Good news!

[Valpo2004]

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/nfl-blackout-rule-fcc-111441.html

 

 

[NFLfan]

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/nfl-blackout-rule-fcc-111441.html

That is very good news. Hopefully the NFL will not find another way to keep games from being shown.

[ruksak]

WOW. Thanks for posting. 

 

A victory for the working man. 

 

I especially keyed in on this part of the article;

 

“Some have tried to scare sports fans by arguing that football games will move from broadcast television to cable or satellite TV if the FCC eliminates the sports blackout rule,” Pai said. “Let me address that argument head on. To begin with, there is no way that this can happen anytime soon. The NFL’s contracts with over-the-air broadcasters extend until 2022, but more importantly, by moving games to pay TV, the NFL would be cutting off its nose to spite its face.”

 

 

 

.....They already did this in 2005, when the ABC/Disney/ESPN conglomerate befouled the sacred blue collar institution of Monday Night Football by moving it from network broadcast to cable. 

[BrentMc11]

That is very good news. Hopefully the NFL will not find another way to keep games from being shown.

The bad thing so far is that the NFL teams are saying they will continue as is.....probably some silly lawsuit will come of it.  Just let folks watch the games NFL.

[Valpo2004]

WOW. Thanks for posting. 

 

A victory for the working man. 

 

I especially keyed in on this part of the article;

 

“Some have tried to scare sports fans by arguing that football games will move from broadcast television to cable or satellite TV if the FCC eliminates the sports blackout rule,” Pai said. “Let me address that argument head on. To begin with, there is no way that this can happen anytime soon. The NFL’s contracts with over-the-air broadcasters extend until 2022, but more importantly, by moving games to pay TV, the NFL would be cutting off its nose to spite its face.”

 

 

 

.....They already did this in 2005, when the ABC/Disney/ESPN conglomerate befouled the sacred blue collar institution of Monday Night Football by moving it from network broadcast to cable. 

 

I think they are speaking about moving it to like pay per view or something like that.  That won't happen.

[Valpo2004]

The bad thing so far is that the NFL teams are saying they will continue as is.....probably some silly lawsuit will come of it.  Just let folks watch the games NFL.

 

I never understood the rule personally.  People are gonna go to the stadium if it's on TV or not and they are paying for the experience.  

[BrentMc11]

I never understood the rule personally.  People are gonna go to the stadium if it's on TV or not and they are paying for the experience.  

All goes back to 1975....when local stations had some control.  No more.  See CBS changing in INDY to Channel 4 soon....never thought I would see that happen.

[SkyBane]

I think they are speaking about moving it to like pay per view or something like that.  That won't happen.

Not pay per view, per say, but more along the lines of "purchase subscription to NFL Network and get your local broadcast, with an additional fee of sunday ticket sub, get access to all games, don't worry, you can still catch Sunday Night Football on it's new location on MSNBC, and Monday Night Football on ESPN."

 

Dem network dollars and sub fees.

[ruksak]

I think they are speaking about moving it to like pay per view or something like that.  That won't happen.

No, the article (the line I highlighted) specifically mentioned moving to "cable or satellite". Obviously PPV would ultimately cost the NFL millions (billions over time) in advertising revenue, and loss of fan interest.

[NFLfan]

The bad thing so far is that the NFL teams are saying they will continue as is.....probably some silly lawsuit will come of it. Just let folks watch the games NFL.

Yes, I heard this also. The NFL is not making enough money...

I agree with you. Let them enjoy the games.

[Gavin]

There are many people that simply cant go to games for a number of reasons.....health/financial situation as example and also simply wont pay to watch games on pay per view.

[BigQandTheManiac]

the link won't work for me...are they saying there will be no more blackout games??

[crazycolt1]

I think they are speaking about moving it to like pay per view or something like that.  That won't happen.

I think eventually that the NFL games will be on pay per view. It may not be in the near future but it will later down the road. I know a couple of workers in the cable business and they anticipate it will happen. JMO.

[SkyBane]

the link won't work for me...are they saying there will be no more blackout games??

Not exactly, the FCC just struck down the regulation that legally upheld them as a mandate. Essentially, the NFL now has to get blackouts written in to the network deal contracts and have it enforced at a local level rather than it be federal law. This has the effect of putting the entire blame for blackouts right in the NFL's lap, and puts the ire of the fans at them for doing it, which creates immense pressure not to do it.

 

It doesn't end blackout, but it took away the legal highground the NFL stood on to enact them.

[NFLfan]

I never understood the rule personally. People are gonna go to the stadium if it's on TV or not and they are paying for the experience.

Isn't the rule there to coerce fans to buy tickets to the games? If more than 85% of the tickets are not sold, the fans in the local area cannot watch the game on television. It is blacked out.

[NFLfan]

I think eventually that the NFL games will be on pay per view. It may not be in the near future but it will later down the road. I know a couple of workers in the cable business and they anticipate it will happen. JMO.

That would be terrible but I would not be surprised.

