How To Ask For ACCN

[hallcity]

Here’s how you can ask

Charter-Spectrum Cable:
https://www.spectrum.com/channelrequests.html

Dish Network:
https://communities.dish.com/t5/Programm...ngrequests

YouTube TV:
https://support.google.com/youtubetv/con...rk_request

Sling TV:
https://help.sling.com/en/support/ticket...annel=true

[devilnfla]

Here’s how you can ask

Charter-Spectrum Cable:
https://www.spectrum.com/channelrequests.html

Dish Network:
https://communities.dish.com/t5/Programm...ngrequests

YouTube TV:
https://support.google.com/youtubetv/con...rk_request

Sling TV:
https://help.sling.com/en/support/ticket...annel=true

Will it not be available on DirecTV?

[brevity]

Will it not be available on DirecTV?

Awful Announcing (https://awfulannouncing.com/league-networks/directv-will-carry-acc-network-when-it-launches-in-august-a-win-for-both-espn-and-the-acc.html): DirecTV will carry the ACC Network when it launches August 22.


ACC Net previously signed launch deals with Altice, Verizon and Hulu TV. ESPN will depend on Hulu’s and DirecTV’s national footprints as they negotiate with other distributors, including Comcast, Charter, Dish Network and AT&T U-Verse.

[Bluedog]

I fear that for those of us in non-ACC land, we're going to be losing at least a few Duke games...:( Hence why I'm not the biggest fan of the ACCN since I liked having everything on national broadcast, largely on ESPN since that's part of the standard package. Now I sense they'll put at least a couple higher profile matchups on ACCN to entice people to subscribe. Is that a valid theory?

[budwom]

I fear that for those of us in non-ACC land, we're going to be losing at least a few Duke games...:( Hence why I'm not the biggest fan of the ACCN since I liked having everything on national broadcast, largely on ESPN since that's part of the standard package. Now I sense they'll put at least a couple higher profile matchups on ACCN to entice people to subscribe. Is that a valid theory?

Maybe, but seems to me these networks carry a lot of tertiary games...ESPN will still suck up the vast majority of Duke games as long as we are relevant...

[devilnfla]

Awful Announcing (https://awfulannouncing.com/league-networks/directv-will-carry-acc-network-when-it-launches-in-august-a-win-for-both-espn-and-the-acc.html): DirecTV will carry the ACC Network when it launches August 22.

Thanks for the information.

[hallcity]

I fear that for those of us in non-ACC land, we're going to be losing at least a few Duke games...:( Hence why I'm not the biggest fan of the ACCN since I liked having everything on national broadcast, largely on ESPN since that's part of the standard package. Now I sense they'll put at least a couple higher profile matchups on ACCN to entice people to subscribe. Is that a valid theory?

Maybe, but why wouldn’t the ACCN be available to you? It’s going to be a national network. The B1G and SEC networks are available to me in NC. Unless you decline ESPN altogether, you’ll probably be getting the ACCN.

[Bluedog]

Maybe, but why wouldn’t the ACCN be available to you? It’s going to be a national network. The B1G and SEC networks are available to me in NC. Unless you decline ESPN altogether, you’ll probably be getting the ACCN.

They are available as part of an extra sports package that costs like $20/month more. You can't usually just add one channel a la carte (unless it's like HBO and that isn't cheap either). So yeah having 90% of Duke games on ESPN networks is better for me than 80% on ESPN networks and 10% on ACCN (unless somehow my package makes ACCN free... possible but unlikely based on where I live. I'm in B1G country and get that but all the other ones are upcharges).

[UrinalCake]

I’m confused. I thought this season was going to be the official launch of the ACCN, different from the ESPN offshoot that has existed in the past. I was expecting all of our games to be on the ACCN. Does anyone know for sure how the game coverage will work?

[hallcity]

I’m confused. I thought this season was going to be the official launch of the ACCN, different from the ESPN offshoot that has existed in the past. I was expecting all of our games to be on the ACCN. Does anyone know for sure how the game coverage will work?

I had the same understanding at first but as best I can tell that’s not how it works. The ACCN will only carry some Duke games — those not covered by other ESPN networks. It’s only one linear channel. It can’t possibly carry all of every ACC team’s games.

