projectorsrule said:Amen Longhorn,
Add to that the fact that ESPN and ESPN2 are soooooo bitstarved and look like such total garbage that 3 years ago I watched the WorldCUP on Univision rather than ESPN because the PQ was far superior. I didn't have a clue what the heck they were saying other than player names and GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAALLLLLLLLLLL but upconverted games on ESPN HD and 2HD are preferable ANY DAY to the horrid PQ on 206 and 209.
Smthkd said:9/3/2005 CFB UCLA Bruins vs. San Diego St. Aztecs 10:15 PM ESPN2HD (720p)
LonghornXP said:Your logic kills me in that if ESPN HD and ESPN2 HD don't do all the games in HDTV on their channels that we shouldn't get the 200+ sporting event games they do per year. I would rather have 200+ sporting events being done in HDTV and counting compared to nothing at all. I'm just glad that people like you aren't making these choices because we wouldn't have jack nor would we ever get anything more for our lifetimes.
LonghornXP said:I always want more but I and others had a reason to complain three years ago and the fact is you have no reason whatsoever to even hint at complaining.
shugo77 said:First of all Longhorn, I am sorry that I am not a self proclaimed HD know-it-all like you are
Second, I guess I am not allowed to voice my opinion without offending people like you. I guess, according to you, I am crazy for thinking ESPNHD should show more HD content. I'm glad people like you aren't in charge, or we would never have growth in technology.
Third, when did I ever say that we should not have ESPNHD? People like you kill me when you put words into my mouth that I never said. (And you are an administrator, you should be better than that) If you would have read my entire post and thought it over intelligently before spouting out like a child you would have understood what i was saying. I don't know why my comment is so hard to understand. All I said was that I wished ESPN would have worked to make all content on ESPNHD actual HD content before expanding with ESPNHD2, what the heck is wrong with that? It is my personal opinion if they concentrated on perfecting one thing at a time, that we would be better off for it, instead, they rush out another channel, when in my opinion, the first channel needs work. I am sorry if you don't agree, but the beauty is, you don't have to.
I don't care about three years ago, I care about right now, you should stop living in the past. Why do you have a right to complain and not me? You don't know anything about me. What the heck makes you so special? I get so annoyed by people like you that think they have rights that others don't.
A piece of advice, longhorn, stop acting like you are so much better than everyone. I've read a lot of your posts, most of the time you sound very intelligent and composed, but other times, it seems like you have lost control of your wits, you get all flustered and seem childish, calm down dude, it's just TV. Everyone isn't going to always agree with you, and that is ok.
shugo77 said:Longhorn,
You know what, we do just have different points of view on this, and I can certainly understand yours, now that you have explained it rationally.
I'll admit that you definitely know a lot more about how HD broadcasts work than I do, and no doubt you were one of the early adopters of HDTV. I understand where you are coming from.
You just don't understand how much I love football and my Falcons, I was so dissapointed when they weren't in HD the other night (the game was replayed on tape delay at 5PM). So I figured, oh well, I guess preseason games don't get the HD treatment, ok whatever. Then, a couple nights later the Miami game WAS in HD. That aggravated me so bad, and that is what led to my anti ESPN2HD rant. I was just thinking "why add espn2hd when everything on ESPNHD isn't in HD?" You know us newbies are spoiled rotten. . You want to know a secret? Despite all of my complaining, the only reason I keep the HD pack is because of ESPN (I do enjoy the channel, I just want to enjoy it more) Give me a little time and I'll get over it.
I'll probably get over being disgruntled when I'm watching the below games; but not a day sooner.
9/3/2005 CFB Boise State Broncos vs. Georgia Bulldogs 5:30 PM ESPNHD (720p)
9/3/2005 CFB Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets vs. Auburn Tigers 8:45 PM ESPNHD (720p)
9/10/2005 CFB South Carolina Gamecocks vs. Georgia Bulldogs 5:30 PM ESPNHD (720p)
9/10/2005 CFB Southern Mississippi Golden Eagles vs. Alabama Crimson Tide 7:45 PM ESPN2HD (720p)
9/22/2005 CFB Air Force Falcons vs. Utah Utes 7:30 PM ESPNHD (720p)
9/29/2005 CFB Air Force Falcons vs. Colorado State Rams 7:30 PM ESPNHD (720p)
Then, as soon as the games are over, back to bitching
vinnyv07 said:This is my take...which isnt worth much but, here goes.....ESPNHD just isn't that great in my eyes. I do like their HD games but there isn't enough of them for me. I feel that insted they should improve and increase their main HD ch ESPN. It just seems to me they can show college football in HD and baseball in HD and whatever else that they wanted in HD with one ch. I feel that its ESPN's fault for not realizing that. It's kind of like what VOOM did having 10 movie ch's when they should have only had three. Why doesn't ESPN fill up their 1st ch with more HD programming? What are they showing on Saturday afternoons and nights that is in HD during the college football season? That being said, I think its a good move to add the ch ....but TNTHD would be a better choice by far. If they add TNTHD I'll reinstate my HD pack. ESPN2HD is not going to make me do that.
LonghornXP said:I agree with you but we also must remember that some major sports and games have contracts for ESPN 2 HD and those games cannot be shown on ESPN HD. Because of this many great games would never ever get shown (even if they had the mobile trucks and cameras) until they offered ESPN 2 HD. Now I agree with you on the Voom channels in that they could have reduced their current Voom 21 into about 5-8 total HD channels which always have something new and current while still repeating enough so people can watch if they miss it.
I would surely say that ESPN Classic HD would be a 100% waste of time and bandwidth but ESPN 2 HD even with little overall HD does still have a good and valid reason for its existance as a channel and on providers lineups.
Chado said:Just wait until TNTHD is added. People will be complaining that they can't get the Weather Channel in HD. The grass is always greener....