Ratings down...

Cyrus12

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2013
Messages
17,534
Reaction score
4,863
Location
North of the Wall
Just read on ESPN that viewer ratings were down 8 percent this year. Do you think it had to do with the Pats pretty much a guaranteed ring? The teams in it? I suspect the sb will be the lowest ratings in years. Thoughts without getting political....yes we all know about the knee thing...
 

sutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
29,169
Reaction score
5,189
Location
Kent, WA
Assuming this is about the playoffs/SB, I would guess that the Patriots being in it is a factor. Sorry, but the Patsies turning into the old Yankees of baseball, where the same team is always in the big show, is boring for the rest of the country.

Plus, they haven't really figured out how many people watch on alternative media, for which they don't get advertising revenue to the same extent.

I know I don't have a lot of interest, but that has been going on for years. In the past 10 years, the only SBs I've watched are the 2 that the 'Hawks were in.

:229031_shrug:
 

XxXdragonXxX

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
3,115
Reaction score
87
Location
Enumclaw, WA
One thing that I dont hear many people talking about is that ratings are down across all of television. People keep blaming politics of the officials or the rules or Goodell...but the reality in my eyes is that people just dont watch the TV as much anymore.

And actually the NFL is doing significantly better than the rest of network TV.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/26/media/n ... index.html
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,530
Reaction score
1,526
Location
Roy Wa.
Sports Hernia":3bshmgcb said:
Officiating and “steered games”.

The flagfest is killing the game.

Throw another aspect in, Football used to be something that blue collar people could enjoy, the rich or well off didn't want to brave the elements to watch, over time the blue collars have been priced out and many want to be in on the new big thing and it's a social aspect more then the game.

Now you have players acting like prim donnas instead of the roughnecks that the middle class associated with, another change.

You also have a generation that played video games instead of pick up street football, their interest is not there as well.
 

sdog1981

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
3,367
Reaction score
240
So here is the funny thing about ratings. It all based off of one system the Nielsen Ratings system. That system has been left in the dust by current consumer trends ratings. The Nielsen system has been accurate for so long people just assumed that it was gospel. The story of NFL ratings is the story of Nielsen losing the ability to track the market.
 

XxXdragonXxX

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
3,115
Reaction score
87
Location
Enumclaw, WA
sdog1981":16g4pbtu said:
So here is the funny thing about ratings. It all based off of one system the Nielsen Ratings system. That system has been left in the dust by current consumer trends ratings. The Nielsen system has been accurate for so long people just assumed that it was gospel. The story of NFL ratings is the story of Nielsen losing the ability to track the market.


Yep. Like I said a few posts above. Ratings are down everywhere. The NFL is better off than the rest of television

Reality is that the Nielson ratings first of all sample a very small portion of people. Second of all they favor people who view live broadcasts on network TV and dont change chanels during commercials. At the end of tje day theyre all about ad revenue.
 

Popeyejones

Active member
Joined
Aug 20, 2013
Messages
5,525
Reaction score
0
XxXdragonXxX":3d3lhpy4 said:
One thing that I dont hear many people talking about is that ratings are down across all of television. People keep blaming politics of the officials or the rules or Goodell...but the reality in my eyes is that people just dont watch the TV as much anymore.

And actually the NFL is doing significantly better than the rest of network TV.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/26/media/n ... index.html

Yep, which is the beginning, middle, and end of the story about NFL ratings, as it has been for awhile now (a few years back the NFL was big news because it was the only prgramming that stayed steady during ratings declines, but now it too is declining due to cord cutting, but as we’d predict, still at a slower rate than everything else).

It’s really not that complicated of a story and it’s a fairly obvious one, but the truth also doesn’t really allow for people or groups to spam their political beliefs and pretend that they have broader support than they do.
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,610
sdog1981":3npvlrq1 said:
So here is the funny thing about ratings. It all based off of one system the Nielsen Ratings system. That system has been left in the dust by current consumer trends ratings. The Nielsen system has been accurate for so long people just assumed that it was gospel. The story of NFL ratings is the story of Nielsen losing the ability to track the market.

Finally someone gets it.

I don't think the NFL ratings are down, it's the fact that people are consuming it differently.

A LOT of people don't just sit down in front of their Comcast or Direct TV box and watch a 3-4 hour game. They're watching Redzone, they're streaming online, or following the games on their Yahoo fantasy sports app, or on Twitter.

This notion that sports is consumed the old fashioned way is the #1 fallacy with this entire discussion. So until the entertainment and sports industries figure out how to properly track viewers across a dozen different outlets? Then I'm not buying the "OMG ratings are down!" detractors.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,530
Reaction score
1,526
Location
Roy Wa.
All you have to do is look at the Super Bowl thread, how many said they were not going to watch.
 

Popeyejones

Active member
Joined
Aug 20, 2013
Messages
5,525
Reaction score
0
Sgt. Largent":ty62pl7b said:
sdog1981":ty62pl7b said:
So here is the funny thing about ratings. It all based off of one system the Nielsen Ratings system. That system has been left in the dust by current consumer trends ratings. The Nielsen system has been accurate for so long people just assumed that it was gospel. The story of NFL ratings is the story of Nielsen losing the ability to track the market.

Finally someone gets it.

I don't think the NFL ratings are down, it's the fact that people are consuming it differently.

A LOT of people don't just sit down in front of their Comcast or Direct TV box and watch a 3-4 hour game. They're watching Redzone, they're streaming online, or following the games on their Yahoo fantasy sports app, or on Twitter.

This notion that sports is consumed the old fashioned way is the #1 fallacy with this entire discussion. So until the entertainment and sports industries figure out how to properly track viewers across a dozen different outlets? Then I'm not buying the "OMG ratings are down!" detractors.

Yep. This one for sure too. And that's true for all media. We don't actually know anymore how many people are watching *any* broadcast or cable programming because that viewing is spread out across so many devices, and at varying levels of legality too.

All the viewers streaming illegal uploads of a Hawks game or So You Think You Can Dance don't count as viewers.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,530
Reaction score
1,526
Location
Roy Wa.
But the scale would still be fine if all media across the board is measured the same way, the percentages should maintain a basic across the board level since streaming would be done for all television by those individuals.

The percentage of people watching the NFL on a channel in Nielson versus watching Judge Judy would be consistent, the streamers would be out of that evaluation. Now measuring viewership based on total households / boxes tuned to a channel counted may be a lot different since they can with digital now tell who is on what channel any given time.

Headcount may be down but I think percentage should be consistent.
 

Popeyejones

Active member
Joined
Aug 20, 2013
Messages
5,525
Reaction score
0
chris98251":22u6o3sj said:
But the scale would still be fine if all media across the board is measured the same way, the percentages should maintain a basic across the board level since streaming would be done for all television by those individuals.

The percentage of people watching the NFL on a channel in Nielson versus watching Judge Judy would be consistent, the streamers would be out of that evaluation. Now measuring viewership based on total households / boxes tuned to a channel counted may be a lot different since they can with digital now tell who is on what channel any given time.

Headcount may be down but I think percentage should be consistent.

Yep, meaning the NFL is even a little more resilient to broadcast viewing than it should be, as it's declining at a slower rate than everything else.

I'm guessing this is because it's "event" viewing in a way other stuff isn't, and because most people most of the time are most interested in watching the local team in their local market, which you don't need cable to do.

Just speaking for personal experience here, but I cord cut five or six years ago and have an antenna hooked up to my TV just to watch NFL games -- it doesn't even really cross my mind to use my TV as a TV outside of the NFL (meaning, I'm not randomly flipping through my six channels to see what's on), as all the other TV watching I do is either through various paid portals or is pirated -- I'll even wait an hour to download a show that's on because the NFL is the only thing I want to watch in real-time enough to make sitting through the commercials worth it.
 

kidhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2009
Messages
22,925
Reaction score
2,703
Location
Anchorage, AK
as mentioned in the OP, this thread is to discuss reasons for the decline in ratings other than the political motivations. We all know they exist, but that isn't what is being discussed in this thread. Multiple posts discussing that aspect have already been removed. Please keep it to the subject at hand and not the political aspects so we can keep the discussion open. Thank you
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,610
chris98251":3vcmgn3n said:
But the scale would still be fine if all media across the board is measured the same way, the percentages should maintain a basic across the board level since streaming would be done for all television by those individuals.

The percentage of people watching the NFL on a channel in Nielson versus watching Judge Judy would be consistent, the streamers would be out of that evaluation. Now measuring viewership based on total households / boxes tuned to a channel counted may be a lot different since they can with digital now tell who is on what channel any given time.

Headcount may be down but I think percentage should be consistent.

Media isn't measured the same ways though.

Nielsen sticks boxes in people's homes, THAT'S what you're seeing everytime an outlet like ESPN reports that ratings are down.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/2219 ... -last-year

Nielsen doesn't track the Redzone, they don't track streaming services, they don't track social media or internet outlets. They track whoever's watching CBS from 12:00am to 3:00 on Sunday, and then compare it to last year's game.

I'm not saying ratings aren't down, they might be. But using some outdated antiquated means of measuring ratings doesn't work for me.
 

Seahawkfan80

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 5, 2011
Messages
11,207
Reaction score
615
Popeyejones":138mwwzn said:
chris98251":138mwwzn said:
But the scale would still be fine if all media across the board is measured the same way, the percentages should maintain a basic across the board level since streaming would be done for all television by those individuals.

The percentage of people watching the NFL on a channel in Nielson versus watching Judge Judy would be consistent, the streamers would be out of that evaluation. Now measuring viewership based on total households / boxes tuned to a channel counted may be a lot different since they can with digital now tell who is on what channel any given time.

Headcount may be down but I think percentage should be consistent.

Yep, meaning the NFL is even a little more resilient to broadcast viewing than it should be, as it's declining at a slower rate than everything else.

I'm guessing this is because it's "event" viewing in a way other stuff isn't, and because most people most of the time are most interested in watching the local team in their local market, which you don't need cable to do.

Just speaking for personal experience here, but I cord cut five or six years ago and have an antenna hooked up to my TV just to watch NFL games -- it doesn't even really cross my mind to use my TV as a TV outside of the NFL (meaning, I'm not randomly flipping through my six channels to see what's on), as all the other TV watching I do is either through various paid portals or is pirated -- I'll even wait an hour to download a show that's on because the NFL is the only thing I want to watch in real-time enough to make sitting through the commercials worth it.

I have approximately 48 over the air channels. Of them, approximately 27 or so are watchable by me. The other channels are not really desireable as I have different tastes then what they put out. Of those, I usually watch about 6 or 8 depending on what is on. Surprisingly enough, not too much in the way of mainstream programming. I may or not watch too much at all as I also have a dvd player and about 200 DVDs and some I recorded off OTA channels. Usually movies and CometTV. I have some old Seattle games on DVD too....if I get really bored. Or need to wash dishes. LOL With all those channel options, there are some either better options or at least distractions to step away from NFL from. And there are new channels popping up all the time. Some I did not know about until last week.
 

Threedee

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 16, 2014
Messages
5,535
Reaction score
845
Location
Federal Way, WA
chris98251":120f7irz said:
All you have to do is look at the Super Bowl thread, how many said they were not going to watch.

I expect Seahawks fans are an especially cynical outlier because the Patriots are in it again. Being reminded of how much Bevell sucks for 60 minutes is fairly unpleasant.
 

RolandDeschain

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
33,116
Reaction score
945
Location
Kissimmee, FL
chris98251":3jlp8lkq said:
All you have to do is look at the Super Bowl thread, how many said they were not going to watch.
People say a lot of things. What they actually do is oftentimes different. How many people that aren't fans of either team will avoid watching the Super Bowl this year, but watched it last year, assuming they aren't fans of either of last year's teams?

Pretty small percentage, I'd bet.
 
Top