Seriously, I said 2 decades when it was 17 years, 1990's and it was 2000 on the other hand you blamed it on a myriad of factors and insinuated that the ratings have been dropping all along when in fact it was the first drop in 17 years. All those extra games did not start last season so once again you can show no correlation. The people that were polled were probably a large part season ticket holders so with the sunk cost of PSLs and that seasons tickets is it any wonder they or those they resold tickets to were still attending games? That is why I brought up television ratings, there is no sunk cost attributed directly to the NFL games except maybe Sunday Ticket. Why ask me why they were attending games yet said they were watching less on TV and the number 1 reason was the protests? They already answered the important question, which was why they were watching less NFL on TV. I mentioned Kaep because that is what is brought up most often but when I mentioned the poll I made it clear it was the protests, plural. I don't think any study was done specifically in 49ers viewership but if you find something on that feel free to post it. Keep in mind that is a San Fran, a bastion of liberal ideals, I would think that some losses due to his protests would be countered by casual fans that agree with his views but may not always watch. If the NFL was heading for a decline for some time we would have seen a gradual drop off or at least a leveling off, not an increase every year for 17 years and then an 8% drop off in one year.
I'd like to see just how much of the drop actually was directly due to Kaepernick. I'd be willing to bet a lot less than due to the presidential election and the Cubs world series run. We can look back at the forum and see how many of the members were watching the debates and series here. I don't see any who said they refused to watch NFL games due to Kaepernick's protest and unless specifically brought up, no one mentioned the dozens of other players who protested.
Have we had a presidential election anywhere near this past one? I brought up the last major drop of 10% because it was in another closely watched election, the next biggest drop, I believe was 8% was again during the 96 election. Tv viewership in general is in decline and while the NFL experienced a sharp declined, it was still the highest rated programing last year. I'm sure there may be some casual fans who stopped watching based on the protest, but I strongly believe that number is far fewer than your trying to portray.
I already said the election played a part but ratings were still down in the weeks after the election. It being the highest rated program means nothing, if a stock drops 10% do people say, it's still the highest priced stock out there? No I brought up that a poll of people that attend games was taken and of those polled the number 1 reason given was the protests, not just Kaeps. There may have been other reasons given that were close but the elections was 4th highest, the leagues response to domestic violence was 2nd highest. This has nothing to do with me portraying anything, it's what the people polled said.
Tony, there was a study done on the NFL viewership drop and a small part of it was due to Kaepernick based on poll responses. Again this was not the major response given, and I think the number was around 20-25%. I think when you say Kaepernick this also includes other players protesting also. When the question of why the NFL is not as popular was brought up in the Boston radio talk shows, numerous callers called in bringing up Kaepernick. At first the radio talk show hosts would dismiss these callers but after awhile it became obvious to them this anger was real. Now keep in mind that Boston is a liberal part of the country and I bet this sediment is stronger elsewhere in the country in the red states. You might be right that the people complaining about Kaepernick are still watching the NFL and are simply messing up these polls. For the NFL to black ball Kaepernick does suggest many of the owners are concerned he is affecting the bottom line. After giving this issue some thought, my anger is starting to be more towards the owners and the league than players like Kaep who are disrespecting the national anthem. If the owners and the league showed some spine and actually started punishing players for this offensive behavior we wouldn't be talking about this. If the league can prevent a player from wearing the wrong clothing for affecting the bottom line, why can't they show some spine over the national anthem? I think we know the answer. Lets see how brave these spoiled over paid athletes are when they start losing money and playing time. As for myself, if the Jets or Pats players continue this trend of disrespecting our country, yes you may see me pretty soon not wanting to be an NFL fan for these teams. As to the decline of the NFL and its not so promising future, that is a subject I will leave for another post.
Many of us in the working world would be told by our employers to take our political causes elsewhere and its doesn't belong in the work place. This type of behavior would be considered unacceptable and grounds for removal. We would be told to take our political cause elsewhere and rightfully so. Our behavior would be considered a distraction and would not lead to a productive work environment. The NFL is a workplace and one of the requirements is to stand for the National Anthem pure and simple. The fact the NFL has no spine in this issue is sad. I really don't care if a player isn't standing for the National Anthem because of black lives matter or he simply wants to sit on top of a cooler to eat a banana. An NFL player does not have the right to interrupt this event or any other event related to an NFL game to express their so called political opinion. I don't watch an NFL game for political opinion. There are many other media sources one can go to for that kind of stuff. So I am crystal clear here, if a player has a Trump, Clinton, Obama, or any other political cause I don't want to see it in an NFL game. Why is this to much to ask? I also find this behavior offensive to our country and I will refrain from this point since I have mentioned this in other posts.
