Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Not seeing the Vikings-Packers on Thursday?

    Do you normally get the Vikings (or Packers for Green Bay fans around this week) game every Sunday but are NOT getting the game into your home on a non-NFL Network channel on Thursday night?

    Ticked off about it?

    The NFL wants you to call your cable company to complain and force them to adopt the NFL's unprecedented demands for compensation.

    And the cable companies believe they are being wronged and want you to complain to the NFL.

    Here's who you really need to complain to about it.


    IA -
    Sen. Charles Grassley
    http://grassley.senate.gov/

    Sen. Tom Harkin
    http://harkin.senate.gov/

    MIN
    Sen. Norm Coleman
    http://coleman.senate.gov/

    Sen-elect Amy Klobuchar
    http://www.amyklobuchar.com/


    ND
    Sen. Byron Dorgan
    http://dorgan.senate.gov/

    Sen. Kent Conrad
    http://conrad.senate.gov/

    SD
    Sen. Tim Johnson - even though he's in a coma, I'm sure he cares
    http://johnson.senate.gov/

    Sen. John Thune
    http://thune.senate.gov/

    WI
    Sen. Russell Feingold
    http://feingold.senate.gov/

    Sen. Herb Kohl
    http://kohl.senate.gov/

    The NFL has an anti-trust exemption which specifically has language relating to the availability of all games for people.
    The Direct TV-exclusivity of the Sunday Ticket skirts around that issue and would likely fail a close examination.

    But NOT making the game available to people who would normally get the Vikings on Sunday is an ABSOLUTE violation of the agreement and your complaints would be heard - assuming your just don't rant and rave but instead voice a clear point.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  2. #2
    TARKenton's Avatar
    TARKenton is offline Asst. Coach
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    660

    Re: Not seeing the Vikings-Packers on Thursday?

    The game may be on a local minneapolis channel.
    for instance, tonights monday night game between the colts and bengals is on espn, a cable network.
    believe it or not, there are still people who are too proud to pay for tv, so the game is being re-televised on a local, over the air channel in indianapolis.
    ...Rodgers had to hold on the ball longer, giving players like Jared "I am completely insane and will literally eat your children" Allen time to sack Rodgers again.And again. And again. Actually I think Rodgers may have nightmares about Jared Allen the rest of the year.

  3. #3
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,604
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Not seeing the Vikings-Packers on Thursday?

    Sorry, but this the NFL isn't violating its anti-trust exemption.
    Especially because the NFL wants the NFLN to be carried as part of a basic cable package, available to all subscribers. The cable companies are the ones who want to make it a premium channel, which might be in violation of the anti-trust agreements.
    It is being offered to the cable companies, they just aren't accepting it.
    It would be no different than if your local cable company decided it wasn't going to carry ESPN.

    It is also being rebroadcast over the free airways in the local area.

    For some background on this... The NFL's anti-trust exemption comes from The Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961.
    The Sports Broadcasting Act was passed in response to a court decision which ruled that the NFL's method of negotiating television broadasting rights violated antitrust laws. The court ruled that the "pooling" of rights by all the teams to conclude an exclusive contract between the league and CBS was illegal.

    The Act overrules that decision, and permits certain joint broadcasting agreements among the major professional sports. It permits the sale of a television "package" to the network or networks, a procedure which is common today.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00001291----000-.html
    TITLE 15, CHAPTER 32, § 1291

    § 1291. Exemption from antitrust laws of agreements covering the telecasting of sports contests and the combining of professional football leagues

    The antitrust laws, as defined in section 1 of the Act of October 15, 1914, as amended (38 Stat. 730) [15 U.S.C. 12], or in the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended (38 Stat. 717) [15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.], shall not apply to any joint agreement by or among persons engaging in or conducting the organized professional team sports of football, baseball, basketball, or hockey, by which any league of clubs participating in professional football, baseball, basketball, or hockey contests sells or otherwise transfers all or any part of the rights of such league’s member clubs in the sponsored telecasting of the games of football, baseball, basketball, or hockey, as the case may be, engaged in or conducted by such clubs. In addition, such laws shall not apply to a joint agreement by which the member clubs of two or more professional football leagues, which are exempt from income tax under section 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 [26 U.S.C. 501 (c)(6)], combine their operations in expanded single league so exempt from income tax, if such agreement increases rather than decreases the number of professional football clubs so operating, and the provisions of which are directly relevant thereto.

    TITLE 15, CHAPTER 32, § 1292
    § 1292.

    Section 1291 of this title shall not apply to any joint agreement described in the first sentence in such section which prohibits any person to whom such rights are sold or transferred from televising any games within any area, except within the home territory of a member club of the league on a day when such club is playing a game at home.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,130

    Re: Not seeing the Vikings-Packers on Thursday?

    It's not that were too proud, just too poor-lol- I've been living with 7 channels including telemundo for like 8 months, but when the eagles play mon night, they put it on abc in philly. I don't know for sure if they'll do the same in minnesota because the nfl network is run by the nfl as where espn isn't.
    Wait, if there's cat food in this bag............................
    I HAVE TO CHECK ON JOLLY!!!!

  5. #5
    vikes2456's Avatar
    vikes2456 is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,656

    Re: Not seeing the Vikings-Packers on Thursday?

    Granted I'm happy I'll be able to see the game thursday, I am against games being shown exclusively on the NFL network. It just isn't right that you should have to pay for a nationally televised game

  6. #6
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,604
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Not seeing the Vikings-Packers on Thursday?

    "vikes2456" wrote:
    Granted I'm happy I'll be able to see the game thursday, I am against games being shown exclusively on the NFL network. It just isn't right that you should have to pay for a nationally televised game
    You and I agree on that.
    And so does the NFLN.
    They don't want cable companies to force you to pay for their service.
    They want it offered as part of a basic package... just like ESPN.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  7. #7
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Not seeing the Vikings-Packers on Thursday?

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "vikes2456" wrote:
    Granted I'm happy I'll be able to see the game thursday, I am against games being shown exclusively on the NFL network. It just isn't right that you should have to pay for a nationally televised game
    You and I agree on that.
    And so does the NFLN.
    They don't want cable companies to force you to pay for their service.
    They want it offered as part of a basic package... just like ESPN.
    Nice regurgitation of the NFL line, NP!


    Reality is - they want EVERYONE - football fans or no - to have to pay for the network.
    Buy forcing the cable companies to put it on basic cable, and charging a much higher per-subscriber fee than any other network which is carried on basic, the NFL is attempting to grow the network on the backs of millions of people who don't want the network.

    The fair way is to do what the cable companies want - to put it on a sports tier so only those who want it have to pay for it.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  8. #8
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Not seeing the Vikings-Packers on Thursday?

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    Sorry, but this the NFL isn't violating its anti-trust exemption.
    Especially because the NFL wants the NFLN to be carried as part of a basic cable package, available to all subscribers. The cable companies are the ones who want to make it a premium channel, which might be in violation of the anti-trust agreements.
    It is being offered to the cable companies, they just aren't accepting it.
    It would be no different than if your local cable company decided it wasn't going to carry ESPN.

    It is also being rebroadcast over the free airways in the local area.
    I have to disagree and many writers who I have read over the past few months also disagree.

    The cable companies want subscribers who WANT the NFL Network to have to pay for it - not every single subscriber.


    ESPN carries a wide spectrum of sports.
    The NFL is a niche network more akin to the Home and Garden channel and should be treated as such.
    However, at the price they are demanding (much more than other niche channels), it cannot be.

    As to the local area thing - I go back to my initial point:
    if you normally get the Vikings on Sunday and are not getting them on Thursday, then that is where violation-land begins.

    =Z=


    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  9. #9
    VikesfaninWis's Avatar
    VikesfaninWis is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,055

    Re: Not seeing the Vikings-Packers on Thursday?

    Living in Wisconsin by Green Bay, every Packer game is on channel 2 locally regardless if it is on Sunday, Thursday, or Monday nights.. I happen to have NFL Network, so it works out just fine.. I am able to watch all Thursday, and Saturday games on that channel..

  10. #10
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,604
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Not seeing the Vikings-Packers on Thursday?

    "AWZeus" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "vikes2456" wrote:
    Granted I'm happy I'll be able to see the game thursday, I am against games being shown exclusively on the NFL network. It just isn't right that you should have to pay for a nationally televised game
    You and I agree on that.
    And so does the NFLN.
    They don't want cable companies to force you to pay for their service.
    They want it offered as part of a basic package... just like ESPN.
    Nice regurgitation of the NFL line, NP!


    Reality is - they want EVERYONE - football fans or no - to have to pay for the network.
    Buy forcing the cable companies to put it on basic cable, and charging a much higher per-subscriber fee than any other network which is carried on basic, the NFL is attempting to grow the network on the backs of millions of people who don't want the network.

    The fair way is to do what the cable companies want - to put it on a sports tier so only those who want it have to pay for it.

    =Z=
    LOL.
    To be honest, I hope the NFLN doesn't get any regular season games next year because I think their broadcast sucks donkey butt.
    The only shining point is Collinsworth.
    Everything else, from the shot angles, to the broadcast definition, to Gumble to Frog, SUCKS!

    However, just because I don't like it doesn't make it illegal.
    The NFL isn't violating its anti-trust by airing the games on the NFLN anymore than it is by airing them on ESPN.
    The rest is a cable company decision.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Vikings to talk draft on Thursday
    By Garland Greene in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-21-2009, 06:41 AM
  2. Vikings Thursday afternoon notes
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-02-2007, 06:42 PM
  3. Vikings will unveil new uniforms Thursday at MOA
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: 05-01-2006, 10:33 PM
  4. Thursday notes on Vikings-Bears game.
    By Muggsy in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-15-2005, 06:52 PM
  5. Packers win, Vikings lose, Packers win division title?
    By MossWilliamsHenderson in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12-19-2004, 05:49 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •