Sam Houston Swept at Liberty, but Record-Setting Saturday Battle Reveals Bearkats’ Resilience
By Cheval John | Vallano Media
This article was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence.
The final version was reviewed, edited and fact-checked by the author
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
Sam Houston’s volleyball team endured a difficult weekend against Liberty, suffering consecutive Conference USA defeats.
But Saturday’s four-set battle offered a different picture of the Bearkats than Friday’s straight-set loss.
Liberty swept Sam Houston 25–18, 28–26, 25–21 on Friday before holding off a determined comeback Saturday, 25–16, 27–25, 31–33, 26–24, at Liberty Arena in Lynchburg, Virginia.
The results dropped Sam Houston to 14–9 overall and 5–5 in Conference USA play.
Liberty improved to 14–8 and 6–4 in the conference.
Although the Flames completed the weekend sweep, Saturday’s contest featured 42 ties, 16 lead changes and a remarkable 33–31 third set that became the longest in Liberty Arena history, according to Liberty Athletics.
The two matches exposed both sides of Sam Houston’s season: difficulty protecting substantial leads and the determination to remain competitive when facing elimination.
Friday: A Seven-Point Lead Disappears
Friday’s straight-set loss was particularly frustrating because Sam Houston had an opportunity to change the direction of the match.
After dropping the opening set 25–18, the Bearkats established a 20–13 advantage in the second set.
Liberty responded with a sustained rally to erase the deficit.
Sam Houston still had opportunities to close out the set, holding set points at 24–23 and 25–24, but the Flames fought off both chances and eventually prevailed 28–26.
From its 20–13 advantage, Sam Houston was outscored 15–6.
Instead of entering the intermission tied at one set apiece, the Bearkats faced a two-set deficit.
Liberty completed the sweep with a 25–21 third-set victory.
The statistical difference was substantial.
Liberty hit .327 for the match compared with Sam Houston’s .115.
The Bearkats committed 24 attacking errors while recording 38 kills.
Chloe Monson, one of Sam Houston’s offensive contributors throughout the season, experienced a particularly difficult afternoon.
She finished with five kills and nine attacking errors on 29 attempts for a negative .138 hitting percentage.
Bella Wood led Sam Houston with 10 kills, followed by Chelsea Butler with eight and Annika Brooks with six.
Friday’s defeat illustrated how quickly an advantage can disappear when a team struggles to finish a set.
Saturday: Another Lead Lost, but a Different Response
The following afternoon initially appeared to be heading toward another straight-set defeat.
Liberty claimed the first set 25–16, with Sam Houston hitting just .054.
In the second set, the Bearkats again established a six-point advantage, leading 15–9.
But Liberty rallied.
Sam Houston eventually reached set point at 25–24 before the Flames scored three consecutive points to win 27–25.
For the second consecutive day, the Bearkats had surrendered a significant second-set advantage.
Trailing two sets to none, Sam Houston faced another opportunity to respond—or allow the match to end quickly.
This time, the Bearkats refused to go away.
A Historic Third Set
The third set developed into the defining stretch of the weekend.
Sam Houston built an early 15–9 lead, but Liberty recovered and eventually moved ahead 23–21.
During the broadcast, commentators expressed concern about Monson’s offensive struggles and questioned whether Sam Houston should continue directing attacks her way.
What followed demonstrated how quickly an individual performance can change during a tightly contested set.
Monson delivered five crucial kills after Liberty’s 23–21 advantage as the Bearkats battled through an extended series of set points.
Liberty repeatedly answered, and the Flames held two match points during the set.
Sam Houston survived both.
With the score tied at 31–31, Monson delivered another kill to give the Bearkats a 32–31 advantage.
Rachelle Reed followed with the set-winning kill, securing a 33–31 victory and forcing a fourth set.
According to Liberty Athletics, the 64-point set was the longest played in Liberty Arena history.
The performance also marked a significant response from Monson following Friday’s difficult outing.
She finished Saturday with a team-high 14 kills and 12 digs.
The Bearkats had not won the match, but they had extended it with one of the most competitive sets in the arena’s history.
A Fourth Set That Could Have Gone Either Way
The intensity continued into the fourth set.
Early in the frame, with Sam Houston leading 5–3, the Liberty broadcast described nervous energy inside the arena.
The commentators later observed that if Sam Houston forced a fifth set, the deciding frame could belong to either team.
That possibility remained realistic as the Bearkats continued challenging the Flames.
Liberty led 16–13 before Sam Houston scored four consecutive points to move ahead 17–16.
The Bearkats appeared to extend their lead to 18–16 when a Liberty attack was initially ruled out of bounds.
However, Liberty challenged the ruling, arguing that the ball had touched a Sam Houston player before going out.
Although the broadcast commentators considered the replay evidence inconclusive, officials overturned the original decision and awarded the point to Liberty, tying the set at 17–17.
The reversal represented a significant two-point swing in a closely contested set.
Nevertheless, Sam Houston continued competing.
The Bearkats repeatedly answered Liberty’s attacks, tying the score at 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23.
When Jenna Otts delivered a kill to give Liberty a 24–23 advantage and match point, Sam Houston responded with a block involving Chelsea Butler and Faith Roulston to tie the score at 24–24.
The Flames finally secured the victory on consecutive kills from Addison Hart and Paige Overcash.
Liberty won the fourth set 26–24, ending a match that had become considerably more difficult than its two-set lead initially suggested.
Liberty’s Offensive Production Makes the Difference
Liberty’s victory was supported by strong performances from Otts and Overcash, who recorded 19 kills apiece.
Overcash hit .378, added 11 digs, five blocks and three service aces, and delivered the match-winning kill.
Otts hit .362.
The Flames finished with 64 kills compared with Sam Houston’s 62, but Liberty maintained advantages in several other statistical categories.
Liberty hit .284 compared with the Bearkats’.202, recorded 10 service aces to Sam Houston’s four, and finished with 12 blocks compared with eight for the visitors.
Sam Houston held a 73–72 advantage in digs.
Alongside Monson’s 14 kills, Wood and Kameron Rector contributed 13 each.
Butler added 12 kills and four blocks.
Shaelin White led all players with 26 digs, while Brenlin Garlitz recorded 28 assists and Lauren Pyle added 18.
