Maybe...  Do they send it to me in a cheque or just credit the $4.99 on my bill?

Yes limited in coverage. TSN is a pay service, and is not included in basic cable packages, so no it is not available on every platform.  Why is NHL Hockey Night in Canada is still on CBC?  Because CBC is available OTA and more people than you would think don't subscribe to Sportsnet.   So coverage on TSN is limited and of course not available OTA.

Actually Rogers would be absolutely losing their shirt with the NHL hockey deal if it wasn't for the coverage provided by CBC. They are losing money as it is, but if the CBC coverage wasn't there for the regular season and playoffs, it would have been a complete  financial and ratings disaster so far.  That's why the arrangement with CBC was extended until 2026, to coincide with the end of the Rogers NHL contract.

paterson1 wrote:

Yes limited in coverage. TSN is a pay service, and is not included in basic cable packages, so no it is not available on every platform. 

"Platform" as it's available on cable, satellite, IPtv, paypass (daily/monthly). So, yes, it is on every platform. Whether you subscribe and pay is your choice.
 

It is your choice to pay or not, but you are also paying for something that used to be available at no extra cost. So in that respect it is limited. And the proof of this as I have already mentioned, is the arrangement with Rogers and CBC for NHL hockey.  CBC is more accessible to more people than Sportsnet.  If CBC and Sportsnet were equal why did Rogers extend the agreement until the end of their NHL contract? And why would the agreement include the playoffs and Stanley Cup on CBC? The ratings and coverage are always better when you include an over the air partner, rather than just relying on pay services. It would have been suicide for Rogers financially and as a business if they didn't have a national OTA partner for the NHL hockey contract.

TheConsultant wrote:

Very simple answer: live sports is almost cord-cutter proof. Sports is in the unique position of being the main reason don't take that final step. Paying piecemeal for sports is almost always more hassle and cost than just staying with cable.

As for the rest of the CBC/Sportsnet/NHL "rationalization"... Huh?

CBC, CTV, Global are more accessible to more people and homes than Sportsnet or TSN, and at no extra cost.

This is why NHL hockey is still on CBC since they reach more homes than Sportsnet, . The original deal was for three years partnering with CBC, but in 2017 Rogers and CBC agreed to an extension until the end of the Rogers/NHL contract to 2026. Even with the limited coverage of Rogers City tv and Omni channels, Hockey Night in Canada would not have the ratings without the CBC.

And getting back to my original comment, as good as the TSN/RDS/CFL agreement has been for both the network and league, I am not sure that the extended TSN deal to 2026 will give the CFL enough TV exposure.  Ideally if there had been a secondary component with either CTV, CBC or Global would be the best for the league and viewers.  

cash wrote:

I will be watching the Dallas-New England game on CTV. 

Good for you cash, enjoy. I'll be pulling for Hamilton later today.

To me there's no better example of corporate greed than the NFL being on free TV and the CFL not being on free TV.

The sim sub is more important than televising the more relevant game to the biggest audience.

CFL viewership overall is fine, so it is not really a ratings issue for OTA. The Grey Cup will have the largest ratings this week on Numeris. . And this is with no other network or OTA coverage.  One of the few times that TSN will have the number one program in the country.

The issue is that the CFL TV deal is exclusive to TSN and RDS. The new contract is for $50 million per year until 2026. And could be worth even more depending how the league does for ratings in the years ahead. TSN is spending big bucks for the exclusive TV rights in Canada.  

So I can see why the CFL has this agreement, it is good for both parties. However looking at the big picture there is no doubt that the CFL would do a better job expanding it's fan base if there was an over the air component in the schedule as well. There isn't and won't be any chance of any OTA coverage until after 2026. 

Actually broadcast rights for sports in Canada will be very interesting in a few years.  Rogers hockey deal finishes in 2026, as does the CFL TV deal, and the CBC's olympic contract ends after the 2024 olympics.

I think we will see some very interesting broadcasting alliances coming up in the years ahead. Doubt very much that Rogers will ever sign another NHL deal like the current contract, since ratings haven't been the best and they apparently are losing money on the deal.  CBC already has a good relationship with TSN and Sportsnet, but I am sure Bell Media will make a play for olympic coverage in a few years, and that would be a major blow for CBC if they get out bid by Bell.

The CFL should spread their rights around. The CBC should have a weekly game, not that I would watch minor league football. 

paterson1 wrote:

[And the reason there was not an OTA component initially was not really ratings based but because the deal was exclusive to TSN and RDS. And TSN paid big money for this.

Bell paid big money for it, not TSN. Bell has the leverage to decide which league is OTA is which is TSN.  Bell decided, all in, NFL gets them (and will get them, regardless of promotion) more ratings than CFL.

The overall ratings for every weekend NFL game on CTV are bigger in total than the Superbowl itself. Overall, regular season plus championship game for both leagues -- NFL is bigger by a long shot. That's why the whole package is OTA and CFL is not.

Last year's Grey Cup was #3 in Toronto, and it all looks worse if you go 18-49. There's no reason for this game to be OTA on a commercial network - never mind the regular season.
 

Last edited by RadioAaron (November 24, 2019 8:14 pm)

Packers-49ers 

Last edited by cash (November 24, 2019 9:19 pm)

The good thing about the Grey Cup being over is that I will hear absolutely nothing about the CFL until next June. 

Kilgore wrote:

This thread began w. a comment that Canadians should be able to catch the CFL championship with an OTA antenna, then attracted comment to the effect that "free" is still too expensive for Cdn football.     Personally I thought the Hamilton/Winnipeg game was at least as entertaining as the NFL's Buffalo/Denver match earlier in the afternoon.  

Yes I agree. Regardless what some feel, there is nothing wrong about the quality of the CFL. It's just different than the NFL.   Yesterday's Grey Cup was average, not the most exciting, but not a snore fest either. Great that they had two teams playing that hadn't won a title in a long time. Congrats to Winnipeg!  The CFL has problems marketing, particularly in the GTA.

I find generally Canadian media and in this case the CFL aren't the best at promoting and marketing their league.  The NFL is the best, and are so good at selling the sizzle and hype of their product that at times the actual game (Super Bowl) is not  the main draw for many viewers. The Super Bowl commercials, tailgating and half time show often are as much of an attraction as the game itself. And whatever network in the US that carries the Super Bowl is far superior to any Canadian media in terms of production and promotion.   Last year's Super Bowl was a boring game, but actually it didn't really matter overall since the whole production, commercials and half time show carried the day. 

Last edited by paterson1 (November 25, 2019 9:05 am)