[polkaface]

So what you are saying is that you get Fox Sports AZ for all but 3 hours a week and some other guy gets NFLN for all but 3 hours a week? And it's not the same??

Way back in the stone age, Fox Sports AZ WOULD show the games regardless of where you were located.

The issue came up when the fees were negotiated again. The leagues want to charge the companies per viewer (that's an easy argument but it's a lot more complicated than that). If you add it basic then it's a prohibitive cost to the company and to each viewer. That is when the Sports Specific all access channels came to be (Sport said "you pay us an overall fee [which is less than it would be if you added it to basic/sports pkg programming] and we take a cut of each viewer").

At this point, Cable (or in your case your satellite provider) views the price of the NFLN (or in your case Fox Sports AZ) as a fair cost. When it comes to the added cost to broadcasting the games on that channel Comcast (or again your provider) thinks the cost is too much and elected not to pay for the right to broadcast it. Your provider in this instance decides to pay to subscribe to the NBA Plan and you can pay for it if you choose.

In your situation you are acclimated to it and the outrage is gone (or it might be all you ever knew). The only difference is that he has no other recourse through his cable company (unless he wants a dish). Cable thinks it is too much, and NFL won't budge on the price.

Personally, Cable might have it right this time. Now Big Ten has their network, Mountain west has their own, SEC is coming up with their own I believe. It is going to get expensive for providers in a hurry if they don't take a stand.