digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

The NFL is trying To "Enrich Themselves" By removing Free Broadcasts

consumerist.com — Says Comcast. The moment of truth may be coming in the NFL Network/Cable showdown. This Thursday the NFL Network scored what is arguably the most interesting regular season game of the year (at least in the NFC): The 10-1 Packers vs. the 10-1 Cowboys. But, not a whole lot of people are going to be able to watch it outside of Dallas and Wisconsin.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • jefbob, on 11/27/2007, -1/+24I am in Ohio and not having the Big 10 Network and NFL Network drives me crazy. I really wish Time Warner Cable would start carrying them. I can think of dozens of channels I would trade them for these two networks.
    • jonnymj, on 11/27/2007, -0/+4once conference play starts for Basketball I am really interested to see if Comcast will buckle and add the Big 10 Network. I know here in Indiana if people have to miss Purdue and IU games there may be a riot at their headquarters.
    • dfay, on 11/27/2007, -0/+2I'm not familiar with what's happening with the Big10 network, but I can tell you that it's the absolute height of hypocrisy for Comcast to make this argument while simultaneously doing the EXACT SAME THING with the Mtn. (The new channel for the Mountain West Conference.)

      Comcast, who owns 50% of the Mtn, runs ads about how they are the only way for fans in the MWC areas to see their team play, and at the same time the Mtn is priced at a rate that the satellite networks will never pay since they can't just provide it regionally like Comcast can.

      My personal solution was to just give up local college sports and hope they all lose a ton of money. As a result I haven't seen my team play for two years. Don't cave to these consumers-as-hostages ploys! We'll all just get screwed more in the end if these work. They need to learn to respect that fans are the only reason they exist, and that we're not just here for them to exploit so they can beat their competitors.
    • sotopheavy, on 11/27/2007, -0/+4These SOBs are killing football.
  • jer2eydevil88, on 11/27/2007, -9/+27I dugg this simply because Comcast is getting screwed over by the NFL who is advertising that customers switch providers to get their channel. I absolutely abhor Comcast services and customer service so any effort on the NFL to make them lose subscribers make me happy.
    • ssn697, on 11/27/2007, -1/+11Sounds like sour grapes from cable. I have it on DirecTV, and my friends who have Dish Network also get NFL Network. It is ONLY cable that puts it on a premium package.
    • iiBeLiEvE, on 11/27/2007, -1/+2I....have Comcast....T.T
    • asforme, on 11/27/2007, -3/+1Cable TV is "free" with my internet (as soon as I remove that pesky filter). Personally I could care less about professional sports though, seeing as it is all a giant spectacle now. But like everyone else I do enjoy anything that pisses off Comcast.
    • sovereign3, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1It's also offered on Verizon FiOS.
  • kbeeveer46, on 11/27/2007, -2/+34This also pissed me off when I wanted to watch the Colts on Thanksgiving night. First they put Monday night football on ESPN and now games are starting to be played on the NFL Network. WTF??
    • nbcaffeine, on 11/27/2007, -0/+5The most interesting games lately have been the Sunday night games, and definitely not the Monday night ones
      • convergent, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1The Monday night game with the Cowboys was probably the most interesting game, but I'm not going to disagree with you.
      • jorisb, on 11/27/2007, -0/+2Sunday night is the new monday night
    • maley, on 11/27/2007, -3/+2What basic cable doesn't give ESPN...and if you don't have it then go get some basic cable if you want to watch it -_-;
      • scottc, on 11/27/2007, -0/+4My basic cable doesn't include ESPN, and I'm not going to pay for 30 extra channels just to watch Monday Night Football.
    • Chewie67, on 11/28/2007, -0/+1Come on.

      Granted, I HATE the fact that I can't get the NFL network or any of those games, but who doesn't have ESPN in 2007? EVERY Cable and Satelite network carries it and nearly all of them have it as part of the base package.
  • Error601, on 11/27/2007, -15/+9Trying to give a ***** about a couple companies playing a PR game....operation failed.
  • Murphy52589, on 11/27/2007, -8/+25First thing i've ever agreed with comcast about
    • devilbody, on 11/27/2007, -0/+3That's (almost like) the first comment on consumerist.com!
    • r2pro, on 11/27/2007, -0/+14The Consumerist missed the entire side of the NFL's argument. Comcast is packaging a bunch of other channels into their sports tier that most NFL fans have no desire for. They claim this is to compensate for the fee that the NFL is charging them for each subscriber. However, the NFL also gives Comcast a significant portion of the commercial airtime of each NFL broadcast on the NFL network. This airtime can be sold by Comcast at a huge profit if there are enough viewers.