[SkyBane]

Isn't the rule there to coerce fans to buy tickets to the games? If more than 85% of the tickets are not sold, the fans in the local area cannot watch the game on television. It is blacked out.

Essentially this. It's also used as a means to hold local businesses and other people who sponsor the team for advertisements for ransom by having them buy bulk tickets for the good guy publicity should the blackout quota not be met. Essentially, it was legalized extortion.

[Valpo2004]

the link won't work for me...are they saying there will be no more blackout games??

 

It's dicey.  Apparently the government will no longer support blacking out games, however the NFL can still reach deals with individual local broadcasters that require them to blackout games.

 

This seems to be a big first step.

[shakedownstreet]

i never miss a colts game, but would never pay for cable or ppv just to see them

 

i'd listen on the radio. if that weren't available, i'd abandon my fandom

[Nadine]

Am I the only one uncomfortable with the government choosing to get involved in this?  Creepy precedent.  It's not like we're all entitled to Life Liberty, the pursuit of happiness and NFL football.

[Nadine]

i never miss a colts game, but would never pay for cable or ppv just to see them

 

i'd listen on the radio. if that weren't available, i'd abandon my fandom

 

I think that's the way the market should work

[SkyBane]

That would be terrible but I would not be surprised.

I would be, mostly because the NFL are largely intelligent enough at business to see how PPV is a dead format. Network subscriptions and expansion of NFL Network to be the all in one inclusive place to get non-primetime NFL content would bank for them. It's a format Microsoft has used for years in both Microsoft Office tools and gaming with Xbox Live Gold, and it's a model that sees even more media expansion as the internet continues becoming more ubiquitous and continues to siphon away the viewer base of all other forms of media.

 

They would not go PPV, they would go "football as a service, for a nominal yearly subscription".

[Valpo2004]

Essentially this. It's also used as a means to hold local businesses and other people who sponsor the team for advertisements for ransom by having them buy bulk tickets for the good guy publicity should the blackout quota not be met. Essentially, it was legalized extortion.

 

Exactly when a game is threatened with blackout usually a local business steps up and buys the tickets to get the game on TV.  

 

Essentially the NFL is saying that one way or another they are gonna get their ticket money or else no one gets to watch it on TV. 

 

What I think the most frustrating part of it is that people in the local area usually cough up tax money so the NFL can have a fancy stadium there.  Then the NFL turns around and "thanks" them by threatening that if they don't get they money for every single ticket they are gonna make it so that the vast majority of the people who coughed up that tax money for the stadium doesn't get to see the game.  

 

Honestly there is a proposed law out there that basically says that if a NFL team used public funds for building it's stadium they can't blackout any games and I fully support that.

[SkyBane]

Am I the only one uncomfortable with the government choosing to get involved in this?  Creepy precedent.  It's not like we're all entitled to Life Liberty, the pursuit of happiness and NFL football.

The precedent of government getting involved in sports has long since been set when they got involved with the steroid era of baseball. This is just America being America, and ultimately this isn't even as bad as it's the FCC's sole purpose to regulate how television networks are allowed to behave and defend their rights should they be pressed upon. This is a move that defends said networks, as it makes the NFL culpable, and not the likes of CBS or FOX.

[BrentMc11]

Yes, I heard this also. The NFL is not making enough money...

I agree with you. Let them enjoy the games.

That is a laugher.  ....the poor NFL  

[Valpo2004]

i never miss a colts game, but would never pay for cable or ppv just to see them

 

i'd listen on the radio. if that weren't available, i'd abandon my fandom

 

That's why I don't think they will go for pay per view ever.  First of all it could destroy their fan base.  But secondly and more importantly, they are gonna make more money from ads during the game then they would from people paying to see the game.

 

Football is a sport that is built for television ads.  Quarter and halftime breaks, timeouts, 2 minute warnings, replays, and if that's not enough they can build TV timeouts into the game.  Just wait for someone to run out of bounds or an incomplete pass that stops the clock and then call an official timeout for ads.

 

Ads and sponsorship of the NFL is big money.  Going to pay per view would kill the league's ratings extremely quickly.  

[Nadine]

The precedent of government getting involved in sports has long since been set when they got involved with the steroid era of baseball. This is just America being America, and ultimately this isn't even as bad as it's the FCC's sole purpose to regulate how television networks are allowed to behave and defend their rights should they be pressed upon. This is a move that defends said networks, as it makes the NFL culpable, and not the likes of CBS or FOX.

there may be a precedent but it's still creepy. Now politicians can run on things like "I'll get you more NFL games" and other things that are private sector

 

They should stick to the things that they should be doing.......rather than pandering imo

[Valpo2004]

there may be a precedent but it's still creepy. Now politicians can run on things like "I'll get you more NFL games" and other things that are private sector

 

They should stick to the things that they should be doing.......rather than pandering imo

 

Here is the problem with that though. . . When taxpayers are forking over millions if not billions for stadiums that are built with the primary use being for an NFL team. . . It's no longer just a private thing.  If you live in Indy or the surrounding area YOUR money went to building the drum.  Not just the Colt's money and not just the NFL's money, but YOUR money.  And I would guess that most of it was paid for via you and other taxpayer's money.

