NBC/NFL waste flex scheduling on Favre's finale.

[adios]

I have no argument about there being a good chance that the game is meaningless. I just think the good chance that this very well could be a meaningless game takes a back seat to ratings for the game with the NBC.

[TheNoodleMan]

[ QUOTE ]
I have no argument about there being a good chance that the game is meaningless. I just think the good chance that this very well could be a meaningless game takes a back seat to ratings for the game with the NBC.

[/ QUOTE ]
As a football fan, I will not be watching the Sunday night game if its meaningless. I don't care about Favre playing his last game. I have seen him hundreds of times. Watching him play against the bears 3rd stringers after a day of watching meaningful games is exactly the kind of thing that should drive ratings down.

[pirateboy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If GB wins and NYG loses, GB only needs ONE of the following:

A STL loss, a ATL win, OR a CAR win.

[/ QUOTE ]



This isn't correct I'm pretty sure.

They need all of those things to happen to make the playoffs. Not just one.
GB has virtually no chance. And NYG is practically in a position where they are in if they win.

Jared's thread on the playoff possibilities addresses this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just read his post and his cliff's notes. I am correct. If NYG loses and GB wins, they only need either Atlanta or Carolina to win or St. Louis to lose.
EDIT: I got them backwards in the original post here. Still, only 1 has to happen.

[pirateboy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I hope someone mentioned ratings in this thread. Bears being popular and Favre's possible last game might mean higher ratings than other possible games.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand what you are saying but Flex Scheudling was supposed to get rid of meaningless games. Wasn't it like 2 or 3 years ago that the Packers played a team that they were 100% going to face the very next week in the playoffs? And didn't Favre only play the first series and then the game turned into a preseason game?

If the Giants win on Sunday, the game pretty much becomes meaningless. Bears would have clinched and it will take pretty much a mathematical error for the Packers to get in. I don't see how this will bring in ratings. Especially considering the "drama" that Favre caused last year I'm not sure the sentiment will be there to sit down and watch his last game.

[/ QUOTE ]

A) NYG beating Washington is nowhere near a likelihood.

B) The scheduling had to be decided now, not Saturday night after the Giants game.

Thus

C) When scheduled, this game is far from meaningless.

and

D) If NYG loses, this game becomes the most important game of the day, between bitter rivals, PLUS it could be Favre's last game.

[Needle77]

Games that I would much rather watch:

Patriots @ Titans
Pitt @ Cincy
Falcons @ Eagles
Jaguars @ Kansas City
and depending on the Patriots game Dolphins @ Colts just to figure out the AFC matchups.

I'm sorry the 6th seed in the NFC is meaningless to me and I'm sure the majority of the country. We are talking about an 8-8 team making it into the playoffs. And yes Giants could lose but a win by them makes it completely pointless. At least the Patriots/Colts have implications on seedings.

I know Pitt/Cincy and Jags/KC are not for playoffs sports, well sort of, but I'm sure they will be hard fought games, especially Pitt vs Cincy. They would be fun to watch, if for nothing else all their starters will be playing. Bears could sit their whole team, thats fun?

I'm sorry, it was a terrible deicison on the league to put that game on.

[Jeff W]

[ QUOTE ]
You know what he is getting at. That at this point Farve does not care about the packers, he cares about a TD record and the future of the pack be damned.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know what he's getting at, but it's bull [censored]. If Favre is hurting the Packers, then it's up to them to cut him. Favre's responsibility is to himself. Selflessness is just cleverly disguised selfishness.

[MoreWineII]

I'm not sure what you are even arguing about, but I stand by my statement that it's kind of sad that Favre would hang on solely for money or records when he clearly is not as good as he expects to be.

Does that make him evil? No, and I never said that.

[Jeff W]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure what you are even arguing about, but I stand by my statement that it's kind of sad that Favre would hang on solely for money or records when he clearly is not as good as he expects to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not sad. The guy just wants to do something he loves and has been doing for over 20 years. How do you know he's doing it for money or records, and if he is, wtf business is it of yours anyway? If he's hurting the Packers, then they should get rid of him and if they don't have the balls to, blame them and not Favre.

[TheNoodleMan]

Favre will hold these records for what, five-six years before Peyton takes them?

[boc4life]

[ QUOTE ]

I understand what you are saying but Flex Scheudling was supposed to get rid of meaningless games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong. It was supposed to increase ratings, as mentioned earlier in the thread. Meaningful games = Increased ratings

If the Giants win on Saturday, all NFC games are rendered meaningless, except for seeding purposes. Seeding purposes are not going to increase any ratings. If the Jets and Broncos win on Sunday, all other AFC games are meaningless. I'm sure we've all seen enough of Denver, and the Jets are playing Oakland, which should also be a pretty boring game to America

Like it or not, Brett Favre's potential last game will increase ratings, and the game has a somewhat decent chance to have playoff implications. Just as much a chance of having playoff implications as Cincy-Pittsburgh or Kansas City-Jacksonville.

The NFL absolutely made the correct decision here, and I don't know how you can really argue against this