The NFL has 256 telecasts.
Of that 256 if I remember the numbers correctly only 16% of the games are available on a national basis with about 1/4th on the NFL Network which doesn't have that huge of a reach.

I don't have time to work out the numbers on college because there are so many games but far and away the majority of games shown on TV are telecast nationally, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPN Classic, CBS, CBSS, NBC or cleared in all or nearly all markets via Fox regionals. Regional telecasts tend to be on more obscure channels or you get the ABC/ESPN hybrid where the game for your region is on the local ABC affiliate and a game featured on ABC in another region appears on your ESPN channel.

The NFL's regionalized approach means that while there may be little interest in Jacksonville playing Tennessee outside of Tennessee, Florida, as well as eastern Arkansas, much of Kentucky, and SE Georgia it will draw a large audience in that region. CBS will get a good rating in the area while showing other games in other regions to do the same. Other areas receive other games of interest. That gives Fox and CBS a way to reach a maximized audience on the broadcast network. The Titans' national value doesn't mean much to CBS. They factor the Titans into their bid based on what sort of regional audience they draw.

Fox and CBS pay more because they can shape their broadcast map to get maximum viewership with their inventory for the week.

Bidders for college football essentially operate nationally so they have to look solely at national value.

Cincinnati may well draw as well on TV in the Cincinnati market as Ohio State does in Columbus but Ohio State will draw more viewers in Philadelphia, Chicago, and Los Angeles than Cincinnati.

The core thinking problem that the Group of 5 has is they are trying to play a national game without the national value. They are trying to negotiate a top tier national package, maybe a second tier national but more likely a second tier regional, and third tier local (which may be doled out the schools to deal with).

What the group of 5 or a combination of the group of 5 (MWC, MAC, Big East, and maybe one or both of the two other southern leagues) ought to be doing is creating an association that will own their top tier rights and sell those rights on a national basis to be chopped up into regional telecasts.

For example one Saturday you might have UNLV-SJSU out west, North Texas - Rice in the Southwest, Northern Illinois - Toledo in the Midwest, Arkansas State - Troy in the South and UConn-ECU along the east coast.

Create a formula to distribute the revenue to reflect the value to TV but the top games are bundled to give the bidder whether it be Fox Sports Regional or some Comcast based network the maximum regional audience in the time slot across the nation instead of MWC and CUSA each competing for that same time slot on a national basis.

Interesting thoughts.

OTOH, I've wondered if the NFL isn't the one who ought to change their philosophy and get more games on nationally and play on more days and at more times.

I really don't see too much of a difference.

Tier 1 tv contracts: SEC on CBS, B1G/B12/P12 on ABC/FOX/ESPN, and ACC on ESPN/ABC are pretty similar to the MNF and SNF contracts.

Tier 2 and 3 (FOX and CBS NFL) is pretty similar to the regional coverage that a lot of ESPN coverage maps feature. It's happening but not under the one-league umbrella... it's happening at the networks where they put the best coverage maps they can out there to maximize their coverage.

Your numbers are way off for the NFL.

17 Sunday Night Football games
17 Monday night games
1 Thursday season opener
3 Thanksgiving games
right there is 38 games. 38/256 is like 15%.

When you add in 15 NFL network games- you are up to 53/256 or about 21%. And- that doesn't even take into account the Sunday late afternoon slots which have gotten more and more to fewer and fewer games.

(02-27-2013 11:09 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Interesting thoughts.

OTOH, I've wondered if the NFL isn't the one who ought to change their philosophy and get more games on nationally and play on more days and at more times.

To some extent, yeah. The NFL can't tread on Fridays and Saturdays and I don't think we'll see games on Tuesday or Wednesday.

Adding another game "window" on Sunday is a possibiity except that NBC (who pays more money per game than anyone else) would complain if there were three game windows preceding their Sunday night game instead of two. They'd be concerned about people not watching the Sunday night game if they've already been watching NFL for 9 hours before the night game starts.


One thing the NFL could do, and ESPN would absolutely pay big to get it, is play a doubleheader on Monday night every week of the season. One game in east coast prime time, one game in west coast prime time.

The nfl makes too much off payperview. Every game is available if you are willing to pay extra.

(02-27-2013 11:14 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Your numbers are way off for the NFL.

17 Sunday Night Football games
17 Monday night games
1 Thursday season opener
3 Thanksgiving games
right there is 38 games. 38/256 is like 15%.

When you add in 15 NFL network games- you are up to 53/256 or about 21%. And- that doesn't even take into account the Sunday late afternoon slots which have gotten more and more to fewer and fewer games.

16% vs. 21% huuuge difference.

(02-27-2013 11:13 AM)S11 Wrote:  I really don't see too much of a difference.

