microscopes

I also remember reading that 100% of games (or maybe it was 95%?) would have sold out it in the early 90's if the stadium was the size it is today. Tough to compare now and then considering we have 7,000+ less seats. ATTENDANCE was 500 less. But all the tickets sold. I'd venture to guess that there isn't a game in the NFL all year that doesn't have some people who don't show up.

I tent to be a pessimist but I actually agree. I don't think the scoreboard will be a blow out, but I think Pettine is going to rattle Brady something fierce. And I will enjoy it. That's because they're a shell of what they were. I'd bet they miss the playoffs.

I don't think this pre-season games says much of anything about what's going to be reality in the regular season. However, I do think this is going to be one of the worst Belichick-Brady offenses. They'll still score points and win games but not like before. You don't lose a perennial 100+ reception WR, a 51 reception TE, a 40 reception RB and have another 55 reception TE coming off back surgery and not skip a beat. Just doesn't happen. Welker, Hernandez and Woodhead accounted for 52% of Brady's completions last season. That's a lot.

Ok.

Ok. It seems very important for you to be right. So you can be right. I'll bow out.

Ok. It seems very important for you to be right. So you can be right. I'll bow out. (PS: We aren't talking about the right to the material or game. Were talking about the right to the feed)

This just in. That doesn't matter. Chuck Lorre production owns Big Bang Theory. But Chuck can't redistribute the feed from CBS without CBS permission. CBS PURCHASED the rights to that feed. If you transfer the rights to a player, you no longer own the rights. You do realize that this is why the NFL hasn't signed a deal with a major cable company yet, right? CBS and FOX have been blocking it. Google it.

If I may break it down for you fine folks: "So DirecTV will blow away the picture quality" (This means the picture is going to blow horrible chunks) "and continuity of picture" (This means the feed will crash often and buffer even more often. ) "and service that Google can offer at this point" (This means when you call Google to complain about the service you paid for, there will be nothing they can do to help you.) Roger doesn't need permission to have a meeting. He will need permission to broadcast FOX and CBS's exclusive programming, yes. This is basic law 101. You can't take a feed from a network and allow it to be rebroadcast without their signature on the contract. Which is why FOX and CBS sign all of the DirecTV exclusive contracts as well. I think the writing is on the wall. DirecTV will give up exclusivity. A cable network will probably join. Google will receive the Online Streaming rights. And I believe Verizon has the mobile rights. It will be all broken up.

Actually, I said the push and pull from the local data center would get logjammed. Why would a data farm get logjammed? Because without a cache to pull from, the ISP would get overloaded. And in that sense, Google can't handle it. They have no way to faciliate the exchange between data farm and ISP. Which is what has plagued YouTube FOREVER. Don't take my word for it, go ahead back up a few pages and take a look for yourself. The bottleneck is at the datafarm. Not at the local ISP. Well, sorta. But this is something Google has attempted to fix for a VERY LONG TIME. They still haven't done it with simple 30 second YouTube videos. Thats why it wasnt until a couple of years ago that they allowed any videos past 10 minutes long. No one here has been arguing that Google can't send the feed. No one here said Google can't facilitate the video. It just would not work well at all. It would be downright horrible. It would be 20 minutes late, buffering every 30 seconds or so, crashing often etc. If you go back a few pages, what started this conversation is the technical side of what can and can't be done or done well. Yes, ABC and FOX would not allow them to be the exclusive provider. Won't happen. Ever. What were talking about now is the technical aspect. Yes, Google can technically push a feed to your ISP. No one said that literally can't be done. It can't be done well. And there will be tons of buffering and performance issues and lots of crashing. It would be horrible. The Bills are capable of fielding an NFL team wth 4 foot 1 inch little people. It's possible. It won't work well. It'll be horrible. It's possible though.

