NFL won't let church show game
Michigan
Posts: 4,942 ✭
in Sports Talk
INDIANAPOLIS (AP) -- The NFL has nixed a church's plans to use a wall projector to show the Colts-Bears Super Bowl game, saying it would violate copyright laws.
NFL officials spotted a promotion of Fall Creek Baptist Church's "Super Bowl Bash" on the church Web site last week and overnighted a letter to the pastor demanding the party be canceled, the church said.
Initially, the league objected to the church's plan to charge a fee to attend and that the church used the license-protected words "Super Bowl" in its promotions.
Pastor John D. Newland said he told the NFL his church would not charge anyone and that it would drop the use of the forbidden words.
But the NFL objected to the church's plans to use a projector to show the game, saying the law limits it to one TV no bigger than 55 inches.
The church will likely abandon its plans to host a Super Bowl party.
"We want to be supportive of our local team," Newland said. "For us to have all our congregation huddled around a TV that is big enough only for 10 or 12 people to watch just makes little sense."
NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the league's long-standing policy is to ban "mass out-of-home viewing" of the Super Bowl. An exception is made for sports bars and other businesses that show televised sports as a part of their everyday operations.
"We have contracts with our (TV) networks to provide free over-the-air television for people at home," Aiello said. "The network economics are based on television ratings and at-home viewing. Out-of-home viewing is not measured by Nielsen."
It is also the reason no mass viewings are planned in large arenas like the RCA Dome or Conseco Fieldhouse.
Newland said his church won't break the law.
"It just frustrates me that most of the places where crowds are going to gather to watch this game are going to be places that are filled with alcohol and other things that are inappropriate for children," Newland said. "We tried to provide an alternative to that and were shut down."
Other Indiana churches said they are deciding whether they should go through with their Super Bowl party plans, given the NFL's stance.
___
NFL officials spotted a promotion of Fall Creek Baptist Church's "Super Bowl Bash" on the church Web site last week and overnighted a letter to the pastor demanding the party be canceled, the church said.
Initially, the league objected to the church's plan to charge a fee to attend and that the church used the license-protected words "Super Bowl" in its promotions.
Pastor John D. Newland said he told the NFL his church would not charge anyone and that it would drop the use of the forbidden words.
But the NFL objected to the church's plans to use a projector to show the game, saying the law limits it to one TV no bigger than 55 inches.
The church will likely abandon its plans to host a Super Bowl party.
"We want to be supportive of our local team," Newland said. "For us to have all our congregation huddled around a TV that is big enough only for 10 or 12 people to watch just makes little sense."
NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the league's long-standing policy is to ban "mass out-of-home viewing" of the Super Bowl. An exception is made for sports bars and other businesses that show televised sports as a part of their everyday operations.
"We have contracts with our (TV) networks to provide free over-the-air television for people at home," Aiello said. "The network economics are based on television ratings and at-home viewing. Out-of-home viewing is not measured by Nielsen."
It is also the reason no mass viewings are planned in large arenas like the RCA Dome or Conseco Fieldhouse.
Newland said his church won't break the law.
"It just frustrates me that most of the places where crowds are going to gather to watch this game are going to be places that are filled with alcohol and other things that are inappropriate for children," Newland said. "We tried to provide an alternative to that and were shut down."
Other Indiana churches said they are deciding whether they should go through with their Super Bowl party plans, given the NFL's stance.
___
0
Comments
Actually I guess Michigan presented exhibit B. My bad.
<< <i>"It just frustrates me that most of the places where crowds are going to gather to watch this game are going to be places that are filled with alcohol and other things that are inappropriate for children," Newland said. "We tried to provide an alternative to that and were shut down." >>
Wahhhhhhahhhh.
Joe
<< <i>
<< <i>"It just frustrates me that most of the places where crowds are going to gather to watch this game are going to be places that are filled with alcohol and other things that are inappropriate for children," Newland said. "We tried to provide an alternative to that and were shut down." >>
Wahhhhhhahhhh. >>
Funny you say that, as "Boo-freakin'-hoo" was the first thing that popped into my mind as I read the article.
I'm sure Pastor Newland was going to pass the collection tray around.
He's upset that his plan to make some tax exempt loot off the Super Bowl went down the tubes.
There's plenty of greed to go around,
and there'll be plenty of praying going on by fans and gamblers alike this Sunday ...
"How about a little fire Scarecrow ?"
