The business side of NFL Films and NFL Network (1 Viewer)

[Jeff Pasquino]

Philly.com

A bit long to re-post, but I thought many would enjoy this article about how NFL Films, NFL Network, cable TV and the NFL $$$$ in general impacted one another.

 

[Fiddles]

.

 

[JoeSteeler]

 

[radballs]

The Steve Sabol productions are just alright. Their productions never influenced my attraction to the NFL. I've just always been an NFL fan and it grew as they intelligently marketed their product. But, NFL films was, not at all, a significant part of that.

Along with that, I'd much rather see a replayed game with the original announcers in a slightly short cut version and see every play, than see an edited-slowed-down-to-music game that only captures 10% of the plays.

Just my opinion, but NFL films productions does little to nothing for me. Now if it was a recap of my team winning the SB, I'd love to get a copy of that. I just think their time is done.

People want information quickly, and I think in most cases they would just rather see the game in its original broadcasting audio and video. NFL Network provides the medium to accomplish that. What else do you need?

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

The Steve Sabol productions are just alright. Their productions never influenced my attraction to the NFL. I've just always been an NFL fan and it grew as they intelligently marketed their product. But, NFL films was, not at all, a significant part of that.Along with that, I'd much rather see a replayed game with the original announcers in a slightly short cut version and see every play, than see an edited-slowed-down-to-music game that only captures 10% of the plays.Just my opinion, but NFL films productions does little to nothing for me. Now if it was a recap of my team winning the SB, I'd love to get a copy of that. I just think their time is done. People want information quickly, and I think in most cases they would just rather see the game in its original broadcasting audio and video. NFL Network provides the medium to accomplish that. What else do you need?

Wow, that's missing the point of NFL Films entirely.NFL Films' Steve Sabol is one of the best storytellers in the history of broadcasting, and I don't think I'm exaggerating. He can put together video and narrative to weave together very good stories - one you simply won't get from the broadcast booth.NFL Films was one of the first to ever mike players, coaches and refs. They can tell the story of a game from the field level unlike anyone else. What happened during the game to affect the outcome. What coaches and players were doing, and on and on.I can't really tell you how to "get NFL Films" if you don't get it. Either you appreciate it or you don't. But if you look at any NFL production that focused on the re-telling of a game, season or career in a 30 to 90 minute format, NFL Films did it - and they did it well.To see it being "ESPN-ified" is a travesty and a loss. That said, there's more to the story than just the current downward direction of NFL Films.

 

[radballs]

The Steve Sabol productions are just alright. Their productions never influenced my attraction to the NFL. I've just always been an NFL fan and it grew as they intelligently marketed their product. But, NFL films was, not at all, a significant part of that.Along with that, I'd much rather see a replayed game with the original announcers in a slightly short cut version and see every play, than see an edited-slowed-down-to-music game that only captures 10% of the plays.Just my opinion, but NFL films productions does little to nothing for me. Now if it was a recap of my team winning the SB, I'd love to get a copy of that. I just think their time is done. People want information quickly, and I think in most cases they would just rather see the game in its original broadcasting audio and video. NFL Network provides the medium to accomplish that. What else do you need?

Wow, that's missing the point of NFL Films entirely.NFL Films' Steve Sabol is one of the best storytellers in the history of broadcasting, and I don't think I'm exaggerating. He can put together video and narrative to weave together very good stories - one you simply won't get from the broadcast booth.NFL Films was one of the first to ever mike players, coaches and refs. They can tell the story of a game from the field level unlike anyone else. What happened during the game to affect the outcome. What coaches and players were doing, and on and on.I can't really tell you how to "get NFL Films" if you don't get it. Either you appreciate it or you don't. But if you look at any NFL production that focused on the re-telling of a game, season or career in a 30 to 90 minute format, NFL Films did it - and they did it well.To see it being "ESPN-ified" is a travesty and a loss. That said, there's more to the story than just the current downward direction of NFL Films.

The whole point Jeff, is that there are other folks that feel the same way. If the majority of fans wanted the productions that they crank out, there would be a viable market for them. NFL films are cool and they do a great job, but for me, it doesn't do anything to add to my attraction to the league. I'm already addicted to the action and I would prefer to watch historical games that include each and every play. If I want to skip over something, I'll use the Tivo remote to accomplish that. If I want music, I'll play it amongst the background sounds of the game. I guess I don't get what the huge deal is here. I also don't see how it brings new potential customers into their marketplace more than just sitting and viewing the game itself. Guess we'll just agree to disagree on this one.

