The NFL's broadcast antitrust exemption has been a topic of intense debate, with the Packers' official in-house website weighing in on the matter. The question of whether the NFL has exceeded its antitrust exemption by selling packages of games to cable, satellite, and streaming companies is a complex and multifaceted one. While the current model ensures that Packers fans living in and around Green Bay and Milwaukee will see all games on a traditional, over-the-air broadcast network, displaced residents and those who became Cheeseheads from afar have to spend plenty of money to see all Packers games. This raises a deeper question: what exactly are we doing here? The SBA wasn't designed to save small-market teams; it was put in place to ostensibly save the league at a time when it wasn't nearly as popular and successful as it now is. Yes, the equal sharing of TV revenue helps all teams. But the exemption was aimed at avoiding a reality in which the teams would be forced to let the market determine the revenue that each team would receive for their home games, and in which some of them would have to fold. If the exemption were to be rescinded now, would it really hurt the Packers? Although the market is small, the Packers would be in a position to negotiate a very strong individual package for their games. They're basically the Notre Dame of the NFL. A historic team with a national profile that plays in a stadium generally regarded as pro football's Mecca. Someone would pay big money to broadcast Packers home games in Wisconsin and beyond. In my opinion, the NFL and its teams are committed to keeping the broadcast antitrust exemption. Losing it would create a certain degree of chaos. However, I also believe that the NFL has exceeded its antitrust exemption by selling packages of games to cable, satellite, and streaming companies. This is a complex issue that requires a nuanced approach. The NFL has a tremendous product, and it's led to unprecedented growth over the past 30 years. A big part of that formula for success, however, is the parity created through revenue-sharing and a structured salary cap. The SBA gives small fish such as Green Bay, Kansas City, and Cincinnati a fair shake in this vast NFL ocean. But, what many people don't realize is that the SBA is not just about small-market teams; it's also about ensuring that the NFL remains a competitive and sustainable league. Without the SBA, it undoubtedly will be more difficult for the Packers to compete financially while likely being more expensive for fans who are accustomed to watching the Packers for free. So, it begs a simple question: what exactly are we doing here? In my view, the NFL's broadcast antitrust exemption is a critical component of the league's success and sustainability. It ensures that small-market teams like the Packers have a fair shake and that the league remains competitive and financially stable. However, the NFL must also be mindful of the changing media landscape and the needs of its fans. The reality is we live in a society where more and more households are cutting cords and switching their media consumption to streaming. Netflix now has more than 80 million domestic subscribers to cable's 55 million. The NFL, like every media entity, is doing what it must to meet tomorrow's consumers where they are today. No different than the challenge the Packers face with private equity money flowing into the league, they must keep finding ways to keep pace with these NFL titans. Losing the SBA, without any proper plan, would jeopardize that. That's why this is such an important topic to discuss. We'll see where Congress goes following the hearing this week, but this feels more and more like messaging to me than meaningful attempts at legislation or oversight. Truly a solution in search of a problem. What's most quizzical to me is why a member of Congress from Wisconsin, whose constituents can already watch every Packers game for free within the Milwaukee market, is thrusting himself into the center of this conversation? If the SBA goes away, it's teams like the Packers that would suffer most. Because make no mistake, Dallas, New York, Philadelphia, and Chicago will be fine. Without the SBA, it undoubtedly will be more difficult for the Packers to compete financially while likely being more expensive for fans who are accustomed to watching the Packers for free. So, it begs a simple question: what exactly are we doing here?
