my first Roku in 2008 for the sole purpose of streaming Netflix. I would guess that eventually Netflix will offer live feeds.
Asmodeanreborn
Well-known member
Cornpoke said:
On top of that, the way things are changing, you're soon going to be paying for exactly what you're streaming similarly to how you pay for a TV package. Net Neutrality is dying fast, as Comcast and Verizon has spent a LOT on money on this happening.
Not only that, but whoever provides the service will have to pay your ISP as well. Ugh.
Wyo2dal
Well-known member
ragtimejoe1 said:
Streaming a game live over the Internet is exactly the same as streaming it over TV. You still have to have the equipment to stream the game. For Basketball it's easier smaller court station streaming media booth it all makes sense and it works you can literally cover the entire Basketball court with 4-5 cameras max.
For Football not so much, You can't take 4-5 cameras and cover an entire Football game you need 8-10 or more that is where the problem lies. There is no media system @ UW that can cover a Football game which is why the MWC streams the games they bring the equipment to the games.
The broadcast trucks etc UW has none of that and that is the problem. Schools that have the Spring game streamed have video equipment to do so and that is why it's out there. It's on UW to get better and more equipment so the streaming can be accomplished and it's just not likely to happen.
You guys remember when UW was streaming off the website and I helped bring up the quality by contacting them and assisting them with streaming issues?
Ok think back to those games, 3-4 cameras max covering the games, 1 at each end of the floor and 1 on each side of the court towards the top of the seating. If you recall the audio was really poor you could never actually hear the ball being dribbled on the floor or shoe sounds from quick cuts. That is because they are covering that game with very limited equipment from stationary positions and it's all indoors.
ragtimejoe1
Well-known member
Wyo2dal said:
Gotcha. What's the cost on that? I checked out themwc.com and there was CSU's Spring game. Made me puke. It would seem like a reasonable and arguably necessary investment.
It would be a good recruiting tool and bring all our other sports to our fans. I guess if it is cost prohibitive, it is what it is. However, these are the types of things that I think are limiting us.
I don't worry about game day experience because I'd rather sit on a 5 gallon bucket and piss in an outhouse if the team is winning than sit in a massage chair with bikini clad women bringing me beer to watch a losing team. Winning will take care of attendance.
fromolwyoming
Well-known member
Here and the MWC board would be a good place to see how people would take to it, since Wyoming fans would be the primary audience and other MWC schools secondary.
TSpoke
Well-known member
There was talk that the reason the spring game wasn't streamed was due to the remodel at the AA and a complete rework of the audio/visual infastructure. We will stream the spring game next year. I think this also means that they have/will upgrade our tv /streaming capabilities. Another reason for the AA remodel.
Wyo2dal
Well-known member
OrediggerPoke said:
Netflix has about the same amount of subscribers as HBO 30 million range. I would venture to guess out of those 30 million less than 25% have the ability to connect their Netflix stream to their TV. That 25% is is most likely way to high, I talk to people every day that have no idea they can connect iPad/iPhones/Computers directly to TV's
Wyo2dal
Well-known member
TSpoke said:
I just don't buy that, The A/V room for the AA has zero bearing on the Football field. Unless the Media room is inside the AA which is just absurd. I would really think there would be a media & broadcasting room somewhere at the UW and the AA/War would just be locations that you could film from.
Anyway UW could stream all media content at a very high level but it wouldn't be free. There are things I would do in a heartbeat if I had bottomless funds. So for a small learning lesson in broadcasting and video production.
This is the Bugatti camera world.
This is about a $300,000 camera just one of them. It records in 6K resolution this is the type of stuff that you would see recording at a Super Bowl. It's just not what you would want students carrying around. To properly cover a Football game 10 of these would be good but you could do it with 7-8. They use 30 of these for a Super Bowl. That should sort of bring things into perspective.
Now like I said this is the extreme level don't ever expect that it was just to show the ideas behind the cost and why it has to be profitable. If you are spending 3 million dollars on equipment alone you need the revenue to cover it.
UW would have to drop $250,000 - $300,00 to have equipment to " PROPERLY " cover a Football game not some 2 camera no audio shitty quality coverage. Then they would need 15-20 people between the cameras and the booths.
If you really had good equipment and less people which is possible you would need double the money and half the people. Anyway you look at it the camera crew that covers a Football game how we want to see it isn't going to happen anytime soon.
If you want no audio, 3-4 cameras sure UW could cover a Football game but I think I would just rather listen to it then be pissed off because what I was watching looked like a cheap youtube video.
Wyo2dal
Well-known member
WYO1016 said:
42% watch Netflix on their computer 14% I told you 25% was a very high guess connect their Computer to their TV.
Keep in mind I was talking about Computers not consoles. We know consoles have a lot of access they haven't in the past and Roku/Apple TV etc those connect directly to your TV so I'm not counting those. What I'm counting with my guess is the amount of people that use a computer and the amount that also connect that computer to the TV.