"But that is going to eat up a lot of resources, and it’s going to be difficult to do much quality of service. It’s one thing to originate it and distribute it. It’s another to make sure that every peered Internet provider will get it to the home at a quality Google wants it delivered. I’ve always been skeptical of scaling live events, but I’m softening. Not because the technology has improved so dramatically — it hasn’t. What has changed is people’s expectation of picture quality. I think there may be enough people who will accept buffering and lesser quality." - Mark Cuban He literally just said exactly what I've said for pages. It will be slow, it will buffer greatly, it'll take a ton of resources, and the picture quality won't be great. LOL. Did you READ it???? He agreed with me lol. Actually all three of those facts have been widely known and published. Google. Its your friend. More from Mark Cuban. "They can do Sunday Ticket. But they have to anticipate the fallout, and negative brand impact, from fans who really, really want the best quality picture on their big screen TVs. While Google can handle the technical side of delivery, they’ll have the QOS issues I mentioned above. So DirecTV will blow away the picture quality and continuity of picture and service that Google can offer at this point. And every football fan will thank them if they keep the rights." Hilarious. I'm laughing my ass off thinking about how 26CornerBlitz didn't read the article so he thought Mark was agreeing with him. Hahahahaha.

As another poster pointed out, all of my posts are backed up in some way by a fact or a quote. 1) FACT: Fox and CBS will not allow Google to have exclusive rights. This isn't guesswork. This is established. 2) FACT: DirecTV said they will either go non-exclusive with their Sunday Ticket or not have it all. This isn't guesswork. This is established. 3) FACT: The NFL has wanted to go Non-Exclusive for many years now. This isn't guesswork. This is established. You just refuse to listen. Which is your right.

No. The argument is against Google, and online distribution. Re-read the paragraph. "The concern of CBS and Fox is if enough people were watching football games online". Online being the key word. Cable companies wanted to have the primary program plus online streaming. CBS and Fox said NO and the NFL said NO as well. Therefore, cable companies will not have their content online. This is because the NFL will most likely remove exclusivity among primary programming and auction off the online portion. My bet is DTV keeps their Max Online Programming in the auction and simply buys their share of the Sunday Ticket non exclusive primary programming. IF they could keep it exclusively with DirecTV, they might do that. But I don't think they can. DirecTV doesn't want it anymore. It's costing too much money and their membership among Sunday Ticket holders is falling due to the red zone channel. And they can't give exclusive right to Google because CBS and Fox would not allow it. The fact that you thought that paragraph had to do with multiple providers streaming the primary programming says all I need to know about your knowledge on this subject. No offense.

Yeah, I just let it roll off my back at this point. Actually, it's a very big issue. "Concerning Google: The concern of CBS and Fox is if enough people were watching football games online that were not available in their town, it could hurt the ratings for their local stations. Even though the ratings for a game watched on Sunday Ticket count toward CBS and Fox's national rating, a Los Angeles resident watching a game in the Washington market doesn't do their local stations any good. This is why the NFL has resisted the urge to offer Sunday Ticket to cable operators such as Time Warner Cable and Comcast who would be very eager to get the package away from DirecTV. The risk is that it would ultimately harm CBS and Fox and make them less eager to spend so much on football."

Hahahahaha. Wow. Yes, yes they do.

No they wont. Because no other provider will match that deal. The reason other providers haven't received exclusivity is because: 1) They won't give that amount of money and has openly said it. 2) Fox and CBS don't want them to have it. This is another example of you not understanding the economics of the business. They have no problem with it being on DirecTV because it expands their national profile without hurting their local profile. Google does the opposite. Don't believe me? Here's an article about it: "Concerning Google:The concern of CBS and Fox is if enough people were watching football games online that were not available in their town, it could hurt the ratings for their local stations. Even though the ratings for a game watched on Sunday Ticket count toward CBS and Fox's national rating, a Los Angeles resident watching a game in the Washington market doesn't do their local stations any good. This is why the NFL has resisted the urge to offer Sunday Ticket to cable operators such as Time Warner Cable and Comcast who would be very eager to get the package away from DirecTV. The risk is that it would ultimately harm CBS and Fox and make them less eager to spend so much on football." http://www.latimes.c...0,1393177.story

