Firefly-10/11/2002 (1 Viewer)

[Martin Rendall]

Must....... hold........ back......... sensationalistic........ comments......... Really ............want .......... to .......... troll............ as.... well...........

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Exactly. It wasn't sports that killed Futurama but the scheduling.

Sure, if Fox had stuck Futurama in a different time slot it may not have been preempted by those games. But if football wouldn't run over more games than not, it wouldn't have needed to. I understand that sports are more popular, I just don't understand why that should dictate that sports should always supercede original programming when there is a conflict. I mean there are more Full Screen viewers than OAR viewers. Does that mean pan and scan should always supercede the theatrical presentation?

 

[Jason Seaver]

I understand that sports are more popular, I just don't understand why that should dictate that sports should always supercede original programming when there is a conflict.

The Heidi Bowl. After that fiasco, not only did broadcasters learn that irritating the sports audience was a bad idea, but the leagues started getting "no pre-empt" clauses written into their contracts.

 

[Jeff Kleist]

The Heidi Bowl. After that fiasco, not only did broadcasters learn that irritating the sports audience was a bad idea, but the leagues started getting "no pre-empt" clauses written into their contracts.

Yup, was a fiasco. And it's got many a show's gravestone to prove it. How about picture in picture? You don't need sound to watch sports.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Quote:

No, you never need to hear the details of a penalty, the status of an injury, or any other commentary that might be pointing out things that you might not notice. :rolleyes
This thread has irritated me enough to want to call Fox for thanking them for preempting programming for sports.

 

[Todd Terwilliger]

Adam,

The nature of sports dictates that exact times cannot be predicted. The networks are aware of this. If they simply allowed for some runover time and adjusted their schedule accordingly, there would be no issue.

I for one want to see my sports like I see my movies: uncut.

 

[Danny R]

Well, all I have to say is this: If the Braves were playing, I'd have wanted baseball to be shown. But since they are not, I miss my Firefly.

 

[Patrick Sun]

It's always about personal self-interest, isn't it?

 

[Andy Sheets]

The Heidi Bowl. After that fiasco, not only did broadcasters learn that irritating the sports audience was a bad idea, but the leagues started getting "no pre-empt" clauses written into their contracts.

Heh. I remember watching the Rockets in 94 going for their first championship only to have NBC cut the game off in favor of the OJ Chase. My step-father immediately got on the phone to the local station and pretty much tore the operator's ear off through the phone line with his abusive language. Yes, the sports audience does get irritated

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Well, all I have to say is this: If the Braves were playing, I'd have wanted baseball to be shown. But since they are not, I miss my Firefly.

 

[Craig S]

I remember watching the Rockets in 94 going for their first championship only to have NBC cut the game off in favor of the OJ Chase.

Ooh, you had to bring that up. I was livid when they did that. The OJ "chase" wasn't news, it was a bunch of cars driving down the LA freeway (remember, it was not a high-speed chase). Is there anybody who thought the OJ "chase" was interesting in any way???

 

[Todd Terwilliger]

Craig and Andy,

I remember the same thing. It infuriated me to no end.

 

[Jeff Kleist]

I should point out that all they have to do to fix football's running over is to set the clock at 3 hours and not stop it. Problem solved

 

[Patrick Sun]

I think that's a very naive way to think about televised pro sports. It would compromise the intregrity of the game if the clock was to just run for a specific length of time because what's to stop teams from "running out the clock once they got the scoring lead" in crazy ways that is unfair to the opposing team?

Also, if you let the clock run continuously, there is no good place for the networks to show commercials, which generates most of the revenue for the networks. Without revenue and profit, the networks might not take a chance on shows, like, say a sci-fi western in space.

 

[Todd Terwilliger]

Jeff,

Obviously you're not a sports fan because the fix you suggest is ludicrous. Patrick is spot-on about the integrity of the game. It's more than just that game, but the entire sport, the parameters of which you want to alter because your show was preempted.

 

[Romier S]

This thread was about Firefly right?

 

[Andrew Beacom]

I knew Firefly wasn't on but I didn't know it was for Baseball. I'm not a fan of American pro-sports so I couldn't really care less. It certainly is poor timing for a show attempting to build an audience.

And they certainly need to do something about the sports over run. If they know that it's going to go over because there's that many stoppages and add's they should be alloting time for it. Give it a 4 hour slot and fill the remainder with ad's.

 

[Todd Terwilliger]

Andrew,

They know about overruns, I just don't think they terribly care.

Maybe they should do what many cable stations do: late night replays of primetime.

 

[John Thomas]

and let Fox do what Fox does best...

Show an all-news program?

 

[Jeff Kleist]

what's to stop teams from "running out the clock once they got the scoring lead" in crazy ways that is unfair to the opposing team?

Shot clock