Mark's Thoughts: Five Unheralded Things That Need to Change About Sports

The start of a list of many things about sports that need to be changed, but items that aren't being talked about...

There are some major things that need to change about the world of sports.  The BCS, the Designated Hitter, NFL overtime rules, voters in the college football polls being uninformed, star treatment for NBA players, and so on.  These are major problems that do need to be addressed; however, they have all been discussed by many writers.  I would like to start to compile a list of things that need changing in sports that have yet to be addressed at any great length.  

1) There needs to be an increase of quality nicknames in the world of sports.  There is just a huge lack of good nicknames in sports.  There are a few, but the problem is the majority of them belong to Shaq.  The other nicknames are just shortening names, or using initials. For example, LeBron, CP3, Manny, A-Rod, etc. The excessive marketing that has encompassed sports might be one of the reasons that nicknames have gone away. Poor nicknames are forced down the throats of fans by announcers, ESPN, and marketing executives. No longer are nicknames able to come about naturally. It would be nice for nicknames to come about, and then for the nickname to be used by commentators and commercials.

2) Arenas need to stop selling beer at halftime. Too often people come to the game after drinking up a storm at a restaurant or bar and sit down with a beer in each hand. Then at the end of the third quarter comes the run to get another two beers for the last quarter. I don't know if the limiting of the beer sales at halftime would cut down on alcoholic incidents.

3) Leagues and conferences need to stop creating networks and placing quality games on those networks without first having a way to have those networks seen by a wide audience. The problem is not just the Mtn. or the NFL network, but every network that has been created by a league or conference to date. It seems that these networks never learned the lessons of the Internet or mortgage collapse. You can't just want something to be profitable and magically it becomes profitable. Let the people see the network, and have it be a good product.

4) The NBA is just too nice. What happened to the intensity that used to be on the court, and the anger that can be seen from players after they lose games? It just seems that too many players are just playing to collect a paycheck. The problem isn't that the players are making too much money, this same problem of people not caring about what they are doing exist at all workplaces. It is frustrating to see people mail in performances regardless of what profession that they do, but it is very frustrating when it comes from performers who are paid to come and give it their all for the entertainment of others.

5) Innovations in broadcast and improvements in sports shouldn't be stopped due to a blanket argument of "purity of the game." Hockey is a really good example of this fact. In the 1990's hockey had an argument that it was one of the top sports in America along with the NBA, MLB, and NFL. Yet, hockey really made a lot of mistakes. One of the major mistakes they did make was trying to cater their sport to fanatical base. In the nineties the NHL was trying to make changes to make hockey more watchable; however, the "hockey purists" didn't like the changes and constantly complained about it until the league altered the changes they made that improved the watch-ability. The league didn't try to attract new fans to the sports, and hockey has suffered ever since. There are things about sports that shouldn't change. There just needs to be a better reason for keeping them than because of the "purity of the game."

Read More >>>

The Big Podcast Episode 3

Have a listen to this week's Big Podcast...

What's inside - 

Welling Roundtable With Aaron Welling
BYU vs. Wyoming and the upcoming bye week
Utah football
Utah State Football
Other teams around the Mountain West
and a touch of baseball...enjoy!

Download here (right click and save as...)

Read More >>>

Happenings on the Mtn.

Comments on the first week of coverage on the Mtn...
(I have been impressed by what is happening on the Mtn to change the Problems on the Mountain postings to Happenings on the Mtn.  At least as long as they continue with this improvement.)

Another season of college football has started and with it focus for the Mountain West Conference is placed on the Mountain Television Station.  The upside to this season is that this is the first season that the Mtn is available on DirectTV.  That is a huge accomplishment, and something that should be seen as a huge step forward for the conference.  That move has bought some time for the struggling television station to gain some viewership among their target market, the mountain west conference football fan.  There is little excuse now for a fan wanting to see Mountain West Conference sports not to switch to either Comcast or DirectTV.

The first games that were broadcast this year on the Mtn proved that the station has made some good  changes.  The picture is improved from last season.  In the past watching the games it was hard to see what the score was in the corner, let alone the names on the back of the jerseys.  This year viewers can actually read the graphics, and see more of the players than blurs on the field.  Is the picture perfect?  No, the picture is very primitive compared to other stations analog signals; not to mention the complete difference between the Mtn current picture and a HD broadcast.  The picture quality should be the top priority for the station.  Improving the picture quality should be even more important than getting the station on Dish Network.  It costs money to improve the equipment to make the broadcast better; however, the station should view the move to HD as an investment that will make the station legitimate.

The graphics overall are much better this year, compared to the graphics used in the past.  The news bar at the bottom of the screen is much better.  The station has simplified it, and it seems that it is smaller this season as well. (Although it might just be that it isn't a huge eye sore that it was last year.)  Not having the Mtn logo flying all over the screen after every change of camera was great.  The camera also was focused more on what was going on in the game, then showing random shots of people in the crowd/sideline during the game.  There was also a wider angle given of the field so the fan could see more of what is going on during the game.

One thing that the Mtn needs to improve is to televise every football game in the conference.  There is no excuse for why any football game in the Mountain West Conference shouldn't be televised.  It just involves more planning on the part of the athletic directors, conference commissioner, and powers at the Mtn.  The Mtn is always looking for more content to broadcast, why they would not take advantage of any football games that they would be able to broadcast is mind blowing. Planning seems to be a key problem with the Mtn network/The Mountain West Conference.  Hopefully that is something that they will continue to improve along with the rest of the station.

There has been improvement, and the station looks better now than it has ever looked before.  Yet, there is still a lot that the station has to improve on to become  a successful alternative to ESPN for the Mountain West Conference.  Hopefully the Mtn will continue on this path forward.

Read More >>>

Matt's Brain Stowell'n Questions

BYU game, BYU ticket office student ticket policy, BYU memories, and a little more...

After the novel I wrote answering the first set of questions, the decision was made to cut the number of questions back to five. That may change in the future, because really it isn't like people are regulating us. Yet, for now it will remain at five questions a week.

Mark, It took a while for these five questions to mosey their way out of the corners of my brain this week but with school starting and a hike up Mount Timpanogos, (Something that is on my list of things to do, but have never gotten around to doing)that seemed to take a month to complete, my mind has been elsewhere. So that leads me into my first question.

1. Prediction time. Who is going to win this week's BYU game, what’s the score, and who is the offensive mvp/defensive mvp?

I stand by my prediction: BYU 35 Northern Iowa 17. I think this game isn't going to be a huge blow out from the start. I think it will be a two score game at half time, and during the third quarter is when BYU will extend the lead.

Offensive MVP: Harvey Unga - He will have 100 yards rushing and 100 yards receiving in the game

Defensive MVP: David Nixon - I was going to go with one of the studs BYU has a D-line, but I think Nixon will really be trying to make a statement in this game. He will try to be making all kinds of plays, and I think he is good enough to get the job done.

Special Teams: O'Neil Chambers - (see question #4)

2. If you had to pin point one area in the Candy Cafe(a business that I helped start/run out of the Stowell household during a summer vacation growing up)downfall what would it be?

That we didn't stop after that first weekend. We made a killing on that first weekend. I think we each put twenty dollars into Candy Cafe, and if we stopped after that first weekend we would have end up each making about $100.00.

Although looking back on that business, we were really coming up with some great ideas for the age we were. We produced our own advertisement that we would call people and play, and copy might still be on the Colyar's answering machine. We out sourced our deliveries, and hired a cheap work force to perform them for us. We also had strict inventory control. Not bad considering how old we were. We just didn't know when to cut and run, when we were sitting on a small pile of money.

3. With the BYU ticket office making it more difficult for us to get in the stadium than it is for Craig Madsen to have a clean thought enter his head. What would you do differently if you were the head of the BYU ticket department?

I have really tried to keep my cool in regards to the terrible ticket policy that BYU used to assign student tickets this year; however, this week I hit my tipping point. The BYU ticket office has moved below the Mountain Television Network as the worst run organization I have ever seen. They now stand alone at number one.

The Five Worst Run Organizations I Have Ever Seen:
1) BYU ticket office
2) The Mtn.
3) Whoever does the drug testing for the MLB/the MLBPA (Major League Baseball Player Union)
4) The Brasilian Post Office/Police Department
5) The DMV/the U of U financial aid office (the college equivalent of the DMV)

The BYU ticket office just made far too many mistakes to list them in one post. Yet, the major mistakes I will include in the post are: not having the rotating seats for the students, not having the program properly tested before use, and over promising and under delivering. The last issue is the biggest. That is a cardinal sin of business. Anytime you over promise what you are going to do you are in a bad situation. If the ticket office would have communicated better with the students, prior to implementing the system(Until the end of July they gave NO information about what the new ticket policy would be), I think everyone would have been okay with the current system. They chose not to do this, and like The Mtn, oversold how great the new system will be. Now even if the new system is the greatest ticket system of all time it doesn't matter. Everyone has a bad taste in their mouth from being burned by the ticket office, and they will have to make some changes now to appease the fans.

If I were in charge of the BYU ticket office I would do something amazing, I would have used the system that has been working for many years. That is the same system they used last year. It wasn't perfect; however, it resulted in far fewer headaches than the current system. The old system was also very easy to understand. You get your tickets, and that is where you are going to sit. Problem solved! The problem with BYU is they are too proud to admit when they are wrong. That is why I like Bronco, maybe he isn't the most energetic guy to listen to do an interview; however, he takes responsibility for mistakes the team makes and corrects them in the future.

4. With O’Neil Chambers coming out and saying that he guarantees a kick return this season, some say that’s less likely than Austin collie throwing a pass to himself. Do you think Chambers should have said that not even having any college experience? But after watching Chamber’s highlight video on youtube

(turn the volume down on that video by the way, I’m sure Bronco wouldn’t approve of Chambers listening to that in Provo!!!!)
I’ve become a believer myself. What are you’re thoughts on this Mark?

I REALLY like O'Neil Chambers. He isn't afraid to speak his mind, and he isn't afraid to be a little cocky. Not only do I think he will return a kick this season, I think he will do it in the opening game. If Northern Iowa kicks to him. White, the other returner for BYU, is much slower and doesn't have big play potential. I have no idea why other teams wouldn't kick it to White every time. If he stays out of trouble, I think O'Neil Chambers will be a huge part of this year's team.

Collie playing QB is a bigger question for me. I don't get why they are moving him to QB. Unless he is going to be used like Weddell was used at Utah, then I don't see any reason for BYU to move him to QB. You can't tell me that Collie, and his little arm is better than either Gaskins or McEuen. If they do use Collie at QB and implement a spread option formation, then I am all for the move to QB

5. The last time I watched a football game at LaVell Edwards Stadium it was also the last time someone else did and his name is Gary Crowton. The last time I watched a game at LaVell Edwards Stadium O'Neil Chambers was a Freshman just dreaming about playing at BYU, and the cougars uniforms looked like this. The last time I was there BYU lost to New Mexico 21-14, a really ugly game. So Mark, what have been your favorite moments at LaVell Edwards Stadium since I left?

Here are the top two moments while you were gone, Matt:
The best has to be last year's BYU vs Utah game. That game had everything! It was a great game from start to finish. It also had moments of complete dread, and of pure sports happiness. Sitting next to a pair of mouthy Utah fans was the best part. After Utah went up late in the game they started to really run their mouths. They instantly shutup after Collie pulled in the magic 4th and 18 pass. Storming the field after the game was great.

Before Bronco's first game was against Boston College was really cool. The stadium was packed, and it was loud. Everyone was really excited to see what Bronco was going to be able to do as head coach of BYU. When the players ran onto the field carrying the BYU Title of Liberty flag...AWESOME. It was the loudest I have heard the stadium since the early 90's.

All-Time Greatest LaVell Eadwards Stadium Moment:
BYU beats Miami during the 1990 season. That was great to watch. I was quite old enough to really understand how big of a deal it was that BYU won that game, but I was just old enough to really enjoy the atmosphere. Everyone was excited to be playing Miami. Detmer made a few out of this world plays, and storming the field after the game really molded me as a fan. I don't think I would be such a huge sports fan, if it wasn't for that 1990 BYU season.

My other opinion that has really changed since the last time you watched a game at LES, is my opinion of Gary Crowton. I have a much higher opinion of him now then I did then. He is a really classy guy, and has a good football head on his shoulders. He just wasn't good at the administrative responsibilities that came along with being the head coach of BYU. I also think he got snack bit by some people within BYU's administration, and by some bad recruits. I also think that he got an unfair shake from the media. Yet, those things are part of the being a head coach, and I think he knew that when they hired him. I think everything worked out well, Bronco is much better suited for the BYU head coaching position, and Crowton really landed on his feet.

Read More >>>

CSTV Now CBS College Sports

CSTV is dead.... so what does this mean?

Now that CBS has finished the accusation of CSTV, what does this mean for Mountain West Conference sports fans? Here is a very good article from Scott Pierce of the Deseret News explaining what this means to fans. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695241176,00.html

Also here is the link to the press release about the change back in February.

http://www.byucougars.com/Filing.jsp?ID=10281

Read More >>>

Mark's Thoughts: James Bates the Best of the Mtn.

The Mtn has a problem now that the deal with Direct TV is in place. What is this problem? People will actually SEE the network. How is that a problem? Have you seen the Mtn? The production value and current use of talent is horrific. The additional viewership will increase the outrage the viewers have felt but has yet to voice due to the networks obscurity. With the new deal in place and the television audience increased, what is the Mtn to do? Relaunch. They should view the start up date with Direct TV as a new beginning. They should distance themselves from the negative perceptions the Mountain West fanbase has of the network. They should put a new face on the network. Who is that? James Bates.

James Bates is the best thing to date that has come out of the Mtn television deal for the Mountain West. Here is the back ground information of the network savior.

James Bates - Football, Men's Basketball, Baseball Play-by-Play; Studio Host James was an All-Southeastern Conference linebacker at the University of Florida and captain of the Gators’ 1996 national championship football team.He has a wide range of sports broadcasting experience on OLN, SPIKE, SUN SPORTS, ESPN, TNN, Speed, and CSTV, hosting and providing play-by-play and color commentary. In addition, James produced and hosted The James Bates Show, which CSTV aired nationally over the past two years. (Source: http://www.themtn.tv/mtn/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=81&Itemid=167 )


James Bates is the only stand out talent on the Mtn. It is like watching a young Chris Berman, Dan Patrick, Linda Cohn or Kenny Mayne. You can see the talent he has whether he is doing a pregame prep rally or commentating the biggest football game of the year.

In interviews he has conducted with Mountain West Conference personas, he has carried the interviews by making them not only watchable, but interesting as well. His interview with Ardie McInelly, head coach of Air Force women's basketball, is a great example. He made the interview interesting and informative. He took an interesting person and told her story. Making the interviewee the focus of the program is what made it great. He has that Dan Patrick quality around him of putting his stamp on the interview without becoming bigger than the interview. I haven't seen another member of the Mtn crew with this ability.

He is a superb play-by-play broadcaster. His work in the most recent BYU - Utah basketball game showcased his talents. He single handily saved the broadcast. He took terrible comments from his color analyst and made them relevant. He did an in-game interview with Shawn Bradley interesting while not taking away from the flow of the game. The awkwardness of in-game interviews is a problem that affects not only every other Mtn. broadcast team, but major network broadcasts (ESPN) as well. He knows the exact level of enthusiasm to use during key plays. He also focused on the game at hand instead of drifting around and talking about every subject under the sun. (That is something that Craig Bolerjack should take notes on.)

The other characteristic that he demonstrated in the BYU - Utah broadcast was his ability to interact with fans. He doesn't come off appearing full of himself, which is a commonality among any network talent, and generally looks to enjoy his work. He will go into student sections to do segments. He gives off a vibe of not wanting to be put on a platform, but wants to appear to be one of the fans. This Lee Corso/Dick Vitale attribute also makes him unique compared to his Mtn co-workers.

James Bates is able to do big games. His calls of the BYU-Utah football games, the biggest Mountain West Conference sporting contest of the year, haven't been good. THEY HAVE BEEN AMAZING! Just listen to the calls he makes during the end of the 2006 game or the 2007 game...

BYU vs. Utah 2006


BYU vs. Utah 2007


He brings great knowledge and intensity to the rivalry. He brings the right amount of respect. He is also able to express, in words, the amazing and to do so on the fly.

During those game he takes Todd Christensen and Blaine Fowler, two men that have talent but are not stars, and elevates their performances. In sports, in business, or in television the ability to make those around you better, in big situations, is a talent prized more than any other. You can't teach that type of leadership, and James Bates has it.

The Mtn has an opportunity. With the new deal in place and national exposure coming in the fall they can put a new face to their faltering network. The face of the network should be James Bates. He should be the star, the focus, and the jack of all trades. He should be on every show he can possibly be on. He should do every big game. When fans think about the network, James Bates should be the first thing to come to their minds. If the heads of the network don't follow this course, BYU, the flagship school of the conference, should demand that he be their exclusive television voice.

James Bates has the talent. The network has the opportunity. The time is now to make the changes they need. I hope that the Mtn. has a long term contract with James Bates, because frankly right now he is better than the network he is on.

Read More >>>

Problems On the Mtn.

This segment of the Blog has taken a vacation during the football off season, but with word coming that the Mtn has finally made a deal with Direct TV it called for a special edition of, "Problems On the Mtn."

The San Diego Aztec Athletic Director, Jeff Schemmel, told reporters that the deal had been signed, and a press release would come out either Thursday or Friday. This is the best news the struggling and almost bankrupt network has ever had. If it is true. That is the rub. It is now almost 2pm MST on Friday, and no press release. Not only that, but no other AD or President is making any announcements about the television deal. All bad signs when it comes to the veracity of the comments given by Schemmel.

Jeff Schemmel is competing in a different type of sports market in San Diego. Interest in the Aztecs' athletics are little in comparison to the Padres, and the Chargers. To get anything into the main stream media he has to make a large splash. If it proves he is running on faulty information, there would be little backlash from the media, in his market. Not to imply he is making this story up. Just that contract negotiations do have a strange way of falling apart quickly. The negations with DirectTV and The Mtn have already had many other people calling the, "wolf," of completion. Virtually an unanimous message of, "wolf," completion came out prior to the beginning of the 2007-08 football season. ADs from the bulk of conference school keep leaking that the deal would be done with in the first month, or shortly there after.

Nothing would hurt The Mtn more, at this moment, than for this contract to fall through. It might be the final nail in the coffin of the network. There would be no better way to fire up all the fans with more anti-Mtn ranting then to make them think they have it on satellite and take it away again. Hopefully, for all parties involved, the press release is pending shortly.

Read More >>>

Problems on the Mtn.

Picture Quality:

I think that the worse thing that the Mtn. did in its first year of broadcasting was to start and broadcast old Mountain West Conference football games. Sure they needed to fill the empty space on the network that had no show besides the games themselves. Plus, there is only so many hours a station can broadcast infomericals before becoming a home shopping channel. Also at the time it did seem like a good idea, what better way to show the fans (those lucky few who could get it) what this station is all about.

Yhey began to broadcast the classic games, and it seemed for a while like Jim McMahon was reincarnated at the Y; he was throwing the Hail Mary in the Miracle Bowl four or five times a week on the new station. People seemed to like it, and the idea of broadcasting old games was a success.

Next the station started to broadcast live games, and then it happened. You couldn't tell what games were live and what games were classics. The picture was just as pixilated as it was in the 80's. In fact, it might actually have been better with the Sports West broadcasts in the 90's then the Mtn. feeds in the present day. I would put money on it that if you put a side by side feed, without any of the newer graphics (which the Mtn. to their credit do blow the older feeds out of water, even with the poorer graphics that they have) you would not be able to tell which was the older and newer signals.

In an interview the director at programming, Steve Hurlbut, claimed the Mtn. uses the same equipment that all the other rivals use. (he mentioned CBS, (which is odd because they are the same company, that is like Microsoft comparing themselves to Xbox it doesn't make sense) Fox, and ESPN) Yet, even to the must unknowlegable viewer changing back and forth from the Mtn. to ESPN or NBC (that are not in HD, because lets be a little fair) can tell the difference. You can't even read the name on the jersey or tell which of the massive blobs are which. If they do have the same equipment then they have no idea how to use it.

It doesn't help that the blurry image appears to be coming from a camera that is somewhere in low orbit above the stadium. Seriously could you get a wider shot of the filed? It is like they only have two choices either too tight to see the formation, or so wide you can see every fan in the stadium. (although you are unable to make them out as anything besides blurs)

Why? If you are going to pay all that money to broadcast games why wouldn't you do it right. Why wouldn't you spend the extra money and get high quality regular, or better HD cameras. The start up capital would have been much higher, but the broadcast would have been amazing. It would also be a nice piece for negotiating if you are a HD channel rather then just standard definition.

The Mtn. missed another great opportunity to have quality video feeds, and look like they are a network that is worth watching.

Next Week: Pre and Post game shows.

Read More >>>

Problems on the Mtn.

Sideline Reports/reporters.

It was in a crowded student union in Rexburg, Idaho when I first saw what we as Mountain West football fans were in store for with the new television deal with CSTV. It was the first football broadcast of the new station, BYU at Stanford. As a show of good faith CSTV was sending the game via closed circuit to the student Union at BYU-Idaho.(by the way that was the last time that anyone on either side of the negotiating table has done anything that benefited the fan) Everyone in the room was waiting for the broadcast and curious about what the quality would be like.

Everyone was very forgiving during the game about the picture quality and poor graphics, seeing this was the first time that they televised a game. Yet, the one thing that no one was forgiving was the terrible sideline reporter. Why? Due to the fact that we were watching a closed feed of the game instead of getting commercials we were able to hear the behind the scene comments between the commentors both in the both and on the field. Which was very interesting, because we were able to get the true opinions of what they were really thinking about the game. The problem with this was the sideline reporters comments during the break. What me and my wife (who I was watching the game with as one of our first dates, which by the way ladies is an extreme plus in the eyes of a sports guy) called the "Love Affair with Matt Berry."

Yes, for the next two and a half hours of the game we were forced to listen to this sideline reporter recount, in a very play by play manner, every movement and action in full gushing detail of Matt Berry. This was especially painful because Berry had started the game for the Cougars and broke his hand during the first drive. A fact we didn't find out about until mid way through the third quarter, because our young harlot couldn't muster the courage to talk to the hunk of Matt Berry until then. Instead it was a continual expression of what features made him great eye candy for this blonde on the sideline.

Problems??? YES! No insight, no effort, and no intelligence. Yet, I gave the situation a gimme in the end, because it was their first broadcast. Fast forward to this season. Do they have timely information on injuries or good insight into why a team is using a certain strategy? NO! During interviews do they ask informed questions? (I define that as questions that I would want answered if I, as a fan of the team, had a chance to ask the coach) NO! Halftime interviews, which are already awkward because coaches are trying to get to the locker room to make changes for the second half and really don't want to be bothered, have now turned into something on pair with pulling your own tooth with pliers on a scale of awkward painful energy.

The interviews on the Mtn. do follow a pattern:

1) Stupid Question from reporter

2) Pause from coach (as all viewers can see them try to control their tongue and not tell the reporter what they really think of them and the question they just asked)

3) Coach talk response (Usually four words or less)

4) Reporter realizing that they didn't get a good answer (not because as the rest of us they are reading the reaction of the coach, but they are referring to a spoken law that answers of less then a sentence is a bad response.)

5) They ask some type of follow up question, but not about the stupid first question, or the

obvious question a fan would have. No, they follow up on the coach speak they were just given.

6) The coaches shifts his weight and starts to move away ending the pointless interview, and spews out some more coach speak right from his wheel house.

7) The reporter confident and happy as always that they got a "quality" follow up response sends it back up to the booth.

Since the launch has the sideline reporting improved? No, in fact I would argue that it has gotten worse. It is to bad that the management on the Mtn. hasn't realized that little changes make huge differences. Good sideline reporting is crucial to a good telecast. Timely information lets the viewing audience focus on what is most important, the game they are watching at the time. There is more to being a good sideline reporter then being easy on the eyes.

What do I want from a sideline reporter?

1) Insight that isn't obvious. Give me information I don't know, things that will make me better understand what I am seeing.

2) During a good game don't do cheesy side note stories. Example, I don't care if the coaches family comes to every game, because that means that the camera crew feels obligated to cut to shots of them during the whole game. I like stories about players/coaches overcoming obstacles to reach the level they are at. Why? It might force the Mtn. to actually show the game being played. (Although, they would rather usually show the random player on the sideline then the actual game)

3) Good information about injuries. Dig a little bit. Don't just repeat the lines given you by the trainer. You can look and tell many things by just observing that people at home would like to know.

4) If the game is good just let the game speak for itself. Don't just jump on to say a stupid comment for the sake of saying something. It is better not to do anything, unless there is an injury.

5)Don't just throw up softballs to the coaches when you interview them, ask good questions.

What can the Mtn. do about this problem. Talent would be a nice start. Training would be a nice follow up. Then seeing it during a telecast would be the perfect finish.

Next Time: Picture Quality

Read More >>>

Problems on The Mtn.

Graphics.

There isn't a worse feeling then watching a distorted image on TV. Except when the image is distorted by the television station you are watching by the stations own doing. Yes, the Mtn has forced all of the fans watching the games to deal with pixelation, and a squished viewing area so they can project their logo, either on the top or bottom of the screen depending on the mood they are in that day. It rubs salt in the wound every time that they go to and from commercial breaks and for a second they take off the graphic and picture quality improves so you can actually see the field, only to have them cut away or insert the graphic forcing the screen back into pixalation.

Also, the flying Mtn logo has to go. It is okay to have that logo every once in a while flying across the screen; however, they use after the cut from one feed to another every time. It is okay to not show that logo and go to another camera, or use that five seconds to show the players lining up for the play. Most fans want to see the formation of both the offense and defense before the play, so they can prepare for what is about to happen on the field. Rather then see a flying logo scream across their screen like a hoped up teenager behind the wheel of a beater car.

The lines showing the first down and line of scrimmage need serious work as well. You have to be at least within a yard of the actual first down to make it a worth while graphic. Also they should have the technology to make it look like the line is actually on the field like all other telecasts and not a floating line that cut into players as they go back and forth over it.

Many Comcast employees have spoken out with surprise that more people haven't complained about this fact, but sighted the lack of availability of the channel as the reason behind the lack of caring from the viewing audience.

KISS- Keep it simple stupid, is always the way to go when it come to telecasts of sports. When a fan turns on a game it is for one reason only, to watch the game. If you are broadcasting a game and extras you are installing into the telecast get in the way of that, KISS, cut out the stuff that is getting in the way. (THE BAD GRAPHICS!!!)

Next Week: Side line reporters.

Read More >>>

This Week's Problem on The Mtn.

Replays!

This in not new technology by far, but some how the Mtn. can't get it right. The point of a replay is to give the viewing audience another opportunity to view the same play. The problem on the Mtn. is replays are getting in the way of the live action. It seems this technology is to much for the Mtn to control, because they are constantly cutting off the current live plays so as to see terrible and blurry camera angles of the previous play.

This Replay abuse was most noted during the Wyoming vs. Utah St. game. Due to the no huddle offense the pokes ran the replay system the Mtn had in place self imploded. The Mtn. would run a replay after each play regardless of what was transpiring on the field. So when the replay would end, the ridiculous Mtn logo would get off the screen just in time to see the tackle being made on the live play. Once or twice is understandable, but that sequence was the standard for the game. Being forced to watch game on a permanent delay is horrible, what is the point? If you are going to watch it on a delay you might as well not watch it live at all.

Until The Mtn. knows when to use it, they just shouldn't use it. It would actually make for a better production.

Next week: Graphics

Read More >>>

Problems on The Mtn.

Posted by:Mark Welling

As I was going through the Deseret News sports page, which is a daily tradition I have,(along with reading the sltrib.com and espn.com) I found an article by Scott D. Pierce which was very interesting. Mr. Pierce, wrote a previous article about the poor production of Mountain West football games on the MTN. In response Mr. Peirce's first article, Steve Hurlbut, the executive producer and director of programming for The Mtn., wrote a rebuttal. In it, Mr Hurlbut, stated that the production value is equal to any other network including, ESPN, NBC, and Foxsports. He then implied that the criticism in Mr. Pierce's article was unwarranted and stated, "We work hard to match or surpass any network in the world in programming quality, so there's not just plenty of TV to watch but also plenty of great TV." Which lead to the follow up article in Friday's sports section by Scott D. Pierce. In which Mr. Pierce stated, and I think rightfully so, that besides Mr. Hurlbut he had received no e-mail or comments criticizing his first article about the production of the Mtn. In fact, he said that the best way to fill his e-mail account with article of praise is to bring up the short comings of the network.

The moral of this story? When you have a terrible product you can't will people to think it is good. To say a major network broadcast(by the way that DOESN'T include VS. or CSTV both of which I would include in the same boat as the Mtn.) and the Mtn are on the same playing field is like saying a high school team can hang with the Patriots.

I thought to write all the problems with the Mtn, but the list is to long. So instead I introduce the new running segment, "Problems on the Mtn?" Each week we at the Big Podcast will post a problem and suggest easy solutions. One thing that is clear is the Mtn needs help, and we here will try to make it better.

Read More >>>