 

[Chase Stuart]

The Steve Sabol productions are just alright. Their productions never influenced my attraction to the NFL. I've just always been an NFL fan and it grew as they intelligently marketed their product. But, NFL films was, not at all, a significant part of that.Along with that, I'd much rather see a replayed game with the original announcers in a slightly short cut version and see every play, than see an edited-slowed-down-to-music game that only captures 10% of the plays.Just my opinion, but NFL films productions does little to nothing for me. Now if it was a recap of my team winning the SB, I'd love to get a copy of that. I just think their time is done. People want information quickly, and I think in most cases they would just rather see the game in its original broadcasting audio and video. NFL Network provides the medium to accomplish that. What else do you need?

Wow, that's missing the point of NFL Films entirely.NFL Films' Steve Sabol is one of the best storytellers in the history of broadcasting, and I don't think I'm exaggerating. He can put together video and narrative to weave together very good stories - one you simply won't get from the broadcast booth.NFL Films was one of the first to ever mike players, coaches and refs. They can tell the story of a game from the field level unlike anyone else. What happened during the game to affect the outcome. What coaches and players were doing, and on and on.I can't really tell you how to "get NFL Films" if you don't get it. Either you appreciate it or you don't. But if you look at any NFL production that focused on the re-telling of a game, season or career in a 30 to 90 minute format, NFL Films did it - and they did it well.To see it being "ESPN-ified" is a travesty and a loss. That said, there's more to the story than just the current downward direction of NFL Films.

 

[King of the Wolfies]

I always liked the recaps, but they have zero impact on whether I watch football or not. I n fact, prior to joining my first fantasy league, I hadnt watched a NFL other than the Super Bowl in 10 years.

 

[Timberlend]

Throughly enjoyed the article Jeff. Really interesting.

Count me in as one of the NFL films diciples.

In fact i wish their was an NFL films channel. Cant count the amount of times I watched one of their documentaries & got goose bumps.

 

[gump]

Mr. Bornstein will not be around much longer if the owners start turning on him.

I personally blame fantasy football for all of this.

 

[Banger]

Borenstein is a piece of work. He can't see the forest for the trees and his hard line approach is being stuffed in his face by the cable companies. I'm glad too because the NFL network is not that great. I love football but the programming is fine for the 5% of fantasy football geeks but is waaay more than the average fan/non-fan wants/needs which is why it will never be a stand alone network supported by the cable companies under its current pricing model.

I know they want to become ridiculously rich (moreso than they already are) by using the same ESPN model but it ain't gonna happen.

 

[Wildman]

I grew up on the old NFL Films episodes. I thought in many ways the music, editing, and narratives, made football feel like an art form. Sounds silly, but for an 8-year-old kid that was some pretty powerful stuff. It made the players seem more legendary...other worldly. Even when I watch these clips today, it elevates the game in a subtle way. I like it and I'll miss it if that goes.

 

[Knight who says Ni]

I too grew up on NFL Films - I would be saddened to see it go the way of the dinosaur. I was especially saddened by this comment:

"The shots that people associate with Films, those long, beautiful, super slo-mo shots of a spiraling football, the NFL Network people hate that," said a league executive familiar with the situation. "It's too slow for them.

And then, for some reason, this bit cracked me up:

"In addition to the low subscription numbers, there also are growing complaints around the league about the quality of the programming on the NFL Network. Two weeks ago, the league put out a release trumpeting the fact that the NFL Network, NFL Films and NFL.com received 15 sports Emmy nominations. But 14 of them, including for last year's well-received "America's Game: The Super Bowl Champions" series, were earned by Films and the other by NFL.com."

Ni

 

[Pickle Rody]

The whole point Jeff, is that there are other folks that feel the same way. If the majority of fans wanted the productions that they crank out, there would be a viable market for them. NFL films are cool and they do a great job, but for me, it doesn't do anything to add to my attraction to the league.

I'm already addicted to the action and I would prefer to watch historical games that include each and every play. If I want to skip over something, I'll use the Tivo remote to accomplish that. If I want music, I'll play it amongst the background sounds of the game. I guess I don't get what the huge deal is here. I also don't see how it brings new potential customers into their marketplace more than just sitting and viewing the game itself. Guess we'll just agree to disagree on this one.

Seems to me there has always been a viable market for the NFL Films productions. It also appears to me that the NFL Network brass don't really care what the majority of fans want, they will jam whatever junk down our thoat that they deem $$worthy$$. Productions from NFL Films just aren't viable to NFL Networks bottom line, which is taking a beating beause they can't get past the cable issues. NFL Network makes more money when they spend less for highlight clips. $$$ is always the heart of the beast. Just because NFL fans might want something, doesn't mean we will get it, especially if the $$$ isn't to NFL Networks liking.

 

[Big Score]

Interesting snippet from the article Jeff linked.

"The network is of interest to a large number of people. But I don't know if we can force it down the cable companies' throats. At least not at the financial level we've been talking about."

Oh! and unlike Radballs, I do like the Sabol productions & they definitely opened my eyes to football some years back. If I want fast food football, I'll tune in ESPN, but when I want the story behind some of historys greatest games (even recent history - though Bornstein seems determined to end that) I look for the Sabol productions. As another poster said, they are of goose bump producing quality & to the this day, they continue to draw the uninitiated in & make fans of them.

 

[renesauz]

I have to say that I'm confused...one would think that the creation of the Network would have more then doubled the work of NFL films.

But then...I'm also very dissapointed in the quality of the network. I want it on my TV because of the extra games, draft coverage, etc., but the truth is that there is very little reason to loop total access at this time of year, and show the same (generally uninformative) show 8X a day.

The NFL is making a huge mistake here, IMO...NFL films is the key to the long term success of the NFL network...they are about the only reason I would even tune into it during several of the slower months of the year.

It wouldn't hurt if the NFL Network would lower the ridiculous demands they've made to the cable companies. Their content IS NOT WORTH what they are asking for!

 

[renesauz]

Interesting snippet from the article Jeff linked.

"The network is of interest to a large number of people. But I don't know if we can force it down the cable companies' throats. At least not at the financial level we've been talking about."

Oh! and unlike Radballs, I do like the Sabol productions & they definitely opened my eyes to football some years back. If I want fast food football, I'll tune in ESPN, but when I want the story behind some of historys greatest games (even recent history - though Bornstein seems determined to end that) I look for the Sabol productions. As another poster said, they are of goose bump producing quality & to the this day, they continue to draw the uninitiated in & make fans of them.

Very

 

[Fiddles]

the nfl really needs to end their battle with sat and cable

its obviously starting to affect them negatively

 

[GroveDiesel]

I have to say that I'm confused...one would think that the creation of the Network would have more then doubled the work of NFL films.But then...I'm also very dissapointed in the quality of the network. I want it on my TV because of the extra games, draft coverage, etc., but the truth is that there is very little reason to loop total access at this time of year, and show the same (generally uninformative) show 8X a day.The NFL is making a huge mistake here, IMO...NFL films is the key to the long term success of the NFL network...they are about the only reason I would even tune into it during several of the slower months of the year.It wouldn't hurt if the NFL Network would lower the ridiculous demands they've made to the cable companies. Their content IS NOT WORTH what they are asking for!

It's nice to see the daily NFL news and info and they can run that maybe once in the morning and once at night, but they loop the same shows over and over again.I'd rather see lots of NFL Films pieces about specific games, players, plays, coaches, etc. Let me really know who Marshawn Lynch is. Give me a day with Tom Brady. What makes Jason Taylor tick? I want to hear old war stories about all of the nasty stuff defensive players used to get away with. I want to know more about the history of the game.It'd also be awesome if the NFL Network had a show that really explained football plays and strategy more. I love football and know most of the players, etc., but I'm admittedly kind of lacking in overall playbook knowledge. I've never played organized football and would love to hear about different protections, coverages, etc. That's where the NFL Network is failing IMO.

 

[Jason Wood]

Certainly as a society we're moving toward micro-chunked, easily consumable bits of entertainment. I'm not going to pass judgment on that trend, but it's the reality of the digital generation growing up around us. With that in mind, I'm not at all surprised to see NFL Films get cut back; and while I think Jeff does an excellent job of articulating the role Sabol's crew played in making the NFL popular, that unfortunately should have no bearing on whether cuts are necessary in today's market.

The reality of the situation, as I've said for some time, is that the NFL hasn't come to terms on their lack of leverage with the cable companies. And for as popular as the NFL is, it's not universally popular enough to justify keeping in a mega tier for many cable companies. It's just not. The sooner the NFL accepts that, the faster they'll see that increase in eyeballs Kraft talked about.

