Bio not provided
In the West if you want the Big 10 network you pay for it and if you do not want it, no problem and no cost. Why should PAC 12 network force carriers to bundle their football only worthy package as if they are worth everyone paying for and paying for all year when they are really only worth paying for in Sept and Oct, with Fox, ABC and Espn cherry picking the best games? Enough is enough with sports content providers holding subscribers hostage with all or nothing options for fans and those who never watch sports. What happened to choice and paying for those who want it. This bundling is BS.
11 months, 3 weeks ago on The Real Nonsense Between The Pac 12 And DirecTV Stalemate
Firstly, Pac 12 network without football is about as relevant as most of the Direct TV channels no one watches. Seriously, you have to go back to Lute Olsen when Pac 12 hoops mattered, compared to Big 10, SEC. Pac 12 hoops is less compelling than ACC football since the latter's expansion. Pac 12 content is not on par with the SEC or Big 10; paying as much for their content as those two is irrational.
That said, the most important part of this article for ANY ONE here is:
"- Most importantly, we need to set the precedent for new networks (in particular sports networks) that you just don't pull this shit on us."
Content providers are looking for the ceiling and I don't give a f--- who shows it to them. The rest of this discussion is irrelevant.
That said, this "shill" is going to make my ransom / extortion call to Direct TV Monday. Cheers!
1 year ago on The Real Nonsense Between The Pac 12 And DirecTV Stalemate