Comments on: The Real Reason It’s The “Super” Bowl http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428 Nielsen TV Show Ratings, Data and More Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:38:11 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Rena Moretti http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-3937 Rena Moretti Tue, 22 Jan 2008 03:12:34 +0000 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-3937 Your very interesting graph also illustrates why the networks love it that Nielsen (and the press) has gone from reporting ratings to reporting viewers. The reason? The population is expanding quite rapidly, making the number of viewers potentially higher each year. I wonder what this graph would look like in ratings points. Your very interesting graph also illustrates why the networks love it that Nielsen (and the press) has gone from reporting ratings to reporting viewers.

The reason? The population is expanding quite rapidly, making the number of viewers potentially higher each year.

I wonder what this graph would look like in ratings points.

]]> By: Rena Moretti http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-16787 Rena Moretti Tue, 22 Jan 2008 02:12:34 +0000 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-16787 Your very interesting graph also illustrates why the networks love it that Nielsen (and the press) has gone from reporting ratings to reporting viewers.<br><br>The reason? The population is expanding quite rapidly, making the number of viewers potentially higher each year.<br><br>I wonder what this graph would look like in ratings points. Your very interesting graph also illustrates why the networks love it that Nielsen (and the press) has gone from reporting ratings to reporting viewers.

The reason? The population is expanding quite rapidly, making the number of viewers potentially higher each year.

I wonder what this graph would look like in ratings points.

]]> By: Bill Gorman http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-3915 Bill Gorman Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:29:26 +0000 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-3915 Indeed. As I said, I think the effect is likely small, much less important than many other factors. I have no real analysis to back up TV market influence on the Super Bowl ratings [just as you have none to prove the counter argument]. It just seems logical to me that the marginal viewer in a market that is involved in the game would be more inclined to watch and there are many more marginal viewers in NY than in TB. Indeed. As I said, I think the effect is likely small, much less important than many other factors.

I have no real analysis to back up TV market influence on the Super Bowl ratings [just as you have none to prove the counter argument].

It just seems logical to me that the marginal viewer in a market that is involved in the game would be more inclined to watch and there are many more marginal viewers in NY than in TB.

]]> By: Robert Seidman http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-3913 Robert Seidman Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:21:05 +0000 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-3913 Really? Tampa Bay vs. Oakland (2003) had more viewers than NY vs. Baltimore (2001). OK, that was Baltimore, but still. There's no statistical historical basis for predicting that there will be more viewers because it's NY than TB. In fact, St. Lous (small television market) vs. Tennessee (smaller television market) in 2002 had more viewers than NY vs. Balt. Really? Tampa Bay vs. Oakland (2003) had more viewers than NY vs. Baltimore (2001). OK, that was Baltimore, but still. There’s no statistical historical basis for predicting that there will be more viewers because it’s NY than TB. In fact, St. Lous (small television market) vs. Tennessee (smaller television market) in 2002 had more viewers than NY vs. Balt.

]]> By: Bill Gorman http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-3912 Bill Gorman Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:19:19 +0000 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-3912 The 2007 viewership was 93.184m, so I'd say that 100m is well within reach. The 2007 viewership was 93.184m, so I’d say that 100m is well within reach.

]]> By: Bill Gorman http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-3911 Bill Gorman Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:15:52 +0000 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-3911 I think the Super Bowl is so universal, any factors moving the ratings are pretty minor. I think the Pats try for 19-0 would be a bigger influence than a Favre-Brady matchup, but either is small, maybe a few percent. The fact that NY as a TV market is in the game is likely an even smaller influence. There will be more viewers than if it had been Tampa Bay, but not significantly. I think the Super Bowl is so universal, any factors moving the ratings are pretty minor.

I think the Pats try for 19-0 would be a bigger influence than a Favre-Brady matchup, but either is small, maybe a few percent.

The fact that NY as a TV market is in the game is likely an even smaller influence. There will be more viewers than if it had been Tampa Bay, but not significantly.

]]> By: Robert Seidman http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-3909 Robert Seidman Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:13:12 +0000 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-3909 Hmmmm chance viewers will be over 100 million? Surely the historic quest of the Golden Boy can squeeze an additional 10 million viewers or so? I'll go 100% Hmmmm chance viewers will be over 100 million? Surely the historic quest of the Golden Boy can squeeze an additional 10 million viewers or so? I’ll go 100%

]]> By: Robert Seidman http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-3907 Robert Seidman Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:54:22 +0000 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-3907 Market size of participating teams doesn't work with sports the way it works with Desperate Housewives. The markets matter for Desperate Housewives, but only *sometimes* in terms of sports. If the LA Dodgers get in the World Series -- it's a HUGE deal ratings wise. But if the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim get there -- no, no ratings bump. It's the same here. The NFL did NOT get the matchup it was salivating for. While it's in no way going out on a limb to predict record ratings (due to the Patriots historic quest) --the ratings likely would have been higher with "small market" Green Bay and Brett Favre vs. Tom Brady than "HUGE market" NY, and Eli Manning. The frozen tundra certainly did look cool in HD, But yesterday,it was Green Bay and Favre who looked old and cold. Market size of participating teams doesn’t work with sports the way it works with Desperate Housewives. The markets matter for Desperate Housewives, but only *sometimes* in terms of sports. If the LA Dodgers get in the World Series — it’s a HUGE deal ratings wise. But if the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim get there — no, no ratings bump.

It’s the same here. The NFL did NOT get the matchup it was salivating for. While it’s in no way going out on a limb to predict record ratings (due to the Patriots historic quest) –the ratings likely would have been higher with “small market” Green Bay and Brett Favre vs. Tom Brady than “HUGE market” NY, and Eli Manning.

The frozen tundra certainly did look cool in HD, But yesterday,it was Green Bay and Favre who looked old and cold.

]]> By: Bill Gorman http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-16786 Bill Gorman Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:29:26 +0000 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-16786 Indeed. As I said, I think the effect is likely small, much less important than many other factors.<br><br>I have no real analysis to back up TV market influence on the Super Bowl ratings [just as you have none to prove the counter argument].<br><br>It just seems logical to me that the marginal viewer in a market that is involved in the game would be more inclined to watch and there are many more marginal viewers in NY than in TB. Indeed. As I said, I think the effect is likely small, much less important than many other factors.

I have no real analysis to back up TV market influence on the Super Bowl ratings [just as you have none to prove the counter argument].

It just seems logical to me that the marginal viewer in a market that is involved in the game would be more inclined to watch and there are many more marginal viewers in NY than in TB.

]]> By: Robert Seidman http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-16785 Robert Seidman Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:21:05 +0000 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-16785 Really? Tampa Bay vs. Oakland (2003) had more viewers than NY vs. Baltimore (2001). OK, that was Baltimore, but still. There's no statistical historical basis for predicting that there will be more viewers because it's NY than TB. In fact, St. Lous (small television market) vs. Tennessee (smaller television market) in 2002 had more viewers than NY vs. Balt. Really? Tampa Bay vs. Oakland (2003) had more viewers than NY vs. Baltimore (2001). OK, that was Baltimore, but still. There's no statistical historical basis for predicting that there will be more viewers because it's NY than TB. In fact, St. Lous (small television market) vs. Tennessee (smaller television market) in 2002 had more viewers than NY vs. Balt.

]]> By: Bill Gorman http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-16784 Bill Gorman Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:19:19 +0000 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-16784 The 2007 viewership was 93.184m, so I'd say that 100m is well within reach. The 2007 viewership was 93.184m, so I'd say that 100m is well within reach.

]]> By: Bill Gorman http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-16783 Bill Gorman Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:15:52 +0000 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-16783 I think the Super Bowl is so universal, any factors moving the ratings are pretty minor.<br><br>I think the Pats try for 19-0 would be a bigger influence than a Favre-Brady matchup, but either is small, maybe a few percent.<br><br>The fact that NY as a TV market is in the game is likely an even smaller influence. There will be more viewers than if it had been Tampa Bay, but not significantly. I think the Super Bowl is so universal, any factors moving the ratings are pretty minor.

I think the Pats try for 19-0 would be a bigger influence than a Favre-Brady matchup, but either is small, maybe a few percent.

The fact that NY as a TV market is in the game is likely an even smaller influence. There will be more viewers than if it had been Tampa Bay, but not significantly.

]]> By: Robert Seidman http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-16782 Robert Seidman Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:13:12 +0000 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-16782 Hmmmm chance viewers will be over 100 million? Surely the historic quest of the Golden Boy can squeeze an additional 10 million viewers or so? I'll go 100% Hmmmm chance viewers will be over 100 million? Surely the historic quest of the Golden Boy can squeeze an additional 10 million viewers or so? I'll go 100%

]]> By: Robert Seidman http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-16781 Robert Seidman Mon, 21 Jan 2008 16:54:22 +0000 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/01/21/the-real-reason-its-the-super-bowl/2428#comment-16781 Market size of participating teams doesn't work with sports the way it works with Desperate Housewives. The markets matter for Desperate Housewives, but only *sometimes* in terms of sports. If the LA Dodgers get in the World Series -- it's a HUGE deal ratings wise. But if the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim get there -- no, no ratings bump. <br><br>It's the same here. The NFL did NOT get the matchup it was salivating for. While it's in no way going out on a limb to predict record ratings (due to the Patriots historic quest) --the ratings likely would have been higher with "small market" Green Bay and Brett Favre vs. Tom Brady than "HUGE market" NY, and Eli Manning.<br><br>The frozen tundra certainly did look cool in HD, But yesterday,it was Green Bay and Favre who looked old and cold. Market size of participating teams doesn't work with sports the way it works with Desperate Housewives. The markets matter for Desperate Housewives, but only *sometimes* in terms of sports. If the LA Dodgers get in the World Series — it's a HUGE deal ratings wise. But if the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim get there — no, no ratings bump.

It's the same here. The NFL did NOT get the matchup it was salivating for. While it's in no way going out on a limb to predict record ratings (due to the Patriots historic quest) –the ratings likely would have been higher with “small market” Green Bay and Brett Favre vs. Tom Brady than “HUGE market” NY, and Eli Manning.

The frozen tundra certainly did look cool in HD, But yesterday,it was Green Bay and Favre who looked old and cold.

]]>