For the first time in 26 years (that's right, first time in my lifetime) the Brew Crew is going to the playoffs!
Love it, love it, love it, love it, love it.
But, I hate that I had to watch the FSN camera focus on Miller Park's jumbotron in order to watch end of the Mets game. Intellectual property? Broadcast ownership? Though television stations may argue over who has the right to broadcast a professional sports game, why must the fans suffer for these disagreements? The leagues would not exist without fans spending money on tickets, merchandise, and concessions. Without the cash flow, there would be no games, without the games there would be no broadcast, without the broadcast the stations would not receive advertising dollars.
This is a logical cause and effect argument, correct? Or am I just biased in favor of the fans?
Editor's Note 10/3/08: Currently there is a scuffle taking place in Green Bay, WI between Time Warner Cable and Channel 11, the local Fox affiliate. Fox's contract with Time Warner Cable is up, and renegotiations have resulted in a stalemate, which has left Green Bay Packer's fans unable to watch the football game on basic cable. Time Warner is handing out antenna's to disgruntled fans (in an effort to not lose cable customers over this, I am sure), until the dispute is resolved. If you have basic cable and tune into to Fox, you will see that Time Warner is providing a premium cable channel for your viewing pleasure. At the bottom of the screen they are scrolling a message that says, until Fox ends the argument, in which Time Warner has been nothing but courteous, Time Warner will be gracious enough to provide this premium channel to its customers. Now, that's a clever strategy to gain public approval!