11-16-2014, 02:55 PM
Quote:Wait! I thought ratings had nothing to do with the value of the rights.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Coldneck" data-cid="231821" data-time="1416112851">
<div>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231818" data-time="1416066507">
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Coldneck" data-cid="231817" data-time="1416065334">
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231816" data-time="1416026430">
This also buys them some time to continue negotiating with potential long-term partners for another year at minimum. If ratings are way up, it puts the team in a better bargaining position and/or opens up other doors.
Of course ratings matter, long-term, but if a short-term pop helps bring in other interested parties to negotiate for the big post-2019 deal, then more time to negotiate doesn't hurt.
Also, no one ever argued that ratings aren't a factor in valuing the next contract, but I do recall some (who shall remain nameless) predicting that this team might not recover from bad ratings over the past few seasons. That is silly, and an organization shouldn't be run solely to "maximize" short-term ratings with an expensive but mediocre team.</blockquote>
Ummm, yes a couple people did argue that ratings are irrelevant to the value of the TV contract . I don't want to rehash the argument so I'll leave it at that.
</blockquote>
Just goes to show that you never understood the argument being made.
</div>
</blockquote>
Exactly.