What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

NCAA has ruined bowl season (1 Viewer)

According to this:

24 out of 32 bowl games had more viewers in 2010, than in 2013

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the increased popularity of bowl games.
I bet the main games were all on ABC, free TV
I don't know - how is it relevant to the point that fewer people are watching bowl games now, than 4 years ago? It does not matter why they are not watching.
Because it's on cable now. I think the first Bcs title game on espn was 2011 or 12. Naturally the ratings will be lower as not everybody has cable.

On cable = big ratings = higher fees charged to providers along with bigger commercial prices. As opposed to just commercial money if over the air.

 
I don't care about ratings -- in fact the idea that the usual suspects has taken something cool and traditional with (some) cultural meaning and turned it into just another way to grind out an extra nickel is a mark against it IMO.
Yeah it sucks that more people get to watch more football and more kids get to play in more games. Even worse, people are making money from it! If there's a winner in this situation, I can't imagine who it'd be.
Well the kids probably deserve more for their role in the profit machine than a free trip to Shreveport and an outdated Apple product with a logo on it. But otherwise, yeah, it's pretty much a win-win-win scenario.
Lets not make this a thread about paying players. We're busy mopping the floor with people that hate America.
:shrug:

Be sure to TIVO "Ow, My Balls!" while you're watching the 2-13 East Tennessee State Pepsis lose to the 4-12 Richmond University Marlboros in the Brawndo Bowl, bro.
Richmond is the Spiders.

 
According to this:

24 out of 32 bowl games had more viewers in 2010, than in 2013

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the increased popularity of bowl games.
I bet the main games were all on ABC, free TV
I don't know - how is it relevant to the point that fewer people are watching bowl games now, than 4 years ago? It does not matter why they are not watching.
Because it's on cable now. I think the first Bcs title game on espn was 2011 or 12. Naturally the ratings will be lower as not everybody has cable.

On cable = big ratings = higher fees charged to providers along with bigger commercial prices. As opposed to just commercial money if over the air.
Either more people are watching, or they are not.

According to the data, over 32 million fewer viewers watched bowl games in 2012/13 than in the 2009/10 season (223.5 million v. 191 million), despite 2012/13 having two more bowl games to televise. You can't sit here and say the games are more popular on TV, when the data suggests otherwise.

 
According to this:

24 out of 32 bowl games had more viewers in 2010, than in 2013

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the increased popularity of bowl games.
I bet the main games were all on ABC, free TV
I don't know - how is it relevant to the point that fewer people are watching bowl games now, than 4 years ago? It does not matter why they are not watching.
Because it's on cable now. I think the first Bcs title game on espn was 2011 or 12. Naturally the ratings will be lower as not everybody has cable.

On cable = big ratings = higher fees charged to providers along with bigger commercial prices. As opposed to just commercial money if over the air.
Either more people are watching, or they are not.

According to the data, over 32 million fewer viewers watched bowl games in 2012/13 than in the 2009/10 season (223.5 million v. 191 million), despite 2012/13 having two more bowl games to televise. You can't sit here and say the games are more popular on TV, when the data suggests otherwise.
I assume the point is that ratings are an outdated way to measure popularity and more importantly profitability. For example, do ratings include people streaming the broadcasts via WatchESPN and the revenue generated there?

 
I don't mind having more games, but I do prefer they put more of the big bowls on Jan 1. Having the national title game another day makes sense, but I miss being able to switch around between lots of games on the 1st. We got lucky this year that most of the games on the 1st were pretty close/entertaining.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
According to this:

24 out of 32 bowl games had more viewers in 2010, than in 2013

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the increased popularity of bowl games.
Can't really tell much from a comparison of one year to one other year.
:shrug:

It tells a pretty basic story that TV viewership was down, pretty much across the board.
:shrug:

Maybe 2010 was the highest ratings ever.
maybe it was...still shows that viewership is declining, not getting better.
I think you're looking at it too simplistically. Take the Music City Bowl. In 2010 it was 1.7 and in 2013 it was 1.4. So yeah, using those two numbers it appears to have "declined." But in the two years between it was 4.2 and 2.7. So it really went up before it declined. There are also bowls where it's pin balled like the Outback (3.5, 7.1, 5.1, 4.3) and Peach (4.2, 4.3, 3.6, 4.8). I don't think these numbers reflect "that viewership is declining."

 
According to this:

24 out of 32 bowl games had more viewers in 2010, than in 2013

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the increased popularity of bowl games.
Can't really tell much from a comparison of one year to one other year.
:shrug:

It tells a pretty basic story that TV viewership was down, pretty much across the board.
:shrug:

Maybe 2010 was the highest ratings ever.
maybe it was...still shows that viewership is declining, not getting better.
No it doesn't. It's two points on a graph...all it shows is that one was higher than the other.

If you want to show a trend, it'll take a lot more than two random seasons.

 
According to this:

24 out of 32 bowl games had more viewers in 2010, than in 2013

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the increased popularity of bowl games.
I bet the main games were all on ABC, free TV
I don't know - how is it relevant to the point that fewer people are watching bowl games now, than 4 years ago? It does not matter why they are not watching.
Because it's on cable now. I think the first Bcs title game on espn was 2011 or 12. Naturally the ratings will be lower as not everybody has cable.On cable = big ratings = higher fees charged to providers along with bigger commercial prices. As opposed to just commercial money if over the air.
Either more people are watching, or they are not.According to the data, over 32 million fewer viewers watched bowl games in 2012/13 than in the 2009/10 season (223.5 million v. 191 million), despite 2012/13 having two more bowl games to televise. You can't sit here and say the games are more popular on TV, when the data suggests otherwise.
If you're only willing to look at things from a black and white perspective like that, then I don't know what to tell you. Not worth my time.

Either way the bowls aren't going anywhere. In fact they're adding more.

 
According to this:

24 out of 32 bowl games had more viewers in 2010, than in 2013

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the increased popularity of bowl games.
Can't really tell much from a comparison of one year to one other year.
:shrug:

It tells a pretty basic story that TV viewership was down, pretty much across the board.
:shrug:

Maybe 2010 was the highest ratings ever.
maybe it was...still shows that viewership is declining, not getting better.
I think you're looking at it too simplistically. Take the Music City Bowl. In 2010 it was 1.7 and in 2013 it was 1.4. So yeah, using those two numbers it appears to have "declined." But in the two years between it was 4.2 and 2.7. So it really went up before it declined. There are also bowls where it's pin balled like the Outback (3.5, 7.1, 5.1, 4.3) and Peach (4.2, 4.3, 3.6, 4.8). I don't think these numbers reflect "that viewership is declining."
The year to year fluctuation of some bowls has to be due to what day of the week the game happens to fall on and what teams are playing in the game. The week between Christmas and New Years has nothing else to offer on TV so any football fan should be watching the bowls and some casual sports fans too.

 
I added all the viewership numbers from 2010 and 2013 - 32 million fewer viewers in 2013 than in 2010. That is total viewers, not just looking from game to game. 2013 had two additional bowl games that did not exist in 2010 that were included in the totals.

I am just the messenger here - TV viewship is down. You can debate why, but you can't debate that fewer people are watching the games now.

 
I don't care about ratings -- in fact the idea that the usual suspects has taken something cool and traditional with (some) cultural meaning and turned it into just another way to grind out an extra nickel is a mark against it IMO.
Yeah it sucks that more people get to watch more football and more kids get to play in more games. Even worse, people are making money from it! If there's a winner in this situation, I can't imagine who it'd be.
Well the kids probably deserve more for their role in the profit machine than a free trip to Shreveport and an outdated Apple product with a logo on it. But otherwise, yeah, it's pretty much a win-win-win scenario.
Lets not make this a thread about paying players. We're busy mopping the floor with people that hate America.
:shrug:

Be sure to TIVO "Ow, My Balls!" while you're watching the 2-13 East Tennessee State Pepsis lose to the 4-12 Richmond University Marlboros in the Brawndo Bowl, bro.
Richmond is the Spiders.
ETSU disbanded football in 2003 and are the Buccaneers.

 
I added all the viewership numbers from 2010 and 2013 - 32 million fewer viewers in 2013 than in 2010. That is total viewers, not just looking from game to game. 2013 had two additional bowl games that did not exist in 2010 that were included in the totals.

I am just the messenger here - TV viewship is down. You can debate why, but you can't debate that fewer people watched the games in one randomly selected year than in another randomly selected year.
fixxxed

 
According to this:

24 out of 32 bowl games had more viewers in 2010, than in 2013

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the increased popularity of bowl games.
Can't really tell much from a comparison of one year to one other year.
:shrug:

It tells a pretty basic story that TV viewership was down, pretty much across the board.
:shrug:

Maybe 2010 was the highest ratings ever.
maybe it was...still shows that viewership is declining, not getting better.
I think you're looking at it too simplistically. Take the Music City Bowl. In 2010 it was 1.7 and in 2013 it was 1.4. So yeah, using those two numbers it appears to have "declined." But in the two years between it was 4.2 and 2.7. So it really went up before it declined. There are also bowls where it's pin balled like the Outback (3.5, 7.1, 5.1, 4.3) and Peach (4.2, 4.3, 3.6, 4.8). I don't think these numbers reflect "that viewership is declining."
The year to year fluctuation of some bowls has to be due to what day of the week the game happens to fall on and what teams are playing in the game. The week between Christmas and New Years has nothing else to offer on TV so any football fan should be watching the bowls and some casual sports fans too.
32 million fewer in 2013 than 2010. Case Closed.

 
According to this:

24 out of 32 bowl games had more viewers in 2010, than in 2013

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the increased popularity of bowl games.
Can't really tell much from a comparison of one year to one other year.
:shrug:

It tells a pretty basic story that TV viewership was down, pretty much across the board.
:shrug:

Maybe 2010 was the highest ratings ever.
maybe it was...still shows that viewership is declining, not getting better.
I think you're looking at it too simplistically. Take the Music City Bowl. In 2010 it was 1.7 and in 2013 it was 1.4. So yeah, using those two numbers it appears to have "declined." But in the two years between it was 4.2 and 2.7. So it really went up before it declined. There are also bowls where it's pin balled like the Outback (3.5, 7.1, 5.1, 4.3) and Peach (4.2, 4.3, 3.6, 4.8). I don't think these numbers reflect "that viewership is declining."
The year to year fluctuation of some bowls has to be due to what day of the week the game happens to fall on and what teams are playing in the game. The week between Christmas and New Years has nothing else to offer on TV so any football fan should be watching the bowls and some casual sports fans too.
32 million fewer in 2013 than 2010. Case Closed.
:lmao:

 
I added all the viewership numbers from 2010 and 2013 - 32 million fewer viewers in 2013 than in 2010. That is total viewers, not just looking from game to game. 2013 had two additional bowl games that did not exist in 2010 that were included in the totals.

I am just the messenger here - TV viewship is down. You can debate why, but you can't debate that fewer people are watching the games now.
Well...to be clear...fewer people watched this year than 2010, right? I'm sure you can take other two year points on the graph and claim that more people are watching...for example, if you take 2010 and 2011, what's the result? I don't know....I'm asking.

 
I added all the viewership numbers from 2010 and 2013 - 32 million fewer viewers in 2013 than in 2010. That is total viewers, not just looking from game to game. 2013 had two additional bowl games that did not exist in 2010 that were included in the totals.

I am just the messenger here - TV viewship is down. You can debate why, but you can't debate that fewer people are watching the games now.
Your point is too broad. Fewer people are watching on their TVs than three years ago. How many were streaming these games? Does it make up the difference? You can't ignore that potentially significant chunk of viewers.

