In the last number of years, and it is increasing, America is subjected to night after night of pre-season NFL games on network TV? Why?
They are meaningless crap. The games and the results mean jack shit. Coaches are running their 3rd and 4th string, and even those that won’t make the cut out onto the field. What demographic meatheads are driving this need, that the networks feel obligated to show them? Can’t ESPN4 or something run these for the fantasy football losers that just have to get their fix and inside scoop on how they’re going to beat the local office league this year? :=)
I just don’t get it. Someone 'splain it to me please.
Reminds me of when my wife came home all excited because her boss sold her “Bears Tickets!!!”. In actuality, it was a bEars-Broncos pre-season game at the University of Illinois’s field, which featured a 1st quart “dream matchup” of Steve Buerlein v. Kordell Stewart at QB, followed by “tryouts”. The tickets were a “bargain” at $55 each.
Another topic: Why are their NCAA rankings without a single-game being played? Certainly there are reasons for this such as giving the big programs a “leg up” in terms of BCS contention, but it’s something that makes little sense to me.
"America is subjected to night after night of pre-season NFL games on network TV? Why? "
because the NFL has eclipsed all the other professional sports leagues in this country, people are a little sick of baseball, basketball has been over for awhile for the few that still watch the NBA, and it gives fantasy players a chance to see a little bit of the players they will be trying to draft in the next few weeks.
After about four plays it becomes unwatchable garbage. I guess the NFL thinks someone enjoys it, I would rather watch classic college football, I have seen some great games this summer.
i watched a bit of the giants-ravens game last night. it was actually quite entertaining; it looked like they were pretty pissed at each other and there was some serious hitting.
as for why it’s on tv, though - the nfl preseason is preseason for everybody involved: the players, the coaches, the officials, but also the broadcasters, the cameramen, the producers. It seems to me that this time of year you’re most likely to have the football not in the picture on punts, the wrong names for the players involved in a play, etc.
not saying that there isn’t too much of it, though.
It is unique to football. We aren’t subjected to preseason baseball, basketball, or hockey. Maybe is has to do with the time of year. Network TV has been showing endless reruns and total crap game shows, etc. They haven’t started their new programs yet and may be just looking for something that will bring in a few viewers without costing as much as producing their own programs.
“We aren’t subjected to preseason baseball, basketball, or hockey.”
That’s because there’s a kagillion of those games in the regular season already.
Really??? On network TV in primetime??? Where I live we get one baseball game a week on network TV, Saturday afternoon on Fox. The only time these sports are usually seen on network TV in primetime is during the playoffs.
Do you live in Tibet? Between the ESPN family of networks, regular network TV, special team networks (NESN in New England, YES in New York, etc.), and TBS you can see a baseball game almost everyday, if not more than one per day. No, they’re not all in primtime, but neither are all the NFL pre-season games.
No I don’t live in Tibet, nor do I pay to watch TV. Network TV to me is what can be freely received from broadcast networks - not from cable/satellite only networks. When a preseason football game is on the networks like ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox in primetime it is much different than the other sports in question. Comparing what is on broadcast TV with what is on pay TV is not what is being debated.
On the few occasions I watch TV I fiddle if necessary. TV continues to deteriorate to the point where I watch less all the time. It’s getting to where about the only reason I turn on the TV is to watch the local news.
I watched some of the Brown’s game and Quinn looked pretty good for only practicing for about a week/week and a half.
Weren’t the Browns down 23-0 before he “lef” them back to a 23-20 defeat?
I think it’s more about the lack of quality defense he was going against than him being great. BUt, hey, he could have thrown 2 interceptions instead of 2 TDs, so I give him credit for that.
I hear 2 comments from the media that I felt were relevant.
Quinn faced a tougher defense during practice at ND. Obviusly tongue in cheek, especially given Notre Dame’s cough defense.
This might have been the WORST thing to happen to Quinn/Browns. He looked great against marginal players, and now fans are going to be clamouring for him to start. Their first 3 games are against divisional opponents with great defenses. Call the chaplain if he really starts at QB on opening day.
FWIW, I remember karl “Tuffy” Rhodes hitting 3 homers against Dwight “DrK” Gooden on opening day one year. You say Karl Who? I say, my point exactly.
I do give Quinn credit though, he looked good against 4th string defense(from what I saw), and that’s better than looking bad against a 4th string defense. I just hope Browns fans keep it in perspective. Ha Ha Ha. I crack myself up, I said NFL fans keep it in perspective … the sport where guys go from Hero to Zero over the course of 1/2 of a football game.
"Comparing what is on broadcast TV with what is on pay TV is not what is being debated. "
Gee, sorry. I didn’t realize there were still people who didn’t use cable. Do you still fiddle with your rabbit ears?
Yeah, I’m one of those guys also…and I do fiddle with the rabbit ears. Frequently.