PDA

View Full Version : Second-Lowest Rated World Series Ever


wealz07
10-29-2007, 10:03 PM
Red Sox Nation apparently isn't all that big.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/baseball/mlb/specials/playoffs/2007/10/29/bc.bbo.world.series.ratings.ap/

Noneck
10-29-2007, 10:04 PM
I loved seeing that.

DumpJerry
10-29-2007, 10:07 PM
We had the lowest rated Series ever. Then 2006 was lowest ever. This one picked up 1/2 point.

Fox and Selig really know what they are doing.

It was Dane Cook's fault.

MUsoxfan
10-29-2007, 10:08 PM
Glorious. I wanted the Indians to make it as to absolutely guarantee horrid ratings. In my mind that might kick ESPN in the ass a little bit and make them realize they need to promote more than the northeast corridor. This is even better because even though the beloved made it and won, they still got dog**** ratings:D:

MarySwiss
10-29-2007, 10:12 PM
Very nice!

Fenway
10-29-2007, 10:16 PM
Red Sox Nation apparently isn't all that big.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/baseball/mlb/specials/playoffs/2007/10/29/bc.bbo.world.series.ratings.ap/

Ratings in Boston were huge but AWFUL in New York. Cleveland might have gotten Yankees fans to watch.

CanBuehrleWait
10-29-2007, 10:44 PM
Glorious. I wanted the Indians to make it as to absolutely guarantee horrid ratings. In my mind that might kick ESPN in the ass a little bit and make them realize they need to promote more than the northeast corridor. This is even better because even though the beloved made it and won, they still got dog**** ratings:D:


Very nice!


May I add.... fabulous :redneck

Dibbs
10-29-2007, 10:47 PM
Sweeeeet! This does make me happy!

chisoxmike
10-29-2007, 10:49 PM
:moonwalk: :moonwalk:

chisoxfanatic
10-29-2007, 11:00 PM
Puney little Boston isn't quite as big as they thought they were, are they now? Our World Series had larger ratings! May this be a lesson to the mediots.

Frontman
10-29-2007, 11:02 PM
It isn't that Boston isn't worth watching, but the World Series is pretty anti-climatic. Other than last year's fluke with the Tigers basically giving the Series to the Cards, anyone believe that any NL team stands a chance in a long series against any AL team?

Fenway
10-29-2007, 11:08 PM
It isn't that Boston isn't worth watching, but the World Series is pretty anti-climatic. Other than last year's fluke with the Tigers basically giving the Series to the Cards, anyone believe that any NL team stands a chance in a long series against any AL team?

Plus the fact nobody knew who the Rockies were with the NLCS hidden on TBS.

oeo
10-29-2007, 11:10 PM
The last two World Series have been unexciting. I may be biased, but at least the 2005 series was pretty even...up and down affairs with the longest game in Series history and a walkoff dinger. Then the pitcher's duel in Game 4. It was actually a good series, in which the two teams matched up well against each other.

The last two...yawn.

johnr1note
10-29-2007, 11:10 PM
It isn't that Boston isn't worth watching, but the World Series is pretty anti-climatic. Other than last year's fluke with the Tigers basically giving the Series to the Cards, anyone believe that any NL team stands a chance in a long series against any AL team?

This is really the point. Unless the Series is tied 2-2 after 4 games, the enthusiasm wanes. I'd like to see the ratings for each of the WS games for 2004, 05, 06, and 07 on a game by game, even inning by inning basis. The series has been an anti-climax for years.

Combine that with the fact the games don't start until after everyone's bed time, no wonder ratings are down. Put the games on in the afternoon on Saturday and Sunday. Screw the NFL and College football. I'll bet the games get higher ratings head to head with football anyway.

Why is this even a surprise?

DumpJerry
10-29-2007, 11:13 PM
It isn't that Boston isn't worth watching, but the World Series is pretty anti-climatic. Other than last year's fluke with the Tigers basically giving the Series to the Cards, anyone believe that any NL team stands a chance in a long series against any AL team?
:woo-woo
Don't stop believing........

thomas35forever
10-29-2007, 11:22 PM
Congratulations, we were now in the third-lowest rated World Series ever.:D:

Hitmen77
10-29-2007, 11:23 PM
:sahaf
Lies! Lies! ALL LIES!!!!!!

