Sports

SlingTV Isn’t Breaking Up the Cable Bundle. It’s Preserving It.

by

Dish took the wraps off its long-in-the-works Internet-delivered TV service today, long known as “NuTV” but now officially known as SlingTV. (Dish has a working relationship with the Slingbox company but there is no other relationship between SlingTV and Slingbox.) For $20 a month you can sign up for a dozen channels from Disney, Turner, and Scripps, including the A&E networks partly owned by Disney and – crucially – ESPN, all delivered over the Internet, plus additional genre-based add-on packages for kids’ channels, news and info channels, and eventually, sports channels. The techie blogosphere, long friendly to “cord-cutting”, is over the moon at the possibility of being able to watch ESPN “without a cable subscription”, “liberated from the cable bundle” in GigaOm’s phrasing. GigaOm calls it “a cord-cutter’s best friend”; “a cord-cutter’s dream”, agrees Deadline; an “over-the-top alternative to the cable bundle”, writes TechCrunch.

None of these are in any way true. Sling TV may not be a cable company in the sense that they string a bunch of wires to your house (or in Dish’s case, put a satellite dish on your roof) and deliver hundreds of channels through it, but it is very much a cable bundle, even if a smaller one. You can’t pick and choose which channels of the base package of twelve you want and discard the rest, and you certainly can’t forego any of those base channels if you want any of the genre packages – especially important when Dish’s existing DishWorld service will be folded into SlingTV. Dish seems to be indicating it intends to keep the SlingTV suite lighter than a typical cable subscription, but make no mistake: the only reason this service doesn’t have more channels is because Dish hasn’t been able to get any other companies on board. If they could get AMC (and the other networks owned by AMC Networks), FX (and the other Fox-owned networks, including Fox Sports 1), or most other big companies’ packages of networks (especially Comcast for USA and NBCSN), they would.

Although Comcast and Time Warner Cable are the two most hated companies in America for a variety of reasons, the desire to be free of “the cable bundle” has never been about anything specific to them or their infrastructure. The channels have always been what’s mattered; how they’re delivered is immaterial. In that sense, what SlingTV is offering isn’t much different from what any other traditional cable provider is offering – something that should be especially apparent when the FCC is considering new rules that would treat Internet-delivered TV providers the same as any other cable or satellite company. TechCrunch paints Dish Network’s original launch as a challenge to the existing hegemony of the cable companies; Dish is now part of that hegemony. What makes them think SlingTV will be any different? Sure, it is cheaper than a traditional cable subscription for now, although given that cable companies often charge as much or even more than Internet alone than they do for Internet and TV, don’t expect to save all that much.

SlingTV believes access to ESPN is its killer app, but I won’t buy that any service like SlingTV is really going to break up the cable bundle unless and until it makes it easier for people to be able to not get ESPN. Anyone who signs up for SlingTV because of the programming on Food Network, Disney Channel, or A&E is supporting ESPN’s hegemony over the sports landscape every bit as much as they would be if they kept their existing cable subscription – and people who are interested in sports won’t get access to the regional sports networks that may be the real reason they aren’t cutting the cord. ESPN is the big winner here: it gets to appeal to “cord-cutters” without losing its hold on its lucrative business model that collects millions of dollars from people with zero interest in sports and funnels that into programming like the NFL playoffs and the College Football Playoff that make it a peer of the broadcast networks. SlingTV does nothing to break up that hegemony; it preserves it.

So to me, the real interesting part of this announcement (besides the ability to sign up and cancel the service any time with no long-term commitment) is that Dish is not including the broadcast networks, not even ABC, in SlingTV, even though a big reason it was able to get Disney on board was to settle ABC’s suit against the company for the AutoHop feature to skip commercials on broadcast networks. When Dish eventually does offer them, it’ll be as a separate add-on. The implicit message: We shouldn’t have to pay retransmission consent fees and jack up the price of our slimmed-down, low-cost service when our customers tend to be urban and capable of picking up broadcast signals with an antenna (not to mention, can watch a lot of broadcast shows on Hulu). I’m not sure they’ll be able to do that if the FCC makes them play by cable’s rules, since cable companies are required to carry any station that doesn’t ask for retrans on their most basic package and do the same for any station they agree to pay retrans for, and I’ve come out against “a la carte” proposals that make it easier to go without broadcast stations without making it easier to pick and choose cable networks like the “local choice” scheme that was floating around Congress a while back. But considering Dish has made clear it doesn’t see Sling TV as a full-fledged replacement for cable or satellite, if they can in fact make broadcast stations optional, perhaps it will serve as an impetus for broadcasters to invest in their signals instead of disdaining their own nominal medium in favor of being just another kind of cable channel.

2014 Stanley Cup Playoffs Ratings Roundup

by

Here are US ratings for all but two games of the 2014 Stanley Cup Playoffs. NHL Network is not rated by Nielsen, so numbers are not available for Avalanche-Wild Game 3 or Lightning-Canadiens Game 4.

There are a number of oddities on this list. At 4.1 million viewers, the finish of the Western Conference Final between the Kings and Blackhawks, airing on NBCSN on a Sunday night, beat both of NBCSN’s Stanley Cup Final games, and wasn’t beaten by Game 1 of the Final by very much (with Game 2’s ratings inflated by having the Belmont Stakes as a lead-in). That was the only non-Final game with more than 2.8 million viewers, broadcast or cable, and only two non-Final games on NBC beat NBCSN’s next-best non-Final game. NBCSN also had the most-watched non-Final game, broadcast or cable, not to involve the Blackhawks: Canadiens-Bruins Game 7. Is this a good sign for NBCSN, or a bad sign for the NHL?

CNBC had the nine least-watched games not on NHL Network, but thanks to inheriting the Blackhawks-Wild second-round series had three games with over a million viewers. Other than those three games, no other CNBC game had over half a million viewers.

Household ratings for games on NBCSN and CNBC through May 11 from Son of the Bronx, from May 12 and later and all NBC numbers from SportsBusiness Daily and Sports Media Watch. 18-49 numbers, when available, from TVbytheNumbers and The Futon Critic.

Read more

2013-14 NBA Ratings Roundup, Part III: Playoff Games

by

Here are ratings for all 89 games of the 2014 playoffs on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, TNT, and NBATV, organized by most watched.

Was the bloom already coming off the rose of LeBron James’ Miami Heat? Every game of the Eastern Conference Finals beat all but one game of the Western Finals – but that one game, West Finals Game 6, was the most-watched game before the NBA Finals, and the most-watched game before the conference finals was Mavericks-Spurs Game 7. The four most-watched games on cable before the conference finals (and six of the top seven overall) all involved the Clippers as a result of the controversy surrounding Donald Sterling, with the most-watched pre-conference final game on cable not involving the Clippers being Grizzlies-Thunder Game 7, not any game involving the Heat.

Cable household ratings through May 11 from Son of the Bronx; household ratings from May 12 and later and all ABC daytime numbers from SportsBusiness Daily and Sports Media Watch. 18-49 numbers, when available, from TVbytheNumbers and The Futon Critic.

Read more

2013-14 NBA Ratings Roundup, Part II: NBATV Regular Season Games

by

Continuing from this post, here are ratings for every game on NBATV last season. In part because we’re so far removed from it, I didn’t bother trying to find out what games were on in each spot, except for the top few games so that you know that the only games with over 700,000 viewers involved the Heat when they still had LeBron James.

All numbers from Son of the Bronx. 18-49 ratings, when available, from TVbytheNumbers or The Futon Critic.

Read more

How should I report sports TV ratings going forward?

by

It’s been hard for me to get my mind off of the Sports TV Ratings site since I discovered it last week. Since I raised my concerns about it potentially being shut down by Nielsen, I’ve found out that the site appears to be run by none other than Robert Seidman, co-founder of the TV by the Numbers site, who presumably either has the credentials to avoid being shut down or at least knows how to stay on Nielsen’s good side. But if the site is in it for the long haul, it’s so ridiculously comprehensive that it could completely shake up how I track sports ratings – and affect the necessity for me to do so.

I’ve generally tweeted whatever I’ve found from TVBTN or TV Media Insights (and the Futon Critic before it) each day, and TVMI reported so many more sports numbers than the Futon Critic I ended up putting up a post recapping the weekend, which for the moment got integrated with the Sports Ratings Highlights, but this site blows that system out of the water by giving me access to every single sports event on an English-language all-sports network, pretty close to as soon as the numbers are available. At the very least, if I still wanted to put up daily ratings I’d be putting up blog posts every single day, and that’s not even getting into the possibility of bringing back the Studio Show Scorecard and bringing it to the point I’ve always had in mind for it. But if I were to do that, I’d be leaning so heavily on STVR I can’t help but wonder if my posts would be redundant with its posts. Reorganizing SotB data into a more viewer-friendly format for the first version of the Studio Show Scorecard is one thing, but this would basically be taking STVR posts, one at a time, and shuffling the data around into a new format that might not be much of an improvement over what it already has. Still, just for myself it may be the best way to compile each day’s sports ratings for my own database.

Although doing a full-fledged SSS may not be all that useful in any case. At the bottom of each daily STVR post is a disclaimer that audiences under 100K or so are considered by Nielsen to be a “scratch”, meaning the audience is too small to be all that statistically significant. Considering how widespread audiences of all sizes seem to be reported these days I’m not sure that isn’t Seidman extrapolating from his experiences several years ago, when CNBC would scratch all the time on TVBTN’s own cable news scorecards, to today when Nielsen may or may not still be scratching small audiences, but it makes sense. There are only around 50,000 Nielsen panelists, and each panelist represents around 5,800 people, so a) audiences below 6,000 or so are really just measuring the random fluctuations of people that happen to be dropping in with no more than one or two panelists actually purposely watching the show, and b) in general the thousands place is determined more by those fluctuations than by how many panelists are actually watching, since each panelist that does or does not sit through the whole thing makes a 5-6 thousand person swing in the measured audience, which explains why Sports Media Watch never brings up the thousands place unless I needle him (according to the laws of statistics, the absolute number actually gets less accurate as the audience gets bigger, but slowly).

It’s still somewhat useful as a tiebreaker on the big listings, but until you get to around 22,000 or so there isn’t better than a 95% chance that the three or four panelists watching aren’t the only ones in the entire country watching; a show with an audience of about 5,000 could easily have several times that number and is being measured for less solely through the luck of the Nielsen panelist draw, or conversely an even smaller audience. All that is to set up that the only networks that can consistently attract audiences over 100,000 for their studio shows, or anything other than live sports events, are ESPN, ESPN2, and maybe NFL Network, which is bad news for FS1 and NBCSN, the two networks with the most high-profile studio shows outside the ESPNs but which fall behind multiple sport-specific networks as a matter of course, for whatever those numbers are worth. If I want to report only shows for whom the numbers are actually statistically significant, maybe I should stick to those live sports events, at least for the moment until non-ESPN studio shows can attract a significant audience. (And Douglas Pucci on Awful Announcing may be on to something by just listing weekly averages for studio shows that didn’t crack their networks’ top ten, even if it’s mostly a means to avoid getting shut down by Nielsen again; averages across multiple episodes should be more accurate than just one.)

I have a new Da Blog Poll up to figure out what I should do going forward, which I’m going to run through the end of next week in hopes of catching people coming back from holiday break, but no matter what the utility of every other site I use as a source could be impacted just by bringing STVR into the fold. TV Media Insights is mostly useful for ratings for broadcast networks and the occasional household rating and ratings for Spanish-language networks and other networks not covered by STVR; this last category cuts further enough into TVBTN’s usefulness that it pretty much only becomes useful for daytime events on non-STVR networks. Pucci’s Awful Announcing posts would be useful for household ratings and that’s it, maybe the occasional event on a non-STVR network. Even the weekly averages would only be useful for the yearly comparisons… and even then at some point I could conceivably make those comparisons myself. For that matter, I’m not sure AA would have much use for him once they discovered STVR. The only sources that wouldn’t be appreciably affected would be SportsBusiness Daily and Sports Media Watch for their daytime broadcast ratings, and even though my issues with CBS seem to have been alleviated as the year has gone along, SBD’s continued tendency to drop their posts after holiday-related delays or when Friday is a holiday makes clear that broadcast daytime ratings really are the weak spot when it comes to the reporting of sports ratings, more than ever before.

2013-14 NBA Ratings Roundup, Part I: ABC, ESPN, and TNT Games

by

With Christmas just behind us, here’s last season’s NBA regular season ratings on ABC, ESPN, and TNT, to kick off what will hopefully be a series of ratings roundups, not just confined to the NBA. This is mostly a copy of this list. As only one NBATV game beat any games on any of these networks, those games will be in a separate chart.

Household ratings from Son of the Bronx for ESPN games and SportsBusiness Daily for ABC games and those TNT games where it is available. 18-49 ratings, when available, from TVbytheNumbers and The Futon Critic.

Read more

Sports TV Scorecard for Friday, December 19

by

I’m going to say right now that I fully expect SportsTVRatings.com to be shut down or at least be forced to scale back by Nielsen at some point. The About page says that “if you’ve seen this much daily cable sports data posted elsewhere, let us know where – we’ll read that and find another hobby!” Well, there used to be a site nearly as comprehensive as what they have, even though it posted on a weekly and not daily basis – remind me to tell you the story of Son of the Bronx at some point. What may help this site last longer is that it isn’t on a blog-hosting service like Blogger and isn’t giving away their real names, so it might be more difficult for Nielsen to contact them and have much force behind it, but possibly not much so considering they have a link to their e-mail.

This site has viewership (and usually 18-49 data) for every single show on an English-language cable sports network, including beIN Sports which SotB has never covered to the same extent as the others (although it appears to be nearly as devoid of viewers as Fox Sports 2, though its peaks are significantly higher than what FS2 could dream of). It also has the weekly primetime and total day summary numbers for each network, without weekly or yearly comparisons but with 18-49 numbers. Because the data is daily and not weekly, using it to calculate median minute ratings and integrating its 18-49 numbers with SotB/Awful Announcing’s household ratings would be a major pain, and the former problem is exacerbated by Excel not recognizing their tables when creating a web-based data query, and taking forever to select the whole table in IE10 Metro mode.

What I can do is present a proof-of-concept of an idea I had when I first discovered how comprehensive SotB was being, daily scorecards for studio shows and sports events throughout the day similar to what TVNewser does for news networks. This would be even more time-consuming than the Studio Show Scorecards were when I was doing them a year ago, and there are other reasons for me not to want to do this on a regular basis, but I present it as an idea for how the site might be able to avoid the fate of so many sites to face the wrath of Nielsen – even if all it would withhold from publishing are the time periods from noon-3 PM and 3 AM-6 AM ET. Events in bold are live sporting events.

Read more

Sports Ratings Report for Weeks of November 17-30

by
Primetime – Nov 17-23
Vwrs
(000)

Change
Lst Wk Lst Yr

=

=

3538

+16%

+11%

=

=

1137

-4%

+3%

=

=

465

-44%

-34%

=

+2

351

+65%

+158%

+1

-1

223

+46%

-3%

-1

-1

160

-9%

+8%

=

=

87

-1%

-5%

=

+1

79

+10%

-4%

=

-1

67

+16%

-26%

=

=

45

-8%

-13%
Total Day – Nov 17-23
Vwrs
(000)

Change
Lst Wk Lst Yr

=

=

1192

-3%

-0%

+1

+1

317

+1%

+10%

-1

-1

301

-19%

-11%

=

=

128

-20%

-28%

=

+1

123

+31%

+64%

+1

-1

97

+37%

-12%

-1

+1

73

-13%

+26%

=

-1

62

+5%

-3%

=

-1

58

+12%

0%

=

=

28

-13%

-7%

There’s a very real possibility I may not need SotB’s Awful Announcing posts (which at this point, include everything I already have except for the rankings) to do the weekly network summaries anymore. TVNewser’s “Cable News Ranker” posts include a document with week-by-week, month-by-month, quarter-by-quarter, and (presumably) year-by-year reports of average audience, average number of households watching, and household “coverage” percentage (a number that presumably reflects the audience estimates that have hardly been reported at all all year)… for (almost) every single Nielsen-rated cable network, as well as each network’s rank compared to the others. To see Nielsen include so many numbers I had thought I was the only one interested in, as well as a number I didn’t even dare to think of but is incredibly useful to put the others in context, that can potentially allow me to include networks SotB doesn’t report information for for whatever reason, blew me away. This may be the most felicitous development since I learned about how comprehensive SotB was being on his blog.

Or, it would be… but there’s a problem. No matter what, TVNewser does only one of these posts a week. So every month It puts up the rankings for the entire month just past but skips a week. Okay, I can just use TVNewser for monthly wrapups, but every three months it puts up the quarterly rankings for the three months just past, and skips that month. I’d bet anything that at year’s end it’ll put up the yearly rankings and skip the fourth quarter, but I don’t think these posts even go back that far, which actually surprises me because I’m pretty damn sure I’ve seen the sort of image that leads the post before, even if it didn’t have this comprehensive document. So it’s vaguely useful for a year-end rating roundup, but that’s it, and no matter what I use it for I can’t do the year-on-year comparisons I’m used to for the near future. (I guess I can accept that it would get pretty crowded if at the end of the year you had the rankings for the last week, and for December, and for the fourth quarter, and for the entire year…)

So this is more of a proof of concept than anything else, taking the November ratings, one of the four all year where I can take the month’s ratings and do a comparison to the previous month. Because I still can’t do the median minute ratings without SotB’s comprehensive information, I would probably still split primetime and total day into two tables given the sheer magnitude of information involved. I’m also assuming “ENN” is short for ESPNEWS, but it’s entirely possible it’s just not on the list; Fox Deportes is the only Spanish-language sports network on the list, and not only have I seen plenty of ratings reported for Univision Deportes and ESPN Deportes (and seen UDN on both the TVMI and TVbytheNumbers lists), I’ve actually seen UDN advertise its weekly summary data of this sort, so clearly not all Nielsen-rated networks are on the list (the disclaimer says it “includes only those cable networks who [sic] supply program names to the industry”, whatever that means – for what it’s worth HBO, which often tops the daily lists with shows like Game of Thrones and True Blood, doesn’t show up either, and neither does FXX, but FXM does).

Regardless, the lack of Spanish-language networks means I’m limiting this list to the same bank of networks I always use. Overall rankings are out of 96 networks for primetime and 98 for total day; note that Nickelodeon and Cartoon Network are each considered to be two networks for Nielsen purposes for their nighttime adult-oriented Nick@Nite and Adult Swim blocks respectively, and only the latter appear in the primetime ranks. Yes, that means MLBN is very near the bottom in both measures. It could be worse; Fox Sports 2 outpaces only Tr3s, MTV’s Hispanic-oriented network, and the dying corpse of G4. (MLBN and FS2 have VH1 Classic, mun2, and Al Jazeera America between them in some order in both measures.)

PT Ovr Rank
Vwr (000)		 LM
Chng		 HH
(Cvr)		 LM
Chng		 TD Ovr Rank
Vwr (000)		 LM
Chng		 HH
(Cvr)		 LM
Chng

1

=

2.4

+19%

1

=

0.9

+12%

=

3881

+21%

2.9

+0.4

=

1376

+14%

1.1

+0.1

2

+13

0.6

+76%

2

+1

0.2

+4%

+1

949

+82%

1.0

+0.5

+1

316

+3%

0.3

=

3

#30

-2

0.3

+7%

3

#38

+10

0.2

+26%

+1

540

+4%

0.4

=

+1

274

+32%

0.3

+0.1

4

#50

-41

0.2

-76%

4

#61

-34

0.1

-63%

-2

276

-76%

0.2

-0.7

-2

124

-63%

0.1

-0.2

5

#64

+15

0.1

+49%

5

#70

+13

0.1

+45%

+2

163

+55%

0.2

+0.1

+5

81

+59%

0.1

=

6

#71

-5

0.1

-4%

6

#72

=

0.1

+3%

-1

132

-10%

0.1

=

=

79

+1%

0.1

=

7

#72

-3

0.1

-3%

7

#74

-10

0.1

+2%

-1

132

+2%

0.1

=

-2

76

unch

0.1

=

8

#79

+4

0.1

+33%

8

#80

=

0.0

+4%

+1

85

+8%

0.1

=

+1

59

+5%

0.1

=

9

#83

+4

0.0

+10%

9

#82

-3

0.0

-4%

+1

69

+15%

0.1

=

-1

55

-5%

0.1

=

10

#90

-8

0.0

-43%

10

#92

-14

0.0

-50%

-2

44

-45%

0.1

=

-3

28

-53%

0.0

-0.1

Read more

Sunday Night Football Flex Scheduling Watch: Week 15

by

NBC’s Sunday Night Football package gives it flexible scheduling. For the last seven weeks of the season, the games are determined on 12-day notice, 6-day notice for Week 17.

The first year, no game was listed in the Sunday Night slot, only a notation that one game could move there. Now, NBC lists the game it “tentatively” schedules for each night. However, the NFL is in charge of moving games to prime time.

Here are the rules from the NFL web site (note that even with the bit about the early flexes, this was written with the 2007 season in mind, hence why it still says late games start at 4:15 ET instead of 4:25):

  • Begins Sunday of Week 5
  • In effect during Weeks 5-17
  • Up to 2 games may be flexed into Sunday Night between Weeks 5-10
  • Only Sunday afternoon games are subject to being moved into the Sunday night window.
  • The game that has been tentatively scheduled for Sunday night during flex weeks will be listed at 8:15 p.m. ET.
  • The majority of games on Sundays will be listed at 1:00 p.m. ET during flex weeks except for games played in Pacific or Mountain Time zones which will be listed at 4:05 or 4:15 p.m. ET.
  • No impact on Thursday, Saturday or Monday night games.
  • The NFL will decide (after consultation with CBS, FOX, NBC) and announce as early as possible the game being played at 8:15 p.m. ET. The announcement will come no later than 12 days prior to the game. The NFL may also announce games moving to 4:05 p.m. ET and 4:15 p.m. ET.
  • Week 17 start time changes could be decided on 6 days notice to ensure a game with playoff implications.
  • The NBC Sunday night time slot in “flex” weeks will list the game that has been tentatively scheduled for Sunday night.
  • Fans and ticket holders must be aware that NFL games in flex weeks are subject to change 12 days in advance (6 days in Week 17) and should plan accordingly.
  • NFL schedules all games.
  • Teams will be informed as soon as they are no longer under consideration or eligible for a move to Sunday night.
  • Rules NOT listed on NFL web site but pertinent to flex schedule selection: CBS and Fox each protect games in five out of six weeks starting Week 11, and cannot protect any games Week 17. Games were protected after Week 4 in 2006 and 2011, because NBC hosted Christmas night games those years and all the other games were moved to Saturday (and so couldn’t be flexed), but are otherwise protected after Week 5. As I understand it, during the Week 5-10 period the NFL and NBC declare their intention to flex out a game two weeks in advance, at which point CBS and Fox pick one game each to protect.
  • In the past, three teams could appear a maximum of six games in primetime on NBC, ESPN or NFL Network (everyone else gets five) and no team may appear more than four times on NBC. I don’t know how the expansion of the Thursday Night schedule affects this, if it does. No team starts the season completely tapped out at any measure; ten teams have five primetime appearances each, but only the Packers, Bears, 49ers, Steelers, and Saints don’t have games in the main flex period, and all have games in the early flex period. I don’t know if both of the games scheduled for 12/20 count towards the total, or only the one in primetime. A list of all teams’ number of appearances is in my Week 5 post.

Here are the current tentatively-scheduled games and my predictions:

Week 17 (December 28):

AFC Playoff Picture
DIVISION
LEADERS		 WILD CARD WAITING IN
THE WINGS (7-7)
NORTH
49-4-1		 59-5
2 tied at 9-5
SOUTH
310-4		 69-5
CLINCHED
WEST
211-3		 8-6
CLINCHED 8-6
EAST
111-3		 8-6
CLINCHED
NFC Playoff Picture
DIVISION
LEADERS		 WILD CARD WAITING IN THE
NFC SOUTH WINGS
SOUTH
46-8		 510-4 5-9
5-8-1
EAST
310-4		 610-4
9-5
NORTH
210-4		 9-5
10-4
WEST
111-3
10-4
  • Tentative game: None (NBC will show game with guaranteed playoff implications).
  • Possible games: Panthers-Falcons, Lions-Packers, Chargers-Chiefs, Bills-Patriots, Bengals-Steelers (with the first three being most likely). Sadly for any chance of seeing Johnny Manziel in primetime this season, on top of his bad play the Browns’ conference record is atrocious, especially compared to the Chiefs and Chargers, essentially eliminating Browns-Ravens as a guaranteed win-and-you’re-in game for the Browns, though there’s an off chance it’s a loser-out game for the Ravens.
  • Lions-Packers will be selected if: The Packers win OR the Lions and Cowboys lose. If the Lions were to win and the Packers lose the Lions would cinch the conference tiebreaker; both teams hold tiebreakers over Philly so there is pretty much no way for this to be a loser-out game, but either team, with a win, would cinch a first-round bye contingent on winning the division. Even if a first-round bye isn’t guaranteed to be on the line, however, this game would probably still be flexed in with a Lions loss and a Cowboys win if any of the other scenarios fail to play out.
  • Panthers-Falcons will be picked if: The Panthers win AND the Falcons beat the Saints AND the Lions-Packers scenario doesn’t happen. The Saints winning on Monday night and the Falcons losing Sunday actually isn’t a disaster for this game’s chances; the Falcons would tie the Saints in the standings and hold a head-to-head sweep with a win, but the Panthers do need to hold up their end of the bargain, as a loss would leave them dependent on what the Saints do against the Bucs. Both the NFL and NBC really hope this doesn’t happen.
  • Chargers-Chiefs will be picked if: The Chiefs beat the Steelers AND the Chargers win AND the Ravens win AND the Lions-Packers scenario doesn’t happen. Though neither team is in position right now, their respective conference records have them in such good shape for cross-division tiebreakers it could actually hurt this game’s chances for the loser to be out; if the Steelers and Ravens both lose out, the Chiefs would still hold a head-to-head tiebreaker over the Steelers, and the Bills’ conference record is even worse than that of the Browns so they would be a nonfactor in this scenario.
  • Bengals-Steelers will be picked if: The Bengals lose AND the Chiefs beat the Steelers AND the Chargers win AND (the Ravens win AND the Lions-Packers scenario doesn’t happen) OR (the Lions win AND the Packers lose AND the Panthers-Falcons scenario doesn’t happen). If the Ravens lose either week, this game is for the division with the loser falling behind the Chiefs-Chargers winner, but if the Steelers lose out, they could easily still make the playoffs if the Ravens also lose out and the Chiefs beat the Chargers, and a Browns win this week doesn’t help that because they split the season series with the Steelers (with both also splitting with the Ravens), would finish with the same division record (ahead of the Ravens), and lose the common games tiebreaker. For the Bengals, the problem is all the more acute because tiebreakers don’t factor into it at all; in the wild card race, they can only fall behind the Chiefs, Chargers, or Bills if those teams win out, or the Ravens if they pick up at least one win. Division winner versus 6 seed might still be attractive to NBC, but not if the division winner would hold the 4 seed, or worse, if the game just determines home field for a rematch the following week. So this game actually has a better shot if it’s not guaranteed to be for the division, because that ensures that the loser will fall to third in the division on top of falling behind the Chiefs-Chargers winner. (UPDATE 12/18: Just realized the Bengals are playing on Monday night, making this all the more unlikely and possibly dependent on the Steelers winning. This game may be just plain out unless there are no other options.)
  • Bills-Patriots might be picked if: The Bills win AND the Steelers beat the Chiefs AND the Ravens and Chargers lose AND the Lions win AND the Packers lose AND the Panthers-Falcons situation doesn’t happen. Even then, the Patriots have already locked up the division and a lot would depend on what the Broncos and Colts do; this game would probably need the Patriots to lose and the Broncos to win, and a Colts win would be nice as well. But if all this happens, the Bills would lose a tiebreaker to the Chiefs-Chargers winner with a loss, while the worst-case scenario with a win would be going to strength of victory against the Ravens. All told, chances are NBC will continue its streak of airing all NFC matchups since Week 17 went to all-division matchups in 2010.

