Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

NFL Adjusting Skins Schedule based on RG3's Availability


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
35 replies to this topic

#1 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,358 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:06 AM

Dave, don't know if you've seen this but would like to hear your opinion.

According the Adam Schefter the league had been consulting with the Redskins on RG3's recovery timeline before finalizing their "primetime" game schedule.

"Adam Schefter's report Sunday said the league had inquired to see if the Redskins could provide them with any information about the recovery as it worked to schedule its 2013 prime time games."

Now if the league is willing to adjust a team's "primetime" game schedule (which typically are divisional matchups, historical rivalries and/or teams that made the playoffs the previous season), to ensure the availability of specific, key player(s), are they not tampering with the "competitive advantage" for the sake of TV ratings?

#2 patpikunas

patpikunas

    Superstar

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,921 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:12 AM

not surprising JNC.... its all about the ratings and the $$.

#3 jonnyeagles12

jonnyeagles12

    Superstar

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,675 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:13 AM

Big shame things like this go on in the NFL.

#4 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,358 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:27 AM

not surprising JNC.... its all about the ratings and the $$.


Of course it is, but to me this has crossed over into the realm of possibly compromising the "integrity of the game".

First there was the "Brady Rules" (although there is no denying that they are not equitably enforced for all QBs) and now this.

Perhaps the Bird's should petition the league to only schedule capcakes for the first few weeks of the season while the team gets comfortable/gains experience with Chip's system. :thumbsup:

#5 mjkvol

mjkvol

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,707 posts
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:Birth

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:44 AM

its all about the ratings and the $$.


Any thought of the 'integrity of the game' went out the window long, loooooooong ago.

There hasn't been a single decision or move made by the NFL in an eternity that hasn't been 100% driven by financial concern.

Griffin is an 'attraction' now - the Skins in prime time are useless without him to the networks. Good move by the NFL.

#6 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,358 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:04 PM

Any thought of the 'integrity of the game' went out the window long, loooooooong ago.

There hasn't been a single decision or move made by the NFL in an eternity that hasn't been 100% driven by financial concern.

Griffin is an 'attraction' now - the Skins in prime time are useless without him to the networks. Good move by the NFL.


Other than from a TV ratings standpoint how is it a "good move by the NFL??? :blink:

What the hell why not just go full-blown "American Idol" then and let fans text vote on who should win which games based on who their favorite players are?

As someone who has been following the NFL for almost 50 years, the day I'm convinced that the outcome on the field is being determined by anything other than uncompromised competition is the day I've watched my last game.

#7 mjkvol

mjkvol

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,707 posts
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:Birth

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:15 PM

You might as well start making plans for Sunday afternoons, then. There's nothing about the NFL anymore that isn't compromised if a couple more bucks can be had - Exhibit A is the 'game' that decides the World Champion. A league concerned with "uncompromised competition" wouldn't decide its championship as what amounts to not much more than a sideshow in a three-ring circus.

That is the exact reason I called the Griffin thing a good move - the sport (and really, every pro sport plus college football and basketball) is no longer about anything but TV ratings. To think otherwise is the height of naivete.

#8 SamEaglesFan

SamEaglesFan

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,902 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:26 PM

Now if the league is willing to adjust a team's "primetime" game schedule (which typically are divisional matchups, historical rivalries and/or teams that made the playoffs the previous season), to ensure the availability of specific, key player(s), are they not tampering with the "competitive advantage" for the sake of TV ratings?

Horrors?!?! Whatever next?!? Who do you think pays the flipping bills?

#9 bungalo71

bungalo71

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,471 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:32 PM

Dave, don't know if you've seen this but would like to hear your opinion.

According the Adam Schefter the league had been consulting with the Redskins on RG3's recovery timeline before finalizing their "primetime" game schedule.

"Adam Schefter's report Sunday said the league had inquired to see if the Redskins could provide them with any information about the recovery as it worked to schedule its 2013 prime time games."

