The MTN to go dark...(shut down)

[LetTheFurFly]

I suspect that this is just three decent sized networks becoming two bigger networks with CBS and NBC spackled on them. I think they're trying to maximize the effectiveness of what supposed to be a 24 hours network at the expense of the service that the MTN was doing. I don't expect much of it to change at all, just a network that's trying to keep up in the sports channel marketplace while doing it cheaper than the other guy. Meanwhile, CBS/NBC get the MTN's general programming and cut their overhead by 44 employees.


I do feel for the MTN employees though. They're getting "first pick" of Comcast SportsNet sub-channels but that still doesn't make this less of an informal reorganization from the top shareholders. Awkward and inconveinent.

[pjamj]

New TV deal with only CBS sports can be good, but we really do need a dedicated MWC broadcast station. I really dont like the new look of the merger. MWC needs to expand on its own, and secure a better TV package by adding new large markets like San Antonio (UTSA), San Jose (SJSU), El Paso (UTEP), and Dallas FW (N. Texas).

I think the ship has sailed...too late.

[lobodude]

Just a gentle reminder, Lobo fans. Our CBS national coverage game with UNLV was only viewable by 49% of their viewers. The MTN was viewable by anyone with Direct TV and the right sports package.

And fans without access to the right cable package could see those games thanks to our various buddies who set up streaming of the mtn. .... I'm betting that for most of our games, there won't be anything to stream. Maybe All-Access will get a major upgrade and show the games not on TV, but those of us complaining about having to pay anything to see games won't like that.

[MrGrizzly]

The Mtn had 10 million people suscribing right?? CBS currently has 45 million right?? 49% of 45 mil is still more than the Mtn. Not trying to be facetious or anything but am I right? Im all for more exposure...you often have people saying "what the heck is a LOBO??" or better yet..."There's a NEW Mexico?"

[GiJoeRay]

The Mtn had 10 million people suscribing right?? CBS currently has 45 million right?? 49% of 45 mil is still more than the Mtn. Not trying to be facetious or anything but am I right? Im all for more exposure...you often have people saying "what the heck is a LOBO??" or better yet..."There's a NEW Mexico?"

Exactly, half of CBS Sports veiwers is still 2.5 time more than MTN viewers. What most people are crying about is the fact that THEY cant watch every game. And to be honest we dont know what is going to happen with EVERY GAME. What we can infer is that our BIG games will be seen on a far larger scale.

[GiJoeRay]

Just a gentle reminder, Lobo fans. Our CBS national coverage game with UNLV was only viewable by 49% of their viewers. The MTN was viewable by anyone with Direct TV and the right sports package.

49% of 300,000,000 people was a bad thing how? Every household in the US gets CBS.

[ThreadKiller]

Yeah but the question is how many games is CBS likely to show of one school? There are only so many slots for time and if your talking about a potentially 20+ team conference that limits how many games from each school they can show. The Mtn. wasn't perfect, but I knew that I could watch pretty much every game with my comcast subscription.
Plus the NCAA has already said that the new conference will only get one auto bid for basketball so I don't see the strength in numbers argument. All I see is a bigger pot split between a lot members with less coverage for each school individually. Hopefully I am wrong and the new TV deal will work out, but I doubt it.

[GiJoeRay]

every conference only gets 1 auto bid. The Big East is 18 large and only 1 auto bid. No crying from their end. CBS will put the best game on their national broadcast, and CBS Sports will get the next level games. If you have a cable or sat package and you get the MTN, then most likely you will also get CBS Sports. Hell everyone that has Dish can now get at least a chance to watch MW teams play.

[ThreadKiller]

True every league get 1 bid but the original merger was for football only through a championship game and maintaining separate leagues for basketball with each league getting their own NCAA tourney bid. The NCAA said no to this and now we are hearing about a full merger. It made sense to me in football, but a full merger doesn't strike me as the most advantages position for UNM basketball IMHO.

[GiJoeRay]

MWC Basketball as a whole does not gain a thing by merging with CUSA. This is a football move, but with that said, CUSA football is about as good as what is left over from the MWC, especially with Houston, SMU, and UCF leaving CUSA.

[loborick]

Actually, I think there are second thoughts now about a merger. There would be too much lost if both conferences disbanded. I think there will be a scheduling alliance between MW and CUSA but no merger.

[Oregon Lobo]

For Lobos fans who don't live in New Mexico, this is likely to be a blow. I've complained about the Mtn. not being in HD, but was still grateful to be able to watch ALMOST EVERY GAME. Now it's likely that there will be fewer games televised outside of NM. Now my wife is gonna expect me to do all of those stinkin' home improvement projects. This could suck.