      What Comcast is really pissed off about, is that they wanted their own sports channel, Versus, to have the Thursday & Saturday game package, but the NFL decided to create their own network instead of selling the package to Comcast back in 06.

      If you look at both sides, Comcast once again steps up to the plate to become the asshat of the telecom world.
  • dagnabbit, on 11/27/2007, -0/+18Not to mention the NFL Network has the season finale between the Pats and the Giants. The game that could see them go undefeated. I don't like the Pats, but that's a game a lot of people will want to see regardless.
  • tehjarvis, on 11/27/2007, -5/+20I hate NFL Network for exactly this reason.
    • chukd, on 11/27/2007, -0/+2The NFL isn't the only one in this zone. It has reached College, NBA and MLB. I currently live about a 200 mile drive from NYC and I can not see one Yankee or Mets game because they are all blacked out, even the nationally televised games on ESPN. I call the cable provider and they say it is mandated by MLB. It isn't like I can jump on a train and make it to the game then get home in time to watch a game. I am not a fan of Comcast either. About 7 months ago, they took over the cable in the area I live. They increased the rates and decreased the number of channels. The bottom line is they are both wrong, they both just want more money whether it is comcast wanting someone to pay for digital cable then more for an expanded package or if its the professional sports leagues. I choose to boycott them, it is the only thing that works.
      • sovereign3, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1I feel your pain, but the unlike the NFL network issue, Comcast has nothing to do with this. It is a rule mandated by the leagues of all sports. Games are blacked out to encourage fans to come out to the games. Whenever a game does not sell out tickets, the local TV markets are prohibited from showing it on television.
  • supafuzz, on 11/27/2007, -9/+2You will be able to watch it online at nfl.com/live
  • Submerge, on 11/27/2007, -0/+28Yep, it's ridiculous when you live in Wisconsin and can't get the game. Only 3 regions in Wisconsin are getting the game, not even Madison!
    • gldfshnpcklejar, on 11/27/2007, -1/+9Ditto from Texas... What a ***** scam, possibly the biggest game of the season and fans can't watch it...
  • Lionhart, on 11/27/2007, -2/+42And as usual the only ones getting screwed are the consumers.
  • aiken, on 11/27/2007, -6/+10Goddamned NFL, trying to make money at the expense of a well known philanthropic organization like Comcast. Oh, wait...
  • jmpeagle, on 11/27/2007, -5/+25maybe Comcast should offer the network and not charge a ridiculous price for it
    • AddMan3001, on 11/27/2007, -6/+3Yes, because there's nothing companies love to do more than not make money. Come on, you know Comcast (just like any other service provider) is looking to make as much $$$ as possible, and forcing people to pay separately for these channels is a great way to do that. Does it suck? Maybe. But It's not like every other large company isn't doing the exact same thing.
      • ssn697, on 11/27/2007, -1/+17Then why can Dish and DirecTV offer it on standard packages? Cable is ripping off their customers, then bitching about it.
        • Bowski, on 11/27/2007, -0/+2Exactly! I get the Big10 Network and NFL Network at no extra charge from DirecTV. Cable should do the same.
    • deludeexistence, on 11/27/2007, -1/+5Comcast just charges a slight bit over what the NFL wants from them.
  • jodofashodo, on 11/27/2007, -7/+1It doesn't matter for me, I'm singing in St. Olaf's ChristmasFest that night...but still, the NFL network and the rest of the NFL is just trying to make more money anyways possible. It's a bastard thing to do, but they know they have something people want to watch, they make them pay...that's all there is to it, it's bad business, but it's still business.
    • Puppetfunk, on 11/27/2007, -0/+5St. Olaf? Hans Friedman is that you? curse me and my late nights of watching the Golden Girls!
    • ddawggin, on 11/27/2007, -3/+3Bad business is creating a product people want and then charging for it? Silly me, thinking all this time thats how capitalism worked.
  • boyleheights, on 11/27/2007, -2/+3Since comcast already blocks some traffic, might has well add nfl.com. I wonder how that would play out.
  • paganmonkeyboy, on 11/27/2007, -3/+6ya know, I love football...but I'm going to stop watching it - this is just plain LAME.

    Vote with your dollars, and be sure to let the people upstream know...AM radio ftw...
    • Lionhart, on 11/27/2007, -0/+2Because the NFL doesn't get paid for radio listeners. oh wait
  • nick2, on 11/27/2007, -0/+7This is retarded. NFL Network and Time Warner need to figure this out soon. I live in Milwaukee area, so I will be able to watch it on TV, if I was home. I won't be home because I am flying down to the game! w00t! Go Pack Go! Favre for MVP!
  • Autrix, on 11/27/2007, -1/+3As a packer fan in San Francisco, I had to sign up for the sports package to get this game.

