Game 17 in 2021: Cowboys @ Pats

[Sicilian]

It was fine the way it was, but this also won't ruin the game, or get me to stop watching. And that's why they can do this. Because the amount of people who will actually stop watching football because of this is microscopic compared to the extra gate and ad revenue this will generate. Greedy? No question. But as long as it comes with additional compensation to the players and considerations for extra time off and roster flexibility (so you don't feel as much pressure to play an injured player), it will be fine.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

One of the reasons why the NFL beats MLB , NHL, and NBA in ratings is because those leagues have too many games. The more games the NFL adds the worse ratings they will get.

 

[Sicilian]

One of the reasons why the NFL beats MLB , NHL, and NBA in ratings is because those leagues have too many games. The more games the NFL adds the worse ratings they will get.

There's a tipping point though, and I'm sure they have marketing analysts crunching these numbers all the time. TV deals are calculated by how much ad revenue they can generate by broadcasting these games. Ad revenue is typically calculated based on number of eyeballs that see the ads. Increasing from 16 to 17 games adds 6.25% more opportunities for those eyeballs to see ads. So let's say it burns some people out and they no longer watch every game. You would need the per game ratings to drop by more than 6.25% before it becomes financially detrimental to add this game (possibly more, because you're also making more money on gate).

At some point, that number will cross the boundary, where the average viewership drops by more than the added opportunities. But until then, this will make money. I would also argue that the reason football gets higher ratings is at least partially (perhaps primarily) due to it being on so infrequently (once per week, per team). As a Pats fan, if I know I only have to carve out three hours once a week to watch every game, I'm likely to do that no matter the total number of games. Again, there's a tipping point there where I wouldn't care as much, but in general my tolerance for that is higher. If they played every day like MLB, no way in hell am I able to watch them all, even if they only played 16 games. I just can't dedicated 2-3 weeks of watching the same sport every day.

 

[venecol]

My understanding is that the 17th game is also by formula. The formula is that one game will be against the division in the opposite conference that you played round-robin against, two years ago, and the team that you play will be the team in that division who placed the same in that division as you did in your division LAST YEAR.

Pats played the entire NFC East in 2019.
Pats and Cowboys each finished 3rd in their division in 2020.

Chiefs played the entire NFC North in 2019
Chiefs and Packers each finished first in their division in 2020.


and so on...

bottom line: There is no arbitrary assigning of the 17th game.

I am not for it, but I would be deadset against if the matchups were manufactured for ratings.

What I read was each AFC division plays against the same NFC division, so East vs East, North vs North, etc. Then by where they finished in the division.

 

[jah]

My understanding is that the 17th game is also by formula. The formula is that one game will be against the division in the opposite conference that you played round-robin against, two years ago, and the team that you play will be the team in that division who placed the same in that division as you did in your division LAST YEAR.

Pats played the entire NFC East in 2019.
Pats and Cowboys each finished 3rd in their division in 2020.

Chiefs played the entire NFC North in 2019
Chiefs and Packers each finished first in their division in 2020.


and so on...

bottom line: There is no arbitrary assigning of the 17th game.

I am not for it, but I would be deadset against if the matchups were manufactured for ratings.

You're right, it appears I misread KC's 2019 schedule when I was writing that post. I had been under the impression they didn't play GB in 2019, which would have been inconsistent with our matchup with DAL. That's what I get for researching on my phone in the auto shop waiting room.

 

[jah]

What I read was each AFC division plays against the same NFC division, so East vs East, North vs North, etc. Then by where they finished in the division.

This can't be it because the Chiefs play in the West division while the Packers play in the North division. As @Palm Beach Pats Fan pointed out, it likely is on a similar cycle to how AFC-NFC divisions were paired prior to this year.

 

[venecol]

This can't be it because the Chiefs play in the West division while the Packers play in the North division. As @Palm Beach Pats Fan pointed out, it likely is on a similar cycle to how AFC-NFC divisions were paired prior to this year.

Has the 17th game schedule for all teams come out? Where'd you see that.

 

[patsfanincleveland]

The negotiation is already over. Not sure why the NFLPA agreed to what they did, but they're not getting any extra demands for quite some time.

They'll re-visit at some point.

 

[XLIX]

Dallas is a good draw, even in down times. If the above is correct, that's 1 exhibition game and 9 regular season ones, including Dallas and Tampa Bay. Those 2 games alone will pay for the entire STH package on the 2ndary market (probably with plenty to spare).

 

[XLIX]

17 is a stupid number but anyone with common sense knows it’s a stop gap until the owners force through 18 games. Which sucks.

This. This this this this this. This.

 

[XLIX]

Not a fan of 17 games. They need to add a second bye week to make it more managable. Pats will be lucky to win 5 games next season...

I don't know if that will ever happen. They are spread so thin with trying to create marquee matchups for all their TV slots. They tried 2 bye weeks before and it was a clunker - and that was a season where there were only 2 primetime games a week instead of 3 like we have now.

 

[XLIX]

The NFL has set it up so that they cannot alternate NFC @ AFC and then switch to AFC @ NFC on a yearly basis. They will have to have one conference be the home team 2 years in a row at some point because I guarantee they won't want it to always be (for example) NFC East at AFC East every 4 years.

 

[Triumph]

The league doesn't want the season to start before or on Labor Day.

Bad ratings.

The NFL is one of the hottest sports product if not most popular product on TV. People would watch tegardless where they are. Labor parties would be geared around the NFL like Super Bowl parties.

 

[patsfanincleveland]

The NFL is one of the hottest sports product if not most popular product on TV. People would watch tegardless where they are. Labor parties would be geared around the NFL like Super Bowl parties.

You might want to look back 30 years and check the schedules and see if games were actually scheduled on Labor Day weekend.

Let me know what you find.

 

[BTTA]

The decision to add a 17th game is absolutely gross and driven by pure greed. Nobody wants this except the owners, TV execs, etc. A reflection of our deranged culture where "enough is never enough" and everything operates with the unrealistic goal of endless growth.

Well, yeah. Endless growth is the true religion of western society. Try suggesting that growth isn't always a good thing, and duck.

Funny thing about 'Merica. When a business you like expands to make more money, it is "free market" and "freedom." When a business you don't like does the same, it is "greed" and a host of similar.

 

[Triumph]

You might want to back 30 years and check the schedules and see if games were actually scheduled on Labor Day weekend.

Let me know what you find.

Meaningless

Does not prove that a NFL Labor day launch would be futile.

 

[Pacific Coast Patriot]

Every single regular season record prior to this season will become meaningless effective immediately...

 

[Sicilian]

Every single regular season record prior to this season will become meaningless effective immediately...

They already kind of were, based on the rule changes. Honestly, for the non-QB ones, I'll still be impressed because if you're a running back who makes it through 17 games unhurt, you deserve credit for your aggregate numbers. But I'll bet teams will further lean on RB by committee with an extra game, so the carries will probably even out. You're already asking Derrick Henry to rush 320+ times, are you really going to ask for 350? Or do you just reduce his carries by 2 or 3 per game and let your backup take some of the hits.

QB records will increase, but as we saw with Manning vs. Brady in the early years and Rodgers' regular season dominance vs. his postseason flaccidity, aggregate numbers in the regular season don't amount to much when looking at a QB's legacy. Playoff performance should be the first thing you look at when judging a QB.

 

[XLIX]

You might want to look back 30 years and check the schedules and see if games were actually scheduled on Labor Day weekend.

Let me know what you find.

I researched this because I was genuinely curious. It seems that....

1985 - 1992: The NFL started the weekend after Labor Day and finished the final Sunday in January (except in 1989 where they started Labor Day weekend and finished the 2nd to last Sunday in January). 16 games, no bye except a bye before the Super Bowl

1993: The NFL gave every team 2 byes but took away the Super Bowl bye. This moved the start up one weekend to Labor Day, and still finished the final Sunday in January

1994 - 1998; 2000: They changed it to 1 bye per team, and resumed the Super Bowl bye, so it was still starting on Labor Day weekend and ending the final Sunday in January. In 1997, the opening Sunday was actually on August 31.

1999, 2001, 2002: They started the week after Labor Day and took away the Super Bowl bye to finish the final Sunday in January. As we all know, the September 11 cancellations pushed the playoffs back a week that year. Because of this, February 3, 2002, was the first February Super Bowl even though it was not planned that way. On that day, a dynasty was born.

2003 - 2020: Start the week after Labor Day, finish the first Sunday in February.

2021 - ????: If Peter King is right, start the week after Labor Day, finish the second Sunday in Feburary. This, of course, will lead to Armageddon and a complete breakdown of societal law and order in 2027 when the Super Bowl falls on Valentine's Day.

 

[patsfanincleveland]

Meaningless

Does not prove that a NFL Labor day launch would be f

I researched this because I was genuinely curious. It seem that....

1985 - 1992: The NFL started the weekend after Labor Day and finished the final Sunday in January (except in 1989 where they started Labor Day weekend and finished the 2nd to last Sunday in January). 16 games, no bye except a bye before the Super Bowl

1993: The NFL gave every team 2 byes but took away the Super Bowl bye. This moved the start up one weekend to Labor Day, and still finished the final Sunday in January

1994 - 1998; 2000: They changed it to 1 bye per team, and resumed the Super Bowl bye, so it was still starting on Labor Day weekend and ending the final Sunday in January. In 1997, the opening Sunday was actually on August 31.

1999, 2001, 2002: They started the week after Labor Day and took away the Super Bowl bye to finish the final Sunday in January. As we all know, the September 11 cancellations pushed the playoffs back a week that year. Because of this, February 3, 2002, was the first February Super Bowl even though it was not planned that way. A dynasty was born.

2003 - 2020: Start the week after Labor Day, finish the first Sunday in February.

2021 - ????: If Peter King is right, start the week after Labor Day, finish the second Sunday in Feburary. This, of course, will lead to Armageddon and a complete breakdown of societal law and order in 2027 when the Super Bowl falls on Valentine's Day.

The two bye system was an obvious attempt for 18 view weeks but the Labor Day viewership was poor so the league felt the need to "grant" fans the last weekend of summer.

Besides summer is not football weather.

(Great work on the research and a superior post)