NFL 2026-2027 Season

[Jimbo]

You're inventing things I've said now, just like the grievances you have with the NFL schedule.

If you stick to facts then you can simply refer back to them, if you make stuff up you have to pivot to name-calling and address literally nothing else in the post you are replying to. Perhaps it's time to reflect on which of those two things you're doing.

I have not Name Called any one.

I have an Opinion ... this is a site that is full of Opinions.

If I have to have Facts for your approval, thats not an opinion ...
If I have an Opinion that is not in your liking, I'm lying according to your post.

Me not liking NFL Games on 5-7 days a week because I believe it wil dilute the product .... I am not the only one ... I posted actual Players that think the same, but thats not Fact enough for you ?

Believe me, I am not the only person that doesn't like a watered down product.
I don't like the idea of an 18th game either, but it will probably get there ... and eventually several STAR players will get injured and unable to play, and Team that should be playing for it all won't be ... Owners have no idea when it comes to players getting injured, as they are not the ones playing.

21 games is WAY too much on the body.

While were at it, College Football will get to the point of over saturation too .... thay already complained the last few years because of Blow Outs in the 1st rounds (and some 2nd round) yet they want to ADD more teams to (double the number of teams) it now going to be what 5 MORE games to win after your Regular season ....

I'm thinking I won't be watching much in a few more years.

 

[rvvaquero]

When an NFL game is played on Sunday afternoon, it is generally a regional broadcast and/or is competing against another NFL game. The NFL is not stupid. They know that if they play that game on a weekday evening, it will get a national audience, thus more viewers. Even if a portion of their fans can't see it for one reason or another, they'll still have a larger audience. Viewers equals dollars.

 

[meStevo]

I have not Name Called any one.

You've done this type of thing to me for Years now ... it's called Trolling.

You forget already?

I have an Opinion ... this is a site that is full of Opinions.

Sure, except when you present an opinion as facts. You just don't like getting corrected / called out over it and then get all defensive and suddenly 'im doing this to you for years'.

Me not liking NFL Games on 5-7 days a week because I believe it wil dilute the product .... I am not the only one ... I posted actual Players that think the same, but thats not Fact enough for you ?

Belief doesn't make it true - as viewership has demonstrated. If it devalues it for you that's an opinion, absolutely.

As for you posting 'actual players that think the same' ... well yeah... I posted that interview days before you did and made the same point.

I don't like the idea of an 18th game either, but it will probably get there ... and eventually several STAR playerswill get injured and unable to play, and Team that should be playing for it all won't be ... Owners have no idea when it comes to players getting injured, as rthey are not the ones playing.

21 games is WAY too much on the body.

I made the 21 game point already, too.

Like I said, just so desperate to find reasons to complain about something.

 

[Yespage]

Myles Garrett named planet's happiest person.

The "forget those picks" era for the Rams hasn't ended. They made a massive trade for Cleveland Browns superstar defensive end Myles Garrett on Monday afternoon, sending a very good young defensive end in Jared Verse, a 2027 first-round pick, a 2028 second-round pick and a 2029 third-round pick to the Browns for the two-time NFL Defensive Player of the Year. It's one of the biggest and most stunning deals in NFL history.

As a reminder, the Browns gave up: Cleveland's 2022 first and fourth round selections, 2023 first and third round selections, and 2024 first and fourth round selections for the Deshaun Watson, an injury issued QB with talent.

Browns get three dare I say, relatively worthless picks and a good defensive player (in LA) in exchange for their best defensive player in franchise history and one of the best defensive players in the last couple of decades.

 

[meStevo]

AJ Brown trade to the Pats finally happened, and the Giants went on an aging-WR collecting spree signing WRs Berrios, Smith-Schuster and OBJ.

 

[Yespage]

OBJ still playa football? I can't wait for him to to return to free agency by Week 2.

For a position that is a magnet for head cases, he is the GOAT of those... the head cases. Dude might have been another Rice, Moss, Carter. Instead, he had a handful of really good seasons and then went sour and chunky like really really old milk. He reminds me of Mario Balotelli (the other football), who has insane amounts of pure talent. But... didn't completely work out to a solid career.

 

[meStevo]

With the prospect of Fox being priced out of / losing their Sunday NFL package, Murdoch appears to have successfully gotten Congress to consider changes to the NFL's antitrust exemption.

What's next in the Congressional scrutiny of the NFL's antitrust exemption?

Rupert Murdoch's power play against pro football culminated this week in a House Judiciary Committee hearing regarding the NFL's broadcast antitrust exemption.

www.nbcsports.com

Linked from that is their piece that sums up the situation:

Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal takes aim at NFL's antitrust exemption

In recent weeks, some politicians have questioned the current viability of the NFL's broadcast antitrust exemption.

www.nbcsports.com

For those who think the NFL doesn't need this anymore, this is largely what you're advocating for:​

​

The counter comes from the possibility that the current exemption doesn't apply to streaming. While that's a question that would be subject to litigation, a decision by Congress to strip the NFL of its broadcast antitrust exemption would make things much cleaner under the law — and much messier for the league.​

​

Competitive balance flows from the ability of the league to sell its TV rights in one bundle. Without it, each team would sell the rights to its home games to the highest bidder. Some (like the Cowboys) would get billions. Others (do we really need to name them?) would struggle for public-access scraps.​

​

Revenue sharing would implode, and at a minimum the league would fracture into the haves and haves-it-all.​

Does a middle ground somewhere exist? Doubtful, but we'll see how much of a mess this becomes.

 

[Mike0616]

With the prospect of Fox being priced out of / losing their Sunday NFL package, Murdoch appears to have successfully gotten Congress to consider changes to the NFL's antitrust exemption.

What's next in the Congressional scrutiny of the NFL's antitrust exemption?

Rupert Murdoch's power play against pro football culminated this week in a House Judiciary Committee hearing regarding the NFL's broadcast antitrust exemption.

www.nbcsports.com

Linked from that is their piece that sums up the situation:

Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal takes aim at NFL's antitrust exemption

In recent weeks, some politicians have questioned the current viability of the NFL's broadcast antitrust exemption.

www.nbcsports.com

For those who think the NFL doesn't need this anymore, this is largely what you're advocating for:

The counter comes from the possibility that the current exemption doesn't apply to streaming. While that's a question that would be subject to litigation, a decision by Congress to strip the NFL of its broadcast antitrust exemption would make things much cleaner under the law — and much messier for the league.

Competitive balance flows from the ability of the league to sell its TV rights in one bundle. Without it, each team would sell the rights to its home games to the highest bidder. Some (like the Cowboys) would get billions. Others (do we really need to name them?) would struggle for public-access scraps.

Revenue sharing would implode, and at a minimum the league would fracture into the haves and haves-it-all.​

Does a middle ground somewhere exist? Doubtful, but we'll see how much of a mess this becomes.

It's kind of difficult for me to feel sorry for a bunch of billionaires. Not sure the exemption was ever needed, really needed. Hopefully, after they take a look at this exemption they will take a look at the one the NCAA has.

 

[meStevo]

It's kind of difficult for me to feel sorry for a bunch of billionaires. Not sure the exemption was ever needed, really needed. Hopefully, after they take a look at this exemption they will take a look at the one the NCAA has.

I'll never feel sorry for any of them when it comes to money - but we will all be much worse off as far as being able to enjoy the resulting product if they just repeal it and say good luck.

 

[Jimbo]

With the expansion of NFL games to Every day of the week ...

Shouldn't the Sunday Ticket be reduced in price by at least 25% ...

 

[Yespage]

Isn't this when the market fights back? The value of Sunday games is less with fewer games. Fox can simply refuse to pay. That the broadcasters keep up'ing what they pay is on them!

 

[meStevo]

Isn't this when the market fights back? The value of Sunday games is less with fewer games. Fox can simply refuse to pay. That the broadcasters keep up'ing what they pay is on them!

Except they haven't priced out the market, the viewers are there and broadcasters are willing to pay. If Fox doesn't pay then the games will be elsewhere.

With the expansion of NFL games to Every day of the week ...

Shouldn't the Sunday Ticket be reduced in price by at least 25% ...

This doesn't make any sense.

 

[harshness]

This doesn't make any sense.

If a Sunday sport sees a significant percentage of its games move to days other than Sunday, shouldn't there be some consideration other than "we haven't raised the price"?

 

[meStevo]

If a Sunday sport sees a significant percentage of its games move to days other than Sunday, shouldn't there be some consideration other than "we haven't raised the price"?

It's a false premise, 25% of the games haven't left Sunday, and makes no effort to tie number of games to the price - for a sport that continues to grow / maintain it's popularity... which has helped justify increases to the package cost.

I'm all ears, I'd love to hear him justify suddenly cutting the price 25%, lol. Make it make sense. Just because a game moved from Monday to a Wednesday this year isn't it.

 

[Yespage]

It's a false premise, 25% of the games haven't left Sunday, and makes no effort to tie number of games to the price - for a sport that continues to grow / maintain it's popularity... which has helped justify increases to the package cost.

The game is not growing in the US. It is exceedingly popular, but it has hit the ceiling. Hence games on other continents where room for growth is much greater. So the NFL transmissions rates in the US increase like household fiber optic Internet costs increase... because they can.

And we are the ones who take the impact of it.

 

[meStevo]

The game is not growing in the US. It is exceedingly popular, but it has hit the ceiling. Hence games on other continents where room for growth is much greater. So the NFL transmissions rates in the US increase like household fiber optic Internet costs increase... because they can.

And we are the ones who take the impact of it.

Ok now demonstrate that with data. If it's hit the ceiling and not declining, then where is the justification for an arbitrary 25% decrease to NFLST based on the sentiment of game inventory changes, rather than actual data? Also, maintaining popularity and demand and expanding viewership overseas aren't mutually exclusive efforts.

Isn't this when the market fights back?

Coming back to this - there is 1 fewer game in the Sunday afternoon window compared to last year. 197 down from 198. If that's a bridge too far for some then then they should absolutely speak with their wallet. Speaking personally, we're probably passing on NFLST this year, depending on the deals available - life's just busier for us and we get what we want from Red Zone 95% of the time. While I don't support the arguments as presented, I'll admit the irony that my withdrawal will feed them.

 

[Yespage]

Ok now demonstrate that with data. If it's hit the ceiling and not declining, then where is the justification for an arbitrary 25% decrease to NFLST based on the sentiment of game inventory changes, rather than actual data? Also, maintaining popularity and demand and expanding viewership overseas aren't mutually exclusive efforts.

I'm not supporting an argument saying costs should go down any arbitrary amount. I'm saying the up'ing of the cost is getting a bit much and we, the actual consumer, are the ones who pay for it down the line.

This is the problem with "competition". It doesn't help the consumer in this case, it helps the *insert league*.

 

[meStevo]

I'm not supporting an argument saying costs should go down any arbitrary amount. I'm saying the up'ing of the cost is getting a bit much and we, the actual consumer, are the ones who pay for it down the line.

This is the problem with "competition". It doesn't help the consumer in this case, it helps the *insert league*.

Ok, but I'm not disagreeing with that. All I am saying is I'm not surprised they're getting more and more for their programming, and it makes sense to maximize the value while at it's most popular - with no signs of it waning.

In response we've gotten:
- The government should largely ruin the sport by repealing the antitrust exemption because billionaires are bad - ignoring the harm it would do to both players and fans
- Drop NFLST 25% because there's 1 less game on Sundays



Speaking of maximizing revenue, Fox picked up the rights to broadcast games in Mexico.

Analysts: Fox-Roku deal will 'embolden' NFL to negotiate new TV deals this year

The analysts at LightShed Partners predict the Fox acquisition of Roku will "embolden" the NFL to negotiate new TV deals this year.

awfulannouncing.com

 

[Yespage]

Ok, but I'm not disagreeing with that. All I am saying is I'm not surprised they're getting more and more for their programming, and it makes sense to maximize the value while at it's most popular - with no signs of it waning.

Well certainly, any product producer is going to want more money and the NFL is the franchise for programming.

And I'm quite happy they have NFL+ which allows me to watch every game commercial free and in less than an hour. I have to wait for the game to end, but that is an easy cost to absorb.

What I find odd is that I felt the whole pay a large amount for exclusive rights was a source of our higher cost. But now the NFL is diversifying the product, providing access to more services... making it more pricey for us. Networks and services are paying high premiums for splintered NFL content.

 

[meStevo]

NFL confirms no supplemental draft this year, stranding the gambler from Texas Tech, he'll likely have to wait until next year's proper draft after losing his NCAA eligibility and the NFL denying his 11th hour application for the supplemental draft.

No 2026 supplemental draft; Brendan Sorsby's NFL path paused

The NFL has decided not to hold a supplemental draft this year, effectively halting Texas Tech quarterback Brendan Sorsby's path to the league this season.

www.espn.com