Pats Games on TV

[Angry Man]

Cardinals/Pats could get moved, if the Pats are who we think they are ( ) and the Cardinals FINALLY take that next step everyone predicts for them every offseason.

Hahahaha... good one. :rocker:

 

[Bigdogx]

I just seen on tv here for those of us in western mass spfld./northhampton area, channel 22 will be airing thursday nights game.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

I thought all the games were on tv?

 

[PatsFan37]

Once the season gets going, you can find out each week which games will be aired on which channels nationwide at this website.

It's not operational now. The guy who does it generally updates it a few days to a week before the games.

 

[jmt57]

Once the season gets going, you can find out each week which games will be aired on which channels nationwide at this website.

It's not operational now. The guy who does it generally updates it a few days to a week before the games.

Thanks PatsFan37.
That site is an incredible resource for out-of-towners without Sunday Ticket or Slingbox.

 

[Canada's #1 Pats Fan]

Doesn't Flex Scheduling mean that if the Pat's happen to be on a hot streak they may show up more in primetime from 11-17? Seems to me I was able to watch every single Pat's game from about week 9 on last year.

The most any team can be shown in one year on National TV (Sunday night, Monday night, Thursday night) is 6 times. Currently the Pats have 5 National telecasts. Depending on the season and how one of their later opponents is doing that game may become one of the flex games. Like last year when the Bills vs. Pats game was flexed.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

I never understood, since the schedule came out, why they didn't make Pats/Giants the nationally televised preseason game. You'd think they'd be smart enough to do that since that would most likely be the highest rated preseason game in the history of the NFL.

i'm not watching that game because they'll play clips of the super bowl throughout. i'll watch the first 3 preseason games if i can, and then the opener against KC and the rest of the regular season.

 

[cincipatsfan]

For those of you that are out of town and thinking about Sunday Ticket, think about a few things before you take the plunge with DIRECTV.

First and foremost, if you sign up, you have a 2 year commitment. If you happen to not like the service, you can get out but it will cost you hundreds to do so (penalty goes down over time).

There are deals for new customers and ST. You will get a sizeable price break and get the games in high def for free. Once you're an existing customer, it's a much different story. This year I'm paying six payments of 41.50 plus tax for ST. The part thats really pissing me off is if I want the games in HD, I have to pay another 100 bucks. So the total package is right around 350.

Here in the Cincinnati area, last year, I would have missed a grand total of 3 games over the entire season. That makes those three games VERY expensive, so I'm really on the fence about whether to cancel ST this season or not.

I'm sure I'll procrastinate on the decision until the season starts, then it's too late to cancel

Just something for you to consider if you're thinking about it. The real plus to DIRECTV is the HD selection and sports packages. I get ST and baseball so I can watch the Sox. The HD selection is WAY better than the cable service I had and the picture quality is great.

 

[Sivy]

For those of you that are out of town and thinking about Sunday Ticket, think about a few things before you take the plunge with DIRECTV.

First and foremost, if you sign up, you have a 2 year commitment. If you happen to not like the service, you can get out but it will cost you hundreds to do so (penalty goes down over time).

There are deals for new customers and ST. You will get a sizeable price break and get the games in high def for free. Once you're an existing customer, it's a much different story. This year I'm paying six payments of 41.50 plus tax for ST. The part thats really pissing me off is if I want the games in HD, I have to pay another 100 bucks. So the total package is right around 350.

Here in the Cincinnati area, last year, I would have missed a grand total of 3 games over the entire season. That makes those three games VERY expensive, so I'm really on the fence about whether to cancel ST this season or not.

I'm sure I'll procrastinate on the decision until the season starts, then it's too late to cancel

Just something for you to consider if you're thinking about it. The real plus to DIRECTV is the HD selection and sports packages. I get ST and baseball so I can watch the Sox. The HD selection is WAY better than the cable service I had and the picture quality is great.

I love Sunday ticket.

 

[Bill219]

I love Sunday ticket.

Me too. I live in Cornelius, NC and have to have my Sox and Pats and Celts games.

According to the DVR guide, the preseason game vs The Ravens will be on MASN

I do not know if it is going to be blacked out for me.

For MLB, this area falls under Baltimore/Nationals blackout rules area, I do not know how it works for the NFL.

 

[Sivy]

Me too. I live in Cornelius, NC and have to have my Sox and Pats and Celts games.

According to the DVR guide, the preseason game vs The Ravens will be on MASN

I do not know if it is going to be blacked out for me.

For MLB, this area falls under Baltimore/Nationals blackout rules area, I do not know how it works for the NFL.

Me either, but its preseason so i dont really care. I hate preseason, it should be ended, and teams should be allowed to plan scrimage games with other teams on their own, if they feel its needed.

 

[jmt57]

Me either, but its preseason so i dont really care. I hate preseason, it should be ended, and teams should be allowed to plan scrimage games with other teams on their own, if they feel its needed.

Though that is indeed what should happen, making it happen is a difficult business decision. Even teams that play the HOF preseason game have the option of playing one less game (for a total of 4, rather than 5) but they don't. The owners are intoxicated by the revenue stream. Fans are charged full price for tickets, and if you want season tickets then you have to buy the preseason games. Meanwhile the costs are low because players are paid the same amount of money whether there are three, four or five preseason games.

For there to be less preseason games, the owners would need to find a way to either increase their revenue or reduce their expenses in order to offset the profit lost from those missing games. Asking the players to take an across the board cut in pay would be like admitting to the NFLPA that you've been ripping them off for preseason games. Increasing per game ticket prices so that the total amount for nine home games equals what is now ten home games would help, but the team still loses all that concession and parking revenue.

One other thing to consider is that the NFL has evolved in to a twelve months per year business. They keep themselves in the news year round with free agency, the draft, hall of fame voting, minicamps, training camp and preseason games. Certain things happen directly opposite other sporting events, which is probably not a coincidence. Reducing the number of preseason games reduces the amount of NFL news, which does not fit in with their agenda of sports domination.

The best time to make a change is when the next collective bargaining agreement is worked out. If it is part of the entire package, then it could be worked out. It's a very remote possibility, because both the owners and the players would have to be willing to accept less than what they are currently getting, so it is very unlikely. Unless or until the fans make a collective statement by not attending or watching preseason games though, the owners don't have an incentive to cut back the number of August games.

 

[ScottieC]

Yea, I'm not a pre season fan either.

That being said, I think that Rodger Doger Good"Gawd Look what I have done"Ell will soon be cutting the preseason to 2 or 3 games and making the regular season 17-18 games long.

That'd be cool. Another record for us to break.

 

[Sivy]

Though that is indeed what should happen, making it happen is a difficult business decision. Even teams that play the HOF preseason game have the option of playing one less game (for a total of 4, rather than 5) but they don't. The owners are intoxicated by the revenue stream. Fans are charged full price for tickets, and if you want season tickets then you have to buy the preseason games. Meanwhile the costs are low because players are paid the same amount of money whether there are three, four or five preseason games.

For there to be less preseason games, the owners would need to find a way to either increase their revenue or reduce their expenses in order to offset the profit lost from those missing games. Asking the players to take an across the board cut in pay would be like admitting to the NFLPA that you've been ripping them off for preseason games. Increasing per game ticket prices so that the total amount for nine home games equals what is now ten home games would help, but the team still loses all that concession and parking revenue.

One other thing to consider is that the NFL has evolved in to a twelve months per year business. They keep themselves in the news year round with free agency, the draft, hall of fame voting, minicamps, training camp and preseason games. Certain things happen directly opposite other sporting events, which is probably not a coincidence. Reducing the number of preseason games reduces the amount of NFL news, which does not fit in with their agenda of sports domination.

The best time to make a change is when the next collective bargaining agreement is worked out. If it is part of the entire package, then it could be worked out. It's a very remote possibility, because both the owners and the players would have to be willing to accept less than what they are currently getting, so it is very unlikely. Unless or until the fans make a collective statement by not attending or watching preseason games though, the owners don't have an incentive to cut back the number of August games.

