The Dreaded 4:05 ET/1:05 PT NFL Starts

[dxtrfn]

I know for once there are no 4:05 starts this week but when they make the schedule for next year the worst teams will generally get the dreaded 4:05 starts. Which teams do you think will get the most of these dreaded games?

 

[KeithE4]

I know for once there are no 4:05 starts this week...

Huh??!?!?! ??? ??? ??? ??? There are 5 late games (4:15 ET) this week. They updated their schedule after Monday's game.

Cardinals-Chargers (Fox)
Falcons-Eagles (Fox)
49ers-Broncos (Fox)
Bills-Ravens (CBS)
Dolphins-Colts (CBS)

CBS games will be seen nationwide except in Philly, Denver, and San Diego (which have home games being carried on Fox). There will be no late Fox game in Indy and Baltimore, which of course will have home games carried on CBS.

 

[dxtrfn]

In a normal week, when the home team plays on the doubleheader network, the other network must show a 4:05pm game. Since both networks have doubleheaders this week, there are no games that start at that exact time but several 4:15pm games

 

[bhayes1016]

It would have to be Oakland in the AFC and Arizona in the NFC, simply because all their home games are in the 4:00 window, and they likely won't be on prime time next year.

 

[chuckydoll]

The Broncos, Cardinals, Chargers, 49ers, Raiders and Seahawks usually have home games at 1:05 or 1:15 ET depending on the week's schedule.

... when they make the schedule for next year the worst teams will generally get the dreaded 4:05 starts.

Let's look at this year's schedule . . .

Week 2: Arizona (won its opener) at Seattle (NFC West champion)

Week 3: Baltimore (AFC North leader) at Cleveland

Week 4: Detroit at St. Louis -- was seen in New York

Week 5: NY Jets at Jacksonville (2 contenders), Oakland at San Francisco, Kansas City (contender) at Arizona

Week 7: Denver (contender) at Cleveland -- was seen in New York

Week 8: St. Louis (contender) at San Diego (AFC West leader)

Week 9: Minnesota at San Francisco (2 contenders) -- was seen in New York

Week 10: Denver (contender) at Oakland

Week 11: Seattle at San Francisco (2 contenders), Detroit at Arizona

Week 12: Oakland at San Diego (AFC West leader)

Week 13: Jacksonville (contender) at Miami, Houston at Oakland

Week 14: Green Bay at San Francisco (2 contenders), Seattle (NFC West leader) at Arizona

Week 15: Denver (contender) at Arizona

Week 16: Arizona at San Francisco (contender)

 

[dhett]

I'm still trying to figure out why a 4:05 PM ET start is "dreaded" but a 4:15 PM ET start isn't.

 

[BDBopper]

the 4:05 start is not dreaded. It's necessary based on the current NFL television rules which are a crock anyway. I think that everybody in America should have three games to watch on Sunday afternoon. Why do people in cities such as Jackson, MS, San Antonio, TX, Spokane, WA, and Salt Lake City, UT get that privilege while unlucky people who happen to live near an NFL city don't. Either have the same rules for everyone or don't have the rules at all. With having the NFL Network televising some games I would accept that but with a loosing of the Sunday rules as a fair compromise.

 

[chuckydoll]

Earlier post should have referred to 2:05 or 2:15 MT/1:05 or 1:15 PT. Just noticed the mistake but was not able to correct it.

You may also have a week where a 4:05 ET game will go to most of the network. Jaguars-Dolphins was a 4:05 ET game and went to a larger area than any of CBS's 1 ET games that week.

 

[dhett]

the 4:05 start is not dreaded. It's necessary based on the current NFL television rules...(snip)

Not to you or to me, but the OP must think so, or he wouldn't have written the subject that way.

Now I'm trying to figure out what's "necessary" about a 4:05 ET start.

 

[Studio20]

Gives that audience getting the single late game a few minutes for updates on the 1:00 PM games. The 4:15 start is an attempt to get all the 1 PM games wrapped up so as few people as possible would miss any of the second game.

 

[EnbyCee]

the 4:05 start is not dreaded. It's necessary based on the current NFL television rules...(snip)

Not to you or to me, but the OP must think so, or he wouldn't have written the subject that way.

Now I'm trying to figure out what's "necessary" about a 4:05 ET start.

Say you're in Chicago (or any NFL team's market in the Eastern or Central time zones). Most of the local team's games will be played at 1 pm ET. When the local team is at home, theirs can be the only NFL game on the air in that timeslot in their market. So if the Bears have a 1pm game on Fox and Fox has the doubleheader that week, the CBS affiliate is required to run a game and can ONLY run a 4:05 game. This is how some real stinker games of limited local interest get on the air in places where it would otherwise make no sense (example: Broncos-Cardinals ran in Chicago, Detroit and Green Bay a couple weeks ago), and why 4:05 games are somewhat "dreaded".

 

[dhett]

IOW, west coast games. They're "stinkers" because right now, most of the west coast teams aren't all that good.

Frankly, I wish the NFL would schedule more late games. I'm busy on Sunday mornings and don't get home until around 1 PM (I'm on Mountain Standard Time year-round) and would love to have a better choice besides AFC West teams, none of which I'm even remotely interested in, except maybe the Chargers. This week, because the Cardinals were on the road, we actually had a choice of 2 PM games.

 

[Morgan Wick]

What's wrong with having all the late games start at 4:15 ET and having late singleheader stations having, say, some highlights or hype before the game begins?

 

[EnbyCee]

What's wrong with having all the late games start at 4:15 ET and having late singleheader stations having, say, some highlights or hype before the game begins?

Since singleheader games tend not to get the ratings that late doubleheader games (which are usually premium matchups specifically reserved for that time slot) get, my guess is that Fox and CBS want those games cutting into Eastern/Central prime time as little as possible.