Goodell likes the changes, and TV viewers like watching it. Andrew Brandt
It’s certainly the time of year to bash the NFL Pro Bowl. The comments from fans and media are largely one-sided against the value of playing the game at all. Of course, this year the volume of negativity is turned up because of the decision to hold the game before the Super Bowl, meaning 14 Super Bowl players can’t participate along with the scores of “medically excused” players. As a result, there are 31 players participating in the game – almost a full active game-day roster – who were not elected to the Pro Bowl on the original ballot as starters or backups. That’s a lot of players.
And, of course, the decision to require the Colts and Saints players to come to Miami in advance of their team arrivals to participate in pregame introductions and media interviews has not gone without major complaint. One of the most vociferous ranters is Colts president Bill Polian, an influential member of the competition committee who is often seen by the league as a sage voice of reason. Well, in this case, Polian and the league are at extreme odds.
Commissioner Roger Goodell, however, has already deemed the decision to hold the Pro Bowl a week before the Super Bowl a success. He notes that the game has attracted more attention than ever, which it has. Whether through negative comments or increased coverage of the logistical and financial issues of the game -- as covered here -- the chatter has been much greater than past years.
And then there’s a statistic from last year’s game that I found absolutely compelling. It involves the all-important metric of Nielsen ratings.
While the Nielsen ratings for the conference championship games were astounding and the numbers for next week’s Super Bowl will be staggering, the ratings for last year’s Pro Bowl surprised and impressed me more because of the network competition.
Last year’s Pro Bowl was played on Feb. 8 in Hawaii – the same meaningless game that we all complain about. At the same time on a different network was the most compelling NBA game of the regular season. The Lakers were in Cleveland playing the Cavs, Kobe against Lebron. The two brightest stars in the star-driven NBA -- as A-list talent as there is in sports, two wonders of the sporting world identified by first-name only -- squaring off on national television on a cold weekend in February with nothing else to watch except a meaningless matchup of all-stars playing an exhibition with their coaches wearing Hawaiian shirts. So what happened in the Nielsens?
Kobe vs. LeBron drew 6.1 million viewers. Good rating. The Pro Bowl? An amazing 8.8 million. The game thought of as a joke and a pointless afterthought to the season drew over 30 percent more viewers than the most compelling individual matchup in all of team sports.
So as we continue to carp about the Pro Bowl and its futility, let’s realize that television is the lifeblood of any sport, and what any other sport wouldn’t give for 8.8 million viewers on a winter weekend. The power of the NFL is undeniable.
While we anticipate the most-watched Super Bowl in history next week, my sense is that the Pro Bowl, in spite of the logistical problems and the lack of meaning in the result, will surprise once again in viewership -- no matter the competition from LeBron, Kobe or whatever else the networks throw up.
Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt
I know I'm going to get killed for saying this, but if you want people to tune into the Pro Bowl, then make it have an impact on the Super Bowl in some way (in a similar way that the Baseball All-Stars does).
Whichever conference wins the Pro Bowl, allows the correlating conference representative in the Super Bowl the very next week to choose on kick/receive in the 1st quarter and in overtime. No more coin toss.
Although neither team has a representative in the Pro Bowl, they still would have minor incentive for their conference team to win the Super Bowl (higher draft slot).
I am as big of an NFL fan as you will meet, and so are my friends and coworkers, but none of us even remember the last time we watched the Pro-bowl.
I'll throw this suggestion out there: Have one team be rookies and 2nd year players vs the rest. On offense you could have Flacco, Ryan, CJ, Moreno, DeSean, Crabtree, Ray Rice, Garcon, Keller, and so on, vs older Pro-bowlers. I dont feel like going through all the defensive players right now, but you get the idea.
No matter how I look at the current game, the interest simply isnt there. You take away blitzing and hitting, so the NFL needs to do something that makes the average fan say "now that could be interesting".
Thoughts?
Andrew: I'll bet that a large part of the viewership for last year's Pro Bowl had to do with it being the last football fix they were going to get before the long dead offseason, and that you'll see a drop in viewing this year. Personally, I've never once watched a Pro Bowl game, wherever and whenever it was being held.
CW: No way does an SB team want competitive SB advantages determined by a game that it will have absolutely nothing to do with.
The game is a joke. The rules are different and it does not count. I would prefer to get rid of it as the only concern I have is one of our players getting hurt. However, TV is king. Based on that, I think moving the game makes sense because people are still interested and excited about football.
If I watch the Pro Bowl it is to see my guys. If my guys are in the SB, I still watch the Pro Bowl because they will most likely spend a lot of time talking about my guys playing the next week. There is more of a chance I watch the game this week then the week after. Yet don't count on it. LOL
Yojimbo is right on here, I only put the Pro Bowl game on because it gives me one more week of football. And I really don't watch it as much as listen and do things around the house. The festive Hawaii atmosphere also has some appeal.
CW I personally thought that was a desperation move for baseball. Baseball's all star game has a much smaller risk of injury than football or basketball, so if they can't make their game relevant that speaks to the state of the game in my opinion.
In the NFL, I think this would cause NFL TEAMS to come up with reasons for their players to skip the game, since the harder the players play the more likely they are to get hurt. No Super Bowl home game or comparable incentive is enough for the team to risk an injuriy to a player. Also I cannot think of a reasonable incentive, a super bowl home game would be a bit much.
What they need to do is realize they can never get the intensity they desire in a real football game, and make it an event. They could rotate the game into EVERY CITY (I've had enough of this warm weather super bowl bullcrap) and make it a local event. Perhaps a flag football game instead of a real one if they want players to play hard. I personally prefer a Superstars type of competition anyday over the football game, as BigD suggested. I'd actually watch that.
I agree with CW. There needs to be some incentive for the players. Some incentive for viewers to have a reason to watch the game.
Yeah, it would never work.
But in reality the coin toss is not a huge deal according to the football front office/teams because if it was - it wouldn't decide overtime.
But all the all-star type games in pro sports are boring because there is no incentive to play. And I watch the baseball All-Stars now because they have a reason to play hard and win the game.
And the Pro Bowlers wouldn't have to exert that much more effort. Just a little bit in order to try and get their conference the advantage of winning the coin toss - which could help them win the game and give them a higher draft slot (which is better for the rest of the teams in the same conference).
Yeah, I know it's weak - the only thing I can come up with...hehehe
At least most of these guys will still be in reasonable football shape. The guys not in the playoffs have been out less than a month, while for guys who lost wild card weekend games, it is three weeks. Could be worse, it could be the usual six weeks at the end of the season.
What they should do is find a way to compel those selected to play and participate unless they are injured truely. Obviously Favre couldn't play because of his ankle this year but he make and misses the Pro Bowl on a yearly basis because he does not want to show.
A)You decide not to show without a medical reason then you lose what ever incentive was loaded into your contract for making it. No play, no pay. Also if you "ditch" the game, you are prohibited from appearing the next year and lose the incentive pay as well.
B)Rotate the game between warm weather sites (or domes): Hawaii, San Diego, Phoenix, New Orleans, Tampa, Miami
C)Move it back to the week after the Super Bowl but with with the stipulations in A
I'd love it if the NFL would look to do more to develop young players not expose existing stars to further injury. Since the loss of NFL Europe and AFL it seems the Kurt Warners of the world are destined to go away never to return. Perhaps bye week before the Superbowl is a way to provide a developmental experience for young players. Maybe a practice squad or backup all star team? I also believe that the NFL has got to consider increasing the number of players that can be held on a roster. These kids need reps and experience. Unfortunately if the NFL doesn't start to get creative in this space the game will suffer.
Initially I liked the idea of moving the Pro Bowl. It past years I've not known when it was on and at the point in the winter, didn't even bother to care. Last night, while flipping through the channels I found the game. Mrs. El Guapo says to me, "I didn't know there was a game this weekend."
I responded, "Yup, they moved the Pro Bowl to this week. I've probably never watched more than five minutes of it before."
I expected to watch a bit of the game, but after a few minutes of identifying players, we realized how pathetic the game actually was. They literally should just make it a flag football game, or let them play beach football. I tuned in and then turned off (before the 5 minute mark) because this wasn't football.
The league should recognize its best players, and maybe highlight them in some skills competitions, but I'm never going to watch the Pro Bowl again because there is no effort. If the players aren't going to make the effort to try, then I'm not going to make the effort to watch. NFL - you've lost a Pro Bowl viewer.
football does not lend itself to an '"all star" game such as this. plain and simple. regardless of the ratings -- and those can be misleading -- no one gives a crap about this game other than goodell, who wants it as revenue generator.
According to Peter King, Dockett's tweet wishing Kurt Warner would be coming back next year doesn't sound much like he's planning on retiring.
Cap and cash ramifications of...
Thoughts on Indy, Eli, Wes, Mario...
The numbers behind the game
Real action is week before the...
Signs point to the end of an era
Jan 29, 2010
11:37 AM
I agree the game has potential, but it needs some changes to have real appeal. As an economist by training (if not by trade) and someone who has zero interest in the Pro Bowl as currently configured, I believe the key to increasing the interest level in this game for both fans and players is much like all of life - incentives (and disincentives).
In this case, all parties need to buy-in (be invested) to what's being done. Here are a few suggestions to improve both the appeal & profitability of the Pro Bowl.
To increase player participation, go back to it happening after the Super Bowl and move the game back to Hawaii. The post-Super Bowl part is an obvious issue (no matter what Goodell spins). Hawaii is a great incentive as well (beyond the obvious) if for no other reason, those with family (most players in one form or another), will be under tremendous pressure on the home front to go.
Imagine if your company offered that to you - you go for a little work and vacation and you get to take your family. Even if you didn't want to go yourself, would it really be worth it have to listen to that brought up again and again down the road (and likely leading to having to spend your own money for a vacation)?
In addition, add some skills & combine-like competitions (speed, strength, endurance) to the event (somewhat like MLB & NBA), with participants selected by an online poll (fan investment) and player poll (both for investment and to get those overlooked by the fans). Maybe use statistical leaders for some nominees or competitors in some competitions.
For example, include a fastest man competition (perhaps in full pads) - maybe the top 12 online vote getters plus 4 others voted by players. Then have either 8 heats of 2 as round one & 4 of 2 with those 4 winners in the final (or 4 of 4, then the final with those 4 winners).
Most players are hyper-competative and would love this just for the titles, but there should also be prizes (and they should be significant. Have both cash and things like cars (donated by sponsors) in addition to the public recognition (somewhat of a factor) and the peer recognition (a huge factor).
An additional (and publicly unspoken) incentive with those sort of competitions is that there would be heavy peer pressure to participate, much in the form of prop bets among many players (often of small value, really more about bragging rights than the actual prize).
I have never known any NFL players well enough to ask, but 2 MLBers and an NBAer, and I am sure that like in those leagues, prop bets between players on a WIDE variety of things are common (and common knowledge) within certain cliques of players (and across team bounderies - some are based on friendship, some more on college affiliations).