Comments on: Worst Ratings Ever for NCAA Final? Probably Not.

By: Jake

Jake — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 18:25:30 +0000

I will definitely be tuning in to see if Kansas can join the next level of the “Haves” like Duke and UNC, or if Memphis can crash the party and win its first title. I admit I didn’t watch last year’s florida vs Osu game because nobody really cares about two football schools playing in a basketball title game. Plus florida already won the title the previous year. People like to see new teams in there. KU is at least a bona fide basketball school.

By: Jake

Jake — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 18:25:30 +0000

I will definitely be tuning in to see if Kansas can join the next level of the “Haves” like Duke and UNC, or if Memphis can crash the party and win its first title. I admit I didn't watch last year's florida vs Osu game because nobody really cares about two football schools playing in a basketball title game. Plus florida already won the title the previous year. People like to see new teams in there. KU is at least a bona fide basketball school.

By: Mikey

Mikey — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 18:03:10 +0000

Bill, that’s a fair comparison. I was almost hoping you’d make it.

Advertisers pay well over a million dollars to advertise in the final four.

The World Series gets about 400k.

Why the disparity?

Overhyped, I suppose, is in the eye of the beholder. Overvalued is probably more accurate, IMO.

By: Mikey

Mikey — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 18:03:10 +0000

Bill, that's a fair comparison. I was almost hoping you'd make it.

Advertisers pay well over a million dollars to advertise in the final four.

The World Series gets about 400k.

Why the disparity?

Overhyped, I suppose, is in the eye of the beholder. Overvalued is probably more accurate, IMO.

By: Bill Gorman

Bill Gorman — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 17:14:37 +0000

I'll leave judging the hype level to others, but the numbers speak for themselves. The NCAA tourney through the regional finals delivers average viewership just below that of the baseball playoffs with much less advantageous timing, since the baseball games are in primetime or weekend afternoons and are far shorter time periods [thus easier to maintain high average viewership], whereas the first two days of the NCAA tournament are on weekday mornings. The NCAA tourney final game, even with its recent ratings fall, still delivers numbers on the order of a baseball World Series game.

By: Bill Gorman

Bill Gorman — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 17:14:37 +0000

I'll leave judging the hype level to others, but the numbers speak for themselves.

The NCAA tourney through the regional finals delivers average viewership just below that of the baseball playoffs with much less advantageous timing, since the baseball games are in primetime or weekend afternoons and are far shorter time periods [thus easier to maintain high average viewership], whereas the first two days of the NCAA tournament are on weekday mornings.

The NCAA tourney final game, even with its recent ratings fall, still delivers numbers on the order of a baseball World Series game.

By: Mikey

Mikey — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 17:08:34 +0000

Cheap programming? I would wager that on a per hour basis the NCAA Tournament is some of the most expensive programming on television.

CBS is paying $545 mill a year for the Tournament. They do 26 broadcasts at roughly 2 and a half hours each. That’s over $8 mill per hour.

Are there a lot of shows in primetime costing their networks over $8 million per hour? I doubt it.

Although, I have to say, I agree with your larger point: the Tournament is absurdly overhyped relative to the numbers it actually delivers.

By: Mikey

Mikey — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 17:08:34 +0000

Cheap programming? I would wager that on a per hour basis the NCAA Tournament is some of the most expensive programming on television.

CBS is paying $545 mill a year for the Tournament. They do 26 broadcasts at roughly 2 and a half hours each. That's over $8 mill per hour.

Are there a lot of shows in primetime costing their networks over $8 million per hour? I doubt it.

Although, I have to say, I agree with your larger point: the Tournament is absurdly overhyped relative to the numbers it actually delivers.

By: Perry

Perry — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 16:34:26 +0000

“march madness” is the most over-hyped event in sports television.
Unlike Super Bowl hype where people really are interested most sports fans will not watch even one game of this event.
Why the hype for College Basketball? Because it provides a lot of cheap programming for the networks at a time of year where there is little else to program.
(By the way if you like College Basketball your fine with me, I’m just responding to the hype which has turned an a moderate event into a gigantic media event)

By: Perry

Perry — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 16:34:26 +0000

“march madness” is the most over-hyped event in sports television.
Unlike Super Bowl hype where people really are interested most sports fans will not watch even one game of this event.
Why the hype for College Basketball? Because it provides a lot of cheap programming for the networks at a time of year where there is little else to program.
(By the way if you like College Basketball your fine with me, I'm just responding to the hype which has turned an a moderate event into a gigantic media event)

By: Mikey

Mikey — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 15:34:16 +0000

The Hollywood Reporter is reporting time zone adjusted fast nationals for the semi-finals indicating that they were in fact lower than last year:

“CBS’ coverage of Saturday’s Memphis-UCLA NCAA men’s basketball tournament national semifinal game, played in the early window of the net’s Final Four coverage, earned a 7.2 overnight rating, down 14% from an 8.4 for the comparable Ohio State-Georgetown game in ’07. In the late window, Kansas-North Carolina averaged an 8.8 overnight, down 1% from an 8.9 for Florida-UCLA last year.”

The 11.0 for Uconn-Ga Tech in 2004 is a good over/under. The semi-finals are down a combined -8%. If that holds up for the final we’d be looking at an 11.2.

It’s going to be close. I think the final will barely avoid being the lowest-ever. Mostly I say that because these are up-tempo teams and I think we’ll get a close game, but what do I know?

