More people in the US watched last year's Minnesota-Syracuse Pinstripe Bowl than the clinching game of the Stanley Cup

College football is like 1,000 x more popular in the United States than hockey.
Plus this was a crappy Stanley Cup between teams from Nevada and Florida :sneaky: and hockey is highly tribal.

Could 100% nearly all Wild fans not tuning into a single game out of sheer spite of Vegas.
 

Were there really 2.75M households "watching" the Pinstripe Bowl? What does that number really mean?

Do we really believe, for example, that there are say 1.375M households (not people, mind you) that are big enough Gopher or Orange fans that they'd tune into the lowly Pinstripe Bowl to watch it live?

I don't know if I believe that.

The bulk has to be casual CFB fans about the nation, so compelled to watch CFB that they tuned into this game. I guess I can somewhat buy that.



This is an entirely separate, but very interesting, discussion about ratings themselves.

I'm not really sure how much I trust them.


It seems to be a co-dependent, symbiotic ecosystem, where content producers need ratings agencies to give them good numbers (so they can charge more for ads during the broadcast), and ratings agencies need content producers to pay them to do the ratings studies.

Somewhat like in The Big Short where the lady at S&P tells them that if they don't give the banks the ratings they want on their MBS products, they'll just go get them at Moody's.

Not sure if Nielsen has any competition, though.
 

Tangible example:

it just seems that CFB games on ESPN get better ratings than games on FS1. Talking equal caliber games. There's no physical reason for that. I doubt there exists a live TV channel bundle that has ESPN but doesn't have FS1? If you're capable of finding the game on ESPN, you're equally capable of finding the game on FS1.

But yet, the ratings boost of being on ESPN persists.


Is that real? Or does ESPN pay Nielsen to manufacture or "fudge" this?

I don't know what I believe.


EDIT: ok, ESPN is only on Sling Orange and FS1 is only on Sling Blue. So that is one example, but guessing not many others and how many subscribers does Sling contribute towards CFB ratings?
 


Good reply. I hope it doesn't seem like I'm trying to be argumentative here. This actually seems like civil discussion between differing points of view in this thread.

I can see your point, but in my case that's a reason why I don't like it live. I want to hear the announcer telling me what's going on, etc. If I see all 22 players, like you are, I get overwhelmed and can't really focus on anything. I like the play-by-play guy showing a reply and who missed the block, or who blew the assignment on defense, etc. I can focus and understand then. But for some reason I can't do it live if it's that many moving parts.
My issue with the announcers is that they pick and stick to a narrative ... regardless of the action sometimes, often they're way off.

I'll go to the games (go to all the home games) and later watch on TV and man the announcers straight up pick the wrong points to talk about... it's weird.
 


Tangible example:

it just seems that CFB games on ESPN get better ratings than games on FS1. Talking equal caliber games. There's no physical reason for that. I doubt there exists a live TV channel bundle that has ESPN but doesn't have FS1? If you're capable of finding the game on ESPN, you're equally capable of finding the game on FS1.

But yet, the ratings boost of being on ESPN persists.


Is that real? Or does ESPN pay Nielsen to manufacture or "fudge" this?

I don't know what I believe.


EDIT: ok, ESPN is only on Sling Orange and FS1 is only on Sling Blue. So that is one example, but guessing not many others and how many subscribers does Sling contribute towards CFB ratings?
They have roughly equal distribution but FS1 has never reached ESPN's status with casual sports fans. The 2.75 million audience for a mid-tier Bowl Game is mostly casual fans who put it on in the background during Holiday activities. I'd guess the % of people with pay TV who know what channel ESPN is by memory is 2-3 times higher than those who know what channel FS1 is. I'm one of them.
 

They have roughly equal distribution but FS1 has never reached ESPN's status with casual sports fans. The 2.75 million audience for a mid-tier Bowl Game is mostly casual fans who put it on in the background during Holiday activities. I'd guess the % of people with pay TV who know what channel ESPN is by memory is 2-3 times higher than those who know what channel FS1 is. I'm one of them.
Yeah, I have both channels but for whatever reason when I flip on the TV my mind immediately goes to check what is on ESPN, while forgetting about FS1. Even though FS1 has a lot of good programming.
 

Hockey needs to get back to what made it fun up to about 15 years ago. And I am sure you can probably guess what I think that is..................
 




I recall a lot of complaining about a crappy bowl slot location, crappy field conditions (true), crappy matchup opponent and yet somehow it keeps showcasing us.
The players enjoyed the swag, the location and the win. We are all happy with the bowl win!
And now people are still talking about us in June. Go Gophers!
Here is to another 10 win season or better! :drink:
Let's keep complaining as long as they are winning those bowl games.
 

I wonder if Florida vs Las Vegas had anything to do with those low ratings? These are not traditional hockey cities.
 

I love hockey, but sorry by June 15th, I am little checked out of the winter sports.
Bingo! It’s the same with the NBA. When they decided to bleed their playoffs into mid June they abandoned a huge audience who would likely be interested but it’s now the off-season. It would take a major conversion to get them to change the model. MLB doing the same thing with World Series possibly bleeding into November. The greed at the expense of the game is discouraging and nauseating. For what it’s worth, I remember a Vikings super bowl on January 14.
 

Bingo! It’s the same with the NBA. When they decided to bleed their playoffs into mid June they abandoned a huge audience who would likely be interested but it’s now the off-season. It would take a major conversion to get them to change the model. MLB doing the same thing with World Series possibly bleeding into November. The greed at the expense of the game is discouraging and nauseating. For what it’s worth, I remember a Vikings super bowl on January 14.
This reminds me of the time when my dad pulled me out of school early on a wednesday to go to World Series game 6 at Met Stadium to see the Twins battle the LA Dodgers. Every single game of the 1965 World Series was a day game with start times between 2pm and 2:30pm locally. Those were the days...
I'm sitting in my 5th grade class at around 10am when I get called to the principal's office. I couldn't for the life of me figure what I could've done wrong, so I had that sick hollow feeling in the pit of my stomach as I walked to the office. Then I see my dad and I just about passed out from fear! That's when he told me we were going to the game. My dad and the principal shared a laugh over me going from ima gonna die, to the World Series in 2 seconds flat!
Anyways, the Twins won that day 5-1 behind winning pitcher Mudcat Grant, who also hit a home run that day!
 



I am the same. The only rules I claim to know are high-sticking and icing...sometimes.
When I did play hockey I always wore my snowmobile boots.
I did watch a little of the Gopher men's run in the championships this year...but that's because its the Gophers.
USFL keeps my interest...until the wife comes to bed and suggests some new streaming show that the hens on Talk 107 were raving about.
Boot hockey is the only way I could play because I had weak ankles and never got a hang of balancing myself on skates!
 

I watch NCAA women's ice hockey because there is far more skating, passing, and play-making than the NFL or even NCAA men's ice hockey.
The Final Four games were very exciting.
Imagine the skill men's hockey players could display if they weren't allowed to hit each other.
 

I'd be willing to bet a meaningless bowl game by two second tier teams would struggle to get 1M viewers if they played it today. I don't care how much more popular CFB is than the NHL!
Umm, if they put a game between Minnesota and Syracuse (2nd tier on a national scale) on ESPN this evening, a football-starved nation would give it better ratings than it got back in December.

If it pulled in 2.75M viewers then, I bet it would do 3-4M now. Certainly would get over 1M!
 

Umm, if they put a game between Minnesota and Syracuse (2nd tier on a national scale) on ESPN this evening, a football-starved nation would give it better ratings than it got back in December.

If it pulled in 2.75M viewers then, I bet it would do 3-4M now. Certainly would get over 1M!
I want whatever you're on!
 


Plus this was a crappy Stanley Cup between teams from Nevada and Florida :sneaky: and hockey is highly tribal.

Could 100% nearly all Wild fans not tuning into a single game out of sheer spite of Vegas.

Markets have a lot to do with this, I think.

Tampa Bay - Colorado got 5.8M US viewers on ABC for decisive game 6 in 2022 (Tampa Bay and Denver are much more engaged hockey markets than Vegas or Miami), which is more than double what Vegas - Miami got on the same network (2.7M)
 


Why do you believe that the same product, presented in an environment of much greater scarcity, would have much lower demand?
You assume there really was a demand for this game back in December. I tend to agree with the poster who said the game was on in the background for many households and weren't really paying much attention to the game or had a rooting interest in either team. It passed the time while the turkey and cranberries were being made!

My last post reminded me. Have you tried Rodrick Williams' tacos? If so, how are they?
 

I watch NCAA women's ice hockey because there is far more skating, passing, and play-making than the NFL or even NCAA men's ice hockey.
The Final Four games were very exciting.
I'm a fan of the women's game too, but you're nuts if you think there's more play making in the women's game. But you're a badger fan and their men's hockey product has been garbage the last few years, so who would want to watch that? And have fun watching Mike Hastings Mankato style hockey for the next few years. Should be lots of 2-1 barn burners.
 

Markets have a lot to do with this, I think.

Tampa Bay - Colorado got 5.8M US viewers on ABC for decisive game 6 in 2022 (Tampa Bay and Denver are much more engaged hockey markets than Vegas or Miami), which is more than double what Vegas - Miami got on the same network (2.7M)
So we know right there, that Colorado adds an additional 3M household viewers!

Florida might seem like a good location on paper for an NHL team. And perhaps they can fill the arena just fine (I don't know TBH). But I doubt that most Floridians, who aren't northern transplants, give a rip about ice hockey to even tune it in on TV.
 

I wonder if Florida vs Las Vegas had anything to do with those low ratings? These are not traditional hockey cities.
Has to be a big issue. I wonder what the ratings in those two markets were specifically. I'm guessing it isn't very good, especially in Miami compared to what it normally would be in one of the participating cities.
 

So we know right there, that Colorado adds an additional 3M household viewers!

Florida might seem like a good location on paper for an NHL team. And perhaps they can fill the arena just fine (I don't know TBH). But I doubt that most Floridians, who aren't northern transplants, give a rip about ice hockey to even tune it in on TV.
"Florida" here is Miami/South Florida.

Tampa Bay is actually a good hockey area simply because the Lightning have been a champion / contender for quite a while. The Lightning sell out all of the games and the bars are packed during the playoffs (not just Stanley Cup) here.

Hockey is much bigger in Tampa Bay than South Florida. It's part of why Tampa is on the Frozen Four circuit.
 

"Florida" here is Miami/South Florida.

Tampa Bay is actually a good hockey area simply because the Lightning have been a champion / contender for quite a while. The Lightning sell out all of the games and the bars are packed during the playoffs (not just Stanley Cup) here.

Hockey is much bigger in Tampa Bay than South Florida. It's part of why Tampa is on the Frozen Four circuit.
I'd be quite shocked if actual overall ice hockey fandom and participation in Tampa is much better than anywhere else in Florida.

Sure, it's easy to throw on a jersey and go to a bar for a good team in the playoffs, and that's the only time you ever watch them. If you tell me that it's 500% better in Tampa for that than in Miami, sure, I'll believe it.
 

Good reply. I hope it doesn't seem like I'm trying to be argumentative here. This actually seems like civil discussion between differing points of view in this thread.

I can see your point, but in my case that's a reason why I don't like it live. I want to hear the announcer telling me what's going on, etc. If I see all 22 players, like you are, I get overwhelmed and can't really focus on anything. I like the play-by-play guy showing a reply and who missed the block, or who blew the assignment on defense, etc. I can focus and understand then. But for some reason I can't do it live if it's that many moving parts.
Agreed, it's too many little dots on the screen moving around and they're way too small when you zoom out to the All-22 view.

TV obviously knows this, and why they've never shown the All-22 as the standard for broadcasts.
 

You assume there really was a demand for this game back in December. I tend to agree with the poster who said the game was on in the background for many households and weren't really paying much attention to the game or had a rooting interest in either team. It passed the time while the turkey and cranberries were being made!

My last post reminded me. Have you tried Rodrick Williams' tacos? If so, how are they?
Yes, I use cannabis. It's awesome. I hope to try those tacos! I'm super excited to come back for a game this season now that Minnesota has smartly legalized.

The Pinstripe Bowl was played on December 29. There might have been some fading leftover turkey and cranberries or guests who wouldn't leave but for most people, this was just another Thursday afternoon (not prime time) between two holidays and they still watched.

I agree, football is all about passive habit viewing. I'm counting on a ton of that when I say this hypothetical game would get more eyeballs than you think.
 

I'd be quite shocked if actual overall ice hockey fandom and participation in Tampa is much better than anywhere else in Florida.

Sure, it's easy to throw on a jersey and go to a bar for a good team in the playoffs, and that's the only time you ever watch them. If you tell me that it's 500% better in Tampa for that than in Miami, sure, I'll believe it.
Participation is a whole other thing. I'm just talking fan and TV viewing interest.
 

I'd be quite shocked if actual overall ice hockey fandom and participation in Tampa is much better than anywhere else in Florida.

Sure, it's easy to throw on a jersey and go to a bar for a good team in the playoffs, and that's the only time you ever watch them. If you tell me that it's 500% better in Tampa for that than in Miami, sure, I'll believe it.
Lightning bumper and window stickers are everywhere down in the TB area. Bucs are obviously #1 but I would say Lightning are ahead of the Rays based on what I have observed on vehicles and apparel.
 




Top Bottom