NFL Greed keeps me from watching the game

By Wodin
in The Sporting Arena

 Share

NFL Network  

27 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you blame the cable companies or the NFL for blocking us from seeing the game.

    • Cable Companies
      9
    • NFL
      18

Recommended Posts

Enthusiast

Wodin

Posted
Posted

The Cowboys vs Packers matchup is the 2nd biggest game of the season so far, two 10-1 teams going head to head in a special Thursday night matchup. I'd really love to watch it, but I can't. See I have cable and its not available on cable, because the NFL wants the cable companies to pay to carry the NFL Network. It's available through Satellite, but I'm not likely to ever have satellite, because I Love my High Speed Internet, and around here cable does it best. But the real point is that only 33% of homes can see this great matchup because of the greed of the NFL. Celizic: NFL Greed causes fans to pay Not to say that the cable companies aren't greedy too, but in this case, the NFL could easily make the game available to me, and they're holding back. I think they're making a big mistake, and this could be the day the fans turned (off) the NFL.

Enthusiast

Wodin

Posted
  • Author
Posted
You can watch it online. http://www.nfl.com/live

I tried that. They don't show the whole game, they give you peeks of the game. The rest is filled with commentary from 3rd rate broadcasters, interviews etc. Not to mention poor video quality and a 12"x12" screen. I had just left trying to watch it on NFL Live to come here and post this.

Experienced

thejohnnyq

Posted
Posted

Yea, let's blame the NFL. They only have basic rules on what is required to care the NFL network, and the cable companies din't want to follow it.

Thanks god for Dish network, i have it, and it is in the lineup no issues or problems.

Grand Master

Prosidius

Posted
Posted

Actually your wrong.

The NFL network wants like $1.10 per subscriber and be played on the extended basic tier whereas cable companies wnat to place it in a sports package so those who dont want the chanel wont have to pay for ti.

Enthusiast

Wodin

Posted
  • Author
Posted

All they have to do is have commercials ( they probably want to have them on top of the charge anyway) and they can make money that way. The NFL is the one that has the power to correct this. They started the conflict with unreasonable demands in the first place. If the cable companies did agree they would pass the cost on to us anyway, and I'm already paying out the arse. If the NFL figures out everyone sees it as the bad guy, hopefully they'll back down from there unreasonable demands.

Neowinian

The Natural

Posted
Posted

This is an interesting conversation. Those that blame the NFL need to know this. ESPN, FoxSports and NFL Network each charge the cable companies a 'subscriber fee'. This fee is charged for each service for each subscriber.

ESPN: $3.26

Fox Sports Net: $1.92

NFL Network: 80 cents

Now, look at that, and tell me that this is the NFL's fault. Cable is bickering over $0.80 per subscriber. I'm just glad I have Satellite. Cable bickers about everything nowadays.

Grand Master

CatnipOligarchy

Posted
Posted

Nobody is without blame. The cable companies are taking the stand they wish they could take against ESPN, and don't want to be bullied into carrying a niche sports channel on basic cable, a service that loses ground to digital cable and dish every day, and is also less profitable for the cable companies than the digital tiers, when they already pay ridiculous fees to ESPN and FSN to cover the same sport, albeit in a more general fashion. The NFL Network's 80 cents is still 20-30 cents higher than the average channel charges, and while the NFL is the most prominent sporting league in America these days, and I'm as big of a fan anyone else, and i too had to go watch the game Thursday at a sports bar filled well past capacity, but there are still a lot of cable subscribers that wouldn't be thrilled about seeing an increase in their bills year round just so rabid football fans can see a few games at the end of the season they wouldnt be able to see otherwise. There are games on every Sunday I would love to watch but I don't get to choose which ones I see because I haven't paid for Sunday Ticket. I honestly don't see where the NFL Network situation is much different.

  • 3 weeks later...
Veteran

Tokar

Posted
Posted

You have to remember, the games which the NFL decides on for those 8 NFL network games back in April are considered bargain bin games.

First choice is CBS and FOX. They get to lock up 8 games every season, preventing them from being picked by NBC, ESPN, and NFLN.

Second choice is NBC. They choose 10 games or something which they cant change. Then the remaining are flex games. They can keep them if they want or they can change them to a more appealing game from that week two weeks in advance.

Third choice is ESPN. They pick 17 games which they cant change.

Last choice is NFLN in those 8 NFL Network games.

Considering that NFLN gets last choice, it really is a crapshoot. 9 times out of 10 they are going to get burned, as you have seen with all 8 games last season and every game except for the DAL/GB game this season.

It is April 2007, you look at GB's 2006 record (8-8) and the fact that they didnt make the playoffs, and they are going nowhere fast with Favre still at QB, and you are going to tell me that DAL/GB looks appealing?

Who the heck knew that it would pit #1 vs #2 in the NFC 8 months ago.

Similarly, who wouldnt want to book Manning vs Vick? NFL Network did in game 1 (IND vs ATL) and they got burned when Vick got burned. It became a David vs Goliath matchup which Goliath won.

Yes, I feel your pain with these NFL Network games, but at the same time I feel the majority of those games are crap anyway.

