Will anyone watch the XFL this weekend?

[primetime]

Veterans are "miserable" and "the worst people in the country"?

We are miserable, certainly, for various reasons, but the demographic Kontra was referring to are almost universally not veterans. But I appreciate the idiotic way in which heavily commodified ultranationalism inevitably gets turned into a synonym for "veterans." Pretty disgusting, actually!

 

[SammyBlueCat]

I watched a few games through my eyelids. I am still experiencing exhaustion.

 

[fnordcircle]

@rochrist do you care to elaborate on what you disagree with? I won’t hold my breath waiting for an answer because there’s not really any sort of logical way that you could take a counterpoint to that and have any hope of winning a debate.

Ok, let's FACTS and LOGIC debate: Is there a survey that shows enough people hate Kaep that it would 'tank' the XFL if they signed him? Until then I'm gonna think you're making a huge assumption based on some combination of your own feelings and loudmouth nerds on the internet who have a hatred boner for the guy that lasts for forever.

Hell, a bunch of the people who hate him would probably tune in just hoping he gets injured or looks awful. Vince would love that ****, but Vince is too much of a USA USA guy to bring him in.

Edit: I did that thing where you don't realize you're replying like 3 pages too late but I'm not gonna read what other people had to say, so whatever.

 

[Kontradiction]

Ok, let's FACTS and LOGIC debate: Is there a survey that shows enough people hate Kaep that it would 'tank' the XFL if they signed him? Until then I'm gonna think you're making a huge assumption based on some combination of your own feelings and loudmouth nerds on the internet who have a hatred boner for the guy that lasts for forever.

Hell, a bunch of the people who hate him would probably tune in just hoping he gets injured or looks awful. Vince would love that ****, but Vince is too much of a USA USA guy to bring him in.

Edit: I did that thing where you don't realize you're replying like 3 pages too late but I'm not gonna read what other people had to say, so whatever.

The NFL ratings took a down turn for a time when they supported a player’s right to kneel. The XFL can’t afford to have that its first season. Unless you think that Vince is primarily marketing to the AA population as well as white libs, signing Kaepernick would have had the same effect amongst their early adopters. Those adopters appear to be the older white male segments based on some of their leadership’s earlier interviews and advertising. In effect, it would tank them even earlier than expected. That’s part of the reason why I’m skeptical of this lasting. Signing Kaepernick would have been the iceberg to the XFL’s Titanic, and anyone with half a brain could have told them that signing Kaep would have been a massive strategic error in the early going. So if they thought that was a good idea behind the scenes, and they really did offer him a contract, their leadership isn’t particularly bright.

 

[primetime]

The NFL ratings took a down turn for a time when they supported a player’s right to kneel. The XFL can’t afford to have that its first season. Unless you think that Vince is primarily marketing to the AA population as well as white libs, signing Kaepernick would have had the same effect amongst their early adopters. Those adopters appear to be the older white male segments based on some of their leadership’s earlier interviews and advertising. In effect, it would tank them even earlier than expected. That’s part of the reason why I’m skeptical of this lasting. Signing Kaepernick would have been the iceberg to the XFL’s Titanic, and anyone with half a brain could have told them that signing Kaep would have been a massive strategic error in the early going. So if they thought that was a good idea behind the scenes, and they really did offer him a contract, their leadership isn’t particularly bright.

NFL ratings were falling before Kaepernick's protest, back in 2016. and then rebounded this year. These things are cyclical and a lot is attributable to sampling methodology or broader trends in TV viewing. The networks surely didn't consider it that big a deal when they dumped money in the league's lap, and the Packers' financials improved over the previous year in the "protest season." The league office was probably a lot less concerned about this than talk radio wanted them to be.

I remember when there was pearl-clutching about Nascar overtaking the NFL a decade ago and then it turned out the supposed surge in Nascar ratings was all caused by oversampling one particular demographic and once they corrected that sampling bias, Nascar viewership hadn't increased much at all.

