Originally Posted by Chilli Dipper
You do realize that there is no ABC when it comes to sports programming, right? Anything you watch on the network is property of ESPN.
Now that ESPN has broadcast rights, every important match is aired live; that's in contrast to when NBC would black out cable and streaming coverage to air the day's marquee match on tape-delay, edited to fit into a two-hour time window, and long after fans already knew the final result.
Yes, the live final is now on cable, same as the Open Championship. But weekend mornings are when network affiliates can air local-oriented programming, as well as the network's political talk shows. The affiliates and the network news divisions don't want their schedules to be preempted by a sporting event going on in Europe. NBC, CBS, and Fox all now have cable sports networks of their own, but as of yet, none of them are carried on all service providers' basic package; ESPN, on the other hand, is. Since the majority of American households have cable, ABC and ESPN have decided it makes more sense to air Wimbledon and the Open live on ESPN, not interrupt network affiliate schedules, but continue to rebroadcast coverage during afternoon hours (as ABC and NBC had always done anyway).
I'm a cordcutter, no cable and get my sports via OTA and I realize I'm a minority but from my POV all I see is that Wimbledon isn't live anymore. I don't keep up with the particulars of the business but all I see is major sport events going to cable, the price of cable going up, nickel and diming people, sneaking in extra charges, more commercials, more unwanted graphics covering the screen, more popup ads on the set top box, etc...