| Scoreboard |  |
 |
 |
 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adults 18-49: Rating/Share | 3.7/12 | 1.8/6 | 1.1/4 | 0.5/2 |
| Total Viewers (million) | 12.21 | 5.65 | 5.63 | 2.24 |
Note: coverage of live events like last night’s sports (College Football (NBC, ABC), World Series (Fox)) makes their numbers approximate and subject to greater than normal adjustment. See definitions below for more information on these Fast Affiliate ratings.
Even with a rain delay, the World Series seems to be falling Fox’s way, as the Yankees won to go up 2-1, burying the college football and repeat competition on Saturday night averaging a 3.7 adults 18-49 rating in primetime. I’d expect final numbers on the entire game (not just the preliminary primetime portion reported here) sometime late today or tomorrow.
Here’s two historical nuggets for baseball fans: Last year’s Game 3 started at 10:06 p.m. because of rain and didn’t end until 1:47 a.m. It was the latest start in Series history. Nine of the last 10 teams to win Game 3 when the World Series was tied 1-all went on to take the title. The exception was the 2003 Yankees, who lost the next three games to Florida.
I thought that the Notre Dame football game might beat the CBS repeats, but it wasn’t even close. These are tough TV days for Touchdown Jesus.
Details:
| Time | Net | Show | 18-49 Rating | 18-49 Share | Viewers Live+SD (million) |
| 8:00 | FOX | World Series Rain Delay | 2.4 | 9 | 8.67 |
| ABC | College Football, Texas v. Oklahoma St, Oregon v. USC (8-11p) | 1.8 | 6 | 5.65 | |
| CBS | CSI: Miami (repeat) | 0.9 | 3 | 4.97 | |
| NBC | College Football, Notre Dame v. Washington State (8-11p) | 0.5 | 2 | 2.24 | |
| 8:30 | FOX | Cleveland Show (repeat) | 2.3 | 8 | 7.44 |
| 9:00 | FOX | World Series Game 3; Yankees v. Phillies (9-11p) | 4.3 | 14 | 14.28 |
| CBS | CSI (repeat) | 1.0 | 3 | 5.38 | |
| 10:00 | CBS | 48 Hours Mystery | 1.3 | 4 | 6.54 |
-
Here are the half hours courtesy of Marc Berman:
2009 Baseball World Series, Game 3
9:00 p.m. – Viewers: 11.87 million, A18-49: 3.5/12
9:30 p.m. – Viewers: 15.11 million, A18-49: 4.5/14
10:00 p.m. – Viewers: 15.11 million, A18-49: 4.5/14
10:30 p.m. – Viewers: 15.06 million, A18-49: 4.7/15
-
You can see TV ratings from other recent Overnight ratings reports here.
Nielsen TV Ratings: ©2009 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 and Numbers 102.
It’s time for MLB to consider a late afternoon start time for the Saturday World Series games. 4:30 Et start would be great for the fans and the ratings would not suffer that much.
Great numbers for the Cleveland Show!
than how would those on the left cost watch whose home at 1:30 on say a wednesday people have jobs
You were right about the CBS numbers.
Cleveland’s “7.44 million viewers and a 2.3/ 8″ probably means a good number of people saw the show for the first time.
The start time wouldn’t have mattered last night because the start was delayed by rain. Had they started it earlier there would have been lengthy rain delays/stoppages and probably would have caused ratings to suffer even more since people wouldn’t have known when the game was going to resume.
For being a repeat of a young-skewing cartoon, The Cleveland Show skewed surprisingly old last night. I wonder how many of those over-50 viewers will tune in next Sunday @ 9:30 for a new episode.
E, please refer to this article from SMW. World Series games during the day are not likely to happen again in any of our lifetimes.
http://sportsmediawatch.blogspot.com/2009/10/day-games-dont-rate-in-world-series.html
ABCHasProblems, last night’s Cleveland Show was basically “bridge” programming during the World Series rain delay. Since the WS skews heavily 50+, that accounts for what happened last night…baseball viewers basically waiting around for a WS game that didn’t have an exact start time. A total aberration relative to Sunday night.
ABC has ordered more Shark Tank according to Robert Herjavec (one of the sharks)
http://twitter.com/robertherjavec/statuses/5328661113
I agree with Ryan, about the Cleveland Show being “bridge programming”. People were just waiting for the game to start and kept the channel on. It wasn’t clear that the whole episode of CS was going to air and didn’t want to miss the game start. That completely explains the numbers.
Ouch for NBC those numbers are really low especially compared to the ABC games.
And I think those Cleveland Show numbers might be wrong unless it miraculously pulled the exact same numbers as the rain delay.
You forgot to mention it was Halloween.
Folks, the Cleveland Show numbers were a typo. They are now corrected.
Well, the CSI’s didn’t do very well, either. Perhaps the fact that it was Halloween did have something to do with how well everything did, with the exception of the game, which people were making a concentrated effort to see. Yes, that’s an excuse, but it’s not much of a reach. Lot’s of adults, and not just the really “young” ones, go out to parties and clubs to have fun on the holiday.
I know this is off topic but what do you think the numbers will be for the new show V?
V should start strong, thanks to heavy promotion. As for Saturday numbers, NBC’s showing is rather poor. 0.5 in the 18-49 demo. I Remember when Saturday use to have hit comedy shows.
The listings say the premiere is up against new episodes of NCIS, The Biggest Loser, and So You Think You Can Dance. (Since when is South Park on MTV?)
3.1 for the premiere
It might be worth noting that Notre Dame was playing a 1-6 Washington St. team — one of the worst in all of college football.
ND has some rebuilding to do in terms of a national audience but this is one game that never should’ve been on in prime-time. It would’ve done lousy at ANY time of the day — and also was opposite a pair of terrific ABC games, making things worse.
If USC was on playing 1-6 Washington St. they would’ve seen their numbers drop big-time as well.
Next year’s primetime game against Army in Yankee Stadium might do a little better but not much because Army hasn’t had a strong team in 60 years.