[duke2x]

I fear that for those of us in non-ACC land, we're going to be losing at least a few Duke games...:( Hence why I'm not the biggest fan of the ACCN since I liked having everything on national broadcast, largely on ESPN since that's part of the standard package. Now I sense they'll put at least a couple higher profile matchups on ACCN to entice people to subscribe. Is that a valid theory?

The ACCN is only going to get enough of the "B" and "C" Duke basketball games to sell it. From ESPN's perspective, the easiest way to meet contractual requirements is to put Duke/UNC v. ??? on, particularly for ACC games against football schools. That makes every non-conference game in Cameron a candidate. 2020 ACCN candidates where we'll mostly agree: BC (2), Miami (2), Wake (2), @Clemson, @GT, Pitt. You might argue VT and FSU as candidates. The net effect is probably 1-2 games/month in January and February with a maximum of 1 during February sweeps.

Football is a different animal. I think we could make a lot of ACCN appearances in addition to ND: Syracuse, Wake, UNC, UVA, GT, Pitt. ND is probably a night game, but the others will alternate between 12 and 3:30 (assuming we have 3 games/day).

Sling TV is my only form of seasonal cable. They offer Big 10 and SEC as part of a $5/month premium tier, but there are novel methods if they don't (go to the game, sports establishments, free public cable viewings). My worst case scenario is 620 WDNC if it snows a lot that day. The MTSU football game is my current concern because I'm not sure how Facebook Live works.

[budwom]

yeah, ESPN doesn't pay a zillion bucks to allow the ACCN to show whatever it wants...ACCN will get the scraps, some of which will be OK, as mentioned, e.g. some lower echelon out of conference hoop games...if you've looked at what the Big 10 network typically shows, you'll have an idea of what's in store...

[sagegrouse]

yeah, ESPN doesn't pay a zillion bucks to allow the ACCN to show whatever it wants...ACCN will get the scraps, some of which will be OK, as mentioned, e.g. some lower echelon out of conference hoop games...if you've looked at what the Big 10 network typically shows, you'll have an idea of what's in store...

Yes, I remember the early BTN showing the Duke-Northwestern football game when Duke had the longest losing streak in the country. Not exactly prime-time fare. We held on at the end to win, and the Big Ten announcers were really excited.

[kmspeaks]

The ACCN is only going to get enough of the "B" and "C" Duke basketball games to sell it. From ESPN's perspective, the easiest way to meet contractual requirements is to put Duke/UNC v. ??? on, particularly for ACC games against football schools. That makes every non-conference game in Cameron a candidate. 2020 ACCN candidates where we'll mostly agree: BC (2), Miami (2), Wake (2), @Clemson, @GT, Pitt. You might argue VT and FSU as candidates. The net effect is probably 1-2 games/month in January and February with a maximum of 1 during February sweeps.

Football is a different animal. I think we could make a lot of ACCN appearances in addition to ND: Syracuse, Wake, UNC, UVA, GT, Pitt. ND is probably a night game, but the others will alternate between 12 and 3:30 (assuming we have 3 games/day).

Sling TV is my only form of seasonal cable. They offer Big 10 and SEC as part of a $5/month premium tier, but there are novel methods if they don't (go to the game, sports establishments, free public cable viewings). My worst case scenario is 620 WDNC if it snows a lot that day. The MTSU football game is my current concern because I'm not sure how Facebook Live works.

You could switch to Hulu Live TV - Big 10, SEC, and ACCN all included in their base package.

[Acymetric]

yeah, ESPN doesn't pay a zillion bucks to allow the ACCN to show whatever it wants...ACCN will get the scraps, some of which will be OK, as mentioned, e.g. some lower echelon out of conference hoop games...if you've looked at what the Big 10 network typically shows, you'll have an idea of what's in store...

Uh...ESPN owns the ACC Network.

[arnie]

Uh...ESPN owns the ACC Network.

I think you can take “Network” out of the sentence.

