Fan ideas on how to improve the NFL -- Peter King's latest FMIA column

[Richard Noggin]

17 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Where do you get seven from?  I'm only coming up with three (Chiefs, Rams, Titans).

 

I got it from being absolutely wrong, okay. Is that what you want to hear?!

 

Yeah I was completely ignoring the annual extradivisional, INTRAconference (AFC) division rotation. 

[Doc Brown]

4 minutes ago, Richard Noggin said:

 

I got it from being absolutely wrong, okay. Is that what you want to hear?!

 

Yeah I was completely ignoring the annual extradivisional, INTRAconference (AFC) division rotation. 

That's exactly what I wanted to hear.  It will be interesting to see what they do if they go to an 18 game season.  Do they punish the division winners even further and make them play another division winner from the opposing conference?  We got lucky drawing Washington last year after a 7-9 record won them the division.

[Richard Noggin]

12 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

That's exactly what I wanted to hear.  It will be interesting to see what they do if they go to an 18 game season.  Do they punish the division winners even further and make them play another division winner from the opposing conference?  We got lucky drawing Washington last year after a 7-9 record won them the division.

 

No league handicaps success like the NFL, and yet no league is as beloved or as successful. The rewards for excellence are still greater than the substantial subsidies for failure/mediocrity. 

 

An intriguing microcosm.

[BillsShredder83]

22 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Which team would have to play in Alabama "a few years in a row" to generate "natural interest" in this team from somewhere else?

 

Who in Alabama is not already aware enough of the NFL to have an interest?  "NFL?  Yeah, I don't know---I'd have to see a game in person before I decide to become a regular watcher of their televised games"...said no one.  Besides, Alabama's 2021 National Championship drew about as many viewers as the average NFL game on CBS. 

 

What would be the point of all this anyway? To bring the NFL more ratings?  There's no reason to believe this will boost the king of ratings any higher.  Big college football schools are loaded with kids who watch the NFL every sundae---same as every other school in this country.

Perfect example. I've always been pretty casual with nba living in buff. Some people like Toronto, some Knicks fans, some cav fans or whoever. Buy there's no like majority obvious team. 

Same with MLB. 

Once I moved to Charlotte and caught a few games outta curiosity, I had someone to identify with finally. 

Same thing there, doesn't matter who, just pick one of the closer teams and be semi consistent with it 🤷‍♂️

[Mr. WEO]

11 minutes ago, BillsShredder83 said:

Perfect example. I've always been pretty casual with nba living in buff. Some people like Toronto, some Knicks fans, some cav fans or whoever. Buy there's no like majority obvious team. 

Same with MLB. 

Once I moved to Charlotte and caught a few games outta curiosity, I had someone to identify with finally. 

Same thing there, doesn't matter who, just pick one of the closer teams and be semi consistent with it 🤷‍♂️

 

 

You moved to a city that had an NBA and went to NBA games and had a new/increased interest as a result.  

 

That's not what we are talking about here.  Tossing a Knicks or Raptors game per year  into KeyBank arena wouldn't create many (if any)  new Knicks or Raptors fans in Buffalo.. 

[chongli]

On 7/12/2022 at 8:17 AM, Logic said:

 

 

Yeah, Chongli, it's weird to share a name with an NFL head coach, and have it be pronounced the same, too. I still haven't gotten used to hearing my name on TV so much during the NFL season 😆

As for the "upsetting the competitive balance" angle you both brought up...I can definitely understand and empathize with that perspective.

The way I see it is that the purpose of the NFL is ultimately to provide entertainment and to make money. The idea I proposed would help in both respects. Obviously, there IS a need for competitive fairness and balance, and the parity in the NFL is one of the things that makes it the best sports league in the country. That said, I think the NFL is always walking a fine line between entertainment and competitive balance.

