MLB’s ‘blackout policy’ has NOTHING to do with the NFL’s blackout/attendance stuff.

Once upon a time MLB teams basically got to decide all on their own how far their team’s coverage would reach. They could pretty much sign up as many RADIO affiliates in as many markets as they wanted surrounding their own. The Reds, for example, was able to take up everyone south of them (because there was no Atlanta until the late 60s). Basically – teams just couldn’t cross into the another’s immediate city.

Then when TV deals became more prominent – MLB just left it to the teams to negotiate their own TV deals, and the affiliates that simulcast the games in neighboring markets.

It wasn’t until teams began moving to cable that this mess really started – MLB never adjusted their rules – they just left it to the teams to negotiate their deals (and never bothered to make sure those cable networks were actually available in the markets the teams claimed)

The once Extra Innings started – this policy continued… MLB has never bothered to enforce teams actually covering the area they claimed. And when there was a dispute between the network and cable provider – the fans get fucked.

(O – and none of this explains the MLB-FOX deal – that one is just plain bullshit that MLB lets FOX get away with0

/no way am I giving up the regional sports package.

Las Vegas is the home territory of six different teams from out West — the Dodgers, Angels, Diamondbacks, Athletics, Giants, and Mariners.

Should be Padres, not Mariners. That looked too weird to be true, so I had to look it up.

I don’t think I’d use the word “greedy”, though.

Timmy – Jeff Passan used the word in his article. Did you read it?

There will always be “two worst teams” that look like shit compared to the rest.

/Cleveland’d
//applies to all sports

/made sure to check it wasn’t a national broadcast.

i’d love for the NBA to lop off 2 teams and disseminate their talent to the worst teams.

There will always be “two worst teams” that look like shit compared to the rest.

Are the Giants still trying to kill the Athletics?

Ha. Yes, exactly. Asshole.

I don’t know if this is what he meant, but there are definitely some MLB owners who would not make decisions in the best interest of the game/league if it meant more profit. Fortunately, enough of the time, they don’t get their way.

Are the Giants still trying to kill the Athletics?

i obviously forgot the word sport. NFL is probably in the same galaxy, yes.

Every league makes money where it can. None of them are giving anything up because they have enough money or are not “greedy”.

I don’t know if this is what he meant, but there are definitely some MLB owners who would not make decisions in the best interest of the game/league if it meant more profit.

/glares at the dolans

It’s not a greed thing. It’s reality.

I don’t know if this is what he meant, but there are definitely some MLB owners who would not make decisions in the best interest of the game/league if it meant more profit. Fortunately, enough of the time, they don’t get their way.

i’d love for the NBA to lop off 2 teams and disseminate their talent to the worst teams.

who gets Carmello and who gets Lin?

Shots fired! Ossifer down!

MLB is a business, like any other, but is there another one as greedy as MLB?

Come on, Jason. We know you don’t care for baseball and you seem to enjoy trashing it when you can, but this is just silly. Every business, whether in the business of sports or otherwise, takes the opportunity to make money where it can. It’s not a greed thing. It’s reality.

i obviously forgot the word sport. NFL is probably in the same galaxy, yes.

Ah, well, some of the MLB owners seem to not be in it to win it, if you will. On the other hand, there’s Mike Ilitch, the Steinbrenners, etc.

I don’t think I’d use the word “greedy”, though.

who gets Carmello and who gets Lin?