Why three networks?

[SamG]

So you'll be able to watch the Pats/Giants game not only on NFL network (where it was originally scheduled), but also NBC & CBS.

BC-FBN--Patriots-Giants-TV,0197
URGENT
Patriots' historic game to be available to all of America, after
all
NEW YORK (AP) - The New England Patriots' shot at history
Saturday night will be available for every household in the country
with a television after months of wrangling.
The game against the New York Giants, in which the Patriots
could become the first NFL team to go 16-0 in the regular season,
was originally scheduled to be shown only on the NFL Network, which
is available in fewer than 40 percent of the nation's homes with
TVs.
But the league announced Wednesday that the NFL Network feed
will be simulcast on NBC and CBS. It's a major concession by league
officials, who repeatedly said they would not show the game
anywhere but the NFL Network. The NFL had faced mounting pressure
from politicians in recent weeks to make the game available to more
viewers.
This will be the first three-network simulcast in NFL history
and the first simulcast of any kind of an NFL game since the first
Super Bowl in 1967, when CBS and NBC both televised the first
meeting of the champions of the newly merged National Football
League and American Football League.

(Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)



So why does CBS & NBC BOTH get to simulcast this?

[Roy Hobbs]

I dunno, but the wide receiver on the winning team should be very careful blowing leaves off his roof 40 years from now.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/sb01.gif

[McCovey Cove Returns]

Now the entire country gets to see how terrible a play-by-play anouncer Bryant Gumble is.

[cinehead]

What's interesting about this is WCVB in Boston and WWOR in New York were both scheduled to carry the game in their respective markets. Clearly the owners of both stations must be pissed. They both bid for this game over a year ago.

How can the NFL just give away something that was an exclusive contract? I'm sure both stations will have to be giving refunds to some of their advertisers over this.

I smell lawsuits.

Here's a link to one story on the media implications:
http://www.bostonherald.com/business/general/view.bg?articleid=1063013

[AutoTranz]

Why is ABC not in on this?

Oh I forgot...ABC doesn't do sports anymore. It's not "upscale" enough.

They'd rather run a 'Samantha Who' marathon.

[cinehead]

Why is ABC not in on this?

Oh I forgot...ABC doesn't do sports anymore. It's not "upscale" enough.

They'd rather run a 'Samantha Who' marathon.


A better question is why not Fox? Aren't they the league's NFC network?

[jrat33]

A better question is why not Fox? Aren't they the league's NFC network?

Because Fox broadcasts games that feature the NFC as the road team. CBS shows the games in which the AFC team is the road team.

This would have been a CBS game since the Pats were on the road.

[Desert Rat]

I heard that WWOR is really pissed and Goodell is already speaking to WWOR about it.

My hunch is that they will honor the contracts in place in New York and Boston with the two stations in question.

I do have a problem with the government putting pressure on the NFL to put this game on free TV....giving a veiled threat to pull their anti-trust ruling if they didn't.

This is a problem between the NFL and some cable operators who don't want to put the NFL Network on the "basic" tier.

Government has no business butting their heads in a business decision by the cable companies and the NFL.

[s'news]

Put it on every channel.

That way, only the people who don't want to watch it will complain.

[cinehead]

Because Fox broadcasts games that feature the NFC as the road team. CBS shows the games in which the AFC team is the road team.

This would have been a CBS game since the Pats were on the road.

Yeah, I realize that. but if they're giving it out to NBC and CBS, why leave out Fox, the other "broadcasting partner". Of course, maybe Fox wasn't interested.

[cinehead]

I heard that WWOR is really pissed and Goodell is already speaking to WWOR about it.

My hunch is that they will honor the contracts in place in New York and Boston with the two stations in question.

I do have a problem with the government putting pressure on the NFL to put this game on free TV....giving a veiled threat to pull their anti-trust ruling if they didn't.

This is a problem between the NFL and some cable operators who don't want to put the NFL Network on the "basic" tier.

Government has no business butting their heads in a business decision by the cable companies and the NFL.

No, it looks like the NFL isn't abiding by the contracts in Boston or New York, both those stations are getting screwed.

I agree with you on Kerry, it's a private business affair, he should have stayed out of it. Of course, then he wouldn't have the opportunity to pander to his electorate.

[Another side]

... Surely there's a better game on than the Patriots v. Giants.

Yeah ... I'm interested in whether the Pats go undefeated ...but I can find that out during one of a dozen highlight shows (And CNN will undoubtedly send a "News Bulliten" to my home computer.)

But just because they're two, East coast teams doesn't mean it will be a great game -- I sure don't expect it to be.

[SamG]

... Surely there's a better game on than the Patriots v. Giants.

Yeah ... I'm interested in whether the Pats go undefeated ...but I can find that out during one of a dozen highlight shows (And CNN will undoubtedly send a "News Bulliten" to my home computer.)

But just because they're two, East coast teams doesn't mean it will be a great game -- I sure don't expect it to be.
Where did this come from? I don't see anyone saying this would be a good game, much less a "great" one. There's been talk all week about the Giants resting their better players because they have nothing to gain by winning (aside from breaking the streak).

It's like the Triple Crown... if the same horse wins the Ky Derby and the Preakness, Belmont viewership will explode because people want to see history. But if two different horses win the Derby & Preakness, the Belmont isn't much more than just another horse race.

Same thing here. People will want to watch history (potentially) being made.

[Gil]

NFL caved to public pressure. They did not want all the hatred that would come if much of the public could not see the game.

Their contract with CBS says that network gets AFC away games.

Their contract with NBC says that network gets weekend prime time games.

So, they honored both.

[Desert Rat]

It turned out to be a better game than a lot of people expected..

[s'news]

Yep. Enjoyed it.

[Another side]

listen to me about sports.

I tuned in at halftime just to catch the score ... and watched the rest of the game. It was a great game.

I'm the same guy who once predicted Dickerson would never make it in the NFL ... and who said earlier this year that San Diego would be the the Super Bowl champ.

Guess I'll stick with that, though -- maybe I'll get a lucky bounce.

[TV Dad]

NFL caved to public pressure. They did not want all the hatred that would come if much of the public could not see the game.


That's how I see it, too. This was very nearly a monumental screw-up on the part of the NFL. I think it had the potential to do to the NFL what pay-per-view has done to the popularity of boxing.

[s'news]

They sure did seem to have a goodly number of pitches for NFL Network in there. Curiously, I saw a spot for Comcast that compared itself to satellite outfits.

[Gil]

They sure did seem to have a goodly number of pitches for NFL Network in there. Curiously, I saw a spot for Comcast that compared itself to satellite outfits.

I watched two of the earlier games on Thursday nights online - lots of pitches for the NFL Network then, too. And why not? It's no different than the promos we run all the time (although we usually don't promote a program within the program).

[s'news]

True. But in this case there was the NFL Network backstory going on.