Or, perhaps, New Orleans.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Super Bowl LIII hits 10 year low
- Thread starter crainbebo
- Start date
Or, perhaps, New Orleans.
Or, perhaps, New Orleans.
Network TV has been spotting red flags all over the place for decades. Both audiences and revenue are more fragmented.
As to the bowl game, just looking at the traditional network revenue is not enough. When you add in the streaming the figures look different.
And it is important to note that this year's CBS revenue is the third highest of all time. Yes, a bit lower than the prior two years, but higher than any other previous year.
What there does seem to be is an NFL problem... more interest in collegiate football, less in NFL. That is not TV's problem... it is one that the NFL itself has to face. Since the NFL became a political platform, I have not watched a single game and there is enough chatter everywhere to make us assume that the politicization of the sport has affected the viewing patterns of many.
Last edited:
Except that the NCAA Championship drew less than half the audience than the Super Bowl. About 25 million. Part of that could be the fact that it's on ESPN.
Once again, the issue is finding events that can draw a consensus audience. We'll see the same thing with the Grammy Awards this week. Expect the numbers to be down from previous years.
26.2 in New Orleans, which is a smidgen over half of last year's Pats-Eagles tilt.
And also that the big cities of the Northeast are generally terrible markets for college sports, New York and Boston especially. In those towns, except among alumni and gamblers, sports is either professional or it's Mickey Mouse.
In St. Louis it scored 39.8, down from last year's 41.3.
Again, the Grammy audience will be split with the streaming options.
Collegiate sports typically gets huge season game audiences, but in regional breaks. But when you look at market by market data, collegiate football is growing or flat, while NFL audiences are declining.
National interest in baseball is way down from years ago.
But for those who say baseball is dying, they should look at what the local numbers are. In all but a handful of the 29 U.S. markets with MLB, the prime time games are by far the most watched show of the evening. Even though the games are on regional sports channels that many viewers probably never watch, the games are always number one. The St Louis Cardinals local tv contract was a billion dollar deal.
The NFL has had the advantage of being pretty much just as popular in markets without a team as it is in cities with a team. The NBA has been moving in this direction the last few decades while the NHL is still really only a big deal in certain markets with teams.
Seems like MLB has been moving in the direction of being only popular in markets with teams where as it use to be the national pastime. ESPN and the other sports talk shows talk NBA and NFL all year, very little MLB talk except certain times of the year. But you turn on local St Louis sports talk and they are discussing the Cardinals constantly.
Could the day come when the NFL starts losing popularity in non football markets like baseball has. I could certainly see that as younger Americans seem to prefer soccer and basketball. The NFL will always be huge in Dallas, Pittsburgh, Cleveland etc. but the day could come when the average kid in say Des Moines couldn’t care less.
But for those who say baseball is dying, they should look at what the local numbers are. In all but a handful of the 29 U.S. markets with MLB, the prime time games are by far the most watched show of the evening. Even though the games are on regional sports channels that many viewers probably never watch, the games are always number one. The St Louis Cardinals local tv contract was a billion dollar deal.
The NFL has had the advantage of being pretty much just as popular in markets without a team as it is in cities with a team. The NBA has been moving in this direction the last few decades while the NHL is still really only a big deal in certain markets with teams.
Seems like MLB has been moving in the direction of being only popular in markets with teams where as it use to be the national pastime. ESPN and the other sports talk shows talk NBA and NFL all year, very little MLB talk except certain times of the year. But you turn on local St Louis sports talk and they are discussing the Cardinals constantly.
Could the day come when the NFL starts losing popularity in non football markets like baseball has. I could certainly see that as younger Americans seem to prefer soccer and basketball. The NFL will always be huge in Dallas, Pittsburgh, Cleveland etc. but the day could come when the average kid in say Des Moines couldn’t care less.
Could be, but the size of that population won't impact the national ratings. Same with other non-football towns. These major sports are built around big cities for a reason. They are big media markets. Losing Des Moines and Grand Forks or Boise doesn't matter if they can hold Philadelphia, Detroit, and San Francisco. You can't please everybody, but if you can please the majorities of the big population areas, you have something to sell.
Or, expressed in dollars, nearly a third of all radio and TV ad dollars are spent in the top 10 markets. Of course, the top 10 DMAs represent 30% of the US population, too.
does that include the subway alums of Notre Dame?
I'm not sure their presence is significant enough to move the needle, but yes, and their numbers are historically strongest in cities like Boston and NYC with large Irish Catholic populations, but Hispanic Catholics, whose numbers are increasing across America much more rapidly than are the numbers of Irish Catholics, have no such sentimental allegiance to the school. Also, as the halcyon glory days of Notre Dame recede deeper into the sepia-toned memories of their fathers and grandfathers and great-grandfathers, millennials are far less likely to continue the subway alum tradition.
Also, actual alumni of today's two dominant college football schools, Clemson and Alabama, as well as most other teams from the SEC and ACC, are more likely to wind up working and living in the Atlanta or Miami areas than in the Boston or New York areas, just as alums of the large universities of the Northeast -- many of which, like the Ivy League schools and the large state universities of the New England states, do not stress athletics -- are more likely to work and live in the Northeast.
Sports gamblers, of course, have (or should have, if they want to be successful) no school loyalty. They're just looking at the team most likely to cover or beat the spread, so theoretically, they should account for equal numbers of college football "fans" in every market. But I have the feeling that these fans whose only real interest in watching any college game depends on whether they have "action" on it are more numerous, percentage-wise, in areas with few strong college programs and few religion-based aversions to gambling.
Might have something to do with the location of this year's game (and the famous "no call" in the preliminary game AND the SB took place on a weekend that was otherwise not for the timid of snow/wind.
I switched years ago. NCAA football is just generally more exciting (specifically less importance on field goals).
I agree with you. The NFL's problems are self-inflicted and not the fault of the networks.
That might have been the 2nd most boring football game ever telecast
(#1 was Oregon State's 3-0 victory over Pitt in the 2008 Sun Bowl).
That might have been the 2nd most boring football game ever telecast
(#1 was Oregon State's 3-0 victory over Pitt in the 2008 Sun Bowl).
Last edited:
Yeah, I agree with Landtuna. I've seen some absolutely crazy college football games over the years. Upset after upset, storming-the-field after storming-the-field. I still remember the 2013 Iron Bowl well. I was channel surfing, stumbled across the end of the game on CBS and for Auburn, of course the rest was history. Watched a lot of good WSU and UW games this fall as well, including the big WSU win over Oregon.
Not as many college football official scandals, aren't there?
Not as many college football official scandals, aren't there?
College officials are bigger clowns than pro officials. Plenty of horrible calls and no-calls every week. Didn't some team get cheated out of a victory not long ago when the officials gave the other team an extra down? And that wasn't the first time it had happened. Don't forget the "friendly" hometown clock operators at college games as well! College sports in general have had more game-fixing scandals than pro sports, although most have had to do with basketball, a ridiculously easy sport to fix. Yes, the games are often wildly exciting, mostly because the players and coaches are making more mistakes.
My biggest problem with college football is there are just too darn many teams, too darn many games every week. I follow my alma mater and check out a couple of other games every Saturday, but with the NFL I know who many of the players on each team are and what I can expect from them. Does anyone really know who's who on every team -- or even most teams -- that play from noon till past midnight every Saturday in the fall? I'd much rather watch a game that I care about, featuring familiar players, over a random 3 1/2 (at least) hours of missed tackles and blown coverages and horrible coaching decisions no matter how many points the latter produces or how few the former does.
I don't know how anyone can say that with a straight face after this season's faux pas.
As far as the rest of your post....let's just say we are light years apart on our opinions. Yes, college football is much more unexpected in play calling than the pro's. These are kids and not people who have devoted more than a few years to the game. And I will agree, each play is not nearly as "premeditated" as in the pro game. Those are exactly the reasons I much prefer college over pro.
Watching pro football is akin to watch NASCAR at its highest level - the top drivers doing what they do week after week and being very good at it versus the youngsters coming up with more enthusiasm than education and taking chances the pro's don't normally take.
When you have a team lineup like the Patriots (great QB, great receiver/running back, outstanding tight end) you can expect something near perfect execution on nearly every offensive play. There is little excitement (unless you are a bettor) in this game compared to the not-so-talented college team battling for its life against an equally talented opponent.
You and I are both free to choose our favorite form of course. Just don't sell the college game short. After all, those are all future NHL stars.
I believe the reason why this year's Super Bowl ratings are low compared to previous years is because of one team: Patriots. Many football fans are getting sick and tired of seeing the Pats competing in the Super Bowl and that might have played a role in the lack of interest. Having them competing in such a major championship game like the Super Bowl is like seeing the Yankees playing in four straight World Series and both the Cavs and Warriors competing in four straight NBA Finals. The Patriots have now won six Super Bowl titles in the past seventeen years and the fans are now complaining about this trend, particularly because of accusations that the team was involved in numerous scandals, such as Deflategate and Spygate.
If Tom Brady and Bill Belichick both retire, it would make a huge difference and open the doors for other teams within the AFC to compete for the grandest stage of them all. I believe pretty soon this dynasty will die down within the next couple of years, and the Super Bowl ratings will improve.
If Tom Brady and Bill Belichick both retire, it would make a huge difference and open the doors for other teams within the AFC to compete for the grandest stage of them all. I believe pretty soon this dynasty will die down within the next couple of years, and the Super Bowl ratings will improve.
Which is the exact opposite of NYC, Boston, and the rest of the Northeast. Southern California is more college football country than NFL, while the Northeast has only a small handful of major college football programs in the entire region of New York, New Jersey, and New England. Buffalo, Syracuse, Rutgers, UConn, and Boston College are about it, as far as FBS programs go.
- Status