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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
tommyp said: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.
tyler durden 71351 said:Jesus H. Christ. Who are they doing this sort of shirt 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 bullshirt and you would get the same ratings...if not a little more viewership.
SoSueMe said: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.
tommyp said:SoSueMe said: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.
That was done in the early 80s on NBC...a Saturday afternoon Jets-Dolphins game late in the season, from what I recall.
tommyp said:SoSueMe said: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.
That was done in the early 80s on NBC...a Saturday afternoon Jets-Dolphins game late in the season, from what I recall.
SoSueMe said:tommyp said:SoSueMe said: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.
That was done in the early 80s on NBC...a Saturday afternoon Jets-Dolphins game late in the season, from what I recall.
That's right, too. I forgot about that instance. How were ratings for that game?