I wonder if the NFLN should have taken the "we'll put your games on PPV" offer and make the cost 2.3 cents for the whole day (which is about what $0.70/month works out to be) and make the PPV event be the 24 hours containing the game. Maybe they were concerned that the percentage of "takers" would be too small, or the cost to notify subscribers would be too large.

Fans lose in football-cable clash
It's tough to cheer for either side as league-controlled networks fight to get space on cable lineup.

The cable operators are saying that they have to find new sources of revenue to pay for these new sports networks, rather than raising rates on all their customers and risk losing those who aren't sports fans.

The disingenuous part of that position is exposed, however, when you look at how the cable companies are relatively quick to give access to new sports networks that they have ownership stakes in.
Bingo. For this reason (and many others), we need a level playing field mandate by the FCC. No forced bundling from content providers, no preferential treatment from channel owners.

Whatever you might think of the value of the NFL Network, this case is just another example of what's wrong with cable (and the disproportionate cost of TV sports in particular).

Great article, thanks for posting.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2007-11-20-comcast-letter_N.htm

Comcast sends NFL Network cease-and-desist note

NEW YORK (AP) — Comcast, the nation's largest cable company, has sent a cease-and-desist letter to the NFL Network demanding the channel's representatives stop encouraging fans to leave the cable provider.

Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, the outspoken chairman of the league's NFL Network committee, has urged customers of Comcast and other large cable providers who don't carry the network on a basic tier to switch to satellite or other cable services that do.

The channel's IWantNFLNetwork.com website includes a box titled "MAKE THE SWITCH." Above a field to enter a zip code, the text reads, "Switch to a TV provider that will bring you NFL Network, not hold you hostage."

The letter, dated Monday, contends that such actions violate the contract between the network and Comcast.

"The legal arguments are without merit, and Comcast subscribers who are dropping that service do not need encouragement from us," said NFL Network spokesman Seth Palansky, who added that network executives had not yet received the letter.

The two sides have gone to court over their agreement. The NFL Network sued Comcast after the cable provider decided to move the channel from its basic digital tier to a premium sports tier that customers must pay extra to receive.

In May, Manhattan state Supreme Court Justice Bernard J. Fried ruled in favor of Comcast. The network has appealed.

The letter requests that the network confirm in writing by the close of business Friday that it has halted its efforts to influence customers. Comcast spokeswoman Jennifer Khoury said she didn't want to speculate what the company would do if its demands were not met.

Here is a statement from Cablevision on the topic.

"The NFL blacks out about 10 games every week in the New York market, and now they are trying to manufacture an outcry over seven out-of-town games all year, for which they are demanding payments totaling more than $25 million dollars from Cablevision customers. The NFL is not fooling New York football fans, who know they will continue to see every Giants, Jets and playoff game on Cablevision."

http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/watchdog/blog/2007/11/_neil_here_is.html

Lobbyists Circulate Draft Letter to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin
By Ted Hearn -- Multichannel News, 12/10/2007 1:45:00 PM

Washington – The NFL Network is trying to get U.S. legislators to pressure the Federal Communications Commission into forcing Comcast and Time Warner into negotiating their differences with the league-owned pay-TV channel.

NFL Network lobbyists have circulated to legislators for their signature a draft letter to FCC chairman Kevin Martin stating that the agency should impose mandatory arbitration because the cable companies have little incentive to carry popular programming they don’t own.

“This market failure has imposed substantial burdens on consumers, who are unable to access popular programming, including games of their favorite sports teams,” the Dec. 6 draft letter said, though without referring to Comcast and Time Warner by name.

Martin already supports the NFL Network. The letter, though addressed to Martin, is more likely aimed at other FCC officials whose support has not been locked up.

“We have been contacted by several congressional offices that have been inundated with complaints about big cable companies not carrying NFL Network,” said NFL spokesman Seth Palansky. “We have provided those congressional offices with language with which to contact the FCC to urge for mandatory arbitration which could help get NFL Network wider distribution.”

Comcast carries the NFL Network on a sports tier seen in about 1 million homes. Time Warner refuses to carry the network on expanded basic, claiming the 70-cent per month, per subscriber license fee is excessive. Time Warner has offered to carry the NFL Network on a sports tier or an a la carte basis, or on a pay per game basis, in which all of the revenue would go to the NFL.

The NFL Network has accused the cable giants of denying consumers access to most popular programming on cable TV.

A copy of the draft letter was obtained Monday by Multichannel News.

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) last Wednesday sent a letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and National Cable & Telecommunications Association president Kyle McSlarrow, urging compromise.

Kerry said he was concerned that millions of cable consumers would be unable to see on TV the New England Patriots (13-0) final regular season game on Dec. 29 against the New York Giants, because the NFL Network has exclusive television rights. No NFL team has gone undefeated for an entire regular season since the 1972 Miami Dolphins.

“In light of the unique circumstances surrounding the 2007 New England Patriots, I urge you to reach an agreement as soon as possible, so that football fans across the country are not prevented from viewing what could be an historic sporting event,” Kerry said in one-page letter.

In the draft letter, the NFL Network said forced arbitration would not be breaking new ground. It referred, for example, to the FCC’s decision in 2006 to pressure Comcast to carry Mid-Atlantic Sports Network (MASN), a regional sports network and the pay-TV home of the Washington Nationals baseball team.

“We note with interest that the [FCC] previously adopted a dispute resolution mechanism to address a similar stalemate between regional sports networks and vertically integrated MVPDs, and this approach benefited consumers right here in the Washington, D.C. market,” the letter said.

But the letter failed to mention that Comcast paid for the MASN contract by immediately raising monthly cable rates by $2 for 1.6 million customers in the Washington-Baltimore corridor.

“We urge the [FCC] to consider using this same approach to resolve disputes involving other types of independently owned programming where similar vertical integration may impede agreement,” the draft letter said. “This proposal would not pick winners or losers, but instead creates a mechanism to address a market failure that has prevented consumers from having access to popular programming including the NFL Network, about which our constituents have expressed much concern.”

http://www.multichannel.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6511245

What a joke...

