props to BET on HBCU sports


Bartram

Bartram

Brand HBCUbian
seems like there was a thread in the last year or so criticizing BET on black college sports. if so, we need to revisit it. quite the contrary, it seems BET has done a HECK of a job running and pubbing HBCU match-ups. i've seen nothing but great HBCU games on BET this fall. great to see my former SIAC foes (that would be Alabama State and Alabama A&M) front and center on BET,, getting nice "Magic City Classic" run during the TSU/SCSU game and scheduled for run on BET. props.
 
Yeah, but it would be nice if they showed more games live. They could do so much more, since they don't so much on Saturdays anyway. They could show a game (or two) every weekend, it would be good to see our conferences negiotiate a deal like that with BET or other networks.
 

JaguarNation99 said:
Yeah, but it would be nice if they showed more games live. They could do so much more, since they don't so much on Saturdays anyway. They could show a game (or two) every weekend, it would be good to see our conferences negiotiate a deal like that with BET or other networks.
Click to expand...

That's a point well taken. It's a matter of growth. our conferences are in the infantile stages of the televised games and big money TV contracts. That will come. BET just following business models not showing more games live. One day they will have a chance to show them live,,, will miss out,, ESPN2 will yank them,,, and then BET (and black "activists") will be screaming unfairness and sour grapes because BET didn't get in the action before hand.
 
Until you guys realize, that the HBCU football market is not what you think it is, then you'll get what you get. I know it's not a popular theme, but it's true.

Poor viewership, equals no sponsors, which equals no ad sales, which equates to a handful of games being televised each season.

I tip my hat to MBC for taking on the task they took on, but truth be told, the demand, didn't meet the supply. A lot of us on these boards support HBCU sports, but the fact of the matter is everyone doesn't share our passion.

I know the Classics turn a huge profit, but the truth is, everyone that attends is not there for the game, or the halftime show. Just there to be in the crowd, and get their holla on, and that's the harsh reality of it. What I mean by that statement, is the interest is in the game itself just isn't there, which is why when it's shown on television, viewership isn't there.

Also, another factor that goes into it, and some of you may not agree with my opinion, but women are the dominant student on campus, which means there aren't many guys to going to the games, and that much needed new blood to keep our product strong isn't there at it's grass roots. The campus. Sure there are women that go to games, and love their share of football, but the majority could give a flying phugg about it, and if football is going to survive, you need a strong male following.

As the older generation gets too tired to travel, and view games on a regular, and only certain markets being able to view the games because the network is not available in every market, as well the product on the field not being what it once was, because of the emergence of the mid-major conferences, and other 1-AA programs. You have a weakening product, that's only getting weaker by the year.

I know some of you have your faults with BET, but as MBC found out, and TV1 hasn't even attempted, producing an HBCU game of the week is hard to do, because we talk a good game, but don't back it up.

Big props to BET. :tup:

NICE
 
After looking at the Grambling-Prairie View game on Fox Sports Net tonight, I think that BET needs to take some cues from them. The game was shown LIVE, there wasn't anybody on the sidelines trying to crack jokes (what is Joe Claire's purpose at a game-comedy relief isn't needed at a football game), they showed the entire halftime of both bands, and the picture quality of the broadcast looks better.
Overall, I think that Fox Sports put out a better product in it's first try with SWAC football than BET has done in a long time. From what I've heard, the Tennessee State-South Carolina State game kept going back to the start of the 2nd quarter when it was shown tonight via tape delay.

BET may have improved, but I still think they have a long way to go. If Fox Sports can find a sponsor to show halftime uninterrupted with both bands, what's stopping BET? What's stopping BET from showing games at the original times they are played? Who wants to see a game when you already know the score of it because it was played at 2 p.m., ended at 6 p.m. and BET is showing it at 8 that night?
 
Come on Antroy, you're not really comparing a game shown on Fox SPORTS, to BET are you? I know a lot of y'all go out of your way to slam BET, but dude be real. You're talking about a SPORTS NETWORK, to an ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK. I would hope that a game shown by FSN would be better than BET's broadcast.

That's like comparing the Jefferson Pilot game of the week, against what CBS, ABC, and ESPN puts on everyweek. It's not even close, as far camera angles, reporting, graphics, on the second stats, and game analysis goes.

If it's so easy to do, why has MBC dropped all of their games? Why is TV1 showing Black Rodeo's, but no football? I'm sure it's a helluva lot easier for Fox Sports to get sponsors for it's NETWORK as a whole, and it's "GOTW" SEASON package, than BET can get for a handful of games per season.

NICE
 
Antroy said:
After looking at the Grambling-Prairie View game on Fox Sports Net tonight, I think that BET needs to take some cues from them. The game was shown LIVE, there wasn't anybody on the sidelines trying to crack jokes (what is Joe Claire's purpose at a game-comedy relief isn't needed at a football game), they showed the entire halftime of both bands, and the picture quality of the broadcast looks better.
Overall, I think that Fox Sports put out a better product in it's first try with SWAC football than BET has done in a long time. From what I've heard, the Tennessee State-South Carolina State game kept going back to the start of the 2nd quarter when it was shown tonight via tape delay.

BET may have improved, but I still think they have a long way to go. If Fox Sports can find a sponsor to show halftime uninterrupted with both bands, what's stopping BET? What's stopping BET from showing games at the original times they are played? Who wants to see a game when you already know the score of it because it was played at 2 p.m., ended at 6 p.m. and BET is showing it at 8 that night?
Click to expand...



...I must Co-Sign this and I agree!!!! Excuses for BET in the age of "technology" will not cut-it with me!!!! You must get with the program or get left behind!!!! (q.e.d.)
 
True there are issues with the quality of the broadcasts, but that should change for the better over time. hell i'm just glad they are showing more games!!
 
Antroy said:
After looking at the Grambling-Prairie View game on Fox Sports Net tonight, I think that BET needs to take some cues from them. The game was shown LIVE, there wasn't anybody on the sidelines trying to crack jokes (what is Joe Claire's purpose at a game-comedy relief isn't needed at a football game), they showed the entire halftime of both bands, and the picture quality of the broadcast looks better.
Overall, I think that Fox Sports put out a better product in it's first try with SWAC football than BET has done in a long time. From what I've heard, the Tennessee State-South Carolina State game kept going back to the start of the 2nd quarter when it was shown tonight via tape delay.

BET may have improved, but I still think they have a long way to go. If Fox Sports can find a sponsor to show halftime uninterrupted with both bands, what's stopping BET? What's stopping BET from showing games at the original times they are played? Who wants to see a game when you already know the score of it because it was played at 2 p.m., ended at 6 p.m. and BET is showing it at 8 that night?
Click to expand...

Big co-sign. BET is a billion dollar company owned by a multibillion dollar media conglomerate. Yes FOXSports is a sports station and they broadcast games for a living, but having problems like messing up a tape delay are inexcusable. I don't see why BET couldn't show a game of the week live every week, football would get better ratings than what they show on Saturdays currently. I understand we have a limited audience, but it's bigger than the Southland Conference, but they managed to negiotiate a deal with FOXSports. There's no reason why a company like BET couldn't show an HBCU Game of the Week LIVE.
 
D-NICE said:
Come on Antroy, you're not really comparing a game shown on Fox SPORTS, to BET are you? I know a lot of y'all go out of your way to slam BET, but dude be real. You're talking about a SPORTS NETWORK, to an ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK. I would hope that a game shown by FSN would be better than BET's broadcast.

That's like comparing the Jefferson Pilot game of the week, against what CBS, ABC, and ESPN puts on everyweek. It's not even close, as far camera angles, reporting, graphics, on the second stats, and game analysis goes.

If it's so easy to do, why has MBC dropped all of their games? Why is TV1 showing Black Rodeo's, but no football? I'm sure it's a helluva lot easier for Fox Sports to get sponsors for it's NETWORK as a whole, and it's "GOTW" SEASON package, than BET can get for a handful of games per season.

NICE
Click to expand...


D-Nice, you must have forgot who owns BET now. Viacom!!! The same company that owns CBS. BET has no excuse as to why they can't put a better package on the field for college football. They have, at least, some of the same resources that CBS has for SEC AND NFL football but yet their quality of product has actually dropped from when they first started showing Black College Football. I'm not saying they should have Greg Gumble, Shannon Sharpe, and Dan Marino doing the pre-game but they should at least improve the quality of their broadcast a little!!
It seems that some people are satisfied with what BET is offering. I'm not. I do not want to see a game being shown on TV via tape delay. Why would I want to see a game on TV when I already know who is going to win? If BET is so stuck on showing games at 7 or 8 at night, the we need to take our product to somebody that is going to give the fans a chance to see the game live, as it happens. And, it doesn't have to be 30 or 40 games a season. If we can get somebody to show the 5 or 6 biggest matchups in the SWAC that season, and show them live, then we have a start.
If the game starts at 2 and your broadcast is set for 7 or 8 that night, try to work with both schools to either move the game to 7 or 8, or move some things around and broadcast the game at the time it's supposed to kick off.
It is known that the SWAC schools will move the times of games around if the game is going to be shown on TV. Alcorn's homecoming game was supposed to be played at 5 p.m. on October 16, but they moved the time up to 2 p.m. to accomodate the Fox Sports Net broadcast. BET needs to try to work with us instead of acting like they are doing us a favor by showing the games when they want to.
Black College Football was a big boost to BET when they were still getting their foot in the door in the 80s and 90s. Now that they are in the house, they don't want us to come into their yard.

