10am starts question.

[253hawk]

No, it was to seahawksny right above me.

I mean a game here and there at 10 AM isn't a big deal, but back-to-back after having just been on PST time for a week can feel really bizarro.

 

[ZagHawk]

Last time I checked most Americans start work anywhere between 6-9 AM, and we're crying about 10 AM? God I wish I could go to work at 10 AM. Maybe the next time there is a situation like this, the team should travel sooner and perhaps take an extra day to practice at the location?

You only answer this way because the question doesn't contain an explanation that plops the homework you obviously didn't do in front of your eyes.

The game STARTS at 10:00AM PST. That means....talking slowly....the players... get... up... at... 5:00AM... to... start... their... routine. You can thank me any time for that in-depth research. :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Sure is starting to sound like the 12thman = 12thWhiners/crybabies.

Our team lost, the end. Don't wanna play 10 am games and on the road or back to back on the road at 10 am. Win the division and preferably HFA. Seahawks hold onto a few more of those 4th quarter leads this season (like they used to), and none of this would have been an issue and perhaps we'd be all excited at the possibility of a third SB appearance in a row (and perhaps 2 wins in that 3 year period). Hell maybe if the Hawks did SOMETHING with the O-Line correctly through the entire season none of this would be an issue.

BTW Seahawks win a few more SBs and establish themselves as more of a national team, and we'll all see less and less 10 AM starts too.

 

[253hawk]

People can say we're "crybabies" about it, but if it's not an issue, then what makes the east coast teams so special that they can't play two games on the west coast even if they're in week 1 and 17? It's favoritism driving on a one-way street.

Whether there's an actual scientific affect is irrelevant, since the rule exists in the first place. A single east coast trip for Seattle is about as many miles as the Eagles traveled during the entire season.

 

[Laloosh]

No, it was to seahawksny right above me.

I mean a game here and there at 10 AM isn't a big deal, but back-to-back after having just been on PST time for a week can feel really bizarro.

I don't disagree. I just think that some of the stats thrown around to support the argument might be misguided.

Anybody know how the vote went on the rule change linked earlier? I'm curious if they ever revealed which owners voted for/against.

Here's the link again.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4009230

People can say we're "crybabies" about it, but if it's not an issue, then what makes the east coast teams so special that they can't play two games on the west coast even if they're in week 1 and 17? It's favoritism driving on a one-way street.

Whether there's an actual scientific affect is irrelevant, since the rule exists in the first place. A single east coast trip for Seattle is about as many miles as the Eagles traveled during the entire season.

Was the reasoning behind the rule change specific to competitive disadvantage or simply sold as an inconvenience with regard to travel? If it wasn't a competitive disadvantage, I think that matters.

 

[ZagHawk]

People can say we're "crybabies" about it, but if it's not an issue, then what makes the east coast teams so special that they can't play two games on the west coast even if they're in week 1 and 17? It's favoritism driving on a one-way street.

Whether there's an actual scientific affect is irrelevant, since the rule exists in the first place. A single east coast trip for Seattle is about as many miles as the Eagles traveled during the entire season.

We as Seahawk fans are being crybabies about it. It's not an issue and if the NFL were to try and make things "easier" for West Coast teams due to time zones to the point where it may seem fair on this side, the East Coast fan base would then cry about what makes the West Coast teams so special.

 

[Sgt Largent]

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.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4009230 <This common sense as well?

Typical "one line quote grab" from you. Then you color it up with "Bias" and "Conspiracy". My entire post is about the NFL caring about 2 things, money, and reputation (so they can keep making money). The exact opposite of "bias" and "conspiracy". That's just cold hearted business.

Apathy from the East Cost on the issue does not equal bias. It's just lack of concern.

The 8:30 PST start scenario should have been ridiculous enough to be taken tongue in cheek, but your trollish nature causes you to hunt for rotting crumbs instead of consuming the meal before commenting.

I agree wholeheartedly with 830 EST kickoffs, but lets not pretend every league does it because it's "common sense". As a matter of fact, it's the only big 3 league (Football, Baseball, Basketball) that does it. I Regularly used to zombie myself watching Mariners games until 2 AM on weekdays living out East.

 

[BigMeach]

By 6AM every morning I'm up with my daughter. By 830 AM every morning I've worked out and ready for work. I knock out the hardest and most focused tasks of my day in the morning because I've got more energy.

East Coast teams are regularly playing football while the rest of the world is tired, winding down, and eating dinner.

The 10AM start time thing amounts to not much more than junk stats and whiny overblown nonsense, IMO. I'm not just targeting Hawks fans with this, as 9ers fans bring it up too whenever they happen to lose a 1PM EST start time game.

People don't like it when their team loses and grab at any reason they can that's not their team getting beaten to make excuses for it.

I'm not going to comment on how I feel about the 10 AM games. However, your argument is completely irrelevant. Your comparison of how you begin your non competitive morning routine to that of professional athletes playing in games of the highest caliber is laughable. Has nothing to do with the price of tomatoes.

 

[Sgt Largent]

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?

Nice work Laloosh. I don't think you fall into the category above. That's reserved for the "Quit whining/griping/moaning, win more games crybaby/poopypants" toughguys around here.

I would like to see data on how much money the NFL loses if SEA/CAR was a late game. It's the only rationale for scheduling this way whether or not the early game disadvantage is real or perceived. If there is no good reason not to, eliminating any hint of competitive disadvantage is the only sensible thing to do. We have tons of rules already based on this concept.

Do we have 30 years of research on the effects of football inflation? How bout K balls? Stick'em is outlawed. Was there a comparative study done before making these changes? The gloves they use now are arguably more ridiculous than old school Stick'em but still allowed.

How in depth was the paper outlining the effects of the "Burden" of traveling to the West Coast more than once a year before that was voted on and changed? Or were there 26 owners that determined one sided rules are just fine if you can carry the vote?

:sarcasm_on: Maybe the Seahawks could play 1 East Coast game a year and all the other teams have to meet us in Denver for the rest of our East Coast road games. :sarcasm_off: < For Popeye>

 

[Scottemojo]

So on Saturday no games started at 12 Eastern. So why start one on Sunday at 12 Eastern?

THe Reality is Eastern teams whined about travel and got their west coast burden reduced.
Also, the NFL protecting afternoon eastern starts for ratings is an outdated concept.

There is literally no reason to not have traveling western teams start games at 12 Pacific.

It isn't whining, it is protecting your interests. Eastern teams did it, and got their way, now it's time for western teams to protect their interests.

 

[Popeyejones]

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?

Seriously, thanks for doing the legwork to bring some evidence to a suspicion that you and I share. Really very much appreciated.

 

[NINEster]

There are articles written with evidence/stats to back up that east coast teams versus the west coast in primetime have historically struggled (Monday Night Football was the basis).

"Stanford researchers dug through 25 years of MNF games and flagged every time a West Coast team played an East Coast team. The West Coast teams dominated their East Coast opponents no matter where they played."

http://deadspin.com/5934440/the-circadi ... -nfl-teams

Let it go guys.

 

[253hawk]

Guarantee that west coast teams play more 10 AM games per season than east coast teams play prime time. Probably almost 2:1.

 

[Sgt Largent]

There are articles written with evidence/stats to back up that east coast teams versus the west coast in primetime have historically struggled (Monday Night Football was the basis).

"Stanford researchers dug through 25 years of MNF games and flagged every time a West Coast team played an East Coast team. The West Coast teams dominated their East Coast opponents no matter where they played."

http://deadspin.com/5934440/the-circadi ... -nfl-teams

Let it go guys.

This is impossible. Just scroll through this post. Excuses, excuses, I tell ya.

I might have an inch of sympathy for East Coast teams if not for the fact that Primetime West vs East happen maybe once every couple-de-5 years per Eastern team. There's only 5 (six now) of us. That and the whole "One trip West per year" thing.

Disgraceful.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

So on Saturday no games started at 12 Eastern. So why start one on Sunday at 12 Eastern?

THe Reality is Eastern teams whined about travel and got their west coast burden reduced.
Also, the NFL protecting afternoon eastern starts for ratings is an outdated concept.

There is literally no reason to not have traveling western teams start games at 12 Pacific.

It isn't whining, it is protecting your interests. Eastern teams did it, and got their way, now it's time for western teams to protect their interests.

Stop using logic to make your point man. Don't you know it's about Hawks fans whining? (even though many of us talked strictly about "west coast teams" including you)

 

[RichNhansom]

There are articles written with evidence/stats to back up that east coast teams versus the west coast in primetime have historically struggled (Monday Night Football was the basis).

"Stanford researchers dug through 25 years of MNF games and flagged every time a West Coast team played an East Coast team. The West Coast teams dominated their East Coast opponents no matter where they played."

http://deadspin.com/5934440/the-circadi ... -nfl-teams

Let it go guys.

So the info agrees that circadia rhythms are really a factor and you do too. Then why not address it?

