Like most of you, I was excited when I saw the slate of week 1 CBS games because it seemed like Miami/Atlanta was a shoe-in for the featured game. You have two playoff teams, the wildcat, Matt Ryan in one of only two CBS appearances. That was, until I saw this . . . http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/thingstodo/6487587.html I might have been okay with it if it had been Jax/Indy, but seriously the Jets without Favre against a perennially disappointing Texans. Worse yet is that CBS will likely ship that game out west. I was doomed to Kansas City/Baltimore no matter what, but man this is just a slap in the face I think. This would have never happen to the Patriots, I promise you that. Gus and Tasker here we come (which is not necessarily bad).
Sanchez is a rookie, who will likely struggle. Plus you don't give preferential treatment to a rook. The only thing I can figure out is that Nantz (having never called his hometown Texans) requested it and the fact that the Patriots were not playing, the Colts were playing a team that sucked last year, and a New York team was the Texans opponent helped.
Since its in Atlanta Fox may have the rights to the game, not 100% sure how it works but I know the networks have some sort of way they work it out.
well the bar we go to out here has a lot of annoying jet fans that show up every week, so if it's the national game, perhaps they won't come that week. pity though, as i'd like to see their faces when sanchez throws his first pick
The reasons why they are showing this game as the national game: Reason number one is the large markets - New York and Texas..... Reason number two is that it might be the only occassion to show these two teams to the national audience and their games still garner interest...... Miami/Atlanta is more of a regional game with the Falcons drawing no interest other than Atlanta. Jax/Indy is small market game that will garner no interest but in Jax and in Indy. KC/Baltimore - see above to a lessor extent. The long and short of it is that all of the interesting AFC games that would make for a national draw are on other channels (ESPN/NBC). So CBS simply went with the largest markets by default.
Excellent post that I agree with most of, but I have to disagree with this one tiny point. Miami/Atlanta pits the two playoff teams that had huge turnarounds with the two "best" coaches of 2008 against each other. That screams "national game" to me...
Oh no I totally understand that my friend. At my station I am on the committee that decides which CBS game we show that week (a lot harder than it seems since we are obligated to schedule the Chiefs for seven games). Like Colorado though, I disagree that Atl/Mia is not a national draw. They were both buzzworthy teams last year and heading into this year. Miami has a top five national following and Atlanta is in the top fifteen. Plus lets not forget the Cowboys play in the early slot on FOX as the primary game on that network. So you are going to have the Texans visa vie the Cowboys in Texas and in some national locations. We know who is going to win that match up. To me that is why if I am a local affiliate (not in the local market or designated secondary market of certain teams (like Kansas City) to counter program with Miami and Atlanta if for no other reason than it has a better chance to stack up against the Cowboys/Bucs. Just my thoughts.
Really, who cares? As long as it's on TV, I don't really care who is doing the game. I usually tune out the guys anyway.
The media rewards consistency. Another division title this year will garner us more national games and a few Monday nighters... espcially if the eciting "Wildcat" offense does well this year.
Don't really care, so long as I get to watch the game on TV. Has to suck though for our posters who live outside our markets, less chance they get to see the Fins play.
For the record, the "Texans" are in Houston, and aside from a handful of faithfuls in Houston, really don't have much of a following. Bottomline is obviously THE bottomline, and that being said, for whatever reason, CBS must feel that game will do well for them. Not sure I agree, but that's far from being my expertise
I'll go with the smoking crack theory, who's gonna catch you in Houston? Seriously, the less Phil Simms calls our games the better!I liked him as a player, but his sportscasting leaves a LOT TO BE DESIRED!!!!!! I'll Take Enberg or Dierdorf any day over Phil. I love the line Simms said last year "You know, you have got to use your eyes as a quarterback" Boy let me tell you, now that was deep!
It's simple, for TV the NFL is all about advertising revenues which are always based on poulation within the given market(s). Here are the rankings of population for the top metropolitan areas in the US: New York (NY) 21,199,865 Los Angeles (CA) 16,373,645 Chicago (IL) 9,157,540 Washington (DC) 7,608,070 San Francisco (CA) 7,039,362 Philadelphia (PA) 6,188,463 Boston (MA) 5,819,100 Detroit (MI) 5,456,428 Dallas (TX) 5,221,801 Houston (TX) 4,669,571 Atlanta (GA) 4,112,198 Miami (FL) 3,876,380
More intriguing because of the laughable options at QB. A 1 year starter in a system college at USC or... that other guy.
