Football Ratings Are Down

[GGGG]

After last night, I am willing to explore the possibility that I am completely wrong about this.

[Pakuni]

"Football" ratings also way down in England.

http://deadspin.com/premier-league-tv-ratings-are-falling-off-a-cliff-too-1788768437

[brandx]

"Football" ratings also way down in England.

http://deadspin.com/premier-league-tv-ratings-are-falling-off-a-cliff-too-1788768437

Network TV is the US has been facing huge drops - football included. This is especially true among viewers under 35. All Traditional TV is dying among these groups.

Even as a huge NFL fan, I am watching less football - GB included - than I have in the last 30 years. Pitiful product both on the field - the games - and off - a commissioner with a heavy hand who wants a corporate product on the field rather than fun & games.

The product no longer warrants my viewing especially when 25 minutes out of every hour is commercials.

[Tugg Speedman]

Ok, it is the day after the election and the world series ended last week.  So starting with tomorrow night's Thursday night game, NFL TV ratings are going to bounce back.

Does anyone believe this?

And if they do not, what excuse are we left with?  Remember that the NFL set record ratings last year.  So what excuse was not present last year that is present this year?  Might that excuse involve the starting QB of the 49ers?

[brandx]

Ok, it is the day after the election and the world series ended last week.  So starting with tomorrow night's Thursday night game, NFL TV ratings are going to bounce back.

Does anyone believe this?

And if they do not, what excuse are we left with?  Remember that the NFL set record ratings last year.  So what excuse was not present last year that is present this year?  Might that excuse involve the starting QB of the 49ers?

Of course not. TV viewership is down just as football viewership is down.

I no longer watch SNF or MNF or TNF at all unless GB is playing, and even then I don't sit for 3 hours for the whole game.

I believe that professional football has seen its best days. We will still continue to watch, but never again at the pace of the past. The NFL is now a corporate sport. I just am not interested that much any more. It is exactly the same reason wht the Olympic viewership was bad. It has been completely absorbed as a corporate event. 5 minutes of action and three minutes of commercials.

Even someone who has been a sports nut for his entire life has had enough.

Other sports - including college basketball - are at the crossroads. 40 minutes of gametime does not merit 18 time outs. Even MU is getting to the point where I may only watch the 2nd halves of games. 2 1/2 hours AT a game is fine. 2 1/2 hours on tv? That is 150 minutes for a 40 minute game. For a cupcake game, that is an eternity.

[rocket surgeon]

Ok, it is the day after the election and the world series ended last week.  So starting with tomorrow night's Thursday night game, NFL TV ratings are going to bounce back.

Does anyone believe this?

And if they do not, what excuse are we left with?  Remember that the NFL set record ratings last year.  So what excuse was not present last year that is present this year?  Might that excuse involve the starting QB of the 49ers?

yes! and all of his sheople

[naginiF]

Ok, it is the day after the election and the world series ended last week.  So starting with tomorrow night's Thursday night game, NFL TV ratings are going to bounce back.

Does anyone believe this?

And if they do not, what excuse are we left with?  Remember that the NFL set record ratings last year.  So what excuse was not present last year that is present this year?  Might that excuse involve the starting QB of the 49ers?

I'm with Sultan on saying after Tuesday I could believe any rationale may be the cause, BUT.......tonights game involves the words 'Cleveland' and 'Browns'.  It seems more likely that the cr@ppy product would be to blame

addition:  if #18 on this list happens (members of at least 6 CBB teams will kneel in the first weeks) does it necessarily tie to CBB ratings?
http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/33-wild-predictions-for-college-hoops-davidson-will-have-another-stephen-curry/

[warriorchick]

Interesting.  Apparently Colin Kaepernick didn't bother to vote...

http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/11/10/colin-kaepernick-san-francisco-49ers-presidential-election-protest

[brandx]

Interesting.  Apparently Colin Kaepernick didn't bother to vote...

http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/11/10/colin-kaepernick-san-francisco-49ers-presidential-election-protest

As you read, he chose not to vote for a reason rather than because of apathy. His stance was consistent with what he has said all along.

I support him fully. Same as I do with anyone exercising their rights. It is irrelevant what the issue is. If someone is protesting without breaking the law, they have my support. I don't just pick and choose the parts of the constitution that I agree with.

[muwarrior69]

I'm with Sultan on saying after Tuesday I could believe any rationale may be the cause, BUT.......tonights game involves the words 'Cleveland' and 'Browns'.  It seems more likely that the cr@ppy product would be to blame

addition:  if #18 on this list happens (members of at least 6 CBB teams will kneel in the first weeks) does it necessarily tie to CBB ratings?
http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/33-wild-predictions-for-college-hoops-davidson-will-have-another-stephen-curry/

Well I hope MU does not do this while honoring our veterans at the game against Howard.

[Pakuni]

Interesting.  Apparently Colin Kaepernick didn't bother to vote...

http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/11/10/colin-kaepernick-san-francisco-49ers-presidential-election-protest

Going way off tangent ... sorry .... but I so hate the "everyone has a duty to vote" mantra. No, voting isn't a duty, and I'm perfectly content when people choose not to vote. In fact, I would prefer that the uninformed and ignorant skip voting. It sucks that the vote of myself and those of us who put in the effort to become intelligent on the candidates and issue can have our cotes canceled out by someone picking candidates virtually at random.

So, anyhow, who cares whether Colin Kapernick voted? Are the problems that sparked his protest any less of problems because he didn't vote?

[GGGG]

Ok, it is the day after the election and the world series ended last week.  So starting with tomorrow night's Thursday night game, NFL TV ratings are going to bounce back.

Does anyone believe this?

And if they do not, what excuse are we left with?  Remember that the NFL set record ratings last year.  So what excuse was not present last year that is present this year?  Might that excuse involve the starting QB of the 49ers?

Sunday night as a big game between the Patriots and Seahawks.

If *that* game doesn't draw viewers, than the issue is something other than the election. 

[Blackhat]

I cut the cord but still watch all sports free (including tonight's NFL game) via streaming online.   I suspect many people are beginning to do this around the nation as technology allows online content to be put on your big screens.

[Pakuni]

“Sunday Night Football” did its best Week 10 ratings in five years, NBC said. It drew a 14.3 overnight rating. It was the best “SNF” game since 2011, when the Patriots played the New York Jets. It’s the highest-rated prime-time game this season since the Patriots and Arizona Cardinals played in Week 1. It was a 13 percent increase from last year’s Week 10 “SNF” game between the Seahawks and Cardinals.

That wasn’t even the biggest game of the day. The Steelers-Cowboys classic pulled a 17.8 rating. That’s the highest rating for any NFL game this season. Fox had a 14.2 average for its doubleheader on Sunday.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/news/with-election-done-nfls-television-ratings-spike-up-in-week-10-164740769.html

[hepennypacker5000]

People no longer feel an obligation to care about politics, back to bread & circus.

[brandx]

People no longer feel an obligation to care about politics, back to bread & circus.

Yeah, but, but......

Colin is still protesting. I think the bigger rating are a lie by the left to cover for Colin.

[Benny B]

Nah. Ain't buying it. Generally, I think people will use their own biases to answer questions like these. And other than a couple of their own friends, they don't have the faintest clue what other people think.

In October, 53 polls surveyed Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.  Only 2 of those 53 predicted Trump would win those states.  Both of those two polls employed the methodology of asking who they thought their neighbors would vote for because they suspected that people were lying to the pollsters when they were asking the subjects who they would personally vote for (much as we saw with Brexit).  I'm sure it's no surprise to you that people did in fact use their own biases to answer, which gave the pollsters more accurate insight as to which way people were actually leaning.

So while you may disagree with the results - be that the election or NFL ratings - the fact remains that the survey methodology employed is a proven strategy.

[mu03eng]

Going way off tangent ... sorry .... but I so hate the "everyone has a duty to vote" mantra. No, voting isn't a duty, and I'm perfectly content when people choose not to vote. In fact, I would prefer that the uninformed and ignorant skip voting. It sucks that the vote of myself and those of us who put in the effort to become intelligent on the candidates and issue can have our cotes canceled out by someone picking candidates virtually at random.

So, anyhow, who cares whether Colin Kapernick voted? Are the problems that sparked his protest any less of problems because he didn't vote?

So Kapernick has an opportunity to determine the leadership in this country that has the potential to improve the situation or make it worse and he chooses....to do nothing? I'm sorry, but his refusal to vote loses him any and all credibility he had on this issue. If you refuse to act in your own self interests, then I have no sympathy or support for you.

Also, are you insinuating that Kapernick is ignorant or uninformed in your post?

[Pakuni]

So Kapernick has an opportunity to determine the leadership in this country that has the potential to improve the situation or make it worse and he chooses....to do nothing? I'm sorry, but his refusal to vote loses him any and all credibility he had on this issue. If you refuse to act in your own self interests, then I have no sympathy or support for you.

You've got some false premises at work here, the first of which being that Kapernick had an opportunity to determine the leadership in this country.
He's gone on record several times saying he does not believe either Trump or Hillary would improve the situation. So, in his opinion (he's allow to have that, right?), a vote either would not qualify as "acting in his own self interests?"

Also, are you insinuating that Kapernick is ignorant or uninformed in your post?

Neither.
Why so angry?

[mu03eng]

You've got some false premises at work here, the first of which being that Kapernick had an opportunity to determine the leadership in this country.
He's gone on record several times saying he does not believe either Trump or Hillary would improve the situation. So, in his opinion (he's allow to have that, right?), a vote either would not qualify as "acting in his own self interests?"

So there is not one person he could have voted for anywhere on the ballot that could have had an impact on the situation? There isn't one person who he could have written in that would have had his interests at heart?

Furthermore, did campaign or advocate for anyone that he thought could shape the political process? Did he bring more people into the political process? I honestly don't know, if he did: awesome, that's better than voting we can all move on. However, if he not only didn't vote but didn't try to expand the people who were engaged in the political process then he's just lazy and entitled. His protest is the easy thing, say people are racist and draw awareness. The actually getting out and getting people involved, advocating for individuals who can make a difference in the political process, voting up and down the ballot....that's the hard stuff that actually matters. Making "statements" is easy.

Neither.
Why so angry?

Couldn't help but draw the conclusion that you were implying that when a post about Kapernick not voting led you to talk about ignorant or uninformed voters not voting.

Not angry, just disappointed that we all continue to say stuff, including Mr. Kapernick, but seemingly choose not to actually do anything to improve the situation. Again maybe he has, to which I would then just say thank you and my apologizes for assuming things.

[Pakuni]

So there is not one person he could have voted for anywhere on the ballot that could have had an impact on the situation?

I don't know every candidate who was on his particular ballot. I was under the impression you were writing about national races.
I do know that he's donating $1 million to charitable causes that he believes will have an impact on the situation which, at least IMO, will be infinitely more effective than his vote.
Agree?

However, if he not only didn't vote but didn't try to expand the people who were engaged in the political process then he's just lazy and entitled. His protest is the easy thing, say people are racist and draw awareness. The actually getting out and getting people involved, advocating for individuals who can make a difference in the political process, voting up and down the ballot....that's the hard stuff that actually matters. Making "statements" is easy.

No, voting is not "hard stuff." Voting is remarkably easy. It took me all of about three minutes of pressing a touch screen. At worst, maybe you had to fill in some circles with a #2 pencil.

Do you really believe "advocating for individuals ... in the political process" is hard, but a public protest that subjects you to death threats, public scorn, loss of current income and future earnings  is "lazy and entitled?"
I beg to differ. Agree or disagree with Kapernick's stance and method, what he's doing is a million times harder and involves far more self sacrifice than standing on a stage next to Hillary Clinton or going to the polls.

[mu03eng]

I don't know every candidate who was on his particular ballot. I was under the impression you were writing about national races.
I do know that he's donating $1 million to charitable causes that he believes will have an impact on the situation which, at least IMO, will be infinitely more effective than his vote.
Agree?

Agree

No, voting is not "hard stuff." Voting is remarkably easy. It took me all of about three minutes of pressing a touch screen. At worst, maybe you had to fill in some circles with a #2 pencil.

Do you really believe "advocating for individuals ... in the political process" is hard, but a public protest that subjects you to death threats, public scorn, loss of current income and future earnings  is "lazy and entitled?"
I beg to differ. Agree or disagree with Kapernick's stance and method, what he's doing is a million times harder and involves far more self sacrifice than standing on a stage next to Hillary Clinton or going to the polls.

Also agree, voting is super easy, did not mean to imply otherwise.

As far as public protest versus advocating, it depends on how you measure the "cost". I would agree that Kapernick's public protest is certainly emotionally harder than getting on stage with HRC and that's not nothing, but in balance with how much time and effort he could be giving to educating voters, influencing politicians, advocating for candidates, etc it's not as hard.

Putting it another way, I think it's a lot easier to point out a problem (Kapernick's protest) than it is to enable the resolution (political and legal recourse). No doubt there is emotional and monetary consequence to Kapernick's pointing out the problem, but when you are dismissive of a potential resolution (voting in people who can make an impact) you are being "lazy"

[Babybluejeansfan]

You've got some false premises at work here, the first of which being that Kapernick had an opportunity to determine the leadership in this country.
He's gone on record several times saying he does not believe either Trump or Hillary would improve the situation. So, in his opinion (he's allow to have that, right?), a vote either would not qualify as "acting in his own self interests?"
Neither.
Why so angry?

He should have written someone in that could have done something.  Maybe he knows of know one.  Take a knee.

[Tugg Speedman]

Older Viewers and Conservatives Are Watching Less NFL, Survey Finds
Morning Consult survey also cites election coverage and over-saturation of prime-time games
Nov. 30, 2016 5:28 p.m. ET

http://www.wsj.com/articles/older-viewers-and-conservatives-are-watching-less-nfl-survey-finds-1480544927?mod=e2twcmo

Explanations for this year’s sagging National Football League TV ratings have ranged from competition with election coverage to an overload of prime-time games to impatience with commercials.

A survey of 2,088 people by Morning Consult finds evidence for all those theories. It also shows declines in viewership among older viewers and those with conservative political views.

As for political leanings, conservatives are watching less football this season compared to last season versus other political groups. Some 28% of conservatives said they were watching some or much less NFL, versus 20% for moderates and 16% for liberals.

The survey did not explore why older and conservative viewers might be losing more interest than other groups this season and whether protests by players during the playing of the national anthem are a factor.

Older viewers cited political coverage less frequently than their younger counterparts as playing a part in their decision to not watch football.

[Benny B]

Older Viewers and Conservatives Are Watching Less NFL, Survey Finds
Morning Consult survey also cites election coverage and over-saturation of prime-time games
Nov. 30, 2016 5:28 p.m. ET

http://www.wsj.com/articles/older-viewers-and-conservatives-are-watching-less-nfl-survey-finds-1480544927?mod=e2twcmo

Explanations for this year’s sagging National Football League TV ratings have ranged from competition with election coverage to an overload of prime-time games to impatience with commercials.

A survey of 2,088 people by Morning Consult finds evidence for all those theories. It also shows declines in viewership among older viewers and those with conservative political views.

As for political leanings, conservatives are watching less football this season compared to last season versus other political groups. Some 28% of conservatives said they were watching some or much less NFL, versus 20% for moderates and 16% for liberals.

The survey did not explore why older and conservative viewers might be losing more interest than other groups this season and whether protests by players during the playing of the national anthem are a factor.

Older viewers cited political coverage less frequently than their younger counterparts as playing a part in their decision to not watch football.

In other news, Commodore Obvious reports from Undyernose, Iceland, that older people are watching less television as they grow old and eventually die.  However, overall ratings among the dead and comatose, however, have skyrocketed to a 100 share over the past couple months with the reboot of the new MacGyver on CBS.