koberulz wrote:JaoSming wrote:that Packers/Cards game was simply entertaining.
Looking at it now, yeah, but giving up a 17-0 lead is never entertaining at the time.
koberulz wrote:You're obviously not a Cardinals fan.
koberulz wrote:Doesn't make watching them give up the lead any more entertaining, though.
JaoSming wrote:man, Warner got fuuucked up off that interception
According to a Wall Street Journal study of four recent broadcasts, and similar estimates by researchers, the average amount of time the ball is in play on the field during an NFL game is about 11 minutes.
In other words, if you tally up everything that happens between the time the ball is snapped and the play is whistled dead by the officials, there's barely enough time to prepare a hard-boiled egg. In fact, the average telecast devotes 56% more time to showing replays.
So what do the networks do with the other 174 minutes in a typical broadcast? Not surprisingly, commercials take up about an hour. As many as 75 minutes, or about 60% of the total air time, excluding commercials, is spent on shots of players huddling, standing at the line of scrimmage or just generally milling about between snaps. In the four broadcasts The Journal studied, injured players got six more seconds of camera time than celebrating players. While the network announcers showed up on screen for just 30 seconds, shots of the head coaches and referees took up about 7% of the average show.
buzzy wrote:Oznogrd wrote:the surgeonesque precision out of brees
So true ..
JaoSming wrote:I got the Saints for the high scoring win. I'm hoping for a shootout like that Cardinals game.
shadowgrin wrote:Jake Delhomme being cut, that's surprising.
stackmillz93 wrote:if he can even beat out Orton for the starting job.
stackmillz93 wrote:Thoughts on the Jets signing LT?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest