All 82 Blazers Games to air in HD

by Ben Golliver on Sep 14, 2009 2:23 PM PDT in News

Every Blazers game will air in High Definition this season. Booya. And I just spent 25,000 dollars removing the creases around my eyes from last year. Throw the telescope back in the garage!

And in case you forgot, that won't be the only change this year.

Welcome to 2007, Blazers Broadcasting. Glad to have you.

Click through for the full press release.

-- Ben (benjamin.golliver@gmail.com)

TRAIL BLAZERS ANNOUNCE ‘ALL-HD'

BROADCAST SCHEDULE FOR 2009-10

For the first time, every game expected to air in high definition

PORTLAND, Ore. - The Portland Trail Blazers revealed plans to broadcast all 2009-10 games in high definition, highlighting the 75-game local broadcast schedule announced by the team today.

The Trail Blazers will air 60 games on Comcast SportsNet Northwest (CSNNW) and 15 on KGW Northwest NewsChannel 8. All KGW games will also be broadcast throughout the state on the Trail Blazers Television Network.

The seven games not included in the local schedule will air exclusively with NBA broadcast partners TNT and ABC, ensuring that all 82 games are slated to be televised.

The Trail Blazers have increased the number of high definition broadcasts each season, up from 40 last season, 34 in 2007-08 and 10 in 2006-07.

Mike Barrett, a 10-year veteran of the Trail Blazers broadcast team, enters his seventh season handling television play-by-play duties. For the fifth straight season, he will be joined on the broadcast by color analyst Mike Rice, who begins his 20^th overall season behind the microphone for the Trail Blazers. Sideline reporter Rebecca Haarlow returns for a third season.

Studio analyst Michael Holton also returns for a third season, providing pregame, halftime and postgame insight. He will be joined in-studio by Bob Akamian and a rotating cast of Trail Blazers personalities.

All Trail Blazers preseason and regular season games will be broadcast on KXTG 95.5 FM "The Game" and to 22 other affiliates on the Trail Blazers radio network. Play-by-play voice Brian Wheeler (12^th season), analyst Antonio Harvey (fifth season) both return, as does sideline reporter Jay Allen, who will host the pre-game show and provide post-game interviews from the locker room.

-- Ben (benjamin.golliver@gmail.com)

Tweet Comment 54 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Old news, but good news.

This was announced at the end of the playoffs last year, and reconfirmed earlier this month by Mike Barrett on Talkin’ Ball. Previous fanpost

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 14, 2009 2:40 PM PDT reply actions

This news is

lame if it is not about Comcast giving in…

Another year in the dark for Blazer fans without Comcast?

Big D from Blog-A-Bull - "Pritchard is such a genius that teams just give him players for free."

Greg Oden - The only other rookie with more than 500 points, 400 rebounds, and 65 blocks in under 1400 minutes played. Since 1946

by FiveOhThree-RipCity!! on Sep 14, 2009 2:47 PM PDT reply actions

No, you can watch in a postcard size window on league pass broadband :)

Or where blacked out crappy illegal streams

There's Gotta Be More To Life

by Norsktroll on Sep 14, 2009 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions

I live in “the sticks” and have Wave Broadband as a cable provider. I get CSNNW as part of basic cable. So it must be possible for other cable providers to purchase the channel. Unless Wave is owned by Comcast.

by Sean M on Sep 14, 2009 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions

I looked up Wave

They are offered in Washington and California but not in Oregon. So it looks as though Vancouverites have an option.

by NWfan on Sep 15, 2009 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions

I actually live in Sandy Oregon.

Charter Communication was my original provider, but Wave bought out some of their coverage areas. Charter did not offer CSNNW, but Wave does. I pay a whopping $26.75/month for 78 channels including CSNNW. It’s as basic as it gets, but I get every game so it works for me.

You might try calling Wave and see if they plan to expand their coverage area. I doubt it, but who knows?

by Sean M on Sep 15, 2009 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions

Just set my mother up with sling box

she will get to watch ever game this year down in Yuma where she lives now for the weather, bought 3 boxes thinking that needed one on each end but all you need is a subscriber to comcast and if lucky a dedicated cable box and one can watch anywhere you have an internet conection. Also hooked it up to her 46’’ flat screen tv may have a slight lag but not to bad.

by prof.mike on Sep 14, 2009 4:43 PM PDT up reply actions

I came to this thread just to find the first person to use this post to bitch about Comcast.

Found it!

I can just imagine Dave making a thread about the Paul Allen donating a billion dollars to charity. Inevitably, someone would say, “Yeah, but he used to write checks to nanny raper Ruben Patterson!”

Whatever
thetinfoil@gmail.com

by TheTinfoil on Sep 14, 2009 7:27 PM PDT up reply actions

comcast

eats babies

"No disrespect to Jeff Blake"

by Eat Politicians on Sep 14, 2009 10:56 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

It's going to happen this year!

The satellites will have all the games. This was hinted at fairly strongly by Blazer personnel, so I know …. just know it will come true. HOORAH!

Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave

Also: COMCAST SUCKS!

by TwoDeep on Sep 15, 2009 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions

Of course it was hinted at 2 years ago

and we know how THAT turned out……

"I'm a man, but I can change.....if I have to......I guess." - Red Green

by antediluvian on Sep 15, 2009 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions

Yeah, how well I remember.

But it’s this comment from the Blazers’ Sarah Mensah that I am clinging to (futile or not):

" …but I think fans should rest assured we’re not going to go into the season again this coming year with the same situation where there aren’t any options."

Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave

Also: COMCAST SUCKS!

by TwoDeep on Sep 15, 2009 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions

Nice no more flippin to channel 732

Blazer Fan

by leeroyjenkins on Sep 14, 2009 2:50 PM PDT reply actions

I’ll believe it when I see it.

Last year many road games were broadcast in SD. I honestly have a hard time believing that we’ll see Portland @ Charlotte or Milwaukie in HD.

Regarding Hedo Türkoğlu:

Look at the bright side, Blazers fans -- you dodged a bullet. He peaked statistically two years ago. He's allegedly 30 but could be closer to 32 or 33 for all we know. (Do you trust Turkish birth certificates? And isn't it weird that he played four years of pro ball in Turkey in the 1990s?)

- Bill Simmons of ESPN.com

by halo_on on Sep 14, 2009 2:57 PM PDT reply actions

..and by HD I mean widescreen, not 4:3 calling itself HD.

Regarding Hedo Türkoğlu:

- Bill Simmons of ESPN.com

by halo_on on Sep 14, 2009 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions

There was one home game broadcast in SD last year that was scheduled to be HD.

I was told that was because of an HD equipment failure. There was also another game that was being broadcast in HD, but because of an equipment failure the broadcast became intermittent and they finally switched over to SD equipment to show the remainder of the game. All other home games were broadcast in HD.

Two road games were broadcast in HD last year, but the last one was a late addition to the schedule. They had only scheduled one road game in HD last year.

It costs more money to broadcast in HD because they have to pay more to rent an HD production truck in the “road” cities. It’s nice that they are eating the extra cost to broadcast all of the road games in HD. It’s to be expected by now in the high-definition era, but they could have dragged their feet longer. (Note the relatively high number of cheap shows still in SD on network TV.)

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 14, 2009 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions

Then there's the high-def shows that artifact so badly in some scenes

that you long for the days of standard def. Comcast believes more channels is more important than actually getting high-def quality on its high-def shows. It makes me want to puke all over the idiots making those decisions.
.

And I had gagh for lunch!

by MiledAnimal on Sep 14, 2009 4:11 PM PDT up reply actions

Video artifacts are a very complex subject.

Far off topic, and way too technical to discuss here.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 14, 2009 4:35 PM PDT up reply actions

I still use a CRT Tv

Yet Comcast regulary has artifacts in its SD broadcasts as well. I get digital errors in the same part of the screen (just right of middle) on all channels at times. Comcast claims that it is with my TV connection being loose, yet is is nothing inside my house as I’ve disconnected and reconnected many times with no improvement. Since the problem is intermitent, Comcast doesn’t bother with more than phone based diagnostics. You’d think we’d get some service for the price we pay. Regulation works, “free markets” screw the consumers.

by NWfan on Sep 15, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Regulation works, "free markets" screw the consumers.

Absolutely! Rec!!!

by Sean M on Sep 15, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions

Without free markets, you'd have rabbit ears on your TV and three channels.

by MiledAnimal on Sep 15, 2009 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions

Another way of looking at it is....

If it was solely left to the free market, you’d have competing standards and the attendant mess that comes with that. Such as TVs only picking up certain stations, 5 different “flavors” of non-compatible HD, etc.

The best model is probably part free market, part regulation.

"I'm a man, but I can change.....if I have to......I guess." - Red Green

by antediluvian on Sep 15, 2009 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions

Competing standards always get sorted-out sooner or later.

And it’s usually the market that does the sorting, not the feds.

Sometimes competitors form consortiums to agree on a standard.

Regulation has a place in ensuring a level playing field for everyone, as in SEC rules prohibiting insider trading, not in telling businesses how to run themselves. That’s when government almost always screws things up.

by MiledAnimal on Sep 15, 2009 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions

Respectfully disagree.

Standards, when left to teh free market, rarely are resolved quickly or efficiently, not in the best interests of the consumer. Case in point (from a different industry) is cell phone transmission systems. Can someone plaease explain why we have both GSM and CDMA in the US?

Also, no one would ever get TV or telephone at “the last mile” if it was left up to the free market. Those of us living in rural America can thank the FCC for that.

"I'm a man, but I can change.....if I have to......I guess." - Red Green

by antediluvian on Sep 15, 2009 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions

Bad example. Differing wireless standards don't hurt the consumer

since each carrier supplies its own network anyway.

Every benefit that government mandates to one group comes at the expense of other groups.

Anyway, I’m not against all regulations, just bad ones.

by MiledAnimal on Sep 15, 2009 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions

Excuse me? It does harm consumers

by locking them into specific carriers. You can’t take your GSM phone and move to a CDMA carrier. Nor can you take your CDMA phone and have it work in much of anyplace else outside the US.

there are competiing standards because transmission equipment manufacturers offered sweetheart deals to companies to choose their standards….not because it was in any way better.

How about the govt. manadate to witch to digital transmission? The move will be a HUGE benefit for public service providers, and get PSPs out of the stone age. The move to digital was a spectrum issue that had to be addressed in order to provide PSP interoperability on the national level.

Or let’s go back……..should we have let the competing TV manufacturers decide on a color transmission scheme? If you thought Betamax and VHS was bad (and there’s another one….how did all the money consumers spent on betamax benefit anyone?), imagine two incompatible transmission methods for color TV….we’d still be watching black and white.

And if you think cable TV is a good thing, that was government regulation that allowed cable TV to even happen in the first place. The private enterprise broadcasters fought the re-transmission of their broadcasts, even though it cost them nothing. The original purpose of cable TV (originally known as community access TV) was to bring transmissions to communities that couldn’t receive broadcasts. there was no economic incentive for major broadcasters to reach the “hinterlands”. Pooled resources brought in high gain antennaes and the ability to send the transmissions over cable to areas where broadcasts couldn’t be reached.

For all its warts, the FCC is one of the most efficient regulatory agencies in the world. It focuses on consumer access and a moderately level playing field, then lets private enterprise move on. Having worked in two different industries regulated by the FCC, I was actually somewhat impressed by them.

Government regulation can be a good thing. It is not always good, but judicious application of regulation can help the free market operate in a way that benefits more people, without impairing the ability to turn a profit.

OR….we could just agree to disagree.

"I'm a man, but I can change.....if I have to......I guess." - Red Green

by antediluvian on Sep 15, 2009 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions

There's no way to know how TV and cable services

would have turned-out had government taken no role, so you can’t really say things are better today for it. The Betamax/VHS outcome was not ideal in that Betamax was a superior format but VHS got to market first and became the standard. Do you think the feds should have mandated Betamax because it was better? Would that have been fair to the stockholders of companies that went with VHS?

CDMA vs GSM… I work in the wireless industry, but I don’t know how the decision was made by some companies to go with one format or the other. How do you know that it was because of sweetheart deals? In any case, wireless companies prefer that customers not switch to different carriers, so I’m pretty sure they would have taken steps to prevent that option somehow even if the feds had mandated one format.

Above and beyond that issue, the question is really what is right and fair for the government to mandate. Most of the time, that is not an easy thing for anyone to recognize early enough in the process for companies to avoid taking the kind of brutal losses that Toshiba, for example, had to take when the market chose Blu-Ray instead of DVD HD. If someone’s ox is going to be gored, I would prefer most of the time that the market, not the feds, is the one wielding the sword.

by MiledAnimal on Sep 15, 2009 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions

Very True.

I do not advocate the goverment takeover of any industry, but regulation forces providers to provide low cost service to the poor and service in general to those of us living at “the last mile.” I live east of the booming metropolis Sandy and pay a whopping $27 a month for basic service. There is simply no way my service exists in the free market. There is no profit in providing me basic cable. If Wave Broadband didn’t have to do it, they wouldn’t.

However, regulation is not the only way problems resolve themselves. Sometimes a company simply decides to set the bar as high as possible, and other companies are forced to follow suit to compete. That is when the free market lives up to the ideal people set for it. The pursuit of a high profit margin needs to be tempered by a desire to produce the best product possible for as many people as possible. Generally, when a company follows that philosophy, they get strong profits, and consumers get the best product possible.

Japanese CEO’s whose companies perform poorly often resign voluntarily (and in disgrace) for the good of the company. American CEO’s who perform poorly get an 8 figure golden parachute with their pink slip.

The free market works when companies behave appropriately. Government intervention is one way to help ensure that happens, at least when the government takes the time to do it right and in moderation.

In short, I get to watch every Blazer game this upcoming season for $27/month!!!! Whoopeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Sean M on Sep 15, 2009 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions

I am so jealous of that last sentence.

I get to spend a LOT more and still not get CSNW.

"I'm a man, but I can change.....if I have to......I guess." - Red Green

by antediluvian on Sep 15, 2009 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions

you’d have rabbit ears on your TV and three channels.

Those were the days. What did my parents pay for their TV service? $29.95 at Sears?

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Sep 16, 2009 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions

I believe

The home game was the Toronto one and they couldn’t get the HD truck there or there was some broadcast issue because it was during the big ice/snow thing.

by TSE on Sep 14, 2009 4:43 PM PDT up reply actions

Considering

A lot of teams still don’t air their road games in HD this really isn’t a 2007 thing.

by TSE on Sep 14, 2009 2:57 PM PDT reply actions

Sigh.

Not having Tony there to tell me other scores and what the winning teams had just one was almost fully healed. Thanks for bringing this up again Ben.

by tking503 on Sep 14, 2009 2:57 PM PDT via mobile reply actions

Or won

Meh.

by tking503 on Sep 14, 2009 2:59 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions

I still have a really old tv, altho Im working on HD for my bedroom! :D

nothing like late night blazers game

It’ll be like I’m really there!!!!!!!!!!!

Sophia

The Princess of Blazersedge

Sport is my boyfriend

by BlazerFan1 on Sep 14, 2009 3:14 PM PDT reply actions

If you want to be there...

I have an extra ticket to several games. However, you have to keep in mind the following:

1) My seats are in Section 315 so they are not really worthy of a Princess. Greg Oden looks about 6 inches tall from my vantage point.

2) I’m not young (41), good-looking or fashionable so being seen with me in public maybe somewhat undesirable.

3) There’s a chance that one of my seats will go empty without your help. The fate of the planet hangs in the balance.

You gotta admit that it’s a pretty hard offer to resist. LOL!!! I hope you enjoy your new TV. Mine’s ancient also, but I’m planning to upgrade just in time for pre-season.

by Sean M on Sep 14, 2009 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions

so glad

to finally be able to watch road games in HD.

by Avoozl on Sep 14, 2009 3:29 PM PDT reply actions

Love this

Having to watch the SD broadcasts on my TV every other game was no fun.

by JK47 on Sep 14, 2009 3:33 PM PDT reply actions

Piss and moan all you guys

for having had to put up with crappy SD. How about no broadcast at all, save some really poor internet feeds that couldn’t be relied on.

