[Hacksaw]

It certainly seems like they want 100% based upon the capacity determined upon the initial contract. (Some formula of seats and sq ft. I can’t remember.) And IIRC the Directv contract doesn’t allow a bar to directly monetize by charging admission.

I have never paid a cover in a bar.
The monopolies need to cool it or go down in flames.

[Kid Charlamagne]

It’s interesting for sure, you’d think that advertisers could reach a bigger audience on free tv and it seems the platforms like amazon will offer it to existing prime members as well as new. So which generates more revenue? I don’t have a clue. I do know however that I refuse to be strong armed into signing up for direct tv just to get nfl, and for sure I would love to be able to watch the Rams every week. Maybe I’m wrong but I think there’s a bunch of people who would pay to watch their team when they’re not on in their region, it doesn’t seem like it should be as difficult as it is.

[St. Loser Fan]

[snackdaddy]

I have a 4K TV. I never noticed difference with last year's Superbowl. Is it that big a deal? I know a lot of people are using their phones for everything. Does it make a difference on a mobile device?

[St. Loser Fan]

I have a 4K TV. I never noticed difference with last year's Superbowl. Is it that big a deal? I know a lot of people are using their phones for everything. Does it make a difference on a mobile device?

You had to have the right equipment to get last year's Super Bowl in 4K HDR. IIRC it was only via the Fox Sports app and some devices like Roku and Amazon Fire devices.

Plus it wasn't "native" 4K: just 1080p and then upscaled.

I've only seen one live sports event in 4K HDR and it was an NHL game with the Vegas Golden Knights. It was certainly nicer, but wasn't anything stunning/jawdropping. However the puck was more visible.

[snackdaddy]

You had to have the right equipment to get last year's Super Bowl in 4K HDR. IIRC it was only via the Fox Sports app and some devices like Roku and Amazon Fire devices.

Plus it wasn't "native" 4K: just 1080p and then upscaled.

I've only seen one live sports event in 4K HDR and it was an NHL game with the Vegas Golden Knights. It was certainly nicer, but wasn't anything stunning/jawdropping. However the puck was more visible.

Were there fights? Did they have to get the puck outta there?

[Elvis]

Not exactly NFL related, but:

[St. Loser Fan]

Not exactly NFL related, but:

Sounds like they want to push most NHL to Peacock streaming. Then maybe Stanley Cup games to USA.

I notice they’d already pushed a bunch of the Premier League games to Peacock.

Anyone old enough to remember when USA had a lot of sports back in the 80’s? Including USFL games?

[aeneas1]

I have a 4K TV. I never noticed difference with last year's Superbowl. Is it that big a deal? I know a lot of people are using their phones for everything. Does it make a difference on a mobile device?

4k by itself isn't a game changer, especially on smaller devices, especially depending on your viewing distance, the real game changer is hdr (high dynamic range), it can be beyond stunning.. thing is hdr is not 4k dependent, it can be accomplished with 1080p as well, but the technology coincided with 4k development so 4k and hdr were rolled out together... samsung and sony talked about offering hdr with their 1080p tvs, but 4k tvs became so popular so fast, no one was buying 1080p when it was time to buy a new tv, so they scrapped the idea... anyway, point is, if they can figure out a way to really take advantage of hdr with nfl broadcasts, it would be really cool.

[majik]

Sounds like they want to push most NHL to Peacock streaming. Then maybe Stanley Cup games to USA.

I notice they’d already pushed a bunch of the Premier League games to Peacock.

Anyone old enough to remember when USA had a lot of sports back in the 80’s? Including USFL games?

Loved the USFL.