TV Ratings for playoffs down 36% on NYE

[beerfan]

The TV Ratings for playoffs down 36% on NYE. I had them on in another room and quickly lost interest in the games when they started getting out of hand.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ge-football-playoff-down-36-percent/78178798/

It will be interesting if they change this next year, and I wonder if there is stats for first half vs. second half ratings.

 

[huskymedic]

slmandel3:27pm via TweetDeck
ESPN gave CFP a chance to move semis to tomorrow. They stood pat on New Year's Eve. They lost 1/3 of their audience
http://www.foxsports.com/college-fo...lemson-oklahoma-alabama-michigan-state-010116

 

[huskypantz]

Such a dumb decision. The 18-35 crowd has plans on NYE as do a good portion of those outside that key demo. Few people make any kind of plans for NYD. Plus, NYE is a work day for many and NYD is a holiday for the vast majority of Americans.

 

[NC_Uconn_Fan]

Had this conversation yesterday with some friends. Why have the 2 games on NYE, I was able to watch, but I'm 37 with a wife a 2 young kids.

 

[sub legacy]

The games weren't nearly as intriguing as they were last year. The match ups were initially, but ultimately, the product didn't live up to the hype. Both turned into blowouts, but it is what it is.

 

[whaler11]

Funny part is the slot isn't available because of the precious Rose Bowl. Which makes the games yesterday seem ultra-competitive.

 

[BlueDogs]

Until they let some underdogs into the mix and move away from the usual suspects year over year, the audience will stagnate. The Power 5 consolidation is a move away from parity. Number one rule of American entertainment is an underdog story. It precisely why the "Cinderellas" stories carry the NCAA year over year. The NCAA is shooting itself in the head.

 

[Nostical]

Agree that New Years Eve is ridiculous for such important football games. Too many natural built in distractions. ESPN was actually promoting sister network ABC's Ryan Secrest New Years Eve Times Square show during pre-game for their Alabama--MSU playoff game. One of the dumbest moves I've ever seen.

 

[BugsyCT]

Rose Bowl's another blowout - all the games the last 2 days have been atrocious. At least Houston over FSU was interesting becsuse they were the only G5 team.

 

[Nostical]

Here's my advice to the Playoff committee. If it's not OSU or UM don't even think about a B1G team in the playoff.

 

[kemba]

Until they let some underdogs into the mix and move away from the usual suspects year over year, the audience will stagnate. The Power 5 consolidation is a move away from parity. Number one rule of American entertainment is an underdog story. It precisely why the "Cinderellas" stories carry the NCAA year over year. The NCAA is shooting itself in the head.

What exactly are you suggesting?

And cinderella stories don't carry the NCAA year after year. They are a nice subplot. NCAA would rather Duke, UConn, Kentucky in the final four than Butler and VCU.

 

[sub legacy]

Until they let some underdogs into the mix and move away from the usual suspects year over year, the audience will stagnate. The Power 5 consolidation is a move away from parity. Number one rule of American entertainment is an underdog story. It precisely why the "Cinderellas" stories carry the NCAA year over year. The NCAA is shooting itself in the head.

College football is the most openly elitist sport in the country. The haves and the have nots, plain and simple. It'll be a good while before both ESPN and the committee realize there's no sustainable desire for audiences in seeing the same four or five "blue blood" programs winning a national championship every other year, and that the only way to create real intrigue is expanding to 6-8 teams and allowing in worthy underdogs to compete for a shot.

Sidenote: McCaffrey is making an absolute statement as to why he should have won the Heisman, although it's understandable how Henry won it. But McCaffrey is without a doubt the very best and most valuable athlete in the country.

 

[Colt house75]

What exactly are you suggesting?

And cinderella stories don't carry the NCAA year after year. They are a nice subplot. NCAA would rather Duke, UConn, Kentucky in the final four than Butler and VCU.

