Only ONE MNF appearance per team? (1 Viewer)

[JaxBill]

WHY'D THE NETWORKS STIFF SEATTLE? From Mike of Providence: "How is it that Seattle got jilted out of playing in any of the four prime-time games on the opening weekend in 2006? Beginning in 2004, the Super Bowl winner has played on Thursday and the loser on Monday night. What happened this year?"

Excellent question. And if I were Seattle, I wouldn't be very pleased about it. But there were two factors at play here. One is that Seattle was not scheduled to play at Pittsburgh this year, which eliminated the opportunity for the NFL to stage a Super Bowl rematch. Second, there is no question that the single most attractive regular-season game at this point is Manning vs. Manning. So you knew that NBC, returning to televised football after a long hiatus, was going to press hard to get a game of that magnitude for its opener on Sunday night. Seattle just doesn't have a game as compelling as that one on its schedule.

Now, as for the Monday-night doubleheader, that's where I figured Seattle would land. But keep one thing in mind: Each team is allowed one Monday-night appearance this year, so if ESPN wanted to use Seattle's appearance on its first Monday night, when the promotion throughout the offseason was already going to be heavy, the network would have blown its chance to use the Seahawks later in the season. That's what I think happened.

That makes no sense. That means every team will be on Monday night...and they'd still be short two team. Even if there's no MNF in Week 17, there's still the doubleheader Week 1 and 15 more games afterwards. So that would be 17 games and 32 teams.http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AuZp...cnnsi&type=lgns

 

[tarheel23]

No surprise here. It pains me to say this but the reality is that the Seahawks have no national appeal.

 

[JaxBill]

No surprise here. It pains me to say this but the reality is that the Seahawks have no national appeal.

While I feeel bad for Seattle, that's not the point of my post. Previously, each team was allowed up to THREE MNF appearances per year. Now, Peter King says the limit is one and I don't see how that's possible.

 

[culdeus]

Maybe I've been trapped under a rock, but did I read this right

A "MNF doubleheader"??

Who is gonna carry the second game? ESPN2? WTF?

 

[Capella]

No surprise here. It pains me to say this but the reality is that the Seahawks have no national appeal.

While I feeel bad for Seattle, that's not the point of my post. Previously, each team was allowed up to THREE MNF appearances per year. Now, Peter King says the limit is one and I don't see how that's possible.

SNF is the new MNF.

 

[JaxBill]

Maybe I've been trapped under a rock, but did I read this right

A "MNF doubleheader"??

Who is gonna carry the second game? ESPN2? WTF?

That's just opening weekend.

 

[JaxBill]

No surprise here. It pains me to say this but the reality is that the Seahawks have no national appeal.

While I feeel bad for Seattle, that's not the point of my post. Previously, each team was allowed up to THREE MNF appearances per year. Now, Peter King says the limit is one and I don't see how that's possible.

SNF is the new MNF.

Even so, I don't see how 32 teams can only appear only once in 17 different games. Also, I don't remember every team geeting a SNF invite, but maybe I'm just losing it.

 

[Capella]

No surprise here. It pains me to say this but the reality is that the Seahawks have no national appeal.

While I feeel bad for Seattle, that's not the point of my post. Previously, each team was allowed up to THREE MNF appearances per year. Now, Peter King says the limit is one and I don't see how that's possible.

SNF is the new MNF.

Even so, I don't see how 32 teams can only appear only once in 17 different games. Also, I don't remember every team geeting a SNF invite, but maybe I'm just losing it.

I dunno. Maybe the one MNF game doesn't count or something for those purposes. Call it a 'special' or whatever.

 

[Godsbrother]

This is the first I have heard about only one MNF appearance per team. What a great idea! I am sure looking forward to the Saints, Texans and 49ers games.

 

[Pat Patriot]

I dont know about a restriction that each team can only appear once but there was a rule that EVERY team had to appear on Sunday Night Football. Since SNF on ESPN now = MNF on ESPN, that is probably what King was talking about.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

This just can't be true. This would have been bigger news and more sites would have reported it.

 

[Orange Crush]

Also, isn't the league going to a flexible format for the late season games this year, so as to maximize ratings by getting the best looking match-up in prime time each week? (Or does that start next year?)

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

Remember that SNF is the new big thing -- the marquee matchups will be on SNF, not MNF.

That does happen this coming season and not in the 2007 season, right?

 

[cstu]

Remember that SNF is the new big thing -- the marquee matchups will be on SNF, not MNF.

That does happen this coming season and not in the 2007 season, right?

Also, I think showing every team on MNF football is a good idea even if they won't all be marquee matchups since it gives everyone in the country a chance to see every team. A lot of people without DTV never get a chance to see anything but local teams and whatever used to be shown on MNF.

 

[Z-Dog]

The old rule was the every team had at least one nationally-televised primetime game, whether Sunday or Monday. I also think it's ridiculous to say that Seattle has no compelling matchups on its schedule - as the first place team, they should play games against Chicago and Carolina, no?

 

[Nemesis]

Well, I had already expected a MNF matchup featuring Minn at Miami (Cpep vs old team) scheduled for mid to late in the year after he was fully healthy. But, Minn @ Wash on MNF in week 1.

I think the 1x a yr MNF idea is a typo or misunderstanding.

 

[Gold Plated Nails]

The old rule was the every team had at least one nationally-televised primetime game, whether Sunday or Monday. I also think it's ridiculous to say that Seattle has no compelling matchups on its schedule - as the first place team, they should play games against Chicago and Carolina, no?

I am very much looking forward to the Chargers @ Seahawks game. Granted it probably wouldn't have much national appeal.

 

[one4thumb]

Even so, I don't see how 32 teams can only appear only once in 17 different games. Also, I don't remember every team geeting a SNF invite, but maybe I'm just losing it.

If not mistaken, week 17 has no Monday night game.

 

[DrJ]

How in the world are they going to accomplish the flexible schedule MNF stuff that we've been hearing about if they're only allowed one game a season?

I thought they were trying to get more good games on MNF, no more games with junk teams...

 

[DrJ]

Even so, I don't see how 32 teams can only appear only once in 17 different games.  Also, I don't remember every team geeting a SNF invite, but maybe I'm just losing it.

If not mistaken, week 17 has no Monday night game.

That's correct - but there is no MNF bye week, so they play weeks 1-16.

 

[JaxBill]

Even so, I don't see how 32 teams can only appear only once in 17 different games.  Also, I don't remember every team geeting a SNF invite, but maybe I'm just losing it.

If not mistaken, week 17 has no Monday night game.

Right. But Week 1 has 2 games and weeks 2 thru 16 have 1.

 

[RandyDB]

How in the world are they going to accomplish the flexible schedule MNF stuff that we've been hearing about if they're only allowed one game a season?

I thought they were trying to get more good games on MNF, no more games with junk teams...

The flexible scheduling is for the second half of the season and is for the SUNDAY night games on NBC, not MNF on ESPN.

 

[BlueDredSo]

That makes no sense. That means every team will be on Monday night...and they'd still be short two team. Even if there's no MNF in Week 17, there's still the doubleheader Week 1 and 15 more games afterwards. So that would be 17 games and 32 teams.http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AuZp...cnnsi&type=lgns

You do know that 17x2=34, right? That means all 32 teams could play one MNF game, and 2 teams would have an extra MNF game, which would be against each other.

 

[MSULions]

Remember that SNF is the new big thing -- the marquee matchups will be on SNF, not MNF.

That does happen this coming season and not in the 2007 season, right?

Also, I think showing every team on MNF football is a good idea even if they won't all be marquee matchups since it gives everyone in the country a chance to see every team. A lot of people without DTV never get a chance to see anything but local teams and whatever used to be shown on MNF.

Yeah...that was SOOOO awesome getting to see the packers three times last year!

 

[Vikes Fan]

Maybe I've been trapped under a rock, but did I read this right

A "MNF doubleheader"??

Who is gonna carry the second game? ESPN2? WTF?

No. They are both ESPN. One early and one late. (I don't remeber official times, but search the first couple pages of this board. There is a thread on this.

 

[JaxBill]

That makes no sense. That means every team will be on Monday night...and they'd still be short two team. Even if there's no MNF in Week 17, there's still the doubleheader Week 1 and 15 more games afterwards. So that would be 17 games and 32 teams.http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AuZp...cnnsi&type=lgns

You do know that 17x2=34, right? That means all 32 teams could play one MNF game, and 2 teams would have an extra MNF game, which would be against each other.

Thanks for proving my point.