 

[Kontradiction]

NFL ratings were falling before Kaepernick's protest, back in 2016. and then rebounded this year. These things are cyclical and a lot is attributable to sampling methodology or broader trends in TV viewing. The networks surely didn't consider it that big a deal when they dumped money in the league's lap, and the Packers' financials improved over the previous year in the "protest season." The league office was probably a lot less concerned about this than talk radio wanted them to be.

I remember when there was pearl-clutching about Nascar overtaking the NFL a decade ago and then it turned out the supposed surge in Nascar ratings was all caused by oversampling one particular demographic and once they corrected that sampling bias, Nascar viewership hadn't increased much at all.

I would think there had to have been some quantitative data out there that was generated on the NFL's behalf and analyzed to find that a good chunk of that loss of viewership was attributed to their protest stance in 2016. I'm not commenting on it one way or another, because that would lead down the political path. But, as someone who was a business analyst earlier on in my career, I look at the pivot and begin to ask myself why the NFL would suddenly adopt that stance. The only conclusion I can come up with is because there was hard evidence in data that was produced and analyzed that showed revenues and ratings declining at least in part because of their stance on kneeling and Kaepernick. There would be no other logical reason, at least in my mind, to make that risky of a pivot.

 

[primetime]

I would think there had to have been some quantitative data out there that was generated on the NFL's behalf and analyzed to find that a good chunk of that loss of viewership was attributed to their protest stance in 2016. I'm not commenting on it one way or another, because that would lead down the political path. But, as someone who was a business analyst earlier on in my career, I look at the pivot and begin to ask myself why the NFL would suddenly adopt that stance. The only conclusion I can come up with is because there was hard evidence in data that was produced and analyzed that showed revenues and ratings declining at least in part because of their stance on kneeling and Kaepernick. There would be no other logical reason, at least in my mind, to make that risky of a pivot.

What pivot? They've been doing hypernationalism for a long time. The troops sell.

 

[LuRkeR1978]

Ok, let's FACTS and LOGIC debate: Is there a survey that shows enough people hate Kaep that it would 'tank' the XFL if they signed him? Until then I'm gonna think you're making a huge assumption based on some combination of your own feelings and loudmouth nerds on the internet who have a hatred boner for the guy that lasts for forever.

Hell, a bunch of the people who hate him would probably tune in just hoping he gets injured or looks awful. Vince would love that ****, but Vince is too much of a USA USA guy to bring him in.

Edit: I did that thing where you don't realize you're replying like 3 pages too late but I'm not gonna read what other people had to say, so whatever.

Actually the XFL apporoached Kaep first, but Kaep asked for an insane amount of money because HE DOESN'T WANT TO PLAY FOOTBALL. It's not in his interest to play again, he is now an activist. Exposure is the only goal. His playing days are OVER. It's not going to happen.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Ok, let's FACTS and LOGIC debate: Is there a survey that shows enough people hate Kaep that it would 'tank' the XFL if they signed him? Until then I'm gonna think you're making a huge assumption based on some combination of your own feelings and loudmouth nerds on the internet who have a hatred boner for the guy that lasts for forever.

Hell, a bunch of the people who hate him would probably tune in just hoping he gets injured or looks awful. Vince would love that ****, but Vince is too much of a USA USA guy to bring him in.

Edit: I did that thing where you don't realize you're replying like 3 pages too late but I'm not gonna read what other people had to say, so whatever.

Report: NFL Hired Firm to Poll Americans on Colin Kaepernick Remaining Unsigned

The NFL did do market research on Kaepernick, but they tried to sweep it under the rug because the research itself supported collusion to blackball him. But reading between the lines, I imagine that signing him would have been bad for business overall. To what extent is unknown. He is still easily the most disliked player in the league, even though he hadn’t played in years and usually that designation belongs to the face of the league (Brady, LeBron, etc.)

https://www.sacbee.com/sports/nfl/san-francisco-49ers/article103340087.html

 

[Kontradiction]

What pivot? They've been doing hypernationalism for a long time. The troops sell.