<< <i>I'm sure Pastor Newland was going to pass the collection tray around.
He's upset that his plan to make some tax exempt loot off the Super Bowl went down the tubes.
There's plenty of greed to go around,
and there'll be plenty of praying going on by fans and gamblers alike this Sunday ...
<< <i>What a total bonehead move by the NFL. An error by them for sure - somebody's head at the NFL will roll over this one. >>
What? It's a legal issue and they (NFL) are in the right. Good move by them IMO. If they bust others, but let the church slide, I'd be pissed.
<< <i>the law limits it to one TV no bigger than 55 inches >>
So is it illegal for me to have friends over to watch the game since my TV is 56"?
<< <i>
<< <i>the law limits it to one TV no bigger than 55 inches >>
So is it illegal for me to have friends over to watch the game since my TV is 56"? >>
Put tape down one side or take it off from widescreen
<< <i>
<< <i>the law limits it to one TV no bigger than 55 inches >>
So is it illegal for me to have friends over to watch the game since my TV is 56"? >>
Absolutely, if you charge admission. You can't charge people to watch a television show you don't own the rights to. Why would anyone be outraged that the rules apply to the church as well? Churchgoers are watching the game for entertainment, just like everybody else. They don't have any special right to be entertained for free, while the rest of us pay, simply because they stick "god" behind something.
<< <i>
<< <i>the law limits it to one TV no bigger than 55 inches >>
So is it illegal for me to have friends over to watch the game since my TV is 56"? >>
No. The key is mass out-of-home viewing. Basically, they started cracking down on this really hard last year because of the major Casino's here in Las Vegas. They threw some pretty big Superbowl parties and made a killing off of cover charges (the food and drink was usually included). Last year the NFL caught wind and shut them all down citing the same reasons they gave the church this year. Funny, nobody said a thing last year when it was just the casino's, whole country is in an uproar when it is a church. What's good for the goose ...
Scott
oops! edited to add: "mass" to the above.
T-205 Gold PSA 4 & up
1967 Topps BB PSA 8 & up
1975 Topps BB PSA 9 & up
1959 Topps FB PSA 8 & up
1976 Topps FB PSA 9 & up
1981 Topps FB PSA 10
1976-77 Topps BK PSA 9 & up
1988-89 Fleer BK PSA 10
3,000 Hit Club RC PSA 5 & Up
My Sets
<< <i>
<< <i>What a total bonehead move by the NFL. An error by them for sure - somebody's head at the NFL will roll over this one. >>
What? It's a legal issue and they (NFL) are in the right. Good move by them IMO. If they bust others, but let the church slide, I'd be pissed. >>
Well of course the NFL is "in the right" - legal issue, smegal issue, it's still a bonehead move by them. They should have just ignored this...I imagine now, whoever started this with the NFL wished they had ignored it.
On a related topic, I am surprised how many parents bring their kids to Hooters to watch games.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
In other words ...
We can violate whatever law we want to because "We're religious" and because "It's for the sake of our children" ...
Churches are making billions and they are exempt from income tax.
It's sickening ... but at least there is no child molestation going on there ...
"How about a little fire Scarecrow ?"
<< <i>Completely idiotic move by the NFL. The church wasn't going to charge an admission fee and they weren't using it as a draw for other goods/services (as a casino or another retail type establishment would be). Now the NFL gets a ton of bad publicity to prevent an event that would have had a neglibile effect on their ratings. Shrewd. >>
If you make one exception then everyone wants in on the same thing and pretty soon it is out of control. The NFL would rather take a one
or two day negative news story that will quickly be forgotten anyway rather than open the floodgates for future problems.
<< <i>
<< <i>Completely idiotic move by the NFL. The church wasn't going to charge an admission fee and they weren't using it as a draw for other goods/services (as a casino or another retail type establishment would be). Now the NFL gets a ton of bad publicity to prevent an event that would have had a neglibile effect on their ratings. Shrewd. >>
If you make one exception then everyone wants in on the same thing and pretty soon it is out of control. The NFL would rather take a one
or two day negative news story that will quickly be forgotten anyway rather than open the floodgates for future problems. >>
What's out of control here? So what if thousands of churches or other groups are having Super Bowl parties and charging a few bucks for them. This isn't some corporation trying to steal the NFL license here. Remember the Super Bowl gets money, repeat MONEY, from their advertisers. These little parties are spreading "goodwill" and other good things about the NFL - it's called good publicity. The NFL is making a mistake here. How big of a mistake? We'll have to wait and see.
The NFL is so strong right now perhaps they feel invunerable. I remember when General Motors probably felt that way as well, as with other corporations that dominated and started making mistakes similar to this one. It's known as "getting too big for your britches" and in this case that's exactly what the NFL is doing.
-
Joe
<< <i>Remember the Super Bowl gets money, repeat MONEY, from their advertisers
<< <i>So if 200 people watch the game at a church instead of 50 households, the ratings are lower and the NFL can't charge as much for advertising.
Joe >>
Small point but the NFL doesn't get anything from the advertisers except in-stadium advertising and a few sponsorships. They get a nice big check from the network and the network gets all the advertising/commercial dollars. The higher ratings gives the network the room to charge more for the 30 second spots (what are they up to $3 mil now). Ergo, they can offer a bigger check to the NFL for the rights to show the game.
Scott
T-205 Gold PSA 4 & up
1967 Topps BB PSA 8 & up
1975 Topps BB PSA 9 & up
1959 Topps FB PSA 8 & up
1976 Topps FB PSA 9 & up
1981 Topps FB PSA 10
1976-77 Topps BK PSA 9 & up
1988-89 Fleer BK PSA 10
3,000 Hit Club RC PSA 5 & Up
My Sets
Joe
<< <i>The NFL gets money from the advertisers based on ratings. As stated in the original article, "The network economics are based on television ratings and at-home viewing. Out-of-home viewing is not measured by Nielsen." So if 200 people watch the game at a church instead of 50 households, the ratings are lower and the NFL can't charge as much for advertising.
Joe >>
Your information is correct but your "conclusion" is incorrect. Yes it is well known about how the Nielsen ratings are gathered. And it is well known that increased Nielsen ratings means that advertisers are charged more for commercials depending on the contractual arrangements. Some ads have fixed rate costs and others do not.
It's not the NFL that "charges" for advertising. The media network that won the rights through bidding for these rights from the NFL, is who charges for the advertising. These bids are not based on TV ratings alone. The bids can be based on a number of factors such as age groups and other factors involved in the makeup of the viewing audience called demographics.
If a network knows that the NFL is receiving a certain market share based on the Nielsen ratings, but also knows that say thousands of groups are showing the NFL games which doesn't affect the Nielsen ratings, they will present that information to the advertisers accordingly, and companies such as General Motors are going to understand this as well and buy their advertising spots accordingly.
Again...this is a mistake by the NFL both from a financial standpoint and a publicity standpoint.
-
If the church was just going to have a few members come over and watch the game, I don't think the NFL would care. This was a fundraiser and the NFL has every right protect their rights.
Would it be OK if someone scanned A Purpose Drive Life and sold copies?
That is why you are seeing advertisements reverting to the 1950's style product placement. You are eventually going to see company logos on the player's jerseys. Basically Nike and the other shoe companies already do it.
The NFL has every financial interest to make sure as many TVs are tuned is as possible.
<< <i>Regarding the advertisers, I worked in the marketing purchasing dept at one of the big 3 automakers. In the past, the networks could present the "soft" viewing data like bars and parties to get higher prices. Recently that argue is starting to fade. The advertisers are demanding more data to justify the higher prices. How do we know that people aren't surfing the web during NFL games? Or playing video games. The same thing is happening to the newspaper business.
That is why you are seeing advertisements reverting to the 1950's style product placement. You are eventually going to see company logos on the player's jerseys. Basically Nike and the other shoe companies already do it.
The NFL has every financial interest to make sure as many TVs are tuned is as possible. >>
<<< The NFL has every financial interest to make sure as many TVs are tuned is as possible. >>>
Your own comment contradicts your previous point. That's exactly what I've been trying to tell ya. That church not showing the game is one less TV set showing the game.
And frankly, I don't buy your other point on this. Were you the one who negotiated these advertising contracts? The answer is "No" or you would have stated that - there is no doubt that this soft data plays a part in the price a network is willing to pay on a deal such as this. Perhaps for a declining TV viewers game like hockey or some other sporting event, the network would want hard data and hard data only. But this is the NFL.
And stop with the silly comparisions of the NFL and pirating DVD's or other nonsense. These comparisons aren't valid - we're talking about the NFL here. Get it...THE NFL - we're not talking about beach volleyball.
-
If the church doesn't show it, I can guarantee you that more than 2 extra TVs will be turned on as a result. Plus there is the copyright and fee issue. Churches don't have an exemption to violate another organization's rights.
Also you have no idea how the marketing buying process works, so please get off your high horse. If you don't think the advertising world isn't becoming more data driven, then you must be a student living in your mom's basement.
Anyways, lunch is over and I need to get back to my job. Have fun flippin' burgers.
<< <i>stevek - I find your comments self-righteous, which is typical for your posts.
If the church doesn't show it, I can guarantee you that more than 2 extra TVs will be turned on as a result. Plus there is the copyright and fee issue. Churches don't have an exemption to violate another organization's rights.
Also you have no idea how the marketing buying process works, so please get off your high horse. If you don't think the advertising world isn't becoming more data driven, then you must be a student living in your mom's basement.
Anyways, lunch is over and I need to get back to my job. Have fun flippin' burgers. >>
Another Axtell protege with the name calling when you're stuck with no other thoughts. And contradicting your own invalid argument is not the way to present a case. If you want to p*ss in the tall grass with the big dogs in a debate, you're gonna have to come up with better replies than this.
-
Joe
Laws are laws.
If it was your business you would have different point of view for sure.
NOTHING in life is FREE!!
<< <i>The NFL is exactly right.
Laws are laws.
If it was your business you would have different point of view for sure.
NOTHING in life is FREE!! >>
We've already been over that in this thread. There is no argument that the NFL was "right" - the question is whether the NFL was "smart" in doing this? The answer is "No" the NFL was not smart in doing this. The negative publicity far outweighs any possible financial benefit, if there is any financial benefit at all which I doubt.
If I owned an NFL team, I would be happy as a lark to see as many people as possible watching and enjoying the Super Bowl in any and every which way. I'd better stop now...I don't want to give Joe a heart attack while he's taking his Geritol.
-
<< <i>We've already been over that in this thread. There is no argument that the NFL was "right" - the question is whether the NFL was "smart" in doing this? The answer is "No" the NFL was not smart in doing this. The negative publicity far outweighs any possible financial benefit, if there is any financial benefit at all which I doubt.
If I owned an NFL team, I would be happy as a lark to see as many people as possible watching and enjoying the Super Bowl in any and every which way. I'd better stop now...I don't want to give Joe a heart attack while he's taking his Geritol. >>
I think that it was not only smart, but their (the NFL) obligation to do so. If you hold the church to a different standard, then it opens the NFL up legally for other similar matters down the road. It may be viewed as negative publicity to someone who has blinders on and cannot see past the fact that a church was not allowed to do as they please. If these people are true fans of the game, they'll be watching the game somewhere whether it's a church function or not, and will choose to do so without breaking the law.
<< <i>
<< <i>We've already been over that in this thread. There is no argument that the NFL was "right" - the question is whether the NFL was "smart" in doing this? The answer is "No" the NFL was not smart in doing this. The negative publicity far outweighs any possible financial benefit, if there is any financial benefit at all which I doubt.
If I owned an NFL team, I would be happy as a lark to see as many people as possible watching and enjoying the Super Bowl in any and every which way. I'd better stop now...I don't want to give Joe a heart attack while he's taking his Geritol. >>
I think that it was not only smart, but their (the NFL) obligation to do so. If you hold the church to a different standard, then it opens the NFL up legally for other similar matters down the road. It may be viewed as negative publicity to someone who has blinders on and cannot see past the fact that a church was not allowed to do as they please. If these people are true fans of the game, they'll be watching the game somewhere whether it's a church function or not, and will choose to do so without breaking the law. >>
Point taken.
Just to be clear in case it wasn't...my point of view had absolutely nothing to do with it being a church. Could of been any small group charging a few bucks to present the Super Bowl, and I would have posted the exact same comments about the NFL acting like a bully, which I still believe in these cases is to their detriment not to their benefit.
Steve
-
Any "large gathering" of people looking at one really giant TV takes away ratings points. Nielsen and ratings (though pretty much a joke when you get right down to it), are 100% mathmatical. Less tvs turned on, means less eyeballs watching, means less peple seeing the commercials --- according to the math used to produce the Nielsen ratings. The Nielsen ratings are the lifeblood of any network. They directly impact the price they can charge per 30-sec spot.
The NFL got a truckload full of cash from ABC and the other networks. They have both a self-interest and obligation to their customer (the networks) to retain as high of Nielsen ratings as possible.
