"wpr"This week GB is at Cleveland, Chicago is at Cincinnati and and MN is at Pittsburgh.
What is up with the NFL schedule makers?
I am sick and tired of how the NFL does things.
All 3 of these games are on Fox. (Luckily the Chicago game is a late game.)
Why not have one of the 3 games scheduled for the NFC team's stadium so it will be on CBS?
The Suits must think every single game is interchangeable with every other game.
So instead of actually providing the fans with a choice they create conflict.

Northern IL was originally scheduled to get the MN game, fortunately the local station was able to change it to the GB game.
I see that Lima Ohio had to request the Cleveland game instead of the Pittsburgh game.
And as of now the northwest corner of WI has to watch the MN game.
It is as if the NFL goes out of their way to create as much conflict as possible.
Last week both GB and Chicago had their bye at the same time.
How difficult would it be to have teams in a geographic area have slightly different schedules?
Now I know it is hard to factor both MN and Chicago into the GB schedule but they could do a much better job than what they are doing now.

I agree 100% with you and I just checked this last night. I am in Chicago and I am getting the friggin Minnesota/Pittsburgh game. I was under the impression that it would be on CBS but they are putting the 'hot garbage' Colts/Rams game on.

So, my line-up is:
CBS @ Noon- Colts/Rams
Fox @ Noon- Vikes/Steelers

CBS @ 3:15- Bull Riding (lol)
Fox @ 3:15- Bears/Bengals

I always thought if the AFC team was home, the game was on CBS...am I wrong?

I get.
Packers at Browns



Late games
Jets at Raiders

Bears at Bengals

"AKamp74"

I always thought if the AFC team was home, the game was on CBS...am I wrong?

Wrong

Link

Sunday regional games

Under the current contracts, the regional Sunday afternoon games (1 p.m. "early" and 4 p.m. "late" games) are broadcast on CBS and Fox. CBS holds what is generally called the AFC package (AFC away games), and Fox holds what is referred to as the NFC package (NFC away games).

The "AFC package" for CBS is summarized as the following:


* Sunday afternoon AFC intra-conference games (AFC at AFC)

* Sunday afternoon interconference away games (AFC at NFC)

The "NFC package" for Fox is summarized as the following:


* Sunday afternoon NFC intra-conference games (NFC at NFC)

* Sunday afternoon interconference away games (NFC at AFC)

In 1970, when the NFL and AFL merged, and home blackouts were put into place for AFC games (the AFL had lifted these during its run), this assured that all Sunday afternoon road games would be seen on the same network. The current package allows both CBS and Fox access to every stadium/market in the league for at least two games per season (unless an interconference game is chosen as a primetime national game). In 2003, both Miami's home games against NFC teams were televised in primetime, a rare exception which prevented Fox from airing a game from Pro Player Stadium that season.

"Zero2Cool"I get.
Packers at Browns



Late games
Jets at Raiders

Bears at Bengals

Personally I think the network that only get to air on game should be aloud to rebroadcast a game that had been aired earlier that day.
Thus if Fox only has one game the local stations could show the MN game in the upper and western part of the State and the Bears game in the south east part. (if the games were 12 o'clock games.)
Here in northern IL we could see the GB game.
I think the NFL and networks would have a larger audience that way.
Those who want to see the "big late game matchup" on CBS can do so.
Others who would have gone to another channel and watched golf, bowling or the big mahjong tourney or even dare I say, turned the tv off and the internet (PackerHome) on can now watch the game on tv that they didn't get a chance to see before.

update original post

Browns fans must be really down in the dumps because I'm finding it impossible to find any Packers v. Browns threads on their message boards.

So is Ahman Green going to be suiting up for this game? Anybody know?

I think we have this one in the bag, unlike my felled Bungal prediction, the Brows have been horrible - and they are wafer thin right now, that being said, I still think our play will frustrate.

I think that we'll win this one, but not as easily as many appear to think. It all comes down to, once again, our O-line and Rodgers getting rid of the ball.

I know that everyone is optimistic about Lang playing LT. And rightfully so, he was pretty impressive. Still, though, we had the same feeling about Barbre (who's still manning the right side, btw), so this might just go horribly wrong and we'll be stuck with a horrible LT to complement our already horrible RT.

Normally, I wouldn't be too worried about the Browns' front 7 personnel. Yes, they have a good NT and a good OLB in Wimbley, but it ends just about there.

They do, however, have Rob Ryan as their defensive cordinator. He wasn't that impressive in Oakland, but from what I've seen from the Browns, he likes to play the same kind of defense as his brother. And that's pretty scary. I watched them play Buffalo (who also have a horrible O-line) and Edwards got under quite some pressure. I know, it was the Bills, but still, they kept them to 3 points the entire game. That man makes their entire defense just a tad bit better.

That said, if you can't score more than 10 points a game, you're still pretty much in trouble. I expect us to win this one, just because of the fact that the Browns can't get the ball into the end-zone to safe their life. Throw in Derek Anderson and our secondary and we should be ok.