From a business point of view, all of that is correct. But how would business be if Brady went down in preseason week 3? Or any major player on any team. Sure, season ticket holders would have already paid, but how about if they stop going to the games and spending 10 dollars on beer, or whatever else they buy while at the games. And the guy that doesnt have season tickets and is willing to buy individual tickets to every game he can...is he going to go wath matt cassel leading the 1-7 patriots? I dont think so.
Maybe the odds of a player getting injured are weighed against the odds of making money on preseason games, but sometimes things have to to qualitivative rather than quantitative.

 

[Deus Irae]

From a business point of view, all of that is correct. But how would business be if Brady went down in preseason week 3? Or any major player on any team. Sure, season ticket holders would have already paid, but how about if they stop going to the games and spending 10 dollars on beer, or whatever else they buy while at the games. And the guy that doesnt have season tickets and is willing to buy individual tickets to every game he can...is he going to go wath matt cassel leading the 1-7 patriots? I dont think so.
Maybe the odds of a player getting injured are weighed against the odds of making money on preseason games, but sometimes things have to to qualitivative rather than quantitative.

Patriots v. Green Bay strike a cord?

 

[jmt57]

From a business point of view, all of that is correct. But how would business be if Brady went down in preseason week 3? Or any major player on any team. Sure, season ticket holders would have already paid, but how about if they stop going to the games and spending 10 dollars on beer, or whatever else they buy while at the games. And the guy that doesnt have season tickets and is willing to buy individual tickets to every game he can...is he going to go wath matt cassel leading the 1-7 patriots? I dont think so.
Maybe the odds of a player getting injured are weighed against the odds of making money on preseason games, but sometimes things have to to qualitivative rather than quantitative.

There are two different business aspects to consider when we speculate on the effect a player such as Brady going down in a preseason game would have - that of the team and that of the NFL. For the reasons you point out above, it would have a major affect on the Patriots. However, it would be negligible from the NFL's perspective. While it could result in no-shows at Gilette should the team not be able to overcome his loss, the injury would have an equally opposite, positive affect on one or more teams within the division. The Bills and Jets, for example, could have greater interest as they battle for a division title, and some other team in the AFC also has greater interest generated as they make a successful playoff run. The networks could hype Chargers vs Colts rather than Pats vs Colts.

An extreme example would be what happened in Atlanta without Mike Vick. It had a devastating affect on the Falcons from a business perspective, but another team was able to profit from winning a division title and hosting a playoff game, while other players replaced Vick's role in the NFL marketing machine.

 

[Sivy]

There are two different business aspects to consider when we speculate on the effect a player such as Brady going down in a preseason game would have - that of the team and that of the NFL. For the reasons you point out above, it would have a major affect on the Patriots. However, it would be negligible from the NFL's perspective. While it could result in no-shows at Gilette should the team not be able to overcome his loss, the injury would have an equally opposite, positive affect on one or more teams within the division. The Bills and Jets, for example, could have greater interest as they battle for a division title, and some other team in the AFC also has greater interest generated as they make a successful playoff run. The networks could hype Chargers vs Colts rather than Pats vs Colts.

An extreme example would be what happened in Atlanta without Mike Vick. It had a devastating affect on the Falcons from a business perspective, but another team was able to profit from winning a division title and hosting a playoff game, while other players replaced Vick's role in the NFL marketing machine.

I think tv netwoks would much rather see a patriots run, than a bills or jets battle for the wild card. The patriots are a big draw, which makes them good for the nfl (no matter how much we want to belive that the nfl hates them) the NFL LOVES the patriots winning so many games, and "running up the score" they'd much rather have that to offer than some other set of teams that are doing OK because tom brady isnt injured.

Mike Vic and Atlant, is no tom brady and new england.

 

[vvusteve]

anyone have the old fashioned dish (before direct tv)
just wondering what satelite and channel
the pats vs ravens feed will be on this thursday
Its hard to find a bar in phoenix with the old dish
to get LIVE preseason pats games