NFL Week 2

The Game Room
121

Your contradictions are comical. First it’s only “local” interest where the teams “reside” that drives the NFC East ratings. Then you claim that the “local” Dallas market is Dallas, San Antonio, Austin, Las Vegas, New Orleans, Albuquerque, and Oklahoma City. It kind of undercuts your point that the rest of the country isn’t interested outside the local market when the local market is 8 large cities. (And two of the cities you claim to be local Dallas markets have their own friggin’ teams.) And you also somehow lump in Richmond, Norfolk and DC as not counting toward the question of appeal outside of the “local” Giants and Cowboys markets.

You realize that you’re not making sense, right? It only has “local appeal”, and here’s a dozen cities that qualify as “local”. Ha!

It’s also comical that in your worldview, nobody outside the (9!) local markets could possibly care about Giants-Cowboys, yet it’s clearly obvious that they do care about Packers-Bears. How does that work, exactly? Is that fact cited in your ass?

Here’s a breakdown of what percentage of playoff spots each division has earned since 2006 and the percentage of SNF broadcasts each division has received, sorted by the delta between the two percentages.


Division   Playoffs     SNF   Delta
---------  --------  ------  ------
AFC North    11.11%  11.46%  +0.35%
NFC East     22.22%  23.96%  +1.74%
AFC South    16.67%  14.58%  -2.08%
NFC West      8.33%   6.25%  -2.08%
NFC North     8.33%  10.42%  +2.08%
AFC East     11.11%   8.33%  -2.78%
NFC South    11.11%   6.25%  -4.86%
AFC West     11.11%  18.75%  +7.64%

Based on the numbers, the NFC North is more overrepresented than the NFC East, but both are pretty darn close. Close enough to call it fine. The AFC West, OTOH, is on way more than they deserve.

So looks like the NFC East is on just about exactly as often as they should be. If you want other teams to get some broadcast time, I would suggest that those teams should stop sucking.

122

I think we can all agree that it would be way better if the AFC west became the next NFC East in terms of prime time games. Nothing is so consistently exciting as the Oakland vs KC battles.

123

Both were first rounders. Revis was selected 14th, Ross was selected 20th. I was thrilled that draft because both NY teams were sorely lacking in the secondary.

EDIT: Revis was the first cornerback taken, then the Bengals took some guy named Leon Hall, then Ross was third CB off the board.

124

Actually, looking him up it would appear Hall doesn’t suck. Has held the starting job for a while now, plus set the Bengals’ franchise record with 5 picks in a season. Looks like the Jets and Bengals both picked correctly, leaving the Giants with the scrubby Ross. ::cries::

125

[QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright;11586037

Maybe Antwaan Odom of the Bengals and his 7 sacks, but I doubt he can sustain that sort of production.[/QUOTE]

Kiss my ass Doubting Thomas!

:lol:

126

Yeah, it’s clear he’s going to hit 56 sacks this year.

127

Let’s see. How many times do they play the Packers?

128

Stop the snark. Are you intentionally misrepresenting what I’m saying and quoting me out of context?

Everything you quoted is perfectly consistent. I’m defining the state of Texas as a Dallas local market. I’m sure the Cowboys and the citizens of Texas would agree with that representation. I am not grouping the Virginia locales as local markets, I only highlighted that 3 Redskins markets made the list because it was interesting. (And who other than New Orleans has a team?)

I’m just pointing of the fallacy of the logic that ratings equal national interest, specifically that the record rating of the Giants-Cowboys game somehow indicates a universal interest. That was your claim, not mine. The cite you quoted seems to indicate that it clearly wasn’t national. Or are you going to say that those 15 cities represented are somehow well distributed around the country?

:rolleyes:

What in holy fuck are you ranting about? I’m making no bold claims. You said that the Giants-Cowboys game got a big rating therefore it’s a “big” game. I’m pointing out that a whole shit ton of viewers in Texas and New York do not a “big” game make, necessarily. It’s your cite that I’m expounding on.

It’s my sole claim that of the two cites you gave, the one about the Bears-Packers game has a broader geographic distribution than the one about the Giants-Cowboys game. In what way have I not made this clear?

Where was it unequivocally stated that playoff teams are the sole teams that merit interest among casual football fans? Is it the stated purpose of the NFL and NBC to show nothing but playoff teams in primetime?

Do you really think that the reason the NFC East gets on national TV all the time is because of the fact that they get a couple more wildcard teams than other divisions? Really? That’s how you think TV works?

Incidentally, where the fuck are you getting your percentages? You numbers aren’t anywhere close to those Hal Briston cited.

129

Speaking as a transplanted New Yorker, and longtime Texan…

ARE there sports franchises and teams who get way too much media attention? Sure, but it hardly follows that this is due to some unfair bias by the New York/Eastern media. Remember that only ONE of those overexposed teams is in New York (the NY Yankees), and only TWO of them are in the Northeastern United States (the Yankees and the Boston Celtics).

As I’ve observed before, every major sport has one team that’s both ridiculously overloved and overhated, a team that gets too much hype both when it’s good AND when it’s terrible.

In baseball, it’s the Yankees. In pro basketball, it’s the Celtics. In college basketball, it’s Duke. In pro football, it’s the Dallas Cowboys. In college football, it’s Notre Dame (oh, that damned Indiana media bias!). In the NHL, it’s the Montreal Canadiens.

The New York Giants and New York Jets have NEVER dominated NFL coverage in that kind of way. The Jets don’t make all that many appearances on Monday or Sunday Night Football. The Giants do, but ONLY when they’re good! During their down years, Monday Night Football has always shunned the Giants, just as they would the Detroit Lions.

Right now, the Giants are one of the best teams, and they have a marketable star in Eli Manning. Hence, it may SEEM to fans in Seattle or New Orleans as if the Giants are overexposed. But tell the truth, during the Giants’ lean years, did you REALLY see a lot of Norm Snead, Joe Pisarcik, Dave Brown or Danny Kannell? Of course not!

In other sports, can anyone REALLY argue that LeBron James has been underexposed in Cleveland, or that the NBA has tried to cram the Knicks down Americans’ throats? Can anyone seriously argue that the New York Islanders get too much media attention?

The Phil Simms era Giants won two Super Bowls, but they got no more media hype in those days than the Bears, Redskins or 49ers did. The current Giants get a lot of TV exposure, but not significantly more than any other team of comparable stature and talent.

130

Nice backpedaling. In case you’ve forgotten, your bold claim was this:

Pretty much all of which is wrong. The Bears and Steelers did well, but it was no bigger nationally than Cowboys-Giants, and in fact it was probably smaller once you account for disaparate market sizes.

You don’t get to say that Giants-Cowboys only matters locally where the team resides and then claim 9 markets as “local” and toss in three Redskins markets out of the blue as if you were always including them. It’s disingenuous at best.

I showed that the New York viewership of Giants isn’t much different than Chicago viewership for Bears, so that entire half of your argument fails. The Cowboys do have a large viewership, but only if you count non-local markets. Which you still don’t seem to understand demonstrates national interest.

Are you kidding with this, or are you being deliberately obtuse?

Yes, I’m stating that better teams get more primetime games. Take off the tinfoil hat; it’s not some great conspiracy to keep the flyover states down. The only reason your teams don’t get on as much is because they suck by comparison. Look at the Colts as an example of a quality team that played their way onto primetime. Their market is tiny, it’s in the middle of the country, and yet they made it onto SNF more than any team in the NFC East did.

From Hal’s cite. One of us is unable to handle basic arithmetic, and it could easily be me. What numbers look wrong to you?

131

Family Guy funny

132

I just double-checked my math, and please keep in mind that what I’m using is the game-by-game breakdown for SNF 2006-2008. I’m only counting Sunday night, regular season games. The numbers are the same as what I got before – 47 games, 20 of them involving an NFC East team (as an aside, 13 of them involved NFC North teams).

One stat that I suspect will be telling involves the flex-scheduling. After all, that’s designed to showcase the most intriguing matchup available. So far, 13 games have been flexed into Sunday night. Here’s the breakdown by division and team:

AFC West: 7 – Broncos (3), Chargers (3), Chiefs (1)
NFC East: 6 – Giants (2), Redskins (2), Cowboys (1), Eagles (1)
NFC North: 4 – Bears (2), Packers (1), Vikings (1)
AFC South: 3 – Colts (2), Titans (1)
AFC East: 2 – Patriots (1), Bills (1)
NFC South: 2 – Panthers (1), Saints (1)
AFC North: 1 – Ravens (1)
NFC West: 1 – Seahawks (1)

Huh…didn’t expect to see so much love for the AFC West in there. But now that I think about it, this all pretty much makes sense. A game is flexed when it’s a surprisingly good matchup. After all, in the Spring the schedule makers put together what looks on paper to be good matchups on Sunday night, but who knows what’ll actually happen? If they load up SNF with powerhouse teams, then those teams don’t need to be flexed into the spotlight. So what we have here is a look at teams that outperformed expectations.

Bottom line, the teams that draw the biggest numbers are going to get the spotlight. It doesn’t matter if it’s because they have a huge fan base or because they play damn good football, they’re still going to get the prime-time games.

133

I’m so fucking stoked for the Bengals/Steelers matchup I can barely contain myself. Literally.

134

Go… Bengals…?

135

Well, your team was originally my team, then was bought by Art Modell, then moved, then brought back, and…yeah.

So, Go Bengals. As much of an Ohio rivalry that exists between the Bengals and Browns, this is called “taking one for the team”, or the division, as it were. Bengals, Browns and Ravens fans can ALL get behind hating the Steelers!

:slight_smile:

136

Eh, someone has to win the AFC North and if it’s not going to be the Browns then the Bengals are by far the next team I prefer. I don’t feel comfortable actively rooting for them, but I will by default as I root against the Steelers and the illegitimate entity.

137

The Illegitimate Entity?

:):):):slight_smile:

That’s pretty funny.

No, it’s VERY funny (and true).

138

I try not to refer to them by name. It gives them an air of credibility they don’t deserve.

139

I suppose you could always go the Prince route and call them “The Team Formerly Known As The Browns”.

140

Also more credibility than they deserve.