B1G New Additions Offseason Thread

[betarhoalphadelta]

In the modern market, does this hurt Comcast or the B1G more? 

After all, I don't think this affects me as a Hulu Live TV subscriber. (Not that it would otherwise; we have Cox serving my town, not Comcast.)

If Comcast starts blacking out games people want to watch, it's not like the old days where you had to put up a satellite dish to have any alternative to Comcast. There's a half-dozen or so live TV streaming services that could give you these games, most of them cheaper than Comcast. 

[utee94]

In the modern market, does this hurt Comcast or the B1G more?

After all, I don't think this affects me as a Hulu Live TV subscriber. (Not that it would otherwise; we have Cox serving my town, not Comcast.)

If Comcast starts blacking out games people want to watch, it's not like the old days where you had to put up a satellite dish to have any alternative to Comcast. There's a half-dozen or so live TV streaming services that could give you these games, most of them cheaper than Comcast.

If Comcast thought they were going to drive away any more subscribers than they're already losing on a weekly/monthly/annual basis then I'm sure they'd cave.  But they've resisted in other markets that were arguably more actively football-oriented than this one, so I wouldn't bet on that happening.

[FearlessF]

I'd say it will hurt the BTN more

[utee94]

One other thing to note is that if there are areas where Comcast is the sole internet provider, with no competition from Google or ATT fiber or anyone else, then it's likely they've got you trapped either way.  That's the situation with Spectrum at my house here in the Austin area, there are no competitors so if I want broadband internet upstream and downstream, I have to use them.

So they have a streaming package that you can bundle with them and "save."  But if you decide you want to ditch their streaming service and move over to Hulu Live or YouTubeTV or Sling or whatever else, then you're now UNbundled and the price of the internet-only service increases to the point where any savings from moving to another streaming option, are completely offset and eliminated.

You still might see some benefit with the other streaming service (such as, it has the B1G Network while Comcast does not), but there's no potential for actually saving any money, they've priced that possibility completely out of the model.

[betarhoalphadelta]

One other thing to note is that if there are areas where Comcast is the sole internet provider, with no competition from Google or ATT fiber or anyone else, then it's likely they've got you trapped either way.  That's the situation with Spectrum at my house here in the Austin area, there are no competitors so if I want broadband internet upstream and downstream, I have to use them.

So they have a streaming package that you can bundle with them and "save."  But if you decide you want to ditch their streaming service and move over to Hulu Live or YouTubeTV or Sling or whatever else, then you're now UNbundled and the price of the internet-only service increases to the point where any savings from moving to another streaming option, are completely offset and eliminated.

You still might see some benefit with the other streaming service (such as, it has the B1G Network while Comcast does not), but there's no potential for actually saving any money, they've priced that possibility completely out of the model.

I've done the math. It's not offset and eliminated. I live in a place where my only options are Cox cable internet or 1.5 Mbps download speed DSL w/ AT&T. Not a type. 1.5 Mbps. Completely useless. (Note: This is for Cox internet + Hulu Live TV vs Cox Internet bundled with Cox cable, in Mission Viejo CA. YMMV.)

When I looked at my current vs the bundled version, the first year (of a 2 year contract) was MUCH less expensive for the bundled version. But the price hikes in year 2 were more than enough to not only be more expensive than being unbundled, but high enough to erase all the savings in year 1, and then some. 

I suppose if I was the type that would constantly call in and do the "I'm threatening to switch unless you give me the intro price" every year and actually make it stick, maybe I could save money. But I've also heard that a lot of these companies have wised up to that and won't do it. 

So yeah, they've got me trapped for their overpriced internet because I have no other option. But it's STILL a savings to use Hulu Live TV. 

[utee94]

I've done the math. It's not offset and eliminated. I live in a place where my only options are Cox cable internet or 1.5 Mbps download speed DSL w/ AT&T. Not a type. 1.5 Mbps. Completely useless. (Note: This is for Cox internet + Hulu Live TV vs Cox Internet bundled with Cox cable, in Mission Viejo CA. YMMV.)

When I looked at my current vs the bundled version, the first year (of a 2 year contract) was MUCH less expensive for the bundled version. But the price hikes in year 2 were more than enough to not only be more expensive than being unbundled, but high enough to erase all the savings in year 1, and then some.

I suppose if I was the type that would constantly call in and do the "I'm threatening to switch unless you give me the intro price" every year and actually make it stick, maybe I could save money. But I've also heard that a lot of these companies have wised up to that and won't do it.

So yeah, they've got me trapped for their overpriced internet because I have no other option. But it's STILL a savings to use Hulu Live TV.

Good for you. Absolutely not the case for me, unfortunately.

HOWEVER...

...I like YouTubeTV a lot better than the Spectrum streaming option, so I just pay more for my unbundled internet service + YTTV, and enjoy YouTubeTV's superior channel selection and range of options.

[FearlessF]

guessin old Muleshoe is quietly pleased he wasn't able to backout of the LSU game this morning

[CatsbyAZ]

For this week, yes - Muleshoes can hold his head high. The Trojans won with a style Muleshoes isn’t known for - with their defense getting big stops and capitalizing on enough mistakes to carry the team until the offense broke through late in the game. It’s the type of win against a big enough name to give USC a lot of confidence going forward.

If you’re LSU, now what? BK isn’t working at this point. The defense has no identity or composure. Star power is lacking. Offense is disorganized. But I wouldn’t fire BK without firing AD Scott Woodward first. Not only is this Woodward’s mess but he his the one massively overpaying for it by signing BK to a $100M contract and paying the new DC $2M.

One another note - I’ve noticed this trend going back to about 2018, where Week 1 post coverage of the college football weekend trends toward poor performances. Turned on ESPN this morning and the commentary was all about who had the worst showing. This morning the victims of analysis were Florida, Clemson, and LSU.

[FearlessF]

Clemson was matched with an elite team

I'm not sure about Florida and LSU