Tonight, the NFL Network broadcasts its first game, pitting the Denver Broncos against the Kansas City Chiefs. It promises to be a hard battle, with two longtime and bitter rivals fighting to stay in the playoff picture. This will also mark Bryant Gumbel's return to sports play-by-play, something he hasn't done in many, many years (he was NBC's NFL studio host before he got the Today job; this may be his first play-by-play work since the seventies), and it will be fun to hear the always-opinionated Cris Collinsworth back in the booth. Should be a good game.Here's the problem: I won't be able to watch it. And neither will the majority of fans.
Why? Because, despite giving its own network a slate of Thursday night games, the NFL hasn't been able to negotiate carriage deals with four of the biggest cable comapnies: Cablevision, Time Warner, Comcast, and Charter Communications.
The reason? Money, of course. The NFL wants the network to be on a basic tier, but is charging the cable companies triple what they wanted before adding the Thursday games. Some of the cable companies, like Time Warner, wouldn't mind putting the channel on a premium "sports tier," but the NFL doesn't want that. Comcast has its own reasons for playing hardball, since they bid on the Thursday package for their own Versus network before the league decided to hold on to the games for themselves.
Here's what I want to know, though: does it matter? As football-crazed as America is, people who don't get NFLN have more than enough games to watch during the week, thanks to FOX, CBS, ESPN, and NBC. And if your local team is on an NFLN game, there are no worries: like all cable games, it will be carried on an over-the-air channel in the local market. So, I've got to wonder if the NFL isn't overplaying its hand here, thinking there's more demand to see this game than there really is.
What do you think, football fans? Let me know in the comments.
Giveaway Monday: How I Met Your Mother season three DVD
Oops! Newspapers around the world use SNL pic as official Palin one - VIDEO
The evolution of TV Squad
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
11-23-2006 @ 3:22PM
RC said...
ESPN has an article on the issue as well. And they brought up the "NFL Sunday Ticket" thing where it's only available to DirecTV in the US. I always find that strange since here in Canada all cable and satellite companies have access to it. Sounds like cable is getting a bit of revenge against the NFL for the Sunday Ticket deal with DirecTV.
In Canada the night game is being shown on TSN [Canadian version of ESPN] so I'll get the game. This completely sounds backwards as sounds like Canadian NFL fans have it better than the US?! I'll give thanks for that. :-)
Reply
11-23-2006 @ 3:39PM
Ryan said...
It's strange the report says that Comcast doesn't have a deal with NFLN. In the Northern California market, NFLN is on my local Comcast system -- in the upper digital tiers.
Maybe the NFL wants a better deal, but I think they've at least got part of a deal with Comcast.
Me thinks the NFL wants a deal on the basic tier where they're guaranteed money. By being an expanded (or sports) tier, viewers can vote with their dollars. I know I did -- I dropped down a tier because it wasn't worth it to me.
Reply
11-23-2006 @ 6:11PM
Big said...
Previous Turkey Days had 2 games,
Dallas vs ? and Detroit vs ?
This is an extra game on Thanksgiving day,
so if you do not get it this year...
just wait to next year when it is all sorted out.
I have the game on my cable system here in Northern Virginia.
Reply
11-23-2006 @ 7:06PM
Tony said...
As far as I know, the games are still being shown on local channels in the teams' local markets, so it's just the national audience that misses out. I guess NFL is hoping they will miss it enough to call and bug their cable provider to carry the channel.
Reply
11-23-2006 @ 7:21PM
Chris said...
As a KC fan, I am upset to be missing what is a very important game. So this whole thing feels punitive to me for not shelling out the money to get NFLN.
Reply
11-23-2006 @ 7:34PM
Brent said...
Chris, for the local markets, I believe you get the game carried on one of your local stations, too.
But yeah, this sucks. Golf channel with every provider, but not the NFL network?
Reply
11-23-2006 @ 10:05PM
Design said...
BIg, This is not JUST an extra game for Thanksgiving.
The NFLN will be showing MORE games this year on Thursday and Saturday Nights. They will be like 10 more LIVE games this year on NFLN.
Reply
11-23-2006 @ 10:05PM
Design said...
Brent, Chris is just a fan of Kansas City. He doesn't live there. At least that's what I get from his comments.
Comcast DOES carry NFLN, the other 3 you mention do not. Comcast is trying to take NFLN off of basic for the Adelphia cable copmanies Comcast just sucked up, and put it on a digital sports tier. The NFL is sueing Comcast because of this.
