THOUGHTS ABOUT AMERICAN PHAROAH

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

It is my contention that A LOWER PERCENTAGE OF THE PUBLIC WATCHES FOOTBALL (other than the Super Bowl), and that giving the NFL, or any sport, credit for population increases is stupid. If you have a lower percentage, you are less popular, period.

You can't be serious. ALL of us were around during the 70s and the 80s...and we have experienced all this first-hand. FOOTBALL..."LESS POPULAR"? You've lost your mind. Haven't you noticed that football has become a RELIGION, in this country? The NFL is now a year-round affair, for heaven's sake.

You are trying to compare the audience of yesteryear, when we only had one game to watch on a Sunday...to the audience of TODAY...when every single game is available for our viewing pleasure?

If you go out on the street and tell people that football is "less popular" now than it was in the 70s...they'll lock you UP!

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by dilanesp
It is my contention that A LOWER PERCENTAGE OF THE PUBLIC WATCHES FOOTBALL (other than the Super Bowl), and that giving the NFL, or any sport, credit for population increases is stupid. If you have a lower percentage, you are less popular, period.

Dilan, you're only taking into account ONE form of media in your opinion, that being network television of the 70's. Let's look at today's media stats:

NFL Media is comprised of NFL Network, NFL Films, NFL.com, NFL Now, NFL Mobile from Verizon and NFL RedZone, not to mention network contractual agreements with ESPN, FOX, NBC and CBS.

Seven days a week, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, fans turn to NFL Network to receive information and insight straight from the field, team headquarters, league offices and everywhere the NFL is making news. Launched in 2003, NFL Network gives fans unprecedented year-round inside access to all NFL events, including the Super Bowl, Playoffs, regular season, preseason, Pro Bowl, Pro Football Hall of Fame induction weekend, NFL Draft, NFL Scouting Combine, Senior Bowl, league meetings, minicamps and training camps.

Currently in more than 72 million homes, NFL Network has carriage agreements with each of the country's largest television providers including Comcast, DirecTV, DISH Network, Cablevision, Cox, Charter, Time Warner Cable, Verizon FiOS and AT&T U-Verse.

For fans on the go, all NFL Network programming can also be streamed live on the NFL Mobile from Verizon app (NFL.com/mobile), the NFL app delivered on XBOX from Microsoft, and through Watch NFL Network (NFL.com/watch), with participating cable and satellite providers. For more information, log on to NFL.com/nflnetwork. NFL.com is the exclusive internet home of NFL Network.

NFL content has never been more popular across the media landscape. According to the Nielsen Company, the 2014 NFL regular season reached 202.3 million unique viewers, representing 80 percent of all television homes and 68 percent of potential viewers in the U.S. NFL games accounted for the top 20 and 45 of the 50 most-watched TV shows among all programming in 2014.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

You can't be serious. ALL of us were around during the 70s and the 80s...and we have experienced all this first-hand. FOOTBALL..."LESS POPULAR"? You've lost your mind. Haven't you noticed that football has become a RELIGION, in this country? The NFL is now a year-round affair, for heaven's sake.

You are trying to compare the audience of yesteryear, when we only had one game to watch on a Sunday...to the audience of TODAY...when every single game is available for our viewing pleasure?

If you go out on the street and tell people that football is "less popular" now than it was in the 70s...they'll lock you UP!

In the 1970's, there were 3 games on Sunday and one on Monday.

Now there is 1 on Thursday, 4 on Sunday, and one on Monday.

And I think it's silly to assume that all those games are drawing different audiences. The audiences are all drawn from the same group of football fans.

As for ReplayRandall's point-- the audiences for those media properties are a rounding error compared to broadcast television. Broadcast television slaughters everyone.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

As for ReplayRandall's point-- the audiences for those media properties are a rounding error compared to broadcast television. Broadcast television slaughters everyone.

NFL Media is comprised of NFL Network, NFL Films, NFL.com, NFL Now, NFL Mobile from Verizon and NFL RedZone, not to mention network contractual agreements with ESPN, FOX, NBC and CBS.

The NFL controls and prospers thru ALL FORMS of media. No one dominates the Media like the NFL.....Frankly, I'm surprised by how weak your response is Dilan......Do you realize when to throw in your losing hand and move on?....I guess not.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

......Do you realize when to throw in your losing hand and move on?....I guess not.

Not a good sign...for a limit holdem player.

[rastajenk]

Damn...

All these things that I mentioned, that Randall mentioned, that Thaskalos alluded to, none of them would have come about if the NFL was losing popularity (according to your defintion). They came about as a result of the growth of the sport. Dilanesp makes it sound like they are desperate measures to hold on to their dwindling, or at best stable, level of attraction. What a weird alternative universe he must live in.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by rastajenk

Damn...

All these things that I mentioned, that Randall mentioned, that Thaskalos alluded to, none of them would have come about if the NFL was losing popularity (according to your defintion). They came about as a result of the growth of the sport. Dilanesp makes it sound like they are desperate measures to hold on to their dwindling, or at best stable, level of attraction. What a weird alternative universe he must live in.

Ras, the NHL has apps, a cable network, more television coverage than ever, regional TV deals, and new arenas. Is it your contention that the percentage of the population which cares about hockey is larger now than it was in the 1970's?

What you are doing is describing changes in the sports media landscape that apply to EVERY sport-- horse racing included, by the way-- and saying that's magically due to football's growing popularity. Meanwhile, the best measure we have-- broadcast television ratings-- show that the NFL is about half as popular as it was in the 1970's.

By the way, I'm pretty plugged in to media types. It's both part of my background and part of my job. If someone from ESPN or the NFL joined this discussion, they would laugh at you. Hundreds of meetings have been held about the fact that professional football, despite making tons of money, has lost a lot of market share.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Ras, the NHL has apps, a cable network, more television coverage than ever, regional TV deals, and new arenas. Is it your contention that the percentage of the population which cares about hockey is larger now than it was in the 1970's?

What you are doing is describing changes in the sports media landscape that apply to EVERY sport-- horse racing included, by the way-- and saying that's magically due to football's growing popularity. Meanwhile, the best measure we have-- broadcast television ratings-- show that the NFL is about half as popular as it was in the 1970's.

By the way, I'm pretty plugged in to media types. It's both part of my background and part of my job. If someone from ESPN or the NFL joined this discussion, they would laugh at you. Hundreds of meetings have been held about the fact that professional football, despite making tons of money, has lost a lot of market share.

There's a lot more people in America than there was in 1970, aren't there more people watching just due to there being more people period?

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

There's a lot more people in America than there was in 1970, aren't there more people watching just due to there being more people period?

Correct. I mentioned this several times. The issue we are discussing isn't number of people, but percentage of the population, because the NFL doesn't get any credit for people having more babies or emigrating to the US.

And, as I said, this is all just unreal. It is literally a huge point of discussion in both the media and professional sports industries that almost all professional sports-- including professional football-- have seen their market shares decrease. The only real exception to this is the Super Bowl, which still gets ratings comparable to what it always got.

There are gigantic problems with the argument that everyone is using new media. I only scratched the surface in my last post. In addition to the fact that every sport uses new media, and the fact that the NFL Network's ratings are basically in the sewer except when they show live football games (and their ratings for live football games were so low they were forced to agree to a simulcast with CBS, which the owners did not want to do), the Super Bowl's huge ratings contradict that too, because they show that people actually WILL watch a broadcast if they are interested in the game, even though Super Bowl highlights are all over the apps and the NFL Network and everything else everyone mentions.

I found a nice indicator about new media. This was the biggest play of the regular season last year, exactly the sort of video that you would expect to get a huge number of views in new media. And it did:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxbz3DDQzHU

It got 1.7 million views. In contrast, Sunday Night Football-- with its DIMINISHED ratings as opposed to 30 or 40 years ago, averages 24 million viewers a week this year.

So basically the most played new media highlight of last year draws an audience of 1/14th what a broadcast football telecast draws. (And remember, many of those 1.7 million probably watched the game live anyway.)

New media is wonderful, but it's a drop in the bucket. Broadcast television dwarfs everything. So if broadcast television ratings are down (and they are WAY down), that means a much smaller percentage of the population is watching, no matter how much new media is out there.

[tzipi]

Originally Posted by Bigadam119

He is at the top of the charts. To win the Classic like that is incredible. No horse wins the classic like that!

Yeah the two speed horses scratch out and he walk easy upfront once again.

[tzipi]

Originally Posted by NY BRED

While I would normally agree Secretariat and his Belmont win
made him one of the greatest horses of all time, the fact remains he lost
to a claimer, Onion, trained by the Chief.

Funny certain horses always scratch out and AP once again gets a free easy ride up front. Rich owner money rules.

"Sec lost to a claimer". Onion was a stakes place horse at the time. AP lost to a just a MSW winner in Keen Ice then. Please

So great, but he's retired for money when the owner has more then he'll spend in three lifetimes. Hmmm.

[lamboguy]

this year we are going to have the chance to see CALIFORNIA CHROME and SHARED BELIEF as older horses after we lost the opportunity to watch BEHOLDER in the classic.

[NY BRED]

[So great, but he's retired for money when the owner has more then he'll spend in three lifetimes. Hmmm.[/QUOTE]

Although I'm a huge fan of AP, I do not admire his owner who has
burned many people in his lifetime.

I do respect the owner for electing to race the horse twice
after the Breeders Cup BUT felt he should have raced once before the Breeders Cup.
None of us know what Zayat made by winning the Haskell/BC
as incentives /perks from Ashford, but most owners would have stopped
racing a Triple Crown Winner and risk losing huge stud fees that could be lost due to a poor finish in the BC and/or having an injury or death
to the next potential superstar.


Quite simply, it is impossible to compare this achievement as AP & his team have created the Platinum standard for other TBREDS to duplicate
and run as fast if not faster, as the better horse.

So, for now, , it is what it is

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by NY BRED

None of us know what Zayat made by winning the Haskell/BC as incentives /perks from Ashford, but most owners would have stopped racing a Triple Crown Winner and risk losing huge stud fees that could be lost due to a poor finish in the BC and/or having an injury or death
to the next potential superstar.

I have always disagreed with this and will continue to vehemently disagree with this statement.

Will an owner eventually win the TC and retire the horse the morning of the first Sunday in June? I'm sure it will happen...however, this will never be the norm, as some on here are always predicting whenever a TC is on the line (or in this year's case, actually won).

[ebcorde]

better than Zenyatta and Pleasantly Perfect (Medaglio D'oro measuring stick).