Kemba, ratings are the most important. Especially with the field of 68/64 and round of 32. From what I could recall, one of the reasons the tournament was expanded from 32 to 64. I do not agree with you.
The Cinderella stories DO CARRY the NCAA BB tournament, especially in the first 2 rounds. As a result, more fans around the country watch many of the games. The underdog knocking off a powerhouse is compelling, at least to myself. IMO, people love the story, especially the underdog story. "Rudy", "Hoosiers" (the best sports movie).... invokes emotion and dreams as does the NCAA tournament. Emotion sells.....

 

[whaler11]

The basketball tourney is driven by Cinderella the first two days. After that the ratings clearly show people want the big name programs.

 

[kemba]

Kemba, ratings are the most important. Especially with the field of 68/64 and round of 32. From what I could recall, one of the reasons the tournament was expanded from 32 to 64. I do not agree with you.
The Cinderella stories DO CARRY the NCAA BB tournament, especially in the first 2 rounds. As a result, more fans around the country watch many of the games. The underdog knocking off a powerhouse is compelling, at least to myself. IMO, people love the story, especially the underdog story. "Rudy", "Hoosiers" (the best sports movie).... invokes emotion and dreams as does the NCAA tournament. Emotion sells.....

I don't know where to go to look up ratings, so maybe somebody will do so and prove this wrong, but I've heard time and again that when the big name schools get knocked out early, the ratings drop.

 

[Sportsman5]

What exactly are you suggesting?

And cinderella stories don't carry the NCAA year after year. They are a nice subplot. NCAA would rather Duke, UConn, Kentucky in the final four than Butler and VCU.

I think the point of the earlier poster is that a giant vs a good underdog yields better ratings than two giants. However, two underdog type teams playing each other just creates an undesirable game for most people.

 

[Colt house75]

College football is the most openly elitist sport in the country. The haves and the have nots, plain and simple. It'll be a good while before both ESPN and the committee realize there's no sustainable desire for audiences in seeing the same four or five "blue blood" programs winning a national championship every other year, and that the only way to create real intrigue is expanding to 6-8 teams and allowing in worthy underdogs to compete for a shot.

Agree, partially, with your thought. It is not so much the same four or five teams (maybe 8-10 teams) but in the end, the ratings and interest will never FULLY be reached and the CFP potential probably won't be realized in the current format. In the end, big money is being left on the table by not compelling greater interest. Bad time slot. Even worse, horrendous games to watch if you weren't a Clemson or Alabama fan. The build up over 12 months never justified the result..... I did not know what was worse, the second half of the Bama game or having ESPN cutting to and advertising Ryan Seacrest New Year's Eve (ABC) -are you kidding me after the buildup???

Then again..... I know I'm impartial but the best game so far has been Houston/FSU...

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

How many other people also thought the 2 games were today, and not New Year's Eve?

 

[junglehusky]

How many other people also thought the 2 games were today, and not New Year's Eve?

Well the games today are all lopsided as well. Bo-ring!

 

[sub legacy]

Well the games today are all lopsided as well. Bo-ring!

Couldn't agree more. So far, just about all the New Years Six bowls have been total blowouts. The closest games by default were Houston/FSU and Notre Dame/Ohio State, and that isn't saying much. The national championship better be epic because they are not living up to the hype so far. I would almost dare say that UConn/Marshall was more entertaining than these games.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

The basketball tourney is driven by Cinderella the first two days. After that the ratings clearly show people want the big name programs.

Exactly, difference is there are three CFP games, there are 63 basketball games. If there were only a Final Four selected by the committee, everyone would be worn out by it being comprised by four of Duke, Michigan State, Kentucky, Kansas, and UNC every year and we'd be having the same arguments. There don't need to be cinderellas in college football, but the chance that team 7 or 8 would have a shot. Wouldn't everyone be psyched right now for a Stanford-Alabama or Clemson-Ohio State game next weekend? At least if we're talking about eight, we don't have the same formula of two or three ESPN-propped southern teams, the Big 10 champ, and occasionally an outsider like Oregon. At least then the second place team from a conference or two has a chance to play for it. That's what viewers want to see, teams with a chance. The overwhelming perception of college football is that it's an old boys club where only seven or eight programs have a chance to win every year, and everyone else is just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. College football will never achieve the maximum level of success in ratings and popularity it can until it appeals to everyone and not just the same segment of the population.

 

[Jimdish255]

Any AAC team "lucky" enough to make it would be the lowest ranked team playing #1 on the road. Of course FSU had essentially a home crowd against Houston but they were overrated to begin with.

 

[Drew]

Exactly, difference is there are three CFP games, there are 63 basketball games. If there were only a Final Four selected by the committee, everyone would be worn out by it being comprised by four of Duke, Michigan State, Kentucky, Kansas, and UNC every year and we'd be having the same arguments. There don't need to be cinderellas in college football, but the chance that team 7 or 8 would have a shot. Wouldn't everyone be psyched right now for a Stanford-Alabama or Clemson-Ohio State game next weekend? At least if we're talking about eight, we don't have the same formula of two or three ESPN-propped southern teams, the Big 10 champ, and occasionally an outsider like Oregon. At least then the second place team from a conference or two has a chance to play for it. That's what viewers want to see, teams with a chance. The overwhelming perception of college football is that it's an old boys club where only seven or eight programs have a chance to win every year, and everyone else is just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. College football will never achieve the maximum level of success in ratings and popularity it can until it appeals to everyone and not just the same segment of the population.

please. Its not like CFB ratings on TV during the entire season suck. Is anyone shocked the playoff on NYE got lower ratings? Both games still had more viewers than the NCAA Basketball tournament average from last year (link: http://www.ncaa.com/news/ncaa/artic...ament-has-highest-average-viewership-22-years) and the regular season games get insane amounts of viewership.

Even some of the smaller bowls have had ridiculous numbers. 1.5 million people watched a meaningless game between Arkansas State and Louisiana Tech in the New Orleans Bowl. (Link: http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-football-tv-ratings/)

also what is the reason for going to 8 from a real competition standpoint? The CFP and NCAA tournament are like government- once you expand it you can't take it back. Do 68 teams really deserve to be in the NCAA Tournament for basketball? The regular season means absolutely nothing there. CFB has the craziness associated with the regular season and that only comes with the playoff being limited to 4 teams.

The CFP and ESPN will both look at this and play out the obligated games for next year's playoff on Dec 31 and then will have to figure out a way to tell the Rose Bowl committee to F off and let them play the playoff games on Jan 1 every year. Everyone involved knew this was going to happen and thats why they tried like crazy to move the date of the Rose Bowl. If the Rose Bowl doesn't budge then play the first Semi Final at 12ET, Rose Bowl at 4ET and second Semi Final at 8ET on Jan 1 every year. They'll figure it out and the ratings and popularity will be fine.

 

[JSM1970]

In a year like this Stanford and OSU would have potentially made it, assuming no conference cap on eligible teams. Both teams would have been better than OU, MSU and could legitimately play with Clemson and Bama.

Good point with Rose Bowl, but how can you move it with parade and all?

It does seem possible to play @ 12:30, because every non-Rose semi year either Orange and Peach one of games, so early starts fine.

[QUOTE="

also what is the reason for going to 8 from a real competition standpoint? The CFP and NCAA tournament are like government- once you expand it you can't take it back. Do 68 teams really deserve to be in the NCAA Tournament for basketball? The regular season means absolutely nothing there. CFB has the craziness associated with the regular season and that only comes with the playoff being limited to 4 teams.[/QUOTE]

 

[Colt house75]

Any AAC team "lucky" enough to make it would be the lowest ranked team playing #1 on the road. Of course FSU had essentially a home crowd against Houston but they were overrated to begin with.

The financial incentive to a school to host the first round, if there were 8 teams, as well as to all participating schools and conferences would make it a home run. If it expanded to 16 teams, the first two rounds would be a grand slam . A spot for each of conference champions and 6 at large berths. Will never happen but the amount of money being left on the table is insane.