Spurs Jackals cheer with fans before Game 6 of the Western Conference Finals at Frost Bank Center in San Antonio, Thursday, May 28, 2026. (Andrew J. Whitaker/San Antonio Express-News)
Monday morning, The Athletic published a column asking a question. "The NBA's never been more flush with cash," the headline read. "But is it losing its connection to its fans?" Two days later, the Spurs issued a press release providing another piece of the answer. In brief: Fans might not be losing their connection to the league. But more and more these days, they're having to pay for it. To be clear, there's nothing singularly outrageous about the Spurs' decision to move 67 regular-season games to a subscription streaming service called DAZN, with only 22 local broadcasts set to be carried over the air. Most NBA franchises now have an arrangement that looks at least something like this. But at a time when it's never been more expensive to attend games in person, and in an era where even terrible owners are making billions of dollars simply by buying pro franchises, watching them appreciate in value, then flipping them to someone else, it's hard to blame any viewers who saw Wednesday's news and threw their hands in the air. Hardcore fans won't think twice about downloading yet another app and forking over an extra $19.99 plus tax every month in hopes that it won't glitch out in the fourth quarter. But what of the more casual, channel-surfing, "I'll watch the game if it's on" crowd? What of the, "I already subscribe to seven streaming services and I'll be danged if I'm adding an eighth" group? Maybe you can run a successful pro sports league forever without those people. But it sure seems like the NBA is running the risk of missing out on another generation of them. Now, here is where we acknowledge some important caveats. First, it should be noted that this happened only after the old regional sports network model, which paid teams huge broadcast fees that were covered by cable subscribers whether or not they watched basketball, fell apart. There was no option to bring games back to semi-basic cable again. We also should point out that the Spurs have 34 regular-season games set for national TV, and you won't need to subscribe to DAZN to watch those. Then if, the 22 over-the-air games (think of the ones on KENS-TV in recent years) are all separate from the national TV selections, that means there could be as few as 26 games that are available only on DAZN.
The Spurs' new Jackals fan section begins cheering as they get ready for the team's first home game of the season against the Brooklyn Nets at Frost Bank Center in San Antonio, Sunday, Oct. 26, 2025. (Sam Owens/San Antonio Express-News)
That's about a third of the season. On one hand, that's a pretty big number for those accustomed to watching everything. On the other, it might not be big enough to convince the casual fans that adding DAZN is an absolute necessity. Chances are, you're going to lose some people. With every move like this, that's part of the risk. The more often a fan says, "Oh, looks like I can't watch that one," the more likely he or she is to realize that, well, there are other things to watch. Or to scroll. Or even to read, if you're truly ancient. And how many average folks will be able to watch every Spurs game this season? To do so, some cord-cutters would have to subscribe to as many as four different services (DAZN, Amazon Prime Video, ESPN/ABC, and NBC/Peacock). As recently as last season, a typical cable bundle covered everything except for the handful of Prime games. One bright side is that there will be more Spurs games available on free, over-the-air TV than there were five or 10 years ago. The catch there is that there won't be nearly as many of those as there are in places like Phoenix and Utah, where the Suns and Jazz are among the teams who have decided to make the bulk of their team-broadcast inventory available through local broadcasters. There's a tradeoff there, though: With more fans tuning in, that means more revenue can be made through advertising. But that still might not be enough to offset what can be generated through exclusive streaming subscriptions (which also, of course, are filled with cheaper advertisements). The Spurs apparently weighed all their options and decided that, as they look for ways to cover forthcoming contract extensions for Victor Wembanyama, Stephon Castle and Dylan Harper, the subscription model had more financial upside. And maybe they're right. But don't get this twisted. It isn't an upgrade for anybody. It doesn't make your entertainment bills cheaper. It certainly doesn't make the viewing experience better (ever try to flip back and forth between games using two different smart TV applications?). And it can't be the best way to win over new converts. Instead, it's about a league flush with cash maximizing value from the fan connections it already has. And assuming those connections will last. Subscribe There’s more to San Antonio with the Express-News. Subscribe today for just 25¢. This article originally published at Why Spurs streaming plan tests the price of NBA fan loyalty, connections.