![\"\"](\"https:\/\/mumbrella.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Screenshot-2025-08-07-090825-e1754526677258.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\nThe NFL Network will be included in ESPN\u2019s forthcoming direct-to-consumer streaming platform, which launches in the US on August 21. ESPN will also license the linear and digital rights for the channel to other traditional cable operators.<\/p>\n
In addition, ESPN will license three additional NFL games per season, bringing its total to 28 matches per season, which will be broadcast across the NFL Network, plus on ESPN\u2019s linear and streaming services.<\/p>\n
To complicate the deal further, ESPN will own \u201cbroad rights\u201d to RedZone \u2014 an ad-free channel which broadcasts a live seven-hour feed each Sunday, bouncing between the various matches around the country \u2014 meaning it will distribute the product to various pay TV operators. However, the NFL will continue to own, operate, and produce the channel\u2019s content, as well as owning the digital distribution rights.<\/p>\n
The NFL will also retain its NFL Films division, as well as NFL.com.<\/p>\n
No monetary value has been placed on the deal, which is subject to regulatory approval, as well as the green light from NFL team owners.<\/p>\n
\u201cBy combining these NFL media assets with ESPN\u2019s reach and innovation, we\u2019re creating a premier destination for football fans,\u201d ESPN chairman Jimmy Pitaro said in a statement.<\/p>\n
\u201cTogether, ESPN and the NFL are redefining how fans engage with the game \u2014 anytime, anywhere. This deal helps fuel ESPN\u2019s digital future, laying the foundation for an even more robust offering as we prepare to launch our new direct-to-consumer service.\u201d<\/p>\n
Disney\u2019s CEO Robert Iger said the deal \u201cpaves the way for the world\u2019s leading sports media brand and America\u2019s most popular sport to deliver an even more compelling experience for NFL fans, in a way that only ESPN and Disney can.\u201d<\/p>\n
Iger praised the \u201coutstanding media assets\u201d the league has built, claiming this deal \u201cwill add to consumer choice, provide viewers with even greater convenience and quality, and expand the breadth and value proposition of Disney\u2019s streaming ecosystem.\u201d<\/p>\n
It\u2019s a complicated deal, to say the least. It also throws up a lot of potential conflicts of interest.<\/p>\n
ESPN is currently in a A$3 billion, ten-year deal with casino operator Penn to license its name for a sports betting product, ESPN Bet.<\/p>\n
As former ESPN journalist Joon Lee pointed out<\/a>: \u201cThe NFL will directly profit from sports gambling.\u201d Lee also noted NFL commissioner Roger Goodell\u2019s previous hardline on sports betting. In 2017, Goodell told reporters<\/a>, \u201cWe still strongly oppose legalised sports gambling. The integrity of our game is No. 1. We will not compromise on that.\u201d<\/p>\n USA Today\u2019s sports writer Bryan Kalbrosky similarly asked<\/a>: \u201cHow can the league suspend players for gambling when it also owns 10% of a sportsbook?\u201d<\/p>\n ESPN Bet is likely to cause a problem<\/p>\n Another issue is ESPN\u2019s editorial independence.<\/p>\n The Wall Street Journal put it to Iger<\/a> that \u201cone potential wrinkle\u201d is the conflict of ESPN\u2019s journalists and commentators covering a league that owns a stake in the company. The Disney boss rejected this idea, telling the publication that \u201cnothing in this deal in any way changes ESPN\u2019s approach when it comes to journalism.\u201d<\/p>\n Still, such a murky ownership structure may cause journalists and wary editors to think twice before launching the types of investigations seen from ESPN in the past. Will they feel free to launch deep dives <\/a>into domestic violence incidents by NFL players without fear or favour? Will they report stories with headlines<\/a> like 2017\u2019s \u201cCTE found in nearly 90 percent of brains donated by football players\u201d?<\/p>\n It seems unlikely, regardless of what Iger claims.<\/p>\n Interestingly, a precedent to this type of deal exists in New Zealand.<\/p>\n In late 2022, World Rugby acquired direct-to-consumer streaming service RugbyPass from Sky New Zealand, as part of a wide-ranging rights deal that saw the pay TV outfit secure exclusive rights for every World Rugby major event through to 2029, including Rugby World Cups, WXV and Sevens.<\/p>\n At the time, World Rugby CEO Alan Gilpin said<\/a> he was \u201cexcited by this deal and its potential to unify a very fragmented rights environment.\u201d<\/p>\n Could a similar thing happen in Australia? Let\u2019s look at the numbers of the major players.<\/p>\n Seven West Media is currently valued at $223 million. Nine is valued at $2.7 billion. Foxtel was just sold to international sporting giant DAZN in a deal that values the company at $3.4 billion.<\/p>\n The AFL currently has the biggest sporting rights deal in the land, with Foxtel and Seven paying a combined $4.5 billion for seven years. The NRL is seeking a similarly sized deal at the moment, and is currently playing out a five-year $2 billion deal with Nine and Foxtel, set to expire after the 2027 season. Cricket Australia has a $1.5 billion, seven-year deal, again with Foxtel and Seven.<\/p>\n Foxtel pays billions to broadcast the AFL.<\/p>\n So, which organisation would such a deal make sense for?<\/p>\n Foxtel declined to speculate, when contacted by Mumbrella. At any rate, DAZN isn\u2019t likely to give away a chunk of its newly purchased media company, especially seeing its recent history (DAZN bought out European sports broadcaster Eleven Sports in 2022) showed it to be in the acquisitions game, and not the shedding of assets.<\/p>\n Nine, on the other hand, is in full shedding season. This week, the company\u2019s shareholders voted in favour<\/a> of selling its 60% stake in Domain. It has also recently divided its publishing from its television from its radio, suggesting it may be going to market<\/a> for its radio assets. It could trade off a slice of the company in exchange for NRL assets and a long term rights deal.<\/p>\n The network also has $1.4 billion from the Domain sale jingling in its pockets, and could free up more spare cash if it does offload its AM radio network. Could it enter a reverse ESPN\/NFL deal, where it takes a portion of the NRL, in exchange for guaranteed TV rights at a reduced rate (or at least, with a portion of the rights deal money boomeranging back)?<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n