PDA

View Full Version : Scrubs TV ratings down 39%, White Sox down 19%


1908<2005
07-27-2010, 06:09 PM
http://www.sportsmediawatch.net/2010/07/local-mlb-ratings-big-declines-for-red.html
Meanwhile, Cubs telecasts are averaging a 2.71 on Comcast SportsNet Chicago, down 39% from last year. The 2.71 rating for the Cubs is not much higher than the local ratings for the Blackhawks (2.45) and Bulls (2.35), though the team still has a big lead on the White Sox (1.85, down 19%).

SOXSINCE'70
07-27-2010, 06:13 PM
What took so long?

LongLiveFisk
07-27-2010, 06:17 PM
At first I thought you meant the TV show Scrubs. :lol:

tony1972
07-28-2010, 10:10 AM
http://www.sportsmediawatch.net/2010/07/local-mlb-ratings-big-declines-for-red.html

I think the Sox will always be near the bottom even in winning seasons. I know a lot of Sox fans that do not watch TV broadcasts because of Hawk Harrelson.

I don't think he is that bad....but (unfortunately)...I do think he affects the ratings. Many Sox fans prefer tol listen to the radio broadcast or follow on the Internet than listen to Hawk. I guess he must be an aquired taste...

Hitmen77
07-28-2010, 10:22 AM
What is the time frame of these ratings? Is it all season up through this week?

Remember, up until about 6 weeks ago the White Sox were very unwatchable. This team was awful and buried in the standings. No surprise that ratings were down. The Sox were probably not getting people's attention as possible contenders until maybe the last week in June.

hi im skot
07-28-2010, 10:51 AM
I think the Sox will always be near the bottom even in winning seasons. I know a lot of Sox fans that do not watch TV broadcasts because of Hawk Harrelson.

I don't buy this. I've sat through Josh Lewin, Joe Buck and Tim McCarver during Sox broadcasts. I also tuned in to Farmer and Singleton on the radio when I was driving. I really don't think it matters in the long run.

The Sox were awful for the first two months of the season, which takes up a majority of these numbers.

TheOldRoman
07-28-2010, 11:00 AM
I know a lot of Sox fans that do not watch TV broadcasts because of Hawk Harrelson.Then you know a lot of ****ing morons. Anyone calling themselves a Sox fan who would rather either listen on the radio or not pay attention to the team than watch the Sox and hear an announcer (who they could mute) is full of crap. If having sound is that important to them they coudl turn on the radio, too. That sounds like a bunch of holier-than-thou bull****. "I like the White Sox but I am far too good to listen to Hawk.":rolleyes:

Coops4Aces
07-28-2010, 11:06 AM
Then you know a lot of ****ing morons. Anyone calling themselves a Sox fan who would rather either listen on the radio or not pay attention to the team than watch the Sox and hear an announcer (who they could mute) is full of crap. If having sound is that important to them they coudl turn on the radio, too. That sounds like a bunch of holier-than-thou bull****. "I like the White Sox but I am far too good to listen to Hawk.":rolleyes:

Love this post :thumbsup:

PatK
07-28-2010, 12:24 PM
Don't forget the Blackhawks didn't help the ratings

voodoochile
07-28-2010, 12:27 PM
At first I thought you meant the TV show Scrubs. :lol:

Ditto. I was like "why is this in WTS?"

Oh THOSE sCrUBS...

Zakath
07-28-2010, 12:27 PM
We're also the team that gets shuffled off to alternate channels all the time, which affects the ratings. Tonight it's CSN, then it's WCIU, then it's WGN, then it's CSN+...

voodoochile
07-28-2010, 12:31 PM
I don't buy this. I've sat through Josh Lewin, Joe Buck and Tim McCarver during Sox broadcasts. I also tuned in to Farmer and Singleton on the radio when I was driving. I really don't think it matters in the long run.

The Sox were awful for the first two months of the season, which takes up a majority of these numbers.

As someone who is HOH and watches the vast majority of the games on MLB.TV with no captions it's a bonus when they are on WGN and I get to watch them with captions. Now obviously I don't get to hear Hawk's voice and I don't read every word that flows across the screen during sporting events anyway, but people who don't watch because of Hawk are simply being silly...

Foulke You
07-28-2010, 04:16 PM
The Sox were awful for the first two months of the season, which takes up a majority of these numbers.
As I posted in another thread, the Blackhawks dominated the local sports landscape from April to early June. This fact combined with the Sox not playing good baseball until just after the Stanley Cup title is the reason for the numbers being low. I expect the 2nd half Pennant Push to give the numbers a shot in the arm.

ewokpelts
08-03-2010, 10:25 AM
http://www.sportsmediawatch.net/2010/07/local-mlb-ratings-big-declines-for-red.htmlthese are CSN only

hawkjt
08-03-2010, 11:22 AM
Then you know a lot of ****ing morons. Anyone calling themselves a Sox fan who would rather either listen on the radio or not pay attention to the team than watch the Sox and hear an announcer (who they could mute) is full of crap. If having sound is that important to them they coudl turn on the radio, too. That sounds like a bunch of holier-than-thou bull****. "I like the White Sox but I am far too good to listen to Hawk.":rolleyes:


Nailed it!!

Anyone that would rather listen to Ed Farmer and DJ than actually watch the game if that is an option is too stupid to be a Sox fan...has to be a cubfan in disguise:D:

GlassSox
08-03-2010, 12:32 PM
Then you know a lot of ****ing morons. Anyone calling themselves a Sox fan who would rather either listen on the radio or not pay attention to the team than watch the Sox and hear an announcer (who they could mute) is full of crap. If having sound is that important to them they coudl turn on the radio, too. That sounds like a bunch of holier-than-thou bull****. "I like the White Sox but I am far too good to listen to Hawk.":rolleyes:

Right on :thumbsup:

areilly
08-03-2010, 01:14 PM
Then you know a lot of ****ing morons. Anyone calling themselves a Sox fan who would rather either listen on the radio or not pay attention to the team than watch the Sox and hear an announcer (who they could mute) is full of crap. If having sound is that important to them they coudl turn on the radio, too. That sounds like a bunch of holier-than-thou bull****. "I like the White Sox but I am far too good to listen to Hawk.":rolleyes:

I can't stand Harrelson's announcing and to top it off usually have things to do in the evening that preclude staring at a screen for three hours. It's not about being too good for Hawkeroo, although he certainly doesn't make the television broadcasts any more compelling of an option, just a matter of priorities. But hey, whatever, holier-than-thou and all that.

FielderJones
08-04-2010, 11:01 AM
these are CSN only

Anybody know combined WGN - WCIU ratings for both teams?

sachin
08-07-2010, 05:53 PM
Sorry, but Hawk drives me crazy with his predictable and thread-bare cliches. "Can o' corn", "YES! YYYESSSSS!", and his completely over-used "... and the count very quickly nothing and 2" are just some of the utterly expected lines used EVERY. SINGLE. BALLGAME.

It's like he thinks someone writes him a check every time he uses one of his own Hawk-isms.

sullythered
08-07-2010, 08:02 PM
I can't stand Harrelson's announcing and to top it off usually have things to do in the evening that preclude staring at a screen for three hours. It's not about being too good for Hawkeroo, although he certainly doesn't make the television broadcasts any more compelling of an option, just a matter of priorities. But hey, whatever, holier-than-thou and all that.

What does your personal lack of free time have to do with other people not watching Sox games because of the announcer?

OldRoman said that people that skip the TV broadcast of the White Sox game because of the announcer are not really Sox fans, or full of ****. And he is right. So hey, whatever, holier than thou is pretty damn accurate.

chisoxfan4life
08-10-2010, 09:45 PM
Obviously the Bulls and Hawks will be above the Sox in the rankings (since they are the lone team in that sport in the city), but it baffles me how the Cubs have more than the Bulls and Hawks. A team that hasn't won it all in 100+ years getting more support than teams that have won a combined 8 titles in the past 15-20 years deserves careful study by a social scientist.

Lip Man 1
08-10-2010, 10:34 PM
It's because of everything that happened in the 80's to basically turn the city over to them without a fight, especially by the Sox.

From the Tribune Company buying them, to the explosion of the Superstations to the Sox untimely "SportsVision" debacle to the threat of moving the team.

Lip

Quentin08
08-11-2010, 07:26 AM
Hawk probably has something to do with it too. I know a ton of people who would probably be Sox fans but they simply can't handle listening to Hawk. If we had a normal announcer, along with Stone Pony, who was actually a pleasure to listen to, the Sox would have a ton of more fans.

Dub25
08-11-2010, 11:14 PM
http://www.sportsmediawatch.net/2010/07/local-mlb-ratings-big-declines-for-red.html

Could some of these numbers be based on the fact that the Sox sucked in the first 2 months??