[Ari @ Nov 21st 2007 12:43PM]

i know comcast sucks, and i pay an extra $15 to get an extra packages which includes HD channels for ESPN, ESPN 2, Nat Geo, TBS, TBS and a bunch of others, including the NFL Network. This channel is the best thing on TV. Sunday NFL TIcket is cool but not everyone has time to watch 16 games on a sunday, but this channel gives games replayed throughout the week, good coverage, and now the thursday games. I hope comcast doesnt lose this channel.

[rene siller @ Nov 21st 2007 1:33PM]

I agree with Comcast on this, and I'm a football fan. Why should the NFL Network be placed on a tier of channels for everyone to pay? Not everyone likes football.
Now we're all going to get screwed!!

[Jeremy @ Nov 21st 2007 1:43PM]

Oh please, that is the worst argument you could possibly make. What percentage of the population watches things like Oxygen, Lifetime, the outdoor network (horray we can watch the lumberjack challenge!), or the large number of spanish channels, yet we are all stuck paying for them. I find it hard to believe that these channels get more viewers than NFL network would.

[riggs @ Nov 21st 2007 2:10PM]

large number of spanish channels?

[Ari @ Nov 21st 2007 2:36PM]

a 'la carte pricing doesnt work. one reason is many channels would be forced to go off the air.

[TonyB @ Nov 21st 2007 2:40PM]

Yeah...I have comcrap too, and I get like 40-some hispanic channels that I will never watch... Comcast should worry more about the 5 days and 4 canceled or no show appointments I've had in the last week. They are the worst company,cable tv or otherwise I've dealt with in my 35 years of buying any product or service. THE WORST

[rob @ Nov 21st 2007 6:02PM]

Comcast is not dumb the people that want sports will pay the price those that don't will complain. When you look at the fact the NFL net is charging $.70+ a sub I can see why they moved it up, the costs would be crazy. If the NFL net would lower their fees I am sure they could get into a reducded teir. Look at what the NBA Network did....

[FourStringPhunk @ Nov 21st 2007 4:09PM]

A la carte doesn't work because a bunch of channels would go off the air? Isn't that the whole point of capitalism? You don't want it, you don't pay for it. I think we should all have to pay to get scabies.

[Ari @ Nov 21st 2007 6:29PM]

you can call it capitalism, but the truth is many niche channels only exist because parent channels keep them alive, even though viewership doesn't necessarily say its worth it. not all the espn channels are profitable but the main ones keep the others alive, so many are able to watch something which wouldn't exist otherwise. I'm not saying it shouldn't be a la carte, but there would be a lot of unhappiness when people lose availability to channels they want and they would regret it. alternatively many channels would cost 5 each per month or so according to a study i read and many people would end up paying the saying amount as they do now, but without all the options. i am all for free market choice, but instead of switching to only a la carte, or leaving as it is, other options such as iptv and computer tv options shold be explored.