-
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
NFL TV Ratings Down 10%, Even More For Prime Time Games
- Thread starter Oscar Madison
- Start date
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/programming/primetime-ratings-baseball-beats-football/160801
Update World Series beats Sunday Night Football.
Update World Series beats Sunday Night Football.
No surprise....one is a championship game, the other is just a regular season game.
I predict a nice rebound next season. The NFL has had much stronger competition to overcome on TV this season than I can recall. Two of the three debates in a once-in-a-lifetime (I hope) presidential race and then the Cubs -- America's baseball underdog -- in the Series for the first time since 1945 trying to win their first championship since 1908. Baseball would be in deep, deep trouble if that storyline couldn't attract more viewers than a ho-hum regular season football game. It's one thing to outrate Rays-Phillies or Giants-Royals, but there's a lot more for the casual fan in this year's matchup. Add to that the Black Lives Matter protest controversy and the absence of viewer magnet Tom Brady for four games and it's small wonder the ratings are down. Next year -- unless the Cubs fail to win this season but return to the Series next year -- the anthem protest thing probably will have jumped the shark in terms of ability to stir passion or outrage, and barring injury or further cheating, Brady will be back for a full season. Will that make up the entire loss in TV eyeballs? Probably not, but every sport's TV numbers are bound to slide as cord cutting increases and people find ways to watch that don't show up in the Nielsens.
Another possible factor: fantasy football. Unlike betting against the spread, which creates a strong desire to watch the game(s) you have your money on until the outcome is decided, fantasy players can get their fix easily without watching a snap -- instant notifications of your "team's" stats are readily available on any device. I work Sundays and three of the guys I work with play fantasy -- they don't watch because they're working, but they do stay updated on how the players on their roster are doing. I doubt they're the only three such people out there.
Oh, and how about the impact of NFL Red Zone, the cable/satellite channel that shows game action only when teams are threatening to score? Fantasy players love it, as it gives them the instant gratification of statistics without having to sit through all those possessions that go nowhere. Does Red Zone viewership figure into the total ratings number for the NFL?
Last edited:
In all fairness, prime time network entertainment programming ratings are down, too. Cable "news" ratings are up.
People are watching the World Series this year because neither team has won one in over 50 years. In previous years when you had teams like the Kansas City Royals in the series, nobody cares.
Since the World Series is going to game 7 tonight I won't be surprised if it will have the biggest ratings for a baseball game in years if not decades.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/spor...a44d-cc2898cfab06_story.html?tid=ss_fb-bottom yes a new article out on NFL Ratings.
The last time the Cubs were in a World Series (1945, vs Detroit Tigers), there was no TV broadcast. Chicago had one station (WBKB), but they didn't televise the games at Wrigley, and Detroit had no TV yet. The Tigers won in 7.
The last time Cleveland won the WS (1948, vs Boston Braves), all four networks aired it, but coverage was split. The games in Boston aired there, plus NY, Schenectady, Philly, and Washington, while the Cleveland games aired there, plus Chicago, Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Detroit, and Toledo, with no coverage in the East. The Indians won in 6.
One of these teams is going to lose. If the Cubs lose and make it back to next year's Series, will the ratings match this year's? How about if the Indians lose, then return? Should the Cubs return, their opponents should be the Rangers, who haven't been in a World Series yet -- either as the Rangers or the 1961 expansion Senators. (The original Senators won two Series and became the Twins and have won two more.) Should the Indians return, they should face the Nationals, whose Series-less legacy traces to the 1969 expansion Expos.
Last edited:
Well, the Cubs have a national following and a lackluster legacy which draws people in. I don't think the same can be said for the Rangers and Nationals. They just don't have the same allure.
The Cubs developed quite a national following when WGN-TV was a superstation. The Braves were also on a superstation but their following seemed mostly in the South.
The Senators 2.0/Rangers have been in the series twice. 2010 and 2011. Lost both times.
Oops, brain fart there. For some reason I thought they went out in the LCS each time. Then I was reminded of Nelson Cruz's error...
So you're saying a Cubs-Yankees or Cubs-Red Sox series would do better than Cubs-Rangers if the Cubs don't win this year? (Although the Cubbies are looking pretty good at this moment!)
Well, now that the election is over, ratings should bounce back big, starting ... well, not tonight. Browns-Ravens. Think I'll watch warmed-over pundit talk on CNN or Fox.
- Status