SShoe Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Given last week's discussion regarding SLU's rating vs. RI, I was curious to see what they were against Richmond the week before, so I emailed Caesar and he responded today with this: FEBRUARY 7-9 Pro Bowl (NFL) KSDK 6.3 Bud Shootout (NASCAR) KTVI 3.6. LA Lakers-Cleveland (NBA) KDNL 3.0. Colorado at Blues (hockey) KPLR 2.3 Purdue at Illinois (men’s basketball) KMOV 2.3 St. Louis U. at Richmond (men’s basketball) 1.2 SIUC-Missouri State (men’s basketball) ESPN2 0.5 Kansas-Missouri (women’s basketball) FSM 0.4 Missouri at Iowa State (men’s basketball) FSM 0.8 It turns out, SLU's unbelievably low ratings were either A.) wrong, B.) a fluke, or C.) Mizzou's recent success caused many in the area to watch them instead of us that day (games were essentially the same time that day). Either way, SLU's ratings against Richmond were way higher than against RI and even higher than Mizzou's that weekend. Postcard, based on your argument, I just proved that SLU has more local fans than Mizzou. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Given last week's discussion regarding SLU's rating vs. RI, I was curious to see what they were against Richmond the week before, so I emailed Caesar and he responded today with this: FEBRUARY 7-9 Pro Bowl (NFL) KSDK 6.3 Bud Shootout (NASCAR) KTVI 3.6. LA Lakers-Cleveland (NBA) KDNL 3.0. Colorado at Blues (hockey) KPLR 2.3 Purdue at Illinois (men’s basketball) KMOV 2.3 St. Louis U. at Richmond (men’s basketball) 1.2 SIUC-Missouri State (men’s basketball) ESPN2 0.5 Kansas-Missouri (women’s basketball) FSM 0.4 Missouri at Iowa State (men’s basketball) FSM 0.8 It turns out, SLU's unbelievably low ratings were either A.) wrong, B.) a fluke, or C.) Mizzou's recent success caused many in the area to watch them instead of us that day (games were essentially the same time that day). Either way, SLU's ratings against Richmond were way higher than against RI and even higher than Mizzou's that weekend. Postcard, based on your argument, I just proved that SLU has more local fans than Mizzou. We must be related or something. I e-mailed Caesar to ask what the SLU/Dayton rating was. He just got back to me a half hour ago. The rating: 1.7 Don't get me wrong, I'm not bragging about ratings of 1.2 or 1.7 but I think any assertions that SLU is dramatically lower then MU are just wrong, especially when you consider that MU is clearly a much better team right now and SHOULD be getting higher ratings based on that fact alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soderball Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 when the PRO BOWL gets ratings 6 times higher than Mizzou or the Billikens, I think ratings are bogus and are either based on luck or randomly generated. Who watches the PRO BOWL or rather the GET OUT OF BOUNDS AND FLOP bowl? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinfootes Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Given last week's discussion regarding SLU's rating vs. RI, I was curious to see what they were against Richmond the week before, so I emailed Caesar and he responded today with this: FEBRUARY 7-9 Pro Bowl (NFL) KSDK 6.3 Bud Shootout (NASCAR) KTVI 3.6. LA Lakers-Cleveland (NBA) KDNL 3.0. Colorado at Blues (hockey) KPLR 2.3 Purdue at Illinois (men’s basketball) KMOV 2.3 St. Louis U. at Richmond (men’s basketball) 1.2 SIUC-Missouri State (men’s basketball) ESPN2 0.5 Kansas-Missouri (women’s basketball) FSM 0.4 Missouri at Iowa State (men’s basketball) FSM 0.8 It turns out, SLU's unbelievably low ratings were either A.) wrong, B.) a fluke, or C.) Mizzou's recent success caused many in the area to watch them instead of us that day (games were essentially the same time that day). Either way, SLU's ratings against Richmond were way higher than against RI and even higher than Mizzou's that weekend. Postcard, based on your argument, I just proved that SLU has more local fans than Mizzou. Do you remember which channel the Richmond game was on? I can't recall, but maybe that has something to do the the variance. Just taking a stab here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Do you remember which channel the Richmond game was on? Maybe that has something to do the the variance. Just taking a stab here. Ch. 11 both times. One was on a Sunday and one was a Saturday. As some of us pointed out in the original thread, these ratings are based on 50-100 or so local viewers. It only takes 1 or 2 viewers to dramatically affect the ratings for events such as this, which has to call into question their validity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinfootes Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Ch. 11 both times. One was on a Sunday and one was a Saturday. As some of us pointed out in the original thread, these ratings are based on 50-100 or so local viewers. It only takes 1 or 2 viewers to dramatically affect the ratings for events such as this, which has to call into question their validity. I know I'm splitting hairs here, but the article you cited is disputed by what Nielsen says they do. Your article states that Nielsen surveys 5,000 respondents nationwide. Nielsen claims they do 12,000, and about 2 years ago they said they would triple that number by 2011 (not sure where the sample size stands right now). We're still talking about a relatively small sample size for the StL area, but probably bigger than what you assume it is. They also claim to take a representative sample of viewers in the market (not just people who post on here ). That said, I agree that it's not an exact science. Here's how I see our problems... 1. Our games are on 3 different channels, with none on ESPN or FSN. 2. The school does little to promote the team, so it's hard for the casual fans to know when they're on. 3. On weekends there are all kinds of sporting events on that can fragment viewership. Unless you know where you're looking, it would be very easy to just turn on one of the ESPNs, FSNs, or big networks for sports and just leave it there. Things will continue to improve as the team wins. It would be nice to have a little hype along the way to help this out, but we'll get there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 We must be related or something. I e-mailed Caesar to ask what the SLU/Dayton rating was. He just got back to me a half hour ago. The rating: 1.7 Don't get me wrong, I'm not bragging about ratings of 1.2 or 1.7 but I think any assertions that SLU is dramatically lower then MU are just wrong, especially when you consider that MU is clearly a much better team right now and SHOULD be getting higher ratings based on that fact alone. Considering a lot of Bills fans were at the Chaifetz, plus Mardi Gras, a sold out Blues game and even a sellout at the Dome for the truck event, that seems like a pretty strong number for the Dayton game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 The silence in response to the initial post is deafening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I know I'm splitting hairs here, but the article you cited is disputed by what Nielsen says they do. Your article states that Nielsen surveys 5,000 respondents nationwide. Nielsen claims they do 12,000, and about 2 years ago they said they would triple that number by 2011 (not sure where the sample size stands right now). We're still talking about a relatively small sample size for the StL area, but probably bigger than what you assume it is. They also claim to take a representative sample of viewers in the market (not just people who post on here ). That said, I agree that it's not an exact science. Here's how I see our problems... 1. Our games are on 3 different channels, with none on ESPN or FSN. 2. The school does little to promote the team, so it's hard for the casual fans to know when they're on. 3. On weekends there are all kinds of sporting events on that can fragment viewership. Unless you know where you're looking, it would be very easy to just turn on one of the ESPNs, FSNs, or big networks for sports and just leave it there. Things will continue to improve as the team wins. It would be nice to have a little hype along the way to help this out, but we'll get there. Footes, I agree that there could be more than 5,000 national viewers that go into their ratings. Later in the day that I posted that article I found another article that said there are 20,000 local viewers that participate for local ratings. Still, St. Louis is about 1/100 of the nation, therefore that means at most 200 people in St. Louis are being recorded for Nielson purposes. Whether its 50 or 200, you can clearly see that even one person watching the game or not watching the game can have a dramatic affect on the rating a game receives, and this is reflected in the high variance of our ratings (0.3, 1.2, 1.7). Another way to think about it is that Nielson is a lot like political polls. They will say 44% of people like candidate A but it could be off by 3% either way. Thinking about the Nielson ratings, when any t.v. rating gets a 1 its like saying 1% watched that show but it could be off by 3% either way. I don't know about you, but that seems like a huge difference to me, especially if we are arguing about the difference between 1% and 2%. Again, we all know that SLU can do many things to improve its exposure in the local community but anybody that says MU is getting 6X the ratings then SLU or that women's basketball is more attractive then SLU is just trying to mislead from the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Postcard Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Given last week's discussion regarding SLU's rating vs. RI, I was curious to see what they were against Richmond the week before, so I emailed Caesar and he responded today with this: FEBRUARY 7-9 Pro Bowl (NFL) KSDK 6.3 Bud Shootout (NASCAR) KTVI 3.6. LA Lakers-Cleveland (NBA) KDNL 3.0. Colorado at Blues (hockey) KPLR 2.3 Purdue at Illinois (men’s basketball) KMOV 2.3 St. Louis U. at Richmond (men’s basketball) 1.2 SIUC-Missouri State (men’s basketball) ESPN2 0.5 Kansas-Missouri (women’s basketball) FSM 0.4 Missouri at Iowa State (men’s basketball) FSM 0.8 It turns out, SLU's unbelievably low ratings were either A.) wrong, B.) a fluke, or C.) Mizzou's recent success caused many in the area to watch them instead of us that day (games were essentially the same time that day). Either way, SLU's ratings against Richmond were way higher than against RI and even higher than Mizzou's that weekend. Postcard, based on your argument, I just proved that SLU has more local fans than Mizzou. Shoe, I like how you conveniently leave out certain important factors. For one, the Mizzou game was on a Saturday(when there are way many more games to go up against) and it was also on cable. The SLU game was on Sunday and was on free TV. If you don't think those are huge factors in determing audience size than you have your blinders on. The sample I provided was much more equal. So you proved nothing. The silence in response to the initial post is deafening. What? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Given last week's discussion regarding SLU's rating vs. RI, I was curious to see what they were against Richmond the week before, so I emailed Caesar and he responded today with this: FEBRUARY 7-9 Pro Bowl (NFL) KSDK 6.3 Bud Shootout (NASCAR) KTVI 3.6. LA Lakers-Cleveland (NBA) KDNL 3.0. Colorado at Blues (hockey) KPLR 2.3 Purdue at Illinois (men’s basketball) KMOV 2.3 St. Louis U. at Richmond (men’s basketball) 1.2 SIUC-Missouri State (men’s basketball) ESPN2 0.5 Kansas-Missouri (women’s basketball) FSM 0.4 Missouri at Iowa State (men’s basketball) FSM 0.8 It turns out, SLU's unbelievably low ratings were either A.) wrong, B.) a fluke, or C.) Mizzou's recent success caused many in the area to watch them instead of us that day (games were essentially the same time that day). Either way, SLU's ratings against Richmond were way higher than against RI and even higher than Mizzou's that weekend. Postcard, based on your argument, I just proved that SLU has more local fans than Mizzou. Well done shoe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShoe Posted February 26, 2009 Author Share Posted February 26, 2009 Shoe, I like how you conveniently leave out certain important factors. For one, the Mizzou game was on a Saturday(when there are way many more games to go up against) and it was also on cable. The SLU game was on Sunday and was on free TV. If you don't think those are huge factors in determing audience size than you have your blinders on. The sample I provided was much more equal. So you proved nothing. What? Postcard, if you can't see that all I'm doing is poking holes in your argument from last week, then you're denser than I thought. I'm not out to prove anything, because I think that at the moment Mizzou is going to get better ratings. They're playing very well and have earned the attention. But you set out to take one small ratings sample and act like you've proven that there are more MU fans than SLU fans in STL. That may be true, but your evidence sucked, and I just used the previous week's ratings to help illustrate how truly crappy your argument was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Shoe, I like how you conveniently leave out certain important factors. For one, the Mizzou game was on a Saturday(when there are way many more games to go up against) and it was also on cable. The SLU game was on Sunday and was on free TV. If you don't think those are huge factors in determing audience size than you have your blinders on. The sample I provided was much more equal. So you proved nothing. Post, I think everyone on here would be surprised if SLU and its 100 plus RPI was consistently getting better ratings than a MU team ranked in the top 15. However, the fact YOU have to make arguments about how Sunday and Saturday viewerships are different speaks volumes. SLU's problems on t.v. clearly aren't as bad as the RI rating would indicate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Postcard Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Postcard, if you can't see that all I'm doing is poking holes in your argument from last week, then you're denser than I thought. I'm not out to prove anything, because I think that at the moment Mizzou is going to get better ratings. They're playing very well and have earned the attention. But you set out to take one small ratings sample and act like you've proven that there are more MU fans than SLU fans in STL. That may be true, but your evidence sucked, and I just used the previous week's ratings to help illustrate how truly crappy your argument was. I realize you're trying to poke holes but I don't think you're doing a very good job. I've repeatedly made the point before that Mizzou is more popular but no one wants to believe it. So I emailed someone that I thought might know about the viewership of both schools(Dan Caesar). When he emailed me back and said that typically, Mizzou outdraws SLU by 3-1, I posted his email. What I got in response were accusations that I must have made up the email and how did we know that was true and the normal, kool aid drinking bs. So finally, when the Post printed the stats for a recent game, I posted them over here for some validation of my original point. Again, most(your brother for one) didn't want to believe that the numbers could be true. You're both still trying to argue it. What evidence to you need? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShoe Posted February 26, 2009 Author Share Posted February 26, 2009 I realize you're trying to poke holes but I don't think you're doing a very good job.I don't know, presenting ratings from the previous week that show SLU with higher ratings than MU seems like a pretty good method to show that your initial post is flawed and one week's ratings sample is not enough to "prove" anything, which is what you said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Postcard Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I don't know, presenting ratings from the previous week that show SLU with higher ratings than MU seems like a pretty good method to show that your initial post is flawed and one week's ratings sample is not enough to "prove" anything, which is what you said. I was comparting apples to apples(both games on a Saturday on free TV). You're comparing apples to oranges. Can you really not see the difference? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShoe Posted February 26, 2009 Author Share Posted February 26, 2009 I was comparting apples to apples(both games on a Saturday on free TV). You're comparing apples to oranges. Can you really not see the difference?So you're comparing a game with a resurgent Mizzou team that's currently in the top 10 and drawing national attention for its play this year vs. a SLU team that is currently rebuilding, is the 4th youngest in the country, and is fighting for a spot in the CBI. Yeah sure, apple vs. apples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I don't know, presenting ratings from the previous week that show SLU with higher ratings than MU seems like a pretty good method to show that your initial post is flawed and one week's ratings sample is not enough to "prove" anything, which is what you said. Well, what has been "proven" with certainty is what I've been saying all along about the banned billiphan/postcard. After many denials, he can't even hide it any more. The hoops he is jumping through to advance his black and gold agenda in a couple of these discussions is comical. His "I'm both a SLU and Mizzou" fan act is clearly b.s. as I pointed out long ago. What a fraud. I am getting a kick out of watching him make a fool of himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Postcard Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Well, what has been "proven" with certainty is what I've been saying all along about the banned billiphan/postcard. After many denials, he can't even hide it any more. The hoops he is jumping through to advance his black and gold agenda in a couple of these discussions is comical. His "I'm both a SLU and Mizzou" fan act is clearly b.s. as I pointed out long ago. What a fraud. I am getting a kick out of watching him make a fool of himself. You're a real Sherlock Holmes. And if you need to see someone make of fool of themself, head to the nearest mirror. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbofive Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 You're a real Sherlock Holmes. And if you need to see someone make of fool of themself, head to the nearest mirror. PAYSTUBS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tenthyearsenior Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 So you're comparing a game with a resurgent Mizzou team that's currently in the top 10 and drawing national attention for its play this year vs. a SLU team that is currently rebuilding, is the 4th youngest in the country, and is fighting for a spot in the CBI. Yeah sure, apple vs. apples.Nice SLU bashing. I can't believe you don't think you can compare the tigers to the bills. You said it not me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Postcard Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 PAYSTUBS. Hilarity! Whatever it means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 You're a real Sherlock Holmes. And if you need to see someone make of fool of themself, head to the nearest mirror. Fraud. I think it's funny that you were so afraid to own up to your allegiance. Pat Forde was right about Mizzou fans. The early season attendance figures help support the argument that many SLU fans were making early in the year that SLU deserved the same coverage in the PD as Mizzou. Remember, you got pi$$ed at SLU fans for suggesting that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Postcard Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Fraud. I think it's funny that you were so afraid to own up to your allegiance. Pat Forde was right about Mizzou fans. The early season attendance figures help support the argument that many SLU fans were making early in the year that SLU deserved the same coverage in the PD as Mizzou. Remember, you got pi$$ed at SLU fans for suggesting that. I think everyone on here is tired of us having the same discussion every two weeks. You know the one where you spend 90% of your posts on here talking about the Mizzou witch hunt. The discussion we have where we find out that I'm the one of the two of us that actually goes to Billiken games and spends money on SLU. Ya, we probably don't want to have that discussion. I will give you credit Ace. You're like one of those little dogs that nips at the heels of people until get swatted off and scamper away, shrieking as they go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 we find out that I'm the one of the two of us that actually goes to Billiken games and spends money on SLU. where are your season tickets again postcard? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.