nucci Posted February 3, 2020 Posted February 3, 2020 20 minutes ago, Cripple Creek said: So, swapped money? The feeds will continue to come from the networks, but, how much will they be willing to pay for a watered down product (less key, meaningful games on network as more games move to other platforms? I suppose that the goose and her golden egg isn't cooked yet because those streams have some deep pockets. but those platforms will show the broadcast feed just like directv does so if you're on Amazon you will still be watching CBS broadcast....again, I'm just guessing
Cripple Creek Posted February 3, 2020 Posted February 3, 2020 22 minutes ago, nucci said: but those platforms will show the broadcast feed just like directv does so if you're on Amazon you will still be watching CBS broadcast....again, I'm just guessing I get it, but you won't be watching CBS commercials, will you? I'm trying to remember the Thursday night games I watched on Amazon. So, does the lost ad revenue get made up by payments from the streaming services? 42 minutes ago, Mr Info said: I do not agree with your premise. This is just 1 more game and every game will be as important as they currently are. It will still be just a 17 game season, unlike NBA, MLB, NHL where there may be many inconsequential games. You can't agree with what you don't understand. I'm afraid I'm doing a crappy job explaining this. If the streams simply mean a different way to watch a game then there is a gain for the NFL. If, however, those streaming games are only available on specific platforms then there will be less meaningful games for the old networks on Sunday and Monday. Less meaningful games means less ad revenue. Less ad revenue means less to offer the NFL.
nucci Posted February 3, 2020 Posted February 3, 2020 8 minutes ago, Cripple Creek said: I get it, but you won't be watching CBS commercials, will you? I'm trying to remember the Thursday night games I watched on Amazon. So, does the lost ad revenue get made up by payments from the streaming services? Not sure....you get directv and CBS/ Fox commercials on Sunday ticket..
Spiderweb Posted February 3, 2020 Posted February 3, 2020 23 hours ago, Boca BIlls said: No it isn't since everyone wants them gone and half the team sits in the games. You are the only person that doesn't want less preseason games lol I can't tell if you are serious or just overreacting for fun. If you are saying they should shorten the preseason, that's fine. I'm simply against any expansion of the regular season or adding playoff games, etc. Of this, I'm serious. Again, to use preseason games in a trade off to add games to regular season is a failure to utilize any critical thinking in the comparison of them.
Doc Brown Posted February 3, 2020 Posted February 3, 2020 6 hours ago, nucci said: players don't want 17 games...doubtful they agree to 18 Right, but I said 16 games with two bye weeks (giving the league 18 weeks and an extra week for TV to jack up the tv contracts).
nucci Posted February 3, 2020 Posted February 3, 2020 6 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: Right, but I said 16 games with two bye weeks (giving the league 18 weeks and an extra week for TV to jack up the tv contracts). They did 2 bye weeks once before. I didn't like it...2 weeks with no Bills game kinda sucks
Doc Brown Posted February 3, 2020 Posted February 3, 2020 (edited) 10 minutes ago, nucci said: They did 2 bye weeks once before. I didn't like it...2 weeks with no Bills game kinda sucks Back before fantasy football and they only had 28 teams in the league. They also spread the bye weeks out horribly in '93. It's a good compromise. Edited February 3, 2020 by Doc Brown
TheFunPolice Posted February 3, 2020 Posted February 3, 2020 If you're on a great team like NE or KC that goes deep in the playoffs every year, you eventually play entire extra seasons worth of games at 100% full speed and effort that guys on bad teams never play, just speaking in terms of wear and tear on the body A 17 week season with 1 neutral site game for every team per year could lend itself to some pretty cool venues. Not only international. Legendary college stadiums hosting a game here or there would be neat to see as well.
May Day 10 Posted February 3, 2020 Posted February 3, 2020 42 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said: If you're on a great team like NE or KC that goes deep in the playoffs every year, you eventually play entire extra seasons worth of games at 100% full speed and effort that guys on bad teams never play, just speaking in terms of wear and tear on the body A 17 week season with 1 neutral site game for every team per year could lend itself to some pretty cool venues. Not only international. Legendary college stadiums hosting a game here or there would be neat to see as well. you have to wonder if the 'neutral site' market will be over-saturated with games. 16 a year, every year. Will people flock to an 80,000 college stadium to watch the Lions and the Panthers?
Boca BIlls Posted February 3, 2020 Posted February 3, 2020 3 hours ago, Spiderweb said: If you are saying they should shorten the preseason, that's fine. I'm simply against any expansion of the regular season or adding playoff games, etc. Of this, I'm serious. Again, to use preseason games in a trade off to add games to regular season is a failure to utilize any critical thinking in the comparison of them. It is happening, it happened before and will be happening again. It's a great idea since preseason is garbage and all we want is more football.
TheFunPolice Posted February 3, 2020 Posted February 3, 2020 2 hours ago, May Day 10 said: you have to wonder if the 'neutral site' market will be over-saturated with games. 16 a year, every year. Will people flock to an 80,000 college stadium to watch the Lions and the Panthers? What about 49ers vs Raiders at Penn State's field, for example? Obviously Steelers game there would essentially be a home game.
hjnick Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 What if in the middle of the season all teams had a BYE, like an all star weekend like the NBA and MLB have? Do some skills competitions where the winners get a MIL or something like that. Then you could have the 1 bye week and get it all done in 18 weeks. (17 games + 1 bye week).
stuvian Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 16 hours ago, Dablitzkrieg said: Ha, if this is sarcasm, excellently done. If this is for real, it's really dumb! Also, that last thing you typed isn't a word. watered down football needs more sheeple like you 1
billsfan89 Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 On 2/3/2020 at 8:48 AM, Cripple Creek said: This might deserve its own thread, but, has the TV revenue bubble burst? How much higher can this number go? I know that football is king of the hill, but, the networks have got to have a come to Jesus moment, don't they? No way can the next NBA CBA be so lucrative, right? Can football be far behind? I think the days of 50-200% increases in sports fees are over. But I don't think that the revenue for contracts coming up this decade are going to go down. They will still see 10-20% increases in revenue in their next deals. I think the sports that might suffer are the second tier sports like the MLS, Tennis, NASCAR, NCAA non-basketball/football, and the like. Those sports might see massive declines in revenue in sports deals but the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL (in Canada at least) will still hold their values and just grow at a slower rate than the boom of the previous decade. But I think the move to a 17 game schedule is just not the right move. Teams making the playoffs are often beat up and careers are getting shorter. Adding an extra regular season game just is only going to make things worse opening up another game of wear and tear and injury.
BBills88 Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 (edited) They should leave it at 16 and change the playoff format Edited February 4, 2020 by BBills88
papazoid Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 i'm against 17 weeks expand playoffs to 16 teams...no byes....big money
Recommended Posts