NFL Network SUX!

[Lyrical]

Seriously, it sucks. Tomorrow night could be one of the best matchups of this season. Packers (10-1) versus Cowboys (10-1). And given that Tomy Romo idolized Brett Favre and plays just like him, it could be more interesting. Yet 75% of the country doesn't have the network.

Why should we pay extra to watch get this channel? I shouldn't have to add a package to my cable service. In essence, its like making some of the games the equivalent of pay-per-view. I know Congress questioned NFL officials when they first made this move, but maybe its time to revisit this. My memory may be faulty, but didn't Congress fall just short of labelling this a misuse of monopoly power?

Even worse, if the Patriots enter the final week of the season undefeated, we'll be faced with a choice. Miss out on NFL history, or upgrade our cable packages. The final game of the season will be shown on the NFL Network.

[Sunder]

Blame the cable companies, not the NFL. The cable companies are the ones keeping the network off basic cable.

[Sharmai]

On the internet look up SopCast. Mabye its not the quality you want but it'll be free.

Industry Bad Decisions + 1 Pirates +1

[Tea on tuesday]

I use SopCast for NFL network games; it's not great but it's not really that bad either.

[Moontayle]

The NFL is trying to do the right thing by preferring Cable Companies put the channel in a thier basic package because they believe their product should not be lumped in a premium package with X number of channels that will most likely never be watched. Big Cable (Comcast and Time Warner) are greedy fucks who are incensed that NFL Network would cost them more than CNN (but 1/5th what they pay for ESPN and over a thousand hours of Poker).

It sucks on the whole, because neither side is backing down, but I'm willing to side with the NFL on this one because Cable Companies have been screwing over their customers for years with their pricing packages as far as I'm concerned.

[theawddone]

Does the sopcast make NFL network available when a game is on? i was trying to look at the schedule for the cowboys/packers game, but couldn't find it on there...

[Burkex]

Just go to a sports bar. That is what I do. The Network only has 1-2 good games a year and I don't get it so after work hit up the sports bar and get some dinner, drink some beers, hit on some ladies, and watch the game.

But yea it sucks. These games should only be on ABC, CBS, NBC, and ESPN.

[Akileese]

Okay. If you use sopcast go tohttp://www.myp2p.eu/index.php?part=sports like 15 or 20 minutes before kickoff (to catch some pre-game if you want). You can main window it into Windows Media Player and it's usually accompanied by a 1 minute broadcast delay (since it's a webstream). I use it all the time to watch Soccer and out of all the webcast programs, Sopcast is the best far and away.

Also, they're both wrong. The NFL Network needs more games and original programming (like broadcasting games that won't be seen on any local broadcast. Even if they may not get rated well on Sundays, you'll still have them on which will really stick it to the cable companies). At the same time though, the rates for the NFL Network are about the same as NBA TV (which is not on basic cable) and NBA TV shows a lot more live games and classic games than the NFL Network. So they both need to give up. The Cable Companies charge their users absurd prices as it is and the NFL wants something that no other comparative channel in it's class has gotten. The problem would be that if the NFL got what they wanted, the NBA could do the same thing.

Now what we really need is an MLB channel. There's practically no national Baseball coverage and the sport lasts for about 6 months (not to mention you could show Winter League games in the off-season that a lot of hardcore enthusiasts would watch). This is a win win situation.

[Burf]

Go to ESPN and read TMQ. He rants about NFL Network almost every week (including this week).
Apparently, NFL Network wants like $8 per household, while most channels wants $1. So, for a seasonal sport, they want 8 times what other channels charge which offer year round programming. (I think my numbers are a tad off, but you get the idea.)
Anyway, check it out. It's an entertaining read, if nothing else.

[Akileese]

Originally Posted by Burf

Go to ESPN and read TMQ. He rants about NFL Network almost every week (including this week).
Apparently, NFL Network wants like $8 per household, while most channels wants $1. So, for a seasonal sport, they want 8 times what other channels charge which offer year round programming. (I think my numbers are a tad off, but you get the idea.)
Anyway, check it out. It's an entertaining read, if nothing else.

