Browns and Jags get no primetime games

HawkGA

New member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
107,412
Reaction score
1
I thought that alone was interesting . . . they do technically get a nationally televised game as they each get a London game. But then further down in this article it mentions that they benefit from no short weeks . . . which means the whole "everybody plays a Thursday Night Game" is out the window. Thoughts? I think it might be overlookable given that these teams are not competitive to begin with but a secondary effect of this is that two more teams have to play a Thursday night game they otherwise wouldn't have had to play.

http://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post ... le-release

Discuss.
 

JGfromtheNW

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2012
Messages
2,345
Reaction score
119
Location
On-Track
Last year there was so much rumbling about ratings being down and the majority of primetime games being snoozers, especially the TNF games. It really doesn't surprise me that the NFL took a relatively aggressive approach as far as the games and franchises that are getting primetime games. Unfortunately, the Browns and Jags have been by far the worst two teams in the league since 2010 as the author noted and with the NFL freaking for ratings it's probably just that they gave them the primetime axe. It's not like you can alienate fans of those teams anymore than the franchise already does lol.

28-3. Poor Falcons.
Now, they'll have a chance to ease themselves back into things before facing up to the biggest disappointment of their professional lives.
 

kidhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2009
Messages
22,924
Reaction score
2,702
Location
Anchorage, AK
HawkGA":3t2d0y54 said:
I thought that alone was interesting . . . they do technically get a nationally televised game as they each get a London game. But then further down in this article it mentions that they benefit from no short weeks . . . which means the whole "everybody plays a Thursday Night Game" is out the window. Thoughts? I think it might be overlookable given that these teams are not competitive to begin with but a secondary effect of this is that two more teams have to play a Thursday night game they otherwise wouldn't have had to play.

http://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post ... le-release

Discuss.

There are also quite a few non divisional match-ups this year as well. BTW, it's Dallas and Washington who get the "extra" Thursday games and that's because they both also play on Thanksgiving. I'm pretty sure though, it's no coincidence that it's the Browns and Jags that don't get the extra prime time game.
 

mikeak

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
8,202
Reaction score
25
Location
Anchorage, AK
I think it is totally appropriate for the Browns

I am going out on a limb here but I think Jacksonville is fighting for a playoff spot this year. Maybe misses out but then makes it next year.

If people actually look at their scores last year they will realize how many really close games they lost. They are close to being a competitive team and changed coaches due to being awful the last 10 minutes of 6-8 football games......
 

SeatownJay

Active member
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Messages
10,745
Reaction score
6
Location
Hagerstown, MD
This is easily explained when you look at the four NFL executives in charge of picking the official schedule.

Howard Katz, senior vice president of broadcasting
Blake Jones, director of broadcasting
Charlotte Carey, manager of broadcasting
Michael North, senior director of broadcasting

Notice the theme?
 

Hawk Finn

New member
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
1,368
Reaction score
0
SeatownJay":2lr9mged said:
This is easily explained when you look at the four NFL executives in charge of picking the official schedule.

Howard Katz, senior vice president of broadcasting
Blake Jones, director of broadcasting
Charlotte Carey, manager of broadcasting
Michael North, senior director of broadcasting

Notice the theme?


Each surname begins with a consonant
 

HawkFan72

Active member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
16,570
Reaction score
1
Location
Bay Area, CA
Maulbert":26bf3dg9 said:
Does anyone really care? Remember, we weren't on MNF at all from November 30th, 1992 until November 1st, 1999, a span of 138 games.

I certainly remember. When the Hawks finally made it on MNF because of Mike Holmgren it was like a national holiday for me. Being a kid living in the Bay Area with no cable (MNF was on ABC back then), that was one of the first times I was able to watch the Hawks on TV in primetime and against someone other than the Raiders. It was glorious.
 
OP
OP
H

HawkGA

New member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
107,412
Reaction score
1
Maulbert":157ifdnu said:
Does anyone really care? Remember, we weren't on MNF at all from November 30th, 1992 until November 1st, 1999, a span of 138 games.

I think the MNF part doesn't matter. It's the TNF part that (potentially) does. Those games are still rather controversial from a competitive (dis)advantage standpoint.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,524
Reaction score
1,522
Location
Roy Wa.
HawkGA":1e2842n1 said:
Maulbert":1e2842n1 said:
Does anyone really care? Remember, we weren't on MNF at all from November 30th, 1992 until November 1st, 1999, a span of 138 games.

I think the MNF part doesn't matter. It's the TNF part that (potentially) does. Those games are still rather controversial from a competitive (dis)advantage standpoint.


MNF does, initially they hated us but our games were so entertaining and weird stuff always happens when we play for some reason. We have the best Record on MNF also. Later teams that were either good and or were part of a rivalry were who you saw, That drought was because we sucked badly or were barely .500 and our only real rival was the Raiders who also were sucking badly. I also think it is part of the reason we have fan chips on our shoulders, MNF was something every fan base loved to have happen, being ignored just fueled the East Coast bias syndrome.
 

Seahawkfan80

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 5, 2011
Messages
11,207
Reaction score
615
chris98251":314hdfgt said:
HawkGA":314hdfgt said:
Maulbert":314hdfgt said:
Does anyone really care? Remember, we weren't on MNF at all from November 30th, 1992 until November 1st, 1999, a span of 138 games.

I think the MNF part doesn't matter. It's the TNF part that (potentially) does. Those games are still rather controversial from a competitive (dis)advantage standpoint.


MNF does, initially they hated us but our games were so entertaining and weird stuff always happens when we play for some reason. We have the best Record on MNF also. Later teams that were either good and or were part of a rivalry were who you saw, That drought was because we sucked badly or were barely .500 and our only real rival was the Raiders who also were sucking badly. I also think it is part of the reason we have fan chips on our shoulders, MNF was something every fan base loved to have happen, being ignored just fueled the East Coast bias syndrome.


I like this. I like mine in BBQ flavor.
 

Hasselbeck

New member
Joined
May 2, 2009
Messages
11,397
Reaction score
3
I think it shows that TNF is on its last legs and if these "better" matchups don't move the needle, the league is going to get rid of this.
 
OP
OP
H

HawkGA

New member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
107,412
Reaction score
1
Hasselbeck":31kgx4ed said:
I think it shows that TNF is on its last legs and if these "better" matchups don't move the needle, the league is going to get rid of this.

I disagree. They are looking to boost the ratings but I doubt it is in "scrap it" territory. I don't see how these games are an added cost to the league so the extra TV revenue, whatever it is, is straight profit. The players may not like it but they also like the salary cap going up.
 

sdog1981

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
3,367
Reaction score
240
Hasselbeck":vd4hn72j said:
I think it shows that TNF is on its last legs and if these "better" matchups don't move the needle, the league is going to get rid of this.


I wish this was true. But look how much money the league made is the streaming rights alone in just one bad TV season. It went from 10 million to 50 million. Money trumps all in the NFL.
 
Top