 

NFL wants to make this into a totally private thing. . . they can start building their own dang stadiums.  I guarantee they will never do it.  Even the NFL can't afford to build a billion dollar stadium every 20 years in each and every NFL city.

[SkyBane]

there may be a precedent but it's still creepy. Now politicians can run on things like "I'll get you more NFL games" and other things that are private sector

 

They should stick to the things that they should be doing.......rather than pandering imo

You're asking a fish not to breathe water. This veers in to offtopic a bit, but American politics and the private sector are entwined too deeply to separate at this point, and politicians have no reason to care about constituents, as their primary job security comes from lobbyists of industry sectors paid by big companies. 

 

Also as mentioned above, huge amounts of tax money are funneled in to the NFL from local coffers because of the commerce NFL games and the use of those venues for other events brings to the local economy, making the NFL just as linked in to government as Google or News Corp., albeit at a lower level (arguably more dangerous, as national attention is rarely paid to city level politics). Essentially the precedent you're scared of setting has already been set years and years ago, and is the basis of modern American politics. What you are asking is to close pandora's box after it's been sitting open for a long time.

 

Back on topic: This particular move has even less to do with politicians, as it was an FCC move. Essentially, the FCC did their job here to the letter by defending the rights of networks so as not to be bullied by content providers. The striking down of the blackout regulation evens the playing field so that negotiations have to happen, rather than NFL lawyers having a stranglehold on the situation through legal high ground.

[NFLfan]

Am I the only one uncomfortable with the government choosing to get involved in this? Creepy precedent. It's not like we're all entitled to Life Liberty, the pursuit of happiness and NFL football.

I think Valpo makes a good point. The NFL wants the public to fund stadiums but then will not allow those same people to watch the games unless they fill the local stadium. Fans in small markets get hurt.

[shakedownstreet]

. 

[BrentMc11]

$$$$$ talks...yeah yeah.....money talks....wo-oah...money talks.  Boy can is sing  Well.....maybe not....

[Nadine]

I think Valpo makes a good point. The NFL wants the public to fund stadiums but then will not allow those same people to watch the games unless they fill the local stadium. Fans in small markets get hurt.

I think it's a lot more complex than that

Anyway now we wait and see how this changes things

Blackouts are not an issue here regardless

[SteelCityColt]

We get blackouts on Gamepass, including each and every playoff game... Funny you think they'd be doing everything they could to boost exposure in the UK before the move the Jags here

[DougDew]

Am I the only one uncomfortable with the government choosing to get involved in this?  Creepy precedent.  It's not like we're all entitled to Life Liberty, the pursuit of happiness and NFL football.

That is a good point.  This is actually part of a larger point.

 

Cowherd the other day said that the NFL is getting too powerful for network TV.  Their contract negotiations basically dictate the network's schedule...Thursday nights...possible 18 game schedule...etc.  In many ways, it interferes with TV execs jobs in that they have to work their programming around what the NFL wants.  It gets a bit personal.

 

He also suggested that part of the reason all of these off-field/social issues have been raised to the degree they have, as well as criticism on Goodell, is to knock down the NFL a peg or two, make it more humble, so that its easier for the media to negotiate contracts.

 

The FCC cares more about its brethren in the media than the old guard in the NFL, and are doing what they can to help out.  And to the extent a government agency can be politcal, they are probably not to happy with the NFL's vocal position about the redskins name.  Small punishment by way of giving the local networks what they are asking for.

[ruksak]

I think it's a lot more complex than that

Anyway now we wait and see how this changes things

Blackouts are not an issue here regardless

I gave you a +1 for not saying "irregardless". 

[Nadine]

That is a good point.  This is actually part of a larger point.

 

Cowherd the other day said that the NFL is getting too powerful for network TV.  Their contract negotiations basically dictate the network's schedule...Thursday nights...possible 18 game schedule...etc.  In many ways, it interferes with TV execs jobs in that they have to work their programming around what the NFL wants.  It gets a bit personal.

 

He also suggested that part of the reason all of these off-field/social issues have been raised to the degree they have, as well as criticism on Goodell, is to knock down the NFL a peg or two, make it more humble, so that its easier for the media to negotiate contracts.

 

The FCC cares more about its brethren in the media than the old guard in the NFL, and are doing what they can to help out.  And to the extent a government agency can be politcal, they are probably not to happy with the NFL's vocal position about the redskins name.  Small punishment by way of giving the local networks what they are asking for.

Interesting and also creepy

I guess us minions don't have a clue most of the time

[shakedownstreet]

I gave you a +1 for not saying "irregardless". 

 

that was a nice thing to do irrregardlessnessly

[ruksak]

that was a nice thing to do irrregardlessnessly