[nmsutoo]

We will more than likely be on cbs sports channel, not cbs. 3,4, or 5 games if we are lucky. How many times were we on it this year, 3, 4? Sounds like a wash to me as far as national coverage. Actually a lot less coverage because of the loss of the MTN.

[hefman]

Exactly, half of CBS Sports veiwers is still 2.5 time more than MTN viewers. What most people are crying about is the fact that THEY cant watch every game. And to be honest we dont know what is going to happen with EVERY GAME. What we can infer is that our BIG games will be seen on a far larger scale.

I agree with you.

People need to understand that the conference has to make themselves competitive or they will die. We've already seen Utah, BYU, TCU, and Boise leave the conference almost entirely due to the fact the MWC television revenue package was just not competitive and was not providing the benefit and exposure that was initially envisioned.

Look, it was nice having the MTN for us fans to tune in and keep up with our team and conference counterparts. It was great to have almost every game televised. I loved it and watched as much as any other network. However, I'm not short-sighted enough to think it was going to last if it wasn't making any money (for the network OR the conference). There was a reason DirecTV took so long to pick up the MTN and there is a reason that Dish never has. If it was a winner for them, they would have done it long a ago.

And, while we all loved it, NOBODY, outside of MWC fans, gave a rat's @ss about The MTN. I'm shooting from the hip here, but I'm guessing that one game on ESPN carries as much national exposure weight as a whole season worth on the MTN -- it has true national viewership, it has casual sports fans not affiliated with a conference, and absolutely huge potential numbers -- none of which The MTN can provide. I wish I had a nickel for every time I heard an analyst say "we haven't seen them much" when talking about UNM, UNLV, or SDSU. I'm sure recruits are saying the same thing. Their buddies are all watching Gonzaga, VCU, Temple, etc. on the occasional nights they are on, while MWC teams are buried on a network those kids never watch, unless they happen to know somebody on one of the teams. In my opinion, the old WAC was more in the national spotlight than the MWC has become, after years of this limited exposure.

All of this is outside of the financial aspect of this for the conference, which we all know is what is driving college sports these days. It was inevitable. We can either complain about it or move on, adjust, and acknowledge that it is better for the school we support in the long run.

[Oregon Lobo]

I agree with you.

People need to understand that the conference has to make themselves competitive or they will die. We've already seen Utah, BYU, TCU, and Boise leave the conference almost entirely due to the fact the MWC television revenue package was just not competitive and was not providing the benefit and exposure that was initially envisioned.

Look, it was nice having the MTN for us fans to tune in and keep up with our team and conference counterparts. It was great to have almost every game televised. I loved it and watched as much as any other network. However, I'm not short-sighted enough to think it was going to last if it wasn't making any money (for the network OR the conference). There was a reason DirecTV took so long to pick up the MTN and there is a reason that Dish never has. If it was a winner for them, they would have done it long a ago.

And, while we all loved it, NOBODY, outside of MWC fans, gave a rat's @ss about The MTN. I'm shooting from the hip here, but I'm guessing that one game on ESPN carries as much national exposure weight as a whole season worth on the MTN -- it has true national viewership, it has casual sports fans not affiliated with a conference, and absolutely huge potential numbers -- none of which The MTN can provide. I wish I had a nickel for every time I heard an analyst say "we haven't seen them much" when talking about UNM, UNLV, or SDSU. I'm sure recruits are saying the same thing. Their buddies are all watching Gonzaga, VCU, Temple, etc. on the occasional nights they are on, while MWC teams are buried on a network those kids never watch, unless they happen to know somebody on one of the teams. In my opinion, the old WAC was more in the national spotlight than the MWC has become, after years of this limited exposure.

All of this is outside of the financial aspect of this for the conference, which we all know is what is driving college sports these days. It was inevitable. We can either complain about it or move on, adjust, and acknowledge that it is better for the school we support in the long run.

Well, unless there's a deal with ESPN somewhere here, this move won't seem to improve anything. There will likely be the same number of games on CBS and NBC Sports networks--and people weren't likely tuning into those much either.

[hefman]

Well, unless there's a deal with ESPN somewhere here, this move won't seem to improve anything. There will likely be the same number of games on CBS and NBC Sports networks--and people weren't likely tuning into those much either.

We'll see. There are plenty of (non ESPN) conference TV deals out there that allow a certain number of games to be broadcast on ESPN. One of the big problems with The MTN deal is there was not this flexibility (like the Big Ten network has now). Either way, I disagree with you. CBS Sports offers a similar viewer profile ESPN does (much broader national audience), just at a smaller scale (although it is almost 4X The MTN, and growing). I used ESPN as an example, but CBS Sports would have similar advantages. This is still much more effective exposure than The MTN offered, in my opinion.

