The NFL world is currently trying to figure out how to maneuver through a complicated web of political traps when it comes to negotiating their next rights deals. And no franchise has more at stake than the Green Bay Packers.
At the center of the drama is a looming battle between the NFL and the federal government over just how many games the NFL should sell to streamers at the highest bidder versus airing on broadcast television. Naturally, there are political reasons why the Trump administration wants to protect like-minded allies at Fox and CBS and keep their NFL packages in tact.
But what may be a much bigger deal is a potential challenge to the NFL’s antitrust protections and the 1961 Sports Broadcasting Act.
The SBA has been the subject of debate in both college and pro football over the pooling of media rights. Some power brokers in college football are looking to pool rights together while the major conferences are against it. The NFL implemented it decades ago and the ability to negotiate as one entity has been foundational to the league’s success.
And that pooling of rights has helped the Green Bay Packers above all others. As the smallest of small-market teams, the pooling of media rights has allowed them to play on a level playing field with teams in New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. But with the House Judiciary Committee taking a serious look at making changes to the SBA, it’s setting off alarm bells in Wisconsin.
And incredibly, it was Wisconsin Republican representative Scott Fitzgerald who downplayed concerns from the Packers over potential Sports Broadcasting Act changes in an interview on WISN in Milwaukee.
“That’s absolutely ridiculous and almost laughable …that is absolutely the Packers going for kind of hair on fire, oh my gosh, the world’s coming to an end.”
Rep. Scott Fitzgerald on House Judiciary subcommittee hearing on Sports Broadcasting Act and potential changes: pic.twitter.com/fsYV7XDbdt
— Matt Smith (@mattsmith_news) June 14, 2026
Fitzgerald said that while he didn’t want to get rid of the Sports Broadcasting Act entirely, he did say that the NFL’s activity needs to be reviewed. He also called concerns from the Packers “laughable” over the threat to sharing revenue. Fitzgerald said that he wasn’t concerned about shared revenue and said “the Packers are going to be fine” in spite of the congressional investigation.
That assurance wasn’t enough for the Green Bay Packers.
They released a statement this week via ESPN condemning Fitzgerald and doubling down on the existential threat that any changes to the Sports Broadcasting Act would mean for the team.
“Packers fans everywhere should be deeply concerned that Rep. Fitzgerald admitted to giving ‘zero’ consideration to keeping the Packers in Green Bay as he explores upending the 65-year-old Sports Broadcasting Act,” the Packers said in a statement released Tuesday. “Fans should be offended that Fitzgerald then went further, saying our concerns were ‘laughable.’ What is laughable is that a congressman from Wisconsin is leading this charge. Why threaten the team his community overwhelmingly cherishes and its ability to compete on a level playing field?
“The tremendously successful model of pooling media rights and sharing revenue equally amongst teams has allowed the Packers to survive and thrive in the smallest media market in professional sports. This model is as foundational to the Packers’ existence as the very bricks in Lambeau Field. It is careless and unwise to rearrange the bricks of a foundation which has stood strong for over half a century.”
If things are getting this chippy in the nascent stages of hearings and discussions about the Sports Broadcasting Act, it will only intensify if congress and the Trump administration get more serious as this saga moves forward. So far the NFL’s push on inking new rights deals has stalled, at least in terms of public developments, but everyone is going to look to protect their own turf ahead of what may be the most transformational negotiations in modern sports media history.