10am starts question.

[Popeyejones]

Primetimers are played at what 830pm EST?

They start at 8:30 EST not because there's a secret east coast bias or because east coast fans are wimpy (as you claim), but because the NFL is trying to maximize viewership and fans' ability to watch the game.

If everything was in the tank for the East Coast they'd much rather not have national games ending at midnight (I live in EST now and it sucks).

Instead they'd be starting games at 7PM EST so they could air the whole game during primetime, but they don't do this, because West Coast viewers are still at work at 4PM. 8:30 PM maximizes primetime viewing as much as possible across both coasts.

Rather than being a bias or a conspiracy it's a matter of common sense.

 

[WilsonMVP]

Is there a reason that the 4 games played during the playoff weekends can't start at 3:30pm & 7:30pm on both Saturday and Sunday?

This is what I was wondering...why can Saturday start out later than usual but Sunday HAS to be 10am...why cant they just make it the same time both days..makes too much sense to me, but then again..what do i know im just a fan

 

[Bobblehead]

Primetimers are played at what 830pm EST?

They start at 8:30 EST not because there's a secret east coast bias or because east coast fans are wimpy (as you claim), but because the NFL is trying to maximize viewership and fans' ability to watch the game.

If everything was in the tank for the East Coast they'd much rather not have national games ending at midnight (I live in EST now and it sucks).

Instead they'd be starting games at 7PM EST so they could air the whole game during primetime, but they don't do this, because West Coast viewers are still at work at 4PM. 8:30 PM maximizes primetime viewing as much as possible across both coasts.

Rather than being a bias or a conspiracy it's a matter of common sense.

You mean on Saturday and Sunday?

 

[Popeyejones]

^^^ That was in reference to Monday night games. Look at the words immediately following the words you bolded for your answer. :th2thumbs:

 

[Bobblehead]

My bad, I thought we were talking about 10 am games on the weekend.

That said, they do have prime time games on the weekend as well.

 

[AgentDib]

There's a funny subset of sports fans who think if they minimize an issue it transfers a magical shield of denial to their team. You can see this with any factor that can be a slight disadvantage: size/height, time zones, weather/field conditions, key injuries, etc. "No excuses" is often the mantra behind this viewpoint and it never makes any sense. We're only too happy as fans to discuss the positive factors so why are a few negative factors so scary? Being honest about a negative factor is the first step in overcoming it.

Body clock is a real factor. Three hours is enough that it becomes difficult to force yourself to go bed at a reasonable time for your first couple of nights and the 20 somethings who comprise NFL players are not known for going to bed at a reasonable hour anyway. Seahawks players woke up at 4:30 am (PST) against the Panthers and I'll wager the vast majority did not get 8 hours of sleep prior to that.

The numbers which have already been bandied around here quite a lot lately clearly show that west coast teams perform worse at 1 pm EST then they do at 4 pm EST and later. The Seahawks have struggled in particular and I have posted this scoring differential before of every playoff game under Pete sorted by timezone.

@Panthers: 0-31 first half, 24-0 second half (10am)
@Vikings: 0-3 first half, 10-6 second half (10am)
@Falcons: 0-20 first half, 28-10 second half (10am)
@Bears: 0-21 first half, 24-14 second half (10am)
Packers: 0-16 first half, 22-6 second half (12pm)
Saints: 16-0 first half, 7-15 second half (1pm)
@Redskins: 13-14 first half, 11-0 second half (1pm)
Saints: 24-20 first half, 16-17 second half (1pm)
Patriots: 14-14 first half, 10-14 second half (3pm)
Broncos: 22-0 first half, 21-8 second half (3pm)
Panthers: 14-10 first half, 17-7 second half (5pm)
49ers: 3-10 first half, 20-7 second half (6pm)

I do agree that the reason for 10 am starts is short term revenue rather than some sort of conspiracy, but that doesn't end the discussion or mean that things cannot change. One of the main strengths of the NFL is that they have figured out that parity is key to increasing long-term revenue. This is a parity issue and it would be worth giving up a small amount of short term revenue if it meant solving an issue which there was large public perception about. The first problem is that most NFL fans do not know much about this or have a reason to care. The second problem is that the media tends to shy away from reporting on anything that might look like an "excuse" unless there is a suspicion of wrongdoing and a potential culprit to blame.