[Oregon Lobo]

We'll see. There are plenty of (non ESPN) conference TV deals out there that allow a certain number of games to be broadcast on ESPN. One of the big problems with The MTN deal is there was not this flexibility (like the Big Ten network has now). Either way, I disagree with you. CBS Sports offers a similar viewer profile ESPN does (much broader national audience), just at a smaller scale (although it is almost 4X The MTN, and growing). I used ESPN as an example, but CBS Sports would have similar advantages. This is still much more effective exposure than The MTN offered, in my opinion.

I understand what you're saying. But the ESPN networks have been established for years--and even get a preferential location on the DirecTV channel lineup--easy to find, etc. I think all of the ESPN channels are also included in most standard satellite and cable packages. The other networks you've mentioned are only included in upgraded packages and the channels are listed with all of the other second-tier networks. While they are technically "broadly available" people either have to pay more money to have access to them and they have to be pretty desperate for some sports action to go looking in the 700s section of their channel guide.

[LaVidaLobo]

Say it isn't so.....I'm gonna miss Andrea Lloyd. Seriously.

[wallyhopp]

I did the math back when the UNLV UNM game took place. The game was in 33% of all households.. Which accounts for at least 100 million people... They were in just 2 of the 10 major market cities though.


This is quite a sad day. I've been a huge fan of the mountain from the beginning for the simple fact of getting games on tv.. This year at least half of our games were on the MTN.. Who will pick up the pieces?


Internet only streaming is the wave of the present and future. If we could get games on LOCALLY (not my50tv), and those available on a PPV basis, the MTN void will be filled.

Now we wait and see what we are left with

I also wanted to mention.. C-USA had tv deals with almost every network out there./ Comcast sports net channels... FSN.. ESPN family.. CBScs and CS..... If the MWC can get just a glimpse of what the CUSA had, we should be okay

[lobodude]

I don't want to get too negative here -- because after all, we don't know the new deal yet and I bet CBS Sports Net won't have our teams playing after midnight East Coast time -- but if it's supposedly better for the program to have a very small number of games with national coverage and rest not covered on TV at all, then why didn't we go for the national coverage before?? The Lobos have had ESPN offers for one-off games with the Lobos on the road against a high-profile team such as Duke, and turned them down.

..... In other words, we have already had chances at 1-2 ESPN games *with* the rest of the games also on TV and decided that wasn't good for the program. So now we are supposed to believe that 2-3, maybe 4, games on a national network, with the rest of the games not broadcast, is somehow better? Is the only difference really just the cash (and we don't even know yet how big a difference that will be)? Well, here's hoping the new deal provides a way to see the 25-plus games that won't be on CBS Sports Net.

[GiJoeRay]

I did the math back when the UNLV UNM game took place. The game was in 33% of all households.. Which accounts for at least 100 million people... They were in just 2 of the 10 major market cities though.


This is quite a sad day. I've been a huge fan of the mountain from the beginning for the simple fact of getting games on tv.. This year at least half of our games were on the MTN.. Who will pick up the pieces?


Internet only streaming is the wave of the present and future. If we could get games on LOCALLY (not my50tv), and those available on a PPV basis, the MTN void will be filled.

Now we wait and see what we are left with

I also wanted to mention.. C-USA had tv deals with almost every network out there./ Comcast sports net channels... FSN.. ESPN family.. CBScs and CS..... If the MWC can get just a glimpse of what the CUSA had, we should be okay

Question is, do we want our program to grow as much as possible, or stay at the same level that its at now? I see it as the more national exposure we get the more Alford can grow this program. Especially is we can get into an ESPN slot here and there. the MTN. will, or has already stimied us. If we as fan have to sacrifice watching every game, in order for our team to be more of a national presence, than I am ok with that. And when they get to that real big time stage we wont have to worry about seeing if we get a tv slot, because we will be able to see them all the time at the highest of levels.

[Oregon Lobo]

Question is, do we want our program to grow as much as possible, or stay at the same level that its at now? I see it as the more national exposure we get the more Alford can grow this program. Especially is we can get into an ESPN slot here and there. the MTN. will, or has already stimied us. If we as fan have to sacrifice watching every game, in order for our team to be more of a national presence, than I am ok with that. And when they get to that real big time stage we wont have to worry about seeing if we get a tv slot, because we will be able to see them all the time at the highest of levels.

