Thanks to the Masters, this Sunday's NFL schedule is filled with quirks.
With CBS airing the final round of the tournament Sunday at 10 a.m. ET, the network will not air any NFL games in the 1 p.m. ET window.
That means we will have an NFL Sunday that features more late games (six) than early games (five). Here is the breakdown:
1 p.m.:
Houston at Cleveland on Fox
Washington at Detroit on Fox
Jacksonville at Green Bay on Fox
Philadelphia at New York Giants on Fox
Tampa Bay at Carolina on Fox
4:05 p.m.:
Denver at Las Vegas on CBS
Los Angeles Chargers at Miami on CBS
Buffalo at Arizona on CBS
4:25 p.m.:
Seattle at Los Angeles Rams on Fox
San Francisco at New Orleans on Fox
Pittsburgh at Cincinnati on Fox
From what I see on Twitter each week, a lot of people will be happy with this schedule. Most fans always seem to want more games in the late window. Personally, I prefer when there are only three or four games in the late window. Most weeks, the best game of the day takes place at 4:25 pm. I like to lock in on that game and enjoy having as few distractions as possible. But I seem to be in the minority on this.
Live coverage of Sunday’s final round on CBS earned the highest overnight rating for a morning golf broadcast in 34 years, according to CBS Sports. It delivered a 7.7 rating on Sunday morning, as the final round tee times and groupings were moved up to avoid inclement weather on Sunday afternoon.
However, due to the early start time, the 7.7 rating is the second-lowest for a Masters final round since 2004.
It also resulted in the highest-rated golf broadcast on any network since the final round of the 2018 Masters. Last year’s final round, which aired in its usual Sunday afternoon time frame, had an 11 percent higher viewership than this year’s, according to Sports Media Watch.
The final round peaked in the 2:15-2:30 p.m. ET time range, as viewership spiked to a 12.1 as Tiger earned his fifth green jacket and 15th major title. It’s the highest peak rating for the Masters since 2013.
Sunday’s live final round coverage and encore presentation on Sunday afternoon earned a combined gross household 11.1 rating in metered markets.
Broken down more simply, because of ownership’s willingness to spend big, the Warriors now have Wiggins on the roster instead of a minimum wing, a better war chest of assets (the Wolves’ future picks are more valuable than the ones they traded away) and a $17.2 million transactional weapon that, if used before it expires at the end of November, could really boost their rotation.
But the origin of this ambitious plan — basically Joe Lacob agreeing to pay for the most expensive roster in league history for the upcoming 2020-21 season — was green-lit before the pandemic hit, before Chase Center went completely dark, before the financial landscape shifted under the Warriors and the NBA.
But a parachute has been tossed in the organization’s direction. Late Monday night, news leaked of an agreed-upon CBA. The tax line didn’t rise to $139 million, as expected before COVID-19, but it didn’t dip either. It will remain at $132.6 million next season, a mini win for the Warriors. Even bigger, here’s a vital line within the press release: “Teams’ tax payments will be reduced in proportion to any BRI (basketball-related income) decreases.”
Why is that so huge for the Warriors? Why is it so potentially advantageous that rival teams were already reportedly grumbling? The protection essentially shields them from a worst-case scenario, in which the Warriors rack up the largest luxury tax bill in league history, but fail to gather any game-night money to help pay it off because Chase Center remains empty the entire season.
Maybe a vaccine is widely distributed in the coming months. Maybe some fans are allowed in at reduced capacity to start the season. Maybe NBA arenas are loaded up come playoff time. Maybe the BRI is only lightly affected, and the Warriors have to pay off the near full amount.
That’s a bill they’d love to foot. It’d mean Chase Center is hopping, the league is healthy, their largest revenue stream has opened back up and the globe is returning to normal.
But, in the likelier scenario, let’s assume the recovery remains slow, municipalities play it cautious and fans (at least in large droves) aren’t allowed to return until the 2021-22 season, continuing to limit the Warriors’ expected revenue. League-wide BRI would take a significant hit, but (per this new CBA tweak) so would the tax bill.
Here’s a tweet from ESPN front-office insider Bobby Marks: “For example: If Golden State used the $17.2 (million) trade exception and revenue decreased by 30 percent, they could save close to $50 (million).”
The Warriors have committed $130.1 million combined to four players next season: Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, Andrew Wiggins and Draymond Green. That already brings them all the way to the doorstep of the $132.6 million tax line.
Kevon Looney’s on the books for $4.8 million. Jordan Poole is due just over $2 million. The second overall pick, if used next week, will be due $8.7 million in his rookie season. The taxpayer mid-level, which is their best tool to boost the rotation in free agency, would add a player around $5.7 million.
Add to that the mandatory minimums that’ll fill out the rest of the roster, plus the $666,667 they owe for stretching Shaun Livingston’s contract, and you’re staring at a roster that could land above $160 million before the use of that trade exception even enters the discussion.
Which is where the spotlight now brightens on Lacob. Before Monday’s CBA specifics were revealed, any Warriors’ wariness to use the trade exception on an average rotation piece (let’s say a Kelly Olynyk, making $13.5 million, or Rudy Gay, making $14 million) was more understandable. They’d be running the risk of adding a seventh man at a tax cost in the $30 million-$40 million range without any guarantees on revenue next season. That’s steeeeep.
But the protection’s been added. It’ll still cost a whole lot to use the exception, but the worst case has been avoided, which would only sharpen the local criticism if the expiration date (likely in the Nov. 24 range) comes and goes without approval from the Warriors’ ownership group and movement from the front office. This 12-month (now 16-month) plan, concocted in Durant’s final day, created salary flexibility other franchises don’t have. We’ll find out in the coming days if the Warriors have the spending appetite to capitalize.
2. Golden State – James Wiseman, C, Memphis
This pick is turning into a circus, with the Warriors’ multiple smokescreens layered over what appears to be genuine internal debate about who should be the pick if they keep it.
We’ve heard a lot of fanciful trades involving Golden State and this pick, but let me offer a simpler one: What if they traded down from No. 2 to No. 4, sent Kevon Looney to Chicago for Wendell Carter, and picked Tyrese Haliburton? The Bulls could then pick LaMelo Ball second, if the first pick had already been James Wiseman via my Charlotte deal above.
The other name you hear a lot with the Warriors is Deni Avdija, although, again, that seems more of a trade-down possibility than something they would do at 2. One other wild card I can’t resist however: If Wiseman goes first, what about trading the second pick to New Orleans for Jrue Holiday, and then the Pelicans reuniting the brothers Ball?
Fake trades are fun! Nonetheless, at the end of the day I think they make the pick themselves and take Wiseman. Despite my own questions, enough other teams seem high on him that I feel pretty certain he goes in the top two. He helps the Warriors the most now, and has the most trade value later.
https://theathletic.com/2186314/2020/11/08/how-alex-trebeks-love-of-sports-helped-one-contestant-me-connect-with-him/?source=user_shared_article
Giants say 'everything is on the table'
The Giants missed the postseason by one game in 2020 -- they finished with the same record (29-31) as the Brewers but Milwaukee held the tiebreaker and got the No. 8 seed -- and they are going into the offseason with an open mind, according to Andrew Baggarly of The Athletic. President of baseball operations Farhan Zaidi said the team is open to anything. Here's what Zaidi told Baggarly:
Look, we're in a big market. We consider ourselves a signature franchise. When you look at that group of teams, there's always an expectation for how they might act. As we've shown the last couple years, what makes sense is not just a function of your market size but where you are from a baseball standpoint — whether you need to create opportunities for young players, whether you're in position to make a big push. We've talked about ourselves being in a transition state, but we're also coming off a season in which we just missed the playoffs. So again, everything is on the table.
San Francisco extended the $18.9 million qualifying offer to Kevin Gausman prior to last weekend's deadline, a clear indication the team is willing to spend. You don't make that offer unless you're prepared for the player to accept. Between guaranteed contracts and arbitration projections, the Giants have about $120 million on the books for 16 players next season. They were set to open this past season with a $167 million payroll prior to the pandemic. The Giants could be a major player in free agency.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
FARHAN SPEAKS —
Giants president Farhan Zaidi on offseason goals — and the Dodgers’ title
https://theathletic.com/2183879/2020/11/07/giants-president-farhan-zaidi-on-offseason-goals-and-the-dodgers-title/?source=user_shared_article
You won’t know the full scope of the free-agent market until teams non-tender players by the Dec. 2 deadline. You can’t say for sure whether there will be the DH in the National League or whether expanded rosters will persist into 2021. To what degree does that put you in a holding pattern when it comes to contacting free agents?
If you look at a five- or 10-year horizon, the player market in the offseason has trended toward moving more slowly. Last year, it was more of a blip that some of the bigger free agents signed quickly. For a combination of factors, we may go back to trending towards a more deliberate market. And there are a lot of reasons for that.
The $18.9 million qualifying offer to Kevin Gausman is a clear sign that the organization is willing to spend, even if the Giants face just as much budget and revenue uncertainty as every other team. Do you expect that the Giants will be in a less distressed position relative to opposing teams, and if so, could this offseason represent a chance to scale up quickly?
We’ve made a point of trying to create more flexibility over the couple years. That will certainly be helpful to us in the current marketplace.
(Note: The Giants already have $97.2 million committed to six players in 2021, not including as many as 10 players who would receive modest raises in salary arbitration. Their commitments in 2022 amount to just $25.9 million — the balance of Evan Longoria’s contract plus three potential option buyouts.)
Our ownership is really supportive and flexible and I think will be responsive to the market to a certain degree. I wouldn’t say we have any stakes in the ground in terms of specific payroll targets, but I would expect us to continue to be responsive into how we can address some of the needs we have on the baseball side while maintaining flexibility on the financial side, too.
Financial might aside, you’ve been consistent in expressing your reticence to make moves that would block anyone in your system, both as a practical measure as well as the message it sends to your upper-level prospects. Some of those prospects like Marco Luciano, Hunter Bishop and Luis Matos appear to be killing it in Instructional League. Would that make it difficult for you to envision any multiyear discussions for free-agent hitters?
I wouldn’t say that’s a hard-and-fast rule for us, but to your point, we’ve got a wave of talent that is maybe not on the doorstep but is making a lot of progress through the system. Even in a year that’s been frustrating with the lost development time, seeing some of those guys at the alternate site, and then in Instructional League — and this is an area where we received huge ownership support, having two Instructional League teams to enable more reps for our guys — is going to create a little bit of an impetus to be more aggressive with our player promotions next year. We want these guys to have building blocks on the progress they made. We also know that we’re going to have openings on our roster in the next couple years. So again, no hard-and-fast rules on free agency, but even in a year in which circumstances were constrained, we saw some position players take big steps forward and maybe create a clearer timeline for themselves to arrive in San Francisco.
The industry chatter has already begun that the Giants, along with the Mets, are poised to be one of the few movers and shakers this winter. A lot of that is going to be little more than the echo chamber of speculation, but it does create expectations among fans. What do you make of that characterization?
Look, we’re in a big market. We consider ourselves a signature franchise. When you look at that group of teams, there’s always an expectation for how they might act. As we’ve shown the last couple years, what makes sense is not just a function of your market size but where you are from a baseball standpoint — whether you need to create opportunities for young players, whether you’re in position to make a big push. We’ve talked about ourselves being in a transition state, but we’re also coming off a season in which we just missed the playoffs. So again, everything is on the table.
No comments:
Post a Comment