NLCS Ratings on TBS: Tank City

[KeithE4]

With two smaller-market teams (Rockies & Diamondbacks) playing, the NLCS generated its lowest ratings ever. The division series' did fairly well on the same network but they involved big-market teams (Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Phillies). Teams in Denver & Phoenix draw yawns outside of their home markets - they're newer teams with no long-term traditions or multi-generation fan bases.

Through the first 3 games of the 4-game series, TBS drew a 3.5 average rating compared to 4.4 average for the division series games.

Since it looks like it'll be a Rockies-Indians match-up (barring a big Red Sox comeback of course), this will be the 3rd year in a row that the World Series will involve teams that don't draw a national audience (read: both teams from outside the NE or California) outside of hard-core baseball fans. MLB apparently is only interested in selling the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, and Cubs (in their case, that's theoretical since no World Series involving the Cubs was televised; TV networks didn't exist in 1945 and baseball wasn't televised at all in Chicago until the next year) as desirable teams.

And that's too bad, since this should be a good series - one that Fox will probably do comparatively little to promote since it won't involve one of the aforementioned teams. Joe Buck & Tim McCarver will attempt to sound like they're halfway interested, just like the last 2 years. They won't fool anybody.

Link: Multichannel.com

 

[StadiumMustard]

Since it looks like it'll be a Rockies-Indians match-up (barring a big Red Sox comeback of course), this will be the 3rd year in a row that the World Series will involve teams that don't draw a national audience (read: both teams from outside the NE or California) outside of hard-core baseball fans. MLB apparently is only interested in selling the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, and Cubs (in their case, that's theoretical since no World Series involving the Cubs was televised; TV networks didn't exist in 1945 and baseball wasn't televised at all in Chicago until the next year) as desirable teams.

And that's too bad, since this should be a good series - one that Fox will probably do comparatively little to promote since it won't involve one of the aforementioned teams. Joe Buck & Tim McCarver will attempt to sound like they're halfway interested, just like the last 2 years. They won't fool anybody.

That's because FOX won't be making as much $$$ than they would if it was a Yankees/Red Sox/Cubs-size market in the World Series. It's not like the hacks at TBS and FOX aren't making their bias obvious. On Tuesday night when the Indians were cleaning the Red Sox clocks, McCarver and crew were digging for all the stats they could to prop up their "Baws-ton" boys. The sound of Indians' fans puking was heard all over (although the sound of Red Sox fans screaming in agony drowned them out )

 

[mleach]

Kinda makes me wonder if MLB regretted ever expanding to such markets as Phoenix, Denver, Florida or even Washington DC?

I was always told that the Baltimore Orioles were up there with the Yankees, Cubs, Red Soxs in getting the ratings, but I guess that is history now considering how bad they have been playing lately.

 

[DToTheJ]

I'd love to see someone at Fox bump his gums that he bets Fox would get bigger ratings with "House" reruns than a Cleveland/Colorado World Series.

In a perfect world, there would be a loophole which could move the series to TBS, but cleared locally on Fox 8 in Cleveland and Fox 31 in Denver as well as the other Fox affiliates in Colorado. Then, it would buy enough time for Joe Buck so that he could hop a flight to London and call another game for his New York Football Giants.

 

[bpatrick]

I saw in my local paper this morning that the Rockies-Diamondbacks
NLCS ratings (average) was HALF that of the Little League World
Series this year. HALF! One of the reasons cited (besides a bunch
of unknowns on the field) was the late starting time for some of the
games, after 10 PM in the East, one of which didn't end until after
3 AM ET.

And the writer went on to say that Fox must be dreading the
prospect of a Colorado-Cleveland World Series.

He also opined that the ratings downfall for postseason baseball
can be attributed to other things: postseason games are no longer
played in the afternoon (so an entire generation doesn't get to
watch because they have to be in bed); more commercials than in,
say, the '60s, which means the games take longer (he pointed out that
the longest game in the 1967 World Series took two hours, 48 minutes);
too narrow a strike zone on the part of most umpires; too many batters
stepping out of the box; too much time between pitches. So it's not
all about accommodating television. Nevertheless, he feels the public's
attitude about postseason baseball this year is: who cares?

