NFL Network critics

[jtn]

Eric 2.0 | Chicago Tribune | Blog

"Originally posted: November 30, 2007
NFL's broadband telecast a mirage

Analysis posted by Eric Benderoff at 9:25 a.m.
What was more frustrating for football fans last night: the inability to watch a nationally televised game between the Cowboys and Packers, or watching the National Football League's incomplete NFL.com "live" presentation of the game?
The league introduced NFL Live on its Web site Thursday so fans who haven't paid the extra fee to the cable company to get the NFL Network (that includes me), a chance to watch a streamed broadcast of the game over the Internet."

 

[Jimbo]

Eric 2.0 | Chicago Tribune | Blog

"Originally posted: November 30, 2007
NFL's broadband telecast a mirage

Analysis posted by Eric Benderoff at 9:25 a.m.
What was more frustrating for football fans last night: the inability to watch a nationally televised game between the Cowboys and Packers, or watching the National Football League's incomplete NFL.com "live" presentation of the game?
The league introduced NFL Live on its Web site Thursday so fans who haven't paid the extra fee to the cable company to get the NFL Network (that includes me), a chance to watch a streamed broadcast of the game over the Internet."

To bad these guys didn't bother to do their homework before writing this story.

The NFL WANTS the NFL Network to be available to everyone, meaning on a basic channel tier, therefore they do NOT want to charge the sub more money to see it.
It is the Cable operators that are fighting it. because they don't want a channel on that is only uses for a small part of the year.

Also,
(Do you think DirecTV would have the nerve to charge extra after the NFL gave it exclusive rights to the Sunday Ticket package?)

This info is also inaccurate, the NFL Network is NOT tied to the ST at all , last I heard.
I believe you get it regardless whether you have the ST or not.

Jimbo

 

[Araxen]

Aye, NFL Network is on the $30 tier, iirc

 

[satfrat]

It's too bad the NFL doesn't feel the same way about having everyone see their Sunday Ticket. After the NFL turned their backs to cable with their exclusive deal with DirecTv, I don't blame the cable companies one bit. The NFL doesn't give a damn about the fans,,, it's all about the $$$.

 

[rjruby]

It's too bad the NFL doesn't feel the same way about having everyone see their Sunday Ticket. After the NFL turned their backs to cable with their exclusive deal with DirecTv, I don't blame the cable companies one bit. The NFL doesn't give a damn about the fans,,, it's all about the $$$.

+1

 

[ONUOsFan]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this isn't a Big Ten Network type debate... most cable companies have the NFL network, right? It's just a question of whether someone wants to pay for it?

Sorry, but if it's important enough for you to call and complain about it, it's important enough to pay $5/mo for.... the people who really want to see the game saw it, because they paid for it.

 

[Sparkman]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this isn't a Big Ten Network type debate... most cable companies have the NFL network, right? It's just a question of whether someone wants to pay for it?

Sorry, but if it's important enough for you to call and complain about it, it's important enough to pay $5/mo for.... the people who really want to see the game saw it, because they paid for it.

Not really. I do know Time Warner does not carry NFL Network at all. Numbers I read somewhere were that only about 60% of cable subscribers even have the ability to choose if they want the NFL Network.

 

[ONUOsFan]

Not really. I do know Time Warner does not carry NFL Network at all. Numbers I read somewhere were that only about 60% of cable subscribers even have the ability to choose if they want the NFL Network.

OK, then, consider me corrected.

I still think this is different than the BTN debate, though - if the NFL is willing to let their channel be on a sports tier (which they apparently are), there's no reason for the cable companies not to carry it. They can set the price of their package to whatever it needs to be to offset it.

 

[Billusa99]

The NFL wants their channel to be on a regular tier, at 70 cents for every subscriber in the cable company.

The cable companies say "no" we are not charging everyone for a channel that will only show 8 games a year and rehashed stuff the other thousands of hours. It must be on a sports tier.

Thus, the standoff.

It's reasonable for cable to say that. The NFL totally blew their case with the completely amateur Cowboys game. It wasn't worth 2 cents in production value or on-air-play-by-play talent.

 

[ONUOsFan]

The NFL wants their channel to be on a regular tier, at 70 cents for every subscriber in the cable company.

The cable companies say "no" we are not charging everyone for a channel that will only show 8 games a year and rehashed stuff the other thousands of hours. It must be on a sports tier.

Thus, the standoff.

It's reasonable for cable to say that. The NFL totally blew their case with the completely amateur Cowboys game. It wasn't worth 2 cents in production value or on-air-play-by-play talent.

I agree, but Comcast is already doing this, aren't they? I think they have it on a separate tier now. They were running ads here before the Packers/Cowboys game offering a free trial of the package that includes NFL network so that people could see the game.

All I'm saying is that if NFL Network will concede to having it on a tier, which they apparently have done with Comcast, the other cable companies have no one to blame but themselves.

That's different from the BTN negotiations where they're saying basic tier or nothing, and charging $1.10 (IIRC) per sub.