Low Ratings and Quality of Play

[DMelt36]

So while overall numbers are down on people watching their own teams a little, the biggest dip is in the primetime games. People aren't watching games where their own team isn't involved as much.

A lot of those primetime games (especially the Monday night ones) have had some shitty matchups with little to no intrigue, and that isn't helping matters.

 

[bearmick]

By comparison, after watching Game 1 of the World Series my faith in the NFL has been somewhat restored. MLB had the choice of any umpire in either league to be the home plate ump for the World Series opener, and the MLB unfortunately chose an umpire who was not equipped to call balls and strikes...which is kind of important in baseball. It would be like the Bears finally reaching the Super Bowl 78 years from now, and then seeing that the referee for the game is Gene Steratore.

Yes, it was farcical.

 

[theOHIOSTATE!]

It's odd the multiple people who are talking about how there aren't 20 elite passing QBs ready to run an NFL off. out of college in the league don't get that......

15+ yrs ago YOU DIDN'T NEED AN ELITE QB (generally) TO BE AN ELITE TEAM, bc you could draft D heavy, play a solid power running/play action passing game and keep up with the NEs of the world. Somewhere down the line that became more and more difficult due to a bunch of factors the league has control of.

THEY WANTED A PASS HAPPY/SCORE HAPPY league to satisfy fantasy players, and that's what they got.

In that environment, it's MUCH HARDER to be a consistent winner without a top level QB....im not sure there ever were that many of them to begin with, honestly.

 

[BaBaBlacksheep]

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/17965626/seattle-seahawks-cornerback-richard-sherman-says-league-fun-anymore-criticizes-nfl-roger-goodell

Think Sherman nails part of the ratings issue here.

 

[The Hawk]

I think ratings are down somewhat because of the fact that they have basically legislated some of the fun stuff out of the game such as kick-off returning. TO me, watching a guy like Hester run a kick back was the most exciting play in the game.

Also, there are way too many penalties being called it seems to me, particularly pass interference calls. I think that it would be better if they just would let these guys play more without a zebra stop the game.

Just read the Sherman interview and I somewhat agree with him except for his Budweiser stuff. Goodell is not a good commissioner in my opinion. I think he wants the game to be pretty much played by robots not human beings and if the player steps out of Goodell's pre-determined mantra for how to play, the player gets punished.

 

[The Hawk]

So while overall numbers are down on people watching their own teams a little, the biggest dip is in the primetime games. People aren't watching games where their own team isn't involved as much.

That is also true. Maybe the problem is how many really bad teams that there are in the NFL right now and also the lack of really good teams. Back when there were real "STARS" in the league, fans would gravitate toward watching a great team with great stars play someone equally as good in primetime. Now we have very few even really good teams but a lot of mediocre to really bad ones.

 

[BNB]

These are all great points and the article is a terrific read. One more that factor nobody has yet mentioned is the fact that parity is a mirage. The same teams win the Super Bowl and/or appear in the game multiple times. Most teams in the NFL range from mediocre to complete dogshit. Those of us who have watched Bears games in the last three seasons can Attest to that. If you watch a team and know it's flat out awfull and has no chance to win or at least entertain you whyinvest more than a couple of hours in seeing it weekly?

Parity does exist in the NFL in the sense that every team has an equal opportunity to improve or be great.

I think it's a league of parity because, regardless of what team you are or what city you play in, you have just as good of a chance as any other team to build a consistent winner. Probably the biggest reason for that is the hard cap. Every team has the same amount of money to spend. If you're a great player, you'd have to take a significant pay you if you wanted to help build a super team, like the Warriors in the NBA. Or you can go to an average team and sign a huge contract, and help make them a great team. Most players in the NFL choose the money.

If you have a good owner that hires the right people (President -- > VP --> GM -->Coaching-->rest of coaching staff) and they draft well, it doesn't matter where your team is located. You'll consistently be a good team.

What's stopping teams like the Bears, Browns, etc. from being consistently good? Themselves and their terrible decisions. But is it actually possible for them to turn it around and compete for a Superbowl in a few years? Yup.

Look at a league like the NBA. They have a soft cap, which gives the bigger market teams a clear advantage over small market teams, and you are left with franchises dominating over decades. Case in point- Over the last 32 years, only 10 NBA franchises have won the NBA Finals. In the NFL, 10 different franchises have won the Super Bowl over the last 13 years. Why is that? Because in the NBA, great teams can keep their great players by giving them an absurd contract and go over the cap. And then, while being over the cap, they'll trade for another great player on a contact year, and then proceed to sign him to a big contract and pay even more tax. But fuck it, they can afford it and they're winning. In the NFL, a lot of times a great team or a dynasty will fall apart because they have a lot of great players on contract years that WILL leave and go elsewhere for a lot more money. Their teams don't have the option to go over the cap like that to keep them. They have to rely on their talent evaluators to continue making good draft picks and finding the perfect fit for the coach in free agency, etc.

 

[Icculus]

Different teams have won in MLB since the last repeat champions and that league doesn't have a salary tax (though it does have a luxury tax).

 

[JDB_219]

It's odd the multiple people who are talking about how there aren't 20 elite passing QBs ready to run an NFL off. out of college in the league don't get that......

15+ yrs ago YOU DIDN'T NEED AN ELITE QB (generally) TO BE AN ELITE TEAM, bc you could draft D heavy, play a solid power running/play action passing game and keep up with the NEs of the world. Somewhere down the line that became more and more difficult due to a bunch of factors the league has control of.

THEY WANTED A PASS HAPPY/SCORE HAPPY league to satisfy fantasy players, and that's what they got.

In that environment, it's MUCH HARDER to be a consistent winner without a top level QB....im not sure there ever were that many of them to begin with, honestly.

I get sick of people acting like that there was a time when every team had a good QB.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

The only real solution is to contract the Bears.

 

[didshereallysaythat]

People wonder why ratings are low. Just look at the last 10 seconds of the 1st half of the MNF game.

 

[Gunzaan]

Fine. Take the number of pro, college, etc players who play QB. Look at all of the draft picks from all of the rounds over the last 10
years. Focus on the first row rounds. Almost ALL suck. Not mediocre but suck.

Think about it. The best guys playing that position all came into the league 10-15 years ago. Almost all of the guys coming in since then have been terrible to average. The top ones ala Luck and Cam (both #1) have been inconsistent.

Everyone is on Dak's nuts. He's playing as a game manager and that offense is led by that great o line and the best running game in the NFL

Again, there are 15 people right now who are doing the job of NFL qb at a quality level. That's it. Maybe 5 are elite and they are all gonna be out of the league in the next 2-5 years. Shitty qbs are replaced with shitty qbs

This league is fucked when it comes to qb play. They'd better fix this shit and quick. The lack of continuity with the college game and the pro game is killing the NFL

I agree and think you can extend that to ALL positions, due to injuries across the board. When you have most teams using 3rd stringers and street free agents all over the place, the quality of play has a lot to be desired!

 

[Bearshomer]

Parity does exist in the NFL in the sense that every team has an equal opportunity to improve or be great.

I think it's a league of parity because, regardless of what team you are or what city you play in, you have just as good of a chance as any other team to build a consistent winner. Probably the biggest reason for that is the hard cap. Every team has the same amount of money to spend. If you're a great player, you'd have to take a significant pay you if you wanted to help build a super team, like the Warriors in the NBA. Or you can go to an average team and sign a huge contract, and help make them a great team. Most players in the NFL choose the money.

If you have a good owner that hires the right people (President -- > VP --> GM -->Coaching-->rest of coaching staff) and they draft well, it doesn't matter where your team is located. You'll consistently be a good team.

What's stopping teams like the Bears, Browns, etc. from being consistently good? Themselves and their terrible decisions. But is it actually possible for them to turn it around and compete for a Superbowl in a few years? Yup.

Look at a league like the NBA. They have a soft cap, which gives the bigger market teams a clear advantage over small market teams, and you are left with franchises dominating over decades. Case in point- Over the last 32 years, only 10 NBA franchises have won the NBA Finals. In the NFL, 10 different franchises have won the Super Bowl over the last 13 years. Why is that? Because in the NBA, great teams can keep their great players by giving them an absurd contract and go over the cap. And then, while being over the cap, they'll trade for another great player on a contact year, and then proceed to sign him to a big contract and pay even more tax. But fuck it, they can afford it and they're winning. In the NFL, a lot of times a great team or a dynasty will fall apart because they have a lot of great players on contract years that WILL leave and go elsewhere for a lot more money. Their teams don't have the option to go over the cap like that to keep them. They have to rely on their talent evaluators to continue making good draft picks and finding the perfect fit for the coach in free agency, etc.

If you went back another 7 years to make it 20 years, you would only add one new Super Bowl winner.

While the NFC has enormous parity due to the lack of elite QB play, the AFC has had 12/13 SBs represented by the same three QBs.

 

[The Hawk]

One trouble in the NFL that is seldom is mentioned is the shitty ownership of so many franchises. Because of the revenue sharing rules and the monopoly that these guys have in their markets, they really do not have to hire excellent people to run their organizations. It isn't like in real business where you have to compete in order to make money. As long as fans continue to trod like lemmings to fill their stadiums, and have big time revenue from the networks, we will continue to see loser assholes like the McCaskey family laugh their asses off on the way to the bank.

 

[The Hawk]

If you went back another 7 years to make it 20 years, you would only add one new Super Bowl winner.

While the NFC has enormous parity due to the lack of elite QB play, the AFC has had 12/13 SBs represented by the same three QBs.

I guess that you could call it parity. I'd call it more exactly shitty mediocrity. This is an ownership/monopoly reality. No need to look beyond the Bears. Look, George Halas was cheap. NO doubt about it. But Halas also wanted to WIN and knew talent and how the game was played. Not these pukes in ownership of the Bears and many of the other teams. Truth is that it is easy for them to make money without even really trying. And that is the damned problem.

 

[The Hawk]

I get sick of people acting like that there was a time when every team had a good QB.

You are right. Just look at the Bears history Personally, I think that in pretty much every generation of football, there were 3-4 great quarterbacks, 5-6 good quarterbacks, and then every other team had pedestrian to bad ones. You could pretty much say the same things about every other position on the field but there is no doubt that a great quarterback made a great difference on the field.

Think about it for a second. Look at Drew Brees. Personally I think he is possibly as good as Brady but had shit defenses around him. Yet in every game, he was on the field, his team could beat any team that they faced because he was so special. That is the effect of a great quarterback in a nutshell.