Superbowl 42: Highest rated Superbowl ever.

[OILFAN #81]

http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/news_story/?ID=228871&hubname=

Wow, Over 97 million watched it. Old record was 94 million in 1996. Only M*A*S*H (one show - finale) had more viewers in history with 106 million.

[troutman]

Not surprising - two big markets, and the perfect season on the line.

[corporatejay]

Not that surprised, even the casual fan was going to watch this until the end.

what still blows me away is the MASH finale, in todays viewership wouldn't that be around 120 million??

[Sylvanfan]

Yeah, when Fox had Dallas, the Giants, and Packers as the last 3 NFC teams and looking to go up against the Patriots they had to be licking their chops for T.V. ratings.

[burn_baby_burn]

I heard on the Fan this morning that CTV had 5 million viewers in Canada. Not sure if my memory is correct. But isn't that higher than game 7 of the 2004 Stanley Cup Finals?

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

I heard on the Fan this morning that CTV had 5 million viewers in Canada. Not sure if my memory is correct. But isn't that higher than game 7 of the 2004 Stanley Cup Finals?

not sure but it wouldn't surprise me. Football has a way of attracting fans regardless of their affiliation. With the other sports fans are more apt to tune out once their team is gone.

[albertGQ]

Does the SB consistantly draw more viewers in Canada than the Grey Cup?

Does anyone have stats on this?

[OILFAN #81]

Originally Posted by albertGQ

Does the SB consistantly draw more viewers in Canada than the Grey Cup?

Does anyone have stats on this?

3.3 Million people in Canada watched the past Grey Cup compared to the 5 million on CTV who watched the Superbowl.

[ken0042]

I am pretty sure that in a past CFL vs NFL thread the numbers in the past had shown more people in Canada watched the GC than the SB.

But I just can't see 5 million people watching. That number just seems too high.

[OILFAN #81]

"Global Television drew 3.367 million for the 2007 Super Bowl (Chicago Bears-Indianapolis Colts), compared with the CBC's (3.202 million for the 2006 Grey Cup (Montreal Alouettes-B.C. Lions)."

[Sylvanfan]

Well the Superbowl has a lot of other things like half time entertainment, shiny new expensive T.V. Commercials that add to it's appeal. My 61 year old widowed mother for example watches the half time show at the SuperBowl even though she really doesn't watch the game...And like anything else football it has the distinction of being a pre-determined one time only event. You can make Superbowl plans for next year today if you want. You can't difinitively plan to watch game 7 of the World Series or NBA finals today...

[albertGQ]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Well the Superbowl has a lot of other things like half time entertainment, shiny new expensive T.V. Commercials that add to it's appeal. My 61 year old widowed mother for example watches the half time show at the SuperBowl even though she really doesn't watch the game...And like anything else football it has the distinction of being a pre-determined one time only event. You can make Superbowl plans for next year today if you want. You can't difinitively plan to watch game 7 of the World Series or NBA finals today...

You can for the Grey Cup though.

People pride on the CFL being Canadian, but I think the NFL is more popular in Canada

[Sylvanfan]

Well suffice to say...people aren't always excited to see Trooper in a B grade production and more Bell commercials. IMO the two events aren't even close in production. It's amazing the Grey Cup draws as well as it does for the type of production it is and the money spent on it.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Well the Superbowl has a lot of other things like half time entertainment, shiny new expensive T.V. Commercials that add to it's appeal. My 61 year old widowed mother for example watches the half time show at the SuperBowl even though she really doesn't watch the game...And like anything else football it has the distinction of being a pre-determined one time only event. You can make Superbowl plans for next year today if you want. You can't difinitively plan to watch game 7 of the World Series or NBA finals today...

The US numbers are for those who watch the entire game. Can't speak for the Canadian ones.

Super Bowl XLII, which saw the New York Giants score one of the biggest upsets in football history over the heavily favored Pats, averaged 97.5 million viewers.

The telecast's total audience -- a figure including all of the people who happened upon the game at any point -- was 148.3 million, topping the 2004 game in which 144.4 million saw at least part of the Patriots' narrow victory over the Panthers.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

not sure but it wouldn't surprise me. Football has a way of attracting fans regardless of their affiliation. With the other sports fans are more apt to tune out once their team is gone.

Thats what you get for marketing the game properly.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Azure

Thats what you get for marketing the game properly.

hmm, ya they market well, but by marketing it obviously means more than a bunch of commericials.

They schedule properly (games are at a reliable time ... and being in the fall doesn't hurt)

They know gambling butters their bread and they cater to it. Not only vegas but things like jumping on the fantasy bandwagon before most.

The fact that there is only 16 games increases the importance in each game

[Sylvanfan]

Another thing the NFL has done is re-invest a big chunk of it's profits back into the T.V. Production. Plus the NFL more than any other sport jumped onto the T.V. Bandwagon and got the best product out there long before other sports did. Did the NHL ever spend a dime on Stanley Cup 1967 like the NFL did to to do an NFL Films production on Super Bowl 1? Not even close. The NFL has invested huge in T.V. and it's paid off big time for them as their game to game productions are leaps ahead of any other sport.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Another thing the NFL has done is re-invest a big chunk of it's profits back into the T.V. Production. Plus the NFL more than any other sport jumped onto the T.V. Bandwagon and got the best product out there long before other sports did. Did the NHL ever spend a dime on Stanley Cup 1967 like the NFL did to to do an NFL Films production on Super Bowl 1? Not even close. The NFL has invested huge in T.V. and it's paid off big time for them as their game to game productions are leaps ahead of any other sport.

In related news few people know but from a revenue standpoint MLB is now catching up to NFL because of their new media enterprises. NFL's dependance on network TV may one day be a thorn in their side.

[Sylvanfan]

Yeah, Ted Leonsis of the Capitals was the program before Hockey Night in Canada and basically said the NHL should forget about T.V. and go after the Internet. Says Television is "Old Media" and that the league still has a chance at getting a foothold on the "New Media". He had some compelling data about how teen agers for example are now spendig the time on the internet that they spend watching T.V.

[Flames in 07]

ya, agree with the thought, but to me you need TV as a tablestake before you can cash in on the internet. At least for the next decade. MLB is a respected sport, with die hard fans relocated around the US, who can't get 95% of their teams games as they are stuck with a local team.

I don't know that the NHL has the casual fan base and more important, the passionate fan base to make massive inroads on the net the way MLB has.