[budwom]

I think you can take “Network” out of the sentence.

yes, the point being that millions will watch ESPN and they will have revenues which reflect that...they're not stupid enough to put high echelon Duke games on the ACC Network with what will no doubt be (initially at least) a tiny following.

[Acymetric]

yes, the point being that millions will watch ESPN and they will have revenues which reflect that...they're not stupid enough to put high echelon Duke games on the ACC Network with what will no doubt be (initially at least) a tiny following.

This is mostly true, but maybe less true initially. I feel like I remember this with the advent of the Big Ten Network although it was a while ago. I would expect the ACC Network to get some pretty high profile games early on, especially if some carriers are still holding out, in order to increase demand for the channel and drive subscriptions or drive carriers to add it. Once that is done, yeah it will probably mostly be B-sides.

People aren't going to be clamoring for the ACC Network if it's just Wake vs. Pitt in football and Clemson vs. BC in basketball, and ESPN (at least initially) is going to want people clamoring for it.

[budwom]

This is mostly true, but maybe less true initially. I feel like I remember this with the advent of the Big Ten Network although it was a while ago. I would expect the ACC Network to get some pretty high profile games early on, especially if some carriers are still holding out, in order to increase demand for the channel and drive subscriptions or drive carriers to add it. Once that is done, yeah it will probably mostly be B-sides.

People aren't going to be clamoring for the ACC Network if it's just Wake vs. Pitt in football and Clemson vs. BC in basketball, and ESPN (at least initially) is going to want people clamoring for it.

I guess we have a different recollection, though I didn't pay ultra close attention....I checked on the big ten network a few times early on and found most of the games to be tertiary ones...

I see no logic for people outside of the ACC area having any interest in the ACC Network, yet ESPN gets great viewership on upper echelon games....they have to continue feeding that...with TV saturation already being what it is, I just don't see the ACC Network becoming any kind of huge moneymaker, with anything more than a very modest following...

[Acymetric]

I guess we have a different recollection, though I didn't pay ultra close attention...I checked on the big ten network a few times early on and found most of the games to be tertiary ones...

I see no logic for people outside of the ACC area having any interest in the ACC Network, yet ESPN gets great viewership on upper echelon games...they have to continue feeding that...with TV saturation already being what it is, I just don't see the ACC Network becoming any kind of huge moneymaker, with anything more than a very modest following...

It depends on what you mean by tertiary I guess. Ohio State and Michigan football both played multiple games on the Big Ten Network in it's opening year. Not the biggest games (obviously not the OSU-Michigan game), but still some of the biggest draws regardless of who they are playing. Don't be surprised to see Clemson/FSU/Miami etc. make appearances on the ACC Network, and then when basketball rolls around you'll see Duke and unc on there as well. The (correct) thinking is that it will cause people to sign up just to see those games. Some of them will drop it immediately after, but some people will forget or not care enough (or, I suppose, enjoy the content so much) that they keep the channel in perpetuity. It's not going to be the biggest games in a given week, but it isn't going to be the Raycom 12:30 lineup either.

*I'll note that I was living in Ohio when the Big Ten Network rolled out, so I was reasonably plugged in with the programming because my friends had to go to great lengths to see some of their games since the school didn't carry BTN on it's cable.

[-jk]

IIRC, for its first few years, the January/first Duke-UNC game was on ESPN2 as a way to pressure cable companies to carry it. Lots of folks traipsing off to their local sports bar...

-jk

[UrinalCake]

I have been operating under the (apparently incorrect) assumption that the ACC Network will be similar to the Big 10 Network, SEC Network, etc. Those all operate as separate standalone entities. The only time I have ever wanted to watch a PAC 10 game was a couple years ago when Arizona and Deandre Ayton were playing Hurley and the highly ranked at the time ASU. Despite being a very high profile game, it was only carried by the PAC10 Network which nobody has, and not on ESPN.

Anyways, based on this link (http://theacc.com/news/2019/3/11/general-acc-network-frequently-asked-questions.aspx) it looks like the ACCN is just a pile of content that will be shown on ESPN, with a few things carried on the separate ACCN channel.

[hallcity]

My guess is that the ACC will have to make some scheduling commitments in order to get carriers to sign up -- something like promising at least five conference BB games per school per year on the ACCN and at least two FB games. With that kind of commitment and the strength of the ACC, the ACCN will carry some games that will be of interest beyond the ACC area. Any Notre Dame FB games and any Duke BB games are of national interest. Those two schools have a national following unlike those of any other school. I'm also hoping that the non-game ACCN scheduling will be of national interest. They're already promising interesting 30 for 30 type broadcasts that other conference networks don't have. I hope they'll have shows covering college BB nationally in a way that no one else covers it. It may not be the ACC but I'm interested in what's going on at Arizona and Memphis and Villanova, etc. I would watch a show that tries to cover college BB nationally.

[tbyers11]

I have been operating under the (apparently incorrect) assumption that the ACC Network will be similar to the Big 10 Network, SEC Network, etc. Those all operate as separate standalone entities. The only time I have ever wanted to watch a PAC 10 game was a couple years ago when Arizona and Deandre Ayton were playing Hurley and the highly ranked at the time ASU. Despite being a very high profile game, it was only carried by the PAC10 Network which nobody has, and not on ESPN.

Anyways, based on this link (http://theacc.com/news/2019/3/11/general-acc-network-frequently-asked-questions.aspx) it looks like the ACCN is just a pile of content that will be shown on ESPN, with a few things carried on the separate ACCN channel.

From reading your link I think that your original assumption is correct. There will be a standalone network (ACCN) available via your cable/streaming provider. In addition to that there will be a distinct platform (ACCNE) that will show some content only on digital app.

Seems to me that it will be very similar to the SEC Network which is a distinct network from ESPN but has relationship of shared resources and digital content platform. Big10 and PAC10 networks do not have any relationship with ESPN.

[Acymetric]

I have been operating under the (apparently incorrect) assumption that the ACC Network will be similar to the Big 10 Network, SEC Network, etc. Those all operate as separate standalone entities. The only time I have ever wanted to watch a PAC 10 game was a couple years ago when Arizona and Deandre Ayton were playing Hurley and the highly ranked at the time ASU. Despite being a very high profile game, it was only carried by the PAC10 Network which nobody has, and not on ESPN.

Anyways, based on this link (http://theacc.com/news/2019/3/11/general-acc-network-frequently-asked-questions.aspx) it looks like the ACCN is just a pile of content that will be shown on ESPN, with a few things carried on the separate ACCN channel.


From reading your link I think that your original assumption is correct. There will be a standalone network (ACCN) available via your cable/streaming provider. In addition to that there will be a distinct platform (ACCNE) that will show some content only on digital app.

Seems to me that it will be very similar to the SEC Network which is a distinct network from ESPN but has relationship of shared resources and digital content platform. Big10 and PAC10 networks do not have any relationship with ESPN.

The ACC Network and SEC Network are both owned by ESPN (with Hearst Communications also having a 20% stake in each network). As I understand it, the business models/structure are basically the same for both (although the ACC Network will reportedly take a slightly different approach to content that "fits the culture of the ACC" or whatever). The SEC Network is not a separate entity from ESPN and does not operate as such (there is SECN+ content all over WatchESPN just as there will be ACCNE+). Yes there will be a standalone ACC Network channel (there is also a standalone SEC Network channel), but in both cases that channel and the content are owned by ESPN, not the conferences.

The Pac 12 Network and Big 10 Network are standalone/owned by their respective conferences, a different model.

[budwom]

IIRC, for its first few years, the January/first Duke-UNC game was on ESPN2 as a way to pressure cable companies to carry it. Lots of folks traipsing off to their local sports bar...

-jk

In the very early days (circa 1982 or so) a lot of weird stuff went on with ESPN because they had little clout. For example, my wee cable company back then forced me to subscribe to both HBO and Showtime in order to get ESPN (those rat bastids).
I called ESPN about this, they confirmed that nothing in their contract with local cable companies precluded this.

But of course in time ESPN disallowed this...

[-jk]

In the very early days (circa 1982 or so) a lot of weird stuff went on with ESPN because they had little clout. For example, my wee cable company back then forced me to subscribe to both HBO and Showtime in order to get ESPN (those rat bastids).
I called ESPN about this, they confirmed that nothing in their contract with local cable companies precluded this.

