| Scoreboard |  |
 |
 |
 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total Viewers (million) | 10.33 | 6.74 | 5.55 | 3.71 |
| Rating/Share: Adults 18-49 | 3.4/10 | 1.5/4 | 1.9/6 | 1.0/3 |
Not much to say about Saturday night. ABC won easily as Oklahoma put a major beat-down on Texas Tech. I was expecting a close game between the then #2 Red Raiders and the #5 Sooners that would hopefully come down to which team had the ball last. Not even close! The Sooners made a statement. The game was a rout that was pretty much over in the first quarter. Oklahoma won 65-21. Considering the blow-out nature, the 10.33 million the game averaged in primetime in the overnights is impressive. As always, numbers for live events are heavily subject to change. But the numbers were impressive anyway. So were the Sooners.
Full details:
| Time | Network | Show | Viewers (Millons) | 18-49 Rating/Share |
| 8:00 | ABC | Saturday Night Football: Texas Tech vs.Oklahoma 8p-11p | 10.33 | 3.4/10 |
| CBS | CSI (R) | 5.92 | 1.2/4 | |
| FOX | Cops | 5.53 | 1.9/6 | |
| NBC | Knight Rider (R) | 2.91 | .7/2 | |
| 9:00 | CBS | Criminal Minds (R) | 6.94 | 1.4/4 |
| FOX | America’s Most Wanted | 5.56 | 1.8/5 | |
| NBC | Law & Order (R) | 4.41 | 1.2/4 | |
| 10:00 | CBS | 48 Hours Mystery | 7.35 | 1.9/5 |
| NBC | Law & Order : SVU (R) | 3.82 | 1.0/3 |
Shows are sorted by viewers in each time slot.
Nielsen TV Ratings: ©2008 The Nielsen Company. All Rights Reserved. Source Marc Berman/Mediaweek.
Definitions:
Fast Affiliate Ratings: These first national ratings, including demographics, are available at approximately 11 AM (ET) the day after telecast, and are released to subscribing customers daily. These data, from the National People Meter sample, are strictly time-period information, based on the normal broadcast network feed, and include all programming on the affiliated stations, sometimes including network programming, sometimes not. The figures may include stations that did not air the entire network feed, as well as local news breaks or cutaways for local coverage or other programming. Fast Affiliate ratings are not as useful for live programs and are likely to differ significantly from the final results, because the data reflect normal broadcast feed patterns. For example, with a World Series game, Fast Affiliate Ratings would include whatever aired from 8-11PM on affiliates in the Pacific Time Zone, following the live football game, but not game coverage that begins at 5PM PT. The same would be true of Presidential debates as well as live award shows and breaking news reports.
Rating: Estimated percentage of the universe of TV households (or other specified group) tuned to a program in the average minute. Ratings are expressed as a percent.
Share (of Audience): The percent of households (or persons) using television who are tuned to a specific program, station or network in a specific area at a specific time. (See also, Rating, which represents tuning or viewing as a percent of the entire population being measured.)
Time Shifted Viewing – Program ratings for national sources are produced in three streams of data – Live, Live+Same Day (Live+SD) and Live+7 Day. Time shifted figures account for incremental viewing that takes place with DVRs which are currently in approximately 24.4% of all U.S. TV households. Live+Same Day (Live+SD) include viewing during the same broadcast day as the original telecast, with a cut-off of 3:00AM local time when meters transmit daily viewing to Nielsen for processing. Live+7 Day ratings include incremental viewing that takes place during the 7 days following a telecast.
For more information see Numbers 101.
Sadly, the BCS damaging Texas Tech/Texas national championship game is now impossible. We’ll have to drop back to hoping that Alabama gets beat and that the swarm of 1 loss teams getting shut out of their chance at the championship game does at least a little to advance the cause of a playoff.
Are the logos of Fox and ABC reversed or am I going blind…
I hope there will be at least *some* overhaul regardless. There’s still another week and Oklahoma has to play Ok. State, but even determining which Big 12 South school gets to play Missouri is based on BCS numbers. Texas Tech seemingly is clearly out of contention for that. One irksome problem with the current approach is “when” something happenes matters a lot.
If Texas Tech had the exact same games, but would’ve gotten drubbed by Oklahoma in week 2, and beat Texas last night, the outcomes are very different even though the “body of work’ is the same.
There’s not going to be any options like BBALL where 64 teams get in and a 32 team playoff doesn’t seem likely either. 16 teams made up of the 11 conference winners and five at large bids solves some of it, but not all of it. Texas seems likely to get to play Missouri since it beat Oklahoma head-to-head. But the scenarios are complex even with the 16 team playoff. Let’s say in that scenario Missouri beat Texas. Texas would then have two losses, Oklahoma, and Texas Tech by virtue of *not* playing in the conference final only have one loss. Who gets the at large bid?
