October 14, 2002
Getting rid of NFL Blackout Rule
I've always thought the NFL blackout rule was among the worst things in sports. Chris Isidore agrees, writing about the archaic broadcast rule in his "SportsBiz" column at CNN Money.
While I can understand how some might think that threatening to blackout a game may entice some to purchase tickets, is this really the case? I mean there is a BIG difference between wanting to watch a game on TV and in person. To attend the game live means shelling out $50 or more per seat (plus parking, food, etc.) and braving the cold and snow, etc. I'd have to be a pretty hard core fan to do that just because of the threat of a blackout, and if I were such a big fan chances are I'd already have my ticket.
But the casual fan, who wants to see their team play without breaking the bank or catching pnumonia, is out of luck.
I remember when I lived in Atlanta how the Falcons were almost always blacked out. I also remember how the city was so apathetic towards the team, in part because they never got to watch them play. Even the year they went 14-2 and played in the Super Bowl, it was nearly the end of the season before people got behind the team because it was only then that the games were televised.
The NFL really needs to change this rule. I just don't see the benefit. It's like making somebody buy a product, and then giving them a free sample when in the real world it works the other way. Lure them in with the free product (TV broadcast of the game) and then maybe they'll like it enough to pay for the game tickets.
Posted by blipsman at October 14, 2002 08:14 PM