Snake

If Wilks gets embarrassed this game no way he gets the job. 

Just now, Brooklyn 3.0 said:

Probably a lot of the big talkers aren't posting because they're pacing their livingroom right now since this trash team can still make the Playoffs.

This is what we do every year. Piss away draft position and lose important games. 

A TD here would be a killer. 

We are getting completely out coached right now. Not good. 

I have a feeling DJ will play. 

Get the f off the Vikings field. 

Well I guess you can't blame Shanahan and Quinn for Ryan's massive choke. He's done made history twice.

31 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

If you make the most money (most game purchases) then you deserve the most revenue from the league.

Would force teams to try to get more fans, build better teams, and have better outreach and marketing.

I like competition, even at the owner level.

My point is that Dallas and Pitt games are almost always televised. All I know is with fantasy a bunch of games that have low viewership could become much more profitable. It's just that 70 year old Boomers think they have something very special and they don't. It's why viewership is down. 

11 minutes ago, amcoolio said:

Nope, I live in the Charlotte market and have to pay CBS to get the panthers game if it’s on CBS. 
 

The NFL is mentally challenged. Everyone involved in the commissioner office needs to be replaced. 
 

Apple wanting zero restrictions, no blackouts and a cheaper entry point to gain more viewers and the NFL says “no thanks to your 3.5 billion dollars, we want to make sure poor fans can’t watch games if they can’t go to the game”…. Really makes you question what the fug these people are doing 

The NFL has always been greedy. I'm pretty sure they make Bars pay by the seat if they want NFL Sunday ticket. It's absolutely ridiculous and it's why viewership is down. 

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I just wonder how long it'll keep flowing? It's all about the TV contracts and the viewership numbers have to be completely atrocious.

Most of the time longer than they should. 

9 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

They gotta get rid of at least half the bowls. They have to bring back the pride of bowl eligibility. With everyone who isn't completely atrocious going to a bowl nowadays it just doesn't matter and that's why you have draft bound kids sitting out left and right. You don't see them sitting out of playoff games. Meanwhile, most of these poo tier bowls have the attendance of a local HS game.

They love that money though. They don't care much as long as the revenue keeps flowing. 

3 minutes ago, Cullenator said:

The problem with streaming from those other sites is that I dont want to watch the game on a 15 inch screen.  I paid good money for that 60ish inch screen and Ill watch redzone there before my wife and I huddle around my 15" laptop monitor.

 

Id buy the whole season, all 32 teams as long as I didnt also have to subscribe to an entire provider at the same time.  Apple TV would have been great but Amazon isnt a horrible alternative.

I watch my pirate games from my 60". I just use the web browser. It's still extremely annoying though. 

1 hour ago, thefuzz said:

IMO, this would be the best option.

Cowboys bring in 9% of league revenue, thats how much they get paid out at the end of the year.  Salary cap would remain the same league wide, with spending minimums as well.

What it would ultimately do is incentivize (force) the shitty owners to do better.  The more you win, the more eyeballs (game by game subscriptions) would be on your product.

Pump out the Texans this year, or us over the past two...and the owners start to feel it in the wallet.  The way it is now is too socialistic for my taste.

Your idea is flawed in that the Cowboys are rarely a winning team. No matter how much they win or lose the Cowboys and Steelers make up most of the popularity in the NFL. I doesn't matter if the Browns have 3 winning seasons they will never be as popular as Dal or Pitt. The only way to really get people watching other teams is fantasy football or sports betting. Something I wish NC would do but they still have this weird situation where the government is pro LGBTQ+ yet also pro Bible Belt. And the Bible thumpers don't want to allow drinking and gambling. 

Very much a Rivera Philly zone approach to the defense. 

10 hours ago, Gerry Green said:

NFL+ on the NFL APP is only 10 bucks. You can watch every game, once it is over that is. It has every game going back to 07 I think. 

 

It has full game replays, condescends replays, and All22. 

 

You're welcome.

No one wants to watch replays. This isn't what this thread is even about. 

33 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

In theory, sure. In reality I'm not so sure. Simply because it would be a huge spotlight on the massive discrepancy in consumer demand between the teams and on turn, the massive discrepancy in revenue being driven for the league by team. Ultimately, I could see that leading to an argument by the owners of the more popular teams to have that discrepancy reflected in terms of the salary cap. I mean, from a business perspective it would make a ton of sense. If you're driving more revenue you should get a larger operating budget and the overall interest of the league is probably best served by the loft popular teams having a real competitive advantage. From a fan perspective that sucks. 