There is nothing to indicate that killing off The Mtn will get us more national exposure! Where is everyone getting the idea that because the Mtn is going away that somehow we're going to get more games on better, more widely-available networks? This is what we know now: We got a handful of basketball games on CBS Sports Network and NBC Network (Versus) the past few seasons. Almost all the rest were on the Mtn--even those that were exclusive to My50 were shown on The Mtn on delay. So now, the Mtn is going away and--for all we know--there has been nothing announced to replace it. How exactly is that translating to more national exposure?

[COLOLOBO]

More money, more money, more money!!!!!

[GiJoeRay]

There is nothing to indicate that killing off The Mtn will get us more national exposure! Where is everyone getting the idea that because the Mtn is going away that somehow we're going to get more games on better, more widely-available networks? This is what we know now: We got a handful of basketball games on CBS Sports Network and NBC Network (Versus) the past few seasons. Almost all the rest were on the Mtn--even those that were exclusive to My50 were shown on The Mtn on delay. So now, the Mtn is going away and--for all we know--there has been nothing announced to replace it. How exactly is that translating to more national exposure?

Being affiliated with CBS Sports means we are affiliated with CBS. If we get 2 Games on CBS national broadcast that is a dramatic increase on what we have received each of the past 3 years. I wont be surprised to find out that this NEW TV DEAL includes some sort of ESPN deal where they can pick up a top tier game when they want. Very similar to what is being done with the 12Pack TV deal between Fox/ESPN.

[Oregon Lobo]

Being affiliated with CBS Sports means we are affiliated with CBS. If we get 2 Games on CBS national broadcast that is a dramatic increase on what we have received each of the past 3 years. I wont be surprised to find out that this NEW TV DEAL includes some sort of ESPN deal where they can pick up a top tier game when they want. Very similar to what is being done with the 12Pack TV deal between Fox/ESPN.

Right. Because ESPN--with all the programming holes they have to fill--desperately wants and needs Mountain West (or whatever it may be called) football and basketball games. And mother CBS--which was supposed to broadcast the UNM/UNLV game "nationally"--will again broadcast "nationally" more of our games (with the ever-present caveat that the local CBS affiliates can instead pick up a regional broadcast, which many of them did during our one "national" gig). It all sounds great. But it reality it means that our "national" broadcast will be seen by the media bigwigs and D1 recruiting hotbeds in Montana and the Dakotas. If I sound skeptical, it's because living outside of New Mexico and in Pac12 country, I see what the so-called "national exposure" really means. Not really much.

[loboray]

Let me try again. Most of the country could not view our CBS national TV game with UNLV. The MTN did not stymie our TV coverage. The contract Hair Thompson signed stymied our coverage as it didn't allow any other major network to televise our games. C'mon, guys, at least lets try to be factual.

[GiJoeRay]

Let me try again. Most of the country could not view our CBS national TV game with UNLV. The MTN did not stymie our TV coverage. The contract Hair Thompson signed stymied our coverage as it didn't allow any other major network to televise our games. C'mon, guys, at least lets try to be factual.

how is 49% of 300,000,000 possible tv sets from CBS < the 14,000,000 possible that the MTN reaches?

[loboray]

Do you think everyone with a TV in the 33% of the country that could receive it watched our game? I'll guarantee most of the Lobo fans over the entire country who switched to Direct TV so they could watch the MTN did watch most of our games. How's this for B.S. Maybe more people actually watched the MTN games on Direct TV than watched the Nationally televised game on CBS. I can throw out B.S. too.

[JulieG]

I want to see the Lobo program grow and National exposure sure helps. If this leads to National exposure that is great. If CBS decides to cut up what they broadcast so that 1/4 of the country or I/20 of the country sees it then we may not be getting what we think. I am anxiously waiting for some announcements to take place. The main issue I have is that I have been able to see all the conference games on TV. I have also caught a number of games that were streamed. I suspect I might get to see via streaming or live, with no replays maybe 10 games instead of 25 I will take it, but I won't be happy. I think that UNM needs to provide some information about this to their loyal alumni and fans.

[Oregon Lobo]

how is 49% of 300,000,000 possible tv sets from CBS < the 14,000,000 possible that the MTN reaches?

The game was on a Saturday--when there were tons of other D1 games on. If you're a TV station in New York, are you picking up the UNM/UNLV game or a Big East game? Hmmm. If you are in Florida, is the local station picking up the UNM/UNLV game or an ACC game? Hmmm. If you're in Indianapolis, are you gettin the UNM/UNLV game or a Big 10 game? My point is, yes, it was available to roughly half the country (and you know that half had their DVRs rolling). But you don't gain "national" exposure by being watched by the several small markets in between the coasts. When was the last time we heard of a top talent recruit coming from Idaho? When was the last time we cared about what some sports analyst in Bozeman said about our program?