Open Thread: College Football Championship LSU ~ Alabama UPDATE: TV Ratings In, Not Good
posted at 9:01 pm on January 9, 2012 by Rovin
PICK A WINNER!
Update: End of first quarter—Bama 3, Tigers 0
You can watch the game online live on ESPN……click here and then on the “watch live” tab in the middle of the screen.
Update: End of Half—Alabama 9, LSU 0 ………LSU has one first down and 43 total yards of offense to Bama’s 225 yds. It’s going to be a barnburner folks.
Update: End of three—Alabama 15, LSU 0 ………
Update: Final Score—Alabama 21, LSU 0
(note: I’ll try to post Nielson Ratings tomorrow)
UPDATE: TV RATINGS LOWEST SINCE BCS ERA
Alabama-LSU produces lowest TV rating for national championship in BCS era
NEW ORLEANS — Alabama loved a rematch. Not so much of the rest of the country.
It turns out most television viewers didn’t want to see Alabama-LSU again, at least not an uncompetitive rematch.
Overnight ratings for Alabama’s 21-0 victory over LSU were the lowest for a national championship in the 14-year history of the BCS. The All-SEC affair, the first championship pairing teams from the same conference, drew a 13.8 overnight rating on ESPN. The previous record low was a 14.3 for Miami-Nebraska at the 2002 Rose Bowl.
To put last night’s rating in perspective, Alabama-LSU on Nov. 5 drew an 11.5 on CBS. Last night’s game was down 14 percent from Auburn’s three-point victory over Oregon last year. It was down 24 percent from Alabama’s last national championship when the Crimson Tide defeated Texas in 2010.
Alabama-LSU capped a disappointing ratings year for the BCS on ESPN. Even before Monday night, the BCS’ 7.3 average rating was down 10 percent from the 2010 season and 21 percent from 2009, when the games aired on Fox.
The Rose, Orange, Sugar and BCS Championship all took ratings hits this season. West Virginia’s 70-33 rout of Clemson at the Orange Bowl drew just a 4.5 rating, making it the lowest-rated game in BCS history…. (read the whole story here)
Exit question: Would the ratings have been higher if it was aired on a non-cable station? Or was it the match-up?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
College Prof,
I don’t mean to diminish Bama’s win, as the better team won in the match. I, (and I suspect many of those here) are more lamenting the fact that playoffs are good enough for virtually every team sport out there, except football.
And you have it admit, it is kind of odd to have to say that within the SEC there are 2 team, one of which has the title of “Best team in the SEC,” and the other with the title, “Best team in the nation.”
Tremor on January 10, 2012 at 9:24 AM
We’ve always had other schools who thought they belonged in the game, like Boise and TCU now OSU probably some others in the mix, but if you want to play in the big game you gottta get in the big conference. Mizzou and TA&M switched to the SEC because they understand how it works.
Kissmygrits on January 10, 2012 at 9:32 AM
By that logic, if we just moved every team into the SEC, then every one of them would magically become great. Why didn’t I think of that?
Problem solved!
Tremor on January 10, 2012 at 10:28 AM
SEC honks, I appreciate your enthusiasm for defense. However, can someone please name one LSU offensive player that is a nightmare for defensive coordinators? I know the Pac-12 gets some grief, but LSU played basically a home game against Oregon, caught all the breaks, and won. I don’t think they would be undefeated in the Pac-12 or the Big-12. How did Alabama win? Sure, they played great defense against an average offensive team. However, more importantly, they threw the ball! Even so, they put one touchdown on the board.
There is no way, until there is a national playoff, a team that did not win its conference should play for the national title. That is just a bizarre concept. Read that carefully because of what it does not say. I am not saying March Madness is less than wonderful with its field of also-rans. I am saying that in a 2-team playoff, which is what we have, both teams should be champions of their respective conferences.
Last night was as good an argument as their could be for a playoff. There is no reason an 8-team playoff, with games every two weeks, could not take place. Alabama might be the best team in the country, but they were only successful last night in doing what they should have done at home a few months ago.
diplomatsteve on January 10, 2012 at 10:33 AM
Tremor~ LSU’s win against Bama was in OT by one field goal, they won the conference championship against a mediocre Georgia team, and last night they got spanked. They also are a dirty team that plays thug football. So, pardon me for disagreeing, but I don’t think LSU was the best team in the conference. They merely benefited from providence. I think last night demonstrated that Bama is the superior team, and all others are just a bunch of sour grapes.
To those who say that the Big 12 or some other conference would prove to have better offensive teams, a good offense is only possible if the other team’s defense is weak. So, no matter how good the offense or how many times they put the ball in the air, if the other team’s incredible defense foils them, they won’t put the ball in the end zone.
I don’t necessarily disagree with a playoff, but the only reason LSU and Bama didn’t play each other for the conference title is because they are in the same division, not because LSU is somehow magically the better team.
23-0. Nuff said.
College Prof on January 10, 2012 at 11:02 AM
Conference Bowl Season Records
Keep in mind that LSU loss drove down the total win PCT. Even so….lol!
MTLassen on January 10, 2012 at 11:17 AM
Most of them.
Oh, you meant something else. Sorry.
rogerb on January 10, 2012 at 11:19 AM
Prof~ you may not think they are the best in the conference, but that’s not what the record books say. They are the conference champions, which at least implies, if not states outright, supremacy in their conference.
OSU’s loss at Iowa State was in OT, and IMHO, a fluke. They demonstrated that they have a defensive power in their drubbing of OU. They outlasted another high powered offense in Stanford.
Taking this season’s bowl games by themselves, the BCS has shown us that in a game of great offense vs. great offense, the better offense wins, while in a game of great defense vs. great defense, the better defense wins.
Tremor on January 10, 2012 at 11:21 AM
MTLassen~ factoring in that LSU’s loss drove down their percentage, that would basically put them on par with the Big 12, win percentage wise, so… Yeah.
I suppose next you’d say that bowl games before New Year’s shouldn’t count in that statistic…
Tremor on January 10, 2012 at 11:28 AM
You know, it is simply astonishing how many d@cks post to this website with out of context non-sequiturs.
I rebutted your assertion about non-SEC offenses versus SEC defenses with a pretty clear set of statistics. Apparently you willfully choose to ignore end of season rankings, as well as RPI in order to run your mouth.
Prior to this post, I was engaged in a friendly football discussion. Apparently very few people at HA are capable of having any kind of conversation without being a complete a55hat about it when there is a disagreement, or they are simply wrong.
As for your attempt to put words in my mouth: No I wouldn’t say that. Ever. Now go cry in your beer, loser. I’m done talking to a jerk.
MTLassen on January 10, 2012 at 11:59 AM
Look, I’m not trying to be intentionally crass, so if it came across that way, I apologize.
Rankings in NCAA football, being 2/3 comprised of the opinions of a mix of experts and people who just happen to be deemed important enough to be given a vote muddy the statistics.
Tremor on January 10, 2012 at 12:19 PM
My first ever Hot Air post will be short – ROLL TIDE!
tgdouglas on January 10, 2012 at 12:40 PM
LOL, tgdouglas. Welcome, and congrats to the Tide.
J.E. Dyer on January 10, 2012 at 1:02 PM
Exactly. Couple that with the conference obsession of people in the SEC (I’ve lived in other parts of the conference, and I’ve never EVER seen a conference so full of itself), and you KNOW every voter in the SEC’s area is casting ALL of their highest votes for SEC teams. Want some evidence? Go look at the composite scores. The only purely objective component is the computer scores — and 100% of the ranked Big-12 teams scored higher (in most cases MUCH higher) in the computer rankings than in the final BCS ranking:
OK state — #2 in the computer ratings, 3 in the BCS;
K-state — #4 in the computer rankings, #8 in the BCS;
OU — #7 in the computer rankings, #14 in the BCS;
Baylor — #10 in the computer rankings, #12 in the BCS;
Texas — tied for #18 in the computer rankings, #24 in the BCS.
There’s something afoot when EVERY team in the Big 12 is downgraded by the subjective component of the rankings.
RegularJoe on January 10, 2012 at 3:13 PM
Tremor~ Wouldn’t it be nice if we could put the best offense vs best defense into play? Might settle some angry disputes about which conference has the strongest team. However, the fact that LSU is on the record books as the conference champion is of little comfort today to their merry band of thugs since the fact is that Bama is the national championship team as of last night. So, again, Roll Tide!
Welcome to HA, tgdouglas. Those of us in the Bama Nation appreciate your greetings.
College Prof on January 10, 2012 at 3:40 PM
Exit question answer: both(?)
I know more and more people who don’t even bother with cable anymore. Between Netflix and other Internet based media, they’ve decided it isn’t worth it to them. I’d be curious what kind of numbers were watching on ESPN’s website, not only out of curiosity, but to see if that is making up for the drop…
Here in Cowboy country, there were calls to boycott, and while I didn’t think it made much difference (the BCS already made their money, so it wouldn’t change anything) I think the persistent frustration of fans with the ranking set up, and so many of them not having a dog in the race caused many of the more casual fans to skip it.
Tremor on January 10, 2012 at 3:40 PM
Oh, and part of the reason ratings might have been lower might be due to Verizon Fios very stupidly tinkering with their channel lineup on January 1st. We had to watch it on the computer. Stupid Verizon!
College Prof on January 10, 2012 at 3:42 PM
I just skipped it because I knew it (a) would be boring, and (b) was of no real consequence. I live in the heart of SEC country, and didn’t know anyone was boycotting it.
RegularJoe on January 10, 2012 at 9:00 PM
LSU should not have had to play ‘Bama again.
No surprise the Bull Crap Series struck out for this game.
rukiddingme on January 10, 2012 at 10:09 PM
Personally, I’m tired of the NCAA and it’s big government rule over college football. A play-off system has been demanded by the viewers for far too long now. The Rose Bowl was epic this year as was the Fiesta Bowl. A play-off system is the only way to award a true champion. Until then, the so called championship game will continue to lose viewers.
Keemo on January 11, 2012 at 9:16 AM
I much preferred the pre-BCS arrangements, where there were only a few bowl games and the big ones were all on New Year’s Day.
Especially the Rose Bowl game between the best of the Big Ten and the Pac Ten.
And when you knew the Rose Bowl would be on NBC and the Cotton Bowl on CBS.
J Baustian on January 11, 2012 at 10:50 AM
A playoff system could be implemented using the current set of Bowl games. The only bad thing about it would the last two teams standing would be pretty beat up and that might slow the final game down a bit.
I would also allow only conference champs into the playoffs. That would winnow the number of teams in the playoffs a bit.
The bad thing about this, however, is the colleges are not supposed to be producing entertainment. Their business is training minds, and athletics actually gets in the way, regardless of what they say. Athletics is, mostly, a sink of time and money as few of the colleges actually make money of their teams. And if they are making money, then they should be taxed like any other money maker.
Add in the facts that the teams don’t really represent the student bodies, and few of the athletes actually benefit from their college attendance (look at how few actually graduate) and are just ringers, you get a system that is broken. The entire system is sick and needs to be changed.
Quartermaster on January 12, 2012 at 8:09 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2