for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Ravens owner Bisciotti urges NFL to reduce commercial breaks

GiantFilthy : 1/19/2017 10:15 am
Quote:
Bisciotti had some choice words for that entire sequence:

“It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that nobody wants to see two minutes of commercials, come back, kick the ball and then go to a minute-and-a-half of commercials,” Bisciotti said Tuesday. “I’ve thought that was absurd since I was 20 years old.”

A man of the people!
Link - ( New Window )
Pages: 1 2 <<Prev | Show All |
I've wished since '95 they never changed the timing rules  
JonC : 1/19/2017 11:22 am : link
the number of commercial breaks, etc. They shortened the average NFL game significantly from 150-160 plays.

A shorter game means less to me than more football action per game.

Add this to the rules favoring offense and you suck.

If it's a game I really want to watch . . .  
TheManUpstairs : 1/19/2017 11:23 am : link
. . . I DVR it, and start watching maybe 90 minutes late, fast-forwarding. I easily catch up by the second half.

If it's a game I'm NOT completely into, I have a book in my lap, and I read when the commercial load gets too high, and my ears will pick up when the announcers get excited about something.
Soccer  
Deej : 1/19/2017 11:26 am : link
The EPL is on Sky Sports in England, which is a premium channel like HBO. It is very expensive. I just saw somewhere that the cheapest way to get it in HD costs 71.50 pounds per month. And that only gets you 75% of the games. BT sports has the other 25%, and they charge another 22 pounds/month. Pound has taken a beating, down to $1.23, but a few years ago it was ~$1.75.

Not sure about the other major leagues, but the business model for UK soccer is just way different.
When did they move games to 4:30?  
Deej : 1/19/2017 11:27 am : link
I mean, that was a pretty obvious move that they were taking the same product but jamming in a lot more commercials.
RE: NFL better be careful that it doesn't become the NCAA  
Sonic Youth : 1/19/2017 11:28 am : link
In comment 13332268 NYG27 said:
[quote] I don't watch a lot of college games anymore because of how long it takes. I tuned in right before kickoff of the National Championship game and when the announcer mentioned "This should be exciting and we'll find out who the champion will be in about 4-5 hours"....... I just turned the channel right then. [/quot]anddddd you missed an all time classic football game...
Eliminating the cycle of TD/FG, commercials, kickoff, commercials  
mfsd : 1/19/2017 11:29 am : link
would be great. Doing that and I think most of us could live with the rest of the games length
RE: RE: Question: Soccer or European football  
MetsAreBack : 1/19/2017 11:30 am : link
In comment 13332327 BigBlueinChicago said:
Quote:
In comment 13332320 That’s Gold, Jerry said:


Quote:


is huge...gets big TV money. But their games, generally speaking, are shown with very few commercials. So how can they get away with it (and their players are paid huge money) and not the NFL?



Soccer games with their own structure do not have natural breaks built in. They play with a running clock and then add time if needed after the half is over.

When a ball goes out, the clock continues. When a foul is committed, the clock continues. When a corner kick is in play, the clock continues.

Can you imagine if soccer stopped play for 2 minutes when any of these events took place? It would look weird.

The NFL doesn't play with a running clock, so it allows for those type of breaks with commercials.



Umm this didn't answer the question in the slightest way.
The question posed about the Euro Soccer above  
MetsAreBack : 1/19/2017 11:33 am : link
was a very good one, but Deej is the only one so far to slightly address it (apparently people pay per view more or less to watch).

I guess they have fewer players on teams vs NFL too.

But I'm also very interested in understanding how that business model works.. without commercials.. if anyone knows (since we all already knew the games are played continuously without stoppage, and just because its always been that way doesn't explain how certain players over there make so much money now)
RE: When did they move games to 4:30?  
Big Blue '56 : 1/19/2017 11:34 am : link
In comment 13332407 Deej said:
Quote:
I mean, that was a pretty obvious move that they were taking the same product but jamming in a lot more commercials.


