Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

Browns and Jags get no primetime games

Discuss any and all NFL-related topics and matters of interest here. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
Browns and Jags get no primetime games
Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:36 am
  • 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.
    HawkGA
    NET Hall Of Famer
     
    Posts: 104833
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 12:29 pm


  • 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.
    User avatar
    JGfromtheNW
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1336
    Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 9:37 am
    Location: Wenatchee


  • HawkGA wrote: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.
    Image

    “You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time”

    :les: Check your PM's....We miss you :les:
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 20786
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    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......
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6169
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


  • 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?
    Image

    2014 Adopt-A-Rookie: Kiero Small
    2015 Adopt-A-Rookie: Tyler Lockett
    2016 Adopt-A-Rookie: Joey Hunt
    User avatar
    SeatownJay
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 9265
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:38 pm
    Location: Hagerstown, MD


  • SeatownJay wrote: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
    User avatar
    Hawk Finn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1312
    Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 3:44 am


  • 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.
    This is becoming far too common for my tastes.

    RIP Cortez Kennedy, 1968-2017

    RIP Sir Roger Moore, 1927-2017
    User avatar
    Maulbert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3047
    Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 6:44 pm
    Location: JMC Mining Ship Red Dwarf


  • Maulbert wrote: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.
    Image
    Radish and Cheinhill — Gone, but not forgotten
    User avatar
    HawkFan72
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 15868
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:50 am
    Location: Antioch, CA


  • Maulbert wrote: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.
    HawkGA
    NET Hall Of Famer
     
    Posts: 104833
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 12:29 pm


  • HawkGA wrote:
    Maulbert wrote: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.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 20831
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • chris98251 wrote:
    HawkGA wrote:
    Maulbert wrote: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.
    Cats will rule the world...just ask my cat. MEOW.......
    User avatar
    Seahawkfan80
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6903
    Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 12:20 pm
    Location: A little ways from Boise.


  • 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.
    February 2, 2014... the day the dream was finally realized
    User avatar
    Hasselbeck
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 11073
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 4:55 pm


Re: Browns and Jags get no primetime games
Sun Apr 23, 2017 11:00 am
  • Hasselbeck wrote: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.
    HawkGA
    NET Hall Of Famer
     
    Posts: 104833
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 12:29 pm


  • Hasselbeck wrote: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.
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 953
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am




It is currently Mon May 29, 2017 7:22 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ NFL NATION ]




Information
  • Who is online
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests