Why NFL RedZone Will Change Under ESPN Ownership

Scott Hanson (middle), lead anchor for the NFL RedZone network, is photographed during the Sunday broadcast of NFL games at the Culver City studios on November 4, 2012. He spends his Sundays bringing football fans NFL coverage live, on air, for 7 straight hours. He also files reports from NFL games, practices and events throughout the year, and can be seen on Mondays on NFL Network as host of “Up to the Minute,” providing a fast-paced look at the biggest NFL headlines from the previous week, along with a preview of the Monday Night Football matchup. (Photo by Gary Friedman/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

ESPN’s acquisition of NFL Media assets (first reported by The Athletic’s Andrew Marchand) will mean major changes for both the “Worldwide Leader in Sports” and the NFL.

But for football fans, the biggest concern in all of this might just be what happens to the popular NFL RedZone channel. As others have pointed out, ESPN owning NFL RedZone means that ads are likely on the way.

The network tried out some split-screen ads last season, much to the chagrin of audiences. And while they remained “undecided” on advertising at the time – according to Front Office Sports’ Michael McCarthy – new ownership would seemingly dictate a new direction.

Disney’s Ad Adjustments For NFL RedZone

ESPN parent company Disney has spent recent years transitioning to a more ad-friendly model across the board.

After decades of largely keeping some properties free from brand commercials, Disney Channel now features plenty of – mostly co-branded – spots from advertisers like Lunchables, Barbie, Huggies and Capri Sun (though in-house promos still account for over 75% of TV ad impressions on the network since the start of 2024, according to iSpot data).

Disney+ also launched as an ad-free service, before introducing its ad-supported tier in 2022. eMarketer projections have its ad revenues estimated at nearly $1.1 billion in 2025.

So there is clear appeal and appetite for Disney to turn NFL RedZone into another vehicle for advertising revenues, despite precedent without them. And for as much as RedZone has been a haven from a sea of NFL advertising, it’s almost worth asking: What took so long for NFL RedZone to be monetized?

Advertising Fuels Football

Over the course of a year, the NFL accounts for the largest share of ad reach and ad revenues on TV, compared to any other programming. And it got to that point not by avoiding advertising, but by wholeheartedly embracing them (perhaps to a fault).

While RedZone host Scott Hanson’s “seven hours of commercial-free football” was a fun catchphrase for audiences to grasp onto, it also existed in conflict with the NFL’s own approach to TV, which embraces ads.

When fans get mad that ads may start creeping into that apparent safe haven from ads, it’s also foolhardy; on the fans for thinking they were forever entitled to TV’s most profitable entity without ads included, and on the league for creating the would-be controversy to begin with by avoiding ads on the network.

The fact that NFL RedZone has existed without ads for this long at all is, perhaps, a miracle.

As the NFL was long looking for a buyer for these NFL Media properties like NFL Network and RedZone, having the latter channel completely avoid generating revenues during Sunday action would seem to stand in opposition to that goal in boosting its value.

After all, in today’s media environment fueled by data, viewership without ads can lack any true end value for the publisher. And the rising cost of ad-free subscriptions indicate as much (which is one of numerous reasons why more streaming subscribers have been opting for ad-supported tiers of late).

Ads Don’t Have To Subtract

Beyond the feelings that ads during RedZone will somehow betray what audiences love about the channel, audience pushback comes in part from the idea that ads are inherently bad.

In 2024, the IAB found that 80% of consumers would prefer to get more ads in return for having to pay nothing for websites/apps. And at least for TV, there’s limited research to support the idea that consumers broadly dislike advertising (digital ads, on the other hand, are not well-liked). So if an ad-supported RedZone is included as part of the larger ESPN streaming offering without an additional upcharge, then audiences are getting what they want there, no?

More to the point, the issue fans appear to have with ads during RedZone – or really, any content – is the idea that commercials interrupt what they’re actually trying to tune into.

There are ways around that, though.

The NFL’s five- and 10-second ads during Sunday contests keep viewers on the action already. And over the last few years, programs like Rick and Morty and Saturday Night Live have made significant strides in TV ad placements that feel like less of a break – utilizing characters and themes from the episode to effectively do branded segments.

RedZone could do the same, utilizing Hanson, other media talents and/or players to serve consumers good advertising that doesn’t feel like a break from the football action. It just feels like a brief break from live games.

While it isn’t “commercial-free,” there’s still a suitable way forward here so that fans and ESPN all get what they want out of the RedZone arrangement. It just takes a little creativity.