Three games on Thursday. Four more on Sunday. One on Monday. Fully half of the NFL schedule was available to the television viewing public this week (ok, the segment thereof that lives in greater N.Y. or greater Denver or has access to the NFL Network had eight, everyone else had seven, but you get the point).
For New York and other two-team-market fans, that’s twice as many as usual, and even I gave up midway through the third quarter of the Vikings blowout of the Bears today, and I think my eyes might need a break after seeing at least parts of the first six. Sorry, Al, Chris and Andrea.
This brings up the issue of overexposure… Is that too many games? Other than semi-obsessive fans (’pure’ and Fantasy), obsessive bloggers and super-obsessive gamblers, who can watch that much football in one week? Couple that with the 20 or so college games available on just the broadcast networks and ESPN, and that’s a lot of pigskins flying across the HDTV.
Why is overexposure an issue? After all, fans who buy the DirecTV NFL Sunday Ticket package can flip between all 16 games during the week.
What makes football unique among American sports is that is a once-a-week affair: the anticipation, examination and discussion of each game for six days. Each game takes on even more meaning, as a single play in a single contest can affect an entire season, more than in any other sport.
Sports, especially high-profile sports like the NFL, being less subject to the DVR and more “appointment TV” than most scripted programming, are of increasing interest to sponsors. If four games a week is good, six must be better and eight must be best. This was the theory that eventually drove the popular “Who Wants to be a Millionaire” program from “must watch” to “Millionaire again?”
I’m all for more choices, and with it more football. I just hope the Commissioner and networks are looking beyond today’s dollars and are preserving the health of the sport for years to come.
Now, pardon me, but Steelers-Ravens kickoff is in 20 minutes…