Reply
11-23-2006 @ 10:43PM
nick said...
I have Astound cable (owned by Wave Broadband) and I didn't think I'd have the channel, but come to find out, I do have it! Thing is, I couldn't watch it. Not sure if it's extra or what, but I do have the complete full package for my cable.
Reply
11-23-2006 @ 11:22PM
MrsEldubya said...
I have a very small local cable company and there is no way they are going to pick up the NFL Network, even if all 20 of it's customers beg. :) We had it when we use to have DirecTV. My husband loved the NFL Network actually. Still we watched Boston vs Miami tonight because we are bigger college fans than NFL. We did watch some of the Detroit and Dallas game earlier today too. So we didn't miss it and we aren't going to complain. I think the NFL is crazy to broadcast this so that no one can see it.
Reply
11-24-2006 @ 12:04AM
Brent said...
I saw highlights of the game, and what is the deal with that annoying bar on top? It goes all the way across, and it is not way at the top to boot! I hope the get rid of that stupid ass bar in the future.
Reply
11-24-2006 @ 11:58AM
DanMacMan said...
I have DirecTV HD and watched the game on channel 95. In short, worst broadcast ever. I could barely stand to watch it. Listening to Gumbel is like listening to my dad narrate my middle school games on our home video camera. I think local cable companies are doing their customers a favor...
Reply
11-24-2006 @ 1:28PM
jonashpdx said...
in Portland, OR, I was able to watch the game on INHD-- i guess they have a deal with NFLN, since I don't get that channel, but do get the HD grouping from Comcast. I agree with Dan about the game-- listening to Gumbel was AWFUL. and the network seemed to be having some troubles-- there was no yellow line for the first few sets of downs to indicate where the first-down marker was, some of the camera angles were odd, and the feed itself was pretty crackly.
Reply
11-24-2006 @ 1:42PM
kip said...
NFLGOLF netowrk and event hen the golf network must be owned by the actually cable company putting it on al lla time warner cable w/cnn.
Hopefully in the next few years the nfl will blow up with hd boradcasts online and I can tag the video with announcers that I want to hear via a gootube channel. long live the taco revolution. Then I can watcht eh game with the local announcers of the specific markets and hear a nice biased commentary instead of one thatis meant to be PC without anyone taking sides.
As for Brian G's return: give him more than a game. He si a very good commentator and he wasn;t just goo d in the 70's , he called game in the 80's as well, though I wouldmuch rather watch one of those games without all the breaks for tv times out and commercials of the games now. There is no flow to the game. TV ruins everything. Give me a webcast with a running ad and I'll wathc it all day.
Reply
11-24-2006 @ 2:51PM
Sam said...
Does anyone realize that a large portion of your cable bill is due to sports programming? ESPN, FSN, all the super-regionals like NESN, YES and MSG, they all command much more in per-subscriber fees than many of the other channels. It IS out of control and I'm glad that cable companies are beginning to put their feet down on it. They are (surprisingly enough) protecting the consumer here, and they should get more credit for it.
I can gladly go without a few NFL games. For that matter, I don't need NBA TV or Golf Channel either. I'm not sold on a la carte, but I would like ALL sports channels (ESPN included) on a secondary tier. Then again, I'd also like peace in the Middle East, and that's probably more likely to happen.
Reply
11-25-2006 @ 2:37PM
Big said...
re: #7
I understand, but the thought still works. Any games on the NFL network are extra televised games. CBS, Fox & ESPN are still going to be showing their games. The local markets still get their games on whatever their "Flagship" station is and Direct TV NFL package folks still get all the gammes. So these are extra games for those with the NFL Network, so people should not freak out if their provider does not carry the channel, they are still seeing the games they would before this move.
Reply
11-27-2006 @ 5:08PM
Brice Dudley said...
It sucked....the game, the broadcasters, the channel....the whole nine yards.....and, was that Bryant Gumble? Good God, even sports is going down the drain. Couldnt the find anyone else? Put Bryant, and Theisman on the same boat for a Viking funeral.
Reply
12-08-2006 @ 8:07AM
Dr Lau said...
I all ready pay too much for cable TV, I will not pay more to watch NFL football. From this point on, I plan on boycotting all NFL games except our local team, the hapless Packers. I fully realize that nobody cares if I boycott the other games or not. It's just a matter of being fed up with all of the greedy entities involved and feel like I have to personally take a stand. Greedy league, greedy players, greedy cable companies, only real loser, the fans.
Reply