“Hey, what’s the game on?” is a question I’ve caught myself asking a little too often lately.

You too?

Welcome back to Between the Sidelines, where this week we’re actually not on the court.

Instead, we’re at home on the couch, scrolling through apps and clicking through TV guides, trying to figure out where to watch our favorite teams.

Although you’ll get this post today, I’ve started to write this exactly a week in advance—so, it’s Wednesday, March 18 as I’m drafting this.

Why is that important?

Well, because for NBA fans, Wednesday means one thing: the two nationally televised games are on ESPN. The earlier tipoff typically features an East Coast team, while the later one is somewhere out West.

Yesterday though, a Tuesday evening, the two games were on NBC and Peacock. So, out of habit, as I sat down to watch the Boston Celtics host the Golden State Warriors while eating dinner, I opened Peacock. I scrolled for a moment, confused as to why there were no live NBA games on the homepage.

The realization hit me harder than a fast break in the opposite direction: I had the wrong app.

I checked Apple Sports and saw the game was actually on ESPN. I sighed, logged out of Peacock, and switched over to ESPN, where I then watched the Celtics beat the Warriors, 120 to 99.

Tomorrow is Thursday, and that means another platform change.

Goodbye Peacock and ESPN, hello Prime Video!

Along the way, just finding the game at all became part of the game.

So, why is that? Drop your remote. Let’s talk.

What Watching a Game Actually Takes

The natural reaction to this streaming dilemma from someone who doesn’t follow sports might be simple: “Well, just switch apps based on the day.”

And sure, that’s understandable—it’s not that hard. But that’s not really the point.

It points to something larger. The streaming era promised fans convenience, but instead it has fragmented the viewing experience, scattering games across so many different services that keeping up with the league now requires three, four, even five platforms.

And that’s not even accounting for local broadcasts still tucked away on cable, which somehow feel harder than ever to access without paying for yet another expensive package.

So, let’s break down the average NBA viewer experience, which rotates based on the day:

1. Regional Sports Networks: To watch your home team, you’ll need access to one of these channels. They’re cable networks that carry MLB, NBA, and NHL games live, along with pre and post-game coverage.

   • Examples: MSG, FanDuel Sports Network (formerly Bally Sports), NBC Sports Regional Networks, and YES Network.

2. Streaming Exclusives: Then, there are the games that aren’t shown on traditional television at all. If you don’t have the right subscription to Peacock or Prime Video, you simply don’t have access to these games.

   • Peacock’s cheapest plan with live sports sits at $10.99 per month, while Prime Video typically comes bundled with an Amazon Prime membership, which costs $14.99 a month.

   • That’s already two separate subscriptions, just for select games.

3. National Broadcasts: The nationally televised games are normally juggled and split between at least three networks: ABC, NBC, and ESPN.

   • While ABC and NBC are major networks and normally a part of many basic TV packages and even can be viewed via antenna, ESPN isn’t a guarantee, and often can be a premium add on.

Altogether, to follow the league on a regular basis, you’ll need access to NBC, Peacock, ABC, ESPN, Prime Video, and whatever local channel carries your team.

(Editor’s Note: That’s also not including if you enjoy watching around the league so much that you’d also pay for League Pass which is $16.99 a month. I have mentioned being an avid user of League Pass and feel that it is worth it, but that’s another story for another day.)

As a matter of fact, the league even made a handy guide that lays out where the games are each day.

In a Sports Business Journal piece on sports and the media landscape, Chad Menefee wrote that the NBA’s new broadcast setup “leaves only 15% of Americans with access to all national broadcasts, down from 63% last season.”

And while I’m centering the NBA here, let’s be clear: this isn’t just a basketball problem, it’s a sports problem.

Take the MLB, for example. Depending on your team and market, you needed access to your regional sports network, ESPN, Fox, FS1, TBS, Apple TV+, Roku (which, at the very least, is free), and Prime Video for select games.

And don’t even get me started on the NFL.

Just last season, games were spread across CBS, Fox, Prime Video, ABC, ESPN, and Peacock. And that’s not even including that YouTube exclusively streamed the first Friday game of the season that kicked off in São Paulo, Brazil, and Netflix carried two games on a Christmas slate.

Different leagues, but the exact same issue.

At that point, are you following your team or are you managing subscriptions?

So, How Did We Get Here?

Question: Why is this happening?

Answer: Money makes the world go round, and sports are no exception.

We’ve been conditioned to watch everything on demand. Shows that once aired weekly now drop entire seasons at once, ready to be binged whenever we choose.

Even traditional broadcasts can be recorded and watched later, on our own time instead of the network’s. It’s a huge reason why ratings for shows can’t often be taken at face value when they first air, since DVR and delayed viewing often paint a different picture.

You know what you can’t do that with?

Sports.

It’s one of the few things that people still sit and watch at the exact time it airs. No skipping around it, no recording to watch a week or two later—just you, your tv, and the game. Live.

According to recent data, sports fans spend an average of $88 per month on streaming services, compared to $64 for non-sports viewers.

That’s what makes sports so valuable.

