Hirly5 Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 On Mike and Mike this morning they gave out the top 10 football cities based on average local TV rating when the hometown team is on. 1. Pittsburgh 2. Green Bay 3. Buffalo 4. Kansas City 5. Indianapolis 6. Philadelphia 7. Denver 8. Cincinatti 9. Tampa Bay 10. Minnesota Not a big surprise about the top 3. Notice some of the teams that are not on the list but claim to have the biggest fans (Dallas, New England). Granted this is local rating but it still says a lot on which cities love their teams.
ch19079 Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 On Mike and Mike this morning they gave out the top 10 football cities based on average local TV rating when the hometown team is on. 1. Pittsburgh 2. Green Bay 3. Buffalo 4. Kansas City 5. Indianapolis 6. Philadelphia 7. Denver 8. Cincinatti 9. Tampa Bay 10. Minnesota Not a big surprise about the top 3. Notice some of the teams that are not on the list but claim to have the biggest fans (Dallas, New England). Granted this is local rating but it still says a lot on which cities love their teams. 506354[/snapback] im surprised buffalo is so high. we dont have that many people in buffalo compared to phili and others.
Hirly5 Posted November 18, 2005 Author Posted November 18, 2005 im surprised buffalo is so high. we dont have that many people in buffalo compared to phili and others. 506358[/snapback] Population is not a factor. It is the percentage of households that are watching the game in a given market.
plenzmd1 Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 im surprised buffalo is so high. we dont have that many people in buffalo compared to phili and others. 506358[/snapback] Those ratings are just a percentage of people watching the game, not the number of people . There is another number that shows the percentage of TV sets that are turned and have the game on, which is a much higher number. Only basic to think that smaller, cold weather cities have higher proportions of people watching. Lets be honest here, lot less to do in Buffalo on a Sunday afternoon in Nov, than say Miami Beach
HopsGuy Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 I would say the most surprising thing here is that Cleveland isn't in this list. I would have thought you could have put the Mistake at #3. Tampa and Cincinnati are interesting because the suffered for so long. I guess on Sundays a lot of TVs in DC are examining the tape of the morning political shows. Does Miami have a team?
plenzmd1 Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 I would say the most surprising thing here is that Cleveland isn't in this list. I would have thought you could have put the Mistake at #3. Tampa and Cincinnati are interesting because the suffered for so long. I guess on Sundays a lot of TVs in DC are examining the tape of the morning political shows. Does Miami have a team? 506366[/snapback] Lot of sets in DC, NY, atlanta etc are tuned into other games on the ticket, there are so many transplants in those cities.
PromoTheRobot Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 I wonder what the Pats ratings are when a Red Sox game is on against them? Probably not very high. PTR
bobblehead Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 I would say the most surprising thing here is that Cleveland isn't in this list. I would have thought you could have put the Mistake at #3. Tampa and Cincinnati are interesting because the suffered for so long. I guess on Sundays a lot of TVs in DC are examining the tape of the morning political shows. Does Miami have a team? 506366[/snapback] No kidding, Pitt, Green Bay, Buffalo, KC and Cleveland, you would expect to be the top 5.
ganesh Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 im surprised buffalo is so high. we dont have that many people in buffalo compared to phili and others. 506358[/snapback] May be there is nothing else to do in those 4 cities other than watch their beloved Stillers, Bills, Packers or Chiefs
ganesh Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 Surprise miss is Cleveland....I wonder what else is there to do....Unless people are watching reruns of their beloved OSU games. I would have also thought Baltimore would have been there...
DeeRay Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 Population is not a factor. It is the percentage of households that are watching the game in a given market.also... based on the TV market, the Bills coverage area and blackout area extends over 225 miles east of Orchard Park (Herkimer) because Syracuse (WTVH) has the only CBS affiliate between Buffalo and Albany (none in Utica). Even though the 75 mi. blackout area line falls somewhere on the southeastern part of Canandaigua Lake (Naples area), everyone as far as Herkimer gets the shaft because it's in WTVH's designated viewing area and considered a part of that 75 mile radius.
colin Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 the ratings are gathered by household. i'd suspect that in buff, GB and Pitts more than the usual number of people get together to watch the game, so the per capita ratings are even higher. in B lo and GB in particular, a large % of the population (compared to other markets) are actually at the game in the first place, so the number of people impacted by the game is damn high
Ned Flanders Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 Saw a study a couple of years ago where Buffalo leads the NFL with highest percentage of homes with at least one piece (or something like that) of NFL-licensed apparel in the household.
Lori Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 Indy? Oh yeah - being undefeated will do that for you. I'd say the opposite effect is to blame for Cleveland's absence. Would you want to watch that team?
drnykterstein Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 we were somewhere between indy's 53% and pitts 69%. i never heard buffalo's exact percent.
Mikie2times Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 Those ratings are just a percentage of people watching the game, not the number of people . There is another number that shows the percentage of TV sets that are turned and have the game on, which is a much higher number. Only basic to think that smaller, cold weather cities have higher proportions of people watching. Lets be honest here, lot less to do in Buffalo on a Sunday afternoon in Nov, than say Miami Beach 506364[/snapback] That has an effect from say November on but I bet Buffalo still ranks in the top 5 during the warm months, especially since the warm months signal the start of football. The Bills just have an obsessed fan base
R. Rich Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 That list is garbage. Where's the really great football towns like Des Moines (IA), Pine Bluff (Ark), Shippensburg (PA), and Los Angeles?
SF Bills Fan Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 The top 4 do not surprise. I am surprised that Cleveland is not up there.
plenzmd1 Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 The top 4 do not surprise. I am surprised that Cleveland is not up there. 506695[/snapback] Would have to ask BuckeyeMike, but I think both Cleveland and Baltimore face the same issue. Mainly, lots of fans just got so emotionally beaytch slapped when the teams moved, a good number just cannot come to embrace the new team.
The Avenger Posted November 18, 2005 Posted November 18, 2005 Those ratings are just a percentage of people watching the game, not the number of people . There is another number that shows the percentage of TV sets that are turned and have the game on, which is a much higher number. Only basic to think that smaller, cold weather cities have higher proportions of people watching. Lets be honest here, lot less to do in Buffalo on a Sunday afternoon in Nov, than say Miami Beach 506364[/snapback] A rating is based on the number of households watching a given channel at a given time - it's is an actual number of people watching a show (by actual, they mean a number dervived from a statistical sample). A share is the percentage of television housholds tuned to a particular channel at a particular time. Ratings show you how many people are watching, share shows how much of the total audience you captured. I don't think there's any way Buffalo could do well on a ratings basis - it's simply not a large enough area in terms of population. The rankings must be based on share - showing that football in those locations dominates anything else that is on. Oddly, this discussion has parallels to the state of the NFL in general. There are towns where football is king and the support (share) is high (Buffalo, Green Bay), but to a large extent the league cares more about how many people are watching (rating). How else can you possibly explain why the league is dying to get a team in L.A. when the community seems generally indifferent to it and teams with good support like Buffalo are often talked about as reloaction candidates?
Recommended Posts