# Doesn't Charlie understand that MLB is our nation's pastime?



## purtman (Sep 19, 2006)

MLB's Opening Day is upon. The MLB Extra Innings package is providing free viewing for the first week. Of course, we can't get that on DISH. There's also the MLB Network that so many others enjoy. Not on DISH. Charlie says that the reason there's no MLB Extra Innings and Network is because of the cost to the viewers. We pay extra for the Extra Innings. Why not let us decide? I'm seriously considering dropping DISH and going to cable at the end of the NHL season. I'd go to Direct, but there are five 50-foot trees blocking the angle to the Direct sats.


----------



## rtd2 (Oct 2, 2006)

Purtman,
I dont think its the Per subscriber fee as you pointed out the customers would pay that. I think its the Upfront Buyin that dish is balking on! they dont want to by part owners of MLB network :lol:


----------



## Rduce (May 16, 2008)

Personally, I could care less about baseball and it really isn’t the National pastime any longer. If I care about sports then I suppose I would have given Direct more of a consideration. However, I was more interested in dual tuner receivers that I could have installed to work 2 television sets at the same time for one price, which Direct did not offer at the time. 

I would never return to cable in my area, which is Charter, mainly because they suck!


----------



## MikeW (May 16, 2002)

MLB.TV is quite a viable option. The PQ on a ROKU or PS3 is pretty decent, and, if you have an iPhone, you'll get the games there as well. I wouldn't let this be the deciding factor on making a switch.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

_I'm seriously considering dropping DISH ...._

Seeyalaterbye.


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

purtman said:


> MLB's Opening Day is upon. The MLB Extra Innings package is providing free viewing for the first week. Of course, we can't get that on DISH. There's also the MLB Network that so many others enjoy. Not on DISH. Charlie says that the reason there's no MLB Extra Innings and Network is because of the cost to the viewers. We pay extra for the Extra Innings. Why not let us decide? I'm seriously considering dropping DISH and going to cable at the end of the NHL season. I'd go to Direct, but there are five 50-foot trees blocking the angle to the Direct sats.


:wave: :wave: :wave:


----------



## AZ. (Mar 27, 2011)

MikeW said:


> MLB.TV is quite a viable option. The PQ on a ROKU or PS3 is pretty decent, and, if you have an iPhone, you'll get the games there as well. I wouldn't let this be the deciding factor on making a switch.


Im thinking the same thing! $119 for computer and $15 for the phone app,,,,,still cheaper than direct...


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

purtman said:


> MLB's Opening Day is upon. The MLB Extra Innings package is providing free viewing for the first week. Of course, we can't get that on DISH. There's also the MLB Network that so many others enjoy. Not on DISH. Charlie says that the reason there's no MLB Extra Innings and Network is because of the cost to the viewers. We pay extra for the Extra Innings. Why not let us decide? I'm seriously considering dropping DISH and going to cable at the end of the NHL season. I'd go to Direct, but there are five 50-foot trees blocking the angle to the Direct sats.


Charlie decided long ago that sports were NOT going to be a priority for Dish Network, due to their high costs and due to the fact that DirecTV's focus is sports, and Dish needed to be different.

Dish has chosen to use the bandwidth they have for additional national "cable" channels instead of sports feeds, which is why Dish has 30+ HD channels that DirecTV doesn't have, but doesn't have the sports feeds that DirecTV has.

What you may not understand is that, for the premium sports packages, the leagues negotiate a set, multi-year price for carrying the package, along with other requirements, and then it's up to the multichannel provider (Dish) to find enough subscribers willing to pay. So, getting one of those packages at a high price, locked in for several years, means you MUST get X-number of subscribers to pay Y-number of dollars for the package, or you're losing money, a LOT of money.

Charlie doesn't think there are enough folks on Dish who are willing to pay to make it profitable, since a large percentage of the people who ARE willing to pay are already with DirecTV. And he's probably right - there are only so many people willing to pay $300-400+ per season for these packages, and with the economy, even DirecTV has plenty of people who don't want to pay.

Plus, the contracts are already in place through 2014 for MLB, so nothing could happen until then at the earliest. But it isn't expected for anything to change even then, for the same reasons.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

BattleZone said:


> ...
> Charlie doesn't think there are enough folks on Dish who are willing to pay to make it profitable, since a large percentage of the people who ARE willing to pay are already with DirecTV. And he's probably right - there are only so many people willing to pay *$300-400+ per season for these packages*, and with the economy, even DirecTV has plenty of people who don't want to pay.
> 
> ...


