I agree. Why should I have to watch a game on my undersized laptop instead rather than my large TV? And the start of the game which waited for the end of a baseball game between Texax A&M and Missouri when the game had little importance but the hockey game was a National playoff game? Did they really think the importance of the game or the size of the audience were the same? Why not switch the baseball game to another channel - they have plenty of alternates available?
Oh well, its a heck of a lot better now than it was 10 or more years ago.
Tom Rowe
------------------------------
I hate it when people use big words just to make themselves sound perspicacious.
------------------------------
On 3/28/2017 12:17 PM, charlie shub wrote:
For the record, i'm extremely unhappy with the ESPN Coverage
of the 12 games
- only 9 were broadcast, the other 3 were only available by internet streaming
- of the 9 broadcast games, the vast majority ran over the allotted 2.5 hours thus disrupting a later show on that channel. 2.5 hours is just not enough time for a playoff game.
- of the 9 broadcast games, one could not watch the vast majority FROM THE BEGINNING because an earlier show ran over. It really does a whole lot of good to get home an hour after a game starts and go to my DVR to discover the start of the game was NOT RECORDED because something else ran over and what was advertized as the schedule. was changed at the last second. It got so bad that i was not only recording the scheduled games, i was also recording the alternate channel just in case
there is a whole lot of room for improvement.
On 3/27/2017 11:17 AM, Mark Lewin wrote:
Also, I think the NCAA needs to be more beholding to their on-site fans, not just ESPN. If they are going to stop the flow so often for reviews, they need to inform the fans what is going on.
Come on NCAA, it's called customer service!!!!
-- charlie shub at home cell: (719) 761-8778 [log in to unmask] home: (719) 488-3634