RANDALL’s RANT

Way too many early games this past Sunday

@randallhandle

It looks good on the NFL and the television networks that broadcast the games. All they are thinking about is their money-making machines. How else do you explain the imbalance in scheduling games this past Sunday?

Typically, there are a few more 1 p.m. Eastern games than 4 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. games, due largely in part to time zone demographics. However, Sunday's slate was a joke. There were nine early games and just two late afternoon games. Don't think for a moment that it wasn't deliberate. The brain trusts at Fox Sports knew they had a marquee game with the Packers and Bucs, featuring two storied quarterbacks with Aaron Rodgers taking on Tom Brady. They didn't want any other games sharing the spotlight so they shifted all other contests to the early slot. CBS knew that it couldn't compete with the big matchup so they stuck us with one game. Of course, they chose the useless Jets as their sacrificial lamb in order to satisfy their obligation. Hopefully what happened next is a lesson to them all. By halftime of the pair of late games, there was little reason to continue watching. Both games were blowouts and football viewers could engage in other activities that did not include being glued to their televisions. Karma strikes again.

One of the more controversial decisions from Sunday's schedule had Romeo Crennel trying a two-point convert when ahead by seven and less than two minutes remaining in regulation. Former NFL quarterback turned broadcaster Rich Gannon went ballistic on this strategy. Chill out, Rich. While an argument can be made for kicking the extra point to go ahead by eight, a successful two-pointer likely secures the game as it would have put the Texans ahead by two scores. A miss still required the Titans to march downfield and score the same touchdown that would have been needed if Houston opted to go ahead by eight. Gannon pulled out his “2-point” strategy card, the same way that a novice blackjack player has a chart advising when to hit or stand, before ranting to colleague Greg Gumbel about Crennel's strategy. The fact that an ex-QB requires such a card is embarrassing in itself. Truly, it's not that complicated. Ask any bettor. In this particular case, either choice has some merit. One set of analytics indicates that there was 91.5% probability of winning by kicking, 90.5% by going for two.

Such a slim margin can easily justify the coach's decision.