Other than Sunday Ticket, there's no sports package that costs near that much. NBA, NHL and MLB are all around $200; and 2 of them are available on Dish, so there's people willing to pay.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

Dish's cost for NBA and NHL are MUCH lower than what MLB or NFL would cost them, though. A big reason Dish didn't get MLB was that the deal not only required paying for the programming, but also investing in the MLB Network channel. Dish had no interest in investing in that, but that was the deal being offered.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

And if they got the contract and didn't get enough subscribers, the costs would be dumped into the mainstream packages and we'd all be paying more.

I have no interest at all in subsidizing multi-million dollar ball players.


----------



## inazsully (Oct 3, 2006)

You are correct that Charlie decided LONG AGO that a lack of sports would make Dish different than Directv. But guess what, Dish carries almost every sport available, as does Directv. I don't want the expensive NFL package offered only on Directv but I do enjoy the NFL Network offered on Dish and Directv. MLB Network shows many games that do not require buying a special package. Does anybody really think the new Dish entry "OWN" will generate as much viewership as the MLB Network would? And the MLB Network has greatly lowered its requirements to be carried by Dish. It should be a no brainer.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

_Does anybody really think the new Dish entry "OWN" will generate as much viewership as the MLB Network would?_

That's not a new 'Dish entry'. That's a former channel (Discovery Health) that was taken over by new management and is carried under the existing contract for now. With the failing ratings, it may get dropped [hopefully].


----------



## pfred (Feb 8, 2009)

BattleZone said:


> Charlie decided long ago that sports were NOT going to be a priority for Dish Network, due to their high costs


I say great!! 
In addition, make ESPN a premium channel.
I never watch it, and it costs more to Dish than any basic cable channel.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

purtman said:


> MLB's Opening Day is upon. The MLB Extra Innings package is providing free viewing for the first week. Of course, we can't get that on DISH. There's also the MLB Network that so many others enjoy. Not on DISH. Charlie says that the reason there's no MLB Extra Innings and Network is because of the cost to the viewers. We pay extra for the Extra Innings. Why not let us decide? I'm seriously considering dropping DISH and going to cable at the end of the NHL season. I'd go to Direct, but there are five 50-foot trees blocking the angle to the Direct sats.


If Dish got MLB Extra Innings we would have to pay extra for a few thousand people. Just watch ESPN...


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

SayWhat? said:


> And if they got the contract and didn't get enough subscribers, the costs would be dumped into the mainstream packages and we'd all be paying more.
> 
> I have no interest at all in subsidizing multi-million dollar ball players.


AMEN!!!!!!!!


----------



## DavidMi (Aug 24, 2009)

So what it looks like Directv is dropping the Yes Network.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

MLB still operates as if it is the nation's pastime... but in reality it is probably #4 in pro sports... and possibly #5 or lower in participation.

Last I checked.. NFL was #1, then you have the NBA... then Nascar and the NHL.

I don't know where MLB fits in there... but I know it is below the NFL and NBA in terms of popularity.

Then for kids participation... I think it falls below soccer. Yes, soccer. We don't watch it on TV for pros... but lots of kids in the US play soccer... and I see way more of that going on than little league baseball when I drive around town.

IF MLB offered their MLB channel to Dish at the same kind of rates as NFL Network, NBA, and NHL... then I'm sure Dish would carry that channel.

Dish lots Extra Innings for not carrying MLB... but since that is a subscriber package, I'm sure Dish would offer it IF MLB would allow them to do so for paying customers.

The ball, literally, is in their stadium (court)...


----------



## brucegrr (Sep 14, 2006)

Always love when people want to drop channels other people want/watch or make them premium channels but if someone tried to do the same to their favorite channels. well let ******* begin. (and I do understand that people who aren't into sports don't place any value on sports channels)

There are a large number of channels I don't watch, wouldn't watch but I know other people do. That's the way it works. We all pay for someone else's must see TV.

Dish should at least add the MLB channel. (if it is a bandwidth issue cut the number of religious channels in half and get rid of some of the other filler channels)

I suspect Dish would have more than a few thousand Extra Innings subscribers if they offered the package.

I would be happy if Dish just took care of what they do offer.

As of now I can't watch the HD channel for my RSN. It says the channel not available in my area. The SD channel works fine. I'll wait to see if the game comes on live at 2:00 P.M.

I am also in Detroit's market and once again Dish forces me to subscribe to the Sports package if I want to get the Detroit RSN. Since I don't and won't, the first game of the year Detroit vs New York is blacked out on ESPN. I thought we were supposed to get our local RSN's. Evidently not.


----------



## brucegrr (Sep 14, 2006)

I think the numbers for Baseball are better than the NHL and in some markets better than the NBA. Nascar's numbers are tanking. But, Stewart is right, the NFL rules the roost. The NFL is the runaway favorite. Let's see if they can screw it up with their labor dispute.


----------



## Chihuahua (Sep 8, 2007)

rtd2 said:


> Purtman,
> I dont think its the Per subscriber fee as you pointed out the customers would pay that. I think its the Upfront Buyin that dish is balking on! they dont want to by part owners of MLB network :lol:


Charles Ergen does not want to be part owner of a network or company in which he is not the top dog.


----------



## brucegrr (Sep 14, 2006)

Now I am blacked out on the HD and SD channel (RSN Cincinnati) Why can't they get this right? 

Time to call....


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Dish and SNY may also be looking at a divorce this weekend, see http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/b...ld_miss_out_if_sportsnet_new_york_cant_n.html 


> Mets fans who subscribe to Dish Network could miss Opening Day - and perhaps much of the 2011 season.
> 
> If SportsNet New York, the TV home of the Mets, and Dish Network cannot reach an agreement on a new deal by 11:59 p.m. Thursday night, their current five-year contract will expire.


----------



## brucegrr (Sep 14, 2006)

According to the CSR I talked to this is a widespread problem. There is an error in the Program guide.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

brucegrr said:


> I think the numbers for Baseball are better than the NHL and in some markets better than the NBA. Nascar's numbers are tanking. But, Stewart is right, the NFL rules the roost. The NFL is the runaway favorite. Let's see if they can screw it up with their labor dispute.


Lemme put it this way. If there were never another MLB, NFL, NHL, NBA or NASCAR, PGA or Soccer event played, I most likely wouldn't even notice. Well, except that there would likely be better programming on certain days and evenings.


----------



## scorpion43 (Mar 16, 2011)

Screw baseball 
Soccer rules


----------



## epokopac (Aug 8, 2007)

"And the MLB Network has greatly lowered its requirements to be carried by Dish."

Please elaborate on the "new" requirements vs. the "old".


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

SayWhat? said:


> _Does anybody really think the new Dish entry "OWN" will generate as much viewership as the MLB Network would?_
> 
> That's not a new 'Dish entry'. That's a former channel (Discovery Health) that was taken over by new management and is carried under the existing contract for now. With the failing ratings, it may get dropped [hopefully].


DISH did not carry Discovery Health in HD. There must be a new contract - probably not the high rate that OWN asked for before launch, but some agreement.

Cablevision reportedly got OWN (SD) for free with a future price to be determined to make sure the network wouldn't be missing that area. I believe DISH is in the same position. Hopefully they are paying nothing more for OWN HD than they did for Discovery Health while the channel popularity sorts itself out. But even carriage "for free" requires a contract. OWN HD would not be there if there was not a contract.


----------



## adkinsjm (Mar 25, 2003)

Stewart Vernon said:


> MLB still operates as if it is the nation's pastime... but in reality it is probably #4 in pro sports... and possibly #5 or lower in participation.
> 
> Last I checked.. NFL was #1, then you have the NBA... then Nascar and the NHL.
> 
> ...


Sorry, but MLB is a solid No. 2. The worst ratings for the World Series are still better than the best ratings for the NBA Finals. Can't believe you moderate if you pull junk like this.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

adkinsjm said:


> Sorry, but MLB is a solid No. 2. The worst ratings for the World Series are still better than the best ratings for the NBA Finals. Can't believe you moderate if you pull junk like this.


You're way wrong. In 2010, the MLB had 1 game, ranked #97 in the 100 Most-Viewed Sporting Events of 2010 on Broadcast TV. The NBA had 6, including #14.

http://www.sportsmediawatch.net/2010/12/2010-numbers-game-broadcast.html

The entire MLB Postseason averaged more viewers than the entire NBA Playoffs, yes, but the reason is that the MLB has far fewer low-rated early round games to drag down the overall average.


----------



## inazsully (Oct 3, 2006)

epokopac said:


> "And the MLB Network has greatly lowered its requirements to be carried by Dish."
> 
> Please elaborate on the "new" requirements vs. the "old".


MLB is now offering the MLB Network to Dish as a stand alone channel and no longer requiring Dish to include Extra Innings in the package.


----------



## zippyfrog (Jul 14, 2010)

inazsully said:


> MLB is now offering the MLB Network to Dish as a stand alone channel and no longer requiring Dish to include Extra Innings in the package.


How do you know that? Is that just based off the fact that AT&T didn't get Extra Innings with their deal?


----------



## epokopac (Aug 8, 2007)

zippyfrog said:


> How do you know that? Is that just based off the fact that AT&T didn't get Extra Innings with their deal?