But of course in time ESPN disallowed this...

ESPN2 launched in the early 90s, though - a far cry from the Aussie Rules football days!

-jk

[budwom]

ESPN2 launched in the early 90s, though - a far cry from the Aussie Rules football days!

-jk

They're (ESPN) not above coercion, that's for sure...but I don't see ESPN trying to coerce people nationally to get the ACCN in order to watch Duke-UNC, it just doesn't sense. Not much logic for those outisde the ACC area. I guess we'll see.

People are already cutting the cord and rebelling against paying for a lot of channels they rarely, if ever, watch.

[Acymetric]

They're (ESPN) not above coercion, that's for sure...but I don't see ESPN trying to coerce people nationally to get the ACCN in order to watch Duke-UNC, it just doesn't sense. Not much logic for those outisde the ACC area. I guess we'll see.

People are already cutting the cord and rebelling against paying for a lot of channels they rarely, if ever, watch.

I suspect that trend is going to start reversing if it hasn't already (although maybe in favor of web-based "totally not cable or satellite but really the same thing" options like Youtube TV, Hulu, Sling, etc). There are too many platforms spinning up their own proprietary content streaming services, and eventually people are going to say "wait, I'm spending $140 per month...maybe I'll just go back to a TV package". I expect something similar with the proliferation of subscription based software (I'm looking at you, Adobe and Microsoft Office).

[budwom]

I suspect that trend is going to start reversing if it hasn't already (although maybe in favor of web-based "totally not cable or satellite but really the same thing" options like Youtube TV, Hulu, Sling, etc). There are too many platforms spinning up their own proprietary content streaming services, and eventually people are going to say "wait, I'm spending $140 per month...maybe I'll just go back to a TV package". I expect something similar with the proliferation of subscription based software (I'm looking at you, Adobe and Microsoft Office).

It's certainly true that a lot of cord cutters who went to the services you reference has found escalating costs to be a major disappointment...I've had a few friends rave about the other services getting them everything they want (and perhaps they do), but when I checked out what I require, especially in terms of wanting access to Duke sports, the alternatives don't cut it.

I know personally I require the various ESPN channels, but have drawn the line pretty much on ESPN Plus, just can't see giving those guys any more $$ on top of the bundle they already get. People do have limits.

[rasputin]

IIRC, for its first few years, the January/first Duke-UNC game was on ESPN2 as a way to pressure cable companies to carry it. Lots of folks traipsing off to their local sports bar...

-jk

I was just going to mention that. I remember there were some other high-profile things that they put on the Deuce in those days, for the same reason.

[budwom]

I was just going to mention that. I remember there were some other high-profile things that they put on the Deuce in those days, for the same reason.

True, but even the deuce is/was a national channel...can't see them alienating subscribers by foisting the ACCN on them, but corporate greed should not be underestimated I suppose...

[Acymetric]

True, but even the deuce is/was a national channel...can't see them alienating subscribers by foisting the ACCN on them, but corporate greed should not be underestimated I suppose...

The best comparison is the SEC Network, which is almost the exact same business model.

In 2014 (the year the SEC Network launched) the SEC Network had:

21 games with at least one ranked team
2 games with two ranked teams
2 games with Alabama
24 games featuring two "big time" football teams (traditional football schools with followings, not necessarily ranked at the time)

The ACC Network isn't going to get the biggest games, but they are going to get big games in an effort to push carriers to carry and subscribers to subscribe.

[UrinalCake]

I suspect that trend is going to start reversing if it hasn't already... there are too many platforms spinning up their own proprietary content streaming services, and eventually people are going to say "wait, I'm spending $140 per month...maybe I'll just go back to a TV package".


It's certainly true that a lot of cord cutters who went to the services you reference has found escalating costs to be a major disappointment...I've had a few friends rave about the other services getting them everything they want (and perhaps they do), but when I checked out what I require, especially in terms of wanting access to Duke sports, the alternatives don't cut it.