 

[vibe]

Question: does every cable system have TBS?

 

[KML0224]

I think pretty much all homes have the channel these days.

 

[JeeperOne]

With two smaller-market teams (Rockies & Diamondbacks) playing, the NLCS generated its lowest ratings ever. The division series' did fairly well on the same network but they involved big-market teams (Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Phillies). Teams in Denver & Phoenix draw yawns outside of their home markets - they're newer teams with no long-term traditions or multi-generation fan bases.

Add to the fact that Arizona put up a BIG FAT ZILCH in the way of a little something called EFFORT and it should be of little wonder why the ratings were so low.

The game start times had little to do with it IMO...

Just my blunt opinion...

GO ROCKIES!!

Cheers

 

[KeithE4]

Add to the fact that Arizona put up a BIG FAT ZILCH in the way of a little something called EFFORT and it should be of little wonder why the ratings were so low.

Unfortunately, you're 100% correct. But you do have to admit, the Rockies are white-hot right now and would have won anyway unless the D'backs all of a sudden turned into the 1927 Yankees instead of the .250 hitters they were.

The game start times had little to do with it IMO...

Yes it did. Like it or not, the majority of the "important" (Top-20) markets, Madison Avenue advertisers, and all the network HQ's other than LA-based Fox are still in the eastern and central time zones. They're still the ones that count and those affiliates are the ones most upset about the late (to them) start times. MLB was trying to accommodate the home fans and that p***ed off these "important" stations when the games were in Phoenix, Denver, and Anaheim (counting the division series'). This was a western NLCS that didn't involve the Dodgers or Giants, with two teams that are just now building traditions that the bigger-market teams have had for 40-125 years. Both our teams are in the same boat and will be for many years to come.

Just my blunt opinion...

GO ROCKIES!!

Cheers

I'm pulling for them this year regardless of whether it's against the Indians or Red Sox. ;D

 

[bk77]

I'd love to see someone at Fox bump his gums that he bets Fox would get bigger ratings with "House" reruns than a Cleveland/Colorado World Series.

In a perfect world, there would be a loophole which could move the series to TBS, but cleared locally on Fox 8 in Cleveland and Fox 31 in Denver as well as the other Fox affiliates in Colorado. Then, it would buy enough time for Joe Buck so that he could hop a flight to London and call another game for his New York Football Giants.

and perhaps Erie, PA and Columbus and Youngstown, Ohio.

 

[Smittian]

I consider myself a hard-core baseball fan and I'll watch the WS no matter who's playing. But I'll admit, playoff baseball has become hard to watch. The reason is that the games have become so SLOOOOOOOOOOOWWWW!!!. The other night, while watching Red Sox-Indians, I could watch the beginning of an at-bat, switch over to the Rutgers-USF game on ESPN, watch a couple of plays from that game, switch it back and THE SAME GUY IS STILL AT BAT!

MLB has to do something to speed the games up. Make the pre-game show shorter, have the umps speed the game along, fewer commercials(which I know will NEVER happen!)

 

[Smittian]

To further prove my point, here are the average times for the playoff games so far................

ANGELS-BOSTON: 3 games, avg. time 3:22
ROCKIES-PHILLIES: 3 games, avg. time 3:08
CUBS-D'BACKS: 3 games, avg. time 3:13
INDIANS-YANKEES: 4 games, avg. time 3:57

ROCKIES-D'BACKS: 4 games, avg. time 3:30
INDIANS-RED SOX: 5 games, avg. time 3:51 (one game was an 11-inning affair that lasted a whopping 5:14 )

22 playoff games, average game time 3 hours 33 minutes

 

[genius]

Well with the Red Sox now going to the World Series perhaps interest in the series may go up again?

 

[RicoGregg]

I consider myself a hard-core baseball fan and I'll watch the WS no matter who's playing. But I'll admit, playoff baseball has become hard to watch. The reason is that the games have become so SLOOOOOOOOOOOWWWW!!!. The other night, while watching Red Sox-Indians, I could watch the beginning of an at-bat, switch over to the Rutgers-USF game on ESPN, watch a couple of plays from that game, switch it back and THE SAME GUY IS STILL AT BAT!

MLB has to do something to speed the games up. Make the pre-game show shorter, have the umps speed the game along, fewer commercials(which I know will NEVER happen!)

In the 60s, A's owner Charlie Finley had proposed a "20-second rule", where a ball would be called if the pitcher did not throw a pitch within 20 seconds. He even went to the trouble of installing a 20-second clock just beyond the CF fence at KC's Municipal Stadium, where the Athletics were still located, and where the home plate umpire could see it. Then-Commissioner Eckert ordered Finley to take the clock down, and of course, like just about everything else Finley proposed, the 20-second rule never got off the ground.

I personally liked the idea. They have shot clocks in basketball, and play clocks in football, why not a pitch clock in baseball?

 

[bpatrick]

If I remember, Charlie Finley's rule was that
the pitcher had 20 seconds to deliver the
pitch or be charged with a ball. I like the
idea, too. I'd also like to see the batter
prohibited from leaving the box from the
time he steps in until his at-bat is over.

 

[KeithE4]

Well with the Red Sox now going to the World Series perhaps interest in the series may go up again?

It'll own the northeast, between Red Sox-loving New England and Red Sox-hating New York. Fox will at least be able to get a few more ad dollars than they would if the Indians hadn't choked had won. The only interest in the rest of the country (outside of true baseball fans, of course, who'll always watch) will be in Colorado and with transplanted New Englanders nationwide.

Without the Yankees, Dodgers, or Cubs (the only teams with a true national following), no World Series will garner top ratings. MLB ratings, like the NBA and unlike the NFL and college sports, are almost totally big-market driven.

 

[bk77]

Well with the Red Sox now going to the World Series perhaps interest in the series may go up again?

It'll own the northeast, between Red Sox-loving New England and Red Sox-hating New York. Fox will at least be able to get a few more ad dollars than they would if the Indians hadn't choked had won. The only interest in the rest of the country (outside of true baseball fans, of course, who'll always watch) will be in Colorado and with transplanted New Englanders nationwide.

Without the Yankees, Dodgers, or Cubs (the only teams with a true national following), no World Series will garner top ratings. MLB ratings, like the NBA and unlike the NFL and college sports, are almost totally big-market driven.

I have heard that the Rockies have a following on the west coast mainly because their games are heard on KOA but I am not totally sure. The Braves when TBS was still more/less an Atlanta station had a nationwide following. I still remember some of those old Braves/TBS promos that point out the Braves were "America's team".

From baseball to the NBA, if NBA ratings are indeed totally big market driven why is it that in recent years the NBA had expressed interest in putting a team in some of the smaller markets like Louisville, Norfolk and Oklahoma City not too mention actually putting a team in Memphis and New Orleans? New Orleans wasn't exactly a "major" market even before Katrina.

And even with baseball, back in the 90s I seem to remember that MLB was very interested in expanding into Buffalo and Indianapolis. If the BIG markets are that important why even consider putting a team say in Buffalo? Of course one could say that MLB ( and the NBA and other major league sports ) likes to play with the other markets about putting a team there, kinda like when the Montreal Expos moved to DC. It seems like every city "had a chance" get that team from Las Vegas to Indianapolis to Virginia Beach even though I heard that MLB had already decided from day one to move to Washington DC.

 

[KeithE4]

I have heard that the Rockies have a following on the west coast mainly because their games are heard on KOA but I am not totally sure. The Braves when TBS was still more/less an Atlanta station had a nationwide following. I still remember some of those old Braves/TBS promos that point out the Braves were "America's team".

I still question how many viewers TBS really had for Braves games, especially when compared with the Cubs or the Mets in their WWOR days. Once WGN became a superstation and Harry Caray moved to the north side, the Cubs were "America's Team" far more than the Braves were, even though the Braves were the better team overall.

From baseball to the NBA, if NBA ratings are indeed totally big market driven why is it that in recent years the NBA had expressed interest in putting a team in some of the smaller markets like Louisville, Norfolk and Oklahoma City not too mention actually putting a team in Memphis and New Orleans? New Orleans wasn't exactly a "major" market even before Katrina.

This is a 100% turnaround on the part of David "I'd like Lakers-vs-Lakers in the finals" Stern. His priority throughout most of his tenure was the Top 10 markets and he made no secret of that fact. But I think that had a lot to do with those markets being his broadcast network's (NBC) priority. Now that they're mostly cable and NBC is out of the picture, the big-market emphasis isn't necessary to keep their TV partners happy, although I think the effort to move into smaller markets will ultimately fail.

Try to market a Utah-vs-Charlotte NBA finals to national advertisers based in NYC, LA, or Chicago. If there's one league who's core audience is young, affluent, and urban, it's the NBA. Teams from the "sticks" won't cut it with them. The Jazz may have been to the finals twice, but I can almost guarantee that few outside of Utah were rooting for Stockton, Malone, and company no matter how good they were.

And even with baseball, back in the 90s I seem to remember that MLB was very interested in expanding into Buffalo and Indianapolis. If the BIG markets are that important why even consider putting a team say in Buffalo? Of course one could say that MLB ( and the NBA and other major league sports ) likes to play with the other markets about putting a team there, kinda like when the Montreal Expos moved to DC. It seems like every city "had a chance" get that team from Las Vegas to Indianapolis to Virginia Beach even though I heard that MLB had already decided from day one to move to Washington DC.

Buffalo and Indianapolis are too small to support major league baseball. Both cities are within a 2 hour drive of existing teams (Toronto and Cincinnati, respectively) anyway. Milwaukee, Baltimore, Kansas City, St. Louis, and Cincinnati are also too small by today's standards but they have baseball traditions going back 50 years or more. They've established their fan-bases. Buffalo and Indy probably couldn't do that. They'll probably always have AAA teams, though. Both cities do well at that level.

Even some big markets don't support their teams - both Florida cities come to mind immediately. Even in Chicago, SF/Oakland, and LA, those cities' AL teams don't draw well unless they're winning. But they do well enough to stay, although the White Sox and A's have attempted to move at one time or another. The only guaranteed-viable 2-team city is New York.

 

[JeeperOne]

Hi everyone:

Well with the Red Sox now going to the World Series perhaps interest in the series may go up again?

Yeah. It's already being dubbed the Rox vs. SoxDavid & Goliath World Series.

And we all know who usually wins those David & Goliath World Series matches (That is if recent history is any indicator).

My prediction - ROCKIES IN FIVE BABY!!

Can you DENVER = BONKER CITY on Monday October 20th???? I can just see it now. FOX Sports showing the post game ceremonies and the presentation of the trophy while across the Platte River, Mike Tirico & the Monday Night Football crew over on ESPN can't even hear themselves think because 80,000 people are screaming after having heard about the Rockies winning the World Series.

Not even the legendary Brett Favre will be able to navigate the Packers down the field in all the noise as Invesco Field will be LOUDER than Seattle's Qwest Field has ever been. *Heheh!*

But you know something though? With MyNetwork now no longer running those stupid telenovelas (Which is what MyNetwork was running when TBS bought their way into the postseason to begin with) and running such sports-oriented programming as NFL Total Access and fight league action, how much do you wanna bet that News Corp. will buy out the remainer of TBS' current contract and put those games on MyNetwork (Or at least those that conflict with the FOX telecasts) next year?

I'd be willing to bet the farm on that.

Thoughts?

Cheers

 

[dhett]

Thoughts?

Cheers

Yeah, October 20th is already past, and it was a Saturday. I think you forgot your meds today.