The Bearkats produced more offense Saturday than they had Friday, improving from 38 kills to 62 and raising their hitting percentage from .115 to .202.
Yet Liberty’s greater efficiency and advantage at the service line helped the Flames complete the weekend sweep.
Six Matches Remain
The losses leave Sam Houston at .500 in Conference USA play with six regular-season matches remaining.
Liberty, meanwhile, moved to 6–4 in league competition and extended its all-time series advantage over Sam Houston to 6–0.
It remains too early to determine how the conference tournament race will unfold.
For the Bearkats, the immediate concern is translating Saturday’s competitive response into more consistent execution.
The weekend exposed recurring difficulties protecting leads.
Sam Houston surrendered a 20–13 advantage Friday and a 15–9 lead Saturday, both in the second set.
But Saturday also showed that the Bearkats could recover from adversity rather than allow earlier setbacks to determine the remainder of a match.
The 33–31 third set and the continued resistance following the fourth-set challenge provided evidence of a team still willing to compete.
Liberty earned its two victories, but Sam Houston made the Flames work considerably harder for the second.
With six matches remaining before the postseason, the question is whether the Bearkats can sustain that level of play long enough to turn competitive performances into victories.
THE GAME IS EVERYWHERE: How Streaming Changed College Sports
By Cheval John | Vallano Media
This article was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence.
The final version was reviewed, edited and fact-checked by the author
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
On a Saturday night in Huntsville, Texas, a Sam Houston football game can be local and national at the same time.
The stadium sits far from the country’s largest television production centers.
The broadcasters, camera operators and production staff may have connections to Huntsville, Houston and the surrounding region.
Yet when the game begins, their work can be distributed through an ESPN platform to eligible subscribers far beyond Huntsville.
That combination was much harder to achieve not that long ago.
Before streaming became a major part of college sports, programs outside the largest conferences often depended on regional television, local radio and school-operated webcasts for much of their exposure.
National television opportunities existed, but television had an unavoidable limitation: There were only so many hours available.
ESPN+ helped change that.
When ESPN+ launched on April 12, 2018, ESPN executives specifically described one of its intended audiences as fans who had limited access to teams they cared about—including alumni whose schools might otherwise receive little television exposure.
The service launched with thousands of college events across numerous conferences.
Eight years later, that idea has reshaped a substantial part of college sports.
Television Had A Scarcity Problem
ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU and other traditional networks have only 24 hours in a day.
College athletics does not.
Football, basketball, volleyball, soccer, baseball, softball and other sports frequently overlap across hundreds of campuses.
Traditional television forces networks to choose which events receive a channel.
Streaming created another shelf.
Conference USA’s ESPN agreement makes more than 450 live sporting events available through ESPN+ and ESPN3, including substantial inventories beyond football and men’s basketball.
The West Coast Conference offers an even larger example.
Its agreement with ESPN places more than 900 conference events each year on ESPN+, covering basketball, soccer, volleyball, water polo, baseball and softball.
The model was apparent from ESPN+’s beginning.
The Ivy League agreement announced just before the platform launched called for more than 1,100 conference events annually, with the majority distributed through ESPN+.
None of this means a Tuesday-night volleyball match suddenly attracts the audience of a Saturday SEC football game.
Streaming did not erase college athletics’ hierarchy.
What it changed was availability.
A game does not necessarily need one of a small number of national television windows simply to reach viewers beyond its local market.
The school can remain where it is.
The game can remain where it is.
The distribution can travel.
Huntsville Shows How The Model Evolved
Sam Houston provides a useful case study because its digital-broadcast history predates ESPN+.
Bearkat Sports Network began streaming Sam Houston sporting events annually in 2008 under the guidance of Jason Barfield.
By 2016, he was helping transition Sam Houston’s operation toward live ESPN productions.
The university later built production facilities that include a television and podcast studio and a central control room connected to multiple athletic venues.
By 2024, Bearkat Sports Network said it was responsible for nearly 80 ESPN+ productions annually, along with more than 50 live audio productions, press conferences, podcasts and studio programming.
That is no longer simply a school putting a radio call or basic video stream online.
It is local production infrastructure feeding a nationally distributed sports platform.
Barfield’s career illustrates what that can mean for the worker.
Before joining Sam Houston, he served as sports editor of The Huntsville Item.
He has called Bearkat baseball and soccer, worked football and basketball radio and handled both play-by-play and analyst roles on ESPN productions.
He did not have to leave Huntsville for his work to travel beyond Huntsville.
That may be one of streaming’s least-discussed effects.
The Worker Did Not Always Have To Move Either
For generations, one familiar route through sports media was geographical.
Start in a smaller market.
Develop a résumé.
Move to a larger market.
Then move again.
Maybe, eventually, reach a national platform.
That ladder still exists.
But streaming has expanded another route: sports-media professionals can gain experience on nationally distributed platforms without necessarily having to leave the markets where they built their careers.
Consider Rosie Langello.
Langello joined WSFA in Montgomery in January 2022 and became the station’s first female sports director.
In 2026, she moved into a primary news-anchor role.
She has also worked Troy football sidelines on ESPN+.
When Sam Houston opened its 2026 season at Troy, the ESPN+ crew featured Will Kollmeyer on play-by-play, Ben Stanfield as analyst and Langello reporting from the sideline.
That is an important distinction.
She does not have to choose between a regional television career in Alabama and participating in ESPN-distributed college sports.
She can do both.
Experience Can Travel In The Other Direction, Too
Will Kollmeyer represents another pathway.
Long before the current streaming era, Kollmeyer had already spent 18 years as sports director at WTVA in Tupelo, Mississippi, more than three years as sports director at WCBI and a decade working in public relations, marketing, sports information and broadcasting at Itawamba Community College.
When the SEC Network launched in 2014, Ole Miss selected Kollmeyer as one of its local play-by-play voices for locally produced network broadcasts.
More than a decade later, he remains part of the ESPN college-sports ecosystem, including that 2026 Troy-Sam Houston ESPN+ assignment.
His career shows that streaming does not merely create opportunities for newcomers.
It can also give experienced regional broadcasters another outlet for decades of accumulated knowledge.
A Student Can Now Enter The Same System
Then there is Gavan Baxley.