Take prime time games, for example, or Thursday night games. No one can tell me that it's not a bit of a competitive disadvantage to have a bunch of prime time games, or three Thursday night games, as the Bills do this season. Teams accept it, though, because TV viewership and the "entertainment" and "revenue" angle to it all. It's a tightrope that the NFL ALREADY walks, and I don't feel that allowing the league to pick one matchup out of 17 is all that big a deal. 

I used to be much more concerned about all the aspects of whether a schedule was perfectly fair or not. I don't care so much any more. The schedules rotate anyway, and in the case of the idea I proposed, the opponents chosen would likely be different most years, meaning it would all sort of balance out over time. Not only that, but teams that look fierce when a game is scheduled are sometimes not so fierce when the game finally rolls around, due to injuries or what have you.

I understand the perspective you both espoused, though, and I think it's ultimately why the NFL will never enact the idea I proposed. I stand by the notion, though, that it would add entertainment value, viewership, and bring in extra revenue for the league.

 

 

Sorry for taking so long to respond (work and all...). You make some very valid point. I think I failed to take this into consideration when I posted. I guess having to play a good team like Green Bay, in your original example, can be interpreted as the price you pay for being a good team, or having a good QB. As you said, the NFL does take measures to try to maintain a fair balance to all team (like no MNF during the last week), but they have also relented in the ways you mentioned in your post. Teams themselves also have relented at times in the name of revenue, like the Bills in Toronto series, or Green Bay playing three home games each year in Milwaukee in the 80's (and probably before). (The NBA Boston Celtics used to do this too in Hartford).

 

I guess the other objection to having an interesting matchup for the 17th game is who gets to decide this and what are the standards? Would both LA teams play each other every year? Would some playoff teams have to play each other, while others play an easier game against a regional rival (like maybe Dallas vs. Houston or Tampa Bay vs. Jacksonville)? But your conclusion in your post above, which I will repeat below, is one that I now have to agree with completely:

 

"I understand the perspective you both espoused, though, and I think it's ultimately why the NFL will never enact the idea I proposed. I stand by the notion, though, that it would add entertainment value, viewership, and bring in extra revenue for the league."

Edited July 13, 2022 by chongli

[Billy Claude]

On 7/12/2022 at 1:42 PM, Mr. WEO said:

 

Which team would have to play in Alabama "a few years in a row" to generate "natural interest" in this team from somewhere else?

 

Who in Alabama is not already aware enough of the NFL to have an interest?  "NFL?  Yeah, I don't know---I'd have to see a game in person before I decide to become a regular watcher of their televised games"...said no one.  Besides, Alabama's 2021 National Championship drew about as many viewers as the average NFL game on CBS. 

 

What would be the point of all this anyway? To bring the NFL more ratings?  There's no reason to believe this will boost the king of ratings any higher.  Big college football schools are loaded with kids who watch the NFL every sundae---same as every other school in this country.

 

I agree with the rest but if you limit these college site games to one or two a year on a Monday or Thursday, you would absolutely get increased ratings.  People will tune in to watch a game in Bryant-Denny or Beaver Stadium for the spectacle as long as you don't do it very often.   Have all the overseas games be in the same division and use college site games if you don't have enough oversea games for the division.  That way, everybody in the division has a neutral site game.

 

 

 

[BillsShredder83]

4 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

You moved to a city that had an NBA and went to NBA games and had a new/increased interest as a result.  

 

That's not what we are talking about here.  Tossing a Knicks or Raptors game per year  into KeyBank arena wouldn't create many (if any)  new Knicks or Raptors fans in Buffalo.. 

I totally your perspective, and respectfully disagree.

 

Give a fiend a taste of something and they're gunna want more. South is weird, rabid college fantasy, but less interest in nfl, and I think it's a lack of an identity. 

 

I've watched a few Braves games, but if they played a few games a year near me, and I went, I think I'd end up rabid.

