https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/mls-...lub-storytelling-ahead-of-2026-fifa-world-cup Two of the four series will not premier on Apple TV but may end up there eventually (the press release isn't totally clear). I mean. W.T.F. You spend 5 years driving everyone to Apple TV, come up with a dearth of non-live action programming, and now that you do have some shoulder programming you're not putting it on Apple TV?
They want those coveted casual channel surfer views. You know, the ones who will naturally discover MLS content and suddenly become fans.
🚨🏆 NEW: Televisa-Univision has officially secured the Copa Libertadores broadcasting rights in the United States. 🇺🇸This is an important step towards bringing back Mexican clubs to the most prestigious tournament in South America. 🤯Via @mluiscastillo pic.twitter.com/sqBPiAvnjF— All Fútbol MX 🇲🇽 (@AllFutbolMX) May 13, 2026
Yeah that's what I was thinking. I mean, perhaps there was a wink wink nod nod type of arrangement that got telmundo to pay more, but it's not necessarily a big step in any direction
The BBC has got so cheap that they are showing one of their highest rated broadcasts of the year, the FA Cup Final, with radio commentary.
No broadcast system is as bad as MLB. They show random games on multiple networks at random times with generic network broadcasters. If people actually become fans, they can purchase a league package for one price, however* they can't see any of their favorite team's games if they are in that team's blackout zone unless they purchase an additional paywall buster, and even then they can't see all of their favorite team's games if they live in other teams' blackout zones. And heaven help them if they live in Iowa because six different teams have somehow decided that all 3 million plus Iowans are a such a mortal threat to their in-person attendance hundreds of miles away that they must be blocked statewide. (The nearest MLB stadium, Target Field, is 107 miles from the Iowa border.) I grouse about Taylow Twellman's babbling, but I think the MLS single paywall for all league matches approach is awesome. Yes, they can do more, but overall approach is a solid way to retain fans. *I just couldn't resist.
In fairness they carried the game on CBS SN: NEW @TheAthleticFC Paramount+ failed to load streaming coverage in the United States of Celtic v Hearts in the most anticipated Scottish title decider in decades. It had been promoted on the CBS Sports website yesterday.https://t.co/36cl8wiM4V— Adam Crafton (@AdamCrafton_) May 16, 2026
This is a fascinating observation: Former ESPN president John Skipper on the "dangerous scenario" the NFL is headed towards — where tech and streaming giants don't need an NFL package in order to exist. pic.twitter.com/edkqLqvgXc— Pablo Torre Finds Out (@pablofindsout) May 16, 2026 Former ESPN president John Skipper on the "dangerous scenario" the NFL is headed towards — where tech and streaming giants don't need an NFL package in order to exist.
Given the number of tech and streaming giants that don't have an NFL package right now and exist, I don't see how this is news. (Apple, HBO, etc.)
HBO got bought by Paramount. Which owns CBS. The traditional linear networks have increasingly turned to live sports for their survival. At some point live sports will become too expensive for the linear networks. Once they lose live sports what are they left with?
Why does ESPN treat the fa cup as an afterthought? The premiere league is a major selling point of peacock whole ESPN puts the fa cup final on ESPN 2.
The post doesn't reflect what he was saying. The traditional channels are over-paying for NFL. It's a loss leader for them. CBS is paying $2 billion and will soon be paying $3 billion. The networks are dependent on NFL but don't have the money to keep upping how much they pay. The tech bros do, so it's quite possible the next round of contracts will be steaming only. However streaming services won't be as dependent on NFL in the future as the networks are today. It's possible that down the road NFL asks for more more and the streaming services just say no.
Most Paramount Plus subscribers were not able to watch it on CBS Sports, because that's not in the subscription level that carries the rest of the SPL. I cancelled my Paramount subscription during the first half when it became clear they were not showing it, and found the game on another streaming site through the help of other Celtic fans on a reddit discussion.
I think the one caveat to this is that, very possibly, we are moving into a new age of streaming in which it somewhat piggy backs off the cable model we have been used to. We're already seeing plenty of bundle arrangements of multiple streaming services. Will streamers pay up for the crown jewel of content NFL to keep themselves involved in these future bundles and overall mindshare? Will they want NFL at a loss to make themselves worthwhile to advertisers? It may not go that way, but either way I do think we are still some time away from the point where the new streaming era matures, and until then, there will be some players desperate for NFL.
Rapids make a double sub during a replay, takes Apple/MLS more than 90 seconds to show sub graphics to let viewers know who's now in the game since we didn't see the sub while they were (correctly) showing a replay.
The NFL's current TV deals expire in 2033. They do have an opt out clause for 2029 with NBC, CBS, Fox and Amazon.
CBS Sports confirmed to The Athletic that the game was mistakenly promoted on the CBS Sports website as being available on Paramount+ and also that it was mistakenly visible on the Paramount+ app in the first half of the game, as it had been decided internally that the game should be shown exclusively on the CBS Sports Network — which is accessible not by a Paramount+ subscription — but by a cable, satellite, or live TV provider/streaming service login.
“You’ve been watching Scottish football on Paramount all year, and you want to watch the biggest game in a decade there? Ha! Go ******** yourself, peasant, get a cable subscription.”
Exactly -- thank you. Paul Berry, great pull, thanks for posting the note from the Times. I keep getting follow up emails from Paramount since cancelling, and on the most recent exchange I just copied and pasted the text of your post into my reply, as if they should need any further explanation on why people are cancelling.
I just want to point out there’s an English wanker of an announcer who is good for at least one “from whence” every match. “Whence” means “from where.” So when he say from whence he’s really saying from from where. But he’s got the right accent so nobody calls him out on his shitty grammar.