Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted January 31, 2018 So ratings are up? Link? Who said the ratings are up? The point is that the lower ratings do not appear to be affecting revenues (at least initially). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,589 Posted January 31, 2018 Who said the ratings are up? The point is that the lower ratings do not appear to be affecting revenues (at least initially). Oh. I thought this thread was about the ratings. That are down. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,877 Posted January 31, 2018 Players going to get hit HARD in the wallet by those declining ratings! Assuming the ratings ever result in lower revenue, which is the opposite of what is happening. Never mind. What time is the game on? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,589 Posted January 31, 2018 Bad move out of Fox. NBC and CBS, the ones who held the rights and know the landscape, submitted lower bids than they had paid the last two years. I wouldn't count on the same mistake happening again. Eye opener for Fox, and I'm sure they regret it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reality 2,710 Posted January 31, 2018 Bad move out of Fox. NBC and CBS, the ones who held the rights and know the landscape, submitted lower bids than they had paid the last two years. I wouldn't count on the same mistake happening again. Eye opener for Fox, and I'm sure they regret it. Football has put in ESPN in a horrible bind, will be interesting to see how FOX comes out of this. Maybe they can make Thursday night football watchable? I doubt it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baker Boy 1,477 Posted January 31, 2018 Who said the ratings are up? The point is that the lower ratings do not appear to be affecting revenues (at least initially). There is no way for you to know that. That offer could be 100 million lower than an offer if ratings had gone up the last two years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,589 Posted January 31, 2018 Football has put in ESPN in a horrible bind, will be interesting to see how FOX comes out of this. Maybe they can make Thursday night football watchable? I doubt it. I think the somebody that bid 100 million plus per year more than the other guy got an earful and might get a pink slip. Really dumb move from Fox. But the snowflakes can't see what's happening here, that the other tow networks submitted lower bids than they had paid prior. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted January 31, 2018 There is no way for you to know that. That offer could be 100 million lower than an offer if ratings had gone up the last two years. Last year, it cost $450m. This year it costs $550m. I think that it is reasonable to infer that the ratings are not costing money (at least not yet). Now, inferring that they could have possibly gotten more money is an even bigger stretch IMO. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,589 Posted January 31, 2018 Last year, it cost $450m. This year it costs $550m. I think that it is reasonable to infer that the ratings are not costing money (at least not yet). Now, inferring that they could have possibly gotten more money is an even bigger stretch IMO. I'm not a businessman. I don't think you are either. But paying 500 million more than you had to over the course of a deal is more indicative of you overpaying for a diminishing asset than buying into an ascending one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted January 31, 2018 I'm not a businessman. I don't think you are either. But paying 500 million more than you had to over the course of a deal is more indicative of you overpaying for a diminishing asset than buying into an ascending one. I am a businessman and in a bidding system like this, you don't know what the others are bidding. Fox wanted to take that slot away from their competitors and felt that they needed to bid $550m per year to get the next 5 years. Whether the asset is declining or not is up for debate. Remember Fox (and the other networks) are dealing with declining ratings across the board that are double what the declines are for the NFL product. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,589 Posted January 31, 2018 I am a businessman and in a bidding system like this, you don't know what the others are bidding. Fox wanted to take that slot away from their competitors and felt that they needed to bid $550m per year to get the next 5 years. Whether the asset is declining or not is up for debate. Remember Fox (and the other networks) are dealing with declining ratings across the board that are double what the declines are for the NFL product. Like I said, paying 500 million plus over the five years is indicative of your new asset not having the value you thought it did. That's a lot of money. I would think they weren't too happy when they found out how much they "won" by. It's like outbidding everyone for a house and not knowing everyone is moving because the neighborhood is going to shite. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 719 Posted January 31, 2018 But Fox is full of idiots, right? Fox Sports <> Fox News NFL is still big time money...revenue is huge and even when their ratings take a hit (all ratings everywhere have been) they still are king. All entertainment is shuffling to move into how they can tap into people not watching on TV anymore. NFL and other sports tapping in to how to get people involved that just don't come to games anymore. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,589 Posted January 31, 2018 The only reason I can think of why Fox did this is they are going after ESPN while they are vulnerable due to their leftist content, and plan on putting the games on FS1. That would make sense, but isn't indicative of a positive long term outlook for the NFL if ratings continue to decline. It feels like a one off. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted January 31, 2018 Like I said, paying 500 million plus over the five years is indicative of your new asset not having the value you thought it did. That's a lot of money. I would think they weren't too happy when they found out how much they "won" by. It's like outbidding everyone for a house and not knowing everyone is moving because the neighborhood is going to shite. Oh, I get that. If they knew that they could have paid $450m, I am sure that they would have felt much better. Of course, their Board may have told them to go as high as $600m. We don't know. I also look back on Bob Kraft buying the Patriots. He bought the team for $175m and people said that he overpaid by a lot. The challenge is that we don't really know what Fox is going to get for games and advertising revenue for those games as compared to their regular Thursday programming. Could be a totally crappy move or it could be a bold move. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
avoiding injuries 1,220 Posted January 31, 2018 The tax cuts just gave them more money to bid with. Thats it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baker Boy 1,477 Posted February 2, 2018 A new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll depicts a developing nightmare for the National Football League: Its core audience is losing interest rapidly, a potential threat to the league’s dominant role in American culture. The poll shows that fans are following the sport less closely, even in key demographics, such as young men, that historically propelled the league’s growth. At the same time, parents increasingly want their children to turn away from football amid growing worry about player safety and the league’s efforts to address it. The drop in interest spans age groups and the political spectrum—painting the picture of a sport that isn’t just experiencing a momentary dip, but a battle against fundamental questions about football’s future that have been building for years. The problems are taking a heavy toll. Adults who report following the NFL closely have dropped 9% since 2014, the poll finds. More alarming for the league, however, is the makeup of the people moving away from the NFL in large numbers: Just 51% of men aged 18 to 49 say they follow the NFL closely, down from 75% four years ago. The poll did not ask respondents why their interest changed. The Journal/NBC News poll interviewed 900 adults from Jan. 13-17. The margin of error for the full sample was plus or minus 3.27 percentage points. http://www.paywallnews.com/sports/The-NFL-Is-Losing-Its-Core-Audience--a-WSJ-NBC-News-Poll-Finds.BJzTD36-IG.html Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NorthernVike 2,079 Posted February 2, 2018 Fantasy football has burned out the average fan. And that focker Kapernick. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,631 Posted February 2, 2018 So it's 25 pages of guys like Baker Boy saying the same thing over and over and over again without any acknowledgment of any other relevant factors. Hey, fantastic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NorthernVike 2,079 Posted February 2, 2018 So it's 25 pages of guys like Baker Boy saying the same thing over and over and over again without any acknowledgment of any other relevant factors. Hey, fantastic. Are you new here? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baker Boy 1,477 Posted February 5, 2018 SB VII TV ratings down 3%. 3rd year in a row viewership is down. Super Bowl LII will no doubt take in a massive ratings haul, but the early numbers have it down slightly from last year. In metered market households, Sunday’s game on NBC drew a 47.4 rating. Super Bowl LI in 2017 on Fox drew a 48.8 rating, meaning this year is down just three percent in that measure from last year. The top 10 metered markets for Super Bowl LII were: Buffalo, 56.4; Philadelphia, 56.2; Boston, 55.9; Minneapolis-St. Paul, 54.9; Pittsburgh, 54.9; Norfolk, 53.9; New Orleans, 53.0; Providence, 52.5; Milwaukee, 52.3; Seattle, 52.2; Kansas City, 52.2. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted February 5, 2018 SB VII TV ratings down 3%. 3rd year in a row viewership is down. Super Bowl LII will no doubt take in a massive ratings haul, but the early numbers have it down slightly from last year. In metered market households, Sunday’s game on NBC drew a 47.4 rating. Super Bowl LI in 2017 on Fox drew a 48.8 rating, meaning this year is down just three percent in that measure from last year. The top 10 metered markets for Super Bowl LII were: Buffalo, 56.4; Philadelphia, 56.2; Boston, 55.9; Minneapolis-St. Paul, 54.9; Pittsburgh, 54.9; Norfolk, 53.9; New Orleans, 53.0; Providence, 52.5; Milwaukee, 52.3; Seattle, 52.2; Kansas City, 52.2. So the ratings are down for the 3rd year in a row? The kneeling has not been going on that long, though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
supermike80 1,285 Posted February 5, 2018 SB VII TV ratings down 3%. 3rd year in a row viewership is down. Super Bowl LII will no doubt take in a massive ratings haul, but the early numbers have it down slightly from last year. In metered market households, Sunday’s game on NBC drew a 47.4 rating. Super Bowl LI in 2017 on Fox drew a 48.8 rating, meaning this year is down just three percent in that measure from last year. The top 10 metered markets for Super Bowl LII were: Buffalo, 56.4; Philadelphia, 56.2; Boston, 55.9; Minneapolis-St. Paul, 54.9; Pittsburgh, 54.9; Norfolk, 53.9; New Orleans, 53.0; Providence, 52.5; Milwaukee, 52.3; Seattle, 52.2; Kansas City, 52.2. Buffalo #1...LOL.....COld as heck, too much snow....Guess there isn't much else to do! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 4,554 Posted February 5, 2018 This was the only Super Bowl I'd not watched in my life other than the one during the Gulf War. I missed a pretty good one, admittedly. Also I was online and checking in, cheating I guess, as I was curious as to what was going on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baker Boy 1,477 Posted February 6, 2018 Footballs popularity drops Overall, the poll found, the number of people who say they follow the NFL has declined sharply since 2014. In January, 49 percent of those polled said they follow the league closely. In January of 2014, the follow closely figure was 58 percent. Thats a 9-point drop. But look closer at the numbers and there is a strong racial component to the decline: its being driven by white Americans. Since 2014, the number of African Americans and Hispanics saying they follow the professional football closely has remained flat, according to the poll. But among whites, the number is down 12 points from 59 percent in 2014 to 47 percent in 2018. And digging deeper, gender plays an enormous role. Among white men, the follow closely number has declined an astonishing 22 points, from 69 percent in 2014 to 47 percent in 2018. Over that same time the follow closely number among women was unchanged at 47 percent. https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/super-bowl/concussions-protests-football-s-popularity-drops-n844506?cid=eml_pol_20180204 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baker Boy 1,477 Posted February 13, 2018 Maryland Dems follow NY, Illinois in efforts to limit youth tackle football Maryland lawmakers are considering a measure that would allow the state -- not parents or guardians -- to limit children playing tackle football and other contact sports until they reach high school. The measure, similar to efforts in two states with Democrat-controlled legislatures, would prohibit children from playing tackle football and other contact sports at publicly supported fields or sites until they reach high school. It would restrict “headers” in soccer and checking in lacrosse and ice hockey, according to The Baltimore Sun. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/10/maryland-dems-follow-ny-illinois-in-efforts-to-limit-youth-tackle-football.html Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted February 13, 2018 Maryland Dems follow NY, Illinois in efforts to limit youth tackle football Maryland lawmakers are considering a measure that would allow the state -- not parents or guardians -- to limit children playing tackle football and other contact sports until they reach high school. The measure, similar to efforts in two states with Democrat-controlled legislatures, would prohibit children from playing tackle football and other contact sports at publicly supported fields or sites until they reach high school. It would restrict headers in soccer and checking in lacrosse and ice hockey, according to The Baltimore Sun. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/10/maryland-dems-follow-ny-illinois-in-efforts-to-limit-youth-tackle-football.html There is a similar measure being proposed is CA. Dumb. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kutulu 1,542 Posted February 13, 2018 Way way down this weekend Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baker Boy 1,477 Posted February 13, 2018 There is a similar measure being proposed is CA. Dumb.A number of kids in these states are going to miss out on some scholarships. The concussion outrage is way over blown! This will be just another reason kids dont get outside and play. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ROCKFORD 134 Posted February 13, 2018 i say we let our kids get concussed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baker Boy 1,477 Posted February 14, 2018 i say we let our kids get concussed. Yes, lets protect our kids from an exaggerated problem so the can stay home and eat tide packets, burn their arms on a stove, etc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,877 Posted February 14, 2018 Yes, lets protect our kids so the can stay home and eat tide packets, burn their arms on a stove, etc. Your kids are retarded. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baker Boy 1,477 Posted February 14, 2018 Your kids are retarded. I don’t have kids! HTH Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted February 14, 2018 i say we let our kids get concussed. Probably need to have them stop doing just about any activity. This offseason for my football team we have had: - One coach break his arm falling on ice - needs rods and all sorts of surgery - One player break his wrist skiing - One coach rupture a tendon in his hand from a minor fall During the football season, we had no concussions or broken bones. Football is not the only activity where people can get hurt and having kids wait until they are in HS to play these sports sets them up for greater injury then because they have no skills to protect themselves and are coming in clean. Heck, the people thinking flag football is safer have never seen a 7-on-7 flag game with high schoolers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,877 Posted February 14, 2018 I dont have kids! HTH Good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,589 Posted February 14, 2018 Olympics ratings down as well. Nice job gay boy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ROCKFORD 134 Posted February 14, 2018 i had at least 3 severe concussions growing up. look how i turned out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DonS 3,063 Posted February 26, 2018 DeMaurice Smith addresses declining ratings... http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22576497/demaurice-smith-nflpa-executive-director-says-nba-model-fight-nfl-declining-ratings A couple of his ideas for fixing ratings: Smith pointed to the success the NBA is having right now and a desire to find out more about what's behind it."I think that it's important to take a look at what's going on in basketball, because for the most part, I think they are the only sport that more and more people are watching," Smith said. "And my hat's off to what they do and how they do it in the NBA. I think that you could make the argument that a lot of their programming is fresher, hipper. Fresher? Hipper? Christ, that will make me tune out for sure. "When you do look at playoff games, when you do look at whether they're division rivalries or games that have a level of significance, those games are not only exciting and people still want to watch them, but those marquee games are still big-time, high-viewership games." He suggested a model with fewer regular-season games and another round of playoff games. Playoffs are more exciting so lets just add another round to fix ratings??? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,877 Posted February 26, 2018 Too bad all those people missed out on the greatest Super Bowl ever. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 12,589 Posted February 26, 2018 Anyone paying attention to that moron must have had a lot of concussions. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 4,554 Posted February 26, 2018 DeMaurice Smith addresses declining ratings... http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22576497/demaurice-smith-nflpa-executive-director-says-nba-model-fight-nfl-declining-ratings A couple of his ideas for fixing ratings: Fresher? Hipper? Christ, that will make me tune out for sure. Playoffs are more exciting so lets just add another round to fix ratings??? If you expand the playoff field from 16 teams to 32, you can eliminate preseason and call the regular season "preseason." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
