I was mildly surprised when I saw that we were flexed into the SNF game for this week. I'd totally forgotten that FOX and CBS each get to protect one game from being flexed. Given the teams involved and rating they bring with them, it's pretty simple to understand.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/believe-49 ... --nfl.html

When networks stated their desires for this week's flex scheduling, FOX protected the New York Giants (8-6) and Baltimore Ravens (9-5), CBS kept a grip on the Cincinnati Bengals (8-6) and Steelers (7-7). So that left NBC, still tentatively holding the San Diego Chargers (5-9) and New York Jets (6-8). They dropped the Chargers-Jets for a chance to venture into the relatively unexplored NFL region of the Pacific Northwest.

Might not work out for NBC as well ratings wise as if they had NY or the Steelers. But they're going to get the best game of the lot.

Interesting. I'd be willing to bet ours ends up being the best game out of the three though.

I think we still would've been the first choice even if those games weren't protected.

And anyways, where in that article does it say that we weren't the first choice? Other networks just protected their games, that's it. Doesn't guarantee that Seattle wouldn't have been picked.

Understandable.

Even though IMO the Hawks vs. Niners game is far more exciting than either of those two, it's not hard to understand Fox and CBS wanting to protect the NY market game and CBS wanting to protect a game with big playoff implications.

I think both teams are better than any of those teams.

What's funny is every article I've read has ours as the game of the week to watch, this week.

RolandDeschain wrote:What's funny is every article I've read has ours as the game of the week to watch, this week.

For sure. But don't confuse football fans & analysts with network TV execs. Only one things TV execs care about. Ratings and $.

Playoff implication games involving Giants & Steelers? Not to mention against teams also fighting for playoffs? Trust me, those games would get bigger ratings than SEA-SF. Just the way it is. Not a slight against our team or the West Coast. Just the way it is. Exactly the same reason ESPN would rather cover the Jets losing over any Seattle win. RATINGS.

SeaTown81 wrote: Exactly the same reason ESPN would rather cover the Jets losing over any Seattle win. RATINGS.

Every week it's the same thing.

1. Get all excited after a big Hawk win.
2. Turn on TV and radio Sunday night and Monday morning hoping for some Hawk love.
3. Watch people argue over the demise of the Cowboys and Jets for 30 minutes before getting to any of the other games or players.

Even Cowherd brought it up yesterday on his show when on of the SportsNation questions was about Tebow, and he said "who cares? when in the history of the NFL has there ever been a backup QB that got this much airtime?" Great point, and checkmate on media whoring for ratings.

SeaTown81 wrote:I was mildly surprised when I saw that we were flexed into the SNF game for this week. I'd totally forgotten that FOX and CBS each get to protect one game from being flexed. Given the teams involved and rating they bring with them, it's pretty simple to understand.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/believe-49 ... --nfl.html

When networks stated their desires for this week's flex scheduling, FOX protected the New York Giants (8-6) and Baltimore Ravens (9-5), CBS kept a grip on the Cincinnati Bengals (8-6) and Steelers (7-7). So that left NBC, still tentatively holding the San Diego Chargers (5-9) and New York Jets (6-8). They dropped the Chargers-Jets for a chance to venture into the relatively unexplored NFL region of the Pacific Northwest.

Might not work out for NBC as well ratings wise as if they had NY or the Steelers. But they're going to get the best game of the lot.

This just isn't true. At least not when it counted. 2 weeks before they were to decide, I'd read from a Giants reporter that FOX had protected that game already, so I believe the networks choose their protections before NBC chooses their games. In other words, NBC knows which games it can't select, therefor, they never tried to select those protected games. Might NBC have wanted a different game? Perhaps, but the didn't submit any request for the Giants game as they already knew ahead of time it was protected.

Kidhawk, nobody is saying NBC didn't want it. They never had a chance to get the other games, as they were protected by the other networks. But TV networks are TV networks. They all want the same thing. The most people watching their channel as possible.

CBS and FOX didn't use some crazy different reasoning for protecting those games that NBC wouldn't have. Ratings are the only thing they care about. They use data and numbers that tell them the average # they'll get with what team. Then combine it with importance of game.

Both the NYG/BAL and PIT/CIN games involve bigger draw teams PLUS have larger playoff implications. All four teams in those games are currently fighting for their playoff lives. We are as well, but SF has already clinched. All at stake is seeding for them. Factor that in with the simple fact that the national sports consciousness is infinitely more aware of NY and PIT (and the importance of their games), it's a super easy call.

NBC would much rather have either of those games. And I would as well if I was running a television network and cared about doing my job.

Sgt. Largent wrote:Even Cowherd brought it up yesterday on his show when on of the SportsNation questions was about Tebow, and he said "who cares? when in the history of the NFL has there ever been a backup QB that got this much airtime?"

Matt Flynn coulda given him a run for his money.

I dont know what you guys are watching, but the Seahawks have been getting plenty of National Love this week. Every day this week they've been a topic of discussion on NFL Live, Around the Horn, and PTI.

Mark Schelerth, Jaws, and Wilbon are all completely sold on Seattle at this current moment.

And I still believe this would have been NBCs first choice. Also dont underestimate SFs fanbase. Its big Nationally. Not to mention Russell Wilson is starting to turn into a household name as well as Two Top NFC teams battling it out.

SeaTown81 wrote:Kidhawk, nobody is saying NBC didn't want it. They never had a chance to get the other games, as they were protected by the other networks. But TV networks are TV networks. They all want the same thing. The most people watching their channel as possible.

CBS and FOX didn't use some crazy different reasoning for protecting those games that NBC wouldn't have. Ratings are the only thing they care about. They use data and numbers that tell them the average # they'll get with what team. Then combine it with importance of game.

Both the NYG/BAL and PIT/CIN games involve bigger draw teams PLUS have larger playoff implications. All four teams in those games are currently fighting for their playoff lives. We are as well, but SF has already clinched. All at stake is seeding for them. Factor that in with the simple fact that the national sports consciousness is infinitely more aware of NY and PIT (and the importance of their games), it's a super easy call.

NBC would much rather have either of those games. And I would as well if I was running a television network and cared about doing my job.

The difference though, is that when I saw those games were protected, Seattle and the Niners weren't as interesting a matchup as they were when the decision had to be made, and when the decision had to be made, the Niner/Seahawks game had the biggest implication possibilities of them all. A GB loss to the Bears and a Niner loss to the Patriots put the #2 seed on the line and a division title.. Would NBC have chosen a different game? We don't know this. To day they would have chosen a different game when that wasn't an option is just guessing and sounds really whiney. Really, NBC may have chosen our game if no games were protected. That's as much a fact as the OP's statement.

I think everyone ell be watching. The nation is pumped.