It's all about $$$, pure and simple.
-Tom
------- 1960 Topps Baseball PSA 8+
------- 1985 Topps Hockey PSA 9+
<< <i> It's all about $$$, pure and simple. >>
That's what separates "Professional" sports
from "amateur" sports like college hoops and college football.
As to whether it was a bad PR move by the NFL, I think not.
If it raised the collective public consciousness so that more folks understand
that they cannot steal the NFL's product for their own selfish gain, then they made their point.
If it had been a sports bar they went after,
nobody would have paid any attention, and there would have been no national media coverage ...
"How about a little fire Scarecrow ?"
Let the church and their endless tax loops PAY for the right to show the super bowl, instead of expecting yet ANOTHER handout. The church in question was ABSOLUTELY going to charge an admission fee, named it 'super bowl bash' (or some other such nonsense with 'super bowl' in the title), and they expect the nfl to give them a break? Get real. And people wonder why anyone with a brain sees the church as totally corrupt.
The NFL is making a mistake with this move? No, they are INSURING that future episodes of this nature don't happen. And don't give me this crapola about how rich the NFL is, how profitable they are - they are that way because they PROTECT their interests unilaterally.
I applaud the NFL for bringing the hammer down on yet another corrupt church.
SteveA - Do you realize that in hell all you will receive is Detroit Lions games ... for all eternity ...
"How about a little fire Scarecrow ?"
<< <i>SteveA - Do you realize that in hell all you will receive is Detroit Lions games ... for all eternity ...
Good god that DOES sound like hell. One season would be hell...let alone games for all eternity.
<< <i>
<< <i>SteveA - Do you realize that in hell all you will receive is Detroit Lions games ... for all eternity ...
Good god that DOES sound like hell. One season would be hell...let alone games for all eternity. >>
Believe me when I say this as a Lions fan since birth... Satan wouldn't even dare to watch the Lions for more than a half.
Then they better start banning the Super Bowl from 60" plasma flat panel TV's...because I'll be at a friend's house watching the game on one with a ton of other people. (But if the TV police show up we'll be sure to turn the channel to the Andy Griffith marathon.) Seriously, except for diehard NFL fans or fans of the participating teams, who watches the Super Bowl at home? The game itself is rarely anything special - for most viewers it's a social event. If they estimate the number of viewers based on the number of TV sets on (without any multipliers accounting for it being a group event), then their math is waaayyyyy off.
When will people realize THAT'S what the NFL took issue with? It had nothing to do with TV size, had nothing to do with them being 'heartless', and everything to do with said church being greedy (as usual), charging admission, and calling the thing a 'super bowl bash'. It's trademark infringement and charging admission to view a broadcast of an NFL game without previous consent is, as anyone who has ever watched any professional game knows, ILLEGAL.
But because it's a church we should look the other way? Hell no.
Sincerly...............Proud Marine!!!!!!
(If you want peace, prepare for War).........Semper Fi
<< <i>That's why we gotta stop liberals, communists, draft dodgers and people too stupid to serve the country we live in (or at least support)!
Sincerly...............Proud Marine!!!!!! >>
Go take your right wing, neo con, church lovin BS to the appropriate boards - it doesn't belong here, blowhard.
(If you want peace, prepare for War).........Semper Fi
(If you want peace, prepare for War).........Semper Fi
<< <i>Still not done with you Steve and since your obviously inept and too weak to serve your country I want to leave you with one thought. THANK GOD FOR THE AIR YOU BREATH, THANK A SOLDIER FOR THE FREEDOM YOU HAVE AND ALWAYS REMEMBER THIS ....WORDS ON THE BOARD DON'T TALK HALF AS MUCH AS A FIST TO THE FACE. TeLL A SOLDIER WHAT YA TOLD ME AND STILL SEE IF YOU HAVE YOUR B&*S!!! >>
Did someone pee in your wheaties toughguy?
I wasn't dismissing the military, I was simply dismissing your blabbering, right wing BS for what it was. Thank 'god' for the air I breathe? What god? Whose god?
Get out of here.
I wasn't dismissing the military, I was simply dismissing your blabbering, right wing BS for what it was. Thank 'god' for the air I breathe? What god? Whose god?
Get out of here.
Look at johnny 37 posts telling who to get out of here. And the atheism thing is right out of the Axtell handbook.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.