Sec19Row53

It's rumored that someone somewhere heard that someone hoped to talk about it.

Who are they? That's Dallas, where they STILL play on astroturf (however named).

I'd call that less 'interesting' than missing the point - that doesn't address the lack of colors in the uniform.

I have no problem with single layer numbers, but given (I think it's a given) that the Jaguars are too lacking in color, an outlined number would be good there, IMO.

I think everyone ELSE is wearing them upside down

Isn't the fact that you had to id the Rams colors the antithesis of what this stated, that the colors were the teams' ID?

I have never read that, or heard that, before this thread. I think Dave Maraniss would have addressed it in his book (When Pride Still Mattered) had it been a thing.

No. Some to USA. Some to NBC. Some to Peacock https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/SB-Blogs/Breaking-News/2021/01/NBCSN.aspx

Bubbles never wore a helmet. Wait - that might explain Detroit's problems all these years!

Not to mention 'angry mascot logo' is played out.

How about giving me a reason to click on some random link? I'd think you would want to tell us what this is so that we might look at it.

I don't know anyone who uses the old name. Also anecdotal.

Considering how many people HATE the Rams new look, and consider how many also thought their update would be a slam dunk classic, YES the Bengals could possibly look worse.

Careful what you wish for. Player involvement doesn't offer much more than fire emojis.

This has happened to me for awhile. I thought I was imagining it. It's only certain style ads - ones that have an almost 'dashboard' shape to them.

I paid for the autographed version, so mine doesn't.

One of these years, there will be two threads. One for real news, and one full of speculation and lists of teams that people want to change

I disregard them unless I'm trying to get at notifications. It's easier that way. Of course, that might be the cause for periodic inaccessibility when in phone, but I don't know.

Speculation on the 506Sports Twitter feed revolves around this: I'd think that explanation from last week about ensuring they're giving Sunday Ticket a minimum number of games applies here as well. I'm curious how they ended up with these markets though. Were these the markets that would have shown the game if it was on Sunday? The important part of it is that Sunday Ticket has to ahve a minimum number of games. If these markets have already met that threshold, then they are more likely to get this game. The "last week" part of this has to do with a game between Denver and Tampa Bay that was similarly blacked out. EDIT: This is done to protect the Sunday Ticket package. That package is contractually provided a minimum number of games. Re-scheduled games have chipped away at that number, so certain areas aren't allowed to have this one broadcast to assure that the NFL delivers its quota to Sunday Ticket.

That sounds good, but there's no way Green Bay or Milwaukee would have gotten Pittsburgh-Washington rather than Chicago-Detroit. The same can be said for Chicago and Detroit!

I hope nobody is going to drive there. I get it - low level football will drive. Ugh

If you're talked about and don't listen, does a tree make a sound when it falls? Or something

Side banners / mobile ads have been noticeably strong the last few days. It's making navigation on the board difficult at best.

66.7% of all players in MLB history with the first name of Robin are Hall of Famers. Damn you, Ventura!

Adding 5 teams from a semi-pro league? WARNING WARNING WARNING