 

Well with that in mind most extremely popular teams take up the primetime slots anyway so they already expose those teams in the way you say. Most people now want to watch other less popular games for fantasy reasons or betting. So honestly less popular teams could bring in more revenue on a per week bases by not blacking them out. It's the networks that get screwed in that scenario because to be able to do that it needs to be on the NFL app in one place. A pay per view subscription every week would be massively popular. There's no doubt about that. 

10 hours ago, PanthersATL said:

Direcztv is already out of the consumer conversation, although they may still try to negotiate a continuation for the sports bar business.

I’d like a team-by-team subscription rather than pay for individual games or picking the whole package.  
 

if the only option is buying the whole package, it’s still cheaper to view/eat/drink at home than it is going to a sports bar and eating/drinking there.

But if the choice is between YouTube and Amazon Prime….. I think more people would would rather  go through Amazon than through Google.

I don't think I know anyone under the age of 40 that has a DirecTV subscription. It's a boomer thing and the future is al la carte. Both the NFL and broadcasters should come to a understanding and make it happen because the only loyal group the NFL has is the boomers and they are retiring and dying. 

2 hours ago, mav1234 said:

Your first post said "[Wilks] has zero knowledge of offensive football." Then it was "Ok, he knows a little, but McAdoo knows more." Then it was, "The reason Wilks has had any success is because of McAdoo and Holcomb. [Wilks isn't some] ultra multitasking HC." I never said he was ... multitasking as an OC, or knew more than the OC, or whatever. My point in every post has been this: Wilks knows more than "zero" about an NFL offense. As is the cast for most HCs, he likely has a vision that he works with his coordinators to implement.

You're the one that called me an idiot and whatever else just for replying to you.  I clearly struck a nerve, which is pretty funny, given I've never had a problem admitting when I was wrong here before.  I wouldn't now.  I agree - and always have - that Wilks is going to need a good OC to have any sustained success.  Doesn't mean I agree he "has zero knowledge of offensive football."

My first post said he didn't know anything about offense. Then I explained what I ment as in he only understands the defensive side. You're the retard who's trying to defend this post by saying he's well rounded yet his majority of the time has been spent as a DB coach not even a DC. A title he's only had one year! But he's so well rounded guys. He's gained all this knowledge of offense by being a DB coach for 20 years. Trust me guys this isn't McAdoo this is Wilks system. He knows offense guys. Yeah that's you my dude. You are arguing that a DB coach knows more than McAdoo. A guy who's spent his entire career on the offensive side of the ball. Now be gone repeatedly saying the same thing over and over again like it's going to make it correct. Wilks knows DBs not the offensive side of the ball. The end 

1 minute ago, panthers55 said:

McAdoo said the offensive philosophy and vision came from Wilkes. His job was getting the players ready to execute it each week gameplanning and coaching.

Or was it just them working together. I mean he didn't really do this well in AZ. Either way it's working right now. 

Well York County got more money then they ever had. 

1 hour ago, joemac said:

Sunday is the biggest game this team has played in YEARS.  If we win, and the Bengals beat Tampa, we will be in first place in the NFC South.  Its amazing to even be in this situation after how utterly pathetic this team was under Rhule, and after trading away one of the best playmakers in the league, your WR2, and your opening day starting QB.  poo like this just does not happen in the NFL. God, I hope we win.  By Sunday evening we could be in first place and in a playoff slot. 

Your prob right and that's kinda sad really. 

3 hours ago, mav1234 said:

Snake arguing with himself, in three posts:

"[Wilks] has zero knowledge of offensive football."

"He may have some understanding of offenses"

"You idiot don't you read posts he's not some mastermind!"

What's so funny about this is if your stance is, "he knows about NFL offenses but not enough to run an offense and needs an OC to do that," we agree!  I just disagreed with your initial *unqualified* statement that he has zero knowledge of offensive football.

But I like I struck a nerve and now I understand the bag wearing a bit better.

Edit: and having a coordinator doesn't mean "zero knowledge" either.

Dude you're a and trying to gaslight your way out of it. Pretty pathetic my dude. 

We have a good chance the Bucs are going to get dominated this Sunday. The Bengals are just on another level. 

2 hours ago, grimesgoat said:

This is not an easy schedule for us. 

While this schedule probably wouldn't frighten KC or Buffaloe, I think there are serious challenges ahead.  It would be a significant accomplishment to win out...

• We'd have to beat Pittsburgh, a nemesis that has bitch-slapped us for years.
• We'd have to beat Detroit - a red hot team who has won 5 of 6 and in the playoff hunt.
• We'd have to beat TB at their place with the playoffs probably on the line.  In two games last year they beat us 32-6 and 41-17.  
• We'd have to beat NO at their place.  These games are almost always close.  I guarantee they will pull out all the stops to spoil the party.  

 

Nothing is for certain but those teams are either below 500 or barley above it. No it's not a cake walk but it's not a really hard schedule either.