NFL Network vs. Cable holdouts - The 8 game dilemma. - Page 52  

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).

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...

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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

Senators threaten to reconsider antitrust exemption over cable dispute

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.

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.

That is also the NFL's accurate fear.

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.

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

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.

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.

He know what a capital letter is!

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/art...th_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.