My guess is, one, they saved what they deemed to be the key, high profile match-ups for 4:30 and two, oft times games ran over the scheduled start for the 4 pm games robbing fans of the entire start of the game after the 1 pm games ran over at times
RE: I'll tell you what highlighted  
UConn4523 : 1/19/2017 11:39 am : link
In comment 13332352 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
the absurdity for me was the week 17 game. I had to miss it live because my youngest had a hockey game in NH and I am the coach.

I got home, avoided all media, and had the game on DVR.

the entire 3+ hour game took me about 15 minutes to watch. and I watched every play just fast forwarded through the bullshit.

How much actual game action, plays, do you think are in a football game?

Not much. add in the crap Bisciotti talks about like commercials after a score, a kick-off, go to commercial, and injury on the kick-off when they come back, go to commercial, a challenge, go to commercial.

without even considering game action there are approximately 2 hours of commercials for an hour of football.

it's absurd.


Yup. I used to watch every game and spend 10/11 hours each Sunday doing it. Fuck that, not anymore. I'm watching the Giants (even then on a 30 minute delay to fast forward) and no way will I sit through other games and suffer the commercial breaks.

They will slowly lose their fanbase (nothing catastrophic but enough to make a change). Kids that are in middle school now have a plethora of other content to consume that is all instantaneous with no breaks. I can see their generation being very disinterested in the NFL of today.
RE: The question posed about the Euro Soccer above  
pjcas18 : 1/19/2017 11:42 am : link
In comment 13332416 MetsAreBack said:
Quote:
was a very good one, but Deej is the only one so far to slightly address it (apparently people pay per view more or less to watch).

I guess they have fewer players on teams vs NFL too.

But I'm also very interested in understanding how that business model works.. without commercials.. if anyone knows (since we all already knew the games are played continuously without stoppage, and just because its always been that way doesn't explain how certain players over there make so much money now)


Deej was mostly right, but also they have uniform advertisements in many soccer leagues.








Emirates spent 350M on sport sponsorships.
RE: The question posed about the Euro Soccer above  
UConn4523 : 1/19/2017 11:45 am : link
In comment 13332416 MetsAreBack said:
Quote:
was a very good one, but Deej is the only one so far to slightly address it (apparently people pay per view more or less to watch).

I guess they have fewer players on teams vs NFL too.

But I'm also very interested in understanding how that business model works.. without commercials.. if anyone knows (since we all already knew the games are played continuously without stoppage, and just because its always been that way doesn't explain how certain players over there make so much money now)


I think a lot of it is the ads/sponsors on jerseys, all over the sidelines, and in post game interviews. No idea how much that effects the bottom line but its a huge difference from how things are in the US (where the NFL just has a deal with Nike or Reebok, etc). Emirates, for example, pays Real Madrid $39 million per year for their sponsorship deal.

Just doing some quick math the NBA signed an 8 year $1 billion deal with Nike in 2015. That's a little over $4 million per team per year. Emirates pays 10x that just for Real Madrid.
and what pjcas said  
UConn4523 : 1/19/2017 11:47 am : link
I would honestly rather have this in every sport and limit commercials to halftime in football, quarterly in basketball, etc. I'd probably watch a lot more sports again if they did this.

It would suck to see the jerseys we grew up with altered, but they are changing all the time anyway and I'd rather a better game than clinging to the past.
I dont know, UConn  
MetsAreBack : 1/19/2017 11:49 am : link
I'm all for cutting down on commercials, but I'd rather not see advertising on jerseys personally. There's something just so low-brow about it.

I've got zero issue with halftime commercials, quarter end commercials, commercials after TDs/FGs and two minute warnings (someone said above that is a bad rule - why?)

Also not all late games start at 4:30 - just one/two national games.
RE: When did they move games to 4:30?  
Giants2012 : 1/19/2017 11:51 am : link
In comment 13332407 Deej said:
Quote:
I mean, that was a pretty obvious move that they were taking the same product but jamming in a lot more commercials.