 

[renesauz]

I have to say that I'm confused...one would think that the creation of the Network would have more then doubled the work of NFL films.But then...I'm also very dissapointed in the quality of the network. I want it on my TV because of the extra games, draft coverage, etc., but the truth is that there is very little reason to loop total access at this time of year, and show the same (generally uninformative) show 8X a day.The NFL is making a huge mistake here, IMO...NFL films is the key to the long term success of the NFL network...they are about the only reason I would even tune into it during several of the slower months of the year.It wouldn't hurt if the NFL Network would lower the ridiculous demands they've made to the cable companies. Their content IS NOT WORTH what they are asking for!

It's nice to see the daily NFL news and info and they can run that maybe once in the morning and once at night, but they loop the same shows over and over again.I'd rather see lots of NFL Films pieces about specific games, players, plays, coaches, etc. Let me really know who Marshawn Lynch is. Give me a day with Tom Brady. What makes Jason Taylor tick? I want to hear old war stories about all of the nasty stuff defensive players used to get away with. I want to know more about the history of the game.It'd also be awesome if the NFL Network had a show that really explained football plays and strategy more. I love football and know most of the players, etc., but I'm admittedly kind of lacking in overall playbook knowledge. I've never played organized football and would love to hear about different protections, coverages, etc. That's where the NFL Network is failing IMO.

EXACTLY!!!!

 

[GroveDiesel]

Ok, I got a chance to read through the article, and I think there's a bit of a math mistake in there. It talks about DISH moving the NFL Network from their Digital 100 package and the NFL losing 4 million viewers. But if there are 12 million Digital 100 subscribers and 8 million Digital 200 subscribers, then they actually lost 12 millions viewers, not 4 million. The Digital 200 package already had the NFL Network.

Maybe it was just worded poorly and the Digital 100 + the Digital 200 packages reached a combined 12M versus 8M for just the Digital 200 package. If it's worded correctly and the writer just sucks at logic and math, then losing 12M viewers out of 31M (or 43M if the 31M figure already takes it into account) was a HUGE loss to the NFL Network.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Ok, I got a chance to read through the article, and I think there's a bit of a math mistake in there. It talks about DISH moving the NFL Network from their Digital 100 package and the NFL losing 4 million viewers. But if there are 12 million Digital 100 subscribers and 8 million Digital 200 subscribers, then they actually lost 12 millions viewers, not 4 million. The Digital 200 package already had the NFL Network. Maybe it was just worded poorly and the Digital 100 + the Digital 200 packages reached a combined 12M versus 8M for just the Digital 200 package. If it's worded correctly and the writer just sucks at logic and math, then losing 12M viewers out of 31M (or 43M if the 31M figure already takes it into account) was a HUGE loss to the NFL Network.

Interesting catch, but somehow I doubt that DISH has 20M viewers in all, so it is probably just worded poorly.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Ok, I got a chance to read through the article, and I think there's a bit of a math mistake in there. It talks about DISH moving the NFL Network from their Digital 100 package and the NFL losing 4 million viewers. But if there are 12 million Digital 100 subscribers and 8 million Digital 200 subscribers, then they actually lost 12 millions viewers, not 4 million. The Digital 200 package already had the NFL Network.

Maybe it was just worded poorly and the Digital 100 + the Digital 200 packages reached a combined 12M versus 8M for just the Digital 200 package. If it's worded correctly and the writer just sucks at logic and math, then losing 12M viewers out of 31M (or 43M if the 31M figure already takes it into account) was a HUGE loss to the NFL Network.

Interesting catch, but somehow I doubt that DISH has 20M viewers in all, so it is probably just worded poorly.

Yes, I'm going with poor wording:Dish Network

For the year ended Dec. 31, 2007, Dish reported total revenue of $11.09 billion compared with $9.82 billion for 2006, an increase of 13%, and the company posted net income of $756 million compared with $608 million for 2006. Basic earnings per share were $1.69 for the year versus $1.37 for 2006, and Dish had 675,000 more subscribers at year-end 2007 than it did at year-end 2006, giving it a total of 13.78 million.

 

[Ranethe]

I grew up on the old NFL Films episodes. I thought in many ways the music, editing, and narratives, made football feel like an art form. Sounds silly, but for an 8-year-old kid that was some pretty powerful stuff. It made the players seem more legendary...other worldly. Even when I watch these clips today, it elevates the game in a subtle way. I like it and I'll miss it if that goes.

This is exactly how I feel, and have felt, about the episodes. Beautiful to watch, added a mystique to the game that I may not have perceived before, at least when I was young, and gave the "game" a stature that differentiated it from other sports.