1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Worldwide Leader...

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by tommyp, Oct 24, 2006.

  1. tommyp

    tommyp Member

    And are you ready for tonight's production?????

    http://thetrack.bostonherald.com/moreTrack/view.bg?articleid=164807

    Ugh...might have to splurge on a TiVo now, especially if I really want to watch football without the "entertainment" value.
     
  2. BigRed

    BigRed Active Member

    Kill me now.
    I'm glad I usually miss the first quarter or so while covering a late football practice.
    Even moreso tonight.
     
  3. Jesus, Phil, go back to yelling at the neighborhood kids, will you?
    Does he really think it matters to anyone whether or not people, you know, watched the game on ESPN because it was a game, rather than specifically because it was on ESPN? Doesn't matter to the people selling the time, I guarantee you that.
     
  4. tyler durden 71351

    tyler durden 71351 Active Member

    Jesus H. Christ. Who are they doing this sort of shit for? Do they think women will watch the game because Paris Hilton is on? Or young people? Paris Hilton is an overexposed joke. Just show the damn games with no bullshit and you would get the same ratings...if not a little more viewership.
     
  5. tommyp

    tommyp Member

    Can I get opinions of the halftime "Sausage" race?
     
  6. SoSueMe

    SoSueMe Active Member

    Funny you should say that. It made me remember something the CBC did in Canada. Broadcasters were locked out during a contract dispute but the CFL (yes, yes, I know, Double-A football) was broadcast as planned with NO COMMENTATORS. And, I think it was Week 2 of the dispute there was a big game (I forget the teams) but it drew BETTER THAN AVERAGE numbers WITHOUT any play-by-play or colour.

    I'd have to surf around a bit, but I'm pretty darn sure the lack of broadcasters barely hurt viewership numbers.

    I think it proves people tune in for the game, but never ever tune out because of the idiots running their mouths.
     
  7. Herbert Anchovy

    Herbert Anchovy Active Member

    Those three guys were as bad as bad can be last night. And something tells me they still haven't achieved their rock bottom low. There's still nine weeks left.
     
  8. tommyp

    tommyp Member

    That was done in the early 80s on NBC...a Saturday afternoon Jets-Dolphins game late in the season, from what I recall.
     
  9. SoSueMe

    SoSueMe Active Member

    That's right, too. I forgot about that instance. How were ratings for that game? Did Americans react the same way Canadians did and still tune in?

    It also happened during a Montreal Canadiens game in Canada, too, not that long ago.
     
  10. spaceman

    spaceman Active Member

    One of my favorite games of all time.
     
  11. tommyp

    tommyp Member

    I culled this from a little web research:

    There is a precedent for airing an NFL game without the use of broadcasters. On Dec. 20, 1980, NBC aired the New York Jets at the Miami Dolphins. The Jets were 3-12 entering the game and the Dolphins were 8-7. (Jets won 24-17). Since the game had no playoff implications, NBC decided to let the sounds from the stands and the PA announcer serve as the sole audio. No players were miked. Dick Enberg set the scene for viewers at the beginning of each quarter and then viewers were taken to the stadium.
     
  12. Technically, they were probably better than any game gets now, but that's just because all ratings are lower now.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page