Milwaukee Brewers To Remain On Fan Duel Sports -- Now contract terminated

[igor67]

You now have an increasing percentage of the league going this way, potentially a big enough chunk that you can seriously threaten to lift the blackout restrictions in local markets in exchange for better revenue sharing. That's the real angle. And how many cable subscribers would jump off in LA or NYY since they already get MLB.tv for free as part of T-mobile? The biggest nuisance is that neither of my Smart TVs let me download new streaming apps, so I have to screen cast from my lap top.

[owbc]

3 hours ago, MrTPlush said:

1) RSNs were largely dominated by smaller markets. Look at the list of current MLB ran teams and the new ones joining it. We don’t need to close the revenue gap with those teams. I actually greatly disagree we had the least to lose. RSNs sucked, but they also gave financial stability and long term contracts. For teams working with smaller margins, that is a pretty important thing to have . Especially if we are shelling out contracts longer than 2 years.

2) This is probably the only hope…that this is so terrible for a chunk of teams it pushes change. The problem though is this news is probably phenomenal for 10 teams minimum and another 5-10 it is probably a wash. Not sure you could get the votes to create a lockout.

I think it's wild that you would defend a system that gives the Dodgers nearly a half a billion dollars of more annual revenue per year. With that system specifically enabling them to sweep us in the NLCS because of all of the deferred salaries.

Our local TV revenue is not going to be $0. It has exactly the same value that it had a month ago. 

Manfred has explained where this is going. We're now in a group of 13 MLB teams with local rights that are owned by MLB with that number likely to increase. MLB is going to package all of them and sell at once and we will receive an equal share, with no blackout restrictions. We're going to be getting way more than $20 million/year when that deal is signed and we won't be at a financial disadvantage with anyone else in that package.

We're not the ones in financial doo doo. It's our competition. Look at Minnesota's situation. Look at Houston -- how many big contracts have they signed lately despite being the #6 TV market? St. Louis is in a rebuild. Atlanta has fallen off a cliff. Detroit can't afford to extend Skubal. We are heading toward a world where we will be close to a level playing field with mid-market teams that used to have a huge advantage over us.

Once that happens, the momentum will be there to chip away at the big boys. I don't think it will happen in the upcoming CBA. More likely in 5-10 years. But it will happen eventually and we're way closer to that reality than we were 5 years ago. 

 

[MrTPlush]

40 minutes ago, owbc said:

I think it's wild that you would defend a system that gives the Dodgers nearly a half a billion dollars of more annual revenue per year. With that system specifically enabling them to sweep us in the NLCS because of all of the deferred salaries.

Our local TV revenue is not going to be $0. It has exactly the same value that it had a month ago. 

Manfred has explained where this is going. We're now in a group of 13 MLB teams with local rights that are owned by MLB with that number likely to increase. MLB is going to package all of them and sell at once and we will receive an equal share, with no blackout restrictions. We're going to be getting way more than $20 million/year when that deal is signed and we won't be at a financial disadvantage with anyone else in that package.

We're not the ones in financial doo doo. It's our competition. Look at Minnesota's situation. Look at Houston -- how many big contracts have they signed lately despite being the #6 TV market? St. Louis is in a rebuild. Atlanta has fallen off a cliff. Detroit can't afford to extend Skubal. We are heading toward a world where we will be close to a level playing field with mid-market teams that used to have a huge advantage over us.

Once that happens, the momentum will be there to chip away at the big boys. I don't think it will happen in the upcoming CBA. More likely in 5-10 years. But it will happen eventually and we're way closer to that reality than we were 5 years ago. 

 

Where am I defending the system that gives the Dodgers such an advantage?

Im sure this isn’t the end of the circus and thus, quite a bit of instability remains. At least enough unknown we probably are going to play it a bit safe financially.

Getting to share revenue with a bunch of other doo doo markets is so irrelevant. Until the Yankees/Dodgers/etc. are in that pot we are not any better off. Pointing to this as a step towards that is a big hypothetical. It would almost surely take a lock out and likely a very long one to make that happen. Not only that, but then you’d have to figure out how you would even come to a mutual conclusion when the Dodgers are very blatantly signing stupid contracts so the next wrinkle is how you suddenly institute revenue sharing/cap in 2034-2043 when Ohtani’s contract is actually paid out. That entire hypothetical is one heck of a mess. If the small markets don’t die on that hill in the upcoming CBA I don’t know that it will really ever happen. 

Regardless they need to figure out the TV stuff. It feels like it has been a constant half decade of playing ‘how and where to watch baseball on my TV’ roulette.

[owbc]

1 hour ago, MrTPlush said:

Where am I defending the system that gives the Dodgers such an advantage?

Im sure this isn’t the end of the circus and thus, quite a bit of instability remains. At least enough unknown we probably are going to play it a bit safe financially.

Getting to share revenue with a bunch of other doo doo markets is so irrelevant. Until the Yankees/Dodgers/etc. are in that pot we are not any better off. Pointing to this as a step towards that is a big hypothetical. It would almost surely take a lock out and likely a very long one to make that happen. Not only that, but then you’d have to figure out how you would even come to a mutual conclusion when the Dodgers are very blatantly signing stupid contracts so the next wrinkle is how you suddenly institute revenue sharing/cap in 2034-2043 when Ohtani’s contract is actually paid out. That entire hypothetical is one heck of a mess. If the small markets don’t die on that hill in the upcoming CBA I don’t know that it will really ever happen. 

Regardless they need to figure out the TV stuff. It feels like it has been a constant half decade of playing ‘how and where to watch baseball on my TV’ roulette.

I don't think you are appreciating how revolutionary it is that 20+ out of the 30 markets are in the same boat on local TV revenue. Local TV revenue is the #1 reason why we're stuck in the bottom 10 of payrolls despite being 12th in attendance, getting extra postseason revenue, etc. 

The Brewers are bringing in record high TV revenue right now because of the national contracts. The local revenue is worth less than 25% of our TV revenue income. Our one and only interest is to secure more revenue sharing.

I'm of the viewpoint that more instability is a good thing. Of course the Dodgers are going to fight tooth and nail to preserve their revenue. Deferring the money is surely part of that strategy ("We can't possibly change the system or we'll be broke!"). 

We are not going to win a pennant until there is a major disruptive change. 2025 was our ceiling in the current financial system. We need the ability to spend more RELATIVE to other teams. 

[treego14]

Well, Fan Duel Sports has been free on my Roku app for a long time now ... been able to watch Bucks and Brewers for free here through Roku.  I doubt I will be seeing much of the Brewers this season in the Rig Leagues.  :'(

[edfunderburk]

I gladly pay the $120 annual MLB.com app fee to have access to the Brewers & all other baseball teams. 
 

Additionally, I happily pay $60 annually for ad-free access to this website & the game day forums. 
 

These may be my best expenditures of the year as a diehard Brewers fan. 
 

 

[BlazingGunz]

11 hours ago, igor67 said:

You now have an increasing percentage of the league going this way, potentially a big enough chunk that you can seriously threaten to lift the blackout restrictions in local markets in exchange for better revenue sharing. That's the real angle. And how many cable subscribers would jump off in LA or NYY since they already get MLB.tv for free as part of T-mobile? The biggest nuisance is that neither of my Smart TVs let me download new streaming apps, so I have to screen cast from my lap top.

Just get a $25 Roku adapter and then you don't have to worry about the native smart tv garbage.   I think all of my TV's are smart TVs and they each either have a Roku stick or Apple TV (that's pretty pricey though but the wife likes it).

[Samurai Bucky]

On 2/2/2026 at 1:13 PM, MrTPlush said:

Were blackouts even a problem anymore for Brewers fans? In market fans could buy the subscription and out of staters either had the same option or MLB.tv?

We saw everything that was not on AppleTV via FanDuel as part of our Fubo subscription.

[owbc]

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/mlb/st-louis-cardinals/news/cardinals-get-brutal-40-million-update-after-new-tv-deal-mlb/aa72cd80821367f81f997d3a
 

More good news for the Brewers — the Cardinals are expected to receive just $20 million from their TV deal with MLB, down from the $60 million they received last year. 
 

 

[MrTPlush]

On 2/3/2026 at 1:02 PM, owbc said:

I don't think you are appreciating how revolutionary it is that 20+ out of the 30 markets are in the same boat on local TV revenue. Local TV revenue is the #1 reason why we're stuck in the bottom 10 of payrolls despite being 12th in attendance, getting extra postseason revenue, etc. 

Well, no, I don’t think it is all the revolutionary because we still have a gigantic disadvantage over the Top 10. The gap is arguably getting even bigger.

Actually, I’d venture to argue teams like the Cardinals etc. being in the same boat as us actually just makes things even worse for us. Those upper-middle payroll teams weren’t afraid to spend some cash on extension and/or FAs. That at least helped steal some talent from the big markets. Now those Top 10 teams are the only ones not in financial turmoil/distress. 
 

If the commish can make his dream happen and put us all in the same TV pot and close the revenue gap because of this, then yes, it is revolutionary and he saved baseball.

[igor67]

It's all about them switching their voting habits. Realizing that they will never be able to come close to competing on revenue in the current environment going into CBA negotiations is huge.

[Jopal78]

1 hour ago, MrTPlush said:

Well, no, I don’t think it is all the revolutionary because we still have a gigantic disadvantage over the Top 10. The gap is arguably getting even bigger.

Actually, I’d venture to argue teams like the Cardinals etc. being in the same boat as us actually just makes things even worse for us. Those upper-middle payroll teams weren’t afraid to spend some cash on extension and/or FAs. That at least helped steal some talent from the big markets. Now those Top 10 teams are the only ones not in financial turmoil/distress. 
 

If the commish can make his dream happen and put us all in the same TV pot and close the revenue gap because of this, then yes, it is revolutionary and he saved baseball.

Agreed. The difference in local market revenue between Milwaukee and St. Louis isn't daunting. It is the difference between Milwaukee, Los Angeles, New York, etc. that is daunting. 

The real problem for any future change is the Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox and Mets own their own TV Networks. Another half dozen have an equity stake in an RSN. Those teams can’t just simply roll up stakes and walk away from those entities even if they wanted to.
 

Further with long-term distribution contracts, plus long term debt incurred building out the TV networks, there likely isn’t a practical way for those companies to unwind from their networks even if the vast majority of owners decided to share all local revenue tomorrow. 
 

Also importantly, the local revenue is part of the valuation of a franchise to strip that from the Yankees and Dodgers would destroy their valuation, and compress the valuation of all the other teams. That is why the current system is a compromise .
 

Finally, with the Dodgers and their deferments of player salary for example has made diminution of their local revenue impossible; they’ve committed the money already and would need to declare bankruptcy to void those obligations or receive a bail out from the other owners/MLB neither of which will ever happen. 
 

TL:DR local revenue sharing is a nice talking point but the next CBA is going to simply kick the status quo can further down the road.

[owbc]

1 hour ago, Jopal78 said:

Agreed. The difference in local market revenue between Milwaukee and St. Louis isn't daunting. It is the difference between Milwaukee, Los Angeles, New York, etc. that is daunting. 

The real problem for any future change is the Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox and Mets own their own TV Networks. Another half dozen have an equity stake in an RSN. Those teams can’t just simply roll up stakes and walk away from those entities even if they wanted to.
 

Further with long-term distribution contracts, plus long term debt incurred building out the TV networks, there likely isn’t a practical way for those companies to unwind from their networks even if the vast majority of owners decided to share all local revenue tomorrow. 
 

Also importantly, the local revenue is part of the valuation of a franchise to strip that from the Yankees and Dodgers would destroy their valuation, and compress the valuation of all the other teams. That is why the current system is a compromise .
 

Finally, with the Dodgers and their deferments of player salary for example has made diminution of their local revenue impossible; they’ve committed the money already and would need to declare bankruptcy to void those obligations or receive a bail out from the other owners/MLB neither of which will ever happen. 
 

TL:DR local revenue sharing is a nice talking point but the next CBA is going to simply kick the status quo can further down the road.

The idea that the St. Louis is a comparable market to Milwaukee is a new concept that just emerged in the post-RSN era. St. Louis outspent us by $70 million in 2024. They've had access to ~$50 million more than us in RSN revenue for a long time. That advantage has now evaporated and they suddenly have no more spending power than we do and possibly less. Imagine telling a Brewers fan 10 years ago that in a decade the Brewers would be dominating the NL Central and the Cardinals would be rebuilding and in worse financial shape. 

2026 will be the first year since the Brewers moved to the NL that they will have a higher payroll than the Cardinals on Opening Day. 

I agree with you and TPlush that the big boys running away from everyone else is a huge problem. MLB is going to suffer. The deferred salaries will make this hard to fix. But some fixes will get implemented. Change will happen. The changes will likely benefit us. 

In the interim though we are very well positioned. We are thriving. We don't have to worry about our divisional competition overtaking us with a spending binge. We will continue to be a financially healthy organization and continue to win division championships. We will get our $20 million from the MLB TV deal like everyone else. 
 

[TURBO]

2 hours ago, owbc said:

In the interim though we are very well positioned. We are thriving. We don't have to worry about our divisional competition overtaking us with a spending binge. We will continue to be a financially healthy organization and continue to win division championships. We will get our $20 million from the MLB TV deal like everyone else. 
 

The Cubs will surely have something to say about that. 

If they want to spend, they will, and they can...

[owbc]

1 minute ago, TURBO said:

The Cubs will surely have something to say about that. 

If they want to spend, they will, and they can...

They are definitely capable of being in the group of ~10 MLB teams that isn't pinching pennies, but they don't seem to want to go over the luxury tax. Tucker was too expensive for them. 

[Jopal78]

30 minutes ago, TURBO said:

The Cubs will surely have something to say about that. 

If they want to spend, they will, and they can...

Buying and rehabbing  all the real estate in Chicago surrounding Wrigley Field wasn’t cheap, and may explain why the Cubs aren’t laden with free agent talent. 

Then again, Jason Heyward 10 years ago (8 years/ 180 million dollars) is their biggest free agent contract to date, and they didn’t resign a single hero from their World Series team, so there isn’t really a huge track record for the Cubs being big players in free agency either. 
 

 

[nate82]

For those who watch on cable/satellite the channel that will host the Brewers games will be announced closer to opening day.

Spring training games will be free on Brewers.TV. 
 

https://www.mlb.com/news/how-to-watch-mlb-games?adobe_mc=TS%3D1770749726|MCMID%3D44172606526068941028489490775615351846|MCORGID%3DA65F776A5245B01B0A490D44@AdobeOrg&affiliateId=mlbapp-ios_webview_news-index&rsid=mlbios.at.bat.new.implementation

[RobertCrawley]

Looks like a flat rate of $100 for the season with no black outs but not national games on other networks. That's not a terrible deal. And there's a local carrier situation still to be worked out.

https://www.mlb.com/brewers/schedule/programming

[long ball]

So I read everything on the mlb website regarding the brewers tv, but I’m still slightly confused. 
 

I am an out of market fan (Illinois) and I’ve subscribed to mlb tv for 20ish years. 
 

1) the $100 option- is this exclusively for in market fans? Or if I only want brewers games as an out of market fan can I buy the $100 option. 

2) the $200 option- is this exclusively for in-market fans? If I as an out of market fan purchase this bundle, would I be subject to blackouts on brewers games when they’re playing the cubs and white Sox?

 

basically my goal is to be able to watch all brewers games, even when they play the cubs and white Sox. I used to be able to watch cubs and white Sox on my cable package- but that’s more difficult has become more costly and comber some as those teams have created their own RSNs. 

[wiguy94]

1 hour ago, RobertCrawley said:

Looks like a flat rate of $100 for the season with no black outs but not national games on other networks. That's not a terrible deal. And there's a local carrier situation still to be worked out.

https://www.mlb.com/brewers/schedule/programming

That's cheaper than it was to watch the Brewers last year. Fanduel Sports Network ran $20 a month which is $140 for the season.

[torts]

2 hours ago, long ball said:

So I read everything on the mlb website regarding the brewers tv, but I’m still slightly confused. 
 

I am an out of market fan (Illinois) and I’ve subscribed to mlb tv for 20ish years. 
 

1) the $100 option- is this exclusively for in market fans? Or if I only want brewers games as an out of market fan can I buy the $100 option. 

2) the $200 option- is this exclusively for in-market fans? If I as an out of market fan purchase this bundle, would I be subject to blackouts on brewers games when they’re playing the cubs and white Sox?

 

basically my goal is to be able to watch all brewers games, even when they play the cubs and white Sox. I used to be able to watch cubs and white Sox on my cable package- but that’s more difficult has become more costly and comber some as those teams have created their own RSNs. 

As out of market in Pittsburgh who can't watch and of the pit/MIL games I am also very interested in this goo

[ClosetBrewerFan]

What does the last part mean?  Do we have access to all brewers minor league games?  Actual games and not just gameday views?

Quote

BREWERS.TV

$99.99/season

Stream Brewers games without blackouts LIVE or on demand for the entire 2026 regular season. Plus, access to MiLB games and MLB Big Inning.

 

[brooks_quichenick]

13 minutes ago, ClosetBrewerFan said:

What does the last part mean?  Do we have access to all brewers minor league games?  Actual games and not just gameday views?

 

I believe that would be correct, all minor league game footage. That's how it is with a normal MLB.tv subscription, at least.

[nate82]

16 hours ago, long ball said:

1) the $100 option- is this exclusively for in market fans? Or if I only want brewers games as an out of market fan can I buy the $100 option. 

2) the $200 option- is this exclusively for in-market fans? If I as an out of market fan purchase this bundle, would I be subject to blackouts on brewers games when they’re playing the cubs and white Sox?

The $100 offer is only for in market.  If you are out of market you cannot get this package.  You could try the VPN route of spoofing your location to be in WI but I am not sure that will work.  
 

These are the teams that the $100 offer will be available to in market.  
 

Arizona Diamondbacks (Dbacks.TV)^
Athletics (Athletics.TV)*
Baltimore Orioles (MASN+)*
Cincinnati Reds (Reds.TV)^
Cleveland Guardians (CLEGuardians.TV)^
Colorado Rockies (Rockies.TV)^
Detroit Tigers (TBA)^
Kansas City Royals (Royals.TV)^
Los Angeles Angels (Angels.TV)
Los Angeles Dodgers (SNLA+)*
Miami Marlins (Marlins.TV)^
Milwaukee Brewers (Brewers.TV)^
Minnesota Twins (Twins.TV)^
New York Mets (SNY)*
Philadelphia Phillies (Phillies.TV)*
St. Louis Cardinals (Cardinals.TV)^
San Diego Padres (Padres.TV)^
San Francisco Giants (Giants.TV)*
Seattle Mariners (Mariners.TV)^
Tampa Bay Rays (Rays.TV)^
Washington Nationals (Nationals.TV)^

^ Indicates clubs whose local games will be produced by MLB, with all Spring Training games for these teams available to stream for free for fans with a valid MLB.com account.

* Indicates clubs whose broadcasts will be distributed by MLB through deals with the clubs’ regional sports network (RSN).
 

If you are in market for any of these teams you will get those teams as your in market teams.  If you are in market for the Cubs and White Sox nothing changes for you.  

[Vgmastr]

What's nice is I normally get MLB.TV anyway because I enjoy watching as much baseball as I can, and getting the Brewers included is only $50 more which is an absolute steal.