There might be a compromise between the NFL Network and Time Warner. Let me say that again. There might be a compromise between the NFL Network and Time Warner. And the benefits to all of us, might be quick. Like sometime next week quick.

Were they pressured?

Take this perspective. When the NFL Network tells you that Time Warner is preventing you from seeing their games and 24x7 coverage, do they really think you're that stupid? It is, after all, their ridiculous assertion that taking the games away from all but 35 million households (of which only 1.6 million subscribe) is Time Warner's fault -- not the network that journeyed the games to Rivendale where no one else can find it, unless it wants to be found. The Big Ten Network is taking the same approach. And each time I'm told that both networks are being prevented from reaching their target audience, I laugh. If these networks weren't created, the games wouldn't be broadcasted on those channels. Simple as that. Don't take us for fools.

"Cable companies swim in a multi-billion dollar tower of gold coins." Both networks are just as greedy establishing channels to increase revenue for their respective product. If the cable companies are greedy, then the networks aren't? They're the victims? Furthermore, if Oprah created her own channel, would you be willing to pay for that general increase on your bill for basic? Or would you agree it should be on a digital tier that you would have to pay for to receive so the cost isn't spread out among all cable subscribers?

"Cable companies could absorb the costs and not charge anyone." The first question that has to be asked is do you run a business? Furthermore, take the Oprah hypothetical -- because obviously you'll be more willing to pay for the NFL Network if you were the CEO of cable company-A. The NFL is demanding between 50-75 cents per-subscriber while the Big Ten Network is asking for a full dollar per-subscriber. For comparison, ESPN charges $3.26 per customer -- "by far the highest rate of any U.S. basic cable channel."

Currently, the NFL receives $712.5 million per year from Fox to air NFC games. CBS is paying $622.5 million a year to air AFC games. Between the two networks, that's $8 billion that will paid through 2011. DirectTV, with exclusive rights to air the games of both networks, paid $3.5 billion for the NFL Sunday Ticket package. Now, we're up to $11.5 billion. NBC is paying $650 million per year on a contract that runs through 2012 for Sunday Night football. ESPN is paying $1.1 billion a year through 2014 for Monday Night football games. [Source: ESPN]

All television contracts added up, that's $3.785 billion per year that the NFL receives. Talk about greedy. The Cable companies pay service, InDemand, had offered a bid for NFL Sunday Ticket in 2002 before an agreement was reached for an extension between the NFL and DirectTV. The Cable Companies didn't care for exclusive rights, they just wanted to broadcast it. The cable companies missed the deadline and the league reupped with DirectTV.

Note: The Super Bowl produced $336 million in revenue.[Source: Forbes]

So what does the NFL suggest to you, the viewer that wants the NFL Network, but can't have it because their near $4 billion revenue on television contracts just isn't enough? They are urging you to cancel cable and get satellite. Yep. That's how low and panicked they are now. Jerry Jones threatens more games will be aired exclusively through the NFL Network. Even Congress is being asked to intervene. Mommy is being asked to settle another dispute.

Gregg Easterbrook notes the NFL's hypocrisy:

Easterbrook concludes:

Note: Combined, Time Warner and Comcast reported $68.5 billion in revenue in 2006. Time Warner ($43.6 billion in 2006) Comcast ($24.9 billion in 2006).

So basically, with all that said, nothing has changed in the past three years.

Cable Plays Hardball With the N.F.L. [NY Times]
Of Tiers, Football and Dollars [NY Times]

What do you get when leagues start grossly overestimating the interest from the public? You have the NFL Network and Time Warner unable to broadcast to some customers because compromise is only a word that sits idle and alone in the Oxford Dictionary. ESPNU, the network that aired last year's Crosstown shootout blacking out a majority of Cincinnatians from cheering on their respective home town teams, was an inconvenience, but they are now on Time Warner.

When we heard that the Big Ten will have their own network, you almost had the feeling that this exact thing would happen. Time Warner, holding onto their guns, will only put the network on their digital sports tier, rather than basic, so people that want the channel, pay for the channel. Not the other way around.

As Ohio State fans with Time Warner, we'll miss out on four games this year (Youngstown State and Akron and possibly Northwestern and Kent State). The SEC could be following suit next season and the Pac-10 and ACC are considering.

Boy, I can't wait until we're paying $3,000 per month because regular network programming will be a thing of the past.

Buckeyes blacked out [Enquirer]

First it was the NFL Network refusing to come to terms with Time Warner leaving millions and millions of football fans in the dark during their national games; unless it was in the home market. Then it was ESPNU that blocked out the Crosstown Shootout (UC vs. Xavier) in Cincinnati. Now it's the Big Ten Network that has Ohio State fans concerned that they'll miss some college football games this season.

This is the new trend in sports broadcasting. You have to pay for sports specific channel to get fulfill the addictive coverage of our respective sports. The demands the channels are asking for isn't falling in line with mea-companies like Time Warner.

However, as per this article, ESPNU and Time Warner came to an agreement. The launch date is TBD.

I think the NFL and some owners are pissed off. They have to be. They claim to have left over $400 million on the table during television negotiations so they could broadcast eight measly games on the NFL Network (by the way, there was a game Thursday night I heard). Anyway, the cable companies (most notably Time Warner and Cablevision) and the NFL Network remain at a stalemate. So, for whatever reason, Roger Goodell announces the NFL will be free for one week during the time two bowl games will be played.

1.) Why is the NFL Network hijacking two bowl games? Funny name for a station carrying college football games.
2.) Imagine right now if you're a Rutgers fan.

Time Warner and Cablevision are having none of it.

The NFL Network is providing one week of free programming from December 24-30th. NFL.com likens it to HBO or Showtime having a free preview weekend. Of course, during that weekend, HBO doesn't black out programming like the NFL Network will for the Saturday night game between the New York Giants and Washington Redskins. Which means we'll have the same programming that's keeping the demand for it relatively low.

NFL Network offering free week [NFL.com]

This is a non-Bengals related local sports post. Tomorrow (Wednesday), the University of Cincinnati plays Xavier in the annual Crosstown Shootout. The level of discussion is down this year. Some say it's because Cincinnati has changed so much, that the fanbase has either changed or remained skeptical. Some say it's because Bob Huggins is gone so the level of intensity in the rivalry has waned.

Either way, unless you have ESPNU or go to the game, you won't have the luxury of watching it. Like the NFL Network, ESPN wants their ESPNU channel on basic cable while charging cable companies way more than Time Warmer wishes to charge for their basic service risking more increases to their basic subscribers.

I'll admit, I'm a little surprised that none of the local channels are bidding for broadcasting rights like WLW-TV did with the Bengals Thursday Night game.

But, it's going to get worse.

Welcome to the new age of sports television.

Crosstown blackout [Enquirer]
Enquirer Shootout Section [Enquirer]

If you're in the Southwestern region of Ohio (i.e. Cincinnati) watching television via Time Warner, then most likely you're going to see a 5.1% increase in your rates, says the Cincinnati Enquirer -- effective today. I swear, if 200 MPH wind and -43 degrees wasn't enough... Time Warner's reasoning is that programming costs keep increasing pushing the rates customers pay. This happens during the peak of a major NFL Network/Time Warner dispute which has me questioning: Is this a power move by the cable company to solidify their justification against bringing the NFL Network to their programming?

There's an increasing fear that if people unload their paychecks for the NFL Network that it will encourage the league to install a pay-per-view type of system after the current agreement runs out. A test, so to speak, to see if people would pay money to watch games. People could be saying that as a scare tactic, who knows. I just know that Time Warner is right by insisting the network be shown on the Sports tier so only those that subscribe to it would pay for it -- from my understanding, that's the biggest hold-up.

Cable rates up in SW Ohio [Enquirer]
Doyel's here to help since you probably missed Bengals-Ravens [Sportsline]

Well, here we are. The Bengals are playing tonight (Thursday) on the NFL Network. If you're outside the primary market (i.e. Cincinnati) and don't get Channel 5, WLW-TV, then you're basically forced to a radio broadcast and NFL.com's GameCenter. You have no chance at seeing, perhaps, the best game of the season. People have offered the cable providers a sense of support by not demanding the network onto their cable systems. For example, as anticipated Thanksgiving night, there was hardly any demand from the customers to the providers to show the network like they had hoped afterwards. It's not like the network provides quality broadcasts anyway, like this NY Times article states:

Insight systems just picked up the NFL Network which serves people in Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana and Illinois.

Cable Subscribers Aren’t Saying, ‘I Want My N.F.L.’ [NY Times]
NFL Network works to catch on [Enquirer]
Insight picks up NFL Network [Enquirer]

After having two full plates of turkey, mashed potatoes, corn, sweet potatoes and stuffing, I was treated to two apple pies and a pumpkin pie. I won’t lie. I take full advantage of Thanksgiving at the family’s house. And it’s almost like my mother, after years of dealing with football – one of her most hated things in the world – she instinctively timed the dinner perfectly. Not long after Miami secured their 27-10 win over the Detroit Lions, the dinner bell rang. After eating enough food that could feed Warren County, I made my way to the couch and turned it to Fox to see Tampa Bay take the field for their first offensive possession. I didn’t miss a second of NFL action; just the boring rubbish that followed and preceded the games. For that and the delicious food, I'm thankful for mom. Of course, like the years before that, I led the prayer for dinner and shocked EVERYONE -- including my mother -- when I finished saying "thanks" for football and the Cincinnati Bengals. I got the stare.

As the trend continues in the NFL this year during national games, the games were boring and mind-numbing. I guess it’s what you can expect. Detroit is always on Thanksgiving therefore making the games typically bad. Joey Harrington was booed in Detroit and Fox was getting off on a warm Tony Romo love-fest.

That was all the football I got. Boring games that if prompted, I’d never pay to watch. There was no night game for me. See, I’m one of the victims in the Time Warner/NFL Network wars. I’m the innocent Frenchman that begs American soldiers to take my daughter away from the bombarded town like the scene in Saving Private Ryan.

Broncos owner Pat Bowlen doesn’t much mind that only 41 million have access to the network. He’s a chairman of the league's broadcasting committee and called the Chiefs/Broncos game "historic".  He continues, "I think as you look into the future three or four more years," Bowlen said, "it will be a fully distributed, 365-day, 24/7 network. And it won't just be about the NFL." What the hell else could it be about? It’s the NFL Network. Shouldn’t it be about the NFL?

Basically Bowlen is saying to you, the customer, you will have to pay money in order to watch NFL games. To me, this is setting a horrible precedent for the future. Not only would you pay money to watch the NFL, but you’d get a network called the NFL Network that won’t always be about the NFL. That’s false advertising, to me.  Bowlen’s right about one thing; this is just the beginning. There will be a day when you’ll pay $20 just to watch the Bengals live on television.

It’s not just the three major cable companies that are refusing to pay for the outrageous costs.

To be honest, I haven’t lost any sleep over not getting the NFL Network. The games most likely, like most national NFL games, will be over by the third quarter. The only thing that interests me about the network is games replayed the next day.

Otherwise, I’ll just ignore the diatribe of NFL spokesmen telling us they have best programming ever and we’re "suffering" like starving people in third world nations. Really. If the NFL Network is promoting that we’re suffering, wouldn’t they reduce their demands that the major cable companies have gaffed at? Probably not. They have the best programming ever. Just ask them.

I'm a little surprised that my co-NFL bloggers have remained relatively quiet on their opinions about the network. It makes me think that I'm the only one that really has a problem with this. And maybe my opinion that the NFL is starting to think too highly of themselves falls in the minority category. Of all the NFL blogs in SB Nation that mentions this is tommasse at Pats Pulpit saying "Note to NFL: Nice work. Solid plan." Yes, that's dripping with sarcasm.

Note: I think it's interesting if you look at my posts from the birth of the blog until now. My opinion has absolutely changed as I've learned what the hold up is.

Broncos aren't part of some fans' feasts [Denver Post]
Bowlen envisions bright future for NFL Network [Rocky Mountain News]
NFL Network Is Still Plugging Holes [Multi-Channel]
Outlook Dim for NFL Network, MSOs [Broadcast News Room]
NFL Network-Time Warner feud unlikely to be resolved by Thanksgiving [My San Antonio]
No settlement in sight between Time Warner and NFL Network [Desert Sun]
Comcast at odds with NFL Network [Clarion Ledger]
Rutgers fans could miss bowl game [NY Post]