Tier 1 tv contracts: SEC on CBS, B1G/B12/P12 on ABC/FOX/ESPN, and ACC on ESPN/ABC are pretty similar to the MNF and SNF contracts.

Tier 2 and 3 (FOX and CBS NFL) is pretty similar to the regional coverage that a lot of ESPN coverage maps feature. It's happening but not under the one-league umbrella... it's happening at the networks where they put the best coverage maps they can out there to maximize their coverage.

Big 10 has two to four morning games cleared nationally across the ESPN family plus BTN. An afternoon game where ABC/ESPN coverage is regional but still cleared nationally just the outlet varies. Then some ESPN/ESPN2 later.

SEC. Morning is regional. CBS cleared nationally. Night will be ESPN family national with some regional (usually CSS).

But my point wasn't about B1G or SEC.

It was about MWC, MAC, Big East, CUSA, Sun Belt trying to play that game when they could bundle tier I to a carrier with regional broadcast capability if they could cooperate which is against their nature.

(02-27-2013 11:57 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  The nfl makes too much off payperview. Every game is available if you are willing to pay extra.

They could make a lot more from pay-per-view, but they only make NFL Sunday Ticket available to DirecTV subscribers -- and that's because the league doesn't want to tick off Fox and CBS who would lose viewers to Sunday Ticket if more fans didn't have only a local dud like Chiefs-Titans to watch but could also choose to watch Patriots-Steelers or 49ers-Cowboys.

If the league really wanted to tap into that market for extra revenue, they'd come up with some formula that gives Fox and CBS some of the Sunday Ticket revenue to compensate for the viewers they'll lose when cable and Dish subscribers, as well as DirecTV subscribers, can choose to watch any game.

(02-27-2013 12:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  It was about MWC, MAC, Big East, CUSA, Sun Belt trying to play that game when they could bundle tier I to a carrier with regional broadcast capability if they could cooperate which is against their nature.

I'm not sure cooperation is a necessary prelude here. The big step is
A) the shift in philosophy and
B) lining up suitable outlets.

Local-interest football games are a better TV product if you can promote them as being in a predictable timeslot. If you have 10 SMU football games on Saturdays, then the promos you run in September saying "SMU Mustangs football! Saturdays on MyDallas 27!" still help you in November, and helps you next year when football season rolls around again.

(02-27-2013 11:48 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-27-2013 11:09 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Interesting thoughts.

OTOH, I've wondered if the NFL isn't the one who ought to change their philosophy and get more games on nationally and play on more days and at more times.

To some extent, yeah. The NFL can't tread on Fridays and Saturdays and I don't think we'll see games on Tuesday or Wednesday.

Adding another game "window" on Sunday is a possibiity except that NBC (who pays more money per game than anyone else) would complain if there were three game windows preceding their Sunday night game instead of two. They'd be concerned about people not watching the Sunday night game if they've already been watching NFL for 9 hours before the night game starts.


One thing the NFL could do, and ESPN would absolutely pay big to get it, is play a doubleheader on Monday night every week of the season. One game in east coast prime time, one game in west coast prime time.

Was going to ask about why not Fri and Saturday, but I guess it has to do with the sports broadcasting act of 1961. Always wondered why the NCAA could tread on the NFL days, but not visa versa.

I do think a Monday night double header would make sense.

(02-27-2013 12:38 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(02-27-2013 11:48 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-27-2013 11:09 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Interesting thoughts.

OTOH, I've wondered if the NFL isn't the one who ought to change their philosophy and get more games on nationally and play on more days and at more times.

To some extent, yeah. The NFL can't tread on Fridays and Saturdays and I don't think we'll see games on Tuesday or Wednesday.

Adding another game "window" on Sunday is a possibiity except that NBC (who pays more money per game than anyone else) would complain if there were three game windows preceding their Sunday night game instead of two. They'd be concerned about people not watching the Sunday night game if they've already been watching NFL for 9 hours before the night game starts.


One thing the NFL could do, and ESPN would absolutely pay big to get it, is play a doubleheader on Monday night every week of the season. One game in east coast prime time, one game in west coast prime time.

Was going to ask about why not Fri and Saturday, but I guess it has to do with the sports broadcasting act of 1961. Always wondered why the NCAA could tread on the NFL days, but not visa versa.

I do think a Monday night double header would make sense.

they will never do a regular Monday Night dh. Way too hard to ask east coast viewers to be up until 130 or 2am on a regular basis. That's a non starter for the NFL quite frankly.

(02-27-2013 11:48 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-27-2013 11:09 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Interesting thoughts.

OTOH, I've wondered if the NFL isn't the one who ought to change their philosophy and get more games on nationally and play on more days and at more times.

To some extent, yeah. The NFL can't tread on Fridays and Saturdays and I don't think we'll see games on Tuesday or Wednesday.

Adding another game "window" on Sunday is a possibiity except that NBC (who pays more money per game than anyone else) would complain if there were three game windows preceding their Sunday night game instead of two. They'd be concerned about people not watching the Sunday night game if they've already been watching NFL for 9 hours before the night game starts.


One thing the NFL could do, and ESPN would absolutely pay big to get it, is play a doubleheader on Monday night every week of the season. One game in east coast prime time, one game in west coast prime time.

Monday night double header works. But do you really want to see Seattle in prime time every week? Even though teams like San Fran are good now, we all know how bad the NFC west was a couple years back. Then again, it is 10:15 ET programming and provides more visibility for those teams. But attending fans may get sick of seeing their team in prime time 3-4 times a year, because it's a working day. Not sure that's the route to go.

TNF from week 1 on has been a failure. Nobody wants to watch Jacksonville in prime time week 14. It's embarrassing.

Three window Sunday? Why the hell not? 11:00 am tip. Lunch at half time. Next game at 2:15 pm. Next game 5:30 pm. SNF 8:45 pm.

West coast people don't watch the 11:00 am games. East coast people can toss a game and do their shopping in the afternoon. Sounds like a winner.

(02-27-2013 02:45 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(02-27-2013 11:48 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-27-2013 11:09 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Interesting thoughts.

OTOH, I've wondered if the NFL isn't the one who ought to change their philosophy and get more games on nationally and play on more days and at more times.

To some extent, yeah. The NFL can't tread on Fridays and Saturdays and I don't think we'll see games on Tuesday or Wednesday.

Adding another game "window" on Sunday is a possibiity except that NBC (who pays more money per game than anyone else) would complain if there were three game windows preceding their Sunday night game instead of two. They'd be concerned about people not watching the Sunday night game if they've already been watching NFL for 9 hours before the night game starts.


One thing the NFL could do, and ESPN would absolutely pay big to get it, is play a doubleheader on Monday night every week of the season. One game in east coast prime time, one game in west coast prime time.

Monday night double header works. But do you really want to see Seattle in prime time every week? Even though teams like San Fran are good now, we all know how bad the NFC west was a couple years back. Then again, it is 10:15 ET programming and provides more visibility for those teams. But attending fans may get sick of seeing their team in prime time 3-4 times a year, because it's a working day. Not sure that's the route to go.

TNF from week 1 on has been a failure. Nobody wants to watch Jacksonville in prime time week 14. It's embarrassing.

Three window Sunday? Why the hell not? 11:00 am tip. Lunch at half time. Next game at 2:15 pm. Next game 5:30 pm. SNF 8:45 pm.

West coast people don't watch the 11:00 am games. East coast people can toss a game and do their shopping in the afternoon. Sounds like a winner.

TNF from week 1 on a failure? Using what metric? Ratings were solid. Is it because you don't like it infringing on the college Thursday games? It's possible you will see a bit better quality of game this year... Even with that- still had 3-4 really good TNF games last year.

(02-27-2013 02:45 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(02-27-2013 11:48 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-27-2013 11:09 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Interesting thoughts.

OTOH, I've wondered if the NFL isn't the one who ought to change their philosophy and get more games on nationally and play on more days and at more times.

To some extent, yeah. The NFL can't tread on Fridays and Saturdays and I don't think we'll see games on Tuesday or Wednesday.

Adding another game "window" on Sunday is a possibiity except that NBC (who pays more money per game than anyone else) would complain if there were three game windows preceding their Sunday night game instead of two. They'd be concerned about people not watching the Sunday night game if they've already been watching NFL for 9 hours before the night game starts.


One thing the NFL could do, and ESPN would absolutely pay big to get it, is play a doubleheader on Monday night every week of the season. One game in east coast prime time, one game in west coast prime time.

Monday night double header works. But do you really want to see Seattle in prime time every week? Even though teams like San Fran are good now, we all know how bad the NFC west was a couple years back. Then again, it is 10:15 ET programming and provides more visibility for those teams. But attending fans may get sick of seeing their team in prime time 3-4 times a year, because it's a working day. Not sure that's the route to go.

TNF from week 1 on has been a failure. Nobody wants to watch Jacksonville in prime time week 14. It's embarrassing.

Three window Sunday? Why the hell not? 11:00 am tip. Lunch at half time. Next game at 2:15 pm. Next game 5:30 pm. SNF 8:45 pm.

West coast people don't watch the 11:00 am games. East coast people can toss a game and do their shopping in the afternoon. Sounds like a winner.

I think it would be great if they had four windows (including the NBC game) on Sunday, but I'm pretty sure NBC would feel differently after seeing the ratings that result from that.

Thursday Night Football has already accomplished the NFL's biggest goal for TNF, I think -- getting Time Warner Cable to cave in and agree to carry NFL Network on all of TWC's systems. TWC was by far the largest carrier still refusing to carry NFLN.

(02-27-2013 02:55 PM)stever20 Wrote:  TNF from week 1 on a failure? Using what metric? Ratings were solid. Is it because you don't like it infringing on the college Thursday games? It's possible you will see a bit better quality of game this year... Even with that- still had 3-4 really good TNF games last year.

I'm sorry but it was garbage. You had Jacksonville in there. Cleveland (even though they played Baltimore tough), Miami/Buffalo. Tennessee. I'll admit the quality of some games were good despite the disparate talent (still didn't watch most weeks), but that's because teams are on short rest, and I think the heavy underdog relishes the only prime time opportunity they have. So in that regard, it may have led to closer games than they should have been. But it is bad for player health. They need to make them all division games because the travel day in the middle is ridiculous, and that cuts your flexibility in what teams get slotted there.

(02-27-2013 03:01 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(02-27-2013 02:55 PM)stever20 Wrote:  TNF from week 1 on a failure? Using what metric? Ratings were solid. Is it because you don't like it infringing on the college Thursday games? It's possible you will see a bit better quality of game this year... Even with that- still had 3-4 really good TNF games last year.

I'm sorry but it was garbage. You had Jacksonville in there. Cleveland (even though they played Baltimore tough), Miami/Buffalo. Tennessee. I'll admit the quality of some games were good despite the disparate talent (still didn't watch most weeks), but that's because teams are on short rest, and I think the heavy underdog relishes the only prime time opportunity they have. So in that regard, it may have led to closer games. But it is bad for player health. They need to make them all division games because the travel day in the middle is ridiculous, and that cuts your flexibility in what teams get slotted there.

Chi/GB- good game
NYG/Car- wouldn't be classified as garbage goign into the year last year
Bal/Cle- dog
stl/Az- dog
Ten/Pit- Ten was 9-7 the year before. Tough to call this a dog entering season.
SF/Sea- good game
TB/Min- dog(but one that when played was a good game)
SD/KC- dog
Ind/Jax- dog
Buf/Mia- dog
Atl/NO- great game
Den/Oak- tough to call dog based on prior year
Cin/Phi- tough to call dog based on prior year
so of the 13 games, 6 dogs, 3 really good games- and then 4 that if you look prior to season you would think good game- but wound up as dog.

Even with what you think:
NFL Network’s expanded schedule of Thursday Night Football broadcasts set rating and viewership records for the network in 2012. Including the audience from over-the-air broadcasts in local markets, Thursday Night Football finished with a record-high per game average audience of 7.3 million viewers in 2012, marking the fourth consecutive year that Thursday Night Football has set an all-time high viewership mark for NFL Network.
For the season, Thursday Night Football on NFL Network averaged a 4.6 US HH rating (including OTA’s), another record for the network. The 4.6 US HH rating represents an 8% increase from the 2011 season. Each week of the 2012 Thursday Night Football schedule, NFL Network’s game telecast was the day’s most-watched program on cable television

I'd say it's hard to say for the NFL it was garbage in any aspect at all...

As a poster said, the Network closed deals with major cable companies that didn't want to pay for it. Likewise, ratings may have been up from previous years. I don't think it will be a trend. And wow that schedule last year was worse than I thought. Every game you want to call "tough to call a dog" I call a dog at the time the game was played, which is what counts. Absolutely brutal.

If it's getting ratings with 10 games that are dogs- if they up the quality of the games even just to a small degree- what would happen?

And the thing is with the NFL- even with the dog games- folks watch because of 2 big reasons... Fantasy football and Gambling.

(02-27-2013 12:14 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-27-2013 11:57 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  The nfl makes too much off payperview. Every game is available if you are willing to pay extra.

They could make a lot more from pay-per-view, but they only make NFL Sunday Ticket available to DirecTV subscribers -- and that's because the league doesn't want to tick off Fox and CBS who would lose viewers to Sunday Ticket if more fans didn't have only a local dud like Chiefs-Titans to watch but could also choose to watch Patriots-Steelers or 49ers-Cowboys.

If the league really wanted to tap into that market for extra revenue, they'd come up with some formula that gives Fox and CBS some of the Sunday Ticket revenue to compensate for the viewers they'll lose when cable and Dish subscribers, as well as DirecTV subscribers, can choose to watch any game.

Fox and CBS don't lose viewership from the NFL games viewed on Sunday Ticket, because they still count to the CBS and Fox viewership totals. Just like the local feeds of the Monday Night Football and NFL Network games count to ESPN and NFL Network. The reason Sunday Ticket is only on DirecTV is because DirecTV overpays for the rights to keep it exclusive.