    Sucks hard, but at least they pro-rate the package if I cancel early. the game is costing me about $0.33 to have the package for that one day. Not too bad I suppose...
    • GinchMaster, on 11/27/2007, -0/+0Just call and threaten to leave because of this channel and they will give it to you free for six months!!!
  • DeFex, on 11/27/2007, -10/+3that would be awesome not having "football" delaying or replacing programs i was hoping to watch because the have to squeeze about 30 min of commercials into the last 30 seconds of play.
  • Ohill, on 11/27/2007, -4/+8All i have to say is that im going to the local bar to watch Brett lead the Packers to a record of 11-1.

    GO PACK GO
  • williamsba, on 11/27/2007, -2/+10maybe Comcast should offer the NFL network to all subscribers? I HATE Comcast and that is exactly why I switched to DirecTV and will never go back!
    • Bowski, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1I hear that. I boycotted Charter Cable in Madison WI for the same reasons.
  • elbergel, on 11/27/2007, -2/+5Why not just go to a sports bar with some friends, get yourself some yuengling, get yourself some wings and have a good time?
    • TomPhoolery, on 11/27/2007, -1/+4Same price as NFL Network, really. :)
  • LetsGoHokies, on 11/27/2007, -2/+2Directv FTW
  • skin, on 11/27/2007, -1/+2I work in a sports bar. NFL and BTN are the greatest inventions ever. I love them and they can stay on dish only forever. Or at least for as long as my income relies on people packing sports bars.
  • philzone, on 11/27/2007, -17/+1Pro football is for the uneducated masses.
  • pschommer, on 11/27/2007, -0/+6And in Wisconsin, it's only available in the "local" markets of Milwaukee and Green Bay. Those of us in the Madison area are SOL. Thanks for nothing, Charter. Good thing I said good-bye to them and got the DISH this summer. I'll be watching the game in glorious HD. Go Pack!
    • aliengoods, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1Glorious HD?! Someone, take the Kool-Aid away!
  • ChaosProfessor, on 11/27/2007, -1/+2i cant wait beer brats dish HD did i mention Beer and oh yah the packers winning
    • aliengoods, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1Did everyone in the state of Wisconsin take Friday off (I live in Hudson and I did).
      • ChaosProfessor, on 11/28/2007, -0/+1i didn't but thats just because i came off of a 10 day vacation for the holiday and i don't know if they would appreciate me doing that.
  • p51d007, on 11/27/2007, -11/+3Pro sports is a stupid waste of time. It isn't a "sport" anymore. It's a BIG $$$ business. No team loyalty anymore.
    No teams anymore. Just 9 people (or 11 for football) trying to make more money.
    Use to be that at the end of a game, you could hang around and talk to the players. Not anymore. Too busy zipping
    off to their country clubs. Sports is for the uneducated boobs in the world.
    • adrenaline33, on 11/27/2007, -0/+3Pro football is not like that all. Some of the best players have been with the same team their entire career. Look at Manning, Brady, and Favre. Those guys could be like AROD and sign with whatever team threw the money at them but the don't. Very few do. It takes so long to learn an offense or defense that it is basically impossible to switch teams in the middle of the season. The NFL might be some greedy bastards by starting their own network, but Comcast is ***** greedy for not packaging it in.
  • Fullvinyl, on 11/27/2007, -10/+8I hate Comcast, and I hate the NFL. It's a win-win for me at least.

    /diggdown in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1...
  • ssn697, on 11/27/2007, -0/+2So get DirecTV or Dish! Both carry NFL Network without having to buy a "Premium" package. Sounds like cable is bitching because they are gouging their customers, and most of their customers won't pay the extra. How is that the NFL's fault?
    • deludeexistence, on 11/27/2007, -4/+1They already have the NFL network because they have more of a profit margin on the rest of their channels already. Comcast doesn't have that extra money to spend.
  • heystoopid, on 11/27/2007, -0/+4So does that mean that torrent football feeds will soon supplant video and music downloading , due to lack of public broadcasting ?
    • aliengoods, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1Good point. I was wondering when someone would come up with a format for distributed live streaming.
  • bbcoburn, on 11/27/2007, -0/+3This is *****. If comcast really cared about customers not having to pay for programming they didn't want, there would be an ala carte option for purchasing only the channels you want and not paying for the Lifetime networks and Oxygen et al.
    • Ascus, on 11/27/2007, -1/+2I'd pay extra not to have Lifetime, Oxygen and the other man-hater channels not on my selection list.
      • LordRedSnake, on 11/27/2007, -0/+0That's good because you WOULD actually have to pay extra. There are a number of channels that pay to get carried, which keeps the cost down for the customer. Eliminate those channels and the customer has to make up the difference. Everyone's gonna get sticker shock when ala carte goes through and they end up paying more for fewer channels.
    • joker10687, on 11/27/2007, -0/+2If anyone actually started up a cable company that would do that... they would be be set for life.
  • Super6, on 11/27/2007, -1/+1Comcast sucks, the largest part of the city, and the part I'm in, don't get G4 Tech TV, yet the little part that was built by Disney (Celebration) gets it, along with a few other cool channels.
  • insomniac8400, on 11/27/2007, -0/+2The NFL network would only make since if it carried every game, since it's one channel and they don't want want to air the same game that is on another network, it fails. It's bad enough you have to pay for espn just for monday night football.
    • adrenaline33, on 11/27/2007, -1/+1If you care about sports at all you will have enough cable to have espn.
      • insomniac8400, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1But your still paying for it. Same as if the NFL network was on basic, your bill would go up and you would be paying for it.
  • jonnyboy1544, on 11/27/2007, -0/+2Whatever Comcast... so all the other networks can afford to put this "expensive" programming on but the largest company can't? Sounds like a bunch of ***** to me.
  • HappyScrappy, on 11/27/2007, -2/+4This is why I'm anti-NFL Network, anti-Big 10 Network, etc.

    These companies just want to replace what you're getting right now for free with something you have to pay for (even if it's part of a programming bundle).
    • neon1nk, on 11/27/2007, -0/+0The objective of most channels is to make money. I'd love it if more specialty channels were all part of basic tv, but that is not going to happen. As such what the NFL network and the Big Ten network are doing is nothing new.Why aren't people screaming about myth busters being only available on discovery channel? No real difference here.

      What ticks me off the most is comcast keeps screwing around with the packages to force people to buy into the higher levels. First they lure you into a channel by putting it in the basic package then move it up once enough viewers are into it. They did this with the sci-fi channel and again with NFL network then try to argue that they do this only so that people don't have to pay for the channel if they don't want to.

      Bogus! Direct TV is the way to go
  • unknownpoltroon, on 11/27/2007, -0/+8Didn't NHL do this 15 years ago? Went to all pay per view games? AS a consequence, they lost an entire generation of viewers, as dads who weren't COMPLETE fanatics didn't watch the games with their kids on tv, so the kids never got into it.
    • spyd3rweb, on 11/27/2007, -0/+3I for one am glad they got NHL off ***** stations like FOX and ABC.
      • jonnyboy1544, on 11/27/2007, -0/+0On to channels like Versus where they show maybe 1% of games? At least FOX and ABC had regional affiliates.
  • Dweed, on 11/27/2007, -0/+0Well, as long as the Super Bowl or every single game from now on isn't on Pay-Per-View or just the NFL Network...
  • OKeric, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2If someone gets this on tv, stream it to the web for us if you know how.
  • psyclonic, on 11/27/2007, -0/+0how much are we willing to pay to watch an NFL game? a college game? or a high school football game? I think we're going to find out.
  • smacksaw, on 11/27/2007, -2/+1* Think about their BitTorrent lies. You believe them on this? I guess reason is selective or based upon how screwed you feel. Comcast is COMCAST. WAKE UP

    * By federal law just about anyone can get DirecTV/Dish Network. Unless you are facing north, no HOA or landlord can stop you from having it. If you still have cable it's your own damn fault. There is no logical reason to have Comcast cable TV instead of DirecTV anymore, unless you just cannot get a line of sight for your dish. The receivers are free, setup is free, the service is better/cheaper. What more do you want?

    I should mention that I have Comcast basic cable because it's cheaper to get it than their crappy internet alone, but I also have DirecTV. I only ever watch Comcast for Canadian channels because I'm too lazy to put up an aerial to get them.

    Cancel your Comcast and get a dish and ths becomes moot. It's flooring to me that so many people won't see this game. Get a dish. Geez.
    • ben_nushmut, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1The whole price difference isn't always true. I spec-ed out a DirecTV system a couple weeks ago, and the cost after the discounts was a $20 difference from our current cable setup (Comcast, around $90/month!). But, after those discounts go away the monthly cost winds up being about 2ยข cheaper (yes, as in $0.02, or is that $0.002?) than Comcast per month. Now, I would love having NFL built in, SciFi in HD too, but it's not worth the all the strife of the conversion to save so little each year.

      And for all the crap Comcast gets about its internet, it's zippy any time of day. Plus we've been really lucky it seems with the customer service. We were having reception issues on some HD channels this summer, and the techs that came out were able to fix the problem within 24 hours, and we got credit for the downtime, no questions asked. The techs were nice (not to mention awake), and also apologetic about the problems we were having. I know most never have this happen, but I can't just ignore our own experiences. Maybe a dish system is going to happen sometime, but for now, we'll manage with Comcast.
  • ben_nushmut, on 11/27/2007, -0/+7Comcast: "viewers who want to watch the channel will be able to see it, while others who prefer not to receive it will not be forced to pay."
    I don't care about Fox News, MTV, VH1, CNN Headline News, CNBC, ABC Family, Disney, Travel, HSN, or QVC. I don't want to be paying for those channels (and that's just what's on my analog cable). So, can we have our a la carte lineups now?
    It's easy: set a minimum number of channels to sign up for, publish the per-subscriber rate for each, and let us at it. Create some packages of channels for discounted rates (i.e., a news block, a sports block, a movies block, etc.) for the less picky viewers, even broader packages (top 40 channels or something) can still be provided. But this clearly shows the double standard Comcast (and many cable companies) are applying to these specialty channels. Besides, most people I know would rarely watch other types of specialty channels, which is a lot of the cable lineup anyway, for more than an hour. With sports on the other hand, avid fans are going to stay with the events for their duration (2-4 hours in many cases), meaning more potential eyeballs for the ads for a longer period, and more money to be made.
    I know Comcast can block channels we don't have access to on digital cable, so I bet a little bit of tweaking can make this idea a reality. Of course, this would likely eat into profit margins for providers, though I guess we won't know until some company tries it. I expect to be on my deathbed before this changes, but you can always hope, right?
  • minoss, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1Wow, I'm in the Madison area and if i can't watch this game I am going to be ***** pissed.
  • alpine75, on 11/27/2007, -0/+2I see this more from the perspective of the shift the NFL has taken since Roger Goodell became commissioner. The NFL before was all about being accessible and friendly to the fans. Goodell is all about greed and doing what he can to make money for the league rather than furthering the sport and continuining the goodwill fans and the league have shared (something Baseball lost long ago.)

    Beyond his extreme stances on league discipline and his trying to force the fledging NFL network down cable customers throats Goodell has had a shaky start.
    • chukd, on 11/27/2007, -0/+2This happened before Goodell. This was set up by Tagliabue and now carried through by Goodell.
      • alpine75, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1Everything that has happened since the NFL network has come out, including the NFL's stubborn stance on payments is all due to Goodell.
  • blurrie, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1the nfl network is the worst idea.. unless it's included at a basic rate. not in high end digital cable. bad idea.
  • Barbosa, on 11/27/2007, -0/+45 Bucks a month for NFL HD on Comcast... you can only see GB vs Big D this thursday and the Pats final game on the NFL chan. To a football addicted family like mine this is tantamount to extortion...
  • metric7, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1***** the NFL I'm through with them and ***** cable tv too.
  • dagamer34, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1Even Dallas gets shafted. It definitely isn't on any local channels (accoring to the Dallas Morning News anyway).
  • lastfarker, on 11/27/2007, -0/+0What about people who don't have/can't afford cable or satellite? I saw this coming when NFL decided to launch their own network. Both, the cable companies and NFL network are trying to ***** the customers. NFL needs to stop squeezing out the fans for more bucks.
  • ithejosh, on 11/27/2007, -1/+1This is *****. I live in the Dallas area and I can watch MY team play a HOME game without paying for some stupid ***** network? I'm going to have to go to someone else's house to watch it because this is the biggest game of the year.
    • chicagodigger, on 11/27/2007, -0/+2If you live in the home market you'll be able to watch the game on free to air TV, same as you would for any Monday Night Game. The Bears are playing next Thursday on the NFL network, but the game is being broadcast on one of the FTA independent stations in town for people without cable/NFL network. See, wasn't all that anger now a waste of energy.
    • patw85, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1And the only reason this could be considered the biggest game of the year is to help determine who will have a front row seat to lose to the Patriots.
  • Weather, on 11/27/2007, -0/+2I'm still looking for the "free broadcasts". Where would that be? The nfl would be more interesting if it showed games other than dallas vs this weeks opponent. Show some other games, any other games once in awhile.
    • Matrix_Prime, on 11/29/2007, -0/+2"I'm still looking for the "free broadcasts"

      Its called OTA....get an antennae and watch HD for free.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 60 of 60 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.