FloTrack Race Coverage:

I agree. To be fair, the cut-aways were during the blind-spots on the course.

A better investment for flotrack would be a drone with a camera.

One you missed was the announcers claiming chip error for the 6k split showing SU on top as 5 syracuse guys ran by in the top 20.

Great point about Syracuse.

One Syr jersey after another, passing right in front of their faces, and they're telling us "it's probably a chip error."

If that was a blind spot in the course, they should be using that time to tell us what's been happening in the race, which they've done an incredibly piss-poor job of up to that time.

Instead, they showed us an almost-worthless clip of Mick Byrne describing the course, over and over and over.

The same stupid clip looped at least three full times in a row --it might've been four-- while the race was happening.

Then, they showed it AGAIN, twenty minutes later, in the middle of the men's race. (Along with the totally worthless clip of the Guelph coach, which they also showed

TWICE in short succession.)

You could pick out a bunch of reasonably-smart fifth-graders, and ask them to handle the broadcast.

They wouldn't do any worse.

sp2 wrote:

I want my money back.

The simple solution. Join the rest of us. Don't subscribe.

They had a camera in the lead cart about 15 meters ahead the entire race. Were they not streaming that footage? They have chip splits every 2k or so, so the announcer should have had the ability to track who was in the lead, team scores during the race etc. There was also a meet announcer who he was sitting about 15 feet from calling the race.

i used to subscribe, but the race coverage was so poor that i stopped.

their original content is pretty good, though. just not worth $20/month.

if it was $5/month, i'm in.

to me, XC race coverage should have:

* multiple cameras. cart in front of the race, drones, cameras strategically placed on the ground.

* real time splits for each K (or at least 3 or 4 points during the race)

* knowledgable commentary

* a wrap up video done after the race.

if someone offered THAT coverage, I'd pay $20/month.

the cost of video equipment has come way down. a good setup would probably cost about $50K.

sp2 wrote:

You could pick out a bunch of reasonably-smart fifth-graders, and ask them to handle the broadcast.They wouldn't do any worse.

If you've ever seen the behind-the-scenes crew, you'd know the average age of their staff is about 20...and that's not a good thing.

Giant rip off. Not a fan of the stupid antics of the manchildren who work there, it's ok to be legitimate and cover stories people. You used to be good at providing insider coverage of teams and races. You have never, ever, been funny- so please stop trying.

Thanks for covering the sport- but you can do better- especially if you're charging.

Agreed, the coverage is pretty bad by today's standards. The picture quality looks like circa 1975. These days you can get HD from a cheap GoPro, so I don't understand why it's so bad. The women's race wasn't as bad with respect to the other problems mentioned, although it shouldn't be hard for the announcers to at least balance their audio.

Re drones -- last time I checked the FAA regs, using drones for commercial purposes is still not allowed. Private use is ok and limited test runs, but not full commercial yet, although Amazon is pushing hard.

I've been talking to quite a few people about this lately. I don't know who is doing the hiring for Flotrack these days, but the new employees suck. I've watched two live feeds so far this XC season and the amount of errors with how names are being pronounced and overall play by play is just horrendous. If they are trying to create something truly special they may want to start by firing the current crew and bring in people that actually have experience doing live feeds and know what they are talking about. What they have now is not going to last for long and the bubble will burst.

I enjoyed the days of Alex and Ryan doing the commentating. The new employees seem to just be imitating what they did in the past and it's not working at all. They are not Ryan or Alex and need to get their own identities. Getting a new job while they are at it. It may seem harsh, but if you suck at what you do than maybe you chose the wrong job.

Ironically the free stuff is their best stuff.

Track Shacks, Workout Wednesdays etc. Although Workout Wednesdays are starting to go downhill.

Quality people cost money. Internet video is huge and anyone with a good skills = $$.

FloTrack is hiring cheap people straight out of college with no skills. They know the dumbarses out there will keep paying $20/month for sub-standard content, so why invest in better equipment and announcers?

A friend of mine has a Pro account, and let me log in to poke through some of their stuff. Their produced stuff isn't too bad (the Goucher series, the Oregon Project stuff, etc), but the live coverage of Pre-Nats was so bad. It's a shame. There's a lot of potential there, but for the amount of money, I just don't think it's worth it.

suburbanxcore wrote:

A friend of mine has a Pro account, and let me log in to poke through some of their stuff. Their produced stuff isn't too bad (the Goucher series, the Oregon Project stuff, etc), but the live coverage of Pre-Nats was so bad. It's a shame. There's a lot of potential there, but for the amount of money, I just don't think it's worth it.

I agree, the stand alone videos are actually pretty nice and are done well.

But the live coverage's are terrible. Either it's getting a constant headache from the cart jostling, or some destitute feed that pops in and out every 10 seconds from streaming some 480p content. I like the fact that the commentating isn't bone dry, sterile stuff that you see during meets, but being more articulate and knowledgeable would help as well.

As soon as they brought Jason Byrne and the rest of the mile split people aboard it was the beginning of the end for flotrack. Sadface.

Rumor has it USATF is breaking away from RunnerSpace and will be hitting 2015 content hard. Not sure what that means but my buddy tells me he works with a camera guy that has been hired to do a bunch of features for USATF. Some of these features have already been filmed. If USATF can provide monthly content and potentially do a deal with the NCAA or different schools for live content, that would be nice. Their road race coverage is professionally done with real commentary. Always wondered why Flotrack hasn't tried to hire the same guys. Many people on here say it's because of money, I bet it's because real commentators don't want to be associated with Flotrack.

RumorMill wrote:

Always wondered why Flotrack hasn't tried to hire the same guys. Many people on here say it's because of money, I bet it's because real commentators don't want to be associated with Flotrack.

It's a little of both. On the one hand, commentators are easy to substitute. The experienced guy wants $100,000 annually while another will settle for $35,000 out of college. The biggest selling point on the guy fresh out of college is that he can become like the experienced guy after probably 20-30 races if he studies the sport in the meantime. The quality on the other hand suffers because many of the newbies learn as they go. Or don't learn as they go.

That said, I wouldn't want anything to do with flotrack. They are a bunch of mismanaged clowns.

lettuce run wrote:

RumorMill wrote:

Always wondered why Flotrack hasn't tried to hire the same guys. Many people on here say it's because of money, I bet it's because real commentators don't want to be associated with Flotrack.

That said, I wouldn't want anything to do with flotrack. They are a bunch of mismanaged clowns.

Agreed. But they provide content no one else is so they can exist. They're quality is slightly higher than their professionalsm. Both are below par.

I think their original programming isn't bad. I am a Flo pro subscriber only because no one else has content. If someone else had similar content I would much rather spend my money with them.