I don't believe MLB EI was the issue for E* back in 2007. What they objected to was the "if you want EI, you HAVE to own a share of the MLB Channel too". The "can't have one without the other" deal was not acceptable. Who knows what (if any) dickering is going on between MLB and Dish? I suspect there isn't any.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

brucegrr said:


> I am also in Detroit's market and once again Dish forces me to subscribe to the Sports package if I want to get the Detroit RSN. Since I don't and won't, the first game of the year Detroit vs New York is blacked out on ESPN. I thought we were supposed to get our local RSN's. Evidently not.


If getting the Tigers is that important to you it should be worth the $5 / month. That's a lot less than any sports season pass.

BTW what RSN are they giving you w/o the Multisport pack?


----------



## paja (Oct 23, 2006)

Chihuahua said:


> Charles Ergen does not want to be part owner of a network or company in which he is not the top dog.


U-verse just got MLB Net without having to pick up MLB EI. Also in the press statement released there is no indication that they have become part owner in MLB at all. The dispute between U and MLB seemed to be on what tier that MLB Net was placed.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

adkinsjm said:


> Sorry, but MLB is a solid No. 2. The worst ratings for the World Series are still better than the best ratings for the NBA Finals. Can't believe you moderate if you pull junk like this.


Very nice job of sticking to the World series vs the NBA finals, and ignoring the baseball and basketball playoff/extra season. World Series trailed behind the NBA finals, both of which trailed behind World Cup championship game last year. Baseball is a distant 3rd or 4th in top games in the US, not the National past time of the 50's, and the season is about 40 games to long anyways. You could almost put the NFL into to sports the NFL season with the Superbowl, and the NFL Draft, both of which seperatly dwarf the other sports. NFL Draft had higher ratings and at the sametime of the NBA playoff's this year, which really upset Stern, and he asked the NFL NOT to air the NFL draft during the NBA Playoff's again, out of a common courtesy.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

GrumpyBear said:


> Very nice job of sticking to the World series vs the NBA finals, and ignoring the baseball and basketball playoff/extra season. World Series trailed behind the NBA finals, both of which trailed behind World Cup championship game last year. Baseball is a distant 3rd or 4th in top games in the US, not the National past time of the 50's, and the season is about 40 games to long anyways. You could almost put the NFL into to sports the NFL season with the Superbowl, and the NFL Draft, both of which seperatly dwarf the other sports. *NFL Draft had higher ratings and at the sametime of the NBA playoff's this year*, which really upset Stern, and he asked the NFL NOT to air the NFL draft during the NBA Playoff's again, out of a common courtesy.


That's because early round NBA playoffs aren't good matchups and there's a ton of them.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> That's because early round NBA playoffs aren't good matchups and there's a ton of them.


NBA allowing half the league to make the playoff's is there fault. The fact that a Draft, can out preform head to head a Major Sports playoff's, says alot about both of them.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

GrumpyBear said:


> NBA allowing half the league to make the playoff's is there fault. The fact that a Draft, can out preform head to head a Major Sports playoff's, says alot about both of them.


The Draft might of won the slot, but there were 7 playoff games on cable that beat the Draft. Also, NBA's Game 7 Final beat out the WC Final's ABC rating.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> The Draft might of won the slot, but there were 7 playoff games on cable that beat the Draft. Also, NBA's Game 7 Final beat out the WC Final's ABC rating.


If your talking about the NBA final games, yes those beat the draft, and you would hope that the actual Finals could beat out a player Draft. Granted its still pretty sad that outside of the NBA finals the NFL draft, pretty much won the day, and over all. 3 Days of the NFL Draft(can't believe its 3 days) the NFL draft had a 5.3 TV ratings avg. TNT had a 2.7 avg rating, and it wasn't until the Eastern and Western finals did any game acuatlly beat out any day of the nfl draft . If your talking about the actual playoff games held on the same day, the Draft bet them combined. NFL 2010 draft had a 6.45 TV rating and the TNT playoff games with the, Bulls vs Cavs(with Lebron) and the Lakers(super star Kobe) vs Thunder(stolen from Seattle) games combined had a 5.1 rating. Now the Lakers vs Thunder game was the higher rated NBA game of the day with a 3.0 rating. NBA playoff series are to long, the season is to long, and they allow to many teams into the playoff's that actually lesson the the importance of the season and lesson the importance of the early rounds putting people to sleep.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

GrumpyBear said:


> If your talking about the NBA final games, yes those beat the draft, and you would hope that the actual Finals could beat out a player Draft. Granted its still pretty sad that outside of the NBA finals the NFL draft, pretty much won the day, and over all. 3 Days of the NFL Draft(can't believe its 3 days) the NFL draft had a 5.3 TV ratings avg. TNT had a 2.7 avg rating, and it wasn't until the Eastern and Western finals did any game acuatlly beat out any day of the nfl draft . If your talking about the actual playoff games held on the same day, the Draft bet them combined. NFL 2010 draft had a 6.45 TV rating and the TNT playoff games with the, Bulls vs Cavs(with Lebron) and the Lakers(super star Kobe) vs Thunder(stolen from Seattle) games combined had a 5.1 rating. Now the Lakers vs Thunder game was the higher rated NBA game of the day with a 3.0 rating. NBA playoff series are to long, the season is to long, and they allow to many teams into the playoff's that actually lesson the the importance of the season and lesson the importance of the early rounds putting people to sleep.