MBC dropped their games this year because they are undergoing their name change to The Black Family Channel.
 
D-Nice, I agree with you, but people get mad when you say this. BCF is only popular with the die hards. The die hards are the ones at the games so therefore the audience for it at home is not tuned in, no matter the network. That's why BET, ESPN, Fox-Sports, ABC and so on pick thier spots when showing BCF. There is really no money to be made in it.

Antroy, you have some great points. One would think BET should be able to borrow some things from thier big brothers over at CBS when doing a game. The problem is, the powers that be with Viacom know that money is not going to be made on the BET broadcast so they will not put a lot of effort into it. Now if MBC would have been making money off of their BCF production, you would see BET stepping up and getting some help from CBS.

The bottom line is MONEY. No one will cover BCF the way we want it done until the broadcaster know they will turn a profit.
 
Antroy, I'm well aware that Viacom owns BET. Big deal. They also own MTV, but I don't see them broadcasting college football, so what's the point?

You as well as others, keep saying take the product to someone else, uggh they did, and you see what happened with MBC? Who are you going to take it to? If it could've been done, don't you think it would've by now?

Am I making excuses for BET? No. But why would they invest heavy money into something that's not being watched?

Again, BET is not the only Black network in town anymore, where is the pressure for the other two networks to show HBCU football? Don't give me that MBC is changing their name, and programming crap either. They went from showing 2-3 games a week, to nothing at all, don't you think even with the changes that's being made at MBC, that if they were making money off of football they would've kept it in the lineup? I don't care what kind of makeover you're going through, a network's not going to lose any money when they have a sure fire money maker.

TV1 would rather show rodeo's, and fashion shows over HBCU football on Saturday's, and we get mad at BET????

NICE
 
D-NICE said:
Antroy, I'm well aware that Viacom owns BET. Big deal. They also own MTV, but I don't see them broadcasting college football, so what's the point?

You as well as others, keep saying take the product to someone else, uggh they did, and you see what happened with MBC? Who are you going to take it to? If it could've been done, don't you think it would've by now?

Am I making excuses for BET? No. But why would they invest heavy money into something that's not being watched?

Again, BET is not the only Black network in town anymore, where is the pressure for the other two networks to show HBCU football? Don't give me that MBC is changing their name, and programming crap either. They went from showing 2-3 games a week, to nothing at all, don't you think even with the changes that's being made at MBC, that if they were making money off of football they would've kept it in the lineup? I don't care what kind of makeover you're going through, a network's not going to lose any money when they have a sure fire money maker.

TV1 would rather show rodeo's, and fashion shows over HBCU football on Saturday's, and we get mad at BET????

NICE
Click to expand...

A couple of points D-Nice:

1) MTV never made it's impact broadcasting a football game. When BET was trying to get a share of the TV audience, Black College Football was one of the things that helped them get that share. They were showing what nobody else wanted to show but what the HBCU fans wanted to see.

2) MBC has said they aren't going to show football this year because they are undergoing the station name change but they will be back and better next year. Granted, they probably took on too much showing 2 and 3 games in one day but nobody complained about it when they undertook the task. Everybody was fighting to find out if MBC was shown in their cable system.

3) Nobody is watching the games because they already know the outcome of the game when BET gets around to showing them! They are showing tape delayed games!! Why would anybody want to see a game that's been over for 3 or 4 hours? If they showed the game live, more people would probably watch the games.

4) We don't know what's going on with MBC and their station change. They probably aren't showing too much new stuff at all right now. They will start the new season as The Black Family Channel sometime this Fall. They are probably more concerned with making this transistion as smooth as possible and showing a live football game every week might interefere with this transistion. But, they have already said that they will be back and "even better than before" next year. They have a contract with the SWAC, MEAC, and the other HBCU conferences. They know there is a need for Black College Sports. At least you know, even with them not showing games this year, they are committed to the HBCU sports scene. Can you say the same with BET?

5) TV1 is virtually a new comer. I don't even know if they are seen in 1% of American households. They only have 11 affiliates right now. They have to get what they can take right now.
Give them time to see if they can make it in the market. Even BET and MBC didn't leap into BCF in their first year. Give them a few years to see if they will be around and turn a profit then see if they are going to devote some time to BCF. I'm quite sure that there are a few people leery of signing a deal with a new comer with virtually no TV market.
Remember FAMU's contract with UBC? UBC never got off the ground (I haven't seen it listed anywhere) and FAMU got screwed out of millions. I think the litigation between FAMU and UBC is still on going. Everyone is probably waiting to see if TV1 is going to be around and waiting for them to get into some more markets before trying to show sports.

If you are happy with the crumbs that BET is giving you and passing it off as Black College Football, then you can keep it. I'm not going to settle for crumbs when I know that there is a smorgasbord (sp?) out there.
 
D-NICE said:
Poor viewership, equals no sponsors, which equals no ad sales, which equates to a handful of games being televised each season.
Click to expand...

This is the main reason why BCF games are not televised often. It's sad but true.
 

Antroy, in a perfect world, I'd love for BET to show live games, but unfortunately that world doesn't exist. The problem is larger than BET, and I can't see myself, being so judgemental of BET, when they're consistantly showing something, that others don't. We can't even get highlights shown on a consistant basis on Sportscenter, but let's all pile up on BET.

There are 3 other Black networks that show nothing, and 2 of them haven't even tried. TV1 hasn't attempted to show anything, and they're not hinting around that they will in the future. Oprah's Oxygen Network will rather show those rating grabbing WNBA games, but hasn't hinted around to showing HBCU sports. MBC, has tried like others, and have failed. Hell, they signed a contract to televise games for a number of years, and now they've renigged on their contract, where's the outrage for that? You don't accept crumbs from BET, but you accepted that BS excuse that MBC gave for not showing football, something they're contractually obligated to???? Go figure.

The MEAC had a regional contract up here with Comcast to show a live GOTW, but viewership slipped, and the game went from being shown live, to tape delayed at MIDNIGHT, to not being shown at all, but let's all pile up on BET.

Viacom own BET, but you don't think they look at NBC with the Bayou Classic, and see how much ad time they have to sell, to show the game. Man it takes up to 5 hours to televise the BC, with all of the commerical breaks, and do you think they're going to dedicate that type of manpower for a season, when NBC is working hard to show one game. You don't see all of those commerical breaks for their Notre Dame games do you?

Black radio, doesn't even consistantly give you scores from HBCU games, nor do they talk about the games, and a lot of radio personalities are HBCU alums, but they can tell you about the big college games, and the NFL, but pile up on BET.

The problem is much bigger than BET, and I'm not going to pile up on BET for being the only show in town. Don't take the crumbs, but don't starve either, when BET does what everybody else has already done, and that's pull the plug.

I'm done.

NICE
 
A couple of secondary points Antroy

1) BET, like MBC based it broadcasts on an antiquated profit model.

2) MBC underestimated the challenge of marketing effectively to sponsors that are only interested in measurable results. The days of philanthropy are over.

3) Live is better

4) The MBC contract with the conferences is null and void.

5) TVOne is still showing reruns of "Slaughter's Big Rip-Off" They are not spending any money on programming other than a few indy productions. Again, a dated model.

5A) Cabble-access sham UBC was a perfect example of the naive-ness of some HBCU administrators concerning broadcast. There is no free lunch.

Black college football remains one of the great untapped and under-studied resources.

BTW, what dem Braves look like?
 
Much of the reason BET takes the "secondary televising" of the games is because BET is not yet the top dog like an ESPN and the other major networks and because BET doesn't have the funding of the other networks. Also, this is yet another reason why i think HBCU conferences should re-align. If you had the 10 best HBCU Div I-AA conference form a conference, you'd have the attendance numbers to attract more prime time/live coverage.
 
Bartram - HBCU football is not nearly as important as the latest rap video to BET..

BET doesn't put much into football, they don't get much out of it.

No matter, by 2005 the landscape will have shifted once again and those who "slept" one of the most undervalued sports properties on the planet will be calling Rev Al Sharpton for vocal assistance after FOX, ESPN College, CSTV and Comcast gobble it up the tastiest slices of the pie.
 
BET has had a 20-year head start on HBCU football..but they've regressed as technology became better..they went from game of the week to 4 games per year to nothing and then back to 4 games with half being tape delayed...

and the presentation is downright horrible...they will try to incorporate the "urban" element in the game also, which does not fit...

your right...who wants to watch a tape-delayed game when you already know the outcome in this day and age?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top