Boyer' open letter to Kaepernick

I think this is heart of the problem in the NFL front office. Lack of recognition of who their audience is. The people happy with the players disrespecting the flag/anthem are not, in general, loyal, weekly NFL watchers and season ticket holders. They are not the core pro football fan. And, thus, they are not who networks/advertisers are paying to reach.

Instead, it is the people who are unhappy with the kneeling on the flag who, in general terms, are the base. This is the great bulk of the weekly NFL core audience. And, thus, this is the target audience advertisers and networks pay so much to reach. And they are pissed off.

How could anyone not know this? You do not have to be particularly smart or experienced to know this. A taxi driver in Boston knows it, a roofer in Georgia knows it, a rancher in Wyoming knows it, even a San Diego surfer knows it. You really have to be living in a $42M/yr New York Upper East side alternate reality to not know this.

I had my issues with Pete Rozelle but he would not have missed what happened/is still happening here. He would have never let it happen in the first place. He knew what his job was and he knew who his audience was.

 

Yo tambien

 

That is the set up I have. Direct TV with one 4K unit.
IMO, the picture on the 4K is even clearer than being in the stadium, LOL. Which is probably completely due to my slipping eyesight.

 

I think the "Hand's up don't shoot" episode with the subsequent protests without any acknowledgment that the facts of the Brown shooting did not match the political narrative is possibly the root of the problem of support from the fans (not to mention the entire patriotism factor). When you demand that people accept your version of the story then continue with the protest with dismissive arrogance when your version is proven to be incorrect then you lose credibility.

 

You're overblowing the payroll and salary cap impacts in football. Keep in mind that though the Cowboys have to deal with a salary cap, so do their competitors. For some reason it doesn't seem to hurt the New England Patriots. The salary cap is a complication, but it's not an excuse for 20 years of mediocrity.

You're also overblowing the payroll advantage in baseball. Yes, the Yankees spend lots of money, but in several seasons, they frequently got outsmarted by teams with a lot less . Hell, the Kansas City Royals have won more pennants in the last ten years than the Yankees have. Furthermore, there were plenty of teams that also spent big sums and didn't get very far.

The point is that the idea of "buying championships" isn't quite myth, but it's grossly exaggerated. Money can help buy out stupid decisions and poor drafting and player development, but teams that don't make as many stupid decisions and drafts and develop better usually perform better.

As for the Cowboys, the cap is no excuse. They could spend all the money they want, and they'd still be mediocre, because they're badly run, badly coached, and undisciplined. That has been their problem for 20 years, and the ability to sign more free agents wouldn't fix that. That's why I don't watch the Cowboys. The stupid-*** protests don't help, but I quit watching years ago, because until Jerry Jones dies or sells the team, it's a waste of time.

 

I simply quoted from your post using the normal mechanism on the page. I wasn't trying to make it look like you wrote it.

You guys are simplistic. It's possible for the ratings to drop for more than one reason. I've discussed the "elephant in the room" in this thread. It's a big factor, but it's not the only factor. If a team sucks, fewer people are going to watch. If cable gets too expensive (or in the case of ESPN, too political and expensive) and people cancel their subscriptions, fewer people are going to watch (at least the games that are on cable). Keep in mind that ratings for network television in general are down. If you're switching to Amazon Prime and Netflix, you're probably not watching a lot of NFL games.

Frankly, professional sports in general needs to get out of the 20th century and stop giving exclusivity deals to TV networks. As other options for TV entertainment become available, people are going to tolerate that less and less. It's a dying business model.

 

To quote the Shark, lighten up Francis. I was just messing with you on that quote stuff.

Why not 800 lb gorilla?

This excuse has never held water because it neglects to take into account the corresponding increased ratings (and attendance) of the teams who are suddenly good. The only possible exception here is when both NY teams suck at the same time, this can have a small effect on overall combined national ratings. And none of this has anything to do with the positive/negative view of the NFL which has nosedived recently (as shown above multiple times).

 

4K unit? You mean a 4K TV or 4K capable Genie box or whatever?

 

Switching from salary cap to luxury tax in the NFL would usher in night and f'n day results. Assuming otherwise is absurd.

Parity would be history. We'd be back to the days of 3-4 teams annually owning the NFC championship game within a few years.

We'd never see the likes of Seattle again...$85m annual operating income vs. Dallas' $350m....good luck.

It's as simple as can or can't teams pay whatever they desire to fill a key weakness or two with a dominating player.