I can't figure out when they start. Some start at 4pm, then they called one of the games "the game of the week" which began at 4:10, then 4:20, then one was at 4:30, saw a kickoff at 4:40.

Who the F knows?
The much bigger atrocities to the fans to me  
MetsAreBack : 1/19/2017 11:52 am : link
are why the sunday night game does not start until 8:30... and we need team byes ahead of the Thursday night games. (give teams 2 byes per season if there are scheduling difficulties here)

That bothers me more than whether a 1pm game takes 3 hours or 3 hours, 15 minutes. Hell if you're a season ticket holder the game takes up your entire day regardless between commute, getting out of parking lot, tailgate, etc. so why do I care about an extra 15 minutes of game.
RE: I dont know, UConn  
UConn4523 : 1/19/2017 11:55 am : link
In comment 13332442 MetsAreBack said:
Quote:
I'm all for cutting down on commercials, but I'd rather not see advertising on jerseys personally. There's something just so low-brow about it.

I've got zero issue with halftime commercials, quarter end commercials, commercials after TDs/FGs and two minute warnings (someone said above that is a bad rule - why?)

Also not all late games start at 4:30 - just one/two national games.


I get it, but its a proven model that works. No one in Europe cares about the logos. We happen to care too much about our teams logo, IMO. Heck I used to care a lot, but seeing how bad these games are now, I'm up for a complete overhaul.
RE: While I Agree, It's Almost A Moot Point For Me  
mitch300 : 1/19/2017 11:56 am : link
In comment 13332380 Trainmaster said:
Quote:
Unless it's a playoff game (and even sometimes even if it is), I record games on the DVR, go do something for 30 min to 45 min, then start watching the game and fast forward through the commercials. If I get caught up, I pause, go do something and then come back. I HATE commercials.

Another option is to bring something with me to do (work on a hobby or project) and when they go to the commercial break I hit the mute button, look away from the TV and unmute when play resumes.

Exactly, that's what I do. I also might watch a half hour show that I recorded earlier in the week. If the Giants are not on ,I have directtv that has two tuners and will pause 1 game and go to the other game and watch that for a few then pause that game and go back to the 1st game. I haven't watched a halftime show in years.
Football (Soccer) finances  
giants#1 : 1/19/2017 11:57 am : link


Matchday Revenue: gate receipts
Broadcasting: domestic and international
Commercial: sponsorship and merchandise


Link - ( New Window )
Yeah commercials  
pjcas18 : 1/19/2017 11:57 am : link
suck, but the last thing you want is for the NFL to become a European hockey league.

BB56 RE: ... commercial, KO and back to commercial ...  
Trainmaster : 1/19/2017 11:58 am : link
I agree 100%.


That is why I always get on my soap box and say that the 1 point extra point kick should be eliminated entirely and force teams to go for 2 pts after every touchdown. You would replace a boring, still mostly automatic play with a very interesting / exciting "elimination play" (score or not).

I'd rather see:

TD

Commercial

2 pt play, immediately followed by kickoff

Commercial

Resume play
a lot of the leagues  
giants#1 : 1/19/2017 12:00 pm : link
with fewer or no commercials have walls much closer to the field of play that are painted with ads. I imagine that helps offset some of the sponsorship revenue. Maybe the NFL could add "virtual" walls around the field and allow networks to superimpose these ads along the sideline.
RE: The question posed about the Euro Soccer above  
Go Terps : 1/19/2017 12:00 pm : link
In comment 13332416 MetsAreBack said:
Quote:
was a very good one, but Deej is the only one so far to slightly address it (apparently people pay per view more or less to watch).

I guess they have fewer players on teams vs NFL too.

But I'm also very interested in understanding how that business model works.. without commercials.. if anyone knows (since we all already knew the games are played continuously without stoppage, and just because its always been that way doesn't explain how certain players over there make so much money now)


There are a few factors, a couple of which have already been touched on in this thread:

1. The games in England are broadcast on subscription networks, and those subscriptions are hefty. It's funny because I think we actually have more access to the EPL here in the US than people do in the UK.