 

I could totally be over estimating things too just because I'm susceptible af to Fandom lol 🤷‍♂️

[Mr. WEO]

59 minutes ago, Billy Claude said:

 

I agree with the rest but if you limit these college site games to one or two a year on a Monday or Thursday, you would absolutely get increased ratings.  People will tune in to watch a game in Bryant-Denny or Beaver Stadium for the spectacle as long as you don't do it very often.   Have all the overseas games be in the same division and use college site games if you don't have enough oversea games for the division.  That way, everybody in the division has a neutral site game.

 

 

 

 

National TV ratings would be higher if they played games in college stadiums?  Locals would be hooked on watching/following out of town NFL teams when they previously had no interest in thin watching NFL games.....because the NFL put on  a game once in a nearby college stadium?

 

That's not intuitive...

[Billy Claude]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

National TV ratings would be higher if they played games in college stadiums?  Locals would be hooked on watching/following out of town NFL teams when they previously had no interest in thin watching NFL games.....because the NFL put on  a game once in a nearby college stadium?

 

That's not intuitive...

 

Obviously it won't work if you have a lot of games at colleges but you can make an event out of it if it is one game a year.  Call it the campus classic or something like.  Make it a big deal about what college will host it that year.

 

There is a lot of games on TV right now and ratings for Monday /Thursday night football are okay but could use a boost.   Anything you can do to differentiate a unimportant mid season game would help.

 

You don't think ESPN wouldn't promote the hell out of a game at South Bend? It is probably all you would hear about for two weeks.  You would have the students going crazy.  People would watch it as long as it is only one (maybe two) game a year, similar to the Winter Classic in hockey.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 14, 2022 by Billy Claude

[Mr. WEO]

4 minutes ago, Billy Claude said:

 

There is a lot of games on TV right now and ratings for Monday /Thursday night football are okay but could use a boost.   Anything you can do to differentiate a non important mid season game would help.

 

You don't think ESPN wouldn't promote the hell out of a game at South Bend? It is probably all you would hear about for two weeks.  You would have the students going crazy.  People would watch it as long as it is only one or two game a year, similar to the Winter Classic in hockey.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Do you really think ND students aren't already totally into the NFL?  Do you think that if every student or every human in South Bend tuned in there would be a ratings bump? Which team not from Indiana will the students be "going crazy" for?

 

The NHL winter classic had record low ratings last time--and the ratings have steadily dropped since it began 14 years ago.  It's a weird gimmick (proportionally tiny rink in the middle of a baseball or football field with fans sitting miles away) that did nothing for the NHL's ratings.

 

TNF is a massive ratings machine:  a "low" game gets 12 million, a huge game gets 30 million.  Amazon is specifically paying for its huge ratings and ad revenue.  Having a game in front of Joe College can't/won't change this.

 

MNF is another ratings juggernaut.  Its ratings went even higher, not by some goofy rural college stadium stunt, but by simply adding the Mannings to an alternative broadcast.  That was genius.

[Billy Claude]

5 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Do you really think ND students aren't already totally into the NFL?  Do you think that if every student or every human in South Bend tuned in there would be a ratings bump? Which team not from Indiana will the students be "going crazy" for?

 

The NHL winter classic had record low ratings last time--and the ratings have steadily dropped since it began 14 years ago.  It's a weird gimmick (proportionally tiny rink in the middle of a baseball or football field with fans sitting miles away) that did nothing for the NHL's ratings.

 

TNF is a massive ratings machine:  a "low" game gets 12 million, a huge game gets 30 million.  Amazon is specifically paying for its huge ratings and ad revenue.  Having a game in front of Joe College can't/won't change this.

 

MNF is another ratings juggernaut.  Its ratings went even higher, not by some goofy rural college stadium stunt, but by simply adding the Mannings to an alternative broadcast.  That was genius.

 

This has nothing to do with attracting more fans to the game -- most of the students will already will be NFL fans as you said.  That is not the point of putting it into a college campus.  The point is to create a spectacle that will make the game different. That is what can be promoted.