Wrong. The NFL has wanted to be non-exclusive for quite some time. That is no secret. DirecTV kept winning the bid because they were giving an absurd amount of money for a product that wasn't worth it. NOW, the ratings are at their all time lows because of the red zone channel. Now DirecTV won't give that absurd amount of money. And neither will Google. Because it makes no financial sense. And EVEN IF Google did offer that, CBS and FOX would most likely block that deal. Listen. Here's the thing. I haven't been on this forum very long, but i've learned in my short time being here that some people have a very difficult time admitting that they are wrong. You just have to give them the facts of why it won't happen, let them spew their venom, and go along your way. It's sad it has to be that way, but, it is what it is. Youre 100% right by the way. Correct. And CBS and FOX would most likely block any exclusive agreement with Google. Which would leave the NFL with the option of non-exclusivity. Which is something they have wanted for a long time. And now that DirecTV won't pay them that absurd amount of money, is something they'll probably HAVE to do.

That is from DirecTV. They decide whether they are willing to agree to exclusivety just as much as the NFL. Are you for real?

Further proof of non-exclusivity in the next contract. "DirecTV currently pays $1 billion per year for the package. DirecTV CFO Pat Doyle said in March that the satellite giant could strike a non-exclusive deal with NFL or dump the package completely when the current deal expires after the 2014 season. The value of the Sunday Ticket package has diminished in recent years, given the rise of the RedZone package, which whips fans around from game to game, focusing on the most compelling moments." http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/08/21/googleyoutube-could-make-a-run-at-sunday-ticket/ Well the fact that the NFL has been wanting to do this for years, and the fact that DirecTV said they are open to being non-exclusive in the next contract because the value of Sunday Ticket has dropped dramatically and is not worth $1 bill anymore and the fact that CBS and FOX don't want Google to have exclusive rights and they pretty much call the shots when it comes to the television deals.

DirecTV is already thinking about going non-exclusive and the rates are at a point of diminishing returns. "Last month, Chief Financial Officer Patrick Doyle suggested there was a point at which the company would simply consider going non-exclusive. On the topic of a potential carriage deal for the new Time Warner Cable-backed Dodgers TV network, White warned that he’d be figuring out cost per subscriber per game along with ratings and compare all the other RSN fees." http://www.nypost.co...FgI9GGmhcx2FLML Bingo.

That's exclusive for mobile devices. Not primary viewing. It doesn't matter to the NFL either way if mobile streaming is exclusive or not because of the low user rate. I thought that was assumed...

Absolutely. And they don't want Google. At all. "The concern of CBS and Fox is if enough people were watching football games online that were not available in their town, it could hurt the ratings for their local stations. Even though the ratings for a game watched on Sunday Ticket count toward CBS and Fox's national rating, a Los Angeles resident watching a game in the Washington market doesn't do their local stations any good. This is why the NFL has resisted the urge to offer Sunday Ticket to cable operators such as Time Warner Cable and Comcast who would be very eager to get the package away from DirecTV. The risk is that it would ultimately harm CBS and Fox and make them less eager to spend so much on football." http://www.latimes.c...0,1393177.story

Actually precedent may indicate that I am correct. It is no secret that the NFL has been wanting non-exclusive programming for a while now.

I really don't see that happening. The NFL cares about money, but they also care about viewership. It's not just about the money they get from DirecTV. The more viewers they receive on Sunday Ticket means more viewers who are watching the commercials on CBS, and FOX. That leads to higher dollars for the NFL from CBS and Fox as well. It's a big circle.

You're right.That's the only way I can see it. No way the NFL gives sole rights to Google. It will be split non-exclusively. I believe DirecTV pays $1 bill per season right now. Make it non-exclusive and sell the Sunday Ticket rights to any company who wants it for $150 mil per season. It is absolutely guaranteed that DirecTV, Time Warner, Dish, Cox, Charter, and Google would sign up. That's $900 mil right there and the viewership from your product is instantly quadrupled. I'm not sure what the downfall of that would be. I'm sure there is one, It just isn't coming to mind.

The stadium held approximately 7,000 more seats in the early 90's. The club seats weren't even around. It's much easier to sell out now then it was then.