September 20, 200719 yr I guess the questions were answered about whether or not anyone was watching... http://www.ukathletics.com/index.php?s=&url_channel_id=39&url_article_id=20608&change_well_id=2
September 20, 200719 yr Before getting all giddy and pinning medals on Brooks and Barnhart why not do a bit of research and see what that translates to in real numbers then compare to the audiences for previous games on ESPN 1 or 2.
September 20, 200719 yr Before getting all giddy and pinning medals on Brooks and Barnhart why not do a bit of research and see what that translates to in real numbers then compare to the audiences for previous games on ESPN 1 or 2. The game was on Sunday morning and again tonight...it was also the lead story on Sunday morning on ESPN...people who refuse to believe that the whole country knows all about the game are getting kind of pitiful at this point... And...people are getting all giddy and pinning medals on Brooks and Barnhart...for beating Louisville...:ylsuper:
September 20, 200719 yr Author Keep in mind that this number doesn't represent Louisville or Lexington because it was on local networks. Those numbers represent the rest of the country who was watching...
September 20, 200719 yr The game was on Sunday morning and again tonight...it was also the lead story on Sunday morning on ESPN...people who refuse to believe that the whole country knows all about the game are getting kind of pitiful at this point... Since UK fans are used to watching their team on tape delay I guess that means someting. Again, compare the numbers for LIVE viewership to what they were in past years.
September 20, 200719 yr Will Bozich write a "Correction" in tomorrow's paper? He didn't even get the figures correct or mention that the numbers don't include the viewers in Kentucky who watched the game on WHAS and WLKY. Shotty journalism from a neutral writer.
September 20, 200719 yr As best I can tell the ESPN game that night was about a 2.0 while the UK/UL games came in at .78...
September 20, 200719 yr Author Last season, when the UK-UofL game was played on Sunday, Sept.3, at 8p.m. and televised on ESPN, it generated a 1.8 rating. This year was a 1.84 for the last 30 minutes...
September 20, 200719 yr This year was a 1.84 for the last 30 minutes... And where would the rating have spiked to last year if UK didn't get CRUSHED. The numbers were cut in well over half in a great game over a blowout. Case closed. Thanks...
September 20, 200719 yr Author And where would the rating have spiked to last year if UK didn't get CRUSHED. The numbers were cut in well over half in a great game over a blowout. Case closed. Thanks... Lots of "what ifs", but the fact remains a similar number of people watched this year as watched last year. Does it matter how they got there if they were there?
September 20, 200719 yr Looks like another pointless debate about this.....Seriously, you guys just need to get over it....
September 20, 200719 yr And where would the rating have spiked to last year if UK didn't get CRUSHED. The numbers were cut in well over half in a great game over a blowout. Case closed. Thanks... :lol: Huge win for the program, huge for recruiting, everybody knows about it...case closed... Another nice parting gift for you...:sssh: :banana:
September 20, 200719 yr Lots of "what ifs", but the fact remains a similar number of people watched this year as watched last year. False. A similar number of people tuned in to a fantastic game for only 30 minutes while that same number watched the duration of a beat down for 3 hours. If you can't see the clear disparity in the numbers I don't know what to tell you. If last year was kept close by UK AT ALL it would have been over a 3.0 based on these numbers for the last 30 minutes. If you want to compare, there you go...
September 20, 200719 yr :lol: Huge win for the program, huge for recruiting, everybody knows about it...case closed... Another nice parting gift for you...:sssh: :banana: It kills you that I'm right on this one doesn't it? Huge? Sure. As huge as it could have been? No chance. The numbers prove it. Thanks for playing. Mitch and Rich cost themselves over a million viewers and numerous potential recruits. Based on your numbers in use, it has to break down evenly. I love being right... :jump:
September 20, 200719 yr It kills you that I'm right on this one doesn't it? Huge? Sure. As huge as it could have been? No chance. The numbers prove it. Thanks for playing. Mitch and Rich cost themselves over a million viewers and numerous potential recruits. Based on your numbers in use, it has to break down evenly. I love being right... :jump: I've yet to see any evidence that it cost them a single potential recruit.....
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.