Clemson Blowout Draws Lowest TV Ratings for CFP Title Game


#22

The NCAA basketball final was down 28% this year.


#23

People using statistics to push their own views.


#24

They were 28-0, LMAO. So they had to be 30-0 to come by it “honest”? UCF was the only team with a claim they should have gotten a shot.

What were the FCS championship tv ratings? Did they get beat out by 90% of the bowl games again?


(John m Bevil) #25

If you watched the rematch but complained about the CFP, they don’t care.
They got you to watch, they got the eye balls and the ratings. That is all
advertisers want. The only way they will change, is for viewers and $ to
decrease. We must find a way to stop rematch 4, 5 and 6 and not watching
is the only way. I was out, but happy SEC nation lost. There needs to be parity.


#26

This is absolutely impossible, the committee just met about the CFP and they stated that it was the most popular it has ever been. So how can the ratings be so low?


#27

Undefeated has nothing to do with it. Some teams get hot a just the right time and UPSET favorites to win it all. These teams were chosen by a committee using criteria they can’t explain because to them they “looked” like the best 4.

Trying to compare the FCS is a non-sequitur, meaning it doesn’t logically follow from the discussion dude. Of course they got beat out by 90% of the bowl games. What does that prove? Nothing. Nearly all FCS fans have a favorite FBS team they follow too. Some don’t even follow their FCS school.

You want real champions, get a real tournament! Who’s to say UGA or Ohio State wouldn’t have beaten ND or OU? Opinions don’t count. Put the ball down!


(CoogNation_14) #28

This sounds like a fun topic. I’ll take a stab, with an expanded playoff more teams will have a shot, so in time that will help spread the talent around to top schools. Right now, everyone knows only a few schools have legitimate chances at a National title. So the very best talent stays with these schools, add in a little more competition and over a few cycles of an EP with some upsets, the playing field will become more evenly distributed.

Thoughts? Flaw in the simplistic argument?

Great points btw, it looks to be a great discussion with the group. :+1:


#29

It’s a great argument for expansion unless you’re one of the elite teams who actually have a shot under the current system. If the system included every conference champion, that would really upset the apple cart because then P5 schools couldn’t say that “if you go to UH (for example) you’ll never see the playoffs.”

Still would take some years for recruiting to even out somewhat but it would eventually be a battle of chemistry between the recruit and the staff/players and facilities.


#30

You said they didn’t come by it honest, they did. I’m not against an expanded playoff, I think 8 would be good, maybe 12. Just pointing out that these two teams clearly earned it and left no doubt in the semis. They were clearly the two best teams in college football this year. Sure, they could have been upset if they have two more games, they could have lost to OU or Notre Dame too if they didn’t come ready, wouldn’t have meant those two teams were better than them.


#31

I passed it on. They didn’t care!


#32

I’m with you FWC
All it takes is one team. Just one team to beat either Alabama or Clemson and you have a different championship. Until that happens you will get a rematch of the two best teams in football which is, after all, what the championship is all about.


(Max Webb) #33

Tried to watch, turned off at halftime show.


(G.W.) #34

It was not a blowout until the second half.
I’m with you. Give every conference a chance to send their best and watch the ratings rocket.

They won’t do it.


#36

I am probably in the minority, but I liked the old bowl system where conferences were tied to a bowl. Was if fair and did it produce a “true” national champion? Most years not. But neither does this system.

But where the bowl system had charm and history, this is NFL Light.

As somebody said in a prior post, College Football is regional. The Rose Bowl used to mean a lot to people in the Midwest and the West Coast. The Sugar Bowl meant a lot to people in the south as did the Cotton Bowl to people in Texas.


#37

I watched it because it was the last college football game of the season. Only thing I get irritated at is when the talking heads start spewing their analysis and opinions of the system, who deserves what, their predictions, and any other crapass crap they feel like spewing out of their shiny undersized suit wearin’ cabbage heads.


#38

Your opinion. You’re welcome to it. Truth is we will never know. 2nd truth is, in a fair playoff it sometimes happens that the two best teams don’t meet in the title game and sometimes the “best” team doesn’t win. I guess in your world that champion is illegitimate because they weren’t one of the subjectively determined “best”. The system is not fair, and that is what I mean by honest.


(Grant) #39

I mean I am for expanding the playoffs but I hardly see why ratings would skyrocket if Clemson and Alabama rolled through a 12 or 16 team playoff to the championship game. Why do we assume anything would change with viewership?

Oh my team got beat by the Tide three weeks ago…better tune into the championship game this year to see what happens???

Viewership is down just like most other major sporting events.
-Super Bowl…down.
-World Series…down.
-NBA Finals…down.
-NCAA Hoops Championship Game…down.


#40

That’s a good point. As my life has progressed I have become less interested in who wins the championship once my team is out of it. If the stars align and I’m able to watch, I will, but I don’t go out of my way.


(Patrick) #41

It does seem as if the blowout had more to do with the numbers than anything. The article mentions that numbers were around a 16.2 with 27M viewers in the 1st half. Once the game got out of hand, viewers clicked off in droves.

Also, streaming numbers as well as ESPNNEWS numbers weren’t factored in to the overnights.

I hate defending the thing, but with cord-cutting, streaming, and more alternatives, numbers aren’t going to be as high as they used to be. However, these events (any sports really) are the only things that really sell with advertisers. If the game isn’t interesting, folks won’t stay with it.

Big question is whether expanding the playoff would increase advertising revenue over the current system. My guess is that it would, but ESPN has to ask itself what the cost would be to themselves of expanding. Would FOX (or other channels) want in on the rights? How much will the schools/conferences want? How much will the bowls want?

Which probably means we’re stuck with the current iteration until 2026 when the contract expires as I doubt that all parties will want to come together to come to a mutual understanding. However, I imagine that in 2026 that things will change as more channels bid for rights and money goes through the roof.


(CoogNation_14) #42


Sorry I don’t have anything to add to the discussion, but I do have this little jab. :laughing: