Because they’re not? Ok, that’s not a very good answer, but it actually is pretty close to the right one. You would think that sports programming would be out there in glorious 1080p or even 4K, but the truth is it isn’t, and there is a very good reason for that: money.
Over-the-air programs
Let’s look first at broadcast sports. You know what I mean… sports that you find on your local broadcast station. There are zero — precisely no — broadcasters that put out a 1080p signal. They could if they wanted to, it’s part of the broadcast specifications, but when broadcasters went to high definition about ten years ago, there were no 1080p televisions and 1080p equipment was insanely expensive. (Yeah, today your cell phone can record 1080p, but broadcasters are still paying the bill for the transmitters and encoders they bought back in the last decade.) All HD broadcasting in the US is in either 720p or 1080i. 1080i may sound a lot like 1080p, but it’s really only half as good, and 720p is even worse.
So, if a game starts with recording and broadcasting equipment provided by a local station, it won’t be 1080p. Sorry, that’s just the way it is, as Bruce Hornsby used to say.
There still aren’t any 4K broadcasts over-the-air. I’ve talked about them, but it’s still going to be a while before you see 4K over-the-air as more than just test broadcasts.
Cable and satellite channels
What about cable channels like ESPN and those pesky regional sports networks? ESPN also goes out at 720p because it’s part of the “Disney Industrial Complex” that includes ABC, and all Disney-owned stations use the same technology. Regional sports networks mostly use 1080i, sometimes because they share equipment with local broadcasters, and sometimes … just because they’re virtual monopolies that don’t need to really improve in order to get people to watch. Sorry folks, the truth hurts.
To make matters worse, ESPN is still smarting from a decade ago when it tried to do 3D sports, only to have that land with a big thud because no one had enough 3D glasses for an entire gameday party. They’re going to be a lot more careful with any new technologies.
Streaming
Now here’s where you’d think that you’d see some really good quality. “Technically” speaking the stuff you get over streaming is going to be 1080p as long as you have enough bandwidth to get the best quality. However, it’s all coming from 1080i cameras. It’s not the full 1920×1080 at 60 frames per second that you really want. The only difference is the technology. Because streaming signals aren’t actually broadcast, a full frame is sent at a time instead of the half-frame that’s sent on a 1080 broadcast.
Where is it all going?
The landscape is changing though, but 1080p isn’t the future. Broadcast networks, led by CBS, are getting into 4K cameras, just to be able to zoom in further, and slowly but surely we’re seeing more events captured in 4K so that future sports fans can look at them more closely. You’re starting to see some 4K sports, finally. DIRECTV and other providers are doing about one game a week most weeks. When the Olympics comes around, you’ll probably see a lot of 4K content, too. This doesn’t mean that any sports network is going to go 100% 4K in the near future, but the wheels are turning slowly.
You may never see sports in 1080p, but if we’re all lucky, we’ll see something better. 4K over-the-air is supposedly coming by 2025, and in the meantime satellite will deliver the best quality in 4K. Eventually, streaming speeds will go up high enough to deliver good quality 4K as well.
Just curious… I agree with the facts that broadcasters jumped the gun with 3D and it may make them a bit more skeptical about 4K but the one big difference between the two was the need for special glasses to view the content (as well as poor quality 3D since most of the time you had to sit in the sweet spot). Since most 3DTVs sold only gave you only one pair of glasses or if you were lucky a second pair, very few people had a desire to go out and spend extra money with very little return on the investment.
4K/UHD on the other hand requires nothing more special than a 4KTV which can cost you as little as $500. One survey indicates 4K penetration at >30% in 2018.(https://www.statista.com/statistics/736142/4k-ultra-hdtv-us-household-penetration/) Streaming services have been providing UHD content with built-in 4K apps or external devices such as AppleTV or Android TV (NVidia Shield for example).
The only thing a consumer would theoretically have to do is tune to the correct channel (if all the other hardware such as that pesky cable box or built-in tuner supported it). Yes, we’re still waiting for ATSC 3.0 tuners so OTA is not an option right now. Directv obviously has 4K hardware as you write about the occasional broadcast but unfortunately for them, content being provided to them is lacking. Cable providers should be jumping on board since they seem to be losing customers to cord cutters since those options provide higher quality options.
If the sole argument is that broadcasters (and I’m specifically referring to OTA) can’t currently broadcast in 4K – that holds water.
It seems foolish for cable-only channels to still be broadcasting content in anything less than 1440p. Since sports seems to drive innovation and push the technology, I think cable is more important than OTA. RSNs and major players such as ESPN and Fox Sports prefer paying customers to free broadcasts. They could easily offer dedicated ESPN4K or FS4K either as a separate channel to traditional cablecos as part of an amended agreement rather than wait for the next expiration date, an over the top stream or added pay service (like a souped up ESPN+).
At the rate we’re going now, 8K will be fully developed before 4K is more readily available. At least a few select people will be lucky enough to watch the Tokyo Olympics in 8K (https://www.ibc.org/publish/winter-olympics-innovates-with-8k-hdr-and-live-5g-production-firsts/2648.article).
Good news you don’t have to wait for over-the-air 4K in many cities like Kansas City you can get 16-18 4K over the air channels right now, what’s even better is the tuner box now only cost $200. Silicon dust 4K HD home run. The coolest part about this equipment is it connects to your Wi-Fi so hook the tuner near your antenna and close to your Wi-Fi but not necessarily anywhere near your TV as long as it’s on your Wi-Fi and your TVs on your Wi-Fi you’re getting that over the air 4K.
That box will decode ATSC 3.0 but there are very, very few broadcasts that are actually 4K.
Please go back and read my post there are 16 to 18 networks all major networks in Kansas City as just one city example doing it that means you could watch the news you can watch all kinds of programming what part of that are you missing?
Yes ATSC 3.0. Not 4K.
No you’re still not reading my posts these networks all major networks in Kansas City will show their local news broadcast in 4k and significant other stuff including sports, I don’t understand why you’re not reading the posts that I put up.
There are only two channels broadcasting in ATSC 3.0. That’s not NEARLY enough for “all major networks” to show their local news broadcast in 4K. And why in the world would they do that, who cares to see local news in 4K?
As for sports, other than the tiny amount of sports that are made available in 4K (most of it upscaled and not even native 4K) that are made available by Directv and a few other providers, there simply isn’t any 4K sports. It isn’t like they are going to be able to show CBS or Fox NFL broadcasts in 4K. Those networks aren’t producing them in 4K and have announced no plans for if/when they will start do so.
So what 4K sports are you talking about, are local stations going to send 4K cameras to local high school football games lol
New technology? I got my first HD TV in 2002.