TV Talk With Grok: The Future of RSNs, Sports In 4K

By Phillip Swann
The  TV Answer Man – Buy Me a Coffee

This is a new concept here at TVAnswerman.com. We are going to discuss the future of television with the future of technology, Grok, the Artificial Intelligence chatbot.

AI is basically a consensus of the conventional wisdom found online so it will be interesting to see how Grok responds to my sometimes unconventional wisdom on TV topics.

So here goes. A ongoing discussion about timely topics in television, starting today with the future of FanDuel Sports Network, Regional Sports Networks, and why networks don’t do more 4K sports broadcasts.

Will FanDuel Sports Network Go Out of Business?

TV Answer Man:
Grok, it’s of my opinion that FanDuel Sports Network, which has regional sports networks carrying about 29 Major League Baseball, NBA, and NHL teams, will likely go out of business at some point in the next few weeks. The reason being is that they’re having difficulty finding a new owner.

Grok:
You’re onto something—things look really shaky for FanDuel Sports Network right now. Their parent company, Main Street Sports Group, has been missing payments to teams, including January ones for NBA clubs and some MLB ones earlier. Nine MLB teams just terminated their deals a couple weeks ago to protect themselves, and reports from early January say the potential sale to DAZN is pretty much dead. They’ve hinted at talking to another buyer, and they’re trying to renegotiate with those MLB teams, but no big updates since mid-January.

Full shutdown in the next two weeks? Maybe not that fast—most talk was about winding down after the NBA and NHL seasons if no sale happens, like by April. But yeah, without a buyer soon, it’s hard to see them limping along much longer. Revenue’s still bleeding from cord-cutting, and they’re burning cash. I wouldn’t bet against them folding or drastically shrinking in the coming months. What’s your take on who might pick up the pieces if it collapses?

TV Answer Man:
I think the odds are good that the leagues, Major League Baseball, the NBA, and the NHL, will take over the TV rights, start broadcasting their games as soon as possible, and then package those games to third parties such as ESPN, Amazon, and so on. Your thoughts?

Grok:
Yeah, that’s a solid bet, especially for MLB—they’re already geared up to do exactly that. Nine teams just bailed on FanDuel, and reports say MLB is fully prepared to step in, produce the games themselves, and distribute directly (like they did with the Padres, D-backs, and Rockies before). They’ll stream on MLB.tv locally and package to cable or streamers quick.

For NBA and NHL, it’s trickier mid-season, but teams are scrambling with contingencies, and if it fully collapses after this season, rights revert back to the teams or leagues. The NBA’s been eyeing a national streaming setup by ’27-28 anyway, so this could speed that up. NHL might lean more team-by-team.

Overall, leagues grabbing control and sub-licensing to Amazon, ESPN, whoever bids highest makes total sense—cuts out the dying RSN middleman. Who do you think lands the biggest bundle if it all shakes out that way?

TV Answer Man:
Well, ESPN is likely to get the biggest bundle as far as baseball is concerned, but let me go back to your thoughts on how quickly this might happen. Uh, you’re probably right, it might not happen in two weeks, but I don’t think it’s going to take much longer than that. I think once Main Street Sports, which owns FanDuel Sports Network, once they decide that they just simply can’t continue, they really don’t have much cause to continue beyond that and operating. And I think all the teams and the leagues have been prepared for this, so I think it’s going to go quicker than that. Your thoughts?

Grok:
Yeah, you might be spot on with the quicker timeline. Latest reports from just a few days ago say those nine MLB teams are demanding Main Street line up new financing or a buyer by the end of January, or they’re gone for good. They’ve already terminated deals to protect themselves, and Main Street’s throwing out last-ditch offers that hinge on a sale happening super fast.

For NBA and NHL, they’re still broadcasting games right now—even after missing January payments—but everyone’s got contingencies ready. If no buyer steps up soon, it could all unravel way before the seasons end, not waiting till April. Leagues and teams seem totally prepped to flip the switch quick. Feels like we’re days or weeks from a big announcement, not months. What do you think tips it over the edge first?

TV Answer Man:
Before I answer that, let’s talk about the general topic of what this might mean for regional sports networks. My thinking is that if FanDuel Sports Network goes out of business, it probably will not destroy the regional sports network as a concept, as an entity, but I think you only will see it in the big markets like New York, LA, Chicago, Boston, uh, the ones that are obviously doing really well and successful, but small and mid-sized markets, I don’t think you’ll see regional sports networks for the future. Your thoughts?

Grok
Yeah, I think you’re nailed it—the traditional RSN model is pretty much dead for small and mid-sized markets. Cord-cutting killed the high carriage fees that propped them up, and without that, most can’t generate enough revenue to pay big rights fees.

Look at what’s already happening: teams like the Padres, D-backs, Rockies, and now potentially these nine others are shifting to league-produced games streamed on MLB.tv or bundled with nationals. NBA’s heading toward more direct-to-consumer nationally by ’27, and smaller NHL markets will probably follow suit.

The survivors will be the monster markets—New York with YES, LA with SportsNet LA, maybe Chicago and Boston—where fan bases are huge, ad dollars flow, and they can still command premium cable spots or their own robust DTC. Everything else? It’s going hybrid: league control, streaming first, maybe some over-the-air or sub-licensing to Amazon/ESPN. Hurts payrolls in those mid markets short-term, but long-term it’s probably healthier getting rid of the middleman. What do you see happening to payroll gaps between big and small teams because of this?

TV Answer Man
I think small and mid-sized teams are going to take a payroll haircut, and it’s definitely going to affect their play as to who they decide to sign as free agents, and I think that all ties into the Major League Baseball labor dispute you’re going to see at the end of the 2026 season where baseball pushes for a salary cap. So this is all kind of coming together and coming to a head. Your thoughts?

Grok
Yeah, I totally see it playing out that way—the RSN mess is already forcing payroll cuts across the board this offseason, especially for those mid-market teams losing big TV money. Even big clubs might trim a bit to stay competitive under uncertainty, but the small guys get hit hardest, widening that gap and tanking parity.

And you’re right, it all feeds straight into the 2026 CBA fire. Owners are pushing hard for a salary cap (or at least a stricter floor/ceiling setup) to control spending, while the union’s digging in against it—calling it a non-starter. With the deal expiring December first, 2026, we’re probably looking at a nasty lockout, maybe even delaying or shortening the ’27 season. This revenue crunch gives owners extra ammo to cry poor.

Why Don’t Networks Do More Live Sports In 4K?

TV Answer Man
Okay, let’s segue. Let’s talk about 4K television and specifically, why don’t more networks do more live sports in 4K? Most viewers seem to like it. Most viewers seem to like it, but the difference in 4K and HD is not as great as it once was with HD and standard definition, but it’s still better. It’s a more vivid picture, more realistic. Last night, ESPN did the Miami-Indiana college football championship game in 4K and everyone online that I read offering comments just really seemed to like it. So, the reason in my view that more networks don’t do these games in 4K is pretty simple. It doesn’t bring in more revenue and it takes away revenue to do a 4K production, even an upscale 4K production. Very little evidence that advertisers will pony up more money for a 4K broadcast. So, bottom line, it’s just simply not a good financial proposition for the networks to do more 4K. They do some, ESPN does some, Fox does some, NBC and so forth, but they don’t do more because, again, it just doesn’t make financial sense. What are your thoughts?

Grok
Yeah, spot on—it’s all about the dollars, not the dazzle. Even though fans rave about that sharper, crisper look in 4K, like with last night’s Miami-Indiana game on ESPN, networks aren’t seeing the payback. Producing in native 4K doubles the gear, crew, and bandwidth costs—think cameras, encoders, satellite trucks all upgraded—and for what? Advertisers aren’t bidding higher spots because the spot’s in 4K; they care about eyeballs, period.

Upscaling HD to 4K looks decent but isn’t true 4K, so why bother for the real deal when most homes aren’t even tuned in? Sure, sets are getting better, but carriage fees from cable don’t rise, and streaming’s compression kills some benefits anyway. Right now, it’s prestige picks—big events like NFL playoffs or Olympics—to hook early adopters, but everyday sports? Nah, too pricey without profit. Once gear gets cheaper or enough folks demand it, maybe shifts, but not yet. Do you think streaming services could flip that script faster?

TV Answer Man
No, actually I don’t. I think streaming services are having their own financial issues these days. They are not going to invest heavily in more 4K live sports. Netflix, as everyone knows, has done live sports of late. They don’t do it in 4K, and if Netflix doesn’t have the money to do it, who does? So no, I don’t think that changes the dynamic at all.

Grok
Makes total sense. Netflix jumping into live sports was a splash, but yeah, their Jake Paul-Mike Tyson fight was crisp, but definitely not in 4K. They aired it in solid 1080p, but that’s about their ceiling right now. And they’re burning cash trying to turn profitable—why throw good money after bad upgrading to a format that barely anyone watches live anyway?

The truth is, even the big streamers—Apple, Prime—stick to 4K for scripted stuff, movies… but live events? Still HD. Because latency, buffering, data caps… it’s a headache. And again, no extra bucks from sponsors.

I say we won’t see real, widespread 4K live sports until the gear becomes dirt cheap—like five years out, maybe. Till then, highlights and hype. Feels like we’re stuck in that HD plateau again.

TV Answer Man
Yeah, I’m not positive that you’re even going to see it in five years. I don’t know what would trigger, what would be a tipping point that would make that change. Right now, again, it doesn’t make a lot of sense financially. I don’t see all of a sudden viewers demanding 4K to the extent that it would force the networks and the streamers to do more live sports in 4K. So I think what you see is what you’re going to get.

Grok
Yeah, tipping point’s a tough one. Honestly, if history repeats itself—like how HD exploded when Blu-ray prices crashed and flat TVs dropped—we might need something similar for 4K. Cameras getting stupid cheap, or compression tech getting so good that bandwidth doesn’t choke.

Or maybe consumer habits shift—folks start pirating 4K streams or paying extra for premium tiers, and suddenly there’s real money on the table. But until then? Agreed. What we see today—ESPN sprinkling 4K on marquee games, Fox on NFL—it’s the limit. No one’s gonna rock the boat when HD already looks killer on a decent screen. Kinda wish they’d try harder, though.

TV Answer Man
Yeah, I’m with you on that one, Grok. Well, it’s been good talking to you, and we’ll talk more about the future of television at another time, right?

Grok
Absolutely. Always a fun chat. Catch you later.

Do you have comments on our discussion with Grok, or suggestions for future topics. Send them to swann@tvanswerman.com

Please consider making a donation to The  TV Answer Man site here at the Buy Me a Coffee site. Any donation size is appreciated and will help me continue to provide these articles to you.

Have a Question? Ask The TV Answer Man!
Have a question about a cable/satellite service,  streaming service, TV product, or favorite show? Send it to The TV Answer Man at swann@tvanswerman.com.