FCC chair warns NFL that increase in streaming could “collapse” antitrust exemption

Rob0729 said:

You do realize getting rid of the antitrust exemption would put the greed of the NFL on hyperdrive. Jerry Jones would love to see the exemption gone. He would cut a huge deal with Amazon or another company for the rights to the Cowboys and start signing every major player. He could also sign the 10 best prospects coming out of college every year.

Click to expand...

With all due respect, you really just don't understand what the anti-trust exemption does.

Getting rid of the antitrust exemption involves how the League negotiates with broadcast partners and other sponsors. It doesn't get rid of the CBA, so we would still have a draft, salary cap, franchise tag, etc. (assuming all those things survive the next CBA negotiations in a couple years).

Rob0729 said:

The only thing allowing things like salary cap, franchise tags, the draft, and anything that would put a cap on earnings of players is the antitrust exemption.

Click to expand...

As mentioned above, the CBA does those things, not the antitrust exemption.

Now if the players union decertified, all those things would be in line to happen.... but you are confusing the antitrust exemption with the CBA.

Sure, let's go back.
You can watch home games for free and one or other games on Sunday.
You can watch one game of Monday,
You, you will be restricted to 3 or 4 games a week, on Sunday afternoon and Monday night.
And that will be free as long as your rabbit ears work. You might have to pay more for HD broadcasts.
THOSE were the good old days. NOT!
=============================
The rest of will pay for the ADDITIONAL games. We will pay for
games on Sunday night
games on Thursday night
and all the rest that the NFL and streaming services provide for sale.
Of course, this include paid options like NFL+ and Sunday Ticket.

XLIX said:

Really? You don't see the difference between free TV* and using 6 different platforms that we all have to pay money to subscribe to?

*Yes, some people choose to pay for broadcast stations, but anyone living near a big city can easily get ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox for free. It used to be one single game per week shown on cable TV exclusively, which was ESPN (a network the vast majority of people have access to).

If they keep ****ing us fans over, I have no problem with the fans ****ing back.

Um, no. That is not a natural result of losing the anti-trust laws.

Click to expand...

When was the last time you didn't pay to watch TV? 1990? Most people have been paying to watch even free broadcast television for decades. So no, I don't see much of difference. The amount of people who have been watching TV without paying for cable or satellite subscriptions is negligible.

You will be ****ed over far worse if this happens. You think it is garbage product now. Wait until you see the Pats play teams that can't even beat the top

And actually it would happen like that. Antitrust exemptions are the things that affect things like the draft and free agency. The Saudis could do with they did with LIV golf by signing big name players to ridiculous contracts and then force themselves into the league.

Rob0729 said:

When was the last time you didn't pay to watch TV? 1990? Most people have been paying to watch even free broadcast television for decades. So no, I don't see much of difference. The amount of people who have been watching TV without paying for cable or satellite subscriptions is negligible.

Click to expand...

It doesn't matter how many people have cable/satellite. It is still a huge legal distinction between free TV broadcast over the air versus streaming.

Rob0729 said:

You will be ****ed over far worse if this happens.

Click to expand...

No one is ****ing me over because if the NFL disappeared tomorrow, my life would go on unscathed. I would easily find a way to fill the autumn Sunday afternoon.

Rob0729 said:

You think it is garbage product now.

Click to expand...

I do? Where did I say that?

Rob0729 said:

And actually it would happen like that. Antitrust exemptions are the things that affect things like the draft and free agency.

Click to expand...

You don't know what you are talking about.

The Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 governs the NFL's antitrust exemption with regards to shopping out TV packages. The SBA has absolutely nothing to do with the draft or free agency. Those rules are governed by the CBA.

Rob0729 said:

The Saudis could do with they did with LIV golf by signing big name players to ridiculous contracts and then force themselves into the league.

Click to expand...

You're proving my point. The Saudis didn't invade the PGA, they formed their own League. The only way they could compete with the NFL would be to form their own League. They can't force the NFL to take on a 33rd team. All they could do is create a rival League. Good luck with that, Mohammed!!

mgteich said:

Sure, let's go back.
You can watch home games for free and one or other games on Sunday.
You can watch one game of Monday,
You, you will be restricted to 3 or 4 games a week, on Sunday afternoon and Monday night.
And that will be free as long as your rabbit ears work. You might have to pay more for HD broadcasts.
THOSE were the good old days. NOT!
=============================
The rest of will pay for the ADDITIONAL games. We will pay for
games on Sunday night
games on Thursday night
and all the rest that the NFL and streaming services provide for sale.
Of course, this include paid options like NFL+ and Sunday Ticket.

Click to expand...

no no, you're absoultely right!! It is going to be wonderful when more games are on streaming than are on regular TV!!

I can't wait until the playoffs are PPV!! And boy I sure can't wait to spend $299 to watch the Super Bowl!!

XLIX said:

With all due respect, you really just don't understand what the anti-trust exemption does.

Getting rid of the antitrust exemption involves how the League negotiates with broadcast partners and other sponsors. It doesn't get rid of the CBA, so we would still have a draft, salary cap, franchise tag, etc. (assuming all those things survive the next CBA negotiations in a couple years).

As mentioned above, the CBA does those things, not the antitrust exemption.

Now if the players union decertified, all those things would be in line to happen.... but you are confusing the antitrust exemption with the CBA.

Click to expand...

With all due respect, you do not know how the antirust exemption works. The antitrust laws are for broadcasting rights, but they also protect the league from labor law lawsuits. It also allows the league to negotiate with the union to get things that may not be legal without antitrust laws. It will definitely open the league to lawsuits from players trying to say the CBA is illegal. Some of the things might stand while other might not.

The CBA would change radically or go away anyway. Because the teams that have will not want to carry the teams that have not. We are destined for a MLB baseball system at best. When the Cowboys cut a billion dollar deal with Amazon and the Bengals make a $100 million deal with their local broadcast station, Jerry Jones is going to demand the salary cap and other things go away. Just like MLB.

Rob0729 said:

With all due respect, you do not know how the antirust exemption works. The antitrust laws are for broadcasting rights, but they also protect the league from labor law lawsuits. It also allows the league to negotiate with the union to get things that may not be legal without antitrust laws.

Click to expand...

No. Just no.

The CBA is what allows the League to negotiate with the Union to do things that might otherwise be illegal. There are CBA's all over the country in all sorts of industries that involve doing things that would normally be illegal, but are permitted when Management and the Union collectively bargain.

The Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 addresses the NFL's broadcast anti-trust exemption. If the SBA were repealed tomorrow, it would not impact the current CBA. The SBA doesn't say a single thing about labor law.

Rob0729 said:

The CBA would change radically or go away anyway. Because the teams that have will not want to carry the teams that have not. We are destined for a MLB baseball system at best. When the Cowboys cut a billion dollar deal with Amazon and the Bengals make a $100 million deal with their local broadcast station, Jerry Jones is going to demand the salary cap and other things go away. Just like MLB.

Click to expand...

MLB doesn't have a salary cap but the owners are trying to force one, so don't tell me what Jerry Jones would do when you don't have the first clue.

The current CBA would not be impacted one bit if the SBA was repealed. It falls under an entirely different set of laws. That is the last I will say on this particular sidebar. I cannot help someone determined to wallow in ignorance.

Rob0729 said:

When was the last time you didn't pay to watch TV? 1990?

Click to expand...

I believe that over 50% of homes had cable in 1990. It was about equal to 50% in 1989. So, we have been paying for a very long time.

XLIX said:

It doesn't matter how many people have cable/satellite. It is still a huge legal distinction between free TV broadcast over the air versus streaming.

.

Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that there are fewer over the air games than in 1989 when the number paying for games went over 50%.

70% heve PRIME, 75% for NETFLIX.

92% have access to the interner, 90% have smart phones.
================
Let's stop believing that TV broadcasting should be managed as it was before cable and the internet.
=========
Football games are content that we purchase. Very few huddle around their rabbit ears on Sunday afternoons.

What would the result of the trump threat to cancel the anti-trust exemption?

Would the NFL be forced to be 100% on unregulated streaming channels?

Compared to today, there would need to be a "Sunday Ticket" for the equivalent of currently broadcast Sunday afternoon games?

mgteich said:

Are you suggesting that there are fewer over the air games than in 1989 when the number paying for games went over 50%.

Click to expand...

There are more games today therefore there are more games under any category.

But fact is that if we look at percentages, there are fewer over the air games than in 1989 - and that includes the playoffs where you now need a streaming service to see one of the Wild Card games.

Plus, with all due respect, you're being awfully short-sighted here. The situation right now, circa 2026, is not what I would consider intolerable but don't be the frog who does nothing while the water boils around him. It is only going to get worse and worse and worse.

According to Florio, they're talking about putting SNF on Amazon. I'll be pretty pissed if that happens. Will you?

XLIX said:

There are more games today therefore there are more games under any category.

But fact is that if we look at percentages, there are fewer over the air games than in 1989 - and that includes the playoffs where you now need a streaming service to see one of the Wild Card games.

Plus, with all due respect, you're being awfully short-sighted here. The situation right now, circa 2026, is not what I would consider intolerable but don't be the frog who does nothing while the water boils around him. It is only going to get worse and worse and worse.

According to Florio, they're talking about putting SNF on Amazon. I'll be pretty pissed if that happens. Will you?

Click to expand...

Over half of US households have PRIME. What percentage of football fans do you think do?

Sunday night football would likely not even exist without cable and streaming services.

XLIX said:

no no, you're absoultely right!! It is going to be wonderful when more games are on streaming than are on regular TV!!

I can't wait until the playoffs are PPV!! And boy I sure can't wait to spend $299 to watch the Super Bowl!!

Click to expand...

I think that there should be guaranteed free access to the same percentage of games as before cable. These can be watched with rabbit ears on non-HD quality broadcasts.
============
I am surprised that so many of the 1/3 of Americans who don't have PRIME are here posting.

I strongly prefer the number and quality of games being available to me now, compared to the good old days of 1990 and before that so many want to back to, both in broadcasting and in league rules. Even then 50% if Americans paid to watch games.
=========================
Google it. Many more have Netflix.
Approximately 67% to 75% of U.S. households or consumers have access to Amazon Prime, which includes Prime Video. As of early 2026, the platform has an estimated 180 million users in the United States, making it the second most-watched streaming service after Netflix
===============
In the end, the NFL provides a product and many choose to purchase that product. Of course, there are a very, very small number of Americans who do not have cable or streaming channels. That is their choice.

Perhaps I should insist that Ford provide me with a free truck to use, and upgrade it every year for free. Perhaps, I should insist that ticket prices should be voted upon along with concession prices. Surely, buses and taxis should be free.
===============
We are not a socialist society. I expect to pay for those things that I want. Yes, I do think that there should be more provided by the government, but more free football broadcasts is rather low on my list of items that should be free.

With regard to broadcasting, we hit the turning point in 1989 and 1990 when over 50% had cable. When the internet became common (over 50% by 2001, we hit yet another turning point.

mgteich said:

Over half of US households have PRIME. What percentage of football fans do you think do?

Click to expand...

I don't have the first clue.

mgteich said:

Sunday night football would likely not even exist without cable and streaming services.

Click to expand...

I am not going to deal in hypotheticals. All I know is that for 20 years now, SNF has been broadcast on free TV.

Why anyone would support changing that remains a complete mystery.