View Full Version : Sabres still behind Bills in TV ratings
Bay Side
October 28th, 2006, 1:18:36 PM
The latest bouquet for the Buffalo Sabres came Thursday night when ESPN analyst Barry Melrose called them the best hockey team in the world after showing highlights of their 10th straight win.
They are close to selling out all home games. But the Sabres at their early-season best aren't half as important to armchair fans as the Buffalo Bills at their worst.
That's the conclusion that can be drawn from recent television ratings for Western New York's two professional sports teams.
The Sabres' ninth straight victory, 4-1 over Montreal on Monday night, was televised nationally on Versus. It had a 10.6 local rating, which is incredibly high this early in the season.
The Sabres' rating couldn't beat CBS' Monday schedule locally, but it was higher than every prime-time show on ABC Monday and every show on NBC except for "Heroes."
However, you'd have to combine the ratings for four Sabres games in a week to reach the rating for the Bills' latest Sunday televised embarrassment, a 28-6 loss to the New England Patriots. The game averaged about a 28 rating on WIVB-TV, which is extremely low by Bills standards. Bills' regular-season games routinely score in the mid to high 30s. Still, the Bills' game will undoubtedly be the highest-rated local program of the week.
• The elimination of first the New York Yankees and then the Mets from the baseball playoffs has cost WUTV viewership for Fox's coverage of the World Series.
The opening game of the St. Louis-Detroit series had an anemic 4.9 rating a week ago opposite another Sabres victory on MSG. It is understandable that it would lose to the Sabres. But baseball couldn't beat "Kidnapped," a NBC series that was moved to Saturday in anticipation of being canceled. It had a 5.8 rating on WGRZ-TV.
Sunday's Game Two had a healthier 9.0 rating, but Tuesday's Game Three slipped to a 6.0 rating. Thursday's Game Four marathon had a 7.4 rating. For a few hours, it played opposite the Sabres' 10th straight victory, over the New York Islanders, which had a 6.3 rating. In essence, the Series is getting local ratings in the neighborhood of NBA Finals games.
http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20061028/1066469.asp?tbd1066469.asp
JLB
October 28th, 2006, 1:29:51 PM
This team has a chance to change that.
The Bills are and have been Buffalo Sports for so long.
Keep this team together and it will balance out.
GO BUFFALO!!!!!
ArlieKoz13
October 28th, 2006, 1:55:29 PM
Football is a like a day-long event. You start watching the pre-game shows at like 11:00 and just watch the games all day long. Hockey isn't like that. There's so many games on during the week, the casual fan may not know when there's a game on. Who in the world doesn't know when football is on?
I don't know, I just don't put much emphasis on television ratings. Plus, I don't think that the Sabres will ever outmatch the Bills when it comes to popularity in Buffalo. But that's ok. Buffalo's a football town with a good hockey team. Whatever.
Bay Side
October 28th, 2006, 2:07:03 PM
nfl has such a large advantage over any other sport!!
gills2k
October 28th, 2006, 2:13:19 PM
I thinks its Apples and Oranges...
The Bills play 16 games. I can't imagine a die hard fan not watching the Bills game on Sunday. Plus most people are off on Sundays.
I love the Sabres too, but will never be able to watch all 82 games. During the week and during primetime, people have other things going on. That will change for the playoffs obviously.
Mouldsie
October 28th, 2006, 2:43:26 PM
+1 gills
TMR2006
October 28th, 2006, 3:06:51 PM
nfl has such a large advantage over any other sport!!
It is a billion dollar industry
Carl J. Ironsides
October 28th, 2006, 3:40:22 PM
Two completely different things. There's one football game per week; there's multiple hockey games per week. Football is the only thing that's on Sundays. Many, on weeknights, would rather watch their favorite tv shows than a hockey game.
In summation, Alan Pergament is a jackass and I'm glad WGR 550 constantly rips him.
eyedog
October 28th, 2006, 5:50:17 PM
Let's see, football is on Mon., Tue., Wed., Thur., Fri., Sat., and Sun. this coming week. Of course thats college and/or pro. Doesn't matter because they draw ratings. That's why they are on virtually every night now during the season. It's a fact look it up if you want. If the rating were not there the games wouldn't be on ESPN every night.
