There’s a growing cold war between the legacy NFL media partners and insurgent streamers. Ironically, the battle lines will be drawn Christmas Day. The outcome could shape how we watch NFL games on Netflix and YouTube for years to come.
As first reported by my colleague Ryan Glasspiegel on July 1, ESPN and Fox Sports are refusing to lend out their talent for Netflix’s coverage of a yuletide NFL doubleheader. With only six weeks to go before Netflix streams the Cowboys-Commanders and Lions-Vikings games, neither ESPN nor Fox has budged on its talent.
Instead, the only confirmed talent for Netflix’s coverage will come from CBS Sports (Ian Eagle, Nate Burleson, and Matt Ryan), which is producing both games. Plus, Noah Eagle of NBC Sports. Look for Netflix to also employ talent from NFL Media, which will handle pregame, halftime, and postgame programming.
Before Netflix streamed its first Christmas games last year, ESPN allowed Laura Rutledge and Mina Kimes to join the tech giant’s coverage, while Fox gave the green light to Greg Olsen. But any requests for ESPN and Fox talent this year were met with a firm answer: Nyet. ESPN previously put the kibosh on YouTube’s request to use Jason Kelce for its Week 1 Chiefs-Chargers broadcast from Brazil on Sept. 5.
The question now is what happens with Drew Brees, the former TV free agent, just hired by Fox to replace Mark Sanchez. Netflix announced Brees as part of its coverage team Sept. 16, but now that he’s full-time, Fox could pull Brees—or grandfather in his Netflix appearance since he signed it before joining Fox. We’ll see.
Outside of Brees, the word has come down from the executive ranks of ESPN and Fox: Enough is enough. No more streamers poaching our talent. No more sheepishly going along to make NFL brass happy on Park Avenue. No more ignoring the growing threat from deep-pocketed tech giants. Especially, when the traditional TV networks believe Netflix, YouTube, and Amazon Prime Video will try to bid on their game packages in 2029, when the NFL opens early bidding on its 11-year, $111 billion cycle of media-rights deals.
There are already hard feelings emanating from the increasingly bitter carriage standoff between Disney and YouTube. Look for this practice of legacy media standing up to streamers to only expand in the coming months, sources tell Front Office Sports.
“We pay our people so much money, we don’t want them associated with other networks,” says one source. “If Netflix or YouTube wants to hire somebody full-time, go for it. Or do what Amazon did and hire a full-time broadcast team. Otherwise, stay the hell away from our talent.”
Another TV executive talked about the years of investment that legacy networks make to turn former unknowns into nationally recognized play-by-play announcers, studio analysts, and sideline reporters. Why should they let rival streamers waltz in to exploit the star power they’ve spent years nurturing?
“All we ever hear about is, ‘Streaming is the future.’ So we do the work—and they get the credibility?” asked one source. “This is not specific to Netflix or YouTube. Our people are busy. Why should we lend them out? To anybody?”
But tell that to announcers and analysts who like the idea of moonlighting on global streaming platforms. These lucrative gigs can pay game commentators more than $100,000 for one day’s work, say sources, while studio analysts can pocket $50,000 or more. But even some talent agents admit ESPN and Fox have a point, business-wise.
“I’m obviously very pro-talent. But ESPN and Fox are saying to themselves, ‘Why should we help our competitors by lending them our talent?’ They make a significant long-term investment to lock down the best of the best. They commit to long-term deals worth millions of dollars. But they’re supposed to let their people work for a competitor for a day?” asks one agent. “Again, I’m pro-commerce and pro-talent. But I don’t get upset when they feel strongly about this.”
Outside of production partners like CBS and NFL Media, Netflix and YouTube will likely have to employ non-affiliated talent moving forward, say sources.
As one agent told FOS about ESPN and Fox: “They basically look at Netflix as a competitor now. They’re not going to let their talent work for a competitor. That’s really what this is. There were a couple of exceptions last year. But this year they’re saying, ‘No way.’ It’s a blanket policy.”
The issue’s not going away. Netflix is in the second season of a three-year deal to show one live NFL game on Christmas Day. The league was thrilled by the success of Netflix’s Christmas Day doubleheader in 2024. The two games averaged 26.5 million viewers—making them the most-streamed NFL games in U.S. history.
This year, the NFL will stream a Christmas Day tripleheader, with Netflix showing Cowboys-Commanders at 1 p.m. ET, followed by Lions-Vikings at 4:30 p.m. ET. Amazon Prime Video will take over in prime time, streaming Broncos-Chiefs at 8:15 p.m. ET. Meanwhile, ESPN had a huge Monday Night Football matchup with the Super Bowl champion Eagles taking on the Packers in Green Bay. The game was simulcast on sister network ABC, while Peyton and Eli Manning had their popular ManningCast on ESPN2.
ESPN, Fox, and Netflix declined to comment on this story. An NFL Media spokesperson told FOS about Christmas Day: “Regarding additional talent surrounding the games, there has not been an announcement on that yet. Any such announcement would come from Netflix PR.”
