Sports fans are simple people. They love their teams, players, and the escape that sports provides. It’s a simple concept. Come home, have a meal, and watch their team. Sports’ greatest attribute is entertainment. Without question, there are more options for entertainment today than ever before. That is why streaming platforms have found so much success in providing content that cable companies or networks could never offer.
However, sports are different. They have historically been a cable or network television property. I remember WGN carrying nearly every Chicago Cubs game when I was a child. Every time I would go see my grandfather and he’d watch a game, he’d yell from the other room, “Put on channel 9.”
That’s what sports are forgetting. Games are entertainment, and history matters. Sports educated generations of fans on where they’ll be, how they’re presented, and how much they cost. In the last six months, sports have forgotten that, and it’s beginning to cost them, especially with so many other entertainment options now available.
Last Thursday was Major League Baseball’s Opening Day, following a much-promoted, hyped, and overproduced evening debut on Netflix. What better way to celebrate the start of a new season than asking baseball fans to pay additional money to watch it?
Then came the morning. The breeze in the air signaled that spring had finally arrived. The boys of summer were about to begin their 162-game journey toward postseason glory. The rosters set, and stadiums across the country were ready to open their gates. Yet one question remained: Where do I watch the games?
As of the morning of Opening Day, Major League Baseball had yet to inform fans in a majority of its markets where to watch games. For nearly a month, teams under MLB’s umbrella told fans to buy (insert team name here).tv so they wouldn’t miss a second of the action. However, that messaging failed to include cable, satellite, and internet TV providers that had yet to be announced.
In the end, MLB spring games were not watched nearly as much as in the past for many fans. At the two spring games I attended the weekend before the season started, countless fans I spoke with had no idea how to watch their team on Opening Day. Outside of paying more money, that seemed to be the only option. Many said it wasn’t right to pay for a service and then pay extra to watch something they had always known how to access.
Then Opening Day arrived, and MLB released a news article while teams announced their local distribution. That’s it. No tweet, Instagram post or information posted on any of the MLB social media accounts. Just a lot of games on MLB.tv.
For me, that meant finding a channel simply labeled RAYS on my cable guide, with a different channel number than in previous seasons. I spent most of my morning trying to figure it out. With 14 of 30 teams announcing this information on Opening Day, MLB dropped the ball.
How can baseball spend an entire spring training delivering one message, then assume fans will wait for last-minute instructions on Opening Day? The messaging had been clear since pitchers and catchers reported: buy this so you don’t miss it. Now, some who paid discovered a free viewing option at first pitch, forcing MLB to absorb refund costs.
It was sloppy, misguided, and wrong. Again, sports fans are simple people. MLB put those 14 teams in a difficult middleman position. Those teams took heat from fans on radio, at stadiums, and on social media. That’s not fair.
MLB did a disservice to a large portion of its fan base that still consumes games through traditional cable or satellite providers by waiting until Opening Day to share that information.
However, the larger point remains. Even with heavy streaming promotion during spring training from nearly half the league, fans were left confused about what to do and how to do it.
Technology continues to move at a pace faster than many sports fans are willing—or able—to keep up with.
Another example came with the rollout of ESPN’s direct-to-consumer app. When ESPN introduced its revamped app, confusion spread about who needed to pay and what content came with it. Did pay TV subscribers who already had ESPN need to pay an additional $29.99 per month for access?
That question came to a head with WWE’s partnership with ESPN, as wrestling fans asked the same thing—myself included. There were numerous hoops and gaps in information. CNBC’s Alex Sherman even attempted to explain it with a step-by-step guide outlining what fans had to pay for and what they could access.
Needless to say, why was that level of explanation necessary in the first place?
Currently, a lawsuit has been filed against WWE by fans over access to premium live events, with complaints centered on that very confusion. ESPN has since filed a motion to intervene in the case, though not as a defendant.
Again, technology continues to move faster than many sports fans can reasonably keep up with.
This week, the NFL will discuss allowing individual teams to sell preseason broadcast rights to streaming platforms as soon as next season. What has long been an opportunity for local fans to watch games and learn where to find them may now shift to streaming services.
This is another way for NFL teams to increase revenue, potentially at the consumer’s expense. Living in Tampa Bay, I’ve always watched Buccaneers preseason games on my local NBC affiliate. It’s a major marketing opportunity for the station and a valuable revenue driver. What better addition to an advertising package than an NFL team logo?
That could disappear if games move to platforms like Peacock. Instead of a simple, familiar destination, fans may have to pay extra to watch exhibition football, where more than half the players won’t make the roster. That’s a tough sell. Charging fans for games where the stars don’t play and the top broadcast teams aren’t involved.
How confusing will this be for sports fans across the country? It’s yet another example of technology moving faster than audiences can comfortably follow.
At some point, someone in these leagues and boardrooms has to ask a very simple question: who is this all for? If the answer is the fan, then the current model isn’t just flawed—it’s backwards.
Sports should not be this complicated. You didn’t need a flowchart, a password reset, or three subscriptions to find your team. You needed a channel number, a remote, and a routine. That simplicity built generational loyalty. It turned afternoons with your grandfather into lifelong fandom. It made sports accessible, communal, and constant in a world that rarely is.
Now, that simplicity is being replaced with fragmentation, confusion, and added cost—all in the name of progress.
Progress is fine. Evolution is necessary. But not at the expense of the very people who made sports matter in the first place.
Here’s the truth: fans won’t chase the product forever, no matter how inflated “viewership figures” become.
If sports becomes too hard to find, too expensive to follow, or too confusing to understand, they’ll do what they’ve never done before—they’ll find something else. In a world overflowing with entertainment options, that’s not a risk leagues should be willing to take.
Sports don’t need to reinvent how they’re delivered. They need to remember why people showed up in the first place. Make it easy, clear, and fair. Because sports fans are simple people.
And that’s not a weakness—it’s the foundation everything was built on.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
John Mamola is Barrett Media’s sports editor and daily sports columnist. He brings over two decades of experience (Chicago, Tampa/St Petersburg) in the broadcast industry with expertise in brand management, sales, promotions, producing, imaging, hosting, talent coaching, talent development, web development, social media strategy and design, video production, creative writing, partnership building, communication/networking with a long track record of growth and success. He is a five-time recognized top 20 program director in a major market via Barrett Medi’s Top 20 series and has been honored internally multiple times as station/brand of the year (Tampa, FL) and employee of the month (Tampa, FL) by iHeartMedia. Connect with John by email at John@BarrettMedia.com.
simple people are not the target demographic.