I understand the tradition of Michigan and Ohio State. I understand Michigan has been playing well of late. I also get that the QB situation in Columbus is interesting. Despite all this, it seems that the coverage at BTN is grossly disproportionate. Do we really need to hear about the second coming in Ann Arbor or a Meyer interview/news conference every fifteen minutes? Whether it's social media, the BTN website, or network prognosticators, it seems like 23.5/7 coverage of these two teams. Maybe it's just me but anyone else getting repulsed to the point of wanting to turn it off like me? Sorry for the gripe but figured others might harbor the same sentiment. If this irritates enough of us maybe it's time to demonstrate our displeasure and turn it off/unfollow some of these folks. Go Hawks!
The Big Two Network
- Thread starter HASTHAWK
- Start date
Doesn't bother me at all. OSU and Michigan are the traditional powers of the B1G. If we win enough games, year after year, maybe we could get that kind of attention.
Sure hope so.
Sure hope so.
How long has then network been in place, 10 years? When will people accept this and move on? ESPN does the same thing for national powers, it's all about this interest to make a profit, not to feed a socialist organization.
BTN had the Illinois-Iowa replay on at least twice yesterday and segments like BTN Live and BTN Football and Beyond tout Iowa quite a bit. But, yes, there is too much of the same over and over. Have to agree that if we'd win big consistently, we'd get that kind of attention, too.
BTN has been great about showing the Iowa games on replay and now they are condensing them to 60 minutes. Also, the coverage on the live shows is terrific. It is ridiculous though the amount of coverage Michigan gets....last night they did a show on the worst weather games in Big Ten history and 7 out of the 10 involved Michigan. Whaaaat?
As I've said for years, OSU and Michigan make us ride in the back of the bus....but it's a REALLY nice bus!
I am fine with it.
I am fine with it.
It's been a while, and not every football fan has lived in it, but welcome to a world where Michigan is relevant in football again. It's within this world where you will relish wins over Michigan more than most every other thing.
Unfortunately not only does the BIG network give a disproportionate amount of coverage, so does ESPN. Seems like you only hear about those two schools. Gives hem huge recruiting advantage, as if they need any. Won't change, for all the reasons mentioned. Seldom turn on either station for any thing other than Hawk games.
Pretty much this. If that's what it takes to get that egregiously large check from the BTN every year, then by all means, keep pumping more Michigan and OSU up our asses.
Exactly. People are going to complain about all the focus being on Michigan and OSU, and not enough on everyone else (specifically Iowa). Yet the only other reasonable "solution" is to spend equal time on all 14 schools, and then the same people will complain about how they have to watch some 1980s Maryland replay.
Only way people will stop complaining is if only Iowa gets more play, which is never going to happen.
It's ludicrous to consider the possibility of equal time. When has anyone ever suggested equal time in this thread or anywhere else for that matter? I don't think anyone would suggest some type of "socialism" as one previous poster referred to it. Re-characterizing this discussion in the extreme is a red herring.
The BTN certainly needs to maximize profit. It's what every good business should be about. That said, is selling Ohio State and Michigan disproportionately to demand maximizing profit? It seems to me that focusing on these two programs to the degree that the BTN is, despite their record viewership over last weekend's games, which I think is more about the matchups than the disproportionate Michigan and Ohio State coverage, is inconsistent with maximizing ad revenue. I'm speculating of course but it would seem to me more viewers would enjoy a bit more diverse programming.
We (and when I say we I'm referring to the consortium of the Big Ten institutions and Big Ten Conference) own 49% of the BTN. Is there not something more that should be done with this asset than maximizing profit? It seems that the network does play some nonrevenue sports (see women's volleyball and soccer in midmorning work week). My point is that what length of shorts Harbaugh is wearing this week, seeing him throw his temper tantrums several times a day or Meyer commenting about the quandary he is in with what QB he's going to play for the umpteenth dozenth time is just silly. Is the BTN media consumption audience only Michigan and Ohio State fans? I guess I'm not one that agrees with Ferentz's statements that Iowa can never be sexy. Have you seen the new facilities? They're pretty damn sexy. How much do we pay our coaching staff? How many bowl games has Iowa gone to compared to the rest of the Big Ten? Iowa is undefeated. Iowa may not garner as many viewers from outside Big Ten territory as Michigan or Ohio State but there are plenty of Iowa stories to be told about this year's team that haven't been told that Big Ten fans would find interesting. At least as interesting as whether Lebron has Meyer's ear on whether the team should wear black uniforms.
The BTN certainly needs to maximize profit. It's what every good business should be about. That said, is selling Ohio State and Michigan disproportionately to demand maximizing profit? It seems to me that focusing on these two programs to the degree that the BTN is, despite their record viewership over last weekend's games, which I think is more about the matchups than the disproportionate Michigan and Ohio State coverage, is inconsistent with maximizing ad revenue. I'm speculating of course but it would seem to me more viewers would enjoy a bit more diverse programming.
We (and when I say we I'm referring to the consortium of the Big Ten institutions and Big Ten Conference) own 49% of the BTN. Is there not something more that should be done with this asset than maximizing profit? It seems that the network does play some nonrevenue sports (see women's volleyball and soccer in midmorning work week). My point is that what length of shorts Harbaugh is wearing this week, seeing him throw his temper tantrums several times a day or Meyer commenting about the quandary he is in with what QB he's going to play for the umpteenth dozenth time is just silly. Is the BTN media consumption audience only Michigan and Ohio State fans? I guess I'm not one that agrees with Ferentz's statements that Iowa can never be sexy. Have you seen the new facilities? They're pretty damn sexy. How much do we pay our coaching staff? How many bowl games has Iowa gone to compared to the rest of the Big Ten? Iowa is undefeated. Iowa may not garner as many viewers from outside Big Ten territory as Michigan or Ohio State but there are plenty of Iowa stories to be told about this year's team that haven't been told that Big Ten fans would find interesting. At least as interesting as whether Lebron has Meyer's ear on whether the team should wear black uniforms.
Last edited:
Hasthawk,
I agree, there's no way to split time evenly. My point was more that Iowa fans are going to complain about the lack of Iowa coverage and that the BTN shows 90% OSU-Michigan stuff. No one from our fanbase will be happy unless the resolution is to just show more Iowa stuff, and that isn't going to happen. Especially since since Iowa really doesn't have any more claim for more coverage than Wisconsin, Michigan St., Penn St., etc.
As others suggested, if Iowa could sustain success on the football field for a number of years, then coverage might increase. But even then it will still be majority OSU & Michigan, and I'm sure people will still complain.
There's no way that Iowa fans will ever be happy and any solution that will make those upset happy is unreasonable.
I agree, there's no way to split time evenly. My point was more that Iowa fans are going to complain about the lack of Iowa coverage and that the BTN shows 90% OSU-Michigan stuff. No one from our fanbase will be happy unless the resolution is to just show more Iowa stuff, and that isn't going to happen. Especially since since Iowa really doesn't have any more claim for more coverage than Wisconsin, Michigan St., Penn St., etc.
As others suggested, if Iowa could sustain success on the football field for a number of years, then coverage might increase. But even then it will still be majority OSU & Michigan, and I'm sure people will still complain.
There's no way that Iowa fans will ever be happy and any solution that will make those upset happy is unreasonable.
Agreed afsocker. After thinking more about it I think the crux of my issue, and I assume I'm not alone, is that I really don't like either Harbaugh or Meyer. I also resent that Michigan has a few good games and suddenly, despite several down years, they're media darlings and in the national title discussion? As someone else suggested, I think I'll just vote with the remote and turn it off except for the games. Heck, I'd enjoy watching more about Wisconsin, Michigan State, Penn State or even our old hated rival Purdue, than the Big Two.
I guess it's the chicken and egg thing. The problem is to build interest you need the coverage. If the network (in all of it's various forms) continues to focus so much on "The Big Two" interest in other Big Ten programs won't grow. It's self perpetuating.
Where this may impact Iowa fans most is when we have to compete against Michigan for bowl placement. As fans, we can speculate about bowls. It's not going to impact the outcome of a game for us to enjoy rose scented dreams. If, and that's a big if, Iowa is in the hunt for the Rose Bowl and the conference sends a two loss Michigan team over a one loss Iowa team. . . .
One thing we can all agree on is it's a great year to be a Hawkeye fan. I'm relishing the drive down from the Twin Cities for our second game of the year in a few weeks. What's most exciting though is the wife's level of exuberance for a potential trip to Pasadena.
I guess it's the chicken and egg thing. The problem is to build interest you need the coverage. If the network (in all of it's various forms) continues to focus so much on "The Big Two" interest in other Big Ten programs won't grow. It's self perpetuating.