Sunday Night Football Flex Scheduling Watch: Week 14

by

NBC’s Sunday Night Football package gives it flexible scheduling. For the last seven weeks of the season, the games are determined on 12-day notice, 6-day notice for Week 17.

The first year, no game was listed in the Sunday Night slot, only a notation that one game could move there. Now, NBC lists the game it “tentatively” schedules for each night. However, the NFL is in charge of moving games to prime time.

Here are the rules from the NFL web site (note that even with the bit about the early flexes, this was written with the 2007 season in mind, hence why it still says late games start at 4:15 ET instead of 4:25):

  • Begins Sunday of Week 5
  • In effect during Weeks 5-17
  • Up to 2 games may be flexed into Sunday Night between Weeks 5-10
  • Only Sunday afternoon games are subject to being moved into the Sunday night window.
  • The game that has been tentatively scheduled for Sunday night during flex weeks will be listed at 8:15 p.m. ET.
  • The majority of games on Sundays will be listed at 1:00 p.m. ET during flex weeks except for games played in Pacific or Mountain Time zones which will be listed at 4:05 or 4:15 p.m. ET.
  • No impact on Thursday, Saturday or Monday night games.
  • The NFL will decide (after consultation with CBS, FOX, NBC) and announce as early as possible the game being played at 8:15 p.m. ET. The announcement will come no later than 12 days prior to the game. The NFL may also announce games moving to 4:05 p.m. ET and 4:15 p.m. ET.
  • Week 17 start time changes could be decided on 6 days notice to ensure a game with playoff implications.
  • The NBC Sunday night time slot in “flex” weeks will list the game that has been tentatively scheduled for Sunday night.
  • Fans and ticket holders must be aware that NFL games in flex weeks are subject to change 12 days in advance (6 days in Week 17) and should plan accordingly.
  • NFL schedules all games.
  • Teams will be informed as soon as they are no longer under consideration or eligible for a move to Sunday night.
  • Rules NOT listed on NFL web site but pertinent to flex schedule selection: CBS and Fox each protect games in five out of six weeks starting Week 11, and cannot protect any games Week 17. Games were protected after Week 4 in 2006 and 2011, because NBC hosted Christmas night games those years and all the other games were moved to Saturday (and so couldn’t be flexed), but are otherwise protected after Week 5. As I understand it, during the Week 5-10 period the NFL and NBC declare their intention to flex out a game two weeks in advance, at which point CBS and Fox pick one game each to protect.
  • In the past, three teams could appear a maximum of six games in primetime on NBC, ESPN or NFL Network (everyone else gets five) and no team may appear more than four times on NBC. I don’t know how the expansion of the Thursday Night schedule affects this, if it does. No team starts the season completely tapped out at any measure; ten teams have five primetime appearances each, but only the Packers, Bears, 49ers, Steelers, and Saints don’t have games in the main flex period, and all have games in the early flex period. I don’t know if both of the games scheduled for 12/20 count towards the total, or only the one in primetime. A list of all teams’ number of appearances is in my Week 5 post.

Here are the current tentatively-scheduled games and my predictions:

Week 16 (December 21):

  • Selected game: Seattle @ Arizona.

Week 17 (December 28):

AFC Playoff Picture
DIVISION
LEADERS		 WILD CARD WAITING IN
THE WINGS
NORTH
48-4-1		 58-5 7-6
2 tied at 8-5 7-6
SOUTH
39-4		 68-5 7-6
7-6 7-6
WEST
210-3		 8-5 7-6
8-5
EAST
110-3
2 teams at 7-6
NFC Playoff Picture
DIVISION
LEADERS		 WILD CARD WAITING IN
THE WINGS (7-6)
SOUTH
45-8		 59-4
5-8
EAST
39-4		 69-4
9-4
NORTH
210-3		 9-4
9-4
WEST
110-3
9-4
  • Tentative game: None (NBC will show game with guaranteed playoff implications).
  • Possible games: Panthers-Falcons, Browns-Ravens, Lions-Packers, Chargers-Chiefs, Bills-Patriots, Bengals-Steelers. Cardinals-49ers is out because it depends on the outcome of the Seahawks-Cardinals game even in the exceedingly unlikely scenario where it’s relevant, and if the Seahawks won the NFL would want to make the two NFC West games simultaneous even if there were no other options.
  • Chances of Lions-Packers: 60 percent. This is probably the odds-on favorite, but a lot depends on whether or not the NFL would want to take this game if the loser might still get a wild card spot. The Lions won the first game, so they just need to stay within a game of the Packers for the division to be on the line, but the best-case scenario for this game involves both teams slipping so they can’t fall back on a wild card spot. On the other hand, if both teams excel and the NFC East teams slip the winner could be guaranteed a first-round bye, which could outweigh the loser still getting a wild card spot. The fact that this is by far the most TV-friendly option also weighs in its favor.
  • Chances of Panthers-Falcons: 19 percent. Since moving to the all-division-games system for Week 17, the Sunday night game has a long tradition of hosting a division title game for the suckiest division in the NFL, but that looks to be unlikely this year. Falcons-Saints or Saints-Falcons would be a lock if they played each other, but instead this game’s chances depend on the Saints going on a losing streak while the Panthers and Falcons win. The Saints really only need to lose one more game than the Panthers or Falcons, though; a lot’s riding on the Week 16 Falcons-Saints game and how much the NFL would be willing to subject America to this game if there are other options available.
  • Chances of Browns-Ravens: 5 percent. There’s an exceedingly slim chance this game is for the division if the Browns win their next two, the Bengals lose their next two, and the Ravens win one more game than the Steelers. More likely, though still not likely, is that this game is for a wild card spot, but that would require the Browns to win one more game than the other 7-6 teams and the Chargers to fall behind in the wild card race as well. It does help that even if the Browns don’t beat the Bengals, they’d still hold the division tiebreaker over the Ravens with a win Week 17.
  • Chances of Chargers-Chiefs: 5 percent. The Chiefs were swept by the Broncos, so they’re already eliminated from the division, but the idea of this game being for a wild card spot is intriguing. As with the Lions, the Chiefs won the first game with the Chargers and so only need to stay within a game of them, but the AFC wild card race is very crowded when you consider the 7-6 teams. It’s highly unlikely the Chiefs can be guaranteed a wild card spot with a win; they’d need to at least outperform the teams I have listed ahead of them. Combine that with this game’s lack of marquee value and it’s a real long shot.
  • Chances of Bills-Patriots: 1 percent. There is exactly one scenario where this game even has a shot: the Bills win their next two, the Patriots lose their next two, and the Dolphins lose to the Vikings Week 16, since this scenario assumes they’d beat the Patriots. That doesn’t even get into the wild card situation.
  • Chances of Bengals-Steelers: 10 percent. This might have the best shot of any AFC game, but it’s still unlikely. It’s another game where the NFL would have to weigh the possibility of the loser getting a wild card spot. The most likely scenario might involve the teams being in wild card position going in but the loser guaranteed to fall behind the Browns-Ravens or Chargers-Chiefs winner. The lack of name value also hurts it.