Their stance on kneeling being a choice for players changed in one offseason. That pivot. You don’t do that unless you’re attempting to win back a segment.

 

[LJRomanoff]

Come on, fire a guy after one game?

Did you see the game?

 

[Deus Irae]

I watched some of yesterday's last game, while out for dinner and drinks. It was more fun to watch than the Pro Bowl, and more fun to watch than some regular season NFL games. I'll probably watch more next weekend.

 

[LJRomanoff]

The Houston/St. Louis game was better than anything I saw from the NFL last season. YMMV.

 

[lancerman]

I would think there had to have been some quantitative data out there that was generated on the NFL's behalf and analyzed to find that a good chunk of that loss of viewership was attributed to their protest stance in 2016. I'm not commenting on it one way or another, because that would lead down the political path. But, as someone who was a business analyst earlier on in my career, I look at the pivot and begin to ask myself why the NFL would suddenly adopt that stance. The only conclusion I can come up with is because there was hard evidence in data that was produced and analyzed that showed revenues and ratings declining at least in part because of their stance on kneeling and Kaepernick. There would be no other logical reason, at least in my mind, to make that risky of a pivot.

You can't just assume that there is data behind it. The fact is everyone assigns any rating rise or decline on whatever their pet issues is. The facts are the ratings decline started pre Kaep's protest and ended well after he was even relevant.

Also the same people that made all those decisions on Kaep are the same people that made the decisions on Spygate, deflategate, etc.

You can't just assume there is a magic number that we have no evidence exists, when the metrics we are going by kinda refutes it anyways, just because it would conveniantly support your impression of the situation.

 

[Kontradiction]

You can't just assume that there is data behind it. The fact is everyone assigns any rating rise or decline on whatever their pet issues is. The facts are the ratings decline started pre Kaep's protest and ended well after he was even relevant.

Also the same people that made all those decisions on Kaep are the same people that made the decisions on Spygate, deflategate, etc.

You can't just assume there is a magic number that we have no evidence exists, when the metrics we are going by kinda refutes it anyways, just because it would conveniantly support your impression of the situation.

I’m not assuming. I know for a fact that they mine data. FFS, they use AWS and used to utilize The Kraft Group heavily to mine data. Consumer segment data would fall under that category. What more evidence do you need that the decision was data-based? Do you really think they just flew by the seat of their asses and took a major risk in alienating the pro-Kaep crowd for the hell of it?

I remember you from last time. You had no clue how Big Data and data mining works, how firms use it, wouldn’t accept that I did this for a living, wouldn’t accept another poster’s analysis who ended up being a Data Analyst for a living, and then wouldn’t accept links from reputable sources that I provided which proved what I was referring to. In other words, you couldn’t remove your emotion and how you felt about Kaepernick and couldn’t accept that it cost the NFL in the short run. As such, there really wasn’t much of a point in debating this.

 

[lancerman]

I’m not assuming. I know for a fact that they mine data. FFS, they use AWS and used to utilize The Kraft Group heavily to mine data. Consumer segment data would fall under that category. What more evidence do you need that the decision was data-based? Do you really think they just flew by the seat of their asses and took a major risk in alienating the pro-Kaep crowd for the hell of it?

I remember you from last time. You had no clue how Big Data and data mining works, how firms use it, wouldn’t accept that I did this for a living, wouldn’t accept another poster’s analysis who ended up being a Data Analyst for a living, and then wouldn’t accept links from reputable sources that I provided which proved what I was referring to. In other words, you couldn’t remove your emotion and how you felt about Kaepernick and couldn’t accept that it cost the NFL in the short run. As such, there really wasn’t much of a point in debating this.

WTF are you talking about. Nearly every company over 100 million uses either AWS or Azure nowadays. Also I think you really should learn what those systems actually do (I work in the industry as well and have sold AWS so please spare me the expert analysis because you picked the wrong person to try to sound smart on). They aggregate data across the systems within the company. They can't tell you why people are tuning in and tuning out.

You can't even answer why the ratings fell BEFORE Kaep started protesting and it took well after he was completely expelled from the NFL for it to come up. The data we know doesn't support your point.

"Do you really think they just flew by the seat of their asses and took a major risk in alienating the pro-Kaep crowd for the hell of it?"

No I think they had a deal with the DOJ that Kaep was undermining and it was a good way to get out from negative publicity and risky situations with advertisers. I don't think it had any measurable effect on ratings.

So please spare me. Your whole argument is "they have data and data mine SO THEY MUST KNOW". That's such an absurd argument. It is predicated on a massive assumption that nearly every business make correct interpretations based on data and that the NFL is somehow exceptionally above the line there. Don't talk about emotions when you are trying to sound smart and making an assumption I could say about nearly every business.

 

[Kontradiction]

WTF are you talking about. Nearly every company over 100 million uses either AWS or Azure nowadays. Also I think you really should learn what those systems actually do (I work in the industry as well and have sold AWS so please spare me the expert analysis because you picked the wrong person to try to sound smart on). They aggregate data across the systems within the company. They can't tell you why people are tuning in and tuning out.

Yeah, I remember you went through 2-3 different career fields last time we talked as well. I know what AWS does. I know that The Kraft Group did specifically for the purposes of marketing for the NFL as well. We have now come to the conclusion that the NFL mines data. The Kraft Group did it for them specifically for marketing purposes. Marketing data yields customer segment data. So now we have come to the conclusion that the NFL does, indeed, look at customer segment data. Good. We're on the same page.

You can't even answer why the ratings fell BEFORE Kaep started protesting and it took well after he was completely expelled from the NFL for it to come up.

Any ratings dip prior to Kaep is wholly irrelevant to the point at hand, which is why did ratings CONTINUE to dip after the protests. But I suspect that you know this.

https://www.si.com/tech-media/2017/08/31/colin-kaepernick-nfl-ratings-cbs-study-sean-mcmanus

On Wednesday during its annual NFL Media Day in New York City, CBS Sports chairman Sean McManus said research his network did internally indicated that the protests played some kind of role in declining average viewers. He was emphatic, however, that it was merely a factor and not the cause. The average television viewership for the 2016 NFL season dropped roughly 8% last year from 2015.

“We did research and it was relatively proprietary research, to be honest with you,” McManus said. “But I think if you look at some of the reasons why NFL viewership was down last year, that is a reason that’s mentioned by a fair amount of viewers. It is something they don’t find attractive or they find don’t compelling in coverage of the football game. How big a factor it was? I don’t really know. But it was one of the factors that I think perhaps led to the slight decrease in ratings last year.”

The data we know doesn't support your point.

LMFAO. What data is that?

"Do you really think they just flew by the seat of their asses and took a major risk in alienating the pro-Kaep crowd for the hell of it?"

No I think they had a deal with the DOJ that Kaep was undermining and it was a good way to get out from negative publicity and risky situations with advertisers.

The irony here. So, in two separate posts, you take a stance that the NFL didn't use data in its position to make that incredibly risky pivot in public relations, then you tell me about "the data we know," which refutes any sort of stretched logic in your first post to me, and now you're making an assumption which completely contradicts what you were trying to chide me for in your OP. The DOJ threatened the deal with the NFL? And that was confirmed beyond any shadow of a doubt? Do you have a source? Could you share it?

I don't think it had any measurable effect on ratings.

Numerous independent studies, which I'm sure you'll fail to accept, confirmed that it had an effect. The debate was about how measurable. The NFL is merely concerned with profit. They're concerned with it enough to consistently **** their own players in negotiations and it will happen again with the new CBA. They would have asked why the profits were down, probably outsourced the data analysis since it isn't concerned with a core business process, had it studied, and then reported back reasons. A pivot like that is extremely dangerous because, once again, you risk alienating the pro-Kaep crowd, having them tune out, and being unable to lure back the anti-Kaep segment that tuned out. You don't take a risk like that unless you're analyzing data and can come up with a solution that you can pivot at a certain level of confidence while retaining your core segments with the most spending power. Just does not happen.

So please spare me. Your whole argument is "they have data and data mine SO THEY MUST KNOW". That's such an absurd argument. It is predicated on a massive assumption that nearly every business make correct interpretations based on data and that the NFL is somehow exceptionally above the line there.

For one, this paragraph is mostly incoherent. For another, the bolded is a straw man. And a weak one at that. I made no such assumption nor did I make any such argument. I wouldn't make that argument. Incorrect information is often gleaned by studying data. If you believe I made that argument, you're welcome to quote it. I won't hold my breath.

Don't talk about emotions when you are trying to sound smart and making an assumption I could say about nearly every business.

The only reason I brought up emotion is because you accused me of relying on emotion rather than take emotion out of it and go on logic. Thinking that the NFL made this decision, hence the "seat of the pants" approach, without turning to data analysis is about the most ridiculous, flawed, and ignorant take I've ever seen. This is now the second time I'm seeing it from you and it's just as embarrassing as the first.

But fine. Let's hear you out. Allow me to flesh this out a bit...

• Your stance is that the NFL made this extraordinarily risky pivot on their policy because the DOJ was threatening to rip up their contract with the NFL. Provide a source. In your opinion, who would have been hurt more by that? The DOJ or the NFL?
• Since you'll undoubtedly have trouble finding a source to back that claim, what, then, do you think the NFL based this decision on? You're on record as disagreeing with the claim that they mined and analyzed consumer data. You're also on record as saying that you don't believe they used the "seat of the pants" approach to come to the conclusion to shift that policy. So what do you think they used to come to that conclusion? What other businesses use that process? Keep in mind the first A in the ADKAR Model while answering this question.
• Why do you think the ratings suddenly began to climb back up after the NFL instituted that policy change? Such an answer will help you form an argument for why they fell in the first place if you're disputing that it was in any way related to Kaep and their former policy of allowing protest to be the players' choices.

 

[primetime]

When I agree with something the NFL does, it's a coldly rational decision based on mining data and some other stuff I read about on Wikipedia. When I disagree with something the NFL does, it's the result of 32 moronic authoritarians with idiosyncratic and often bizarre personal beliefs swatting at every fly they see with a hammer because they didn't like the way that guy looked at them, just completely disrespectful.

 

[lancerman]

Yeah, I remember you went through 2-3 different career fields last time we talked as well. I know what AWS does. I know that The Kraft Group did specifically for the purposes of marketing for the NFL as well. We have now come to the conclusion that the NFL mines data. The Kraft Group did it for them specifically for marketing purposes. Marketing data yields customer segment data. So now we have come to the conclusion that the NFL does, indeed, look at customer segment data. Good. We're on the same page.



Any ratings dip prior to Kaep is wholly irrelevant to the point at hand, which is why did ratings CONTINUE to dip after the protests. But I suspect that you know this.

https://www.si.com/tech-media/2017/08/31/colin-kaepernick-nfl-ratings-cbs-study-sean-mcmanus





LMFAO. What data is that?



The irony here. So, in two separate posts, you take a stance that the NFL didn't use data in its position to make that incredibly risky pivot in public relations, then you tell me about "the data we know," which refutes any sort of stretched logic in your first post to me, and now you're making an assumption which completely contradicts what you were trying to chide me for in your OP. The DOJ threatened the deal with the NFL? And that was confirmed beyond any shadow of a doubt? Do you have a source? Could you share it?



Numerous independent studies, which I'm sure you'll fail to accept, confirmed that it had an effect. The debate was about how measurable. The NFL is merely concerned with profit. They're concerned with it enough to consistently **** their own players in negotiations and it will happen again with the new CBA. They would have asked why the profits were down, probably outsourced the data analysis since it isn't concerned with a core business process, had it studied, and then reported back reasons. A pivot like that is extremely dangerous because, once again, you risk alienating the pro-Kaep crowd, having them tune out, and being unable to lure back the anti-Kaep segment that tuned out. You don't take a risk like that unless you're analyzing data and can come up with a solution that you can pivot at a certain level of confidence while retaining your core segments with the most spending power. Just does not happen.



For one, this paragraph is mostly incoherent. For another, the bolded is a straw man. And a weak one at that. I made no such assumption nor did I make any such argument. I wouldn't make that argument. Incorrect information is often gleaned by studying data. If you believe I made that argument, you're welcome to quote it. I won't hold my breath.



The only reason I brought up emotion is because you accused me of relying on emotion rather than take emotion out of it and go on logic. Thinking that the NFL made this decision, hence the "seat of the pants" approach, without turning to data analysis is about the most ridiculous, flawed, and ignorant take I've ever seen. This is now the second time I'm seeing it from you and it's just as embarrassing as the first.

But fine. Let's hear you out. Allow me to flesh this out a bit...

• Your stance is that the NFL made this extraordinarily risky pivot on their policy because the DOJ was threatening to rip up their contract with the NFL. Provide a source. In your opinion, who would have been hurt more by that? The DOJ or the NFL?
• Since you'll undoubtedly have trouble finding a source to back that claim, what, then, do you think the NFL based this decision on? You're on record as disagreeing with the claim that they mined and analyzed consumer data. You're also on record as saying that you don't believe they used the "seat of the pants" approach to come to the conclusion to shift that policy. So what do you think they used to come to that conclusion? What other businesses use that process? Keep in mind the first A in the ADKAR Model while answering this question.
• Why do you think the ratings suddenly began to climb back up after the NFL instituted that policy change? Such an answer will help you form an argument for why they fell in the first place if you're disputing that it was in any way related to Kaep and their former policy of allowing protest to be the players' choices.

Point to one analytically driven independent study that confirms your hypothesis. Stop not offering specifics and then saying “well you won’t except anything anyways”

Also to answer your questions

1. The deal was basically free money for the NFL. Both sides easily could live without it. Btw when the President who appoints the head of the Department (my mistake I meant DOD btw) is screaming at the NFL do you really need a source on the deal being at risk. That’s a more specific correlation backed up by fact than anything you offered btw.

2. I’m on record saying that companies much bigger than the NFL mans decisions based off the perception of an issue than hard analysis that an issue exists. The NFL isn’t the biggest business out there. You are assuming the methodology and sound reasoning of the decision but have provided nothing to back you up on this and we’ve already seen the NFL make decisions that tend to go against hard analysis. Also don’t put words in my mouth. It’s perfectly valid to suggest the NFL data mines but doesn’t make every decision based on a thorough data driven analysis. Also the kneeling issue itself was working itself out by every statistic anyways so....

3. Why do I think the ratings came back up? Influx of new stars, coming off a year of record offense, and that the ratings didn’t drop too much to begin with and it was likely just more of an ebb and flow after years of continuous growth. But again you are free to provide counter data since you are the one making the assertion.

You have a very naive understanding of how businesses come to decisions. It would be nice if they were all based on hard data analysis. Most don’t.

I accused you of being emotional because you made this giant argument based on an assumption that we both know you can’t back up and quite frankly isn’t the standard on how most businesses operate

 

[lancerman]

When I agree with something the NFL does, it's a coldly rational decision based on mining data and some other stuff I read about on Wikipedia. When I disagree with something the NFL does, it's the result of 32 moronic authoritarians with idiosyncratic and often bizarre personal beliefs swatting at every fly they see with a hammer because they didn't like the way that guy looked at them, just completely disrespectful.

This is pretty much the heart of the issue. I’m supposed to believe the same group of people that blew millions to suspend one of their most marketable stars (possibly the most marketeable star in the history of the sport) over bad feelings from a decade ago, based this other decision on data mining and Jerry Jones and his peers just took a rational approach.

More likely he agrees with what happened so he fabricated a talking point with no basis in any facts we know so that he could make an argument he thought was beyond reproach