Don't our lawmakers have something more important to do than play Mommy to two large, rich industries?

What a joke...

Don't our lawmakers have something more important to do than play Mommy to two large, rich industries?

No s...

Agree 100%. No where in the constitution does it say anything about our right to watch cable tv.

Just another example of how moronic the people in Washington are.

By the way, Jerry Jones and Roger were in Texas yesterday testifying before a committee of the Texas legislature

What a joke...

Don't our lawmakers have something more important to do than play Mommy to two large, rich industries?

LOL! :D Dude, that's all they have time to do. The only people who get lawmakers' attention are large industries or special interest groups who hire high-powered and high-priced lobbying firms to get them that access. The "little guy", the ordinary tax-paying American, has virtually no real access to the Congress or the President and his voice is virtually never heard in the Halls of Power.

If the FCC is going to mediate adding NFLN to TWC & Comcast, shouldn't they also address the shady exclusivity arrangement that the NFL has with DirecTV on Sunday Ticket?

If the FCC is going to mediate adding NFLN to TWC & Comcast, shouldn't they also address the shady exclusivity arrangement that the NFL has with DirecTV on Sunday Ticket?

That's something I've never understood. No matter how much money DirecTV is willing to pay for an "exclusive" for Sunday Ticket, it would have to pale in comparison to how much the NFL could get if they allowed every carrier to buy the package. While it may be a great marketing tool for D*, it can't possibly benefit the NFL financially as much as getting money from everyone. Makes no sense to me.

That's something I've never understood. No matter how much money DirecTV is willing to pay for an "exclusive" for Sunday Ticket, it would have to pale in comparison to how much the NFL could get if they allowed every carrier to buy the package. While it may be a great marketing tool for D*, it can't possibly benefit the NFL financially as much as getting money from everyone. Makes no sense to me.

The value of the CBS and FOX NFL packages would drop if every provider had access to Sunday Ticket. If everyone had access to Sunday Ticket there would be less eyeballs on the local stations showing the games and that is something that the local stations and the networks will not let happen quietly.

The value of the CBS and FOX NFL packages would drop if every provider had access to Sunday Ticket. If everyone had access to Sunday Ticket there would be less eyeballs on the local stations showing the games and that is something that the local stations and the networks will not let happen quietly.

I think that could be open to debate. The majority of the population is a fan of the team that is considered local to that area. By following the same blackout rules that DirecTV uses today (game not carried on ST if shown locally) and giving local commercial inserts on all games, advertising revenues could actually grow. The local fans are still going to watch their local team, displaced fans or people wanting to watch a different game would see the local insert commercials.

I think that could be open to debate. The majority of the population is a fan of the team that is considered local to that area. By following the same blackout rules that DirecTV uses today (game not carried on ST if shown locally) and giving local commercial inserts on all games, advertising revenues could actually grow. The local fans are still going to watch their local team, displaced fans or people wanting to watch a different game would see the local insert commercials.
Any revenue from local spots on a cable version of Sunday Ticket would go to the cable company, unless your suggesting that the cable company run the local ads and give that revenue to the local CBS and FOX stations. The local stations get something like 6 or 7 minutes of local ad time per game which they would not want to give up. The local ad time is very valuable even though it is usually at the least attractive times such as halftime, before kickoff, and after the game with usually only one break being during the game.

Having Sunday Ticket available to everyone would also diminish the value of the doubleheader to the networks as there would not be as much emphasis on the late 4:15 game which goes to almost all of the country.

What a joke...

Don't our lawmakers have something more important to do than play Mommy to two large, rich industries?

Why not? It would give them a chance to stop giving the oil companies a hand job.

I'm just glad I have D*. Cheaper than cable and 2x as good.

I'm just glad I have D*. Cheaper than cable and 2x as good.

You mean the pizza pan, overly compressed, maybe locals, limited connections, buy-every-new-version-box service? :D

No s...

Agree 100%. No where in the constitution does it say anything about our right to watch cable tv.


While I agree this issue should be beneath the government's radar, invoking the constitution every time you don't like an internet comment is just silly. The constitution does not cover issues like this, the Code and the FCC do.

As I mentioned before in another thread, it was entirely the NFL's decision to risk viewers' "access [to] popular programming, including games of their favorite sports teams." The eight games in question could have been sold to one or more existing networks. Instead, the NFL chose to use them in an attempt to turn a "niche" network into a "basic" channel, and the cable companies saw right through that effort.

Also, as I recall, the government was asked to get involved in the dispute between Sinclair Broadcasting and Mediacom -- which deprived many cable viewers of much more broad-based programming than NFL Network offers -- but they declined.

D* Press Release (http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=127160&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1086631&highlight=)

DIRECTV Airlifts NFL Network To Game-Deprived Fans in Florida

DIRECTV Starship To Promote NFL Network Games Via World's Largest Aerial Digital Screen To Consumers Who Have Been Shut Out by Their Local Cable Company

EL SEGUNDO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 12, 2007--Providing millions of Americans with superior digital television service isn't the only way that DIRECTV (NASDAQ:DTV) is using the sky to bring unparalleled programming to consumers. Over the next two weeks, its newly launched blimp - the DIRECTV Starship - will fly over Tampa, St. Petersburg and Orlando, Fla., showing NFL Network game telecasts and promoting DIRECTV's superior high-definition service to cable customers, who do not receive NFL Network due to a shut out by their local cable provider, Bright House Networks.

While DIRECTV customers have always enjoyed the NFL Network at no extra charge, big cable companies want to force customers to pay an additional monthly service fee by placing it on a special programming tier. Nationally, Time Warner Cable does not carry the NFL Network at all and Comcast only carries it as a pay extra premium service. This situation has caused millions of fans to be deprived of some of the most exciting and anticipated NFL and college bowl games of the season telecast exclusively on NFL Network.

"Once again, big cable is simply reluctant to enhance the programming options they provide their customers," said Jon Gieselman, senior vice president, Advertising and Public Relations DIRECTV, Inc. "We're seizing this unique opportunity to reinforce again why DIRECTV is, hands down, the superior television service and one that is committed to consistently bring the best programming to our customers."

"NFL Network continues to demonstrate our commitment to our fans by going to great heights to give them access to our popular content," said Dena Kaplan, NFL Network's senior vice president of marketing. "DIRECTV was NFL Network's first distribution partner and for more than four years now has been taking advantage of the opportunities to use NFL content in unique and exciting ways for its customers."

The DIRECTV Starship "fly over" project will begin this Thursday in Tampa where local residents can simply step outside and look to the sky to enjoy the NFL Network's broadcast of the Denver Broncos-Houston Texans game. The "fly overs" continue the following Saturday, this time above St. Petersburg for the Cincinnati Bengals-San Francisco 49ers NFL Network broadcast. The following week, the Starship will visit the Orlando area for Thursday's Pittsburgh Steelers-St. Louis Rams broadcast and that Saturday's Dallas Cowboys-Carolina Panthers broadcast.

The first of its kind to operate in North America, and one of only two worldwide, the blimp and its 2,100-square foot video light sign display DIRECTV HD spots and messaging in full color. The 178-foot long blimp, emblazoned in DIRECTV blue and white, features the 70x30-foot full color monitor just beneath the DIRECTV logo. The video light sign, with a resolution of 33,600 total pixels, is the largest ever made for a blimp. The airship can travel up to 35 miles per hour and remain airborne up to six hours.

By calling 1-800-DIRECTV or visiting directv.com, customers can enjoy the NFL Network in addition to the best sports programming available anywhere including NFL SUNDAY TICKET(TM) , NASCAR HOTPASS(TM), MEGA MARCH MADNESS(TM) and the U.S. Open Interactive service. DIRECTV has continually displayed an unwavering commitment to being the undisputed leader in exclusive sports and entertainment services, interactive services and high definition programming.

Woopty-frikin-do...

D* Press Release (http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=127160&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1086631&highlight=)

... "NFL Network continues to demonstrate our commitment to our fans by going to great heights to give them access to our popular content," said Dena Kaplan, NFL Network's senior vice president of marketing...
Of course if they really wanted to give fans access they'd sell the games to an over-the-air network.

And by that, I mean a broadcaster, not a blimp.:D

http://iwantnflnetwork.com/

It appears that the cease and desist order did nothing to alter the "make the switch" portion of their website. :D

You mean the pizza pan, overly compressed, maybe locals, limited connections, buy-every-new-version-box service? :D

I used to think like that. But one day my cable bill shot up without notice and I was still getting the same crappy limited number of HD channels. I called D* and my only regret is that I didn't make the switch sooner.

Of course if they really wanted to give fans access they'd sell the games to an over-the-air network.

And by that, I mean a broadcaster, not a blimp.:D

The primary markets do get the games on a local channel, outside of that, find a provider that offers NFLN

If you don't like how the cable companies are treating you, then switch or give up watching the NFL. If only 8 games a year are not available for viewing, so what. I used to be a big time NFL fan. It seems most also-ran teams just mail it in. I find College football far more interesting.

Ohio State could be Miami. That would be an interesting game. I would be angry if I couldn't see that one.

If you're a die hard football fan, you would have dumped cable and gotten D* a long time before this. It's not like it is something that is going to sneak up on ootball fans.

Let the market work. If cable is too stubborn to give nfl network to it's subscribers, they have other options.

Let the market work. If cable is too stubborn to give nfl network to it's subscribers, they have other options.

That is the whole issue. If cable could just give NFL Network to its subscribers they would. But someone has to pay for it! It's not going to be the NFL, who obviously are unable to make the channel advertiser supported (which should be a big indicator of its actual popularity among the public). It is not cable who is being stubborn here. They are more than willing to carry the channel and let willing customers pay for it. That sounds like a completely reasonable compromise between not carrying it at all vs "giving" it to everyone. Customers paying for what they want - that is the market working!

It's not going to be the NFL, who obviously are unable to make the channel advertiser supported (which should be a big indicator of its actual popularity among the public).
No cable channel is fully ad supported.

When NFL Network was removed from my basic cable, I picked up the sports subscription so I would continue to get it. What's the problem? I pay $4.99 a month more in order to receive NFLN along with a few other sports channels. My neighbor, who is not an NFL fan, doesn't pay and doesn't get the channel. Neither of us in unhappy.

Of course, the NFL can't sell ads on their net claiming my neighbor as a sub, but since he isn't, it's all a bit more honest this way.

Any revenue from local spots on a cable version of Sunday Ticket would go to the cable company, unless your suggesting that the cable company run the local ads and give that revenue to the local CBS and FOX stations. The local stations get something like 6 or 7 minutes of local ad time per game which they would not want to give up. The local ad time is very valuable even though it is usually at the least attractive times such as halftime, before kickoff, and after the game with usually only one break being during the game.

Having Sunday Ticket available to everyone would also diminish the value of the doubleheader to the networks as there would not be as much emphasis on the late 4:15 game which goes to almost all of the country.I know this is OT, but can someone explain to me why we only get two or three games (at 1pm and 415pm eastern) depending on whether the local team is at home, instead of three or four?

I've never understood why the late game is a single but the early is not.

Rules seem to be

a)If the local team is playing Sunday afternoon,you ALWAYS get their game,unless it is blacked out.

b)If the local team is playing at home,no game can run against it.

I would add:

Unless the local team is playing at home at the time,EVERYONE gets the Patriots game. (ON CW and/or MyNetwork TV if needed) :)

Yeah I know about that, but what I'm asking is - if the local team is playing at home at 1pm, why don't we get 2 games at 415pm? And if the local is away or not playing, why don't we get 2 early and 2 late?

I have never seen an explanation for this and it really sucks to get only 2 games when the local is home (especially this year with the downfall of the Falcons here).

Yeah I know about that, but what I'm asking is - if the local team is playing at home at 1pm, why don't we get 2 games at 415pm? And if the local is away or not playing, why don't we get 2 early and 2 late?

I have never seen an explanation for this and it really sucks to get only 2 games when the local is home (especially this year with the downfall of the Falcons here).

i would imagine that it's to "protect" the network that has the doubleheader that week... ensuring that they get maximum eyeballs on the 2nd game... i'd bet that there's advertiser dollars at stake there...

I know this is OT, but can someone explain to me why we only get two or three games (at 1pm and 415pm eastern) depending on whether the local team is at home, instead of three or four?

I've never understood why the late game is a single but the early is not.

Each week FOX or CBS has a doubleheader in which they can show a early (1 Pm ET) game game and a late game (4:05 or 4:15 Pm ET). Each network has 9 doubleheader weeks over the course of the 17 week season. Both network have a doubleheader in week 17.

The terminology the NFL uses to name each timeslot is the following:
Early game on the doubleheader network: regional game
Late game on the doubleheader network: national game
Game on the single game network: single game

late games on the doubleheader network start at 4:15 Pm ET and late games on the single game network start at 4:05 PM ET.

Most markets will receive all three of these games, only during week 17 is it possible to have 4 games broadcast into one market.

NFL broadcast rules differ by what market you are in:

Primary market
The hometown market for a team, there are 31 primary markets for the 32 teams (2 NYC teams and 2 Bay area teams, plus Green Bay which has two primary markets, Green Bay and Milwaukee)

-Must show all of the local team's road games
-Will show all home games that sellout
-Home games of the local team will be the only game on during that time slot. Thus if the home team is playing on the doubleheader network at home three games will be seen in that market. The game on the single game network will air in the opposite time slot of the time slot the local team is playing at. If the home team is on the single game network the market will only see 2 games. It will see the home team's game and a game from the doubleheader network in the opposite time slot.


Secondary market
These markets adjoin the primary market and are within 75 miles of the stadium.

-Must show all of the local team's away games
-Do not have to show the home games, but most will because it would be the most popular team.
-Will be blacked out of the local team if they do not sell out a home game.
-Will receive three games each week (2 from the doubleheader network, 1 from the single game network), provided the home team sells out.

All other markets markets
Get to show whatever games they want, some tend to have a certain team they show more because of a local rooting interest. Always receive 3 games each week.

The reason behind the doubleheader network idea is to allow FOX and CBS the opportunity for a semi-national game each week that they can promote and also that would draw a large audience.

Exceptions to the rules: Each market must see one game from CBS and one from FOX. So during week 1 when CBS is covering the US Open (tennis) they only show the NFL in the early slot. Thus the home markets of the teams playing on FOX in the early time slot, which is the doubleheader network, will have games on the competing network.

I think I covered everything, if there is anything else let me know.

i would imagine that it's to "protect" the network that has the doubleheader that week... ensuring that they get maximum eyeballs on the 2nd game... i'd bet that there's advertiser dollars at stake there...

Exactly the late game on the doubleheader network is a "national" game, the NFL wants viewers to collect there.

-Home games of the local team will be the only game on during that time slot. Thus if the home team is playing on the doubleheader network at home three games will be seen in that market. The game on the single game network will air in the opposite time slot of the time slot the local team is playing at. If the home team is on the single game network the market will only see 2 games. It will see the home team's game and a game from the doubleheader network in the opposite time slot.Thanks homcom, I figured you'd respond. This is the part that I'm probably confused about. The Falcons are always on Fox and generally have a 1pm start for home games, and I can't recall a time when there is more than one late game after the Falcons play. I'm sure I've missed a few but I really hate it when they are home because I know that almost all of the time it means there will only be 2 games on. They do have a rare 4:15 home start with 2 non-local games on at 1pm and I'm guessing that's only when there is some national importance to the game.

homcom, you forgot to mention that it's the visiting team that determines the network the game broadcasts on - CBS for AFC, Fox for NFC.

For the cities with two teams in the immediate area (Bay Area for 49ers and Raiders, NY for Giants and Jets), when those teams play each other, at least once every 4 years, there can't be a blackout because the away team's market must see it - in these cases, they're both the same market (SF and Oakland for 49ers/Raiders game; Tri-state area (NY,NJ, CT) for Giants/Jets).

Not an issue in NYC as Jets and Giants have been sold out for years. Not so on Bay Area.

homcom, you skipped one scenario: primary market, home game that doesn't sell out, on the doubleheader network. This happened in week 9 in the SF market: CBS was the doubleheader network and had the 4:15 HOU-OAK game, which did not sell out, so CBS showed NE-IND at 4:15 instead. However, CBS did not get to show an early game, which I don't understand. SF was away at 1PM on Fox, so that should not have caused the restriction.

homcom, you skipped one scenario: primary market, home game that doesn't sell out, on the doubleheader network. This happened in week 9 in the SF market: CBS was the doubleheader network and had the 4:15 HOU-OAK game, which did not sell out, so CBS showed NE-IND at 4:15 instead. However, CBS did not get to show an early game, which I don't understand. SF was away at 1PM on Fox, so that should not have caused the restriction.

If the local home team does not sell out then the doubleheader network can only show one game, even if the game that did not sellout was scheduled for the other network. In the situation above, CBS choose to show the late game of the doubleheader because it was a bigger game and so as not to compete against the 49ers game which was on in the early time slot.

Thanks homcom, I figured you'd respond. This is the part that I'm probably confused about. The Falcons are always on Fox and generally have a 1pm start for home games, and I can't recall a time when there is more than one late game after the Falcons play. I'm sure I've missed a few but I really hate it when they are home because I know that almost all of the time it means there will only be 2 games on. They do have a rare 4:15 home start with 2 non-local games on at 1pm and I'm guessing that's only when there is some national importance to the game.

Out of the 7 home games the Falcons have had so far 2 have been on ESPN, 1 on NFL Network, 1 on CBS, and 3 on FOX. For the 3 weeks the Atlanta was on ESPN or NFL Network, Atlanta was guaranteed 3 Sunday games which they got. Out of the 4 games on CBS or FOX all but 1 was on the doubleheader network, thus Atlanta has only had 1 week so far in which it has only had 2 afternoon games. The sole 4:15 home game that Atlanta has had so far was against Carolina and was seen only in the southeast as most of the country was getting Washington/NY Giants. They will do this sometimes to spread out the games as FOX had 5 games in the early slot that day. By moving that game to 4:15 it allowed FOX to have larger regions see one of the early games, that otherwise would have been showing CAR/ATL if it had been played at 1 PM as well. Of course this mean a smaller percentage would be seeing the other late game.

In the situation above, CBS choose to show the late game of the doubleheader because it was a bigger game and so as not to compete against the 49ers game which was on in the early time slot.

Plus the TV rules state that there must be at least one early game and one late game shown. So CBS had to show a late game that week because FOX was required to show the 49ers road game early.

Interesting article....probably just posturing on the government's part but it would definitely get the league's attention if their anti-trust protection were to be in jeopardy. At this point, I am losing interest in whether or not the NFL Network even survives. Something about Jerry Jones telling me to switch to satellite makes me not want to do it just for spite :D

Senators threaten to reconsider antitrust exemption over cable dispute (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3162011)

WASHINGTON -- Two members of the Senate Judiciary Committee sent a letter to the NFL on Wednesday threatening to reconsider the league's antitrust exemption if it doesn't make games on the NFL Network available to more viewers.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., expressed concern that many fans in their home states will not be able to see games on the channel involving the New England Patriots or the Pittsburgh Steelers.

Leahy is the committee's chairman, and Specter is its ranking member.

"Now that the NFL is adopting strategies to limit distribution of game programming to their own networks," they wrote, "Congress may need to reexamine the need and desirability of their continued exemption from the Nation's antitrust laws."

Eight games air this season on the NFL Network, which is available in fewer than 40 percent of the nation's homes with televisions. The league has been feuding with several major cable companies over whether they should carry the channel as part of a basic package.

Games are simulcast on free TV locally for each team, but that doesn't include regional markets such as Vermont for the Patriots or parts of Pennsylvania for the Steelers. NFL officials have repeatedly said they will not agree to any distribution arrangement that only involves games and not year-round broadcast of the channel.

Time Warner Rejects NFL's Offer of Arbitration

By Mark Maske
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 21, 2007; Page E04

The NFL made a new offer to Time Warner yesterday in an effort, the league said, to resolve its dispute with the cable television carrier before the Dec. 29 game between the New England Patriots and New York Giants, which is to be broadcast on the NFL Network.

The league's offer to submit the dispute to binding arbitration was rejected by Time Warner, however.

The league has remained embroiled in disputes with Time Warner and other large cable companies, including Comcast, over pricing and distribution of the league-owned NFL Network, which reaches only about 35 million U.S. households and carries eight regular season games. The stalemate has received increased attention recently because the NFL Network is scheduled to carry the Patriots-Giants game, in which New England might be trying to complete an unbeaten regular season.

The league's new offer to Time Warner came a day after Sens. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) sent a letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell threatening to reconsider the sport's exemption from federal antitrust laws if deals are not struck with the cable companies to make the games carried by the NFL Network available to more viewers.

Goodell wrote in a letter yesterday to Glenn A. Britt, president and chief executive of Time Warner Cable, that the league is willing to have the dispute resolved by binding, "baseball-style" arbitration. Each side would submit a final offer to an arbitrator regarding pricing and distribution of the NFL Network, and the arbitrator would choose one of the proposals. Because the arbitration process could be lengthy, Goodell wrote, the league would allow Time Warner to distribute the NFL Network to all its customers immediately if the cable carrier agrees to submit the dispute to arbitration. The NFL's offer will remain open through Dec. 28, Goodell wrote.

"The objective is to have a neutral third party determine the price and tier for NFL Network distribution on Time Warner systems, based on the fair market value of the NFL Network program service," Goodell wrote.

Britt responded to Goodell later in the day, writing that Time Warner remained willing to carry the NFL Network on a sports tier, or make games carried on the NFL Network available to its customers on a per-game basis with the league setting the price and collecting the revenue generated. Britt also urged Goodell to move the Patriots-Giants game to a different network.

"Over the years we've been able to successfully reach agreements with hundreds of programming networks without the use of arbitration," Britt wrote. "We continue to believe that the best way to achieve results is to privately seek a resolution and not attempt to negotiate through the press or elected officials."

An NFL official said the league did not make a similar offer to Comcast because the league's deal with Comcast already allows the company to carry the NFL Network on a basic or digital basic package if it chooses. The league wants the channel carried on basic or digital basic cable, while the cable companies have maintained their customers don't want that and the channel should be on a sports tier with an additional fee for interested customers.

Under NFL rules, all games are carried on over-the-air TV in the home markets of the two competing teams.

The league also has sought the intervention of the Federal Communications Commission. It was announced yesterday that 21 members of Congress had urged FCC Chairman Kevin J. Martin to take action.

The dispute continues to draw scrutiny from Capitol Hill. In their letter Wednesday to Goodell, Leahy and Specter wrote, "Now that the NFL is adopting strategies to limit distribution of game programming to their own networks, Congress may need to reexamine the need and desirability of their continued exemption from the Nation's antitrust laws."

Leahy is the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Specter is the ranking member.

Don't our elected officials have better things to do.......!!!!!!! Sorry, stupid question, apparently they have already funded Social Security and Medicare, streamlined the income tax system, and planned the end of the middle east conficts.

This is a negotiation between two independent companies and the market demands will eventually resolve the issues. I don't know what the resolution will be but it will come to a resolution.

The end result may be exactly where we are now.

Wow. At the end of the day it's really the consumer that is losing out big here. I've been pulling my hair out with TWC. Lack of hd channels, and this nfl network is the real deal breaker. As soon as I can get all 4 of the locals in HD from either D* or via an antenna I'm switching.

At least when I had comcast I could watch these Thursday night games, and had more than 6 HD channels.

why is time warner being so stubborn about getting the NFL Network ??

So we don't have to pay for it if we don't want it.

Hard to believe but they are trying to be responsible to their customers.

From what I have seen less that 25% of subscribers are interested in NFL, either free or for pay.

If the NFL network goes on standard packages, TWC would have to raise 100% of the subscriber's bills.

I for one fall in the 25% of NFL fans but I would not be willing to pay extra for a few games each season. This is the NFL Network's fear.

Best case is if I signed up for the sports package and only kept it for a couple of months during the season.

Signing up for the Comcast Sports Tier and then cancelling it after NFL was my first thought. Then I said to myself - self, why do you care. Giving Comcast another $5 after they sent me a rate increase 1/1/2008 is not in the cards. I will live without NFL network and hope they go under.

Hard to believe but they are trying to be responsible to their customers.

From what I have seen less that 25% of subscribers are interested in NFL, either free or for pay.

If the NFL network goes on standard packages, TWC would have to raise 100% of the subscriber's bills.

I for one fall in the 25% of NFL fans but I would not be willing to pay extra for a few games each season. This is the NFL Network's fear.

Best case is if I signed up for the sports package and only kept it for a couple of months during the season.

Huh, thats really strange, because when I was a Comcast sub, NFL Network moved from the Digital Basic tier to the Sports & Entertainment tier and my bill didn't go down. Using your logic there, my bill should have dropped ~$.70/month because Comcast no longer had to pay that to the NFL for each digital sub.

They aren't looking out for their subs, they are looking out for their bottom line.

Hard to believe but they are trying to be responsible to their customers.

From what I have seen less that 25% of subscribers are interested in NFL, either free or for pay.

If the NFL network goes on standard packages, TWC would have to raise 100% of the subscriber's bills.

I for one fall in the 25% of NFL fans but I would not be willing to pay extra for a few games each season. This is the NFL Network's fear.

Best case is if I signed up for the sports package and only kept it for a couple of months during the season. That is also the NFL's accurate fear.

why is time warner being so stubborn about getting the NFL Network ??

Simple math: 70 cents per subscriber per year adds up to $8.40 per subscriber per year. When you're a large cable compnay like Time Warner, that's a lot of money -- with their estimated 13.4 million subscribers, that works out to something like $112 million per year that they'd be paying to the NFL for the "right" to carry NFL Network on basic cable, as the NFL wants.

Since the NFL Network has highly desirable programming for only two months out of the year, I can understand why Time Warner would prefer not to spend that money.

What about the $12 (WAG #) a month they pay for channels that have no desirable programming at any time throughout the year that are in demand by only a fraction of a percent of their subs?

The only cableco justified holding out out of principle is Cablevision. They are pro-a la carte... the others are being hypocritical by not carrying the NFL Network in their basic tier.

I want to give a big thank you to Comcast for NOT adding NFL Network. Talk about boring games/ announcers. The NFL can put all their games on the NFLN for all I care.

why is time warner being so stubborn about getting the NFL Network ??

For one thing, the NFL Network has very, very, very little to offer!

Eight extra games per year. Big Deal!

There are 8,760 hours in a year and the NFL offers a channel that would provide significant entertainment for only 24 of those hours. (0.27397%) Unfortunately, bandwidth would be occupied 100% of the year.

The NFL Network is a lousy deal for cable companies and their customers.

I am going to miss the all-important Patriots / Giants game and it will be painful, but when the final whistle blows (on the radio), I'll be delighted that TWC did not bow to the pressure.

I, too, would like to see the NFL Network go out of business.

And are you kidding ? The signature game of this fledgling channel this weekend and and they'll get the ratings tantamount to an NHL on NBC telecast

And are you kidding ? The signature game of this fledgling channel this weekend and and they'll get the ratings tantamount to an NHL on NBC telecast

huh ?? 18,100,000 people watched at least part of the nfln packers/cowboys game meaning that at least that amount will watch the patriots/giants game....i dont see nhl games doin that.

For one thing, the NFL Network has very, very, very little to offer!

Eight extra games per year. Big Deal!

There are 8,760 hours in a year and the NFL offers a channel that would provide significant entertainment for only 24 of those hours. (0.27397%) Unfortunately, bandwidth would be occupied 100% of the year.

The NFL Network is a lousy deal for cable companies and their customers.

I am going to miss the all-important Patriots / Giants game and it will be painful, but when the final whistle blows (on the radio), I'll be delighted that TWC did not bow to the pressure.

I, too, would like to see the NFL Network go out of business.

first of all there are alot of other great football shows on the channel such as nfl replay shows (for games i missed), nfl gameday highlight shows, and the americas game super bowl winners series (which should win an emmy award)....so when u say all they show is 8 games u are either ignorant or stupid or imo both.

u are either ignorant or stupid or imo both.

He know what a capital letter is!

huh ?? 18,100,000 people watched at least part of the nfln packers/cowboys game meaning that at least that amount will watch the patriots/giants game....i dont see nhl games doin that.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman2/publish/Cable_20/NFL_Network_scores_big_with_Cowboys.asp

Also: "The game drew the ninth-largest audience of the year on cable, but perhaps most impressive was the game’s cable coverage rating, the best on cable in more than 14 years. "

Pretty amazing considering the Network is only available to 40% of possible viewers and much of that in Digital and Sports Tiers/Packages.

first of all there are alot of other great football shows on the channel such as nfl replay shows (for games i missed), nfl gameday highlight shows, and the americas game super bowl winners series (which should win an emmy award)....so when u say all they show is 8 games u are either ignorant or stupid or imo both.No, they're not ignorant or stupid, they just don't see the value of all that rehash.

The issue is, if you do, should you be footing the bill, or should everyone.

OK guys, here's the deal. As far as I'm concerned, the NFL and TWC can go jump off a cliff. However the upcoming Patriots/Giants game is historic. They should open this one game up for the sake of the fans. Then they will have 10 months to go back to beating each other up.

If it is it's at least the third historic game this year. (Pro)
App. state/Michigan - now that was historic.

If it is it's at least the third historic game this year. (Pro)
App. state/Michigan - now that was historic.

The Pats rule, and it will be a historic game, as will the Superbowl. I grew up in the northeast, and just moved to the Atlanta area. As Gary's comment shows and I've observed, it appears that folks in the south are much more interested in college sports than pro.

I find that strangely interesting, having come from a region where pro sports are everything and people live and breath the Red Sox and Patriots, and no one cares about college sports, at all.

The Pats rule, and it will be a historic game, as will the Superbowl. I grew up in the northeast, and just moved to the Atlanta area. As Gary's comment shows and I've observed, it appears that folks in the south are much more interested in college sports than pro.

I find that strangely interesting, having come from a region where pro sports are everything and people live and breath the Red Sox and Patriots, and no one cares about college sports, at all.

because north eastern college football teams have always generally been lousy.

Oh, I see. We have a fanboy on our hands. BTW, I spent my first 52 years in Baltimore. The '58 Colts with 7 Hall of Fame players (I said HOF, not All Pro) would have kicked the Pats butts. :D

Oh, I see. We have a fanboy on our hands. BTW, I spent my first 52 years in Baltimore. The '58 Colts with 7 Hall of Fame players (I said HOF, not All Pro) would have kicked the Pats butts. :D

unlikely... but then again, most of those guys are in their 80's now... ;)

but seriously, it's still unlikely... the size and speed (not to mention the more complex offenses and defenses of teams) of today's players make such a comparison very difficult... football isn't like baseball, where a reasonable comparison between eras can be made...

however, taken in the context of their time (and not considering this year's pats team until after the season), i've always believed the best team i've ever seen play was the steelers team that won their 3rd and 4th super bowls, and the best team i never saw play was the 58 colts (don't forget their hof coach, either :) )...

on topic: it's not killing me to pay the buck 99 a month to get nfln. if i COULDN'T get it (even by paying extra), then i'd be upset.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman2/publish/Cable_20/NFL_Network_scores_big_with_Cowboys.asp

Also: "The game drew the ninth-largest audience of the year on cable, but perhaps most impressive was the game’s cable coverage rating, the best on cable in more than 14 years. "

Pretty amazing considering the Network is only available to 40% of possible viewers and much of that in Digital and Sports Tiers/Packages.

Yes, and this is why the NFL is sticking to it's guns. It knows what it has.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman2/publish/Cable_20/NFL_Network_scores_big_with_Cowboys.asp

Also: "The game drew the ninth-largest audience of the year on cable, but perhaps most impressive was the game’s cable coverage rating, the best on cable in more than 14 years. "

Pretty amazing considering the Network is only available to 40% of possible viewers and much of that in Digital and Sports Tiers/Packages.

The article also states that more people watched the pathetic Dolphins/Steelers game that week on MNF than watched the Packers/Cowboys on NFLN.

Top sporting event (total viewers): ESPN’s “Dolphins/Steelers” (Monday 8:30 p.m.) 13.1 million

I would like for the NFLN to be available on a tier so that I could subscribe to it during football season. Next thing you know DirecTV will make you pay for NFLN as part of a bundle with Sunday Ticket and raise the price another couple of hundred dollars.

I'm disappointed I won't be able to see this classic matchup on TV but I don't want TWC to give into the NFL's unreasonable demands. The NFL long ago ruined the Sunday games with their backwards rules regarding how many games can be shown, what games can be shown and how long they can be shown before switching to another game.

The article also states that more people watched the pathetic Dolphins/Steelers game that week on MNF than watched the Packers/Cowboys on NFLN.

Top sporting event (total viewers): ESPN’s “Dolphins/Steelers” (Monday 8:30 p.m.) 13.1 million

I would like for the NFLN to be available on a tier so that I could subscribe to it during football season. Next thing you know DirecTV will make you pay for NFLN as part of a bundle with Sunday Ticket and raise the price another couple of hundred dollars.

but total viewers for packers/cowboys on nfln was 18.1 million.

NFL Network: Live-Game Ratings Skyrocketing vs. Last Season

NFL Network said Wednesday that after seven Thursday and Saturday-night National Football League games this season, its coverage-area ratings were up 31% compared to the same time frame last season.

The NFL’s cable network said its games are averaging a 7.1 coverage-area rating versus a 5.4 after seven games last year.

The network added that the games rose 48% in average viewers (to 4.6 million from 3.1 million through seven games last year) and 55% among men 18-49 (1.7 million vs. 1.1 million).

NFL Network’s final live NFL game this year will be Saturday night’s matchup, in which the undefeated New England Patriots will look to complete a perfect regular season in their visit to the New York Giants.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6515238.html?desc=topstory

When does Bowl Season start?

it already started 6 days ago when utah beat navy in the poinsettia bowl.

Yes, and this is why the NFL is sticking to it's guns. It knows what it has.And the cable companies know what NFLN has, too, which is why they're sticking to their guns.:D

NFL Network: Live-Game Ratings Skyrocketing vs. Last Season

NFL Network said Wednesday that after seven Thursday and Saturday-night National Football League games this season, its coverage-area ratings were up 31% compared to the same time frame last season.

The NFL’s cable network said its games are averaging a 7.1 coverage-area rating versus a 5.4 after seven games last year.

The network added that the games rose 48% in average viewers (to 4.6 million from 3.1 million through seven games last year) and 55% among men 18-49 (1.7 million vs. 1.1 million).

NFL Network’s final live NFL game this year will be Saturday night’s matchup, in which the undefeated New England Patriots will look to complete a perfect regular season in their visit to the New York Giants.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6515238.html?desc=topstory

I find that strange since Comcast was offering it on their basic package last year but only on the sports tier this year yet it rose over 48% in viewership. Something just does not add up here!

They signed virtually all of the smaller cablecos. There's only a few holdouts - the same ones that are pimping their own programming far worse than what the NFL is doing.

according to espn (breaking news, apparently, i'm watching otl-first report), nfln is going to simulcast the game nationally via cbs and nbc...

1) why both? :confused:

2) that kinda annoys me, since i'm paying to get the game. oh well.

Just heard this as well. If doesn't say Cable Companies have all the leverage I don't know what does.

The NFL looks bad with this whole fiasco and I think this is damage control. I love every minute of it. The reason for simulcast coverage is to be fair to the networks the NFL probably had to offer it to everyone with a NFL TV deal. If not then they would have shown favoritism and would have made matters worse.

according to espn (breaking news, apparently, i'm watching otl-first report), nfln is going to simulcast the game nationally via cbs and nbc...

1) why both? :confused:

2) that kinda annoys me, since i'm paying to get the game. oh well.

Why both? Have you seen the programming on these two networks on Saturday night? It's usually repeats of shows broadcast during the week. Fox has first-run original programming (Cops and America's Most Wanted) on Saturday nights, so it doesn't make sense for them to participate.

Annoying, maybe, but the NFL would have had to agree to this in order for both networks to carry the game (which has not happened since Super Bowl I, when both networks had annoucing teams broadcast the game) and would hope for the most-watched game this season. I am guessing that the NFL Network crew will be providing the play-by-play, but each network may have their own studio shows do the halftime - although I don't know this for sure.

The big question is: Which network will you watch?

Myself, I like the interplay between Rich Eisen, Marshall Faulk, Deion Sanders and Steve Mariucci, so I'll probably watch the NFL Network HD feed. But, since I have Sirius, I'll listed to the Patriots' radio broadcast instead of Gumbel and Collinsworth (because they are SO annoying).

Stick a fork in the NFL Network. The cable companies just won the war.

The big question is: Which network will you watch?


From what I read, CBS and NBC will simply retransmit the NFLN broadcast with Gumbel and Collinsworth.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d805793b5&template=with-video&confirm=true

according to espn (breaking news, apparently, i'm watching otl-first report), nfln is going to simulcast the game nationally via cbs and nbc...

1) why both? :confused:

2) that kinda annoys me, since i'm paying to get the game. oh well.

With the writers on strike, a night of relatively free simulcast coverage saves another night of filler programming for a later date. If the strike goes on much longer I bet you will see more sports programming moved to primetime to fill hours. How many "best of Saturday Night Live" primetime shows can NBC put on? It also would have been a CBS game if not on NFLN.

This was the last real chip the NFL Network had in the war with cable, unless by doing this they got some signal from Kerry that Congress would help them if they played nice with the public. Of course, they could just sell the games to a normal cable outlet and be done with it.

From TV Week

NFL to Air Patriots Game on CBS, NBC
By Jon Lafayette and Chris Pursell

The NFL, under pressure because many cable subscribers were not going to be able to see the potentially historic New England Patriots game on Saturday, has arranged for CBS and NBC to simulcast the game. The game originally was going to air nationally exclusively on the NFL Network.

The Patriots, with a 15-0 record, will be trying to become the first team to go undefeated since the league’s schedule was expanded to 16 games. They are playing against the New York Giants.

“We have taken this extraordinary step because it is in the best interest of our fans,” NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said in a statement. “What we have seen for the past year is a very strong consumer demand for NFL Network. We appreciate CBS and NBC delivering the NFL Network telecast on Saturday night to the broad audience that deserves to see this potentially historic game. Our commitment to the NFL Network is stronger than ever.”

CBS and NBC will carry the NFL Network feed of the game with Bryant Gumbel and Cris Collinsworth in the broadcast booth. The game also will be televised by WCVB-ABC (Channel 5) in Boston, WMUR-ABC in Manchester, New Hampshire (Channel 9) and WWOR (Channel 9) in New York. The telecast begins at 8 p.m. ET with kickoff set at 8:15 p.m. ET.

In recent weeks, the Patriots have delivered the two biggest ratings of the year (a 20.1 in Week 9 and week 14's 18.4), the biggest NBC Saturday Night Football rating ever (13.4 in Week 12), and the biggest NFL cable rating ever (11.1 in Week 13).

With multiple cable systems still at odds with the NFL Network over carriage fees, the shift will allow fans throughout the country access to the game.

Only a fraction of subscribers of Comcast, which covers much of the New England area, and Time Warner Cable, would have been able to see the game on NFL Network. Comcast carries NFL Network on a special sports tier and Time Warner Cable has no carriage agreement with NFL Network.

Politicians, including Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, have been urging the cable operators and the league to come to an agreement so that more fans can see the game.

“NFL Network is a programming service of great interest to fans and should be broadly distributed by the cable industry,” said NFL Network President and CEO Steve Bornstein.

The game marks the first three-network simulcast in NFL history and the first simulcast of any kind of an NFL game since the first Super Bowl in 1967 when CBS and NBC both televised the first meeting of the champions of the newly merged National Football League and American Football League.

From what I read, CBS and NBC will simply retransmit the NFLN broadcast with Gumbel and Collinsworth.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d805793b5&template=with-video&confirm=true

Gumbel and Collinsworth screwing up the calls on three separate HD network feeds? Thanks a lot NFL! :rolleyes:

Seriously though, glad to know there are human beings running the NFL. How else to explain the fact that they BLINKED? :D

Please take discussion of Saturday Night's game here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=961339

This topic will re-open at a later date.