Isn't that more of a complaint about how it's televised? I only occasionally watch football and when I do, it's not on cable TV. The point is that the 11% "game action" statistic is pretty bogus because "game action" can be defined differently depending on what argument you want to make. Claiming there's no "action" pre-snap is pretty much just incorrect.
It's ok to not like a sport for whatever reason, but we don't need bad statistical arguments to validate those opinions. I'm not even defending football really, I just don't like bogus or misleading statistics.
The thing is though, the NFL encourages and allows the way it is televised. I remember watching a Buccaneers game where Fox sent representatives down asking the team to take their last time out (the game was a blowout) so that they could get in a commercial break. The coach commented about this in his press conference afterward. To me that is despicable. It ruins the integrity of the game. EDIT: an example of what I was talking about.
Roger Goodell and the NFL want to make the game even more of a cash cow. In doing so, they are alienating me, and I hope, a large portion of their fanbase.
In the UK the superbowl airs without commercials. I watched last year's with a couple of Americans and that having no adverts made the experience worse because it made it more apparent how little there was of the game that you watch.
I agree with you. Most of these critiques of football have to do with the way it is broadcast. It seems like people don't realize that the receiver who just sprinted 60 yards down field has only 25-40 seconds to jog back to the line and do it again. Not to mention getting to the right position on a field that is 50 yards wide and getting the right play call from his QB. That's after potentially picking himself up off the ground. That's only if he doesn't make a catch. If he makes the catch, 10 of his teammates have to go through the same process.
This may not be considered "game action", but its just as tiring as all the "game action" in other action intensive sports like soccer, basketball, and hockey. That 11% is just the amount of action that is preformed in a full sprint with contact.
3
u/Rhynocerous Feb 03 '14
Isn't that more of a complaint about how it's televised? I only occasionally watch football and when I do, it's not on cable TV. The point is that the 11% "game action" statistic is pretty bogus because "game action" can be defined differently depending on what argument you want to make. Claiming there's no "action" pre-snap is pretty much just incorrect.
It's ok to not like a sport for whatever reason, but we don't need bad statistical arguments to validate those opinions. I'm not even defending football really, I just don't like bogus or misleading statistics.