During the basketball season I pay each month:

- $50 for YouTube Live (I have also tried Hulu Live and DirectTV Now which are about the same)
- $17 for Netflix (I think the cost might be increasing soon)
- $90 for super high-speed internet; if I didn't stream video then I would probably go with a cheaper level and save $10-15
- $40/year for a VPN service that I use to torrent some movies and shows
- At the start of the season I used the free week of ESPN+ to watch the Canada games, then in the fall I bought it for a month to watch Earn Everything
- I also use Amazon Prime Video which I get with my Amazon Prime membership

It's been over a decade since I've had a traditional cable subscription, but I suspect it would cost me around $80-100/month to get an equivalent number of channels. Which is more, but not a ton more. I'd probably still keep the Netflix subscription as they have a lot of their own content. Plus the usability of a set-top box is so much higher than dealing with these online services. The interfaces are all clunky, plus they insert their own commercials into prerecorded content so you don't really get a true DVR experience.

The counterargument is that with streaming services I can turn them off during the offseason and save money that way. Plus I'm constantly juggling free trials when they come available so that saves a bit more. But I agree that the rapid movement towards streaming services will likely reach a peak and then possibly regress the other way once the novelty wears off.

[budwom]

The best comparison is the SEC Network, which is almost the exact same business model.

In 2014 (the year the SEC Network launched) the SEC Network had:

21 games with at least one ranked team
2 games with two ranked teams
2 games with Alabama
24 games featuring two "big time" football teams (traditional football schools with followings, not necessarily ranked at the time)

The ACC Network isn't going to get the biggest games, but they are going to get big games in an effort to push carriers to carry and subscribers to subscribe.

I think that's a good comparison....but my take on it, given that so many SEC teams are ranked in football, that "2 games with two ranked teams" says it all...you get to see secondary and tertiary games primarily...every single week you have multiple games with two ranked teams in that league, and yet the SEC network only gets two of them...they throw you an occasional bone (2 Bama games) but it's hardly compelling...

[yancem]

I'd say the biggest benefit of the accn to me will be the likely hood of more lacrosse games.

[duke2x]

I'd say the biggest benefit of the accn to me will be the likely hood of more lacrosse games.

ESPN-U has already claimed all the quality games ,and I don't see them giving those back. Next year's schedule probably will feature Furman, Richmond, and likely Navy (now that Amplo has gone from Marquette) on ACC-N.

The bigger beneficiary in the spring is likely baseball. I can see ACC-N broadcasting 2-3 additional weekend series (F/S/S and S/S/M), which would be an improvement from our usual/all ESPN3 status.

[Acymetric]

ESPN-U has already claimed all the quality games ,and I don't see them giving those back. Next year's schedule probably will feature Furman, Richmond, and likely Navy (now that Amplo has gone from Marquette) on ACC-N.

The bigger beneficiary in the spring is likely baseball. I can see ACC-N broadcasting 2-3 additional weekend series (F/S/S and S/S/M), which would be an improvement from our usual/all ESPN3 status.

You guys keep looking at the ACC Network as in competition for content with the ESPN content. This is not the case.

[yancem]

ESPN-U has already claimed all the quality games ,and I don't see them giving those back. Next year's schedule probably will feature Furman, Richmond, and likely Navy (now that Amplo has gone from Marquette) on ACC-N.

The bigger beneficiary in the spring is likely baseball. I can see ACC-N broadcasting 2-3 additional weekend series (F/S/S and S/S/M), which would be an improvement from our usual/all ESPN3 status.

I want to watch any Duke lacrosse game so if the accn adds even a couple that would be great. Right now espnu only carries a couple of Duke's games. Baseball will certainly get a boost from accn but I barely watch any MLB and only watch college ball when it gets to the playoffs.

[budwom]

I want to watch any Duke lacrosse game so if the accn adds even a couple that would be great. Right now espnu only carries a couple of Duke's games. Baseball will certainly get a boost from accn but I barely watch any MLB and only watch college ball when it gets to the playoffs.

I agree, the U covers the tournament well and some key matchups, but by and large most of our games aren't on TV and I'd be thrilled if the ACCN (if DirecTV happens to have it) gets me some of those.