2. There are ads on the uniforms and on the field. While it doesn't quite reach NASCAR levels, games are basically slathered in corporate logos.

3. The structure of soccer leagues in Europe is fundamentally different than the NFL. The soccer clubs aren't franchises. Though there are some protections and revenue sharing, the clubs are more or less left to flourish or struggle on their own financially. The big Euro clubs make an enormous amount of money not only on merchandise, but on participating in cash grab matches and tournaments in Asia and the US. Real Madrid for example makes huge money by frequently doing a tour in China in the preseason.

4. Clubs have a lot of leeway when it comes to pulling off shady deals, hiding money, going into debt, etc. Manchester United is reportedly in a debt of $570 million after a recent spending spree on big name players.

5. This is just my own observation...the soccer infrastructure and its fans are way more sensitive to changes with the game than are NFL fans. We have seen the NFL undergo enormous changes in 20 years, and it seems like the rules are fiddled with every offseason. I don't think that would fly with soccer fans. I remember back in 1994 when we held the World Cup here. TNT was one of the networks that broadcast the games and they actually tried to work commercials into the game. It didn't work and there was a lot of blowback. Imagine watching a 0-0 game and then after two minutes of commercials you come back to a 2-0 score. That shit actually happened.
Thanks Terps  
MetsAreBack : 1/19/2017 12:04 pm : link
very informative.
Run the commercials  
Jesse B : 1/19/2017 12:05 pm : link
But split the screen. See the guys running off the field huddling crowd shots etc. still be better then commercials. Doesn't feel as long when I'm at the game as it does on tv somehow
RE: Thanks Terps  
Go Terps : 1/19/2017 12:18 pm : link
In comment 13332478 MetsAreBack said:
Quote:
very informative.


It's also important to remember that while most people are familiar with the big name Champions League clubs, they are the vast minority. While the health of the small clubs is improving as the TV money is lifting all boats, the difference between the haves and have nots is enormous.
RE: The question posed about the Euro Soccer above  
Joey in VA : 1/19/2017 12:23 pm : link
In comment 13332416 MetsAreBack said:
Quote:
was a very good one, but Deej is the only one so far to slightly address it (apparently people pay per view more or less to watch).

I guess they have fewer players on teams vs NFL too.

But I'm also very interested in understanding how that business model works.. without commercials.. if anyone knows (since we all already knew the games are played continuously without stoppage, and just because its always been that way doesn't explain how certain players over there make so much money now)
For one it's a 38 game season that spans August to May with various in country and international tournament games sprinkled in. It's a revenue machine that runs 10 months a year. Teams have corporate sponsors that pay to be on the kit and the rolling adverts that they have bordering the field so it's non stop advertising that is not intrusive.

Secondly, you have no cheerleaders, no jumbo trons, no idiotic between quarter hokey entertainment, no one screaming over a PA system, no tailgating and generally no fighting (in England anyway, eastern Europe/South America is another mess altogether) in the stands. You don't have 50 different camera angles, non stop replays, replay officials, sideline reporters, 400 extraneous people wandering the sideline doing God knows what, bloated coaching staffs, tons of media/PR on the sideline and the list goes on. You have a safer game with far less equipment, far less domestic travel costs, fewer massive injuries and two 45 minute halves with a 10 minute halftime. Essentially your costs are less so you're really paying the players and funding a stadium and coaching staff. Teams sell players for whopping sums too so the richer teams can buy what they want and the Premier LEague teams all split the TV/Broadcast money.

