General NFL Watching Thread 2007

[dude1394]

Is football the only sports that is effected so much by the weather? I mean it can be no impact to downright stultifying.

[alby]

Personally, I love watching football when they have to deal with the elements.

[alby]

Chicago is moving the ball very well in their first drive v. GB

14 plays so far, 11 of which are running..

Early touchdown for Buffalo against the Giants

*edit- Chicago has to settle for a FG
Orton's hands are freaking nasty, his skin is crackling and they are just bleeding like crazy

[dude1394]

So my fantasy team has Kevin Curtis of the Eagles on it. He falls on a fumble in the end-zone and I can't figure out if he's credited with the TD or not???

The box score has no td scored.

I think because it's 0 yards and they don't know how to put it anywhere? I think it should be some sort of rushing td?

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by dude1394

So my fantasy team has Kevin Curtis of the Eagles on it. He falls on a fumble in the end-zone and I can't figure out if he's credited with the TD or not???

The box score has no td scored.

I think because it's 0 yards and they don't know how to put it anywhere? I think it should be some sort of rushing td?

Yeah, same here. I NEED that TD. Figure it out Yahoo! and make it happen.

[FINtastic]

Good news possibility?

Chicago, who has already beaten GB before, is up 3 points about halfway in the second quarter. Let's pray they can find a way to somehow pull off the upset again.

[FINtastic]

Alright, make that a 6 point lead. Of course, that's nothing when you are dealing with an explosive offense like Green Bay, but we can always hope.

[FINtastic]

Chicago up 13-7 at halftime.

That's some pretty nasty weather, btw. Brett Favres throws have been completely unpredictable, and he has 2 completions for 9 yards thus far.

[dude1394]

Da' Bears....Chicago needs to score here while they have the wind.

[alby]

game over. Chicago up big after blocking their 3rd GB punt lol

[Kirobaito]

This is one of the funniest games I've ever seen, particularly because I want GB to lose.

[alby]

Brett should have had at least 6 interceptions today.

Finally, one gets picked off. 35-7 Chicago

[dude1394]

So looking at the GB running game are we sure we want to play this one at home? Isn't it strange to have a couple of teams (NE, GB) that are built to play in domes but not??

[DevinHarriswillstart]

You would think Green Bay could play in this weather. If Favre has an off game that team has no chance of winning.

[dude1394]

They aren't built to play in this weather. No power running, don't really have a stud tight end.

[alby]

Oakland was down 49-3 and just scored a touchdown with 6 seconds left and now is going for two.

Why?

[fluid.forty.one]

boo tom brady

[alby]

This Brady to Moss connection is too good

and boy, does it piss me off.

[Flacolaco]

go dolphins win new england~~~~

[fluid.forty.one]

everyone vote romo to pro bowls game~~~~

[DirkFTW]

stop copies him~~~~

[fluid.forty.one]

you too did it~~~~


I hope Brady gets 0 TDs in this next game.

[Big Boy Laroux]

speaking of the pats game, it is going to be simulcast on NFL network, CBS, AND NBC

[Flacolaco]

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

speaking of the pats game, it is going to be simulcast on NFL network, CBS, AND NBC

Dumbest. thing. ever.

People are bitching about the dumbest crap. Guess what? This is the United States of America. The NFL can do whatever they want with their network, and the cable companies can put whatever they want on their programming. If you don't like it, go get Directv, Dish, or Verizon FIOS, or go to your local sports bar and stop bitching about it. It's not anyone's duty to help people out who can't watch a freaking football game.

[Kirobaito]

Originally Posted by fluid.forty.one

you too did it~~~~


I hope Brady gets 0 TDs in this next game.

I'm going to laugh if he tosses like four picks forcing the ball down the field just to break the record.

[alby]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

Dumbest. thing. ever.

People are bitching about the dumbest crap. Guess what? This is the United States of America. The NFL can do whatever they want with their network, and the cable companies can put whatever they want on their programming. If you don't like it, go get Directv, Dish, or Verizon FIOS, or go to your local sports bar and stop bitching about it. It's not anyone's duty to help people out who can't watch a freaking football game.

rep Flac.

[Big Boy Laroux]

flac, what about those that can't afford cable, and can't leave their house? you know, like really, really, really obese/poor people?

just playing devil's advocate.

but this was a decision the NFL made - Goodell decided to give the rights to multiple carriers.

[jthig32]

The decision by the NFL is nothing more than a ploy to get the overall fan base on their side against the cable companies that are stonewalling them.

[Big Boy Laroux]

wouldn't that be counter-intuitive? by giving in and allowing other networks to show the game, that just tells the cable subscribers that their cable company isn't doing anything wrong. the NFL is going to give them the games they want to see.

Now, if the NFL had stuck to its guns and only aired it on the NFL network, then that would anger fans towards their cable companies.

but i do see how fans could misplace their anger, and direct it at the NFL instead.

[Flacolaco]

Maybe they should be mad at themselves for still having cable.

[Big Boy Laroux]

hey, i still have cable. no verizon here in our neck of the woods, yet, and I honestly wouldn't get dish - i get cable and internet through Comcast.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

wouldn't that be counter-intuitive? by giving in and allowing other networks to show the game, that just tells the cable subscribers that their cable company isn't doing anything wrong. the NFL is going to give them the games they want to see.

Now, if the NFL had stuck to its guns and only aired it on the NFL network, then that would anger fans towards their cable companies.

but i do see how fans could misplace their anger, and direct it at the NFL instead.

I think with the criticism they've been receiving over their game presentation, they felt like this could turn the wrong direction for them if a lot of people didn't get to see this game.

I personally think it's going to backfire, because Gumbel is just that terrible. People are going to understand why the cable companies are taking their position.

[alby]

For some reason, the cable company here in Orange County (Cox Communications) provides the NFL Network. If Cox is able to do it, why can't Comcast and other cable companies do it as well?

[Big Boy Laroux]

comcast does have it here in nashville, it's just part of a "sports package" that you have to pay an extra $5-10 a month for. there's like 4 other channels in the package, but they're nothing special (like a soccer channel), so you're basically paying that money for NFL network. personally, i don't think it's worth it, and just went to a sports bar for the only game this year on the NFL network worth watching - the packers/cowboys game.

I think Comcast decided to put the NFL network on a special tier because they were actually bidding for NFL games as well (like Sunday Ticket), to show on their sports channel. of course that fell through, so they were bitter and packaged NFL network like that.

But i believe some cable companies may not have it at all.


And thig, you are right - Gumbel is AWFUL. i like collinsworth, but gumbel is such a beating.

[Big Boy Laroux]

according to Wiki, only 3 cable companies have NFL network - Comcast, Cox, and Insight. So some major cable companies like Time Warner and Charter don't have it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Network

Background
As of December 2007, the NFL Network is embroiled in a dispute with several cable companies. Perhaps the most public controversy is over its removal on some systems owned by Time Warner Cable, the second-largest system in the United States, which occurred in September 2006.
NFL Network has insisted that it be placed on basic service and wish to charge the cable companies a monthly rate of $0.61 per subscriber, while Time Warner and other major cable companies wishes to place it on a sports tier. Cable companies feel that a channel with such marginal interest and few live games with filler programming would be tough to sell during non-football season months. [17] NFL Network's position is that demands are unreasonable and many other providers place NFL Network on a basic tier without subscriber backlashes[18].

also from Wiki:

2007 Patriots v. Giants Controversy
In December 2007, Massachusetts Senator John Kerry wrote a letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell asking for the league to settle their differences in time for the New England Patriots-New York Giants game on December 29 that would be broadcast on Saturday Night Football. The game may possibly be the Patriots' record-sealing win that would make them the first undefeated team through the regular season in 35 years. Kerry urged for a solution to be decided upon in time so that Americans can witness "a historic event."[23] An agreement was worked out between the NFL and two of the League's TV partners, NBC and CBS, to allow the game to be simulcast on Network TV, resulting in the first NFL simulcast since Super Bowl I.[24]
According to an article in USA Today, CBS and NBC were contacted by the league and expressed interest in the simulcast. It is not clear if the game was offered to FOX, the league's other broadcast network partner. If it was, FOX obviously declined. In addition, WWOR, the MyNetworkTV affiliate in the New York City area that is scheduled to carry the game in a prior agreement with NFLN, has objected to the new arrangement. (WWOR is also owned by Newscorp.) However, there is no indication that the game will be taken off WWOR, or from ABC affiliates WCVB and WHDH in New England.[25]

ha ha, John Kerry. Should this be posted in the politics forum?

[chumdawg]

I pay $5 a month to TimeWarner for NBATV. I get some other channels, too--as you were describing, BBL--but it is for all intents just NBATV. I don't mind paying it, because there is plenty of good programming.

I'm sure I would pay it for the NFL network as well, but I'm glad the NFL is fighting so that I don't have to.

To flaco, who said that this is the US and the NFL can do whatever it wants to: wrong-o, my friend. The NFL, like any other business, is subject to anti-trust regulation. The NFL already lost one anti-trust case. They can't just do whatever they want to. They can't, for example, put every game on pay-per-view.

I'm supporting the NFL on this one. I want to see TimeWarner suck it up and pay the fees, just like other cable companies have.

[Big Boy Laroux]

i would pay for NBATV - I mean, how many games do they show a year? i'd imagine it's quite a few. Comcast does put most of the NBA TV games on its Versus network, so I actually don't have to pay extra for that.

but NFL network shows fewer games, and many of them are ones i really could not care less about. That's why I say it's not worth it. But to each their own.

[alby]

But with the NBA, you have 10 games every night. With the NFL, they only play once a week. How many games can the NFL Network show?

[Big Boy Laroux]

i believe NFL network can have at most 2 a week. Thursday Night Games and Saturday Night games.

[alby]

It could just be me, but I don't think the players get thrilled about playing on a Thursday.