I am curious why you brought up Trump? So that you know my position, I thought both Clinton and Trump sucked. One was a liar, cheater, and a crook. The other was a megalomaniac, unqualified, and can't keep their mouth shut. It is pitiful that neither party could come up with something better. Anyone who seriously thought either one of them should be President is deranged! How does Trump being President affect this country being free? There are many things to criticize Trump for but I think you are barking up the wrong tree here. The issues brought up by black lives matter existed before Trump was President. If any side was interested in preventing free speech I would say its the left based on what is happening in colleges. The right on the other hand with their morality is a pain also. I actually hate both the left and the right for various reasons. I would like to see a third party, maybe we can call it the "American Party". Sorry I am getting to political here!
The players protesting the anthem has nothing to do with the Black Lives Matter movement. Do you have some sort of issue with that group that you have to mention them in this discussion? Don't watch the nfl if it bothers you. NFL will still continue to get ratings regardless if you watch it or not. No offense, but you won't be missed. Like I said before, far more pressing issues and you are simply wasting your time and energy on the wrong issues. Btw these players aren't interrupting anything and they have the full right to exercise this. Is the national anthem being stopped while they sit? No.
Ah I see where you are going with this. Clearly a waste of time. Go back to the Boston message board. They value Trump a lot more I am assuming.
Due in a small part to Kaep/Protests? It was the number one reason given why people polled were watching fewer games, 26%. What poll did you read that had another reason that was higher? And viewership was down so don't know what you have backing up "that the people complaining about Kaepernick are still watching the NFL and are simply messing up these polls". Sure 16% said the reason they were watching less was due to the election but even after the election passed viewership was still down, down by a small amount but still down and that had not happened in 17 years. Probably also due to the fact many have a short attention span and after the initial reaction to the protests they started going back to watching little by little. If a player still has relative value to the team he will still have a job, when you are borderline it would be best not to threaten the teams bottom line. They all have the right to protest but the team has the right to get rid of them if the team thinks they are affecting how much money they are making,
I don't know if this is the poll Waterboy was referring to but the I find it interesting that according to this poll , is that NFL viewership should be up by 15% " J.D. Power noted that only 12 percent of the fans it surveyed said they watched fewer NFL games last season, with 27 percent of people saying they watched more and 62 percent saying they watched just as much as they had the season before."
I have referenced two polls/ratings on the subject, the first was the Nielsen ratings which showed a drop in overall viewership of 8%. That is all people that watch the televised games. They count millions of people. The other was a poll of 9200 fans that attend games in the flesh, this is why those numbers would not match the overall drop since it is more likely the majority that stopped watching televised games were casual fans, not those that spend hundreds to go see games at the stadium. the more diehard fan would of course be less likely to stop watching televised games. That poll was mentioned because it was the only one I found that asked people whether they were or were not watching more televised games and if they were not what the reasons were. The top reason given by those that stopped watching was the protests.
You are completely wrong here. The protest has been largely due in part to what is perceived as unfair treatment of African Americans by law enforcement. Both Kaep and Black Lives matter have made this an important theme. I have no issue with Black Lives Matter as long as they don't advocate violence towards police officers. I will assume the actions of a few don't represent the whole group. I think its healthy to question public officials and I do believe if you give someone power they will abuse it. My only argument I would make is that African Americans are not the only ones who have been mistreated by cops. I would also argue that being a cop isn't an easy job and when you make a mistake, chances are good someone is going to get hurt.
According to the Nielson ratings, all TV viewership has dropped. The NFL led all programing and had the lowest drop in viewership. 2016 saw the biggest drop in tv viewership ever, the 1st qtr of 2017 has so far shown a continuation in this trend with significant drops in viewing. DVR, on demand and streaming are not counted in the ratings. So among casual fans, the rating drops are significantly less than the drops on all other programing while football fans have actually increased their viewership. As I stated, Kaepernick and the protest have had very little impact on the NFLs loss of viewership. You obviously feel differently and it's clear that we will not agree so let's move on.
More times than not, when you have a multi-choice poll on a subject with diverse answers, you are not going to have a choice over 50%. Saying the number 1 choice was only a small part, especially when you follow it up with, "Again this was not the major response given,", shows you were either intentionally trying to make it seem there was another reason that many more people chose or you just can't read a poll.