It's more soccer for longer and the games cost far less to run and show for the clubs. I'd say soccer is Hanukkah and Football is Christmas, instead of one giant day of junk you get 8 days of some stuff.
RE: Yeah commercials  
Giants2012 : 1/19/2017 12:30 pm : link
In comment 13332465 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
suck, but the last thing you want is for the NFL to become a European hockey league.



yikes

considering these players get fined for the wrong shoelaces I doubt they would be walking billboards.
What I want to know is how Hamburg SV can have that  
cosmicj : 1/19/2017 12:33 pm : link
big a payroll and be as crappy as they are.
My son and I were in Berlin, Germany (hi Tony!) for Super Bowl 42 -  
Del Shofner : 1/19/2017 12:36 pm : link
the German TV network showed the game with *no ads* other than before the game, at halftime, and after - like they would with a soccer match. We got to watch the players just standing around during all the (many) commercial breaks. It was pretty weird.

Another weird footnote - the big player of the game for the German announcers was Domenik Hixon, having been born in Germany to a German mother. LOL.
To piggyback on something Terps said about  
Deej : 1/19/2017 12:39 pm : link
the non-huge EPL clubs, remember that the NFL salary cap is $155 million per team. Now some teams lay out more in a given year and some less, but there is a multi-year salary "floor" where every team has to spend ~90% of the cap amount.

Go look at EPL spending. ManC, ManU, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, and Tottenham all spend over the NFL salary cap, £121-225 million pounds on payroll. Teams 7-15 spend £55-83 million pounds. Teams 16-20 spend £25-41 million pounds.

So economically it's a lot closer to MLB, except on steroids because teams are at risk of relegation (being kicked to a lower league). Which is awesome, but potentially self-reinforcing because it makes investing in players and (in particular) facilities/stadiums much riskier for lower end clubs.
RE: My son and I were in Berlin, Germany (hi Tony!) for Super Bowl 42 -  
pjcas18 : 1/19/2017 12:39 pm : link
In comment 13332558 Del Shofner said:
Quote:
the German TV network showed the game with *no ads* other than before the game, at halftime, and after - like they would with a soccer match. We got to watch the players just standing around during all the (many) commercial breaks. It was pretty weird.

Another weird footnote - the big player of the game for the German announcers was Domenik Hixon, having been born in Germany to a German mother. LOL.


That is interesting, I remember reading another player, maybe Strahan, lived in Germany for a while with his father while was stationed in Germany with the military.
I agree they need to reduce the commercials AND I don't want ads on  
Tom in NY : 1/19/2017 12:43 pm : link
uniforms.

They have tried this during soccer, and in the NFL (early '90's maybe?)...they frame the entire picture, with live action going on, in an ad from Budweiser, for example.

The announcer will even say ".....this kickoff brought to you by Budweiser..." then after the kickoff resume normal viewing.

I'd much rather have this than the commercial break right after a kickoff (which was preceded by a commercial break).
RE: man  
Gatorade Dunk : 1/19/2017 1:02 pm : link
In comment 13332262 spike said:
Quote:
wants less money.

The NFL doesn't collect TV ad revenue.
RE: RE: My son and I were in Berlin, Germany (hi Tony!) for Super Bowl 42 -  
MetsAreBack : 1/19/2017 1:07 pm : link
In comment 13332569 pjcas18 said:
Quote:



That is interesting, I remember reading another player, maybe Strahan, lived in Germany for a while with his father while was stationed in Germany with the military.



I know Andrew Luck spent some time in Germany and England, which they mentioned/marketed during the Colts-Jaguars game at Wembley this year. Is this who you are thinking of? His Dad apparently ran the World League and GM'd the Frankfurt team though, not military.
RE: what the networks  
Gatorade Dunk : 1/19/2017 1:10 pm : link
In comment 13332390 area junc said:
Quote:
don't seem to be grasping is every time they cut to a commercial is an opportunity to lose viewers.

When even diehards have a difficult time sitting through a game, you've got a real problem.

Biscotti summed it up nicely but I'd add cramming a commercial in when a 30-second time-out is granted, and then quickly hurrying back to catch the snap, is equally ridiculous. Those time-outs usually happen in important sequences late in games and you lose that drama by cutting away.

Reminds me of the UFC on FOX, they skip the walk-outs and the between rounds chatter in the corners. You lose the magic the sport provides.