Baxley grew up attending Troy football games and later studied broadcast journalism at the university.
In October 2025, while still a senior, he went from watching Troy football from the stands to reporting from the sideline on ESPN+.
He graduated in spring 2026 with a degree in broadcast journalism and remained at Troy as an athletics broadcasting graduate assistant.
By September, Troy was identifying him in that role while he produced football previews and other athletics content.
That may be one of the clearest examples of how dramatically the entry point has changed.
A student in Troy, Alabama, can learn how to prepare for a live college broadcast, work with a production crew and gain experience on an ESPN platform before beginning the traditional sequence of professional-market moves.
Streaming did not eliminate the apprenticeship.
It brought the apprenticeship closer to the national distribution system.
Regional Television And ESPN Can Overlap
Randy McIlvoy adds another wrinkle.
McIlvoy is sports director at Houston’s KPRC 2 and continues to perform college play-by-play work for Rice, Houston and Sam Houston through university broadcast platforms.
His career also includes regional television work predating the modern streaming era.
On Sept. 19, 2026, McIlvoy called Sam Houston’s home football game against Nicholls on ESPN+ with John Harris and sideline reporter Kendra Sheehan.
At the same time, Jason Barfield and Brian Adams handled the Bearkat Sports Network radio broadcast, which was also available locally on KSHU 90.5 FM.
One game.
Multiple crews.
Local radio.
A university network.
A Houston television sports director.
National streaming.
That is the modern college-sports media ecosystem in miniature.
It also shows why this story is bigger than simply saying workers in small towns no longer need to leave.
Streaming has blurred the boundaries among local, regional and national work.
Video Courtesy of ESPN College Football YouTube Channel
Richmond Offers Another Version
Eastern Kentucky shows the same transformation from a different angle.
Wes Chandler spent 14 years working within the EKU Sports Network before being promoted in August 2026 to lead play-by-play responsibilities for football and men’s basketball.
Maggie Davis followed another path.
Davis is an anchor, reporter and producer for BBN Tonight at Lexington’s WLEX-TV.
She joined the EKU Sports Network in 2025-26 and has worked play-by-play, color analysis and sideline assignments across multiple sports.
In September 2026, Davis joined Chandler and Terry Johnson on the ESPN+ broadcast of Eastern Kentucky’s football game against Dayton.
Again, she did not have to abandon regional television to participate in nationally distributed college sports.
The jobs can overlap.
That is becoming the point.
The Old Ladder Is Becoming A Network
Taken together, these careers do not follow one pattern.
Barfield built his career within a university and local media ecosystem.
Langello combines regional television with ESPN+ sideline work.
Kollmeyer brought decades of local and regional broadcasting experience into ESPN-distributed college broadcasts.
Baxley gained ESPN+ experience before graduating and moved into a university broadcasting role.
Davis works in Lexington television while contributing to Eastern Kentucky broadcasts.
McIlvoy remains the sports director of a major-market television station while continuing college play-by-play work.
That diversity may be more important than any single résumé.
The modern sports-media career increasingly looks less like one ladder and more like a network of overlapping roles—broadcasting, local television, university media, digital production, freelance work, podcasts, social media and national streaming.
One person may participate in several of them.
ESPN+ Is Now Part Of An Even Larger Streaming System
The distribution infrastructure has continued to evolve.
ESPN’s current Unlimited offering provides access to its full suite of networks and services, and ESPN says the platform contains more than 47,000 live events annually.
Meanwhile, the ESPN+ library is now included in the ESPN Select offering.
ESPN content has also been integrated into Disney+.
Disney says subscribers with ESPN Select, ESPN Unlimited or qualifying bundles can access ESPN programming within Disney+. ESPN Select includes the ESPN+ library, while subscribers without an ESPN subscription receive only a curated sampling of ESPN content.
Individual events can also be affected by rights and blackout restrictions.
That distinction matters when discussing scale.
In Disney’s last detailed subscriber disclosure, the company reported 131.6 million Disney+ subscribers worldwide as of Sept. 27, 2025.
That does not mean 131.6 million people can watch a particular Sam Houston, Troy or Eastern Kentucky event.
The number describes the scale of the broader Disney+ ecosystem—not the addressable audience for an individual ESPN+ game.
But the evolution still matters.
A college sporting event produced in Huntsville, Troy or Richmond can now exist within a streaming environment connected to one of the world’s largest entertainment companies.
That is a radically different distribution environment from the one smaller college programs inhabited two decades ago.
Local Media Did Not Disappear
There is an easy mistake to make when telling this story.
National streaming did not eliminate local sports media.
If anything, the new environment makes the distinction between game distribution and community coverage clearer.
A national platform can carry the competition.
A local radio station can deliver a hometown call.
A university media operation can produce interviews, podcasts and highlights.
Local newspapers and independent digital publications can cover the coaches, athletes, facilities, attendance, recruiting and institutional decisions surrounding the program.
Social media can redistribute all of it again.
Sam Houston’s Nicholls broadcast illustrated several of those layers operating simultaneously: ESPN+ carried the game, Bearkat Sports Network produced its separate radio call, and KSHU provided an over-the-air local outlet.
Those platforms do not necessarily replace one another.
They perform different jobs.
ESPN can distribute the competition.
Local media can explain why the competition matters.
Small Market No Longer Has To Mean Small Reach
Streaming has not made Conference USA equal to the SEC.
It has not erased the financial differences between conferences.
It has not guaranteed large audiences for every game.
And it has not eliminated the advantages of working in Houston, New York, Atlanta, Los Angeles or another major media center.
But those are not the only ways to measure what changed.
ESPN+ helped weaken one of the basic limitations facing college sports outside the biggest conferences: Television could not carry everything.
Once that limitation weakened, another boundary weakened with it.
A broadcaster could build ESPN production experience in Huntsville.
A Montgomery television journalist could work the sideline in Troy.
A Lexington broadcaster could add Eastern Kentucky games to her portfolio.
A veteran Houston sports director could call a Sam Houston game on ESPN+ while another crew delivered the hometown radio broadcast.
And a college student could stand on an ESPN+ sideline before his professional career had even fully begun.
The games never stopped being local.
The communities never stopped mattering.
But the ceiling on how far the games—and the work behind them—could travel became much higher.
The game did not have to move.
The worker did not necessarily have to move.
The distribution did.
And that may be one of the most consequential changes ESPN+ brought to college sports beyond the power conferences.
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
How 162 Baseball Games Made Regional Networks Essential to Fan Loyalty
By Cheval John | Vallano Media
This article was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence.
The final version was reviewed, edited and fact-checked by the author
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
For six months, millions of fans experience baseball primarily through the teams they follow.
Then October arrives.
The postseason becomes a much more national experience.
The biggest games move onto national television and streaming platforms.
Storylines that have developed locally throughout the season suddenly become part of a national conversation.
That contrast helps explain something important about baseball’s media business.
National coverage gives Major League Baseball (MLB) enormous reach.
But the sport’s unusually long regular season created an environment in which regional coverage could become particularly important for frequency, familiarity and fan engagement.
Baseball does not just provide games.
It provides a relationship that can be renewed almost every day.
162 Opportunities to Matter
An NFL team currently plays 17 regular-season games.
A Major League Baseball team plays 162.
That difference changes the media equation.
Baseball teams play throughout the week, sometimes for nearly two straight weeks without a day off.
Fans can spend an entire summer following the same broadcasters, players, coaches and storylines.
One Tuesday night in June may not attract a massive national audience.
To a fan following that team every day, however, it is another chapter in a season-long story.
Was the starting pitcher able to recover from his previous outing?
Is a rookie beginning to establish himself?
Can the team survive an injury to a key player?
Will a struggling hitter finally break out of his slump?
Those stories accumulate.
And regional media was uniquely positioned to tell them.
That is why baseball became such a natural product for the regional sports network model.
National Reach and Regional Depth Are Different Products
This distinction matters.
The argument is not that national television is somehow unimportant to Major League Baseball.
National distribution gives MLB something regional coverage cannot: the ability to place its biggest games, stars and events in front of audiences far beyond an individual team’s market.
But regional coverage historically performed another job.
It could spend hours talking about one team.
Pregame shows could examine the night’s matchup.
Postgame coverage could break down what happened.
Original programming could explore franchise history, prospects, personalities and community stories.
National coverage is built for reach.
Regional coverage is built for frequency and depth.
Baseball needs both.
The difference is that a 162-game schedule gives regional coverage an extraordinary amount of material with which to build that relationship.
When the Broadcaster Becomes Part of the Team Experience
There is another element that is difficult to measure simply by looking at television rights agreements.
Familiarity matters.
When fans hear the same broadcasters night after night, those voices can become associated with the team itself.
The broadcast is no longer simply a mechanism for delivering a sporting event.
It becomes part of the experience of following the franchise.
That helps explain why regional sports networks became so valuable to baseball organizations.
They were not simply purchasing inventory consisting of 162 baseball games.
They were gaining access to months of recurring attention from a defined audience.
For a business, that is an enormously powerful proposition.
Instead of asking, “How many people can we reach tonight?” the model also allowed teams and networks to ask another question:
How often can we matter to the people who already care?
That question would eventually help turn some baseball franchises into sophisticated media businesses of their own.
When Baseball Teams Became Media Brands
Perhaps no example illustrates the potential of regional baseball media better than the New York Yankees.
The YES Network launched on March 19, 2002.
Today, YES says it owns the exclusive regional media rights to the Yankees and Brooklyn Nets.
Its ownership includes Yankee Global Enterprises alongside Main Street Sports, Amazon, RedBird Capital, Blackstone’s Tactical Opportunities business and Mubadala Capital.
That ownership structure is important.
YES should not simply be described as a television network wholly owned by the Yankees.
The more interesting business story is that the Yankees helped demonstrate how a franchise could hold a significant stake in the media operation built around its own content.
And the content extends well beyond nine innings.
YES carries Yankees pregame and postgame programming, spring training games and original Yankees-focused shows in addition to game broadcasts.
The baseball team supplies the central product.
The media operation expands the world around it.
Boston Shows How the Model Can Evolve
The New England Sports Network (NESN) provides another useful example.
NESN is owned by Fenway Sports Group, owner of the Boston Red Sox, and Delaware North, owner of the Boston Bruins.
But what makes NESN especially relevant now is how far it has moved beyond the traditional definition of a regional cable channel.
NESN and NESN+ still serve the six-state New England region, but fans can also access the network through NESN 360 via direct subscription or television authentication.
NESN also operates a national service and a free ad-supported streaming channel.
That evolution matters.
The regional relationship survived even as the method of distribution changed.
A fan does not necessarily need the same cable package that would have been required two decades ago to have a regional sports relationship with the Red Sox.
The technology evolved.
The demand for team-specific coverage remained.
The Cubs Provide an Even Newer Example
The Marquee Sports Network offers a more recent version of the same strategy.
Marquee is a joint venture between the Chicago Cubs and Sinclair and serves as the exclusive home of Cubs broadcasts.
It now distributes Cubs coverage through its linear television network as well as direct-to-consumer and streaming options.
Again, the interesting story is not simply that the Cubs have their own regional network.
It is that the definition of a regional network is changing.
A regional sports network once meant a channel buried somewhere inside a cable package.
Increasingly, it can mean an ecosystem.
Linear television.
Streaming.
Mobile access.
Original programming.
Social content.
On-demand viewing.
Different technologies can serve the same underlying purpose: keeping a fan connected to a particular team.
The Business Lesson Was Bigger Than Baseball
This is where MLB’s regional media history becomes useful outside sports.
Businesses frequently become obsessed with total reach.
How many impressions?
How many followers?
How many views?
Those numbers matter, but they do not tell the entire story.
Regional baseball networks built their businesses around a different type of value: repeated interaction with a highly interested audience.
They were not trying to convince everyone in America to watch the Cubs, Yankees or Red Sox every night.
They were serving the people who already cared about those teams and giving them reasons to return.
That is an important distinction.
A niche audience is not necessarily a small opportunity.
If the audience cares deeply enough and returns frequently enough, specialization itself can become an advantage.
But the regional sports network business eventually ran into a major problem.
The audience relationship remained valuable.
The economic structure supporting it began to crack.
The Cable Model Cracked. The Regional Relationship Didn’t.
The story of regional sports networks could easily be mistaken for a story about decline.
Cord-cutting weakened the traditional television bundle.
Distribution disputes became increasingly visible.
Some fans struggled to find or afford their local team’s games.
Then came one of the biggest disruptions in regional sports television.
Diamond Sports Group, the company that operated the Bally Sports regional networks, filed for bankruptcy protection in 2023.
But stopping the story there would now be misleading.
In November 2024, a bankruptcy court approved Diamond’s restructuring plan.
The company subsequently moved forward under the FanDuel Sports Network branding.
Reuters reported that the restructuring reduced Diamond’s debt from nearly $9 billion to approximately $200 million while the company reached revised arrangements involving several MLB teams.
That distinction is critical.
The financial crisis demonstrated serious weaknesses in the traditional RSN business model.
It did not demonstrate that fans suddenly stopped wanting local baseball coverage.
The problem was increasingly about how that coverage was packaged, distributed and financed.
Video Courtesy of S&P Global Market Intelligence YouTube Channel
MLB’s National Strategy Is Changing Too
At the same time, Major League Baseball’s national media strategy is also evolving.
Beginning with the 2026 season, MLB entered new three-year national media agreements with ESPN, NBCUniversal and Netflix covering the 2026 through 2028 seasons.
Under those agreements, ESPN acquired MLB.TV and a midweek game package.
NBCUniversal obtained Sunday packages and the Wild Card round, while Netflix added the Home Run Derby and selected special events.
The change is visible immediately this postseason.
The 2026 regular season ends Sunday, September 27.
Two days later, on September 29, all four Wild Card Series begin with national coverage through NBC, Peacock and NBC Sports Network.
That transition almost perfectly illustrates baseball’s two media worlds.
For 162 games, fans largely experience their teams through an accumulation of local and regional stories.
Then the postseason arrives and those stories are presented to a much broader national audience.
One model does not eliminate the need for the other.
They complement each other.
Streaming Doesn’t Eliminate Regionalism
There is a temptation to describe streaming as the replacement for regional sports networks.
That misses the larger point.
Streaming is primarily a distribution technology.
Regionalism describes the audience relationship.
The two can coexist.
NESN can remain focused on New England while offering NESN 360.
Marquee can remain focused on Cubs fans while offering direct streaming access.
YES can remain centered around Yankees coverage while its content moves across digital platforms.
In fact, YES announced in August 2026 that DAZN would become the exclusive direct-to-consumer streaming home for YES and MSG Networks beginning later that year.
That is not the disappearance of regional sports media.
It is regional sports media adapting to another distribution system.
What Baseball Can Teach Businesses About Audience Strategy
For businesses, there is a larger lesson hiding inside all of this.
Technology changes quickly.
Audience needs often change much more slowly.
A company can make the mistake of confusing the platform with the relationship.
Cable television was enormously important to regional sports networks, but cable itself was never the fundamental reason baseball fans wanted local coverage.
They wanted to follow their team.
They wanted familiar voices.
They wanted context that mattered specifically to them.
They wanted someone covering the ordinary Wednesday game in July with the understanding that, to that team’s fans, it was not ordinary at all.
That principle applies well beyond baseball.
A business may build an audience through a website today, a social platform tomorrow and some technology that does not yet exist a decade from now.
Those platforms are tools.
The relationship with the audience is the durable asset.
Final Thought: 162 Games, One Long Conversation
Four days ago, all 30 MLB teams have played their final games of the 2026 regular season.
Two days ago, the postseason began.
For the teams that advance, the audience becomes larger and the national spotlight becomes brighter.
But those postseason moments do not appear from nowhere.
They arrive after six months of games.
Six months of broadcasts.
Six months of injuries, debuts, winning streaks, slumps, trades, surprises and conversations.
Regional sports networks became important to baseball because they had the opportunity to tell that entire story.
The traditional RSN business model may never look exactly as it once did.
Cable bundles are changing.
Streaming is expanding.
Rights agreements are becoming more complicated.
But the fundamental audience demand remains remarkably familiar.
Fans still want to follow their team.
Night after night.
Game after game.
Season after season.
That is the business lesson hidden inside baseball’s 162-game schedule.
National exposure can make a team visible.
Sustained, relevant coverage can make that team part of someone’s routine.
The platform can change.
The relationship is the asset.
Sources and Further Reading
Major League Baseball — 2026 postseason schedule
Major League Baseball — 2026–28 national media agreements
YES Network — About YES
NESN — Network and streaming distribution
Marquee Sports Network — Cubs distribution and streaming expansion
The Rise of Cheddar TV: Building Business News for the Streaming Generation
By Cheval John | Vallano Media
This article was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence.
The final version was reviewed, edited and fact-checked by the author
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
When ESPN launched in 1979, the idea of dedicating an entire television network to sports was still a gamble.
The network ultimately demonstrated something important about specialized media: a passionate audience could support a destination built around its interests.
Nearly four decades later, entrepreneur Jon Steinberg made a different kind of media bet.
In 2016, Steinberg launched Cheddar, a digital-first business news network designed around the viewing habits of younger audiences.
Rather than trying to beat established financial networks such as CNBC and Bloomberg at the traditional cable television game, Cheddar built its strategy around an emerging reality: people were increasingly consuming video through streaming platforms, smartphones, computers, and social media.
Cheddar did not invent streaming, of course.
But it recognized early that changing distribution could create an opening in an established media industry.
That makes its rise more than a story about financial journalism.
It is a business case study about finding an underserved audience, building around changing consumer behavior, and understanding that distribution can sometimes be as important as the content itself.
It also has an interesting parallel in sports media.
Finding an Opportunity in an Established Market
Before founding Cheddar, Steinberg had already accumulated significant experience in digital media, including serving as president and chief operating officer of BuzzFeed and later leading Daily Mail North America.
That experience gave him a front-row view of changing audience habits.
With Cheddar, he bet that younger viewers could be reached with business news designed around digital distribution rather than the traditional cable model.
The network still covered financial markets, but its editorial universe stretched beyond stock prices and quarterly earnings.
Technology, startups, venture capital, entrepreneurship, media, consumer products, and innovation became important parts of the programming.