You're just failing to translate the ramifications of such spending freedom to the NFL game. A game where a few elite players can significantly change the entire complexion of an offense or defense.

To say Dallas wouldn't win multiple titles over the next 20 years with the ability to add a few Pro Bowl free agents a year is naive.

I cover the league extensively and know exactly who they likely would've targeted to address weaknesses in recent free agency periods.

It doesn't take much memory to understand Dallas did and would lure the best options out there with the highest bid if still able to.

Without the salary cap Dallas likely wins it all in 2014. I'd be willing to bet they'd have won the NFC title last year if able to poach one or two elite defensive free agents from that group...which would've happened.

This is a ridiculous debate built on sour grapes against the Cowboys. They've drafted every bit as good over the last four years as the 90's teams with far less ammo to do so.

If JJ was still able to go buy hired guns like back then the last three years would've produced two serious SB contenders easy.

I'm no Jason Garrett fan but the 2014 and 2016 teams were on the brink. A brink that would've been crossed with even one more Pro Bowl free agent signing.

 

Actually it does. When teams suddenly become good, people are more likely to watch. That's the reverse of the phenomenon that takes place when a team that sucks loses ratings.

And again, there are plenty of reasons for people to have a negative view of the NFL. What's silly about this is that you and the rest of the Rump-lovers here aren't satisfied with that. You're only satisfied if people will admit that the only reason anyone isn't watching the games is that the players protested and that Trump called them on it. I"m not arguing that those were non-factors. They are factors, but they aren't the only ones.

 

You're boiling it all down to payroll and free agency, and you're acting as though the Cowboys are the only team that has to deal with the salary cap. How do you explain the New England Patriots? They've been a dominant team for 16 years, and like the Cowboys, they have to deal with a salary cap. The excuse is getting old. Eventually you have to accept that they're just not a well-run team and that Jones is the common denominator.

Free agency isn't a fix-all. It isn't in football and definitely isn't in baseball. If it was, then the Yankees would win the World Series every year.

 

Rump? LOL! Anyway, there are other factors and I'm sure cord cutting/concussions/etc. are slightly responsible but to think that the anthem protests aren't the big kahuna would be delusional. I doubt we would even be having this ratings discussion here if it wasn't for the protests. Have you seen the emptiness of the stadiums? That sure as hell has nothing to do with cord cutting or concussions.

 

It's a Sony TV. They had a lot of 4K golf this summer -- some pretty cool looking fairways and greens

 

Agree. This is cognitive dissonance.

It's like if you are on a beach in Thailand and suddenly all the ocean water sucks out to sea. OK, maybe a whale took a big inhale but the reasonable man would consider the likelihood a tsunami is coming and immediately head for the hills.

 

I personally believe the Liberal insistence on heavily weighting the other factors beside the anthem protests is to buttress their freedom of speech argument. The idea that the protests are costing the business money must be downplayed because they know that a business has a right to protect it's interests in the face of employee activity that is harmful to the enterprise. This is common knowledge in the business world.

Just like it was common knowledge to those who do not think politically 24/7 that the saying, "The inmates are running the prison" was a George Bush type mispronounced old school colloquialism that has never had anything to do with race; it was merely his way of describing a world turned upside down.

 

I don't view these symbols as some living organism as aggy did "bonfire." Their misbehavior doesn't make me less American and it doesn't make them "more" American.

But that doesn't mean the disrespect isn't any less sincere and it speaks VOLUMES about the perspective these people have toward the very nation which provided them their RADICALLY unique opportunity ... even more unique than being a fighter pilot. (certainly pays more ... relevant or not)

These guys are part of an emotional spin-up. They've bought-in to a lie on multiple levels ... and they're using an inappropriate venue to exercise their right of free speech.

They made their choice ... I have too.

Sadly ... I have considered this may be part of the social engineering which is eradicating masculinity ... and a "manipulation" to destroy football. Seems to be working.

 

It's ignorance at it's highest level. Seriously, if the other saying "The tail is wagging the dog" must mean we are calling them dogs. Just flat out stupidity. But while we are talking about inmates, if the shoe fits.

The NFL has become a thug league. It started a while back. How the hell did Lawrence Phillips ever become a member of any Pro Football team even for one second? What other pro sports league as a whole disrespects our Flag and National Anthem? One player in Baseball (plays for the A's) did it and over the weekend he was arrested for pulling his gun on a girl delivering pizza to his place. That's Thuggery!

 

Last year was the start of the boycott, but on a smaller scale. So not surprising that happened. I'm a little surprised that happened in 2013. Do you know who was playing in that Monday night game in 2013? I'm guess for a while that it will be an every year occurrence until the kneeling stops. It will stop!

 

You're absolutely right, with strict rules of parity, New England is the best run organization hands down.

It's incredible how well they perform under these unbiased rules. Not taking a thing away from their post 2000 success.

I'll also point out under unrestricted free agency rules they weren't even in the conversation and rarely made the playoffs. With Belichick they'd still be a force in any system, but the competition would catch up without spending limits.

So yes, they are by far the best team under these rules that exceedingly magnify precise, monetarily restricted personnel decisions and coaching.

Bring in a luxury tax and even the Barry Switzer's of the world can win a title with a few extra hired gun Pro Bowlers joining an already playoff contending roster.

Dallas spends about 60/40 in their roster. 60% or so of cap is invested in offense. Bring in a luxury tax and the defense would match offensive spending quickly.

We can go round and round on this all day. Agree to disagree.

 

So according to your source, the World Series has beaten Sunday night football in head-to-head viewership for 3 of the last 5 years (2013, 2016, and 2017). Is all of that due to the kneeling, or just the last year?

It is clear that the kneeling issue is costing the league some amount of viewership and attendance. But you make it into way more than it is. Clearly the league thinks so, too, or they'd be putting an end to it, labor unrest be damned.

 

If cord cutting/concussions/etc. and all of these other excuses are heavily contributing to the ratings decline in the pros how come we're not seeing the same thing happen to college football? College ratings and attendance are doing fine. I'm sorry but half empty stadiums this year in the pros are not caused by cord cutting, okay? The owners are not going to stop this silliness because of the political ramifications involved. It's really that simple.

 

Half empty stadiums. Attendance is down slightly but there is also quite a bit of tumult with teams either in temporary digs or planning to move: Chargers, Rams and Raiders.

 

Something about the Patriots I do find to be an honest question...is Belichick really some unrivaled master OR is his dominance largely due to having the best QB to ever play the game?

In his other HC gig, Belichick was 36-44 in 5 seasons in Cleveland (1991-95). Just before his tenure, Cleveland had made the playoffs every year from 1985-89.

While they regressed to 3-13 the year before he arrived, Cleveland wasn't the perennial loser they are these days. Under BB they had one winning season and one playoff win.

Belichick was 5-11 in 2000 (first season in NE). The same year they drafted Brady and he sat the bench as a rookie.

Brady made his first start in the third game of 2001, taking the reigns of an 0-2 team. Which at that point made BB 5-13 in NE. Brady leads them to 14-3 the rest of the way and SB title.

In 2008, Brady goes down in the first quarter of Week 1. Pats end up 11-5 and miss the playoffs for first time since 2003.

It's worth mentioning they were 16-0 and barely lost the SB the year before. Meaning they had top level talent on hand when Brady went out. Brady returns in 2009 and they've been in the playoffs ever since.

One can make the case the vast majority of the Patriots success is due to the best QB who ever played the game. Belichick only has one playoff win without him in 6 seasons. I guess we'll know in a few years, but so far BB hasn't proven special without his legendary QB, quite the opposite.

 

That number is paid attendance. Wait until the season holders who are protesting don't buy their tickets next year. Do you watch pro football? Watch a game and look at the crowds. I've never seen anything like it before. If these other factors you guys keep bringing up are contributing so much to pro attendance/TV ratings explain to me why they are not affecting college football.

 

The most impressive aspect of Belicheck's run in New England is how the team has evolved into different styles without missing a beat. They went from a very run heavy team to a pass happy team to a defense focused team back to a pass happy team.

 

Wow...they are really bad. Clearly the player protests last year didn't stop the snowflakes from buying tickets this year.

 

Since ESPN subscriber loss is a common topic here I thought this might be of interest. Cable cutters are killing the sports networks. It's not just an ESPN phenomena.

 

My only thought with that factoid was how the Astros game was the most kick-*** World Series game in the history of all humanity. I hope and your two reflexive auto-likes were able to enjoy it.

Good grief. The league does not know what its doing. All it has managed to do to date is equivocate and trip over itself. You not only misjudged the audience but the effectiveness of the league response as well. That's the rare two-fer. I dont shock very easy at this age but the fact that you think the NFL is only casually concerned with declining TV ratings did shock me. Sometimes I wonder how you guys manage to get though the day all on your own.