I understand what you're saying, but to say "every time they cut to a commercial is an opportunity to lose viewers" sort of misses the point. The viewers only matter as an opportunity to show them commercials.
RE: RE: RE: My son and I were in Berlin, Germany (hi Tony!) for Super Bowl 42 -  
pjcas18 : 1/19/2017 1:34 pm : link
In comment 13332639 MetsAreBack said:
Quote:
In comment 13332569 pjcas18 said:


Quote:





That is interesting, I remember reading another player, maybe Strahan, lived in Germany for a while with his father while was stationed in Germany with the military.




I know Andrew Luck spent some time in Germany and England, which they mentioned/marketed during the Colts-Jaguars game at Wembley this year. Is this who you are thinking of? His Dad apparently ran the World League and GM'd the Frankfurt team though, not military.


No, it was Strahan.

Quote:
Strahan was born in Houston, Texas. He is the youngest child of Louise (Traylor) Strahan, a basketball coach, and Gene Willie Strahan, a retired Army Major and a boxer with a 1–1 record against future heavyweight Ken Norton.[1] He is the nephew of retired pro football player Arthur Strahan. Gene was a major in the U.S. Army, and when Michael was 9, the family moved to an army post - BFV (Benjamin Franklin Village) - in Mannheim, West Germany.[2] Although Strahan did not begin to play high school football at Westbury High School (Houston, Texas) until his senior year, he did play organized football while attending school at MAHS (Mannheim American High School) a US Department of Defense Dependent High School, in Käfertal (Mannheim), Germany, playing linebacker for the Mannheim Redskins in 1985.[3] The summer before Strahan's senior year of high school, his father sent him to live with his uncle Art in Houston so he could attend Westbury High School. Strahan played one season of football, which was enough for him to get a scholarship offer from Texas Southern University. He then flew back to Germany for the spring term, where he graduated from Mannheim Christian.
RE: I agree they need to reduce the commercials AND I don't want ads on  
RobCarpenter : 1/19/2017 1:43 pm : link
In comment 13332580 Tom in NY said:
Quote:
uniforms.

They have tried this during soccer, and in the NFL (early '90's maybe?)...they frame the entire picture, with live action going on, in an ad from Budweiser, for example.

The announcer will even say ".....this kickoff brought to you by Budweiser..." then after the kickoff resume normal viewing.

I'd much rather have this than the commercial break right after a kickoff (which was preceded by a commercial break).


I thought MLS does a version of that now. During the game they show the sponsor on screen.

Every time I watch a NFL game and there's a long drive, I know I'm in store for a bunch of commercials in short succession. I agree having sponsors on uniforms would be awful, but I don't see why the game couldn't include a logo of some company on the screen or a scroll at the bottom in exchange for fewer commercial breaks. People are so used to seeing the bottom scroll with the scores that a 10 second break here and there with sponsor info wouldn't really be that big of a deal.
An interesting exercise  
Go Terps : 1/19/2017 3:30 pm : link
Go online and stream an NFL game, and get Sky Sports's coverage. It is a SIGNIFICANTLY better viewing experience in several ways:

1. The studios are populated with fewer people and usually have a random ex-NFL player (last I saw was Donald Driver). There is zero ESPN/FOX/CBS-type bullshit banter, with the focus being almost solely on what is happening on the field. The discussion is far more understated and subtle, basically reflecting what we Americans tend to like so much about English soccer announcers.

2. Commercial breaks are often entirely taken up by in-game studio analysis or random highlight packages. During a commercial this year I saw a clip from America's Game that had an anecdote about Larry Csonka being the only running back to ever be called for unnecessary roughness on a play in which he was tackled.

Generally, my impression is that people watching on Sky Sports have a far more relaxed, ad-free, and intelligent viewing experience than we do here in the US. You get the game...not a sales pitch.
I don't think the number of commercial breaks has increased  
Jim in Fairfax : 1/19/2017 3:47 pm : link
Pretty much the same as I remember going back to the 70s.