By: Mikey

Mikey — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 15:34:16 +0000

The Hollywood Reporter is reporting time zone adjusted fast nationals for the semi-finals indicating that they were in fact lower than last year:

"CBS' coverage of Saturday's Memphis-UCLA NCAA men's basketball tournament national semifinal game, played in the early window of the net's Final Four coverage, earned a 7.2 overnight rating, down 14% from an 8.4 for the comparable Ohio State-Georgetown game in '07. In the late window, Kansas-North Carolina averaged an 8.8 overnight, down 1% from an 8.9 for Florida-UCLA last year."

The 11.0 for Uconn-Ga Tech in 2004 is a good over/under. The semi-finals are down a combined -8%. If that holds up for the final we'd be looking at an 11.2.

It's going to be close. I think the final will barely avoid being the lowest-ever. Mostly I say that because these are up-tempo teams and I think we'll get a close game, but what do I know?

By: Bill Gorman

Bill Gorman — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 21:31:46 +0000

Speaking of blowout, couldn’t you just hear the CBS suits screaming when @ 7 min to go in the first half of the UNC/Kansas game Billy Packer says “Jim, this game is *over*”?

By: Bill Gorman

Bill Gorman — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 21:31:46 +0000

Speaking of blowout, couldn't you just hear the CBS suits screaming when @ 7 min to go in the first half of the UNC/Kansas game Billy Packer says “Jim, this game is *over*”?

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 21:17:00 +0000

I’d say anyone who thinks this is gonna be a blowout is crazy, but that’s what I thought about KU-UNC. Oops. Still, I think KU showed they are legit last night, and have the athletes and execution to hang with anyone… it’ll be a good game. As for the ratings, it’s maybe no big deal, but the U.S. Army has a Fort a few minutes from Lawrence, KS, and many kids (me for one) establish KU as their favorite team while their parents are stationed there. This same thing happens for the KC Chiefs, who have season ticket holders in every state. I guess my point is that the ratings draw of KU might well be larger than you’d think. Plus, most basketball fans know how good these two teams are, and will watch based on that alone.

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 21:17:00 +0000

I'd say anyone who thinks this is gonna be a blowout is crazy, but that's what I thought about KU-UNC. Oops. Still, I think KU showed they are legit last night, and have the athletes and execution to hang with anyone… it'll be a good game. As for the ratings, it's maybe no big deal, but the U.S. Army has a Fort a few minutes from Lawrence, KS, and many kids (me for one) establish KU as their favorite team while their parents are stationed there. This same thing happens for the KC Chiefs, who have season ticket holders in every state. I guess my point is that the ratings draw of KU might well be larger than you'd think. Plus, most basketball fans know how good these two teams are, and will watch based on that alone.

By: GHarri

GHarri — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 20:29:30 +0000

This tourney ended up with the best four teams competing for the final game, and the best two teams fighting for the championship. The BCS, on the other hand – well, I don’t know what it is even trying to do. Surely, there will be some interest in seeing these two great teams face off, after what they did to the other number ones. Here’s a good debate about the college post season systems:
http://digits.hrblock.com/ssDigits/digits.php?rType=1&sPath=1703&sNode=1703&uId=286

By: GHarri

GHarri — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 20:29:30 +0000

This tourney ended up with the best four teams competing for the final game, and the best two teams fighting for the championship. The BCS, on the other hand – well, I don't know what it is even trying to do. Surely, there will be some interest in seeing these two great teams face off, after what they did to the other number ones. Here's a good debate about the college post season systems:
http://digits.hrblock.com/ssDigits/digits.php?r…

By: Robert Seidman

Robert Seidman — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 20:21:39 +0000

@Billy — wow, that’s a bold prediction! Jayhawk nation will not be pleased with that outcome, and I’d think neither would CBS. Blowouts can’t be good for ratings.

By: Robert Seidman

Robert Seidman — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 20:21:39 +0000

@Billy — wow, that's a bold prediction! Jayhawk nation will not be pleased with that outcome, and I'd think neither would CBS. Blowouts can't be good for ratings.

By: Billy Bain

Billy Bain — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 20:14:04 +0000

UNC has the top officially licensed logowear in the country. UCLA unbelievably lives on the memory of John Wooden. No doubt, a Tarheel/Bruin championship would have kicked butt and drawn much higher viewership.

Kansas is more well known that Memphis, since Memphis is unknown. Kanas will draw the viewers but Memphis is going to embarrass the Bears. 85 to 53. It’s going to be brutal.

By: Billy Bain

Billy Bain — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 20:14:04 +0000

Kansas is more well known that Memphis, since Memphis is unknown. Kanas will draw the viewers but Memphis is going to embarrass the Bears. 85 to 53. It's going to be brutal.

By: Robert Seidman

Robert Seidman — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 19:47:46 +0000

I think there must be at least something to your theory if you look at the 2000s and consider that games featuring UNC, Duke and Indiana outperformed other games. Indiana is a small market, but has supersized basketball recognition.

By: Robert Seidman

Robert Seidman — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 19:47:46 +0000

By: Bill Gorman

Bill Gorman — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 19:41:56 +0000

Perhaps, for college basketball, name recognition of the schools may be more important than market size for the ratings.

If you asked general sports fans “name the top college basketball programs”, my guess is that UNC and UCLA are on most lists. Kansas is likely on plenty, but not quite as many. Memphis is relatively unknown.

By: Bill Gorman

Bill Gorman — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 19:41:56 +0000

Perhaps, for college basketball, name recognition of the schools may be more important than market size for the ratings.