Grand Master

I am Reid

Posted
Posted

You cant really compare the NFL network to ESPN. ESPN is watched all day, by many people, with broadcast for all the popular sports with news and sports related content, but the NFL network is most likely only to be watched for a few hours out of the WEEK by those you even get the channel. What ESPN asks for is very well deserved, the NFL network, not so much.

Grand Master

Mathachew Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
He's from Mass. Local team games are shown anyways.

But the NFL is out of their mind to not show a team trying to get to 16-0 on national television...

Oh, I didn't pay attention to that...

But you're right. It's been noted several times that the NFL's ratings for Patriots games are setting records. Last game of the season, why would you not make this available to twice as many people?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Posts

    • Qmmp 2.3.3

      By Copernic · Posted

      Qmmp 2.3.3 by Razvan Serea Qmmp (Qt-based MultiMedia Player) is a free, open-source audio player that delivers a classic music listening experience with a modern foundation. Inspired by the legendary Winamp, Qmmp features a familiar, customizable interface that supports both Winamp and XMMS skins, making it instantly recognizable to long-time users. It handles a wide variety of audio formats including MP3, OGG Vorbis, FLAC, WAV, AAC, and many others, ensuring smooth playback across diverse music libraries. In addition to basic playback, Qmmp offers advanced features such as a 10-band equalizer, crossfading, gapless playback, and audio visualization plugins. Users can manage playlists efficiently, create and save multiple lists, and even enable streaming from online sources. Plugin support extends the player’s capabilities, allowing integration of features like lyrics display, ReplayGain, and more. Built with the Qt framework, Qmmp runs smoothly and efficiently, making it ideal even for older systems. 10 great QMMP features you might not know: Global Hotkeys Support – Control playback using customizable system-wide keyboard shortcuts. CUE Sheet Support – Automatically detects and plays tracks from CUE files for full album playback. Last.fm Scrobbling – Integrated support for sending playback data to Last.fm. Audio CD Playback – Play music directly from audio CDs. Command Line Interface – Control Qmmp via command-line options for scripting or automation. System Tray Integration – Minimize to and control playback from the system tray. MPRIS Support – Integration with desktop media player controls via the MPRIS (Media Player Remote Interfacing Specification) interface. Spectrum Analyzer and Oscilloscope – Built-in visualizations for real-time audio feedback. Configurable Notifications – Custom pop-ups for track changes and playback status. Multiple Output Backends – Support for ALSA, PulseAudio, JACK, and more, offering flexible audio routing. Qmmp 2.3.3 changelog: fixed build with PipeWire versions less than 0.3.50; fixed settings dialog layout; fixed default CUE encoding; fixed possible null pointer dereference; fixed tracks order when added using drag and drop (2.3.3 only); fixed uninitialized structure usage; improved sid plugin: added libsidplayfp 3.0 support; added feature to build without residfp engine; fixed memory leak; fixed displaying audio information; updated Japanese translation (2.3.3 only). Download: Qmmp 64-bit | 24.0 MB (Open Source) Download: Qmmp 32-bit | 24.1 MB View: Qmmp Homepage | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • What browser do you prefer to use, and why?

      By WITHOUT-ME · Posted

      ZEN  
    • BATorrent 3.0.3

      By Copernic · Posted

      BATorrent 3.0.3 is out.
    • What browser do you prefer to use, and why?

      By +Edouard · Posted

      The current Statcoungter desktop numbers has Google Chrome increasing it's market share this past year and currently commanding 75% share. Everybody else is just making up the numbers with even MS Edge losing 3% this past year and has dipped just below 10% share which is staggering considering it's default on every Windows deviced purchased. If these numbers are correct that terrible Edge number is both devastating and embarrassing for MS especially when you add in the terribly low Bing market share. This leads me to ask a couple of questions as the default browser holding just less than 10% market share seems really weird. It used to be that all Chromium browsers were being counted as Google Chrome in some cases.  Is this still happening? Do these high Google Chrome numbers contains some Edge user numbers?
    • Browser vendors pen open letter to Microsoft saying "enough is enough"

      By The Norwegian Drone Pilot · Posted

      Yeah, all web browsers seem to have some junk in them these days. The regular Brave browser has a lot of unnecessary stuff in it, similar to Microsoft Edge, so I don't see any benefits of using Brave over Microsoft Edge if you already have Microsoft Edge fully set up with ad blockers and that. The cleanest or best free browser outside of 'Microsoft Edge' I’ve tried so far is 'Samsung Browser'. It has very little bloat and is a nice-looking web browser with an inbuilt 'Ad blocker'. I also really like the web browser called 'Floorp' that is based on Firefox. This browser can also install Chrome extensions. I have a system wide Ad blocking program for Windows 11 that doesn't just blocks ads in the web browser, but over the whole system. I don't really need a web browser with an inbuilt ad blocker because of that.

  • Recent Achievements

    • Rookie
      moog19 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Mentor
      grik went up a rank
      Mentor
    • Dedicated
      JKR earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Year In
      CHUNWEI earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      FBSPL earned a badge
      Conversation Starter

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      491
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      270
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      75
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      68
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      63
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!