So You Don't Have NFL Network? Well NFL.com Has You Covered (Sort Of)

Thursday, November 29, 2007


It's not exactly the same as watching the actual game, but it seems NFL.com is going to do the best it can to make sure you're up to date during the contest. If you have an internet connection you can head to league's website tonight for what they're billing as the "the first widely available Live Online and Wireless Video NFL Game Coverage in U.S.".

Confused? I am too, but here are the details from what I can gather. NFL.com will feature a live studio show during the game consisting of Derrin Horton, Jamie Dukes, and Rod Woodson. They will show video highlights, answer questions from the readers, but most importantly...provide live Look-Ins during the contest.

The Look-Ins will come at :15 and :45 past each hour and occasionally when a team reaches the Red Zone. While it's not exactly the same as viewing the game in its entirety, it's definitely a great gesture for NFL-N to provide this to fans of both teams.

Other Features Of The Online Telecast:

- Live Stats
- A "Call The Play" Feature where you can guess the plays of each team
- Live-Blogging from NFL-N Experts On-site
- Information on how to get the NFL Network from you Cable Provider

While this seems like a great idea, I hope this doesn't turn into just one giant add for NFL Network. You can access all of the NFL-N fun at NFL.com/Live at around 8pm.

Posted by Awful Announcing- at 9:59 AM

19 Comments:

I have the Nuffle Network(it's part of our digital basic plus), but rarely watch it. Anybody want mine?

Bruce said...
Nov 29, 2007, 10:36:00 AM  

They did the NFL.com/NFL Network thing last week during Colts/Falcons. I liked it a lot, especially the live look-ins. Obviously, I wish they were longer, but it would defeat the purpose of NFL Network airing the games on their own channel.

If you need a basis of comparison to this coverage, I'd look to the TBS Hot Corner during TBS' coverage of the MLB playoffs, as far as what to expect from NFL.com Live.

Although, the one thing I didn't like that they did last week was profile the upcoming NFL Network games...like mid-December games during Thanksgiving.

Anonymous said...
Nov 29, 2007, 10:58:00 AM  

i have the nfl network (thankyou penn state cable, but no amc? fuck you) and aside from this game its only purpose is on sundays during the games they run huge stat pages of each game, useful for fantasy purposes

that and the epic combine coverage

Mike Georger said...
Nov 29, 2007, 11:00:00 AM  

I watched it last week and it was awful. It's basically an infomercial for the NFL. The live look-ins were few and far apart. The studio team put me to sleep.

Anonymous said...
Nov 29, 2007, 11:02:00 AM  

Hmm, good feedback. I'll check it out tonight during the live-blog.

Nov 29, 2007, 11:08:00 AM  

AA are you live-blog'ing off the Channel or off the Live feed or both?

Konck said...
Nov 29, 2007, 11:29:00 AM  

I completely agree with what most of you are saying. And it illustrates why the NFL is in the wrong here.

They're expecting cable companies to pay through the nose for a network that the average NFL fan will only watch 6 times during a 5-week span.

Notice that I said NFL FAN, not average person, there are literally tens of millions of people who (gasp) don't even give a shit about tonight's game.

And I'm sorry, but if you are watching the NFL Network from mid-February to July, you really need to get laid or get a life.

Anonymous said...
Nov 29, 2007, 11:33:00 AM  

I'll try to mix in a little bit of both konck. I get the channel but I hardly ever watch it during the week. I'm with Anon...the only time I watch it during that period listed is the Combine.

For some reason I'm intrigued by dudes running and bench pressing. Disturbing I know.

Awful said...
Nov 29, 2007, 11:51:00 AM  

And don't give me that bullshit, "You wouldn't have been able to see it either if it was on Fox" excuse.

If it was on Fox, the game would have definitely been the 4:15 game on the Fox doubleheader (instead of the Giants/Bears game, which would have been moved back to 1:00). At that point, the only people in America who wouldn't get it would be fans in New Orleans and Tampa Bay, and a couple of other cities because of the idiotic NFL blackout rules.

Anonymous said...
Nov 29, 2007, 11:52:00 AM  

NFL should get off their high horse and let the big cable companies air them in the digital tier packages

Nov 29, 2007, 12:30:00 PM  

What, you don't watch the NFL Network during the week?

You mean you're not interested in seeing a replay of the Cardinals/49ers game from Sunday, and the 1973 Houston Oilers highlight film?

Anonymous said...
Nov 29, 2007, 12:58:00 PM  

whats really bugging me about this game is espn keeps refering to it as the likely nfc championship matchup. just like the colts/pats was the likely afc championship matchup. what the hell is that? is there no point in the playoffs? i know they would prefer if these four teams were the only ones in the playoffs but jesus

Mike Georger said...
Nov 29, 2007, 1:07:00 PM  

I'll one-up you mike georger. If the Chiefs were playing the Browns, and both teams were 10-1, I seriously doubt that ESPN would call this the "Game of the Year III."

This is just another sorry excuse for ESPN to make all their football coverage about Brett Favre and Tony Romo (or the Cowboys in general)

Anonymous said...
Nov 29, 2007, 1:22:00 PM  

Apparently, small cable companies can air the NFL Network on digital cable. There's a cable company that serves just one town and only that town in the area in which I live and they do. My town, on the other hand, has Charter. They claim "we don't want people to pay for what they don't what." By that logic, take away the Golf Channel, shopping channels, MTV and such as that.

Anonymous said...
Nov 29, 2007, 1:24:00 PM  

That should be "want", not what.

Anonymous said...
Nov 29, 2007, 1:42:00 PM  

Even though I'm the guy who trashes the NFL Network and says it's their fault, the "we don't want people to pay for what they don't want" argument is stupid (generally I hate cable, but not in the NFL Network beef).

Virtually all cable channels are niche channels. Just for some, the niche is smaller. For example, I don't think cable should get rid of BET or the Cartoon Network just because I don't watch it. All channels have audiences, even though you're not part of it.

The problem comes in with the charges channels make cable pay to carry them. The NFL Network literally tripled and quadrupled their carry charges, strictly because of the NFL games package. The problem is that for the other 11 months, the charges will not even remotely reflect the NFL Network's actual viewing audiences.

Cable companies feel like they are being used by the artificial inflation of charges, and they are right (only in this case).

Anonymous said...
Nov 29, 2007, 2:02:00 PM  

I cheecked out the NFL.com thing last week, and I thought it was petty good. Granted, I woudl have raher watched the game,but this is nto a bad option at all.

Anonymous said...
Nov 29, 2007, 2:11:00 PM  

Tune in the Westwood One/CBS radio broadcast. We already know what Favre, Romo, and T.O. look like, anyway.

Anonymous said...
Nov 29, 2007, 4:06:00 PM  

If the Packers were 6-5, no one would care that this game was on pay television. Can't have it both ways people. Where was the outrage when the fantastic offensive juggernaut Falcons were playing the Colts on Thanksgiving?

Nov 29, 2007, 4:56:00 PM  

Post a Comment