West coast teams play probably 20+ games every year at 10am start time. Seattle has played over 18 the last 3 years alone. How many times over the last three years have east coast teams met west coast teams in prime time? Of the 26 teams that normally start at 10am there is probably half as many prime times games total as Seattle has had in the same time frame.

To me all west teams should be fighting this because if your team makes the wild card next year and you get back to back 10am starts I gaurantee you won't like it. I can also gaurantee I would be laughing about it.

 

[253hawk]

Wild card round:
Packers at Redskins: 1 PM PST start
Seahawks at Vikings: 10 AM PST start

That made absolutely zero sense whatsoever. Make the central/east teams play late, and the west coast team play early? There's now 7 teams west of Texas, and at best, 4 might make the playoffs. There's no reason the NFL can't coordinate start times with geography a little better.

 

[RichNhansom]

Wild card round:
Packers at Redskins: 1 PM PST start
Seahawks at Vikings: 10 AM PST start

That made absolutely zero sense whatsoever. Make the central/east teams play late, and the west coast team play early? There's now 7 teams west of Texas, and at best, 4 might make the playoffs. There's no reason the NFL can't coordinate start times with geography a little better.

This brings up the other question. Why did they slot two NFC teams on Sunday and two AFC teams on Saturday this year whens it has always been one of each esch day?

If they don't change the format we would be playing Saturday and no early start.

Why change it?

 

[gaucho]

I get the body clock thing but sometimes you just have to pick your battles.

Going back to the 70's, teams in "West" divisions have fared better than "East" division teams on the road, in the playoffs, in eastern time zones, in early games.

West


East


I'm aware that some of those teams are not on the west coast.

To be fair, I pulled a different result set with an emphasis on scoring margins and the west coast teams are demonstrably worse.

West


East


Thing is, only 3/8 teams in West divisions showed improvement in the 3rd quarter and 4/9 teams in East divisions improved in the 3rd quarter.

If you saw shrinking deficits or increasing leads across the board in the 3rd quarter for the West, I might be more inclined to think that it's a bigger factor but to me, I don't see how you can measure it's impact.

I appreciate you bringing statistics, but I don't think any of those samples are large enough to be anything other than anecdotal.

I've studied this topic in depth. 10am starts are a large disadvantage. This is not surprising when you understand the physiology behind it (called chronobiology). It decreases your chance of winning almost 10%. It costs you about 3 points. It is a bigger disadvantage than east coast teams playing primetime games on the west coast, and is 4x as prevalent.

This paper (mine) was published by the American Society of Exercise Physiologists yesterday. Take a look if you want specifics. I wish every west coast NFL fan would read this as their outrage could convince the league to make the necessary changes.

https://www.asep.org/asep/asep/JEPonlineFEBRUARY2016_Brian.pdf

As I said on another thread, I am not a seahawk fan, but facing these back to back in the playoffs was horribly unfair.

 

[253hawk]

This brings up the other question. Why did they slot two NFC teams on Sunday and two AFC teams on Saturday this year whens it has always been one of each esch day?

If they don't change the format we would be playing Saturday and no early start.

Why change it?

I thought that was really weird, too. I think that's the first time that's ever happened, for the first time in 50 years...so it was obviously deliberate, for whatever reason.

I'd take a Saturday afternoon game over an early Sunday game in a heartbeat.

 

[RichNhansom]

This brings up the other question. Why did they slot two NFC teams on Sunday and two AFC teams on Saturday this year whens it has always been one of each esch day?

If they don't change the format we would be playing Saturday and no early start.

Why change it?

I thought that was really weird, too. I think that's the first time that's ever happened, for the first time in 50 years...so it was obviously deliberate, for whatever reason.

I'd take a Saturday afternoon game over an early Sunday game in a heartbeat.

Especially when you factor in the temperature difference between Saturday and Sunday that weekend. Even worse when you factor in early forecasts were already out at the time the schedule was being set an predicted pretty much exactly how the temperatures ended up being.

Consider of our 5 away playoff games since Pete Carroll arrived 4 have been 10am starts.
2011 Chicago 10am,
2013 Redskins 1pm
2013 Falcons 10am,
2016 Vikings 10am
2016 Panthers 10am.

How many times has any team that normally starts at 10am had to deal with a body clock disadvantage in the playoffs over the last 4 years? Has it happened even once for all of them combined? Maybe but I bet it hasn't happened 4 times let alone 4 out of 5 and that is factoring every 10am normal start team, not just one.

Gotta say the more I look at this the more I believe it is deliberate.