Do not believe these lies, Americans! Everyone knows that it was the WHITE SOX who had the worst World Series ratings ever. Remember? That was the only thing that mattered about the '05 Series. That was what all Cub fans and many in the media were crowing about when you infidels were having your pathetic parade downtown. The only reason why the 2005 WS ratings were so bad was obviously all the fault of the White Sox and the fact that nobody cares about them. Blame also goes to the equally pathetic Astros. 2007 did NOT have worse ratings than '05. All in this nation watched and cheered on the heroic underdogs - the Red Sox. ALL HAIL THE BOSTON RED SOX!!! The only reason why ratings weren't higher was because the Red Sox didn't get to play the team that most deserved to be the NL champs - the Cubs. ALL HAIL THE RED SOX AND CUBS!!!!! ALL CURSE THOSE DREADED WHITE SOX!

chisoxfanatic
10-29-2007, 11:23 PM
Plus the fact nobody knew who the Rockies were with the NLCS hidden on TBS.
It has NOTHING to do with the NLCS being on TBS. It has EVERYTHING to do with the Rockies, as well as every team that's not the Red Sox, Yankees, Mets, or Cubs, getting virtually ANY coverage to begin with!

Hitmen77
10-29-2007, 11:33 PM
Plus the fact nobody knew who the Rockies were with the NLCS hidden on TBS.

....and because ESPN spends 6 months giving 90% of its coverage to the Red Sox, Yankees, and a few other "choice" teams and totally ignoring teams like the Rockies.

DumpJerry
10-29-2007, 11:36 PM
Come on. The Rockies were in the World Series like the Cubs were in the ALDS.

markp8867
10-29-2007, 11:45 PM
The last two World Series have been unexciting. I may be biased, but at least the 2005 series was pretty even...up and down affairs with the longest game in Series history and a walkoff dinger. Then the pitcher's duel in Game 4. It was actually a good series, in which the two teams matched up well against each other.

The last two...yawn.

This is very true. The only good game of this World Series was Game 4 but few people outside of Boston and Denver saw it since the Series was practically over by then.

I will say I liked this Red Sox team better than the 2004 team which I hated. Johnny Damon, the idiots, stupid bloody sock, the curse, etc. was just unbearable.

At the end of the game Joe Buck said that this Red Sox team will be the team that all other teams will have to measure up to, including the Yankees. He said it like this team is a dynasty which is just ridiculous! They beat the NL Wildcard team, big deal. The Rockies had the hitting but their pitching was far from postseason quality. If the White Sox win it next year, you can bet Buck doesn't say that about our Sox.

Huisj
10-29-2007, 11:53 PM
When the games start at 8:35 and end well after midnight in the eastern time zone, that's going to take away a lot of casual watchers, partially because it's really stinking late, and partially because games that last 4 hours in part because of seemingly endless commercial breaks and crap are too much for most people to tolerate. I had trouble getting other friends of mine to get together to watch the games because they just went too late into the night.

At the very least, there's no reason the games on Saturday and Sunday should be like that. And plus, if they played in the afternoon on the weekends, the weather would be nicer because the sun could make it seem a little warmer, and how cool would it look on TV to see a World Series game start under a bright, crisp, sunshiny October afternoon sky? It'd be a whole lot better than seeing everyone's breath whenever they breathe out.

chaerulez
10-30-2007, 12:16 AM
It has NOTHING to do with the NLCS being on TBS. It has EVERYTHING to do with the Rockies, as well as every team that's not the Red Sox, Yankees, Mets, or Cubs, getting virtually ANY coverage to begin with!

No, actually the NLCS on TBS has a lot to do with it. The casual fan simply wasn't interested. It's like the NBA and their playoffs being on TNT/ESPN. Come time to the NBA Finals on ABC, the casual fan doesn't really care because they haven't been watching the entire playoffs.

MLB got greedy and took the money that cable offered them. They ignored what happened to the NBA and their ratings when they went to mostly cable, the same thing has repeated itself. Having most of your playoff games on cable will hurt your broadcast ratings in the end.

Nellie_Fox
10-30-2007, 01:01 AM
Cleveland might have gotten Yankees fans to watch.Well, it would have gotten me to watch.

Railsplitter
10-30-2007, 07:06 AM
It's all Fox and thier on air "talent" first we have have Jeannie Zelasko and three "experts" yammering away for twenty minutes, then thwenty minutes of Buck and McCarver yammering before we even see a pitch. Cut out the extranious commentary and get announcers who can get peopleto tune just to hear them.

Fenway
10-30-2007, 10:37 AM
Boston averaged a 50.7 rating for the Series, which means one out of every two homes in the market was tuned in to the games. Denver averaged a 37.8 rating for the Rockies' first World Series appearance.

Dallas-Fort Worth finished well below the national average. D-FW scored a 7.7 rating for Channel 4, tying for 48th place with Cleveland and Oklahoma City among the 56 major markets. Only Houston, Columbus, Cincinnati, Knoxville, Jacksonville and Pittsburgh earned lower ratings.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/stories/103007dnsposeriestv.2b8011c.html

Luke
10-30-2007, 10:52 AM
The low ratings can't be attributed to one single factor. I would guess that it's a combination of a bad broadcast, slow games, uninteresting match up, and lots of other options on TV.

