trents wrote:MLB, NBA, NCAA and NHL have all canceled their events for an unknown amount of time. There is nothing, absolutely nothing to turn the TV on for now. I might have to resort to watching Hallmark with my wife. This is all so very primitive.
I bet advertisers are biting their fingernails
RiverDog wrote:The XFL has cancelled the rest of their season:
https://www.si.com/.amp/xfl/2020/03/12/ ... 020-season
Sucks for them as they seemed to be off to such a good start, at least in this area.
NorthHawk wrote:Maybe I'm stupid, but I don't see why they can't conduct Free Agency like they did but without travel.
It's not like they don't know who the players are, and they could put a caveat in the contract offer for
medical approval. It can all be done online using PDFs much like some remote Real Estate contracts
are done.
The only downfall would be not to be able to trot out the newly signed player, but I think most fans
won't mind if that's delayed until the season (and life) gets back on track.
trents wrote:The Corona outbreak is already subsiding in China. If we can trust what we hear from them, that is. My guess is it will have done the same in Europe and North America by April 23 and most of the current bans on travel and large gatherings will be lifted by then.
trents wrote:What's amazing it me is the scale of the reaction to this thing given the fact that on average, more people die from the flu every year than have died from Covid 19 to this point. I think Senator Lindsey Graham offered a good analogy when he compared the reaction to the Covid 19 phenomenon to the press an airplane crash gets as opposed to deaths from motor vehicle accidents which are scattered here and there over time but are a much larger total.
RiverDog wrote:It looks like the NFL is preparing for an unusual season:
While still publicly committed to kicking off its 2020 season in September to packed stadiums, the NFL has been planning for contingencies that include a potentially shortened schedule and holding games in empty or partially filled stadiums, two people familiar with the league’s planning said Wednesday.
The person familiar with the NFL’s planning made the point that “the other leagues have to go first,” referring to MLB, the NBA and the NHL. The league could have to deal with ongoing lockdowns or stay-at-home orders in some states — with some local government officials already warning that a too-soon return of sports could have catastrophic ramifications.
The NFL’s schedule for the 2020 regular season is expected to be released around May 9 and will account for the possibility of games being lost by a delayed start.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/nf ... spartanntp
mykc14 wrote:Hopefully it doesn’t come to this but it certainly is prudent for the NFL to be preparing for the worst. The NFL is in a good position. They get to see how MLB and the NBA deal with this first. They can learn from what works/doesn’t work for those leagues. They also have the most important factor in their favor and that is time!
Are owners going to ask that players share in the decline of revenue or are the franchises going to absorb all the losses themselves?
Are owners going to ask that players share in the decline of revenue or are the franchises going to absorb all the losses themselves?
MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:Not just this specifically, but all businesses: Why shouldn't the owners have an emergency fund (you know, 6 months like they say you and I should have) to be ready for emergencies like this?
Shirley they have made enough money over the years to float themselves at a time like this.
c_hawkbob wrote:As the CBA divides up the pie that is total profits between players and owners, of course both sides will share in the losses as the whole pie will have shrunk. As for owners profits that they chose to disinclude from the CBA, as far as I'm concerned that's totally on them. If they wanted a sharing of the losses they should have included those things in the sharing of the profits.
NorthHawk wrote:I'm not sure that the Cap would change - at least this year because the contracts have been signed and cutting players to get under the Cap
would result in payments for the remainders of the contracts. That would necessarily mean more money out this year.
I think the owners might just have to take less in profits.
NorthHawk wrote:But the contracts are per season, not per game therefor they have to be fulfilled.
c_hawkbob wrote:Those contracts are paid out in game checks predicated on a 17 game season, fewer games = fewer game checks, everybody shares the hit.
c_hawkbob wrote:Those contracts are paid out in game checks predicated on a 17 game season, fewer games = fewer game checks, everybody shares the hit.
RiverDog wrote:I can understand that logic if it were just a matter of fewer games. But if the revenue from those games is substantially less, say all games are played before empty stands, my assumption is that the owners would have to pay all the contracts in full and take the hit.
And consequently, the TV networks would have to absorb any loss in advertising revenue if it fell off as they, too, have a contract to fulfill with the NFL.
Is that how you guys see it?
c_hawkbob wrote:As far as revenue per game yes, but I still say few games will equal fewer game checks. Stadium revenue losses will probably be calculated into the next season's salary cap. I'd think the TV audience would increase if anything.
I wouldn't assume that TV audiences will remain the same or increase.
RiverDog wrote:I wouldn't assume that TV audiences will remain the same or increase.
c_hawkbob wrote:OK, then we disagree, especially if there is still a significant portion of the population sheltering in place. Kind of the definition of a captive audience ... and if not, it will represent the 'return to normalcy' that so many are craving.
Aseahawkfan wrote:I think it would be interesting to watch sports played with no crowd noise. It won't be as fun, but it will be interesting. It will basically be talent on talent, no real help from noise. There would be almost no excuse for penalties. We might even be able to hear the players jawing, which would probably be amusing.
Aseahawkfan wrote:I think it would be interesting to watch sports played with no crowd noise. It won't be as fun, but it will be interesting. It will basically be talent on talent, no real help from noise. There would be almost no excuse for penalties. We might even be able to hear the players jawing, which would probably be amusing.
Oly wrote:I don't know how many other soccer fans are on the board, but I watched a Champion's League match played in an empty stadium, and it was deeply weird. The novelty and interest ran out quickly. It was hard to get excited about anything that was happening and I ended up tuning out early in the 2nd half. Even with nowhere else to go, I can't see myself watching as much sports as I would with fans there.
trents wrote:They could always pipe in canned crowd noise like they used to pipe in canned audience laughter in older sitcoms.
NorthHawk wrote:They could pump in generic cheering but not have increased volume when something good happened as RD said. It would just be background noise. It would also bring back the narrative that some teams pump noise in anyway and that would
be another debate.
Users browsing this forum: Oly and 38 guests