- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: They need to scale back the Superbowl excess
Posted on 2/13/23 at 10:01 am to RolltidePA
Posted on 2/13/23 at 10:01 am to RolltidePA
quote:
Including streaming last year was 105 with the lowest combined viewership rating since 1968.
Steaming isn't significantly offsetting the loss of viewership.
This factors in steaming that can be tracked. There are lots of people that don’t stream it through ESPN or some other official way that can be tracked. You can plug a computer into a tv and pull up a website and have the game playing within 30 seconds.
That combined with this is causing the decline. It’s not people that are getting “exhausted” or whatever.
quote:
I think the difference these days is a lot of the people that only watched for the halftime show and commercials are skipping it because they release the commercials in advance and you can watch the halftime show on the internet within minutes after it's over.
That above has taken a huge chunk out of people that used to watch.
1
Posted on 2/13/23 at 10:06 am to TackySweater
quote:
There are lots of people that don’t stream it through ESPN or some other official way that can be tracked. You can plug a computer into a tv and pull up a website and have the game playing within 30 seconds.
That combined with this is causing the decline. It’s not people that are getting “exhausted” or whatever.
The "untrackable" audience is miniscule, it's not difficult to get access to this game as there is no "out of market" or blackout component to it.
This post was edited on 2/13/23 at 10:08 am
Posted on 2/13/23 at 10:12 am to Stonehog
quote:
Need to also have it a week after the conference championships. Two weeks is too long.
I think eventually, the college championship game will be held during the bye week.
Posted on 2/13/23 at 10:19 am to Mr. Hangover
quote:
Man, it’s just WAYYY too overproduced
It’s always been this way, but lately it’s gone so far over the top that it just seems forced to me
They had a little mini-movie, with actors, including a fake Tua, right before kickoff. So dumb. It's the fricking super bowl, you don't have to convince us they want to win it.
Posted on 2/13/23 at 10:28 am to RolltidePA
Just tune in when the game starts. At least there wasn't a stadium power outage!
The worst in my view:
- the video of Hurts journey, leaving Bama, etc. Even had an actor depicting Tua...dumb.
- the video of players walking out onto a runway above fans...dancing, singing and yelling.
- Gronk's halftime off-site kick, which didn't even look real.
The worst in my view:
- the video of Hurts journey, leaving Bama, etc. Even had an actor depicting Tua...dumb.
- the video of players walking out onto a runway above fans...dancing, singing and yelling.
- Gronk's halftime off-site kick, which didn't even look real.
Posted on 2/13/23 at 10:32 am to VADawg
quote:
I think eventually, the college championship game will be held during the bye week.
That would be cool.
Posted on 2/13/23 at 10:33 am to RolltidePA
If you're watching with friends and family just have a good time.
If you don't want the extra stuff, it's easy to avoid it. You can find out the exact kick off time and tune in just then.
Run an errand at HT.
If you take out the extra time that the HT took, the game length was about what a football game usually is. Around 3hrs15 minutes.
And if you still don't like it, do like the guy above who said he found something better to do with his time. That's OK.
If you don't want the extra stuff, it's easy to avoid it. You can find out the exact kick off time and tune in just then.
Run an errand at HT.
If you take out the extra time that the HT took, the game length was about what a football game usually is. Around 3hrs15 minutes.
And if you still don't like it, do like the guy above who said he found something better to do with his time. That's OK.
Posted on 2/13/23 at 10:37 am to RolltidePA
quote:
Last night, was by most measure a really good game; but I could barely get into it because of the choppy presentation, mediocre announcers, constant distractions, tons of commercials and extra-long halftime.
It's become so overproduced and drifted so far away from how a usual game is played, that it's actually become difficult to watch. I understand that it's now more a media vehicle than a game, but when you dilute the game so much that fans of the actual game start to go away or ignore it, the other viewers will go away as well.
I agree, but you've got to understand what exactly the Super Bowl is. It is the epitome of America, and it's much, much more than a football game. It's "over-the-top" nonstop action. It's a marketer and advertiser's dream. It's filled with the glitz and glam of pre-game and half-time performances. The stands and suites are filled with more celebrities and Fortune-500 C-Suite execs than fans of the two teams.
Posted on 2/13/23 at 10:40 am to cfish140
quote:
I didn’t watch a second of it this year. I’m usually just burned out on football by time the Super Bowl rolls around but normally watch anyway because it’s the Super Bowl. This year I didn’t really care for either of the teams so found something better to do
I watched the Little Mermaid with my daughter and had a better time than if I had watched the game.
Posted on 2/13/23 at 10:45 am to RolltidePA
quote:
mediocre announcers
This. The were horrible last night IMO.
Posted on 2/13/23 at 10:48 am to tigerinthebueche
Just putting out a field that wouldn’t be a disgrace for a preseason game should be priority 1
Posted on 2/13/23 at 11:02 am to RolltidePA
quote:
The "untrackable" audience is miniscule,
Thank you for the numbers to back up your claim
quote:
it's not difficult to get access to this game as there is no "out of market" or blackout component to it.
Nobody said it was. There’s a very large portion of the WORLD out there that has refused to continue to pay for cable services whether it be traditional or a newer version like ESPN+ or YouTubeTV. These people also resize that when their household doesn’t tune in, it hurts cable companies numbers and they intentionally avoid giving them “hits”
Since you’re just talking out of your arse with nothing to back it up, I’ll give you some numbers and links.
Cord cutting stats from 2022
quote:
An estimated 5.2 million households intended to end their cable subscriptions by the end of 2021.
An estimated 4.9 million people will cut the cord in 2022.
Cable providers lost approximately 25 million subscribers since 2012.
That’s not “minuscule” lol
And when you quit paying for traditional cable services, you can’t use the streaming services from that cable company, so you can’t use ESPN streaming.
Alternative viewing numbers for super bowl
quote:
Data shared by anti-piracy platform VFT Solutions shows that more than 12 million people tuned into illegal streams
quote:
Last year, an estimated 7.7 million searched for "Super Bowl stream,"
So you’re saying 12 million is minuscule but you’re citing that viewership was down by several million? Lol ok
LINK
quote:
Outside of a few golf events, the WNBA Finals, and NASCAR, every single sports viewership category was down more than the NFL this past year — including the MLB, NHL, NBA, College Football, and more.
It’s just one factor, among many others, but the acceleration of cord-cutting is certainly contributing to the decline in NFL viewership — especially when you consider that the majority of cord-cutters turn to the illegal streaming of live events, which aren’t counted in viewership data.
With sporadic TV data and no accurate way to capture the shift, some will claim it doens’t exist. Basic principles of supply & demand say otherwise.
This post was edited on 2/13/23 at 11:08 am
Posted on 2/13/23 at 11:19 am to TackySweater
Nonetheless, one can see signs of erosion if one looks under the hood.
The first and most obvious of those signs is the household rating, which last year dropped to 36.9 — the lowest for any Super Bowl since 1969. After topping a 40 rating for three-straight decades, the Super Bowl has fallen below that mark in each of the past two years. The decline is largely obscured when looking at the viewership, which in the past two years has been bolstered by the inclusion of out-of-home viewing. Last year’s linear audience of 99.2 million ranks just outside of the ten largest ever for a Super Bowl.
Yet even in viewership it is clear that the “Big Game” is not quite as big as it had been. Last year’s audience of 99 million (with out-of-home included) is lower than the 103 million the game averaged – without out-of-home — five years ago. Factor in the out-of-home audience (which from 2018-20 was issued separately from the final nationals) and the drop-off is steep: from nearly 115 million in ’18 to shy of 100 million four years later. The drop-off remains steep even when compared to years when no out-of-home viewing was measured at all. Last year’s game fell more than ten million viewers shy of Patriots-Falcons in ’17 (111.3M), Broncos-Panthers in ’16 (111.9M), Patriots-Seahawks in ’15 (114.4M), Seahawks-Broncos in ’14 (112.2M), Giants-Patriots in ’12 (111.4M) and Packers-Steelers in ’11 (111.0M).
Read the rest here:
SMW LINK
The first and most obvious of those signs is the household rating, which last year dropped to 36.9 — the lowest for any Super Bowl since 1969. After topping a 40 rating for three-straight decades, the Super Bowl has fallen below that mark in each of the past two years. The decline is largely obscured when looking at the viewership, which in the past two years has been bolstered by the inclusion of out-of-home viewing. Last year’s linear audience of 99.2 million ranks just outside of the ten largest ever for a Super Bowl.
Yet even in viewership it is clear that the “Big Game” is not quite as big as it had been. Last year’s audience of 99 million (with out-of-home included) is lower than the 103 million the game averaged – without out-of-home — five years ago. Factor in the out-of-home audience (which from 2018-20 was issued separately from the final nationals) and the drop-off is steep: from nearly 115 million in ’18 to shy of 100 million four years later. The drop-off remains steep even when compared to years when no out-of-home viewing was measured at all. Last year’s game fell more than ten million viewers shy of Patriots-Falcons in ’17 (111.3M), Broncos-Panthers in ’16 (111.9M), Patriots-Seahawks in ’15 (114.4M), Seahawks-Broncos in ’14 (112.2M), Giants-Patriots in ’12 (111.4M) and Packers-Steelers in ’11 (111.0M).
Read the rest here:
SMW LINK
Posted on 2/13/23 at 11:23 am to RolltidePA
Why not have the concert before the game or after?
Halftime takes way too long from a traditional game
Halftime takes way too long from a traditional game
Posted on 2/13/23 at 11:29 am to RolltidePA
quote:
The "untrackable" audience is miniscule
There’s literally no way for you to know this for sure
Posted on 2/13/23 at 11:31 am to castorinho
quote:
If you're watching with friends and family just have a good time. If you don't want the extra stuff, it's easy to avoid it. You can find out the exact kick off time and tune in just then. Run an errand at HT. If you take out the extra time that the HT took, the game length was about what a football game usually is. Around 3hrs15 minutes. And if you still don't like it, do like the guy above who said he found something better to do with his time. That's OK
And if you don’t want to read other peoples opinions on what they thought about the Super Bowl, you could have a avoided this thread
you’re doing the same exact thing Posted on 2/13/23 at 11:34 am to nicholastiger
quote:
Why not have the concert before the game or after? Halftime takes way too long from a traditional game
Brng back helmet cars for halftime
Posted on 2/13/23 at 11:39 am to Domeskeller
quote:
Once the game starts, it’s fine except for the fact that the crowd is usually quieter because it’s mostly a neutral corporate crowd.
Nothing displays the passion of football like showing the owner's box after every big play
Posted on 2/13/23 at 11:40 am to RolltidePA
I'm glad I didn't watch any of the pregame. I just watched the game on mute. And listened to the Westwood One broadcast on my phone. I expected a 30 second delay. But it was actually a few seconds ahead of the FOX feed.
Posted on 2/13/23 at 11:41 am to OU Guy
Hell yes. I'd give almost anything for one of the helmet cars.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News