 
The week between Christmas and New Years has nothing else to offer on TV so any football fan should be watching the bowls and some casual sports fans too.
Really? Should be?

"Yeah, not much on network TV tonight. Sure, some NBA games. I guess I could fire up the Netflix, or give my kid the car keys and send him down to the RedBox. Or watch a movie on HBO. Or clear out some of the '30 for 30's I haven't watched yet on my DVR. Some pretty good shows I could catch up on over on AMC or other cable channels, too. Or I could pop in one of those blu-rays I got for Christmas, or start up that Breaking Bad boxed set. Or, maybe I'll flip on the Xbox and try one of these games out. And there's some good articles online I've been meaning to read, and there's some good discussion on SonsOfSamHorn I'd like to get in on. Plus, there's a best-of-week at deadspin.com and some good crap on Reddit that I'll get hooked on for hours. Or, god forbid, I could actually spend time with my family and go to a movie or a junior league hockey game or we could toss the ball around outside for a bit or I could take the ol' ball and chain out for a drive because she really wanted to look at some Christmas lights in the next block over and I haven't had alone time with her in a while this month, we've been so busy.

"But, nah, Ramblin Wreck says I should be watching two teams I've never seen before, featuring players I've never heard of, none of which will ever make the pros, playing a watered-down version of the real game of football that'll be on Sunday anyway, with lots of bad tackling, poor defense, and inaccurate passing, because it's the historical prestige of the San Diego County Credit Union Bowl or the Franklin Mortgage Bowl that must be respected, so I'll settle in to watch and see if 8-6 North Poughkeepsie State can handle 7-7 East Rutherford Technical and Husbandry College and Bovine University. Should be a great game I'll tell my grandchildren about someday."

 
The week between Christmas and New Years has nothing else to offer on TV so any football fan should be watching the bowls and some casual sports fans too.
Really? Should be?

"Yeah, not much on network TV tonight. Sure, some NBA games. I guess I could fire up the Netflix, or give my kid the car keys and send him down to the RedBox. Or watch a movie on HBO. Or clear out some of the '30 for 30's I haven't watched yet on my DVR. Some pretty good shows I could catch up on over on AMC or other cable channels, too. Or I could pop in one of those blu-rays I got for Christmas, or start up that Breaking Bad boxed set. Or, maybe I'll flip on the Xbox and try one of these games out. And there's some good articles online I've been meaning to read, and there's some good discussion on SonsOfSamHorn I'd like to get in on. Plus, there's a best-of-week at deadspin.com and some good crap on Reddit that I'll get hooked on for hours. Or, god forbid, I could actually spend time with my family and go to a movie or a junior league hockey game or we could toss the ball around outside for a bit or I could take the ol' ball and chain out for a drive because she really wanted to look at some Christmas lights in the next block over and I haven't had alone time with her in a while this month, we've been so busy.

"But, nah, Ramblin Wreck says I should be watching two teams I've never seen before, featuring players I've never heard of, none of which will ever make the pros, playing a watered-down version of the real game of football that'll be on Sunday anyway, with lots of bad tackling, poor defense, and inaccurate passing, because it's the historical prestige of the San Diego County Credit Union Bowl or the Franklin Mortgage Bowl that must be respected, so I'll settle in to watch and see if 8-6 North Poughkeepsie State can handle 7-7 East Rutherford Technical and Husbandry College and Bovine University. Should be a great game I'll tell my grandchildren about someday."
Everybody should throw a random drive-by punch of a post at Ramblin Wreck every so often. I approve of the extra effort applied to this one.

 
I don't care about ratings -- in fact the idea that the usual suspects has taken something cool and traditional with (some) cultural meaning and turned it into just another way to grind out an extra nickel is a mark against it IMO.
Yeah it sucks that more people get to watch more football and more kids get to play in more games. Even worse, people are making money from it! If there's a winner in this situation, I can't imagine who it'd be.
Well the kids probably deserve more for their role in the profit machine than a free trip to Shreveport and an outdated Apple product with a logo on it. But otherwise, yeah, it's pretty much a win-win-win scenario.
Lets not make this a thread about paying players. We're busy mopping the floor with people that hate America.
:shrug:

Be sure to TIVO "Ow, My Balls!" while you're watching the 2-13 East Tennessee State Pepsis lose to the 4-12 Richmond University Marlboros in the Brawndo Bowl, bro.
Richmond is the Spiders.
ETSU disbanded football in 2003 and are the Buccaneers.
They're back in 2015.

 
I added all the viewership numbers from 2010 and 2013 - 32 million fewer viewers in 2013 than in 2010. That is total viewers, not just looking from game to game. 2013 had two additional bowl games that did not exist in 2010 that were included in the totals.

I am just the messenger here - TV viewship is down. You can debate why, but you can't debate that fewer people are watching the games now.
Your point is too broad. Fewer people are watching on their TVs than three years ago. How many were streaming these games? Does it make up the difference? You can't ignore that potentially significant chunk of viewers.
You guys are right, college football bowl games are more popular than ever. We'll probably be see in a few more pop up in the next couple of years to take advantage of this new found popularity.

 
I added all the viewership numbers from 2010 and 2013 - 32 million fewer viewers in 2013 than in 2010. That is total viewers, not just looking from game to game. 2013 had two additional bowl games that did not exist in 2010 that were included in the totals.

I am just the messenger here - TV viewship is down. You can debate why, but you can't debate that fewer people are watching the games now.
Your point is too broad. Fewer people are watching on their TVs than three years ago. How many were streaming these games? Does it make up the difference? You can't ignore that potentially significant chunk of viewers.
You guys are right, college football bowl games are more popular than ever. We'll probably be see in a few more pop up in the next couple of years to take advantage of this new found popularity.
You're right. 4 more next year. :thumbup:

 
The week between Christmas and New Years has nothing else to offer on TV so any football fan should be watching the bowls and some casual sports fans too.
Really? Should be?

"Yeah, not much on network TV tonight. Sure, some NBA games. I guess I could fire up the Netflix, or give my kid the car keys and send him down to the RedBox. Or watch a movie on HBO. Or clear out some of the '30 for 30's I haven't watched yet on my DVR. Some pretty good shows I could catch up on over on AMC or other cable channels, too. Or I could pop in one of those blu-rays I got for Christmas, or start up that Breaking Bad boxed set. Or, maybe I'll flip on the Xbox and try one of these games out. And there's some good articles online I've been meaning to read, and there's some good discussion on SonsOfSamHorn I'd like to get in on. Plus, there's a best-of-week at deadspin.com and some good crap on Reddit that I'll get hooked on for hours. Or, god forbid, I could actually spend time with my family and go to a movie or a junior league hockey game or we could toss the ball around outside for a bit or I could take the ol' ball and chain out for a drive because she really wanted to look at some Christmas lights in the next block over and I haven't had alone time with her in a while this month, we've been so busy.

"But, nah, Ramblin Wreck says I should be watching two teams I've never seen before, featuring players I've never heard of, none of which will ever make the pros, playing a watered-down version of the real game of football that'll be on Sunday anyway, with lots of bad tackling, poor defense, and inaccurate passing, because it's the historical prestige of the San Diego County Credit Union Bowl or the Franklin Mortgage Bowl that must be respected, so I'll settle in to watch and see if 8-6 North Poughkeepsie State can handle 7-7 East Rutherford Technical and Husbandry College and Bovine University. Should be a great game I'll tell my grandchildren about someday."
Holy #### dude. Do you overreact to one word like this always? No one gives a #### what you're watching to be honest.

 
I'm not even sure why the NCAA even gives out a National Championship trophy.

Congratulations, you are, at best, the 33rd best football team in the country!
Ditto for high school sports. Way to be, like, the 10,000th best team in the world, East Aberdine Christian Prep. The New Zealand All-Blacks could probably kick your ###, and they don't even know what football is.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top