Thank you Sportsnet for taking a pass on the CFL

I disagree with you.

Sportsnet is a 2nd Rate, American Lovin Sports Channel. they couldn't even afford to have 1 Canadian Channel for the longest time.

they're a joke and the fact they emphasize so much on the NFL and the Blew-it Jays and put the CFL down so much, I say good riddance!

Well, whatever, I personally can't stand Sportsnet from the gut and the last thing I want is to see them get the CFL contract and cover it 2nd or 3rd rate now as they do with most of what they broadcast when they produce the broadcast. It would leave me with an empty hollow feeling about the league I love the most, the CFL.

I don't mind watching NFL on Sportsnet when they take the feed and all of that from NBC, CBS etc. no problem but apart from that, what they broadcast produced wise seems a tad on the sleezy hooters side to me and I don't get that from TSN's productions.

Regardless what we all think of Sportsnet, and most if not all bad, the league has to use it as a negotiation leverage in order to get fair market value.
Unlike last time when Tom Wright made the mistake of not negotiating with anyone?
Negotiations is like poker.

Well in that case, seeing TSN and Sportsnet are competitors, why wouldn't Sportsnet just go in for the ride for negotiating, play a game to screw TSN to paying more than they should and then just back out knowing all along they were just bluffing? They then would get the laugh to see TSN pay more then they should.

No, I think Sportsnet is trying to make it appear the CFL isn't worth it to them since they couldn't do the deal to put on as a classy production as TSN and in the long run they look more lower rate than they do now. That's what I think.

It was so nice of Rogers to inform the public, with two and a half years left on the current TV contract, that they won’t be bidding for the next one. Sportsnet also didn’t bid on the last TV contract, which saw a 30% increase in revenue for the CFL anyways.

Rogers also made national headlines a couple of years ago when they announced they were canceling all CFL advertising and sponsorships. I forget the reason, but it should be painfully clear…instead they gave the Buffalo Bills $80 million to rent the team for 8 games…and their sponsorship of the NCAA International Bowl at Skydome. Little 'ole Canada doesn’t seem good enough for Rogers when it comes to spending money. But they don’t seem to mind collecting billions in revenue from hapless Canadians through their cablevision monopoly.

we as Canadians and CFL fans don't need Rogers Media.

we're doing JUST fine without them.

there are lots out there that don't use Rogers Media (cell phones, TV, etc) because of their stupidity.

Well I suppose we should look at the charity work Sportsnet is doing for our neighbours down south. Certainly they are having many problems there with the economy and such and it's nice of Rogers to use their Canadian earned cash to help 'em out. :wink:

I have always said it's too bad that we cannot organize some sort of a boycott and hit them where it counts.
For me I defenitely do not buy or have anything to do, except attending the Rogers dome for the Argos unfortunately, with the Rogers brand.

Sportsnet's website actually isn't bad for CFL coverage. They've got both Lefko and Brian Chu providing commentary, a better power rankings segment then TSN, and decent coverage of the major stories.

That doesn't translate as well to the network shows, but when the network has a couple hundred baseball games and zero CFL games there's going to be some natural tendancy to push baseball first.

On the one hand, people complain that networks, and the media in general, push hockey too much and football not enough. Then we rejoice when one of those networks takes a pass on the CFL. Slight contradiction, innit?

I understand the current resentment towards Sportsnet (and the whole Rogers empire, while we're at it), but I don't understand why it's good news that they're not interested in the CFL. Don't we want them to be interested? Isn't the current resentment towards them largely due the fact that they're not? If they were willing change their tune on the CFL, shouldn't we be willing to change ours?

Based on the quality of Sportsnet's sports coverage right now, I'm glad they don't have rights to the CFL, but them being interested in broadcasting it is better than them not. More competition gives the CFL a better hand when negotiating the next TV contract (a big reason why NHL broadcasts command so much more per viewer than CFL), and it should motivate TSN to keep up or improve the quality their current CFL broadcasts, not to mention the that having more "friends" in the media is good for the league, even if they're not broadcasting.

I hear ya PiCat and I agree that there was a bit of synicism in the title of this thread I chose, fair enough. I just don't like the way I've heard Phil Lind speak over the years in a condescending manner towards the CFL and Grey Cup, I'd have to check past sites for quotes but my memory serves me fine here. I'm not keen on this individual and I'd like to be a tad condescending towards him as well but can really only do that by putting down Sportsnet.

earl, you and I are both (or at least you were) on the Sportsnet Forum.

we both know how little attention the CFL gets in the Forum, compared to other sports, even the NFL.

Yes, I used to go there but not any longer and for a while now, I'm not really into a lot of other leagues than the CFL to be honest and with the NHL not having a forum at NHL.com, at least they didn't have one there, Sportsnet forums are mainly about the NHL.