That distinction mattered.
Someone didn’t necessarily need to be an active stock trader to care about the next technology company, an emerging consumer brand, or an entrepreneur building a startup.
Cheddar was essentially broadening the definition of who might be interested in business television.
Built for Streaming From the Beginning
One of Cheddar’s most important advantages was that digital distribution wasn’t something added years after the network launched.
It was fundamental to the original concept.
Cheddar distributed programming through streaming services, connected television platforms, social media, and other digital outlets.
By the time Altice USA announced its acquisition of Cheddar in 2019, the company’s reach had become substantial.
Altice said Cheddar was available in approximately 40 million pay-TV homes, distributed through virtual television services including YouTube TV and Sling TV, and available through free streaming platforms including Pluto TV and the Roku Channel.
Altice also reported that Cheddar’s content generated more than 400 million monthly video views across social platforms at the time.
Those figures came from the acquiring company rather than an independent audience audit, but they illustrate how aggressively Cheddar had expanded beyond a conventional television channel.
The strategy was simple: don’t make the audience come looking for you.
Go where the audience already is.
Credibility in a New Format
Being digital-first did not mean abandoning the symbols associated with traditional financial journalism.
Cheddar established a major broadcasting presence on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange.
It also expanded its New York production footprint to locations including Nasdaq MarketSite and the Flatiron Building.
That was smart branding.
The NYSE gave a young streaming network an immediate visual connection to Wall Street, while Cheddar’s presentation, graphics, subject matter, and distribution strategy signaled that it wasn’t trying to recreate traditional financial television.
It wanted credibility without looking old.
That balance helped establish a recognizable identity in an industry already occupied by much larger competitors.
Where Sports Media Enters the Story
This is where Cheddar becomes especially interesting from a sports media perspective.
Cheddar did not create the streaming transformation in sports, nor did sports organizations simply copy its strategy.
The connection is more useful than that: both illustrate how media businesses responded to audiences gaining more control over where, when, and how they consumed content.
Sports organizations have faced many of the same questions.
What happens when fans no longer depend on one television package?
What happens when highlights are consumed on phones?
What happens when fans want interviews, documentaries, analysis, behind-the-scenes material, and live events across multiple platforms?
The answer increasingly has been for leagues, conferences, teams, and broadcasters to think beyond the traditional television channel.
Cheddar was confronting essentially the same distribution problem in business journalism.
It recognized that producing the content was only part of the job.
Making that content accessible was another part entirely.
Video Courtesy of Chat Sports YouTube Channel
Distribution as a Business Strategy
That distinction is easy to overlook.
A company can produce excellent journalism, a university can produce an excellent sporting event, and an independent creator can produce an excellent video.
None of that guarantees an audience will find it.
Distribution determines how easily that product travels.
Cheddar treated distribution as part of the product itself.
That approach helped the network appear in numerous places rather than depending on viewers developing one particular viewing habit.
For sports organizations, the comparison is particularly relevant because media distribution has become inseparable from the sports business.
Streaming services, conference networks, direct-to-consumer products, social media clips, team-produced documentaries, and athlete-created content all compete for a fan’s limited attention.
The platforms may be different, but the underlying business question remains remarkably similar:
Where is the audience, and how do we make it easier for them to reach us?
The $200 Million Milestone
Cheddar’s growth eventually attracted a much larger media company.
In June 2019, Altice USA completed its acquisition of Cheddar for $200 million, subject to customary closing adjustments.
For a company founded only three years earlier, the transaction represented a remarkable milestone.
It also provided evidence that digital-first distribution and a differentiated audience could create substantial business value even in a market dominated by established television networks.
But the acquisition was not the end of Cheddar’s story.
In April 2021, around the network’s fifth anniversary, the brand became Cheddar News.
By then, its coverage extended across business, technology, media, culture, politics, and other areas.
The evolution showed that Cheddar itself was continuing to change.
And that leads to perhaps the most important lesson in the entire story.
Being Early Doesn’t Mean You Can Stop Adapting
The media environment Cheddar entered in 2016 became dramatically more competitive.
Streaming services multiplied.
Podcasts became major sources of business information.
YouTube creators built their own media brands.
Newsletters gave individual writers direct access to audiences.
Social platforms turned entrepreneurs, executives, athletes, and analysts into publishers themselves.
Traditional media companies also became much more aggressive about streaming and digital distribution.
In other words, some of the characteristics that made Cheddar unusual in 2016 became increasingly normal.
That’s one of the paradoxes of innovation.
A company can correctly identify the future and still have to compete once everyone else arrives there.
Cheddar’s ownership changed again in December 2023 when Altice USA sold Cheddar News to Archetype.
Financial terms of that transaction were not disclosed.
The sale shouldn’t erase what Cheddar accomplished, nor should its earlier $200 million acquisition be treated as proof that the original model was permanently solved.
Together, those events tell a more useful business story.
Innovation creates an advantage.
It does not guarantee that the advantage lasts forever.
What Content Creators Can Learn From Cheddar
There are several lessons here for independent publishers, entrepreneurs, and digital creators.
The first is to look for audiences established competitors may be underserving.
Cheddar did not need every CNBC or Bloomberg viewer to switch networks.
It needed to establish a meaningful audience of its own.
Second, distribution deserves nearly as much thought as production.
Publishing an article isn’t a distribution strategy.
Neither is uploading a video and hoping people discover it.
Search, social media, newsletters, streaming platforms, partnerships, and direct audience relationships can all extend the life of the original content.
Third, differentiation matters.
Cheddar didn’t establish itself by simply becoming a smaller CNBC.
Its younger presentation, technology coverage, startup focus, and streaming-first distribution gave viewers a reason to understand the brand differently.
Finally, adaptation never ends.
The strategy that differentiates a company today may become standard industry practice tomorrow.
The Sports Business Lesson
That last lesson may be especially important in sports.
A league might sign an innovative streaming agreement.
A conference might build a successful digital network.
A university might develop an impressive in-house production operation.
But technology continues moving.
Audience habits continue changing.
The next distribution model eventually arrives.
That means the goal cannot simply be to “go digital” or “start streaming.”
Those are tools, not permanent strategies.
The deeper objective is understanding how the audience behaves and being willing to change as those behaviors change.