Two things have changed:

1) The games are lasting longer. Two reasons: increased massing results in more clock stoppages. And replay reviews are slowing the game down.

2) DVRs and commercial free streaming has made viewers more sensitive to commercial breaks.
RE: An interesting exercise  
Fox : 1/19/2017 4:17 pm : link
In comment 13332958 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Go online and stream an NFL game, and get Sky Sports's coverage. It is a SIGNIFICANTLY better viewing experience in several ways:

1. The studios are populated with fewer people and usually have a random ex-NFL player (last I saw was Donald Driver). There is zero ESPN/FOX/CBS-type bullshit banter, with the focus being almost solely on what is happening on the field. The discussion is far more understated and subtle, basically reflecting what we Americans tend to like so much about English soccer announcers.

2. Commercial breaks are often entirely taken up by in-game studio analysis or random highlight packages. During a commercial this year I saw a clip from America's Game that had an anecdote about Larry Csonka being the only running back to ever be called for unnecessary roughness on a play in which he was tackled.

Generally, my impression is that people watching on Sky Sports have a far more relaxed, ad-free, and intelligent viewing experience than we do here in the US. You get the game...not a sales pitch.


That sounds heavenly. Will have to give that a try in the future.
A couple of thoughts:  
81_Great_Dane : 1/19/2017 5:12 pm : link
1) There are too many stoppages, period. TV time-outs, replay reviews, etc. The game is slow and doesn't flow. Excitement gets dissipated. I think a lot of fans are enjoying their memory of what the game was, not reacting to what we're actually seeing. Younger fans don't have those memories, and I suspect that's weakening their interest in NFL footall.

2) There are a number of ways that the NFL could cut back on the number and duration of commercial breaks. The problem is most entail charging more for fewer commercials, or something like that. It would only be a matter of time before the # of commercials crept back up again. Because:

3) I don't think there's a way to save the NFL from itself. There's no broadcasting entity ready to say "Hey, your games are too long, have too many interruptions, and they're getting boring. Make changes or we'll dump you." Because NFL games are a ratings hit on every network where they appear. The broadcasters want the league, and the league wants the broadcasters. Any broadcaster that says tries to impose sanity, as CBS did when Fox snatched away the NFC, pays a big price -- and any network that gets the NFL is suddenly a must-carry network for cable carriers and local affiliates.

NFL-watchers have said that basically the only thing that could stop the NFL is its own greed. Some of the off-the-field stuff has been damaging, but that's still basically true, and the league knows it. They're always trying to figure out how much money they can wring out of us before we lose interest and tune out.

A modest proposal: You can get ads in by interrupting the game, or by running them during game action. They do a lot of the former and little of the latter. Cut some commercial breaks and in stead shrink the size of the game image to something like 50% of the screen, and put an ad on the rest of the screen. Do it after incomplete passes, substitutions, huddles, etc., so the game is still on your TV, but ads take over some of your screen real-estate until the players break the huddle.
My unsolicited and useless idea...  
Sarcastic Sam : 1/19/2017 5:34 pm : link
PAT or 2 pt try has to happen immediately after a touchdown. The review can go concurrently with the play. If the TD is overturned, the try has already been done for that particularly drive and will count. No waiting for replay. Then commercial break (giving more time for the replay if necessary), then KO immediately followed by start of the subsequent drive.
RE: An interesting exercise  
HBart : 1/19/2017 6:18 pm : link
In comment 13332958 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Go online and stream an NFL game, and get Sky Sports's coverage. It is a SIGNIFICANTLY better viewing experience in several ways:

1. The studios are populated with fewer people and usually have a random ex-NFL player (last I saw was Donald Driver). There is zero ESPN/FOX/CBS-type bullshit banter, with the focus being almost solely on what is happening on the field. The discussion is far more understated and subtle, basically reflecting what we Americans tend to like so much about English soccer announcers.

2. Commercial breaks are often entirely taken up by in-game studio analysis or random highlight packages. During a commercial this year I saw a clip from America's Game that had an anecdote about Larry Csonka being the only running back to ever be called for unnecessary roughness on a play in which he was tackled.

Generally, my impression is that people watching on Sky Sports have a far more relaxed, ad-free, and intelligent viewing experience than we do here in the US. You get the game...not a sales pitch.


+1 - working in Amsterdam for a year, outside the time offset which was a PITA, the viewing experience was so, so, so much better.

Even so, I couldn't get my British co-workers to join me watching games because as they said "too many f**king adverts".
It's so awesome  
Gregorio : 1/19/2017 9:41 pm : link
to hear a team owner taking this position. I hope Goodell's ears and the rest of the owners are listening.
...  
christian : 1/19/2017 9:47 pm : link
I would have zero issue with the number and placement of commercials if in between stuff was happening. 3 hour broadcast for on average 11 minutes of on field action.
And also  
Knineteen : 1/19/2017 10:37 pm : link
the replays of booth-reviews are pretty much a thing of the past.

Now, almost all booth-reviews go straight to commercial.
RE: owner greed  
Jersey55 : 1/20/2017 4:36 pm : link
In comment 13332279 Enzo said:
Quote:
is the reason something as nonsensical as the two minute warning still exists.

absolutely agree about the 2 minute warning, what the hell are they warning us about. College football doesn't have a 2 minute warning, this 2 minute warning crap never made any sense to me and now that games are over 3 hours long for fans to see a 60 minute football game it makes even less sense, these games are now all about greed and less about football.
RE: A no brainer  
djm : 1/20/2017 7:41 pm : link
In comment 13332368 trueblueinpw said:
Quote:
Eliminating the ads between kickoffs and less frequently running ads between change of possession is an obvious fix. The ads are annoying but like many others have mentioned, except for with the Giants, on NFL Sunday I'm either time shifting with TiVo or watching Redzone.

I wish the NFL would develop a product that allows me to purchase a live video feed of the game without any ads or commentary. I would be like being at the game without the travel or the drunken morons in the seats. Pure football viewing enjoyment. What would I pay for that? A lot. Not PSL/season ticket money, but I'd still pay a lot for this sort of season pass to the Giants. In the olde times of early pro football the teams needed the networks to get the games out with broadcast and produced product for the masses. There's still a need and money to be made in that segment but the more sophisticated NFL would love a high def live action video feed on game day.


Interesting idea. You'd think there would be a market for something like this by now. I'd be interested for sure. Some kind of delux viewing ppv option that fans could purchase every Sunday.
RE: RE: A no brainer  
Jersey55 : 1/21/2017 11:15 am : link
In comment 13334513 djm said:
Quote:
In comment 13332368 trueblueinpw said:


Quote:


Eliminating the ads between kickoffs and less frequently running ads between change of possession is an obvious fix. The ads are annoying but like many others have mentioned, except for with the Giants, on NFL Sunday I'm either time shifting with TiVo or watching Redzone.

I wish the NFL would develop a product that allows me to purchase a live video feed of the game without any ads or commentary. I would be like being at the game without the travel or the drunken morons in the seats. Pure football viewing enjoyment. What would I pay for that? A lot. Not PSL/season ticket money, but I'd still pay a lot for this sort of season pass to the Giants. In the olde times of early pro football the teams needed the networks to get the games out with broadcast and produced product for the masses. There's still a need and money to be made in that segment but the more sophisticated NFL would love a high def live action video feed on game day.



Interesting idea. You'd think there would be a market for something like this by now. I'd be interested for sure. Some kind of delux viewing ppv option that fans could purchase every Sunday.

I watched an NFL game in my cabin on a cruise ship and there were no commercials just breaks where players stood around on the field until the break was over but there were no commercial ads, so I think it would be a hard thing to do to not have anything. I think the answer is simply to cut down on the amount but the owners and players both share and thats what will make that almost impossible...like taking candy away from a baby.
Pages: 1 2 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner