jbooma Posted February 2, 2004 Share Posted February 2, 2004 Which would then be a 44 share and would put it higher then last years and the most watched game ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeletor The Invincible Posted February 2, 2004 Share Posted February 2, 2004 44 share? Holy crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted February 2, 2004 Author Share Posted February 2, 2004 Originally posted by Skeletor The Invincible 44 share? Holy crap. i guess people thought it would be a bad game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcees4life Posted February 2, 2004 Share Posted February 2, 2004 That's a huge #. 89 million people.......that's 1/3 of the US population. The game was great and it deserves the amount of viewers that tuned in. SUPER BOWL...........AN UNOFFICIAL NATIONAL HOLIDAY THE GREATEST EVENT EVER IN THE HISTORY OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted February 2, 2004 Author Share Posted February 2, 2004 imagine how big that number would be if no one had a party :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcees4life Posted February 2, 2004 Share Posted February 2, 2004 that share may be a little lower tommorrow....that 44 share is just the overnight #'s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sick Posted February 2, 2004 Share Posted February 2, 2004 Fifth most watched TV program EVER. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/nfl/super/2002-02-04-ratings.htm Super Bowl ratings stay even By Rudy Martzke, USA TODAY NEW ORLEANS — New England's stunning Super Bowl victory propelled Fox to a surprising super TV rating Sunday night above the magic number 40. The 40.4 national rating matched last year's rating on CBS, when Baltimore blew out the New York Giants. Fox estimated an audience of 131.7 million, the fifth most-watched TV program. The top four also are Super Bowls. "Going into this game, with all the press that it would be a blowout, the rating should have been lower," said Jon Mandel of Mediacom ad agency. "This shows the power of a good sports event on television. Maybe it showed that for the first time in two years that everyone would band together as a nation in front of their TV sets." Because the tragedies of Sept. 11, the Super Bowl was moved back a week into the February ratings sweeps period. Thus, 50% of Sunday night's programming on competing networks was original compared to 11% for last year's January Super Bowl. Fox sold out its 9 1/2 hours of Super Bowl day programming for total ad sales topping $200 million. The 60 game ads averaged slightly under $2 million per 30-second spot, said News Corp Sales President Jon Nesvig. "Given the competition, I think the advertisers got their money's worth with the Super Bowl," said TV consultant Neal Pilson, former president of CBS Sports. "The Super Bowl is an assured 40 rating. It's appointment viewing." Boston topped the individual markets with a 56.1 overnight rating. St. Louis posted a 52.4 and host city New Orleans a 51.1. Detroit, near where Patriots Super Bowl MVP quarterback Tom Brady starred at the University of Michigan, registered a record 48.9 overnight. NBC had received considerable publicity with its Fear Factor show spotlighting Playboy Bunnies as halftime competition. But Fox's halftime, featuring a U2 concert, dipped only 4% to a 40.7 rating, less than the normal 5% drop. "The rating for this game proves again that no single sporting event in this country has the stature of the Super Bowl," said Fox senior vice-president Lou D'Ermilio. For the third consecutive year, the Super Bowl champions did not appear on ABC's Monday Night Football schedule. Six of the last eight Super Bowl participants were not on the slate for ABC, which has campaigned for a flexible late-season schedule for the networks. Fox and CBS oppose the move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeSkin Posted February 2, 2004 Share Posted February 2, 2004 Uh, hey Joe, I think that article is from 2002. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.