It's absurd honestly. It's not 8 dollars but its a very large amount of money. Face it. The NFL off-season isn't that exciting. You've got the draft, the combine, and that's it. Pretty much all trades are mid-season or draft day anyways so you've got like 6 months of time where nothing is happening (as opposed to Baseball or Basketball (who either have off-season leagues, exciting off-seasons, or both).

The more I think of it, the more I need to walk into MLB's office on Tuesday and pitch the idea of the MLB Network to them. Well, I could pitch it to security as they're walking me out of the door.

[Spontaneous Cumbustion]

Originally Posted by Akileese

It's absurd honestly. It's not 8 dollars but its a very large amount of money. Face it. The NFL off-season isn't that exciting. You've got the draft, the combine, and that's it. Pretty much all trades are mid-season or draft day anyways so you've got like 6 months of time where nothing is happening (as opposed to Baseball or Basketball (who either have off-season leagues, exciting off-seasons, or both).

The more I think of it, the more I need to walk into MLB's office on Tuesday and pitch the idea of the MLB Network to them. Well, I could pitch it to security as they're walking me out of the door.

Already going to be one. You'd just be laughed at.

[Akileese]

Originally Posted by Spontaneous Cumbustion

Already going to be one. You'd just be laughed at.

I meant a good one. The network they're creating is only showing 26 Saturday games. That's fucking abysmal. They should be showing a game a day. I know they have the money since Selig is pretty much swimming in a money bin every day. Then again, they're on basic because they gave the networks part ownership of the network itself. I think this is the #1 problem with what they're trying to do:
"This network will not rise and fall on the number of games we put on it," Brosnan said. "Rather, [it will rise and fall] on the creativity of the non-game programming that we present."

Wrong. You could show small market games and big games that for some awful reason don't hit TV. Okay, so to re-clarify I want to pitch MY idea for MLB Network (including the Winter Leagues because watching rookies is fun) not the network they're launching that I'm semi-excited about.

Derail over. Back to the horror that is the NFL Network. I think they need to show 1-2 Sunday games and lower their asking price per home. That's pretty much the gist of it. The Cable Companies also need to lighten up and stop acting self righteous about their customers when they try to gouge them any chance they get. No one is buying it.

[Moontayle]

Originally Posted by Burf

Go to ESPN and read TMQ. He rants about NFL Network almost every week (including this week).
Apparently, NFL Network wants like $8 per household, while most channels wants $1. So, for a seasonal sport, they want 8 times what other channels charge which offer year round programming. (I think my numbers are a tad off, but you get the idea.)
Anyway, check it out. It's an entertaining read, if nothing else.

NFL wants $.80 a household. ESPN gets like $3.95. CNN gets like $.40 or something lower. Cable companies either want to put NFLN into a premium package or give the NFL like $.20 a household, which what NHL TV charges them.

It's all stupid, but I have no room to complain since I'm not affected by the squabble. I love Verizon Fios!

[Lyrical]

Originally Posted by Akileese

Okay. If you use sopcast go tohttp://www.myp2p.eu/index.php?part=sports like 15 or 20 minutes before kickoff (to catch some pre-game if you want). You can main window it into Windows Media Player and it's usually accompanied by a 1 minute broadcast delay (since it's a webstream). I use it all the time to watch Soccer and out of all the webcast programs, Sopcast is the best far and away.

Also, they're both wrong. The NFL Network needs more games and original programming (like broadcasting games that won't be seen on any local broadcast. Even if they may not get rated well on Sundays, you'll still have them on which will really stick it to the cable companies). At the same time though, the rates for the NFL Network are about the same as NBA TV (which is not on basic cable) and NBA TV shows a lot more live games and classic games than the NFL Network. So they both need to give up. The Cable Companies charge their users absurd prices as it is and the NFL wants something that no other comparative channel in it's class has gotten. The problem would be that if the NFL got what they wanted, the NBA could do the same thing.

Now what we really need is an MLB channel. There's practically no national Baseball coverage and the sport lasts for about 6 months (not to mention you could show Winter League games in the off-season that a lot of hardcore enthusiasts would watch). This is a win win situation.

How's the quality of the broadcast? Can you play the game with a full-sized window, or is it too grainy?

[Warrik]

I like the NFL Network. I watch it all the time on Direct TV.