In that scenario, picking teams for the playoff might be marginally better than what we have today, but still effed up enough that I’m not sre it’s worth changing!
Dennis, I have fixed that, but depending on your browser the old version may still be cached. The correct order is ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC.
Thanks.
The only thing to do is just continue to tweak things every time a new issue occurs. A playoff system would be just as flawed as the BCS system and would be fairly rough on the players extending their season by an additional several games.
Great Sooners game last night. What a blowout.
As a lifelong MIzzou fan, I easily admit the vast superiority of Oklahoma. The loss to Texas was a fluke, and the victory by Tech over Texas a corollary to that. OU is the best team in the NCAA. Second, the old poll system was better than this BCS mess. Third, how ironic that ABC, the network even HH on Salon jokingly calls the network for the smarter people who bear children, lactate and will bring world peace, is only in the demo race in the long haul because of shows which appeal to the despioable disgusting male 18-35, ie, their sports programming. That is also the only reason Comedy Central hasn’t disappeared down a ratings rathole. The male 18-35 ( AND i’M 50 ) IS THE n-WORD OF THE tv WORLD. aND YOU CAN QUOTE MKE ON THAT.
Can anyone get the BBC America Viewers chart?
OU was owned by Texas. They ended the game kneeling the ball 3 times after 1st and goal. If Texas had run up the score and won by 17 instead of the 10 they won by, none of this would be discussed. It’s sad when a team is punished for not running up the score.
The computers aren’t fooled and rank Texas above OU, but the human element all has OU in front of Texas despite losing to them by 10 and being thoroughly crushed in the 4th quarter of that game.
If the human votes hold up next weeks BCS will have OU passing Texas because they play OSU (9-2) and Texas plays Texas A&M (4-7). That will give OU the boost in computers to overcome the slim lead Texas will have in the BCS when announced tonight.
Also, I’d say the Texas vs OU game said more about the value of the two teams than say the Texas vs Tech game. Because Texas went into the Tech game hobbled with injuries to their secondary (two of their starting nickel package) and without their top WR, TE, and DE. Against OU they were just without the TE and OU was just without a LB.
The argument of who is better? Texas or Oklahoma was decided on the field at a neutral site. Texas won. OU’s only loss was on a neutral field, while Texas only loss was on the road. Both lost to a top 10 team. However they also faced each other and Texas won that game handily. I wouldn’t call it a fluke either. Texas dominated them. It would be like calling last nights game a fluke.
I’m with you Nick. Though I am not surprised that the AP poll had Oklahoma ever so slightly ahead of Texas. But as a fan the system is busted and *not* just at the BCS level. I’d much rather see Oklahoma play Texas again than one of them play Missouri for the conference title. Missouri lost to both Texas (by a lot) and Oklahoma State and already has two conference losses, but will get to play for the championship. Regardless of the BCS numbers, Missouri gets to play for the conference championship having more losses in the conference than Texas, Oklahoma or Texas Tech,
Robert, it’s a play off system at least. Missouri won their division. The winner of the South Division is going to come down to likely human error. I’m a huge fan of the UNBIASED computer polls. A computer doesn’t care about anything but numbers. Texas Tech played two teams from what used to be called Div 2 for their non conference schedule. Oklahoma played one Div 2 team. Texas played all Div 1 competition. Oklahoma also played Washington who has the worst record in Div 1. The Div 2 team they played has one of the 5 worst records in Div 2.
I can’t see how anyone could make a reasonable argument for anyone but Texas. Texas beat OU. Tech beat Texas but played a much weaker schedule. OU played a similar schedule to Texas (Cincinnati and TCU aren’t slouches and kind of make up for Washington and Chattanooga) but they lost in the head to head match up.
The Big 12 is crazy every year. We still haven’t had the surprise outcome yet. So don’t be surprised if Texas, OU, or Tech lose this week. All play teams that are capable. Texas & OU both have rivalry games. Tech faces Baylor and their freshman phenom QB and nasty defense.
To those of you that fail to use common sense with notions that UT winning on a neutral field, both UT and OU were on the road. With that being said, you must also consider the neutral site residing in the home state of UT!
Your argument in this case is stricken from the record.
The Judge, UT has to travel farther than OU to the game. The tickets are split evenly between both schools. It’s a neutral field by definition. If OU ever thought it wasn’t they’d move it to home and home. OU also gets the side of the stadium where the teams enter the field. So the Sooners get cheered onto the field and the Longhorns get beer, batteries, etc. pelted at them. That makes up for the state the game is played in.
Still the BCS decided Texas 2nd and mainly due to computer polls.