You're wrong on a lot of stuff. Look here: http://www.sportsmediawatch.net/2010/07/halftime-top-50-sporting-events-on.html

The Drafts 1st day only had 4.6 which was it's highest. So how'd they average 5.3?? 
The following games beat out the draft, but remember these are all on cable like the Draft....
NBA Second Round: Cavaliers/Celtics Game 6 
NBA West Finals: Suns/Lakers Game 5 
NBA West Finals: Lakers/Suns Game 3 
NBA East Finals: Magic/Celtics Game 4
NBA West Finals: Lakers/Suns Game
NBA East Finals: Magic/Celtics Game 6


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> You're wrong on a lot of stuff. Look here: http://www.sportsmediawatch.net/2010/07/halftime-top-50-sporting-events-on.html
> 
> The Drafts 1st day only had 4.6 which was it's highest. So how'd they average 5.3??
> The following games beat out the draft, but remember these are all on cable like the Draft....
> ...


You need to find a better site:lol:. ESPN had a OFFICIAL 5.47 for day 1 first round, and add in the NFL Networks rating of .95 the NFL draft. Day one had a high of 6.42.

Still don't even get your entire point:nono:, you have to go deep into the NBA playoffs, and having nothing to do with the games that were played vs head to head competition vs the NFL draft that had a 2.1 and a 3.0 ratings:nono2:. Like I said you have to get to the finals, as you nicely show before a NBA playoff game out preforms the NFL Draft day. The Vast majority of the 1st and 2nd round NBA playoff games had horrible ratings for a Playoff game.

Granted the entire point was the early NBA playoff rounds failed miserably vs the NFL Draft TV coverage overall, and in a direct Head to Head, the NFL had a 2 to 1 advantage in ratings point, when you consider Kobe's Lakers game had a rating of 3.0 and the NFL Draft was over 6.0 with viewers watching the exact same event with different coverage on two different networks. The three day event combined still had a better rating than the TBS and TNT had of 2.7 rating avg for the entire early rounds.

We can snipe as much as we want, as whats really funny though, is how the MLB finishs lower than all the rest for the most part.


----------



## brucegrr (Sep 14, 2006)

Michael P said:


> If getting the Tigers is that important to you it should be worth the $5 / month. That's a lot less than any sports season pass.
> 
> BTW what RSN are they giving you w/o the Multisport pack?


Cincinnati and Cleveland.

My personal opinion is that if I am in a local market and subject to blackout rules then the channel should be a part of the channels I normally receive. I shouldn't have to pay extra. This is not a MLB issue. This is a Dish issue. I am 2 hours closer to Detroit than I am Cincinnati. In fact I am closer to Chicago than I am Cincinnati.


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

brucegrr said:


> I am also in Detroit's market and once again Dish forces me to subscribe to the Sports package if I want to get the Detroit RSN. Since I don't and won't, the first game of the year Detroit vs New York is blacked out on ESPN. I thought we were supposed to get our local RSN's. Evidently not.


But if your location is correct, you're in the Toledo DMA, and in the blackout zone for the Reds, Indians and Tigers. FSN Detroit is limited to the geographic zone of Michigan.

http://www.dishnetwork.com/SupportSection/rsn-maps


----------



## brucegrr (Sep 14, 2006)

RasputinAXP said:


> But if your location is correct, you're in the Toledo DMA, and in the blackout zone for the Reds, Indians and Tigers. FSN Detroit is limited to the geographic zone of Michigan.
> 
> http://www.dishnetwork.com/SupportSection/rsn-maps


I live in far NW Ohio.I am in the Detroit mkt. That's why ESPN blacked me out on Thursday. (tigers vs.Yankees) only time I can see the tigers is on the sports time Ohio channel when the tigers play the Indians.

Directv and Time Warner give customers in this area Detroit.


----------



## Zero327 (Oct 10, 2006)

Our nation needs a new pastime.


----------



## STEELERSRULE (Apr 4, 2007)

There is a way for people to get/try MLB.TV, which is MUCH CHEAPER than the MLB Extra Innings route.

You will need AT LEAST an average of 6Mbps download speed. I know the web site say 3.0Mbps is enough, but trust me, having the extra bandwidth will be important to avoid rebuffering. Also, if you have at least 6Mbps download, don't multitask and drain it.

Second, go to Best Buy and buy a ROKU player for $80+tax. KEEP THE RECEIPT AND THE BOX!!! You will have a 30 day window to return it.

Sign up/activate your ROKU player, get the latest firmware, and if possible(STRONGLY RECOMMENDED IMHO) have the ROKU box hardwired to your router, or at least, a Belkin 1000Mbps Powerline adapter. But have it harwired.

Next, sign up for 1 month of MLB.TV($20). Get all the games except those that are considered your local teams due to your zip code, or ISP provider. The picture quality, IMHO, is pretty good on most, and really good with the HD feed.

Your mileage may vary. If you don't like it, return the ROKU for a full refund, and drop MLB.TV. At the most you will be out $20, and some of your time, but then you will know.


----------



## purtman (Sep 19, 2006)

The reason the NBA had good ratings was Boston versus LA. That's about it. The NBA means "Not Basketball Anymore". I can't watch a game. I just want Charlie to wake up.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Charley's awake.

Are you?


----------



## talk000 (Jul 5, 2003)

Back on topic, MLB.TV is a good, maybe better, alternative to EI. I had EI while it was on Dish, but went to MLB.TV when Dish dropped EI. It gives you the choice of home or away feeds, radio announcer overlays for audio, carries all games, archives games, has split screens, and other extras not on EI . It also cost less - $100 or $120 depending on the version you subscribe to. You can hook it to your TV via a laptop, ethernet cable if connection available on your TV, a Roku box (when and if they get their bugs worked out), or many people have game consoles that work with it. I would start off paying monthly if unsure and just try it out.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

purtman said:


> The reason the NBA had good ratings was Boston versus LA. That's about it. The NBA means "Not Basketball Anymore". I can't watch a game. I just want Charlie to wake up.


Personal preferences aside (I can't stand to watch baseball myself)... the truth is that overall average ratings are lower for MLB than several other major pro sports.

There are exceptions... in markets like Boston or NY where strong MLB teams have a strong following... but once you extrapolate across the country the national interest for all teams... MLB has more teams dragging down the attendance and ratings such that they end up ranking lower compared to NFL and NBA over the course of the whole season for all teams involved.

I'm sure the Yankees get better attendance and ratings than the Cleveland Cavaliers or the Jacksonville Jaguars... but those are isolated comparisons that don't reflect the greater leagues as a collective whole.


----------



## STEELERSRULE (Apr 4, 2007)

STEELERSRULE said:


> There is a way for people to get/try MLB.TV, which is MUCH CHEAPER than the MLB Extra Innings route.
> 
> You will need AT LEAST an average of 6Mbps download speed. I know the web site say 3.0Mbps is enough, but trust me, having the extra bandwidth will be important to avoid rebuffering. Also, if you have at least 6Mbps download, don't multitask and drain it.
> 
> ...


I thought I could recommend this way as a cheap way for people to get the MLB fix,but I can't.

MLB.TV is just AWFUL on any device. Whether it is a ROKU, PS3, or even your computer, it is terrible, and not worth even the $100-$125 they are asking for a years worth of service.

Don't anyone bother. Either with the yearly route, or monthly route.

And by the way, the problem with the streaming is not the fault of the ORKU, or PS3, or your computer.

MLB.TV, and it's greed, are to blame for this. They put out a cruddy product,a nd they know it, and still continue to deliver crap. Between breakups, streams not working, or just a God awful "HD Picture" mind you, this product is not ready for primetime.

Just avoid it at all costs until some pioneers out there declare it is OK. Because as of right now, MLB.TV is just garbage, plain and simple.

And I "hope" the NFL and sports leagues are seeing what MLB, once again leading the way in greed and ineptitude so that the other leagues can have the bugs fixed and deliver a superior product, watch this and learn by 2012, when hopefully, the NFL Network, and or Sunday Ticket, will be able to be streamed to customers using a computer/ROKU/PS3/Blu-ray player/etc... and paid for upfront.


----------



## brucegrr (Sep 14, 2006)

I agree on Mlb.tv

I have 2 Roku boxes.

Tried it last year, tried it this year. Cancelled both times

Better than SD but no where near HD. (and some times no better than Youtube)

The problem is on the MLB end. I have a 15mb connection and everything else streams just fine. Only with MLB do I have problems with quality.

As far as Dish and Baseball. Last year I usually had one game a week in SD. So far 2 games the first week in SD and one tonight is JIP.

I hate this but I know all the bi***ing in the world isn't going to change it. It is a priority and capacity issue.