Miller Rulez
October 28th, 2006, 6:16:19 PM
That's pathetic. The bills are a horrible team.
Carl J. Ironsides
October 28th, 2006, 6:16:58 PM
Ratings are for small-minded people who watch what they're told to watch. The NHL is the best league in the world, and that's why I watch it. Football has become little more than a commercialized big business. Don't believe me? They're moving games to Mexico, Japan, etc. 'Nuff said.
Hockeystud1414
October 28th, 2006, 6:17:37 PM
The latest bouquet for the Buffalo Sabres came Thursday night when ESPN analyst Barry Melrose called them the best hockey team in the world after showing highlights of their 10th straight win.
They are close to selling out all home games. But the Sabres at their early-season best aren't half as important to armchair fans as the Buffalo Bills at their worst.
That's the conclusion that can be drawn from recent television ratings for Western New York's two professional sports teams.
The Sabres' ninth straight victory, 4-1 over Montreal on Monday night, was televised nationally on Versus. It had a 10.6 local rating, which is incredibly high this early in the season.
The Sabres' rating couldn't beat CBS' Monday schedule locally, but it was higher than every prime-time show on ABC Monday and every show on NBC except for "Heroes."
However, you'd have to combine the ratings for four Sabres games in a week to reach the rating for the Bills' latest Sunday televised embarrassment, a 28-6 loss to the New England Patriots. The game averaged about a 28 rating on WIVB-TV, which is extremely low by Bills standards. Bills' regular-season games routinely score in the mid to high 30s. Still, the Bills' game will undoubtedly be the highest-rated local program of the week.
• The elimination of first the New York Yankees and then the Mets from the baseball playoffs has cost WUTV viewership for Fox's coverage of the World Series.
The opening game of the St. Louis-Detroit series had an anemic 4.9 rating a week ago opposite another Sabres victory on MSG. It is understandable that it would lose to the Sabres. But baseball couldn't beat "Kidnapped," a NBC series that was moved to Saturday in anticipation of being canceled. It had a 5.8 rating on WGRZ-TV.
Sunday's Game Two had a healthier 9.0 rating, but Tuesday's Game Three slipped to a 6.0 rating. Thursday's Game Four marathon had a 7.4 rating. For a few hours, it played opposite the Sabres' 10th straight victory, over the New York Islanders, which had a 6.3 rating. In essence, the Series is getting local ratings in the neighborhood of NBA Finals games.
http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20061028/1066469.asp?tbd1066469.asp
I really think that's gonna change with all the national attention we have gotten ( ESPN, ect)
Still pretty worthless though...Bills are a joke compared to the sabres!
Carl J. Ironsides
October 28th, 2006, 6:19:40 PM
Another note about ratings:
'Arrested Development' was cancelled because of them. That, to me, is enough proof that they're totally worthless.
Sabres244
October 28th, 2006, 6:46:19 PM
I thinks its Apples and Oranges...
The Bills play 16 games. I can't imagine a die hard fan not watching the Bills game on Sunday. Plus most people are off on Sundays.
I love the Sabres too, but will never be able to watch all 82 games. During the week and during primetime, people have other things going on. That will change for the playoffs obviously.
pssshhh I schedule things around the Sabres
anEinherjer
October 28th, 2006, 6:50:21 PM
16 vs 82 has something to do with, doncha think?
Kind of a stupid comparison, thanks Pergajerk.
Sabres244
October 28th, 2006, 6:54:05 PM
16 vs 82 has something to do with, doncha think?
Kind of a stupid comparison, thanks Pergajerk.
that and the channels both are brodcasted on
eyedog
October 28th, 2006, 11:57:20 PM
16 vs 82 has something to do with, doncha think?
Kind of a stupid comparison, thanks Pergajerk.
Considering football is on virtually every night of the week now I really don't think it's "a stupid comparison". If hockey got the ratings don't you think they would have it on ESPN still ? It's kind of stupid if you don't believe so. It's a bottom line business, ratings = money.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.