So, we guess we picked a bad time to start this blog.

We’re fascinated by the immediacy that the 24 hour news cycle and the advent of the internet have brought to the world of sports reporting.   (Except when our twitter feed refreshes faster than our MLB GameDay and we find out that in fact someone just grounded out with the bases loaded on the second damn pitch they saw, oh my God, Lance Berkman, how the hell are we supposed t–)

Ahem. Sorry. That’s a different rant.

Today, however, is the beginning of a new era–an era of repression! Of tyrrany!  Of…The New York Times pointing out that some leagues don’t like bloggers much, with our opinions, and our darn free speech.

Actually, while the article’s lede is about bloggers of a more traditional nature, the more important parts are about video rights: gone are the two minute highlight packages you’d see on local news after the game, thanks in huge part to ESPN, the behemoth that will likely change the face of broadcast sports soon even more than it already has.  (Think about it….remember when the MLB playoffs were on an actual channel anyone could watch?  Now there’s only one October…and it’s on TBS, which isn’t even in DirectTV’s basic cable package, by the way.)

ESPN can afford to pay to broadcast sports.  We can–and do–pay to watch them, more than ever before.  Bloggers who shoot video or, as technology increases, stream games, are infringing on these rights, say the conferences, leagues,  and TV execs.  But movie pirating’s a big business–how much more of a big business could livefeeding a sporting event become?

And if enough of that begins to happen, the model will be forced to change.  Even just one good site streaming live video could do it, if they could make a good argument for being allowed to broadcast their own video and commentary  (the commentary might make it a first ammendment issue, we think, though we didn’t go to law school.)

Well, we’ll see.