I also wonder if the ratings aren't just a symptom of a society with an ever-shortening attention span?

cbotnyse
10-30-2007, 10:55 AM
The low ratings can't be attributed to one single factor. I would guess that it's a combination of a bad broadcast, slow games, uninteresting match up, and lots of other options on TV.

I also wonder if the ratings aren't just a symptom of a society with an ever-shortening attention span?I agree with this assesment, ratings do not really mean that much to me. However this kills the argument that there are Boston fans all over the country, hence why ESPN gives them more coverage. (I've heard that argument before)

pierzynski07
10-30-2007, 11:11 AM
Why would ESPN or FOX care about a team that was in forth or fifth place all year long (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/COL/2007_sched.shtml), and that had never won anything in their history? :cool:

jortafan
10-30-2007, 11:21 AM
and lots of other options on TV.

That's the key!

World Series broadcasts still bring in significant viewers. More people are watching it than watching any one program on any other channel. They just no longer dominate the programming landscape the way they once did, and the way the Super Bowl still does on the one day that it is played. Of course, that's a one-day event, not really comparable to the up-to-a week-and-a-half-long event that the Series can be.

I wish I could find the figures to back up this statement, but the 2005 World Series (which some ridiculous people want to think is the lowest-rated ever) literally drew better ratings than every other program it ran up against, except for the Sunday night game where, for one hour in mid-game, it was outviewed by "Desperate Housewives." I seem to recall it being reported that the ratings also showed that a significant portion of the people who watched Eva Longoria & Co. that night literally then changed the channel when the show was over to catch the end of the World Series game that night.

The bottom line is that ALL World Series broadcasts in this decade are at the bottom of the ratings rankings. The days when the World Series broadcast was a dominant programming event for America are long-gone. It shouldn't stop one from enjoying the series itself.

Luke
10-30-2007, 11:24 AM
I agree with this assesment, ratings do not really mean that much to me. However this kills the argument that there are Boston fans all over the country, hence why ESPN gives them more coverage. (I've heard that argument before)

I think there are Boston fans all over the country, but certainly not in the huge numbers that are perceived. I think it demonstrates that the Red Sox are a less compelling story to the casual fan since they won in 2004.

Fenway
10-30-2007, 11:30 AM
I think there are Boston fans all over the country, but certainly not in the huge numbers that are perceived. I think it demonstrates that the Red Sox are a less compelling story to the casual fan since they won in 2004.

I think it also proves that the hoardes that invade other stadiums DO come from New England. They have pockets of fans everywhere but not in huge numbers.

The ratings seem to indicate that if your team is not in the Series...fans don't care. Just look at the Cleveland ratings.

Huisj
10-30-2007, 11:42 AM
The ratings seem to indicate that if your team is not in the Series...fans don't care. Just look at the Cleveland ratings.


Excellent point. And to be honest, I still think some of that has to do with how "difficult" it is to watch the games. They're late and long.

Around here, all my friends are Tiger fans. Last year, we all had big get-togethers to watch the games all through the playoffs. They didn't care that the games ended late even though they had to work in the morning. This year, people said they'd do the same thing, but when it actually came time for the world series, everyone backed out because the games were so late.

PKalltheway
10-30-2007, 03:46 PM
This is great to hear!:bandance::bandance:

But I agree with what another poster said earlier, there are more options on tv now. People now have more options to choose from than they did 25 years ago, or heck, even 15 years ago. Another thing that could have to do with the low ratings is that the last few World Series haven't really been all that thrilling (from an objective standpoint). The World Series hasn't gone the distance since 2002, and hasn't even gone 6 games since 2003.

Don't let the ratings fool you though, a LOT of people still watch the World Series.

October26
10-31-2007, 01:37 PM
:sahaf
Lies! Lies! ALL LIES!!!!!!

Do not believe these lies, Americans! Everyone knows that it was the WHITE SOX who had the worst World Series ratings ever. Remember? That was the only thing that mattered about the '05 Series. That was what all Cub fans and many in the media were crowing about when you infidels were having your pathetic parade downtown. The only reason why the 2005 WS ratings were so bad was obviously all the fault of the White Sox and the fact that nobody cares about them. Blame also goes to the equally pathetic Astros. 2007 did NOT have worse ratings than '05. All in this nation watched and cheered on the heroic underdogs - the Red Sox. ALL HAIL THE BOSTON RED SOX!!! The only reason why ratings weren't higher was because the Red Sox didn't get to play the team that most deserved to be the NL champs - the Cubs. ALL HAIL THE RED SOX AND CUBS!!!!! ALL CURSE THOSE DREADED WHITE SOX!

Hilarious! I am just reading this thread for the first time today and laughing hysterically at your post. Thanks for the funny post, Hitmen77. I feel vindicated today. I did not watch very much of the World Series this year because 1) I was bored out of my mind, 2) sick of the Red Sox nation hype and 3) the games were too late for me since I get up for work at 5:30 am.

And now I come to WSI and find out that this was not the highest rated World Series, ever? Fantastic!:bandance:

Fenway
10-31-2007, 01:43 PM
The 2007 World Series now goes down as the first time a Series game was NOT the #1 show of the week.

Game 4 wound up being #2 on Sunday night

The most watched show in America last week?

DANCING WITH THE STARS

ugh

pudge
10-31-2007, 05:05 PM
The 2007 World Series now goes down as the first time a Series game was NOT the #1 show of the week.

Game 4 wound up being #2 on Sunday night

The most watched show in America last week?

DANCING WITH THE STARS

ugh

That's really depressing, but just goes to show how the sensibilites around entertainment have changed so drastically. Still, jorta's post in this thread is great stuff - the bottom line is the World Series still gets a heck of a lot viewers, even though it may not be "the" event it once was. And cities who get to host the World Series still seem to treasure it like almost no other sporting event.

Oblong
10-31-2007, 05:16 PM
The 2007 World Series now goes down as the first time a Series game was NOT the #1 show of the week.

Game 4 wound up being #2 on Sunday night

The most watched show in America last week?

DANCING WITH THE STARS

ugh

That doesn't surprise me in the least. I don't think it's a bad thing really. If that show wasn't on, I think the ratings for the WS would have been around the same. Those people watching dancing with the stars would have either watched something else or not at all.

kevin57
10-31-2007, 08:35 PM
I wonder how long poor ratings will have to go on before they decide to at least TRY a day game? Could it be much worse?

Fenway
10-31-2007, 08:54 PM
I wonder how long poor ratings will have to go on before they decide to at least TRY a day game? Could it be much worse?

To be starting at 8:30 in the east on Saturday and Sunday is insanity.

Brian26
11-01-2007, 12:08 AM
The most watched show in America last week?

DANCING WITH THE STARS

ugh

Not anymore. There's a huge backlash against the show right now after Sabrina got robbed last night.

Irishsox1
11-01-2007, 01:20 AM
Not a lot of people outside of Boston are Red Sox fans plus a lot of casual sports fans view the Red Sox a poor mans Yankees but I guess this goes back to free agency.

Also, a lot has to do with all of the other things to do other than sit an watch a long baseball game. Theres the internet, video games, iPod, tivo, and then live television. I didn't watch one live WS game, I tivoed them and got through each game in around 30 minutes.

thedudeabides
11-01-2007, 01:50 AM
Papelbon is on Letterman. I heard they are selling tickets for $700 in time square and Hello Deli is only selling New England clam chowder and Red Sox hats.

Fenway
11-01-2007, 10:06 AM
Papelbon is on Letterman. I heard they are selling tickets for $700 in time square and Hello Deli is only selling New England clam chowder and Red Sox hats.

WBZ reported there were scalpers in front of the Ed Sullivan Theater :tongue:
Papelbon 'bedazzles' on
David Letterman show (http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2007/10/papelbon_on_let.html) VIDEO with dance


Manny will be on Leno Friday..you have been warned

Hitmen77
11-01-2007, 02:35 PM
I'm not worried about World Series ratings. Declining ratings over time is just a fact of life with our ever expanding viewing options. You can't really compare this to the Super Bowl because the SB has just become an insanely crazy event that is bigger to many viewers than the actual teams in the game.

The late starts and long games can only hurt ratings. I'm sorry, but I didn't stay up past 11:00 to watch the end of game 4 with the next day being a workday. Likewise, I'm sure many in the Eastern time zone outside of New England didn't bother staying up past midnight. Plus, interest will never improve if the national media insists on treating the 6 month campaign to reach the WS is only relevant if it involves the few big market teams that they love.

What I don't like is that when the White Sox are in the World Series, low ratings becomes a big media story because it gives a chance for people to take more pot shots at the White Sox. Don't tell me it wasn't, because I remember hearing all that crap 2 years ago (though I did manage to laugh it off:cool:). Many in the media (national and local) were ramming home the idea that "no one" watched this World Series because "nobody" gives a damn about the White Sox.

Well, now the Red Sox were in it and the ratings are still low. Surprise, surprise, surprise. I suppose all the media blowhards will now start complaining that this is all the Rockies fault and that no one will ever care unless the WS is NYY or Bos vs. NYM, CHC, or LAD.