I wish they would just do away with the Division IA BCS and go with a playoff system just like the Division IA subdivision, Division II, and Division III college teams. The higher seeds could get first and second round host duties and then use the old bowl games sites for regional, semifinal, and championship games. With enough advanced planning it should be easy to pull off and financially more rewarding than the current system for all involved. The tv audiences for these type games would be huge because Americans would know they were watching the best teams earn the national title rather than be voted into a national title game. Imagine if college basketball had a BCS type series. We would be watching North Carolina versus Duke in the title game every year based on polls and the NCAA would lose tons of dollars. Financially, I don’t think the NCAA can continue alot longer cutting their own throats using an antiquated system that cost them more money to run those not-so-attractive December bowl games versus having high-stakes, multiple, weekly playoff games building up to a title game.
Nick C that is a horrible way a of looking at it. Texas beat OU so they to ranked higher than them? If that is the case then Texas Tech beat Texas so they should be higher than them. Weak argument. And to say Texas beat Oklahoma handily is pretty weak also considering Oklahoma was up for 3 and a half quarters until the starting middle linebacker gets hurt for the year. Your argument is there but it is weak you every game matches up differently they’ve all lost 1 game…. It is a matter of opinion no matter how you look at it. Being a SEC fan and not having any ties to the big 12 I think clearly Oklahoma is the best team out of that conference. If im Texas I dont want to play them aagain any time soon.
I know it’s a syndicated show but @ 8 PM on Saturdays, Legend of the Seeker airs on The CW. Is it possible to include that info for future Saturday ratings?
Jackson, the short answer is unfortunately not. Long answer below…
While it airs on the CW where you are, it doesn’t air on the CW nationally (though LoTS does air onthe CW in a lot of markets). The CW doesn’t broadcast nationally on Saturdays and so there are no overnight reports for that data. Further complicating it is that it takes more time to prepare the syndicated data for Nielsen so while we get broadcast data for the previous week on Tuesday’s, the syndicated data lags a week behind that. We’ll see the numbers for LoTS for LAST week’s airings (the average of 11/15 & 11/16 airings around the country) this week, but the numbers for 11/22 & 11/23 won’t come until the following week. And actually everything next week will be delayed a little more than usual due to the Thanksgiving holiday.
Mark, you obviously didn’t watch the game. Texas took the lead in the 3rd quarter and went on to win by 10 and easily could have won by 17. They had the ball with first and goal at the 3 when they started kneeling the ball.
Texas, Tech, and OU all play 12 games. Texas Tech played 2 sub division teams and OU played 1 sub division team (and a 1-10 subdivision team at that). Combined records of opponents is for Texas 79-54 with no subdivision teams, for Texas Tech it’s 71-52 but with two subdivision teams, and OU 66-58 with that one subdivision team. Texas and OU played the tougher schedule (two subdivision teams eliminates Tech from the conversation) and in their head to head match up Texas won.
It’s why the computers picks Texas. They have no bias. Jeff Sagarin one of the computer ranking programmers mentioned that the current system was unfair. He said that they are told to ignore all subdivision opponents. He said in this case OU will be stronger in the computers because they aren’t theoretically punished for playing a subdivision opponent. That is the only reason why next week OU will pass Texas in the BCS (if voters continue to vote with a bias). OU should catch up in computers (but not pass) to Texas. So if the voting remains the same, OU will play for the Big 12 title and possibly national title.
Um, Nick C, I watched the OU/UT game. Apparently, you didn’t. UT did NOT dominate anyone in that game. OU led through 3.5 quarters and lost after a key injury. Props to UT for winning the game, but to say UT won it “handily” is the statement of a homer, not a dispassionate observer.
Cal, obviously you didn’t watch the game. UT took the lead in the 3rd quarter. Saying that OU led through 3.5 quarters says you didn’t watch the game. Handily is winning by 10 with the opportunity to win by 17. Texas should have ran up the score. Then people like yourself wouldn’t be arguing if Texas won it handily or not. The lead kept going from 1 point to 8 points for OU until Texas took the lead in the 3rd quarter. Then OU scored once more while Texas added 15 more points and kneeled the ball in the redzone (actually inside the 5 yard line) to run out the clock.
I’m no homer. I just watched one team shut down another teams running game and make them one dimensional. Then the team that was doing the shutting down on defense was impossible to stop with a balanced offensive attack and a QB throwing with something like 85% accuracy.
By the time Texas took the lead in the 4th quarter they were dominating the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball. Bradford had no time to throw and was sacked or hassled and McCoy had time to make a sandwich. Murray couldn’t even average a yard a carry, but the UT RB averaged over 10 yards a carry. Yes, the same Murray that demoralized Texas Tech. Also Texas shut down OU on their TD drive only to have a running into the punter penalty called on them that was all acting. Casual observers would have noticed that once OU attempted the fake punt they were handled easily.
Are you sure you watched the game? Because that 2nd half was won by Texas and then dominated in the 4th quarter.
To say OU lead through 3.5 quarters is the statement of a observer who must have been channel surfing.