----------



## purtman (Sep 19, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> Charley's awake.
> 
> Are you?


Yes, but only until I put an NBA game on. 
The NBA's quality has dropped off significantly, and rules are are optional:
1. Players shuffle their feet all the time without a travel call
2. Ever notice how many times a play hangs on the rim without a technical foul called? I'm not talking about the legit ones where a player is trying to avoid injury.
3. Alan Iverson was considered an all-star, but he only shot 42 percent for his career. That's pathetic.
4. The "hop step" is a travel but is never called.
5. Players routinely carry the ball, but it's never called.
6. the NBA is the only league where players care more about the show than they do about winning. On a two-on-none fast break, how often do you see the alley-oop pass thrown to create a spectacular dunk rather than focusing on making the basket? Too often. It's like having an shortstop standing under a popup and then diving to make the catch rather than just making a routine catch. It's kind of like a wide receiver standing still until the ball is almost out of his reach and then running so that he can dive to make the catch. 
Enough said.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

purtman said:


> Yes, but only until I put an NBA game on.
> The NBA's quality has dropped off significantly, and rules are are optional:
> 1. Players shuffle their feet all the time without a travel call
> 2. Ever notice how many times a play hangs on the rim without a technical foul called? I'm not talking about the legit ones where a player is trying to avoid injury.
> ...


Would you like a list of baseball's negatives in recent years? Here's one...Steroids. Enough said.


----------



## ehren (Aug 3, 2003)

I have MLB.TV and today with my high speed internet I watched 3 games in HD via Roku, Iphone and Boxee simultaneously. And I can still have Dishnetwork for my programming and local RSN.


----------



## tommiet (Dec 29, 2005)

SayWhat? said:


> Lemme put it this way. If there were never another MLB, NFL, NHL, NBA or NASCAR, PGA or Soccer event played, I most likely wouldn't even notice. Well, except that there would likely be better programming on certain days and evenings.


Plus my dish bill could drop about 25-30%.


----------



## txtommy (Dec 30, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> And if they got the contract and didn't get enough subscribers, the costs would be dumped into the mainstream packages and we'd all be paying more.
> 
> I have no interest at all in subsidizing multi-million dollar ball players.


Ball players are in the entertainment business and as such are little different than actors on a TV series. I would much prefer to subsidize a talented ballplayer than most of the talentless actors in many TV series'. Does anyone who thinks that ballplayers are overpaid really think that tv actors are fairly paid? Is Alex Rodriguez overpaid while Charlie Sheen is fairly paid? Bottom line is we already pay too much in our mainstream packages for these lightly talented individuals.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

txtommy said:


> Ball players are in the entertainment business and as such are little different than actors on a TV series. I would much prefer to subsidize a talented ballplayer than most of the talentless actors in many TV series'. Does anyone who thinks that ballplayers are overpaid really think that tv actors are fairly paid? Is Alex Rodriguez overpaid while Charlie Sheen is fairly paid? Bottom line is we already pay too much in our mainstream packages for these lightly talented individuals.


I never thought about it like that. Very interesting.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

The problem with that thuinking is that there are only a small handful of 'overpaid' actors in any TV season. Maybe 20 or 30. A TV season lasts 13 episodes or so. Any given network/channel may have one or two hit shows where the cast have big contracts.

How many ball players on how many teams have multi-million dollar contracts during a season? How many team owners take home additional millions? ESPN carries at least some baseball, football, basketball, golf, hockey, racing and who knows what else that all have multiple millionaire players.

If I could cut off even $5/mo by dropping ESPN, I'd do so in a heartbeat.


----------



## txtommy (Dec 30, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> The problem with that thuinking is that there are only a small handful of 'overpaid' actors in any TV season. Maybe 20 or 30. A TV season lasts 13 episodes or so. Any given network/channel may have one or two hit shows where the cast have big contracts.
> 
> How many ball players on how many teams have multi-million dollar contracts during a season? How many team owners take home additional millions? ESPN carries at least some baseball, football, basketball, golf, hockey, racing and who knows what else that all have multiple millionaire players.
> 
> If I could cut off even $5/mo by dropping ESPN, I'd do so in a heartbeat.


Try doing your calculations on a per episode vs. per game basis.


----------



## AZ. (Mar 27, 2011)

txtommy said:


> Try doing your calculations on a per episode vs. per game basis.


and dont know of an actor who ever had a life threating or crippling accedent while taping an epesode...lol


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

AZ. said:


> and dont know of an actor who ever had a life threating or crippling accedent while taping an epesode...lol


People have died while filming TV shows and movies...

It does happen.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

^^ Ask Vic Morrow.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

SayWhat? said:


> ^^ Ask Vic Morrow.


I tried. I got no response.


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

SayWhat? said:


> The problem with that thuinking is that there are only a small handful of 'overpaid' actors in any TV season. Maybe 20 or 30. A TV season lasts 13 episodes or so. Any given network/channel may have one or two hit shows where the cast have big contracts.


Generally a TV season lasts about 20 or 26 in the US. Prior to the current TV season these were the top earners:



> *Drama (per episode)*
> 
> Hugh Laurie (House) $400,000+
> Christopher Meloni & Mariska Hargitay (Law & Order: SVU) $395,000 (each)
> ...


2.5 men cost $2 million+ per episode just in their top 3 stars.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> ^^ Ask Vic Morrow.


Could always find a way to ask, Bruce and Brandon Lee as well.


----------



## azjimbo (Jun 4, 2010)

"DISH Network L.L.C., the leader in international programming in the United States, today announced that it is the only television provider in the U.S. to broadcast the entire Indian Premier League (IPL) cricket tournament, including playoffs and finals in high definition, for the next four seasons."

Guess Charlie doesn't understand that MLB is our nation's pastime, appears he was saving all that bandwidth for... _cricket?_


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

For the prices they charge for Cricket, they can afford to put up another satellite.


----------



## gpollock87 (Apr 13, 2011)

i don't like baseball but i hope they do something for you all that do


----------



## azjimbo (Jun 4, 2010)

OK, more fun today... Just spent over 1/2 an hour on the phone with someone that doesn't understand what I'm talking about and when I asked to be transferred to someone else, the phone simply rang 15 times with no answer before I gave up on it...

Came home right at one o'clock this afternoon to watch today's game. They may not be much, but they're _my _Diamondbacks.

Turned the TV to channel 415 (FSN Arizona) and got the Reds/Pirates game. Now I'm sure they are fine teams, but neither one belongs on FSN Arizona. Tried the guide and yep, it said Giants vs. Diamondbacks... Just for the heck of it, tried channel 5415 (HD Tier) and the Reds were on there too even though the guide showed it supposed to be Giants/Diamondbacks.

Called Tech Support, and after I explained what my problem was, he asked me what channel I was watching. Told him 415. After he went away for a few, he came back and told me that I had Americas Top 250 and wasn't authorized channel 415. Told him to try 5415 and got the same answer...

After a few more iterations of this, he finally understood that I was looking for the Giants/Diamondbacks game. Looked it up in "his database" and told me it was on at 4:30 am and at 4 pm. I asked him what time zone and he insisted it was AZ time (The game actually started at 1 pm).

We continued in this vane for quite a while before my frustration level kicked in and I asked to be transferred, that's when it went to "la la" land.

I finally realized that the game was actually in SD on FSN Arizona, so I'm assuming it was meant to be JIP'd after the Reds/Pirates game that I'm assuming went long. Usually when a game is going to be JIP'd, it says so in the guide and if I tune to the channel anyway, I get that silly bitmap saying to come back when my team is playing in HD (They ARE! that's why I'm there, Dish just isn't broadcasting it in HD.).

Done venting - Thank You.


----------



## inazsully (Oct 3, 2006)

I had the game in HD on channel 415. And we won.


----------



## Chihuahua (Sep 8, 2007)

Congratulations!


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

This is like the 10th time on the 3rd different thread that someone posted this and it is not true. The PQ of MLB.TV on a PS3 is really good. 


STEELERSRULE said:


> I thought I could recommend this way as a cheap way for people to get the MLB fix,but I can't.
> 
> MLB.TV is just AWFUL on any device. Whether it is a ROKU, PS3, or even your computer, it is terrible, and not worth even the $100-$125 they are asking for a years worth of service.
> 
> ...


Really? Here is a video taken by my phone of my TV showing MLB.TV through my PS3. I just took a video a few minutes ago. I was watching a replay of the Giants and Rockies and switched to a live game between the Yanks and Jays. Tell me this is horrible.

BTW, the color issues is due to filming with a phone. It has nothing to do with the color quality from steaming or from my TV

http://s82.photobucket.com/albums/j259/DodgerKing/?action=view&current=IMG_0139.mp4

And here is an older video shot last week before the latest MLB App update on the PS3. Before the update 1080p streaming put a white bar around the picture and made the picture smaller. You had to change the video output on your PS3 to 720p to remove the white frame.

http://s82.photobucket.com/albums/j259/DodgerKing/?action=view&current=IMG_0132.mp4


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

brucegrr said:


> I agree on Mlb.tv
> 
> I have 2 Roku boxes.
> 
> ...


Here is live capture someone used to give a better image than what I get on a video of the TV through my phone. Tell me it is not HD. It is HD and really good PQ HD. Of course through the provider it is slightly better

This video is from last year so the UI is last year's version


----------