Cry me a river.

Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave

Also: COMCAST SUCKS!

by TwoDeep on Sep 15, 2009 8:54 AM PDT up reply actions

I cried a river over you.

by MiledAnimal on Sep 15, 2009 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions

Thanx. I appeciate your emphathy.

Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave

Also: COMCAST SUCKS!

by TwoDeep on Sep 15, 2009 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions

"Heck, I'm sensitive as all get-out." --Sam Malone

by MiledAnimal on Sep 15, 2009 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions

Sorry I don't know who Sam Malone is. I don't watch TV much. Movie star maybe?

And actually, knowing that animals don’t cry nor do they show emphathy I should have realized there was no need to bother you with a reply to your comment.

Sam Malone FTW (I guess).

Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave

Also: COMCAST SUCKS!

by TwoDeep on Sep 15, 2009 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions

omg yay !!! lol :)

Everything is bigger in Texas lol!

by Blazergirl25 on Sep 14, 2009 3:37 PM PDT reply actions

WOOOHOOO!!!

Paladins are awesome!

by Starvin' Marvin on Sep 14, 2009 3:39 PM PDT reply actions

"broadcast all 2009-10 games in high definition"

This doesnt necessarily mean they are going to film them all in HD.

But I am hoping they will all be in HD.

"OK, it's going to rain tomorrow. And there is going to be a Greenpeace meeting and hippies are going to be protesting" ~ The Buffet of Goodness on Portland

by Blazer on Sep 14, 2009 3:58 PM PDT reply actions

Sweet!!

No more double images for me! lol

by Ben_2.0 on Sep 14, 2009 4:27 PM PDT reply actions

What about Verizon getting CSNNW in HD?!?!?!

Alright I know something is better than nothing (because there are still the satellite folks who can’t get Comcast at all) but I freaking want Verizon and Comcast to get their act together and give me an HD channel. We’ve had CSNNW since the onset but no HD. Fine I went through 1 season w/o it but I don’t want another one. It is almost as bad having to watch the games in SD when you should be watching in HD as not being able to watch at all.

by thrice on Sep 14, 2009 5:13 PM PDT reply actions

I agree!!

The whole Comcast fiasco is bush league… at least I have the SD channel

by Docproc on Sep 14, 2009 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions

Every time Verizon calls (seems like once a week)

I ask them one question: “Do you have CSN-NW in HD yet?” They say no. I hang up. They call the next week. It doesn’t seem to be getting through to them.

But Verizon has sold their FIOS network to Frontier Communications, so maybe the new owners will make another deal with Comcast for HD.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 14, 2009 6:17 PM PDT up reply actions

HD? HD? Great for Everyone with Comcast

no Comcast on the Coast…no deal with Direct TV….I’d just like an opportunity to watch a damn game in black & white…wee wee wee

by jstbeachy on Sep 14, 2009 5:23 PM PDT reply actions

watch em all online for free if you dont have comcast

there is a ton of sites that stream every single game live.

by blazermania92983 on Sep 14, 2009 5:45 PM PDT reply actions

well be honest

most games, but not all…

"No disrespect to Jeff Blake"

by Eat Politicians on Sep 14, 2009 11:00 PM PDT up reply actions

I hope this applies to NBA League Pass also

I get DirecTV in Hawaii, would be nice to see every single one in HD. Last season I had crappy Time Warner Cable here on the Big Island and wasn’t even able to get NBA League Pass through them here, so I had to watch every game on broadband, was alright, but really wanted to see the games on my much larger HD tv (Course Time Warner gets FSNW so every fricking Laker game was on TV and HD………….. Hawaii is Laker fan wannabe’s. I moved out here after the infamous 99-00 WCF. Just imagine being in a dark cave with no weapons and surrounded by hungry mean wolves) So now I’m excited to here this.

by Jaedin on Sep 15, 2009 12:11 AM PDT reply actions