The NFL remains the undisputed heavyweight of American live sports, but even the mightiest can stumble if they're not careful. With the league diving deeper into streaming partnerships with Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, and YouTube, a growing chorus of voices is urging the NFL to pump the brakes and rethink its media strategy.
In a recent episode of John Ourand's podcast, The Athletic's Andrew Marchand delivered a blunt warning: the NFL is playing with fire. Marchand argued that while the league's current deals with streaming giants might seem lucrative, they could ultimately undermine the very foundation that made the NFL a ratings juggernaut.
“I would say that the NFL has to be careful as they go forward, you know, forgetting all the government noise. I just think that the power the NFL has over the networks is important for them long term,” Marchand said, as transcribed by Awful Announcing. “I think it helps the NFL to be on broadcast. The numbers are still there. You know, maybe eventually Amazon Prime or Netflix or someone can deliver bigger numbers. We have not seen that yet.”
The warning comes on the heels of a Wall Street Journal report that the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating whether the NFL has engaged in anticompetitive practices through its streaming deals. Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) pointed out that fans now need nearly $1,000 in cable and streaming subscriptions just to watch every game. That kind of financial burden has sparked scrutiny from regulators and lawmakers alike.
Marchand believes that if the NFL shifts too much of its inventory to streaming, it risks leaving itself vulnerable. “I think it helps the NFL to be on broadcast. The numbers are still there,” he said. “You go five, ten, 15 years out and you kind of essentially ruin the broadcast networks because you charged them too much or they had to relinquish the NFL because the streamers were willing to pay more. I just think you're leaving yourself in a little bit of a precarious situation that YouTube, Amazon and whoever else, Netflix, that they're always just going to pay, because they don't necessarily need it. And so they could one day just decide we don't want it. And then where are you?”
The NFL, however, sees no cause for alarm. Hans Schroeder, the league's executive vice president of media distribution, recently told The Athletic that the NFL “loves” its current hybrid model. “We think broadcast [networks] have been an incredible home,” Schroeder said. “And, now, we also know fans are increasingly spending their time on other platforms as well. They tune into broadcast for the NFL and that's where we want to be. But we also want to be on these platforms with a limited amount of our games where we know our NFL fans are already as well.”
For now, the numbers back up the broadcast-first approach. Networks like ABC, CBS, FOX, and NBC still televise a staggering 87% of NFL games. Meanwhile, streaming-only broadcasts have yet to match those traditional ratings. The FCC chair has recently backtracked on predictions of sweeping changes to sports TV, suggesting that the old guard isn't going anywhere soon.
Still, the NFL is in uncharted territory. As Stephen A. Smith recently warned another sports figure, the word “careful” carries weight. The league may need to balance its appetite for streaming revenue with the long-term health of the broadcast ecosystem that made it a national obsession.
Whether the NFL heeds Marchand's advice or continues its streaming push, one thing is clear: the game of media rights is just as competitive as anything that happens on the field.