 

[RichNhansom]

I noticed as far back as I can see the games have all been 1 afc 1 one nfc team Saturday and the same on Sunday. This year was 2 afc teams Saturday and then 2 nfc teams sunday.

Anyone know why this changed and if it affected who played the 10am game each week?

Simpler question does anyone know if there is a formula for seeding schedule or is it all decided by the nfl and ratings?

Also does anyone know what the tv ratings for the games ended up being for the match ups this year?

It sure would be nice to put a mathmatical formula to this so it makes sense and doesn't look like it is repeatedly written off as coincidence.

It is getting harder and harder to believe there is no bias or purpose to the scheduling after playing at the 9ers 3 of the last 4 years on Thursday night and playing nearly twice as many 10am games as them since the rivalry kicked off in 2012ish as well as landing in the 10am spot nearly every time we are the wild card.

 

[AVL]

Quit whining about east coast time. When they make you play home games at 10 a.m. you will have a right to bitch.

 

[Popeyejones]

Seahawks players woke up at 4:30 am (PST) against the Panthers

Link?

 

[253hawk]

If cross-country travel and start times aren't a disadvantage, then why did the NFL specifically make a rule for east coast teams only which prevents them from having to play on the west coast more than once per season?

Under the new plan, teams wouldn't have to visit two West Coast teams, just one, along with a team closer to the Midwest. Specifically, Oakland will be paired with Denver, and San Diego will be paired with Denver. In the NFC, Arizona and San Francisco will be paired as will St. Louis and Seattle.

(Oh those poor teams that have to fly to Cali instead of Misery now.)

And it's not even an issue in the playoffs for an east coast team that gets a wild card, because there's only one west division winner per conference, so back-to-back west coast trips are impossible. For a west coast team, it's possible to have all 3 games on the east coast.

 

[Popeyejones]

N/M

 

[ivotuk]

Didn't Bill Belicheck complain about traveling to the West Coast in consecutive weeks? I know it was an East Coast team, can't remember who.

My question about 10AM starts is this, why can't the scheduling committee minimize intercoastal travel for teams as much as possible?

Why can't there be more late games instead of most games being jumbled in to the early slot, thus limiting a fans choice? Sometimes I don't watch the early games at all because the teams I want to see aren't available. imaho, they are losing viewership.

Why in the hell, after already traveling to an early start in the MIDWEST! On one of the coldest game days ever, did we have to travel to the East Coast and start an EARLY game when a week later the games were later in the day?!?! Where's the common sense? Or is it common Sensamilla?

And a point I'd like to make, Pete should have stayed on the East Coast between those two games. I live in Alaska and I know how much more working out in the cold takes out of you, than it does to work inside or in warm weather. Expending a lot of energy in cold temperatures takes a toll on one's body and you require more rest than normal. I don't think Pete takes enough in to consideration when it comes to playing in different climates or field conditions.

 

[RichNhansom]

If cross-country travel and start times aren't a disadvantage, then why did the NFL specifically make a rule for east coast teams only which prevents them from having to play on the west coast more than once per season?

Under the new plan, teams wouldn't have to visit two West Coast teams, just one, along with a team closer to the Midwest. Specifically, Oakland will be paired with Denver, and San Diego will be paired with Denver. In the NFC, Arizona and San Francisco will be paired as will St. Louis and Seattle.

(Oh those poor teams that have to fly to Cali instead of Misery now.)

And it's not even an issue in the playoffs for an east coast team that gets a wild card, because there's only one west division winner per conference, so back-to-back west coast trips are impossible. For a west coast team, it's possible to have all 3 games on the east coast.

Anyone know how to find this rule for east coast teams traveling west? I have a co-worker who doesn't believe it or that the Steelers in 2011 didn't have to come to Seattle because of it.

I've tried to find it and have come up empty.

 

[253hawk]

Anyone know how to find this rule for east coast teams traveling west? I have a co-worker who doesn't believe it or that the Steelers in 2011 didn't have to come to Seattle because of it.

I've tried to find it and have come up empty.

It was from an article John Clayton did in 2009:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4009230

That's why the Steelers hosted SEA/STL but played @ ARI/SF.

 

[RichNhansom]

Anyone know how to find this rule for east coast teams traveling west? I have a co-worker who doesn't believe it or that the Steelers in 2011 didn't have to come to Seattle because of it.

I've tried to find it and have come up empty.

It was from an article John Clayton did in 2009:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4009230

That's why the Steelers hosted SEA/STL but played @ ARI/SF.

Excellent. Thank you.

 

[Laloosh]

There's a funny subset of sports fans who think if they minimize an issue it transfers a magical shield of denial to their team. You can see this with any factor that can be a slight disadvantage: size/height, time zones, weather/field conditions, key injuries, etc. "No excuses" is often the mantra behind this viewpoint and it never makes any sense. We're only too happy as fans to discuss the positive factors so why are a few negative factors so scary? Being honest about a negative factor is the first step in overcoming it.

Generalizing about people generalizing isn't an argument either.

My not being convinced that the 10am starts are a big factor in the outcome isn't because I am in denial; it's because I haven't seen any evidence that points directly to the start time of the game being the cause of the early holes.

I've gone back and forth on this topic because before this week, I never really spent much time looking at other teams / games that played under the same criteria or how the outcomes compare to different game times.

Would you be surprised to know that those same West division teams that I pointed out in my prior post have a much worse win/loss ratio in afternoon games (4:30 pm etc) on the east coast in the playoffs?



Every year, every game... they're all different but did you expect to see a much lower win percentage later in the day?

Why do I fall into that subset that you describe if my magical shield is actual game results in the later time slots that everyone is advocating?

 

[seahawksny]

I dont know if this has been addressed yet, but i wanted to point out

East coast teams travelling to seattle playing a 1PM game where its 4P their time, right before sun is about to set on East Coast is not easy either. I live on east coast and right after we change clocks in November, those short days get you VERY tired around late afternoon/Early PM

its not so cut and dry to say East Coast teams have advantage.

 

[253hawk]

But a 4 PM PST game is basically a slightly earlier version of a home prime time game for east coast teams. You can easily adjust for sleeping in when your body clock is gaining 3 hours, but it doesn't work as easily the other way around.

 

[WilsonMVP]

Didn't Bill Belicheck complain about traveling to the West Coast in consecutive weeks? I know it was an East Coast team, can't remember who.

My question about 10AM starts is this, why can't the scheduling committee minimize intercoastal travel for teams as much as possible?

Why can't there be more late games instead of most games being jumbled in to the early slot, thus limiting a fans choice? Sometimes I don't watch the early games at all because the teams I want to see aren't available. imaho, they are losing viewership.

Why in the hell, after already traveling to an early start in the MIDWEST! On one of the coldest game days ever, did we have to travel to the East Coast and start an EARLY game when a week later the games were later in the day?!?! Where's the common sense? Or is it common Sensamilla?

And a point I'd like to make, Pete should have stayed on the East Coast between those two games. I live in Alaska and I know how much more working out in the cold takes out of you, than it does to work inside or in warm weather. Expending a lot of energy in cold temperatures takes a toll on one's body and you require more rest than normal. I don't think Pete takes enough in to consideration when it comes to playing in different climates or field conditions.

The time was allready laid out I believe. If we had lost it would of been the Packers playing in Carolina at 10am pacific

 

[Laloosh]

But a 4 PM PST game is basically a slightly earlier version of a home prime time game for east coast teams. You can easily adjust for sleeping in when your body clock is gaining 3 hours, but it doesn't work as easily the other way around.

Is this in response to my post? Can't tell.