That was the opportunity Cheddar recognized in 2016.
Cheddar’s Story Is Still Being Written
Cheddar did not disappear after the 2023 ownership change.
The brand has continued operating and expanding its streaming distribution, remaining focused on areas including business, technology, finance, and innovation.
That makes Cheddar more interesting than a simple rise-and-fall story.
It began as a startup challenging assumptions about financial television.
Within three years, it was acquired for $200 million.
It subsequently expanded its editorial identity, changed ownership again, and continued operating in a media industry that looks considerably different from the one it entered.
Its trajectory illustrates both sides of disruption.
Recognizing change early can create enormous opportunity.
But eventually, everyone else recognizes the change too.
Final Thoughts
Cheddar’s rise was never simply about creating another financial news channel.
It was about recognizing that the relationship between audiences and media was changing.
The company understood that younger viewers could be interested in business, technology, entrepreneurship, and finance without consuming those subjects in the same way previous generations had.
And in that sense, its story connects naturally with sports.
Sports fans didn’t suddenly stop caring about sports when their viewing habits changed.
Business audiences didn’t suddenly stop caring about business when they moved away from traditional television.
The audience didn’t disappear.
The audience moved.
Cheddar’s bet was to move with it.
That remains a valuable lesson for media companies, sports organizations, entrepreneurs, and independent publishers today.
Getting ahead of the next change matters.
Understanding that you’ll eventually have to change again may matter even more.
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
From Hobby to Headline: How Niche Live Streamers Helped Redefine Live Media
By Cheval John | Vallano Media
This article was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence.
The final version was reviewed, edited and fact-checked by the author
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
For generations, major television networks controlled much of the live media experience.
They decided which events received coverage, when programs aired, and how audiences consumed them.
But outside traditional broadcasting, another media ecosystem was developing.
Gamers streamed from their bedrooms.
Independent producers experimented with live video.
Schools and local sports organizations discovered new ways to reach audiences that television rarely served.
These broadcasters often lacked expensive equipment, major sponsorships, and established distribution networks.
What they possessed was a direct relationship with viewers who cared about their content.
Their experiments helped demonstrate an important change in audience behavior: people were willing to watch specialized programming online, participate in live conversations, and follow events that traditional television considered too small to broadcast.
Major media organizations did not simply copy these creators.
Their investments in streaming also reflected improvements in technology, changing economics, and growing demand for digital access.
Nevertheless, niche creators and smaller broadcasters helped reveal something increasingly valuable: an audience did not need to be enormous to deserve attention.
The Streaming Revolution Began With Experimentation
One of the early pioneers of online live broadcasting was Justin.tv, which launched in 2007.
Initially built around broadcasting co-founder Justin Kan’s daily life, the platform eventually opened to other users, allowing people to stream their own activities online.
Gaming emerged as an especially popular category.
In June 2011, Twitch launched as a dedicated platform for gaming livestreams, building upon Justin.tv’s earlier experiments.
Its growth provided measurable evidence that interactive live video could attract substantial audiences.
According to Twitch’s March 2013 announcement, more than 600,000 unique broadcasters attracted over 28 million unique viewers during February 2013.
The company also reported that those viewers watched an average of more than 90 minutes of video per day.
These were company-reported figures, but they illustrated the scale that an emerging live-streaming community had achieved.
The significance extended beyond gaming.
Twitch demonstrated that audiences were interested in content built around participation.
Viewers could communicate with streamers, react to events, and interact with other members of the community while broadcasts unfolded.
Unlike conventional television, the relationship was not exclusively one-directional.
The audience became part of the experience.
How Niche Creators Tested New Media Ideas
Independent creators possessed an advantage that larger media organizations sometimes struggled to replicate: flexibility.
A creator could experiment with a different broadcast format, introduce a live discussion, or change programming based on audience feedback without navigating a large corporate structure.
That flexibility encouraged experimentation with live conversations, extended broadcasts, community participation, and behind-the-scenes programming.
Not every experiment succeeded.
Nor did every creator build a sustainable business.
But collectively, these activities helped demonstrate that specialized interests could support meaningful online communities.
A gaming enthusiast might spend hours watching someone else play.
A hobbyist could follow a live demonstration.
A viewer interested in a particular subject could interact directly with a knowledgeable creator.
These audiences were not necessarily looking for programming designed to attract millions of people.
They wanted content relevant to their interests.
For media companies, that distinction would become increasingly important.
However, niche creators were only one part of streaming’s development.
Faster broadband connections, smartphones, connected televisions, improved video delivery systems, and changing consumer expectations also contributed to its expansion.
The growth of live streaming was therefore not a simple story of independent creators forcing television networks to change.
It was a broader transformation in which smaller broadcasters helped demonstrate new possibilities while technology and economics made those possibilities increasingly practical.
Local Sports Streaming Revealed an Overlooked Opportunity
While gaming helped popularize interactive livestreaming, local sports broadcasting revealed another opportunity.
For decades, many sporting events attracted passionate supporters without receiving consistent television coverage.
High school football games, volleyball matches, youth tournaments, and smaller college competitions often had audiences interested in watching but limited opportunities for traditional distribution.
Streaming offered another option.
Schools and independent producers could reach families, alumni, and supporters beyond their immediate communities.
One of the clearest examples was the NFHS Network.
Launched in 2013, the network developed a national platform for live and on-demand coverage of high school sports and other school activities.
According to a September 2019 report from the National Federation of State High School Associations, nearly 230,000 events had been broadcast through the network since its launch.
The report also documented more than 100,000 events during the preceding year, including approximately 20,000 nontraditional activities such as graduations, concerts, and theatrical performances.
Those figures demonstrated that digital broadcasting could extend well beyond the sporting events most likely to attract conventional television coverage.
The network also created educational opportunities.
Through its School Broadcast Program, students participated as commentators, camera operators, and producers under the guidance of school advisers.
The significance was not simply that more games became available.
Streaming expanded the definition of which events could receive coverage and who could participate in producing it.
A parent traveling for work could follow a child’s game.
An alumnus living hundreds of miles away could reconnect with a former school.
A student interested in journalism could gain practical broadcasting experience.
These were valuable outcomes even when individual events attracted relatively small audiences.
The business lesson was becoming clearer: a specialized audience could be worth serving without the reach of a national television broadcast.
That did not guarantee profitability.
Production expenses, distribution costs, subscriptions, sponsorships, and audience retention still mattered.
But streaming created opportunities that traditional broadcasting economics had often limited.
Video Courtesy of Max Preps YouTube Channel
Smaller College Conferences Demonstrated the Value of Digital Distribution
College athletics provided another example of how specialized audiences could benefit from expanded digital coverage.
Before ESPN+ launched, universities and conferences were already distributing events through their own websites, conference networks, and existing streaming partnerships.
The Ivy League was among them.
In October 2017, the conference announced that its Ivy League Network would carry more than 200 men’s and women’s basketball games during the 2017–18 season.
The broader platform offered more than 1,100 live events annually across multiple sports.
The conference also maintained a relationship with ESPN3, which carried selected Ivy League productions.
This history matters because it demonstrates that smaller college conferences were not simply waiting for major broadcasters to invent digital distribution.
They were already using it.
In April 2018, ESPN and the Ivy League announced a 10-year media rights agreement that would place more than 1,100 conference events annually across ESPN platforms, with most available through ESPN+.
The agreement covered football, basketball, and numerous additional sports while preserving selected events for traditional television.
The Ivy League’s official announcement described the arrangement as a way to expand exposure and improve access for fans.
Rather than creating an entirely new audience from nothing, ESPN was incorporating an existing digital sports offering into a larger distribution system.
The distinction is important.
The Ivy League example does not prove that independent streamers directly influenced ESPN’s decisions.
It demonstrates how digital distribution developed among specialized sports audiences before becoming part of a larger media company’s subscription strategy.
When Major Media Recognized the Value of Underserved Fans
When ESPN+ launched on April 12, 2018, it represented an important expansion of ESPN’s direct-to-consumer business.
It was not ESPN’s first experience with streaming.
The company had already offered digital sports coverage through services including ESPN3 and authenticated viewing platforms.
ESPN+ nevertheless created a new subscription offering that combined live sports, original programming, and on-demand content.
What makes its launch especially relevant is how ESPN executives described the intended audience.
In an interview published by ESPN on launch day, Burke Magnus, then ESPN’s executive vice president of programming, identified two particularly important groups.
One consisted of fans interested in niche sports that had received limited exposure.
The other consisted of supporters who struggled to access coverage of specific teams, including college alumni interested in following their former schools.
That explanation provides direct evidence of how a major broadcaster viewed the commercial opportunity.
ESPN recognized that passionate sports audiences existed beyond the programming typically featured on its primary television networks.
Its strategy was not necessarily the result of watching independent creators succeed.
Instead, ESPN’s own explanation showed that the company understood a principle smaller digital broadcasters had also demonstrated: specialized audiences wanted reliable access to content they cared about.
For sports media, this represented a significant opportunity.
A volleyball match, college baseball game, or international sporting event might not justify a national television window.
But digital distribution could make such coverage more practical within a larger programming portfolio.
Streaming Was More Than a Response to Creators
It would be misleading to suggest that niche live streamers alone drove the expansion of digital media.
Major broadcasters had their own reasons to invest.
Broadband availability improved.
Smartphones and connected televisions created additional viewing options.
Streaming technology became more capable.
Media companies pursued subscription revenue, advertising opportunities, and control over their digital distribution.
Sports rights agreements also played a major role.
Traditional broadcasters needed to adapt to an environment in which audiences increasingly expected programming across multiple devices.
These changes developed alongside the growth of independent streaming communities.
The relationship was therefore more complicated than smaller creators inventing an idea and larger organizations copying it.
Niche broadcasters helped demonstrate audience demand, while major companies developed strategies shaped by technology, commercial opportunities, existing media rights, and competitive pressures.
Both developments contributed to a changing media environment.
The broader result was an expansion of what audiences could watch and how organizations could reach them.
Key Moments in Live Streaming’s Evolution
Year
Development
2007
Justin.tv launches, helping pioneer accessible online live broadcasting
2011
Twitch launches as a gaming-focused livestreaming platform
2013
Twitch reports more than 28 million unique viewers in February; NFHS Network launches
2017
Ivy League Network offers more than 1,100 live events annually
2018
ESPN+ launches and announces major college sports distribution agreements
2020s
Live streaming remains an important distribution channel across sports, entertainment, news, and creator media
The Business Lesson: Pay Attention to the Audiences Others Overlook
The development of live streaming offers a lesson that extends beyond media.
Businesses sometimes focus so heavily on large markets that they overlook smaller communities with specific needs.
Independent creators and local broadcasters frequently operate in those overlooked spaces.
They may lack the resources of established companies, but they can experiment, learn from their audiences, and develop products around interests that larger organizations have not prioritized.
The growth of Twitch demonstrated the potential of interactive communities.
The NFHS Network showed how digital distribution could expand access to local events.
The Ivy League’s digital coverage illustrated how smaller sports properties could reach supporters beyond their geographic markets.
And ESPN’s own explanation of its 2018 streaming strategy confirmed that underserved sports fans represented an audience worth pursuing.
These examples do not establish that every major broadcaster followed the same path or that niche creators were solely responsible for streaming’s growth.
They establish something more useful: audience demand can become visible in places that traditional media has overlooked.
For entrepreneurs and media organizations, the lesson is to recognize those signals before dismissing them.
A small audience does not automatically mean a small opportunity.
Sometimes it means an opportunity that has not yet been fully understood.
The next important change in media may emerge from a major broadcaster, a technology company, or an independent creator experimenting with an unfamiliar format.
And sometimes, it begins with someone pressing “Go Live.”
Graphics created with AI-assisted design tools.
Visual concepts, editorial direction, composition, and final creative decisions were developed by Vallano Media.
Sources and further reading:
Amazon Web Services — How Twitch Built Its Global Live Streaming Network
Twitch — Record-Breaking Growth, March 2013
NFHS — NFHS Network Begins Seventh Year of Covering High School Events
Ivy League — Basketball Television and Streaming Coverage, October 2017
Ivy League — Long-Term ESPN Agreement, April 2018
ESPN Press Room — ESPN+ Launch Interview, April 2018
Share this: