Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: NBC, CBS fighting over Pats/Broncos game

  1. #1

    Default NBC, CBS fighting over Pats/Broncos game

    NBC, CBS fighting over Tim Tebow vs. Tom Brady


    Minnesota's Brandon Burton tackles Broncos QB Tim Tebow​ in the first half. More photos from the Broncos vs. Vikings game Sunday. (Charlie Neibergall, The Associated Press)Only the power of Tebow can cause such a commotion.

    The NFL and NBC-TV are not expected to announce tonight that they will flex the Broncos-New England Patriots' game to primetime on Sunday night, Dec. 18.

    There's still a possibility there will be a "flex" announcement Wednesday morning. Ordinarily, NBC and the NFL announce their "flexed" game two Mondays before, or 13 days in advance so the involved teams can properly adjust their schedules.

    The Broncos-New England Patriots' game scheduled for a week from Sunday at Sports Authority Field at Mile High is a no-brainer choice to be "flexed" to NBC's Sunday Night Football and kick off at 6:20 p.m.

    Problem is, the game was initially scheduled to be shown on CBS

    with kickoff at 2:15 p.m. The 4 hour difference can be everything when Broncos' quarterback Tim Tebow is the prize.

    CBS, apparently, is not letting the game go easily. The network is considered the "AFC network," yet it was not been able to capitalize on telecasting a Tebow-led Bronco comeback last Sunday against the Minnesota Vikings when the Fox network was handed the game because of an NBC flex game that broadcast the New Orleans-Detroit game.

    Now NBC would like to flex their Dec. 18 primetime game to the Tom Brady​-Tebow matchup, which figures to be a ratings bonanza.

    From a competitive standpoint, both the Broncos and New England would have some concern about playing on Sunday night because both play the next week on Saturday, Christmas Eve. The Patriots, especially would have concerns because of what would be a long, redeye flight back to Boston following the game.

    Without the flex, NBC will broadcast a game between the 9-3 Baltimore Ravens and 5-7 San Diego Chargers. Not bad, but not Brady and Tebow.

    http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_...#ixzz1fo8JnfPL

  2. #2

    Default Re: NBC, CBS fighting over Pats/Broncos game

    no change:

    The story behind the NFL's decision to keep the Dec. 18 Patriots-Broncos game on CBS at 4:15 p.m. ET is fascinating from this perspective.

    I'm not sure how much interest there is from Patriots followers other than the bottom-line decision -- it was either 4:15 p.m. on CBS or 8:20 p.m. on NBC -- but for those who might share my line of thinking, here are some of the interesting points from here:

    1. Robert Kraft's role in the process. Would the chairman of the NFL's Broadcasting Committee really use his influence to keep the game on CBS because it is what the Patriots prefer? This is what some are suggesting, pointing out that Kraft and CBS have a business relationship (the CBS Scene restaurant is at Patriot Place). That could be the case, but I look at things differently. Maybe I'm naive, but I believe if the networks were switched and the same factors were in play, the same decision would be made because it was deemed as being most fair from a league perspective. A key consideration had to be that CBS released last week's Broncos-Vikings game to Fox when NBC's flex scheduling took Lions-Saints away from Fox. If that doesn't happen, and CBS wouldn't have had just one Tim Tebow/Broncos game over a five-week stretch (Week 11-15), I think Patriots-Broncos gets flexed to prime-time and there is no delay in the announcement.

    2. NBC's point of view. As pointed out by Chad Finn of the Boston Globe, "NBC pays $650 million per year to air 18 NFL games, an extraordinary expenditure compared to the $622.5 million CBS pays for 102 AFC games." Given that financial commitment, one would think NBC is fuming at this decision. It would be understandable, as part of the reason it paid $650 million is the value of the flex toward the end of the season to ensure compelling matchups (they don't want to be stuck with Jaguars-Chargers or Rams-Seahawks, like the ESPN back-to-back slate last week and this week). That "flex" has been stripped away in this case. At the same time, while Patriots-Broncos figures to produce big ratings, I still think Chargers-Ravens has potential to be a better game.

    3. When do games have to be protected? As part of flexible scheduling, CBS and Fox have the right to protect one game per week from being flexed to NBC. For Week 15, CBS chose Eagles-Jets over Patriots-Broncos. The decision to protect games must be made at some point before the Week 10 flexing period begins. If CBS had up until Week 10 to protect Patriots-Broncos and didn't, one could say the network has only itself to blame. If that decision had to be made well before the Week 10 flexing period began, perhaps it exposed a flaw in the system. It wouldn't seem fair that NBC could choose a game two weeks in advance, but CBS and Fox would have to protect a game much earlier than that. The feeling here is that should be changed.
    http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-e...s-broncos-flex

    Seems like CBS successfully argued it was unfair to have to give up the highest rated Sunday afternoon game last weekend to Fox to compensate Fox for losing a game to NBC, then lose what figures to be the highest rated Sunday afternoon game week-after-next to NBC.

    I see their point, but it also seems up to NBC, by contract.

  3. #3
    Go Colts! Shade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Age
    36
    Posts
    44,416

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: NBC, CBS fighting over Pats/Broncos game

    This Tebow lovefest is ridiculous.

  4. #4

    Default Re: NBC, CBS fighting over Pats/Broncos game

    Quote Originally Posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    no change:



    http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-e...s-broncos-flex

    Seems like CBS successfully argued it was unfair to have to give up the highest rated Sunday afternoon game last weekend to Fox to compensate Fox for losing a game to NBC, then lose what figures to be the highest rated Sunday afternoon game week-after-next to NBC.

    I see their point, but it also seems up to NBC, by contract.


    Kraft wanted it at that time rather than Sunday Night or so I hear. Doesn't he have a stake in CBS?

  5. #5

    Default Re: NBC, CBS fighting over Pats/Broncos game

    CBS has a restaurant / entertainment complex at Gillette Stadium, so in a sense they are business partners. Kraft is also the chair of NFL's Broadcasting Committee.

    Certainly the rules and compensation for flexing needs to be better defined. It sounds like they are making it up as they go along, which is very odd.

    Quote Originally Posted by shade
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This Tebow lovefest is ridiculous.
    Yes, it is. I was sure to see the game anyway, since I live in Florida (otherwise known as the Republic of East Tebownia). Weeks ago they started carrying Broncos games here, and they get better ratings than Dolphins games, even though the Dolphins started playing well.

    I can't imagine how much worse it is in Colorado (otherwise known as the Republic of West Tebownia )
    Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 12-09-2011 at 05:05 PM.

  6. #6
    Member SycamoreKen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Age
    44
    Posts
    10,475

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: NBC, CBS fighting over Pats/Broncos game

    I would argue the Tebow mania is good for the league. Notice how the Raiders playing a guy that supposedly pointed a gun at someone's head barely got talked about? Imagine if an NBA guy had done that. He would be piled on big time.

    Except for the people that just don't want to see Tebow or the Broncos win, how is this bad for the game?

  7. #7

    Default Re: NBC, CBS fighting over Pats/Broncos game

    I actually respect Tebow a lot and believe he is 100% genuine /sincere in his actions, and also like to watch him play. The level of following is a little extreme though, at least the degree to which people attribute team success solely to him. The hate backlash is extreme too.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Slick Pinkham For This Useful Post:


  9. #8

    Default Re: NBC, CBS fighting over Pats/Broncos game

    Quote Originally Posted by SycamoreKen View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I would argue the Tebow mania is good for the league. Notice how the Raiders playing a guy that supposedly pointed a gun at someone's head barely got talked about? Imagine if an NBA guy had done that. He would be piled on big time.

    Except for the people that just don't want to see Tebow or the Broncos win, how is this bad for the game?


    If he was a high profiled player sure but this was a no name in the NFL not many people know who Ronaldo McClain is.

    NBA stars are easily seen they're the only ones that don't wear any helmet/hat when they play more open to criticism for a lot of things.

  10. #9
    Member SycamoreKen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Age
    44
    Posts
    10,475

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: NBC, CBS fighting over Pats/Broncos game

    Quote Originally Posted by Basketball Fan View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If he was a high profiled player sure but this was a no name in the NFL not many people know who Ronaldo McClain is.

    NBA stars are easily seen they're the only ones that don't wear any helmet/hat when they play more open to criticism for a lot of things.
    I agree to an extent, but even Suh will get off easier than an NBA guy that did the same things. /The general public that actually states an opinion about the NBA always paints it more negative than the NFL because odf the "thugs" when in reality the balance is at least even.

  11. #10
    Member jeffg-body's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Anderson, IN
    Posts
    3,514
    Mood

    Default Re: NBC, CBS fighting over Pats/Broncos game

    I know Tebow is the hot thing right now, but I have to give a lot of credit to their defense for their winning ways recently.

  12. #11

    Default Re: NBC, CBS fighting over Pats/Broncos game

    Sometimes I forget he's on the Broncos. They should be called the Tebows

  13. #12

    Default Re: NBC, CBS fighting over Pats/Broncos game

    Peter King summed up the decision thoroughly today:


    Last week, the NFL raised a ruckus (certainly at the network where I work, NBC) by keeping the Baltimore-San Diego as the Week 15 Sunday night game on NBC, and keeping New England-Denver as a CBS Sunday afternoon game. Let me explain first why the league did that, then I'll tell you a few things about the gymnastics of which games go where.

    When the flex schedule was established by the league for NBC's Sunday night package, it was done primarily to keep bad games (like some of the Monday-night clunkers we've seen) off of national TV on Sunday night. NBC paid for the right to flex out of a bad game. (More about why ESPN can't in a moment.) Flexing also gave teams rising from mediocrity (Detroit, for instance, eight days ago) the chance to play their way onto the Sunday night stage. And this is what NBC had hoped would happen when the league decided whether to keep the Ravens-Chargers as the Sunday night game or, as NBC wanted badly, to move the Patriots-Broncos, with the great Tebow story, to the night game, with Baltimore-San Diego moving to an afternoon start in San Diego.

    NBC had a couple of good arguments. Denver had played its way into prime time, and Denver owner Pat Bowlen, a member of the NFL's Broadcast Committee, agreed. He wanted the game in prime time. New England is a big ratings attraction for NBC, and when the league flexed out of the New England-Indianapolis game a few weeks ago (understandably, obviously), NBC lost one of its two New England availabilities. Also, putting the game on CBS would mean it wouldn't be a national game. The New York, Philadelphia, Cleveland and Phoenix CBS affiliates will show their local teams' games and not Tebow-Brady. CBS, on the other hand, wanted to keep the game because of the Tebow factor and made its case to keep the game. And the case was a pretty good one: The Baltimore-San Diego game matched one team, following the Chargers' Monday night win at Jacksonville, that would enter the game one or two games out of the division lead, San Diego, against a team, Baltimore, likely to be tied for its division lead, in a dogfight with Pittsburgh. It didn't rise to the level of needing to take an A game to replace a B-plus game.

    I can tell you this: The NFL would have moved Denver-New England to prime time if Jacksonville beat San Diego last Monday. There was still some internal debate to be had when San Diego won the game, but the NFL decided it couldn't justify taking the game from CBS.

    Flex scheduling was designed with this primary objective -- to avoid a dog game. Baltimore-San Diego's not a dog at all. It's not Tebowmania, but those are the breaks.

    Now, in the aftermath of the decision, it's been assumed that one of the league's powerful owners, Robert Kraft of the Patriots, had a major hand in keeping the game in the afternoon. An afternoon game in Mountain Time means the Patriots would get back to New England at about 2 a.m. If the game had been moved, their charter would return at about 6 a.m. Monday. With a Saturday afternoon game looming the following weekend, obviously the Patriots' preference would have been to play in the afternoon. I'm told two things reliably: Yes, Kraft did tell the league he wanted the game kept in the afternoon. No, Kraft did not strongarm the league in any way about it. "Categorically not,'' said a league source. "It's baloney. Whoever says that doesn't know what he's talking about.''

    A few other network tidbits:

    • ESPN flex. Many of you have emailed and Tweeted to ask why ESPN doesn't have the same kind of flex schedule. Answer: It's just impractical. It's one thing to move a game back four or seven hours to Sunday night. It's another to move a game, 12 days prior to it, 31 hours back. The hotels, the airplanes, the plans, the fans (inconvenienced enough by the movement from day to night and vice versa) ... It's just too much.

    • Rulers. Who makes the final call on the Sunday night flex? NFL broadcast czar Howard Katz and commissioner Roger Goodell.

    • Protected game. In early October, FOX and CBS must designate five games in the first six weeks of flex scheduling (and no more than one per network per week) that cannot be flexed to NBC. The Denver-New England game was not protected by CBS; the Jets-Eagles game that weekend was.

    • Balancing act. There are 43 prime-time games per season -- 17 on ESPN, 18 on NBC and eight on NFL Network. The NFL cannot take more than 23 games per season away from either network. (CBS has AFC games and FOX the NFC games. In interconference games, most often, the road team dictates the network.)

    • Long-term balancing act. This is year six of the eight-year contract with the networks. By the end of year eight, CBS and FOX must be nearly identical in the number of games they lose to prime time. I'm told it's pretty close to even right now so that shouldn't be a major factor in which games are shown in prime time in the next two seasons.

    • Week 17. No network has the right to dictate time, and NBC is told which game will be on Sunday night. The NFL plots it to try to have a win-and-you're-in game as the last game of the year -- unless extenuating circumstances pop up. The Packers going for 16-0, for example; that might play a part in the league's decision
    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1gKsAd1ct

Similar Threads

  1. Taking a Comparative Look at LeBron
    By quinnthology in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-15-2010, 02:48 AM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-11-2005, 11:25 PM
  3. Odd thoughts round 2 game 4......
    By Peck in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 05-14-2005, 07:54 PM
  4. A fan recaps the season from section 221
    By travmil in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-21-2005, 10:58 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •