Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

MacosNerd · Nov 30, 2007, 08:40 PM

So with all of the hubbub that occurred with the packers/cowboy game and so many sports writers whining for and against this, what do you guys/gals think.

Personally I think basic cable has too many channels and I don't feel like paying for more when I barely watch any of them.

Cold Warrior · Nov 30, 2007, 08:45 PM

cable is way overpriced already. They shoud spin off the sports programming from normal cable, and just make them an add-on, just like cellular data plans.

KeriVit · Nov 30, 2007, 08:53 PM

It's kinda warped the way it's worded.

Yes, I think it should be added. But no I don't want to pay more. I can get it for $5/mo - it includes some other sports channels I will never watch. I don't feel it should be a pay channel. I understand HBO. Showtime, etc. but for each you get 5-8 channels of premium original programming and movies for $10.

MacosNerd · Nov 30, 2007, 09:30 PM

Originally Posted by KeriVit

It's kinda warped the way it's worded.

Yes, I think it should be added. But no I don't want to pay more. I can get it for $5/mo - it includes some other sports channels I will never watch. I don't feel it should be a pay channel. I understand HBO. Showtime, etc. but for each you get 5-8 channels of premium original programming and movies for $10.

The problem is that cable will have to pay the NFL network to do that, and so if they pay them, guess who has to pay the cable company. The money has to come from somewhere that's why you'll not see it added for free.

imitchellg5 · Nov 30, 2007, 09:41 PM

I would love to have the NFL network with basic cable, but I'm not holding my breath. Only one Seahawks game was aired this season in Colorado, it seems like the only way I get to watch is if I go to Washington for the weekend.

MacosNerd · Nov 30, 2007, 09:47 PM

Because it seems that the network is on so few cable operators, I wonder what the ratings have been. I'm guessing virtually non-existent.

Jawbone54 · Nov 30, 2007, 09:49 PM

There shouldn't be an NFL network. Period.

It's just another way for the NFL to milk more money out of its fans, and the quality is well below the other networks.

MacosNerd · Nov 30, 2007, 09:53 PM

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

There shouldn't be an NFL network. Period.

It's just another way for the NFL to milk more money out of its fans, and the quality is well below the other networks.

You're 100% correct, Mike Celizic on msnbc really hit the nail on the head in his article.
msnbc

But there is an NFL Network, it is on cable and satellite so the question is going to be who will blink first. Cable operators or NFL.

My money is on cable as they'll eventually cave, and pass on the expense to us.

wallinbl · Nov 30, 2007, 10:33 PM

Cable is too expensive. I actually canceled it nine months ago. I came to the realization that I was paying $60/month to get ESPN, ComedyCentral and Adult Swim. That's not really worth it. I'm betting that even if ala carte pricing were to happen, they'd price ESPN at $20/month because they know people are so hooked on it.

Rumor · Nov 30, 2007, 10:43 PM

Cable is a crock. I don't pay for it because I don't want 500 channels of crap I won't watch.

I wish someone would wake up and offer an ala-carte type system. Let me pick and choose what I want to watch.

imitchellg5 · Dec 1, 2007, 12:10 AM

The only reason we have cable is because it was bundled with our internet. I can't remember ever having cable before moving to Colorado. Of course, we have the best rabbit ears around in Washington, so we could pick up signals from Oregon and Canada. It's a metal roof

Jawbone54 · Dec 1, 2007, 01:06 AM

I've never had cable. Actually, I only pick up one channel (CBS).

Nodnarb · Dec 1, 2007, 01:16 AM

I don't care specifically about the NFL Network being part of regular cable, I couldn't care less about any of their programming talking about football (there's enough of that on ESPN). What does annoy me however is when I really wanted to watch a game (Packers/Cowboys) I can't because the NFL puts it on their own stupid network that no one has. If the game were on CBS, NBC, FOX, or ESPN (all which do carry games every Sunday/Monday) that would be fine, but apparently THURSDAY night games are in NFL Network's range, so we just can't watch them. Or buy their channel. Screw them.

cjrivera · Dec 1, 2007, 02:22 AM

To add insult to injury, you have Bryant Gumbel (the worst possible announcer in NFL history) as the NFL network's commentator.

imitchellg5 · Dec 1, 2007, 10:07 AM

I hate the ESPN announcers. They're trying to be comedians, not accurate announcers.

MacosNerd · Dec 1, 2007, 11:34 AM

Except for Greg Gumbel and Phil Syms, I don't like any commentators. Even Madden gets on my nerves. The team of Gumbel/Syms is really top notch. Well maybe Stockton and Aikman but the rest suffer from diarrhea of the mouth and generally have little to actually add to the game except their own voices droning on and on.

CreepDogg · Dec 1, 2007, 01:07 PM

No - I never thought I'd say this, but I actually side with Comcast on this one. All I want to watch is games - there's plenty of commentary and highlights on the networks and ESPN. It's not worth it to me to pay ANYTHING to get maybe 2 games a year I'd want to watch - no thanks. Plus as a few pointed out, even for the games that are on, the commentary truly sucks.

Comcast has it right - they have this on an extra $6/mo package you can get if you really want it. I don't believe the subscription rate for that package is very high - which is very telling for the overall quality of programming on the NFL Network. For me - no thanks...

Stogieman · Dec 2, 2007, 06:04 AM

Originally Posted by MacosNerd

Except for Greg Gumbel and Phil Syms, I don't like any commentators. Even Madden gets on my nerves. The team of Gumbel/Syms is really top notch. Well maybe Stockton and Aikman but the rest suffer from diarrhea of the mouth and generally have little to actually add to the game except their own voices droning on and on.

I agree. The only commentators I like are Phil Simms, Greg Gumbel, Troy Aikman & Dick Enberg. Every time I hear Joe Buck call a game (baseball or football) it makes me want to punch a baby in the face.

l008com · Dec 2, 2007, 06:28 AM

Being a Bostonian, I could care less. All Pats games are on local channels, local channels that broadcast HD, so I get the pats in HD for free. Wish I could say the same for the sox. Too bad they don't offer MLB.TV in HD :-D

Chongo · 02:32 PM

That's why I have DirecTV. Same price as Cox digital in Az.
DIRECTV - Package Choices
Choice Package

Choice extra

MacosNerd · Dec 2, 2007, 10:36 AM

But don't have to pay extra for an HD satellite dish and/or receiver plus more $$ per month to have HD channels?

Teronzhul · Dec 2, 2007, 11:10 AM

With DirecTV you get your first HD receiver for free, but there is an additional $10/month HD access fee. Also each receiver beyond your first carries a $4.99/month lease fee, but that is regardless of receiver type (standard, HD, DVR, etc). In some markets their pricing is extremely competitive, and in others it is less so.

The package he is referring to as "basic" is choice at $49.99, then if you add in HD access that makes it $59.99. Additional receivers add $4.99 each.

Chongo · 02:34 PM

Cocks charges $6 a month for the primary digital receiver, $8 a month($6+$2 mirror fee) for each additional digital receiver. $12 a month for the 1st HD receiver and programming, web page does not list fee for additional HD receivers. $23 for an HD DVR

DirecTV: 1st IRD, no monthly charge, $4.99 mirror fee per additional receiver, regardless if SD or HD, as mentioned before.

The dish is included with the free install, new or upgrade

PacHead · Dec 2, 2007, 02:24 PM

I get every single channel through my cable subscription, and I could care less if all of the sports channels were removed, including any NFL channels.

Many of people I know that love watching sports on tv are unhealthy, overweight people who stuff their faces eating food while watching sports from the comfort of their couch, quite ironic.

Nodnarb · Dec 2, 2007, 02:37 PM

Originally Posted by PacHead

Many of people I know that love watching sports on tv are unhealthy, overweight people who stuff their faces eating food while watching sports from the comfort of their couch, quite ironic.

Cause that has anything to do with umm...anything?

Why would you post in this thread if all you have to say is "oh I don't care about sports channels, take them off my TV please, people who watch sports are fat!"

Very constructive bud.

PacHead · Dec 2, 2007, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by Nodnarb

Why would you post in this thread if all you have to say is "oh I don't care about sports channels, take them off my TV please, people who watch sports are fat!"

Because that's my opinion, and to express my disdain for all of the countless sports channels on my system. I'd gladly give them all up for free and still pay the same price that I pay now, it would make surfing through the channels easier if they were removed.

turtle777 · Dec 2, 2007, 08:13 PM

I don't see the problem.

I have very basic cable (no ESPN and stuff), so in order to see most of my games, I have to go to the sports bar.

I got no issues with that. Rather than spending $ x per month on special programing, I spend it on beer and snacks while watching the games with other fans.

-t

Nodnarb · Dec 2, 2007, 08:17 PM

Yeah but some people invest thousands in home theater systems to watch the games in the comfort of their own home with friends on their 60"+ TVs. Going to a bar for them would make no sense as all the money is already invested in the TV/speakers/etc.

Not saying that there's anything wrong with going to a bar for games, it's a blast, it's just that some people have different ideas of fun.

turtle777 · Dec 2, 2007, 09:01 PM

Originally Posted by Nodnarb

Yeah but some people invest thousands in home theater systems to watch the games in the comfort of their own home with friends on their 60"+ TVs. Going to a bar for them would make no sense as all the money is already invested in the TV/speakers/etc.

You can always move to where your team is and get it on local channels

-t

brassplayersrock² · Dec 2, 2007, 09:44 PM

Originally Posted by PacHead

I get every single channel through my cable subscription, and I could care less if all of the sports channels were removed, including any NFL channels.

Many of people I know that love watching sports on tv are unhealthy, overweight people who stuff their faces eating food while watching sports from the comfort of their couch, quite ironic.

so you would still care a little bit if they removed the sports channels?

Nodnarb · Dec 3, 2007, 12:35 AM

Dakar the Fourth · Dec 3, 2007, 04:46 PM

NFL Network shouldn't be on basic cable at all, but I'd be willing to compromise that it can be on basic cable one the NFL allows cable subscribers to get the season pass.

I have the NFL Network on my basic cable and it irritates me, because I'd really enjoy having NBA TV so I could have the option of watching two more games per week (And I bet its way cheaper to put on). That said the NFL Network probably gets waaaaay better ratings even though it has less fresh content.

olePigeon · Dec 3, 2007, 05:38 PM

Maybe if they removed commercials from cable, I'd be willing to pay for it. You know, like how you used to pay for cable to get commercial-free television.

Now it's just television that you pay for, with commercials DURING the show.

No thank you.

Kenneth · Dec 3, 2007, 06:35 PM

I don't even subscribe to any cable TV channel.