If you didn’t think the NFL was king, yesterday’s news about the Department of Justice launching an investigation into the league’s media rights should prove it. It’s no secret that watching sports has become more difficult and expensive for the average American. From the NFL to the PBA, the simple ease of sitting on your couch and turning on a game now lives in the past.
Currently, games are scattered across both traditional platforms and streaming services. Even as early as Opening Day for the MLB season this year, the league didn’t announce where fans of many teams could watch until hours before first pitch.
What’s interesting about this news is what took so long, and why only the NFL? Of the four major sports, isn’t the NFL seemingly the easiest to find and the least expensive to watch? Which brings me to wonder: Is this investigation worth the time and money, or is it targeting the wrong suspect on purpose?
Last year marked a milestone for the National Football League. Viewership reached its highest level since 1989. Each week, the league saw double-digit percentage growth in average viewership, regardless of the channel or platform carrying the games. You can credit the adoption of Nielsen’s Big Data + Panel measurement as one reason.
However, there’s no denying that the appetite for football (college and pro) is at an all-time high.
Because of that success, the NFL is ready to do business. Roger Goodell has already stated publicly that he’s prepared to approach partners and strike while the iron is hot.
According to CNBC, the NFL is already in talks with the new ownership group at CBS Sports about increasing the price of its rights deal. Currently, CBS pays around $2.1 billion per season, with the NFL aiming to push that number above $3 billion—roughly a 50% increase.
Whether the reporting proves accurate or not, that figure reflects what the NFL believes its product is worth. Is that an unfair practice, or simply a business valuing its own product?
Plus, isn’t CBS traditional over-the-air, free television?
The NFL also partners with FOX Sports, NBC Sports, and ESPN/ABC. All three operate as over-the-air distribution sources, not locked behind streaming-only paywalls. The league’s statement following reporting by The Wall Street Journal emphasized that it has always provided a home-market television option for fans.
“With over 87% of our games on free, broadcast television, including 100% of games in the markets of the competing teams, the NFL has for decades put our fans front and center in how we distribute our content,” wrote the NFL in a statement.
Can you say that about the NBA, NHL, or even MLB?
Of course, the NFL has fewer games than those leagues. But the fact remains: the NFL is right.
I live in Tampa Bay. If the Buccaneers play on Prime Video’s Thursday Night Football, I still have a local option to watch on free, over-the-air television. I can’t say the same for the Tampa Bay Rays. If they’re on Peacock, I’m out of luck. The same applies to the Tampa Bay Lightning if a game lands exclusively on ESPN+.
Then there’s the ongoing regional sports network mess affecting MLB, NHL, and the NBA. If your cable or satellite provider doesn’t carry MLB Productions, you’re paying $19.99 a month just to watch baseball.
Is that fair to the consumer? Does that make sports more expensive to watch?
Hell, I can’t even watch most of WWE without a streaming service anymore.
Or is there something more behind this?
When it comes to politics, I’ve always focused on two things: timing and who benefits. The FCC announced its inquiry on February 25, just two weeks after reports surfaced that the NFL was “irritated” that its media rights deal with NBC lagged behind what the network pays for the NBA.
By the way, the NBA just began its 11-year, $76 billion media deals this season with NBC/Peacock, Prime Video, and ESPN.
Then CNBC reported on discussions between the NFL and Paramount Skydance, including the price target the league hopes to reach. Within a month, reports showed the NFL frustrated with NBC’s payments, the FCC launching an inquiry, and new financial expectations emerging in negotiations with CBS.
So, who owns CBS? Paramount Skydance—the same company that secured its takeover of CBS News. A company nearing acquisition with Warner Bros. Discovery, including the TNT Sports division. A company that just paid out a seven-year, $7.7 billion deal with the UFC. A company that has enjoyed favor from the current administration, even in public statements from members of the President’s cabinet.
Could the price of NFL rights be too steep for CBS’s new ownership? It’s a fair question—especially at a time when the President has shown interest in issues like giving Army-Navy its own broadcast window and attempting to “save” college sports.
The NBA doesn’t air on CBS or TNT Sports. MLB doesn’t air on CBS. The NHL isn’t on CBS either.
So is the NFL really the problem worthy of a Department of Justice investigation into “anticompetitive practices?”
A league that still provides free, over-the-air broadcasts of every preseason and regular-season game in local markets is the issue? Or does this renegotiation require outside pressure from figures with power? Is there a power play at work from a company aligned with leadership that could influence key aspects of a league backed strongly in Congress?
The timing makes sense. But who benefits from this investigation?
As long as the NFL continues to provide local markets access to home games on free, over-the-air television, nothing should change. The league offers more free viewing options in local markets than any other major sport.
This investigation will likely prove to be a waste of time. The NFL is king. Fans continue to show up in massive numbers. Franchise values rise, the salary cap increases, and players earn more than ever. Adding games generates more revenue in a capitalistic system. The NFL’s business model remains one to study.
At some point, this stops being about access and starts being about leverage.
Because if the standard for an “anticompetitive” league is one that still delivers the overwhelming majority of its product for free, in local markets, on over-the-air television—then what exactly are we measuring? And more importantly, who are we protecting?
The NFL isn’t perfect. No league is. But compared to the fragmented, paywalled maze that defines the modern viewing experience for the NBA, NHL, and MLB, it’s hard to argue the NFL is the one most out of line. If anything, it’s the last major sports property that still resembles the model fans grew up with—even as it evolves into the future.
So if this investigation is truly about the fan, it’s aiming at the wrong target. If it’s not about the fan, then the outcome was never really in doubt.
Either way, the result will likely be the same: the NFL will keep doing what it has always done—adapting, growing, and capitalizing on unmatched demand.
Because in a landscape where everyone is fighting for control, the NFL doesn’t need to fight.
It already owns the game.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
John Mamola is Barrett Media’s sports editor and daily sports columnist. He brings over two decades of experience (Chicago, Tampa/St Petersburg) in the broadcast industry with expertise in brand management, sales, promotions, producing, imaging, hosting, talent coaching, talent development, web development, social media strategy and design, video production, creative writing, partnership building, communication/networking with a long track record of growth and success. He is a five-time recognized top 20 program director in a major market via Barrett Medi’s Top 20 series and has been honored internally multiple times as station/brand of the year (Tampa, FL) and employee of the month (Tampa, FL) by iHeartMedia. Connect with John by email at John@BarrettMedia.com.