One could say the exact same thing about college football and Alabama.
-
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
One could say the exact same thing about college football and Alabama.
Maybe...there are some who blame the NFL for banning him. That was the issue all of the musical performers addressed about appearing on the show. They didn't want their performances to suggest they approved of what the NFL had done to him.
There are a lot of reasons, concussions, dilution of the game. Patriots and Rams. Teams body outside of Boston really care about. Kapernick is just about forgotten now but the leagues issues continue.
There are only 12 clubs who are the #1 program on all television in their market. Yes, the Cardinals are pretty dominant in the St. Louis market, as are the Cubs un Chicago and the Red Sox in Boston. But the Tampa Bay Rays also got a billion-dollar contract recently, despite being one of several teams with average TV audiences under 50k.
It is true that most baseball teams have the highest rating of any cable program in their market. But that's something like being the tallest midget, when the . Nine teams had average audiences of under 60k, despite being #1 on cable. Even the Dodgers barely cracked 100k despite being in market #2. Only 7 teams cracked 100k, and those were all in top 10 markets where a modest share will get you to the 100k mark. #1 (both Mets and Yankees), #2 (Dodgers), #3 (Cubs), #4 (Giants), #8 (Astros), #9 (Red Sox).
Moreover, baseball viewership is approaching 60. So I'm not sure MLB's TV model is the one to emulate.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mauryb...ows-continued-strong-popularity/#299300346257
Except that there are several dozen playoff games in college, even more if you consider the lower divisions. There is only one Stupid Bowl.
There are playoffs in the NFL too. Only one national college football championship. The bowls are now merely consolation prizes. To the point where the championship is rotated among the four major bowls. The national championship is the super bowl of college.
I think that was definitely a factor, but there were other reasons.
NFL football is becoming difficult to watch with all of the endless delays for replay challenges (after which they often STILL don't get the calls right). I personally would rather go back to
no replays and maintaining the flow of the game, since its clear they are still going to blow a certain percentage of calls.
The game is seen by many fans as less exciting than it used to be, due to rule changes that were enacted mainly to protect players from concussions.
Fans in many other cities are frankly just sick and tired of Tom Brady, Belichick and the Patriots.
Assorted and sundry misbehavior of players that ranges from juvenile, whiny pouting to more serious criminal offenses and the abuse of women. Here in Pittsburgh pretty much all of the talk this season has centered around 2 players who are acting like spoiled adolescent millionaires.
Last edited:
And they should hope the NFL never takes that into account and starts rigging the outcomes of games so the most TV-friendly teams get into the Super Bowl. Because the same thing could happen to THEIR teams should they go on an extended successful run.
Football viewership is also on the north side of 50 and creeping toward the Madison Avenue dead zone. This is a problem with all major spectator sports but basketball.
That was exactly what the NBA was accused of, especially during its time on NBC in the '90s. If Michael Jordan played, Michael Jordan won (OK, 1995 was the exception, but he only played the final 1/4 of the regular season that year).
I also remember the logic-defying streak of something like 20 consecutive Game Sevens all going to the home team. Some suggested the NBA was being pushed to do so by NBC in order to supply a more exciting celebration scene at the end of the climactic contest. Of course, home-court advantage in basketball has always defied logic to some extent, so I suppose that if you buy into crowd support being a major factor in the regular season, then you'd buy into it making home teams invincible in playoff deciders for years and years. But then, some people also buy into the idea of a flat Earth.
Not when the initial playoff field is decided by anything but season's results.
I totally agree.
Disagree. The only two rules I am aware of is the horsecollar penalty and helmet to helmet contact. Unless play is stopped to verify the field call from the replay booth both are immediate penalties and the game goes on.
The rules are tougher on any contact to the head now. Blocking/tackling below the waist is also a penalty in almost all circumstances now, an effort by the league to cut down on knee injuries to its star offensive performers.
Really? I know plenty of people in their 20s and 30s who watch the NFL - and other sports too. Hell one of my 16 year old High School sophomore co-workers turned down the opportunity to pick up a shift on Sunday because he didn't want to miss The Super Bowl. The shift would've been 2PM-7PM.
I agree. Just go to any sports bar on a Sunday and look around. Most people there are under 40.
Which may be the point. Millennials see sports as a social thing, one they do with others rather than at home.
That makes sense, and would certainly distort the average viewer age. Older folks predominantly watch at home anyway, and the older they get, .the less likely they are to go to a party or down to the bar to watch.
Add to that the number of Super Bowl parties.
What I'd like to see is the amount of betting that is taking place on this game. Is it up or down? That will be telling.
With the start of legalized sports betting in several states this year, I'd say it's likely to be up. Even if some fans were uninspired by the matchup or thought a Patriots victory was a "lock,"
Besides, I can't see many of them who routinely bet on the game refusing to do so this year because of either of those factors. If you have a strong opinion of how the game is going to turn out and the inclination and wherewithal to put serious money behind your opinion, then you bet. It's not like racing, where if you bet a heavy favorite you get little in return because of the pari-mutuel system; in sports betting, your wager on the favorite to cover the spread pays just as much as your wager on the underdog to beat it. And there's always the over/under bet, which must have been a disaster for the sports books this year.
- Status