Any updates on MLB Network

[StonesCat]

Thank you, that's my entire point. MLBN does not have "exclusive national broadcasts" as you stated earlier. The local RSNs are still allowed to televise these games if they choose to do so.

An earlier poster asked if they were missing anything by not having MLBN and my point was that you will not miss any of your teams games, provided your RSN carries them. This is not like the situation with NFLN where if you don't have it and your team is playing, you can't see it.

I don't recall making any comments about the "quality" of MLBN. I just went back and looked at my posts and I see I didn't. I was simply responding to the earlier poster regarding the content.

A friend has MLBN and I've seen it. I like a lot of the on-air personnel (Harold Reynolds was great at ESPN, I wish they could trade him for Kruk ) and I think they do a fine job. But, for me it's not enough to switch providers for when I can get comparable content on other networks.

My feelings exactly. Until ESPN loses what they're able to provide now as far as in-game highlights and other programming, I couldn't really care less about MLBN. I don't lose sleep missing one or two games nationally a week. With the NFL network, you've got combine and draft coverage, and NFL televised games are a little more of a premium, I'd say.

 

[DodgerKing]

Thank you, that's my entire point. MLBN does not have "exclusive national broadcasts" as you stated earlier. The local RSNs are still allowed to televise these games if they choose to do so.

It is for those without EI. There is no other way it can be seen nationally.

An earlier poster asked if they were missing anything by not having MLBN and my point was that you will not miss any of your teams games, provided your RSN carries them. This is not like the situation with NFLN where if you don't have it and your team is playing, you can't see it.

"Provided your RSN carries them"? You are placing a condition upon a situation in an argument in which the only outcome is one that supports your argument.

I can make the same argument for Fox Saturday baseball, "We are not missing anything by not having Fox and my point was that you will not miss any of your teams ames, provided your RSN carries them." Well, the RSNs don't carry Fox Saturday games and for many teams on occassion, the RSNs do not carry the MLBNet Thursday night games either.

I would have missed the Dodgers and Astros game a couple of weeks ago. Ask those Dish and U-Verse subs here in LA if they missed the game.

I don't recall making any comments about the "quality" of MLBN. I just went back and looked at my posts and I see I didn't. I was simply responding to the earlier poster regarding the content.

I should have used content and programming instead of quality.

A friend has MLBN and I've seen it. I like a lot of the on-air personnel (Harold Reynolds was great at ESPN, I wish they could trade him for Kruk ) and I think they do a fine job. But, for me it's not enough to switch providers for when I can get comparable content on other networks.

First it is difficult to compare the NFL to any other sport when it comes to televised games. Other sports are more regional and have always been, while football itself is more national. They also only play once a week. That doesn't change the fact that the games are only on MLBNet for MOST subs.

Second, I can telly you that you probably haven't seen enough of MLBNet. They probably have more original programming than any other single sport station, more classic games and historical documentaries (look at its long history), live peak in on games, and even have "exclusive" games (Not exclusive like Sunday Night baseball, but exclusive in the sense that for those without EI, the only way to see the game in on MLBNet...Just like ESPN weekday games and TBS games. And for some in a local area they are sometime the only source of a broadcast.

If you only seen the news shows, then you probably seen less than 5% of the programming and the weakest 5% at that.

On a side note, I like both Kruk and Reynolds. I did like Reynolds on Baseball Tonight more than Kruk.

 

[DodgerKing]

My feelings exactly. Until ESPN loses what they're able to provide now as far as in-game highlights and other programming, I couldn't really care less about MLBN. I don't lose sleep missing one or two games nationally a week. With the NFL network, you've got combine and draft coverage, and NFL televised games are a little more of a premium, I'd say.

You may feel differently if you had the station??? (also depends on how much of a baseball fan you are).

Even I as a huge baseball fan didn't care for EI before I got it and just thought MLBNet would be a cool add-on, but wasn't too disappointed for not having it. Now I watch MLBNet more than ESPN.

MLBNet also covers the baseball draft as well, but you cannot compare the baseball draft to the NFL draft.

I would agree that the NFL Thursday games are a premium, but so are all NFL games since they play very few of them and there is no local coverage (local in the sense of local RSNs, ex); just regional (major networks) and national (ESPN and NFLNet). Wouldn't it be more of a premium if you could watch "other" games or choose with Sunday games you could watch (i.e ST)?

 

[cosmo_kramer]

It is for those without EI. There is no other way it can be seen nationally.
"Provided your RSN carries them"? You are placing a condition upon a situation in an argument in which the only outcome is one that supports your argument.

I can make the same argument for Fox Saturday baseball, "We are not missing anything by not having Fox and my point was that you will not miss any of your teams ames, provided your RSN carries them." Well, the RSNs don't carry Fox Saturday games and for many teams on occassion, the RSNs do not carry the MLBNet Thursday night games either.

I would have missed the Dodgers and Astros game a couple of weeks ago. Ask those Dish and U-Verse subs here in LA if they missed the game.
I should have used content and programming instead of quality.
First it is difficult to compare the NFL to any other sport when it comes to televised games. Other sports are more regional and have always been, while football itself is more national. They also only play once a week. That doesn't change the fact that the games are only on MLBNet for MOST subs.

Second, I can telly you that you probably haven't seen enough of MLBNet. They probably have more original programming than any other single sport station, more classic games and historical documentaries (look at its long history), live peak in on games, and even have "exclusive" games (Not exclusive like Sunday Night baseball, but exclusive in the sense that for those without EI, the only way to see the game in on MLBNet...Just like ESPN weekday games and TBS games. And for some in a local area they are sometime the only source of a broadcast.

If you only seen the news shows, then you probably seen less than 5% of the programming and the weakest 5% at that.

On a side note, I like both Kruk and Reynolds. I did like Reynolds on Baseball Tonight more than Kruk.

Listen, we could go on here forever but unfortunately I can't. MLBN seems like a great network to have if you're a baseball nut, but if you're only concerned with your team and a few occasional marquee matchups then your RSN, FOX, TBS (for the playoffs), and ESPN (the last three are carried by just about all providers) should be sufficient. I'm not poo-pooing MLBN. If I had it I'm sure I would tune in some. But, for the average fan, switching providers just to get this channel doesn't make sense.

MLBN does not have "exclusive national broadcasts", like ESPN and Fox do. In fact, local games are blacked out on MLBN. So, if your team's RSN broadcasts every non-national game and you receive ESPN and FOX you will not miss any of your teams games. I brought the NFLN into the discussion because their games are "exclusive national broadcasts" so if you don't have NFLN you can't see your team play (except for that infamous Pats/Giants game at the end of the '07 season ).

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MLB_Network"]MLB Network - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:MLB_Network_Logo.png" class="image"><img alt="MLB Network Logo.png" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/23/MLB_Network_Logo.png/150px-MLB_Network_Logo.png"@@AMEPARAM@@en/thumb/2/23/MLB_Network_Logo.png/150px-MLB_Network_Logo.png[/ame]

I am curious through why the Dodgers would take a game off of their RSN like that though....

 

[DodgerKing]

MLB Network - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am curious through why the Dodgers would take a game off of their RSN like that though....

The Dodgers have always had 100 games shown on Prime Ticket and 50 games on KCAL 9 and the same is true for this year, so they did not have a game taken off nor did they lose a game. The other 31 games are broadcast on Fox Saturday baseball, ESPN, TBS, or MLBNet. All of the games are televised here in LA.

The same is true for the Sox. Not all of their games are on NESN, some are reserved for ESPN and Fox.

It just comes to the deal the team(s) sign with particular networks. Perhaps MLBNet paid more for the "exclusive" broadcast in the LA area?

 

[DodgerKing]

If a Thursday night Red Sox game is broadcast on MLBN, then you're saying I won't be able to watch it on NESN. I can, so that does not make it an exclusive national broadcast, such as the case with FOX and ESPN.

Something somewhat unrelated that I would like to add. When the Sox are on another "national" station (such as they are now on TBS), I always watch that other feed. Even though NESN probably has the best PQ of any RSN, they also have some of the worst announcers. Don Orsillo and Jerry Remey are two of the biggest snoozers of any baseball anouncing team. They can take an exciting game and make it sound so boring. I ended up watching Friday's Sox Rays game on the Rays feed becasue they were putting me to sleep.

 

[EmpireState]

I need MLB. I'm sick of ESPN. Too biased, too lame. Time for something else.

 

[vampz26]

I need MLB. I'm sick of ESPN. Too biased, too lame. Time for something else.

You are dead-on there about ESPN being too biased and lame...

 

[Mr Tony]

From what I heard MLB Net showed a kinescope of a Expos game from Le Parc Jarry from 1970

ESPN Classic wouldnt ever show something like that

:up to MLB Net

posted on 4/27

mlb network is now showing a 1970 expos-pirates game. Broadcast quality slightly higher than the Apollo 11 mooncast. CBC apparently couldn't spring for a centerfield camera.

 

[vampz26]

From what I heard MLB Net showed a kinescope of a Expos game from Le Parc Jarry from 1970

ESPN Classic wouldnt ever show something like that

:up to MLB Net

posted on 4/27

There can be no doubt that MLB Network is an excellent channel...

All they need to do is show the famous "Sandberg" game and I'm sold...

 

[Mr Tony]

All they need to do is show the famous "Sandberg" game and I'm sold...

The one next Monday late night?

2:00 a.m. All-Time Games
6/23/84 St. Louis @ Chicago Cubs - Ryne Sandberg Delivers Game-Tying and Game-Winning HR

MLB Network: TV Schedule

 

[vampz26]

The one next Monday late night?

2:00 a.m. All-Time Games
6/23/84 St. Louis @ Chicago Cubs - Ryne Sandberg Delivers Game-Tying and Game-Winning HR

MLB Network: TV Schedule

Yes...that one...

 

[Mr Tony]

This is not like the situation with NFLN where if you don't have it and your team is playing, you can't see it.

If you are in the local market of one of the teams playing, its broadcast on a local station (just like the ESPN games are)

 

[vampz26]

If you are in the local market of one of the teams playing, its broadcast on a local station (just like the ESPN games are)

NFLN is pretty decent too for the average fan...but I wish they converted more of their film-based content to HD. From what I hear, MLBN may be better...

 

[mrperple]

Something somewhat unrelated that I would like to add. When the Sox are on another "national" station (such as they are now on TBS), I always watch that other feed. Even though NESN probably has the best PQ of any RSN, they also have some of the worst announcers. Don Orsillo and Jerry Remey are two of the biggest snoozers of any baseball anouncing team. They can take an exciting game and make it sound so boring. I ended up watching Friday's Sox Rays game on the Rays feed becasue they were putting me to sleep.

You weren't watching Remy & Orsillo on Friday night. I believe that was Buck Martinez as Remy is out w/ Pnuemonia. I know it may be hard to enjoy any other annoucer after being spoiled w/ the likes of Vin Scully, but don't knock someone's annoucers when they are down. I do agree Orsillo & Martinez were a snooze fest though. Orsillo & Remy I beleive are one of the best tandums out there. But thats just my humble opinion.

 

[david_jr]

You weren't watching Remy & Orsillo on Friday night. I believe that was Buck Martinez as Remy is out w/ Pnuemonia. I know it may be hard to enjoy any other annoucer after being spoiled w/ the likes of Vin Scully, but don't knock someone's annoucers when they are down. I do agree Orsillo & Martinez were a snooze fest though. Orsillo & Remy I beleive are one of the best tandums out there. But thats just my humble opinion.

I am not a "Sawx" fan, but I live and work among them and I know that Jerry Remy is absolutely loved by the local fanship. Any knock on the "Remdawg" would be considered fightin words in these parts.

 

[david_jr]

Yes, I think that is an excellent point. Why the golf channel over MLB Network? And how much per subscriber can the MLB Network cost? Anyone know what NFL Network costs cable and Sat operators?

The holdup is not the per subscriber cost. The holdup is the MLB tying carriage of MLB Net to the carraige of MLB EI. The cost for DISH to offer EI is 200 million dollars. They obviously don't feel they have the demand to support that steep entry fee.

 

[DodgerKing]

You weren't watching Remy & Orsillo on Friday night. I believe that was Buck Martinez as Remy is out w/ Pnuemonia. I know it may be hard to enjoy any other annoucer after being spoiled w/ the likes of Vin Scully, but don't knock someone's annoucers when they are down. I do agree Orsillo & Martinez were a snooze fest though. Orsillo & Remy I beleive are one of the best tandums out there. But thats just my humble opinion.

Not comparing to Vin at all. Just an observation as I watch all teams. The White Sox have the biggest homer announcers, the Giants have the biggest stoner announcers, and the Red Sox have the most undramatic announcers. That is just the way I see it.

I know it is difficult for fans of a team to have someone else criticize their announcers, but the Sox tandem is dull. I can even admit that Vinny is losing it and should retire soon and the Dodgers newest announcer, Eric Collins, has a lot to learn (the dude is clueless on many things)...Fortunately he only does out of divions away games on TV as Vinny is too old to travel much anymore.

 

[DodgerKing]

I am not a "Sawx" fan, but I live and work among them and I know that Jerry Remy is absolutely loved by the local fanship. Any knock on the "Remdawg" would be considered fightin words in these parts.

I would not doubt it, most fans are loyal to the person they hear call games for their team day in and day out. Sorry guy, but too me they are snoozers, IMO.

 

[DodgerKing]

Looks like MLBNet is taking over ESPNs Memorial day game coverage. In the past ESPN televised games all day long on Memorial Day, now MLBNet is doing that this year.