Where this may impact Iowa fans most is when we have to compete against Michigan for bowl placement. As fans, we can speculate about bowls. It's not going to impact the outcome of a game for us to enjoy rose scented dreams. If, and that's a big if, Iowa is in the hunt for the Rose Bowl and the conference sends a two loss Michigan team over a one loss Iowa team. . . .
One thing we can all agree on is it's a great year to be a Hawkeye fan. I'm relishing the drive down from the Twin Cities for our second game of the year in a few weeks. What's most exciting though is the wife's level of exuberance for a potential trip to Pasadena.
Agreed. I'll watch the Iowa stuff when it's on, and will sometimes watch stories/coverage of other schools if it looks interesting, but like many are probably bored with OSU and Michigan stories.
BTN is a novelty that I'm grateful for now that I don't live in Iowa, but overall it leaves a lot to be desired.
And you're right, I'm not going to let BTN disparage me. We're having a great year, I'll be trekking back for the Minnesota game which should be an amazing Saturday, and if the BTN doesn't want to cover the Hawks I'll just find somewhere else to get my fix Sunday-Friday.
BTN is a novelty that I'm grateful for now that I don't live in Iowa, but overall it leaves a lot to be desired.
And you're right, I'm not going to let BTN disparage me. We're having a great year, I'll be trekking back for the Minnesota game which should be an amazing Saturday, and if the BTN doesn't want to cover the Hawks I'll just find somewhere else to get my fix Sunday-Friday.
What a revealing comment, using "socialist" in expressing contempt for the basic tenet of democracy, that people everywhere are to be treated fairly and equitably.
Worse, the comment is way, way incorrect. There are more residents of Illinois than Ohio, more people in Pennsylvania than Michigan, as many in Minnesota & Wisconsin together as either Ohio or Michigan. NJ & Maryland are NOT small states, neither is Indiana. And the logic is grossly illogical & factually unsupported: it requires empirical evidence that sports ratings are higher in Ohio & Michigan than other states, specifically those of ESPN.
BT members like Iowa, Minnie, Wisky, PSU, IU, Purdue should demand balanced presentations on BTN or withdraw their participation. Push to have the BT allow members to make their own radio & telelvision contracts. Tell BTN that it should change its name, reorganize as a TV outlet for just Ohio State & Michigan with a new name appropriate to that status. Let the rest of the BT create a new network with each member having its own broadcasting IAT or as alternative to network progoramming.
Or simply reorganize BTN into a conglomerate of 14 members creating their own programming and adding BTN programs as desired on a selective basis, replacing BTN scheduled programs as they choose---so the members can all replace the constant glorifying of the two most frequent cheaters, most profit driven, most corrupt programs at Ohio State & Michigan. That would do wonders for BTN TV ratings---few people in Ohio or Michigan watch all the endless, repetitive drivel, while MOST BT fans never turn on BTN except for the rare occasions when BTN deigns to throw a programming morsel their way---a once a month middle-of-the-night rerun of a BT wome4n's minor sport broadcast.
The great majority of BT graduates move to other locales within a few years. BTN programming is of little value or even relevance to those who are not Mich grads or Ohio State dropouts---they don't get access to sports events at their own schools.
Barta needs to make forceful, loud, frequent complaints to the BT Commissioner---and get his counterparts at 11 other BT schools to do the same.
I disagree with your view and frankly so does capitalism. The Big Ten is for profit, don't let not-for-profit organization's fool you. In the meantime, I hope you enjoy the debate tonight.
Demand equal coverage or withdraw participation? Participation in what, the entire Big Ten? Because that is what all 12 schools would need to do and Delaney would just laugh if anyone ever suggested it.
Withdraw from the richest conference over not getting enough non-game coverage...that's rich...
Withdraw from the richest conference over not getting enough non-game coverage...that's rich...
I would say we are getting our fair share of love. Sadly I find I watch very little when we are not winning.
Every school is treated fairly and equitably. If Iowa rises to the #1 team in the country, they will garner the most BTN air time. The BTN is giving the fans what they want, and broadcasting what they think will draw ratings. OSU and Michigan draw the eyeballs. To show _less_ OSU and Michigan because it is "unfair" would actually be the opposite of fair and equitable.
Democracy doesn't mean every individual gets exactly what they want, it means they all have equal opportunity. Iowa operates under the same NCAA rules as OSU and Michigan, and can fail or succeed on their own efforts.
Latest posts
-
Another Lackluster Performance Slams Door Shut on Hawkeyes' CFP Dreams- Latest: Eliot Clough
-
-
-
-