Now if the league is willing to adjust a team's "primetime" game schedule (which typically are divisional matchups, historical rivalries and/or teams that made the playoffs the previous season), to ensure the availability of specific, key player(s), are they not tampering with the "competitive advantage" for the sake of TV ratings?


How does this tamper with competitive advantage? The Redskins still play the same 16 games during the course of the season, right? It seems like they're using this to determine whether or not (hypothetical example here) the week 5 matchup between the Redskins and Cowboys is a Sunday 1pm game or a Monday Night game.

#10 SNOORDA

SNOORDA

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,040 posts
  • Location:Santa Monica Ca.
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:1980

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:44 PM

I'm suprised they even want the Skins on prime time after what Shanny did to RG3 in that last game. That was a big embarrasment to the league. Guy was obviously out there on one leg. Player safety? Haha. What a joke.

If anything they should be punished for the way that situation was handled. Maybe losing RG3 for part of next year and losing that game the way they did was punishment enough though.

Now if they have some cupcake schedule for the 1st part of the season in hopes of helping ensure they are still in the playoff hunt when RG3 returns, thats a big ? in my mind.

#11 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,358 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:46 PM

How does this tamper with competitive advantage? The Redskins still play the same 16 games during the course of the season, right? It seems like they're using this to determine whether or not (hypothetical example here) the week 5 matchup between the Redskins and Cowboys is a Sunday 1pm game or a Monday Night game.


The dates for any of their games have not yet been determined, they're waiting to know when RG3 should be back before finalizing that.

So your hypothetical scenario has missed the point, it's not a case of should their first matchup with the Pokes (that has not yet been scheduled for week 5 or any other week), be scheduled on Sunday or Monday night (week 5) but should it be scheduled week 5 when he'll be back or week 2 when he won't.

So if they do schedule it for week 5 solely based on his availability and schedule say some scrub like the Jags for their week 2, non-primetime game (when he won't) then they have improved the Skins ability to be more "competitive" in both games by having them face an (inferior) opponent that they don't necessarily need their "best" player(s) to beat week 2 and ensuring they have their best players available for a more important divisional game week 5.

#12 MrPhilPhil

MrPhilPhil

    Starter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,050 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:04 PM

We always get our primetime games towards the end of the year because the Eagles are expected to still be good. That has not been the case the past 2 years.

#13 bungalo71

bungalo71

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,471 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:22 PM

The dates for any of their games have not yet been determined, they're waiting to know when RG3 should be back before finalizing that.

So your hypothetical scenario has missed the point, it's not a case of should their first matchup with the Pokes (that has not yet been scheduled for week 5 or any other week), be scheduled on Sunday or Monday night (week 5) but should it be scheduled week 5 when he'll be back or week 2 when he won't.

So if they do schedule it for week 5 solely based on his availability and schedule say some scrub like the Jags for their week 2, non-primetime game (when he won't) then they have improved the Skins ability to be more "competitive" in both games by having them face an (inferior) opponent that they don't necessarily need their "best" player(s) to beat week 2 and ensuring they have their best players available for a more important divisional game week 5.


That assumes that it's possible to foretell what teams are going to be bad and good next season.
Also, just because the dates for games haven't been determined doesn't mean that they're using the availability of RGIII as the basis for determining which week the Skins should start playing good teams in prime time. There's a lot of factors that have to be considered when making the schedules since the opponents each team faces and which teams they face at home are already determined. I imagine if you sit down to sort out a schedule for all 32 teams, you'd find there's not a whole lot of flexibility.

#14 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,358 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:38 PM

That assumes that it's possible to foretell what teams are going to be bad and good next season.
Also, just because the dates for games haven't been determined doesn't mean that they're using the availability of RGIII as the basis for determining which week the Skins should start playing good teams in prime time. There's a lot of factors that have to be considered when making the schedules since the opponents each team faces and which teams they face at home are already determined. I imagine if you sit down to sort out a schedule for all 32 teams, you'd find there's not a whole lot of flexibility.


WTF?

That is exactly what Schefter is reporting, "that the league is waiting to finalize the Skins "primetime" games based on RG3's availability", and what games do they typically schedule for prime time in advance of the upcoming season?

Games with teams that had winning records/made the playoffs the season before (i.e. teams that were "good" last season), divisional games that they expect will have a bearing on possibly making the playoffs in the upcoming season and/or historical rivalries.

So while you're right in saying what a team did in the previous season is no guarantee of success or failure the next, those are the games they "flex" when a team expected to be good (and hence was scheduled for a primetime match up in advance of the season) turns out not to be and teams that weren't expected to be good, (and hence got little to no prime time consideration) are.

#15 bungalo71

bungalo71

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,471 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 02:09 PM

WTF?

That is exactly what Schefter is reporting, "that the league is waiting to finalize the Skins "primetime" games based on RG3's availability", and what games do they typically schedule for prime time in advance of the upcoming season?

Games with teams that had winning records/made the playoffs the season before (i.e. teams that were "good" last season), divisional games that they expect will have a bearing on possibly making the playoffs in the upcoming season and/or historical rivalries.

So while you're right in saying what a team did in the previous season is no guarantee of success or failure the next, those are the games they "flex" when a team expected to be good (and hence was scheduled for a primetime match up in advance of the season) turns out not to be and teams that weren't expected to be good, (and hence got little to no prime time consideration) are.


The quote "finalizing the skins primetime games" does NOT imply that they're switching the order of games the skins play. Like I said, they could just be using it to say "ok, don't put the skins on primetime until week 6".

#16 VaBeach_Eagle

VaBeach_Eagle

    EMB Fossil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 56,291 posts
  • Location:Chesapeake, Va
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:1976

Posted 06 February 2013 - 02:33 PM

Of course it is, but to me this has crossed over into the realm of possibly compromising the "integrity of the game".

First there was the "Brady Rules" (although there is no denying that they are not equitably enforced for all QBs) and now this.

Perhaps the Bird's should petition the league to only schedule capcakes for the first few weeks of the season while the team gets comfortable/gains experience with Chip's system. :thumbsup:

The "integrity of the game"? Over scheduling prime time games? Since when do prime time games determine "integrity of the game"? This isn't much different from the flex schedule that is used late in the season.

What time a game is played and which TV network covers the game plays no part in the "integrity of the game".

#17 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,358 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 03:04 PM

The quote "finalizing the skins primetime games" does NOT imply that they're switching the order of games the skins play. Like I said, they could just be using it to say "ok, don't put the skins on primetime until week 6".


The quote isn't "finalizing" it's:

"Adam Schefter's report Sunday said the league had inquired to see if the Redskins could provide them with any information about the recovery as it worked to schedule its 2013 prime time games."

Perhaps we have different definitions of the term "to schedule" but to me that is saying on which dates they will hold those specific games.

#18 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,358 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 03:21 PM

The "integrity of the game"? Over scheduling prime time games? Since when do prime time games determine "integrity of the game"? This isn't much different from the flex schedule that is used late in the season.

What time a game is played and which TV network covers the game plays no part in the "integrity of the game".


They don't.

But If they do not schedule the Skins against any "primetime" opponents, which the majority of the time are teams that had a winning record/made the playoffs the previous year, divisional opponents which are games that have a bigger impact on division standings than non-division games. or historical rivalries until their starting QB is available then they are purposely enhancing the Skins competitive ability by ensuring that their best player is available for what should be their more difficult/important match ups.

So what would you call it when the league is willing to set up a team's schedule in such a way that it helps ensure that their most important player is available for their most important games, if not as a possibly compromise of the "integrity of the game"?

To me this is no different than if the league would have set up the old "Greatest Show on Turf" Ram's team schedule in such it way that it ensured that they didn't have play any late season games in cold-weather cities with natural grass outdoor stadiums or made sure all of the most challenging opponents they faced where played in stadiums with artificial surfaces.

#19 VaBeach_Eagle

VaBeach_Eagle

    EMB Fossil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 56,291 posts
  • Location:Chesapeake, Va
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:1976

Posted 06 February 2013 - 03:27 PM

They don't.

But If they do not schedule the Skins against any "primetime" opponents, which the majority of the time are teams that had a winning record/made the playoffs the previous year, divisional opponents which are games that have a bigger impact on division standings than non-division games. or historical rivalries until their starting QB is available then they are purposely enhancing the Skins competitive ability by ensuring that their best player is available for their more difficult/important match ups.

So what would you call it when the league is willing to set up a team's schedule in such a way that it helps ensure that their most important player is available for their most important games, if not as a possibly compromise of the "integrity of the game"?

To me this is no different than if the league would have set up the old "Greatest Show on Turf" Ram's team schedule in such it way that they didn't have play any late season games in cold-weather cities with outdoor stadiums or made sure all of the most challenging opponents they faced where played in stadiums with artificial surfaces.

Their opponents are already determined. The divisional games will be later in the season. That's how they schedule.

To me, it's just looking at things to get upset over. This is how the NFL does scheduling. This is how they've always done scheduling, at least since TV ratings have mattered to them. I think you're seeing conspiracy where there is none. The league wants primetime players on primetime TV for primetime games.

Do you think they'd schedule Mike McMahon to go up against the Seahawks on a Monday Night game if they had a choice?

#20 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,358 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 04:04 PM

Their opponents are already determined. The divisional games will be later in the season. That's how they schedule.

To me, it's just looking at things to get upset over. This is how the NFL does scheduling. This is how they've always done scheduling, at least since TV ratings have mattered to them. I think you're seeing conspiracy where there is none. The league wants primetime players on primetime TV for primetime games.

Do you think they'd schedule Mike McMahon to go up against the Seahawks on a Monday Night game if they had a choice?


Yes the opponents have been determined but not the specific dates the teams will play each other and divisional games are hardly always "late in the season", Jersey opened with the Pokes last year, played us week 4 and had 5 divisional games in their first 8 and that's just 1 example.

Sorry Va, but if "this is how the NFL does and has always done scheduling", then please provide some actual evidence where they have ever, in the history of the league, openly consulted with a particular team on the recovery timeline of their star player before scheduling certain opponents because otherwise that statement is absolute horsesheet.

#21 MR-CYN

MR-CYN

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,850 posts
  • Location:NH
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 04:14 PM

Hopefully the Eagles play them early then because this team sucks.

#22 VaBeach_Eagle

VaBeach_Eagle

    EMB Fossil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 56,291 posts
  • Location:Chesapeake, Va
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:1976

Posted 06 February 2013 - 04:37 PM

Yes the opponents have been determined but not the specific dates the teams will play each other and divisional games are hardly always "late in the season", Jersey opened with the Pokes last year, played us week 4 and had 5 divisional games in their first 8 and that's just 1 example.

Sorry Va, but if "this is how the NFL does and has always done scheduling", then please provide some actual evidence where they have ever, in the history of the league, openly consulted with a particular team on the recovery timeline of their star player before scheduling certain opponents because otherwise that statement is absolute horsesheet.

Flex scheduling...

#23 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,358 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 06 February 2013 - 04:44 PM

Flex scheduling...


Come on Va you're usually better than this.

"Flex scheduling" is moving a 1:00 (non-national TV) match up to 4 or Sunday nite, etc, (aka a "primetime" slot) because it has turned out to be a better match up or more important game than the one that was originally scheduled.

The league's schedule-makers waiting until they believe RG3 will be healthy and playing before scheduling on which dates the Skins will face their "primetime" opponents is a 100% completely different situation.

#24 VaBeach_Eagle

VaBeach_Eagle

    EMB Fossil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 56,291 posts
  • Location:Chesapeake, Va
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:1976

Posted 06 February 2013 - 07:44 PM

Come on Va you're usually better than this.

"Flex scheduling" is moving a 1:00 (non-national TV) match up to 4 or Sunday nite, etc, (aka a "primetime" slot) because it has turned out to be a better match up or more important game than the one that was originally scheduled.

The league's schedule-makers waiting until they believe RG3 will be healthy and playing before scheduling on which dates the Skins will face their "primetime" opponents is a 100% completely different situation.

The short answer was due to being on a tablet in class and it's a pain to type more on that tablet.

I know they are different things, but the concept is the same. They want the bigger draws on prime time.

I understand what you're saying, I just don't see it as that big of an issue and I don't see it as an "integrity of the game" issue. It's a marketing/ratings issue.

#25 EagleJoe8

EagleJoe8

    EMB Fossil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 82,539 posts
  • Location:Harrisburg PA
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:1992

Posted 06 February 2013 - 09:57 PM

The quote isn't "finalizing" it's:

"Adam Schefter's report Sunday said the league had inquired to see if the Redskins could provide them with any information about the recovery as it worked to schedule its 2013 prime time games."

Perhaps we have different definitions of the term "to schedule" but to me that is saying on which dates they will hold those specific games.


Your underlying gripe may or may not be valid, but scheduling is more than just a date. Time is a part of scheduling as well.

#26 bungalo71

bungalo71

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,471 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 07 February 2013 - 09:29 AM

The quote isn't "finalizing" it's:

"Adam Schefter's report Sunday said the league had inquired to see if the Redskins could provide them with any information about the recovery as it worked to schedule its 2013 prime time games."

Perhaps we have different definitions of the term "to schedule" but to me that is saying on which dates they will hold those specific games.


Yes, like figuring out if the Redskins prime time games are early in the season or late in the season, not switching the order of the opponents. The dates of the Redskins prime time games. Same definition, you're just reading more into it than what was said.

Not saying that they're DEFINITELY not switching the order of the games, I'm just saying there's nothing in the report that implies it either way.

#27 Edgemont Mike

Edgemont Mike

    Starter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:Ike

Posted 08 February 2013 - 03:40 AM

The NFL is run by the big TV money . That's why the SB is always a late game now . Got to get max audience time frame to drive all those sponsors paying all that money . You may have thought this sport was played and driven by the fans but you'd be wrong . RG3 is now a big draw and pushes up those all important TV ratings and viewing scores , so YES they will do whatever it takes to max the $$$$ .

#28 MightyJNC

MightyJNC

    EMB Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,358 posts
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 08 February 2013 - 11:38 AM

Yes, like figuring out if the Redskins prime time games are early in the season or late in the season, not switching the order of the opponents. The dates of the Redskins prime time games. Same definition, you're just reading more into it than what was said.

Not saying that they're DEFINITELY not switching the order of the games, I'm just saying there's nothing in the report that implies it either way.


The "order of the games" will not be finalized or announced until April. The only element of the schedule that is currently set is who each team will play at home and away.

#29 PoconoDon

PoconoDon

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,548 posts
  • Location:The Poconos
  • Team:Eagles

Posted 10 February 2013 - 07:38 AM

Other than from a TV ratings standpoint how is it a "good move by the NFL??? :blink:

What the hell why not just go full-blown "American Idol" then and let fans text vote on who should win which games based on who their favorite players are?

As someone who has been following the NFL for almost 50 years, the day I'm convinced that the outcome on the field is being determined by anything other than uncompromised competition is the day I've watched my last game.



That day was when the Herschel Walker trade was approved by the league, giving Dallas an obvious, improper, and completely unfair advantage for half a decade. Scheduling is a minor sideshow to what that circus represented.

#30 mjkvol

mjkvol

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,707 posts
  • Team:Eagles
  • Fan Since:Birth

Posted 10 February 2013 - 10:01 AM

That day was when the Herschel Walker trade was approved by the league, giving Dallas an obvious, improper, and completely unfair advantage for half a decade. Scheduling is a minor sideshow to what that circus represented.


It's a different topic, Pocono, but why should the league be responsible for protecting teams against making bad trades? Where exactly is the line drawn?

What made that trade look so egregiously bad was the brilliant job Johnson did with the picks he got. Had half of those picks bombed, and the Cowboys were simply ordinary, not a single mention would ever be made of it again.

The fact that he hit home run on top of home run and built the last truly great team we'll probably ever see is why it is remembered the way it is.