I appreciate your diligence in coming up with counter points, but I'm not really swayed. My comments were general, not specific to ESPN, and certainly they are primarily informed by my experience with NBC, because the EPL is by far the most important thing to me. And you seem to agree that NBC/Gold has some of the shortest shelf-life for content at ~7 days (I'll take your word for that, I haven't tracked it... only know that old content goes poof pretty quickly). And you also mention ESPN+ may have a 30+ day horizon. Either of those cases is a severe limitation in my book. I'm no IP lawyer, but why is it that content that a provider originally broadcast in 2017 can't legally be replayed by them in 2019 or beyond. From a purely customer-centric POV it should be. You also mention that I should be able to watch any match I want to via Google or Youtube. Well, from my experience that's not too dissimilar to finding pirated streams on r/soccerstreams to watch live matches, and I'd rather not have to go through that hassle/crapshoot. How often have I ended up watching some subpar quality video in some foreign language from some dodgy "provider" who implores me to click their link or like their video? If the original content was on NBC or ESPN, it's way more desirable, appropriate, reliable and higher quality to watch a replay from NBC or ESPN, rather than some random Youtube source.