lol...you're straying from the point. It's not too much money from a "willingness" standpoint. It's too much money from a profit standpoint. They wouldn't make enough profit to be able to justify it.
The expenditure wouldn't be a front-loaded type thing either (where the cost gradually comes down). They would be paying more for the name than the lines themselves
(As another aside, Joe Buck has already refused to do it in the past...I believe it was Phill who said that).
Also, "being the only game in town" doesn't mean anything to bottom line. I can assure you there are plenty of 2Kers who prefer to just stick with 2K5 and APF. The competition wouldn't help here because I can promise you the competition wouldn't spend the money on 3 sets of big name broadcasters either...lol.
Your confusing the "competition breeds innovation" argument (which I do agree with) with something else entirely. EA would be foolish to spend money on 3 separate big name broadcast teams AND associated presentation.
We already know, from previous conversations with them, that EA is trying to present it's own brand...meaning these types of varied TV presentations are a pipe dream anyway.
As for your last point (comparing your spending 60$ on to EAs spending)...I do see a definite similarity there...you're both doing what's best for EA