This weekend NFL fans saw Brady, Ben R., Rodgers and Ryan take their teams to the finals. They are all over 30, except Rodgers not very fast on their feet yet they have lasted all this time because the league has become so QB centric that there is no way to win without a top, top signal caller. You used to have a chance with defense but the rules are so QB friendly that it has ruined the game at least for me. Oakland lost their QB and were defeated by a mediocre teams with a C- QB. Fantasy football has won. Big yardage and TD's are all that matters. Maybe this a one of the reasons for declining ratings.
You may be right about why the ratings are declining. I disagree about the rest. I didn't get to see it because I had a party I had to go to, but I heard that the GB-Dallas game was very exciting. I watched most of the KC-Pittsburgh game, and it was exciting at the end. The Steelers have Rothlisberger and all they could muster was FGs. KC only has Alex Smith, but if not for several drops by Kelce and a bonehead hold, KC would have won. I'd much rather watch games with lots of scoring than 6-3 games where the defense rules. At least offense is exciting. Defense can often be flat out boring.
I agree about it being more fun to see more points. Wishful thinking that KC was close to winning that game - KC was never in the drivers seat in that game. I think the Steelers would have scored more if they had to. They knew they could play it closer to the vest because KC isn't explosive. They won the game because Big Ben and Antonio Brown are elite. Thank God it's Pittsburgh going to New England and not KC.
It may be more far-sighted than just fantasy football winning. We (just about everybody except the Jets), have been enjoying a golden-era of QBs. As you mention, many of the league's elite QBs are aging. College football is not putting out pro-ready QBs. Unless we get another couple of 2004-esque QB drafts, one or more of a few things will need happen: 1) Rules continue to get more QB friendly to mask the talent-poor nature of NFL QBs. 2) Teams go back to the old way of spending a few years to develop QBs themselves. 3) We enter a cycle where despite QB friendly rules, the game is dominated by run-first and defense oriented style of play. Within 3 years, we'll probably see Brady, Brees, Romo & Palmer retired. Within 5 years, Manning, Rivers, Roethlisberger and Cutler will most likely all be heading for retirement. Given that Romo & Cutler will likely find a starting gig somewhere, that's 25% of the league's starting QBs being within 5 years of retirement, including 3 of the league's top 5 QBs.
Both games yesterday were entertaining for a change. I watched at my sister's place because the nephews needed somebody to eat wings with them and take up the best seat on the couch. Was a blast.
yep - its all about the QB - have a top tier QB and you will pretty much always be competitive - don't have one and you are just treading water - the way the Jets have pretty much for the last 40 years - trouble is that there is only ever a handful of people that are capable of playing the game and if you don't have one its going to be a long tough season with nothing to show at the end of it.
The NFL is nowhere near the product it used to be. The ratings will continue to decline as long as Goodell and his stooges in the league offices continue to show the favoritism towards the franchises owned by his buddies and the rules continue to be tweaked to allow the small handful of quality QBs to do whatever they want while the rest of the QBs have to play by a different set of rules. I've been an NFL fan as long as I can remember, but I'm getting close to giving it up. The greed and corruption of the league is starting to send it into a downward spiral that I don't think it can recover from.
Some of the best football games I've ever seen ended with scores like 10-3 or 3-0. I get that some large portion of the world wants to see teams put up 60 points every game, but I'm not one of them. I feel like back in the day there was a lot more excitement from every pass because every pass was high risk. Generally every series was 1st down run, 2nd down run, 3rd and short run or 3rd and long pass. And when a team did pass, there was a good chance of a sack, a good chance of an interception, and a near certainty that the receiver was going to either score or get crushed into another plane of existence. I played LB in high school. I love defense. When my friends started following college teams, I found them boring. I liked the NFL better because the defenses were better. Another place where I may be in a minority is that I just enjoy watching a good running attack more than a passing attack. Perhaps I just got tired of Jim Kelly, Dan Marino, and Tom Brady roasting the Jets? No QB, not even Namath, is as fun for me to watch as Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, Earl Campbell, John Riggins, Eric Dickerson, Tony Dorsett, or Bo Jackson. Maybe I've just grown old, but I know there was a time I could have a blast watching any NFL game between any two teams any week of the season. Now I pay more attention to funny TGG posters than I do to the guys playing pitch and catch on the field. I don't feel like there is ever any risk on the field, because any team could suddenly put 28 on the board in 45 seconds these days. I don't feel like it's a game of inches anymore, just a game of seconds until time runs out. YMMV.
Ratings were great this weekend. As long as Goodell ensures the most popular franchises (GB, DAL, PIT, NYG, and NE) are competitive he will be fine.
great points and insight. i agree in that i love to watch tightly contested defensive games, i love to watch a running game that just pounds anotehr team into submission. i had never thought about the game of inches no longer being valid and that its more of a game of seconds until the time runs out.
this article says that the ratings overall were down 3 percent, even with the packers vs cowboys having the highest div round ratings in 20 years. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/01/16/divisional-round-ratings-down-three-percent/
I disagree. Kelce dropped a pass at the 7 yard line and he had a step or two on the defender. If he hadn't scored on the play, I think KC would have scored within a down or two as they had momentum. Then KC marched down the field again to score their 2nd TD. They would have had 3 TDs (21 points) to Pittsburgh's 18. Pittsburgh could move between the 30 yard lines but no further. They never came close to scoring a TD in the 2nd half.
Problem for me is to watch similar(same) teams in the playoffs year after year. Since I moved to USA in 2014, AFC has been represented by a team featuring Manning, Brady or Roethlisberger with the exception of 1 year with Flacco. Next weekend I will watch Falcons-Packers game but I don't think I will care to watch Brady-Roethlisberger again.
Doesn't make sense. How did Carr go out? With a big hit. Roethlisberger is constantly getting hit and injured. Brady gets hit all the time but he's tough and plays when injured. Wasn't Namath the reason the Jets won all those years ago? Sure, you've got to have a quarterback, because you have to have an offense. Was the game so different when Montana was going to all those playoff games and superbowls all those years ago? Gosh, wouldn't it be nice to have a great QB. Ron
I think you meant 2004. Yeah I saw that stat today. In 12 out of the last 13 Super Bowls, the AFC quarterback has been Peyton Maning, Tom Brady or Ben Rothlesberger. Flacco was indeed the only other one. That's crazy. Out of 16 starting QB's, those three return, year after year. I can't think of another position in a team sport that is more influential on a teams success. That's why you pick a QB in the draft year after year, and carry 4 if needed. Sooner or later, you are going to find a good one.
I had the good fortune to watch Joe Namath. He was wonderful even playing against the bump and run and head slapping defensive lineman. What he could have done against defenses with these limitations is unimaginable.
A 6 to 8 team D league equivalent would do wonders for QB development. Not a hyper-scoring, talent-limited version like the NBA has, but a true developmental league that allows for a one to two year cushion for college QBs to learn NFL-style offensive fundamentals. Of course that will never happen in a million years, because why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free.
No reason to watch.. Knew Pats and Steelers were going thru. Not watching next week either. Not even about being a jets fan..I'd gladly watch other teams but it's gotten to the point I don't even care anymore. Atlanta is the only hope for something new.
Feel the same. I watch every Jets game but every season i only watch the playoffs if are in it and the Superbowl if there is a chance of a newcomer winning it. So like you I hope Atlanta win it. Although you know its going to be New England Again. We have been waiting so long for a top tier QB it burns to see Green Bay go from Favre to Aaron Rodgers. Life. Its just not fair.