Networks and streaming platforms want the rights to sporting events and various leagues to drive viewership, advertising, and subscriptions. Meanwhile, leagues know their games will always draw interest.

Instead of consolidating under one broadcaster, they cast the widest financial net possible.

So, when the deals are signed on the dotted line, each sport is left without a singular “home,” but each network comes away with a fraction of the season that makes the deals worthwhile.

NBC and Peacock opened the season with the “NBA Tip-Off”, Prime Video got the NBA Cup Championship Final, and ABC and ESPN received the Christmas Day slate in addition to being the exclusive broadcaster of the 2026 NBA Finals.

Nielsen reported that more than 47 million people in the U.S. watched at least part of the five-game Christmas slate on ABC and ESPN, which represents a 45% increase from the year before.

The NBA’s return to NBC paid off immediately, with 5.61 million viewers tuning in for the opening night doubleheader. It marked the league’s most-watched October opener in 15 years, and an 87% increase from the 3 million who watched on TNT the season prior. And lastly, NBC won the entire evening in prime time among adults ages 18-49 spanning all networks.

See what I mean?

This is not random.

This is by design, because spreading these games across platforms drives views, and views turn into money.

What about the Fans?

…What about them?

These deals, in theory, were not made with us primarily in mind.

What we’re left with as fans is the burden of an ever-changing schedule and the growing cost of juggling multiple services just to watch the teams we love.

For me, at least, it’s ESPN+ for FC Barcelona, Apple TV for Formula 1 and MLS, Peacock just for the NBA, Prime Video through a shared membership, League Pass, and another streaming service just to cover basic TV.

I actually sat down and calculated it: $93.82 a month without League Pass.. and $110.81 with it.

And after all that money spent, I’m still not content. I switched services recently and lost MSG in the process. It was either pay handsomely ($94.99 a month for TV alone, not including the other services) to keep it, or save money and go without.

Well.. you can probably guess how that went.

Now, if I want to watch the Knicks, it either has to be a nationally televised game that I can stream at home, or I have to go out to a bar that hopefully carries MSG.

I’ve even taken up a free trial of SiriusXM, because it’s the only way I can at least hear the games when I can’t see them. And once that trial runs out?

You guessed it, another subscription!

And I’m not the only one thinking about this, or feeling how disruptive it’s become.

Scroll through any Reddit thread detailing how to watch games, and you’ll find the same frustrations as mine. Or better yet, check the comments under any screenshot of the NBA watch guide schedule on Instagram, and you’ll see fans longing for the days when games were just… on TV.

But, it’s not just anecdotal, there’s data that shows just how frustrating the viewing experience has become:

• More than half of sports viewers (57%) report challenges when watching live games.

• Nearly a third (30%) say they couldn’t watch a game because it was on a service they don’t subscribe to.

• About 18% of viewers report experiencing poor video quality on streaming platforms.

• Among viewers aged 18–24, 31% cite issues like freezing and buffering.

• In the same age group, 25% report insufficient bandwidth for high-quality streaming.

• 20% of younger viewers also mention lag as a frequent issue.

And, in the same piece referenced earlier by SBJ’s Chad Menefee, a striking point is made: “Avid fans generally follow a sport no matter where it goes, but casual fans are less likely to seek out an event or pay for yet another subscription to watch.”

The fragmented streaming situation has spun up a dual problem: it makes it more complicated for current fans to keep up, while simultaneously making it more difficult for newcomers to immerse themselves in a sport.

How can these leagues grow an audience they can’t reach?

The Bottom Line

I wish I was able to offer all of you, my dear fellow sports fans, a smart solution for how the leagues could fix this issue.

Unfortunately, I don’t have one. And truthfully, when these media deals are worth billions, I doubt the leagues are losing much sleep over it either.

The closest thing to a working model right now is Formula 1. ESPN had F1’s rights dating back to 2018, but this season Apple TV took over as its singular broadcast home. Conveniently timed, of course, as the Apple Studios-produced F1 became the highest-grossing sports film of all time with $633 million at the worldwide box office.

Jon Noble of The Race explained what the move means for fans:

“The new arrangement [F1’s move from ESPN to Apple TV] will give access to all F1 practices, qualifying sessions, sprints and races for Apple TV subscribers – with no extra cost element involved. However, a select number of races – suggested to be around four or five over the season – plus all practice sessions will be made available free to watch on the Apple TV app for non-subscribers. The idea is clearly that trying to draw people in with some free action, rather than hiding everything away behind a paywall, could prove to be a bigger benefit in driving subscriptions.”

No expensive cable packages or multiple streaming services needed here. Only a convenient set up for returning fans, and an easy entry point for those looking to test the waters of motorsports.

It’s proof that accessibility and profit don’t have to be at odds.

But, I am also aware that replicating F1’s model would require either (1) a massive financial sacrifice or (2) one platform willing to write an even bigger check for exclusivity.

Most leagues and networks aren’t willing to do that just yet.

Maybe one day, “hey, what’s the game on?” won’t be such a complicated question.

For now, we’ll keep switching apps, chasing tip-offs, and hoping we’re in the right place at the right time to catch our teams.

Until then, I’ll see you between the sidelines.

That is, if we can find where to watch.