ND / Michigan TV Ratings Prove Game is Relevant
I did some research on TV ratings for 2013 season. Some very interesting insight on the ND/UM Game. Last year this game was 5th in overall viewership. I wonder why ND thinks this game is NOT national. ND had an average of 3.92 million viewers per game.
Here are the top 5 games nationally:
1) Bama / Auburn
2) Bama / Texas A&M
3) Bama / LSU
4) The Game
5) Michigan / ND
Also it was reported in a previous post that Michigan was 2nd in team ratings (6.18 million viewers per televised game). Bama was #1.
On another note: Michigan State averaged 2.28 million viewers. This is a bitch-slap in the face of the players who worked so very hard to win the Big Ten Championship. It just goes to prove that no one really cares about MSU. I almost feel bad for the players....almost.
September 3rd, 2014 at 11:46 AM ^
This link is a couple of years old but is an excellent piece on the size of TV markets and fan bases (and why ND cancelling the series is just plain dumb from a dollars and cents perspective).
http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-fo…
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:05 PM ^
I wasnt under the impression the issue was relevance or irrelevance of this particular series but more a matter of Notre Dame extending its foot print beyond the confines of the midwest and the Big Ten.
I havent read this piece in a while but SI's Mandel (who's reputation Im admittedly not familar with so maybe this is for naught) did a piece on the declining population of the midwest and how this factored not only into the Big Ten's plans for expansion but also Notre Dame's decision to end the series.
Link:
http://www.si.com/college-football/2014/06/18/big-ten-expansion?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=t.co
Oh yeah, and our fearless leader Brian Cook is the article's lede
September 3rd, 2014 at 2:16 PM ^
With five games against ACC opponets each year plus the annual Navy contest, semi-independent Notre Dame's new "footprint" is now East Coast centric with many of the universities they're now playing in areas with lower population growth (Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College) that they also played when they were part of the Big East.
Add in two West Coast opponents per year (USC, Stanford), at least one or two Big Ten teams, one other home-and-home (Texas, Georgia) and a fill in the blank team (Rice, Army, Temple).
Michigan, OTOH, plays in a confernce that spans from Nebraska to the same mid-Atlantic region that overlaps part of the ACC region Notre Dame will be playing in as a semi-independent. Future schedules include non-conference games with SEC teams (Florida, Arkansas), Virginia Tech, Oklahoma, Brigham Young and five Pac 12 teams (Washington, UCLA, Oregon State, Colorado, Utah). Even the non-Power 5 competition largely resides outside the Midwest with Hawaii, UCF, SMU, UNLV and AIr Force on future schedules (Cincinnati would be the exception to the rule along with Ball State).
One of the real benefits from the lapse of the Notre Dame series is that Michigan can become more national in terms of geography. That's not to say UM-ND isn't a national rivalry or a game that gets big ratings, etc., because the opposite is true. But now Michigan gets the opportunity to expand its non-confernce schedule footprint, even with just three OOC games starting in 2016.
What will be interesting to find out is if David Brandon is willing to have two home-and-home series with Power 5 Conference teams like he has set up in 2020/1 with Washington and Virginia Tech. Because of the relatively short time frame for non-conference scheduleing, he might not be able to do it in 2018/9 when Arkansas is opening contest. But there may be a possibility to pair up a second Power 5 team when Michigan plays UCLA (2022/3) and Oklahoma (2025/6).
September 3rd, 2014 at 5:20 PM ^
also are explained by footprint and followers. The price for MSU@Oregon is third most expensive.
According to TicketCity.Com:
The average secondary ticket price for Michigan's visit to Notre Dame on Saturday sits at $349, with a single-ticket starting rate at $278 -- easily making it the hottest ticket in the country this week.
No. 2 on the list is Virginia Tech's trip to Ohio State (average price of $182), No. 3 was Michigan State at Oregon ($179), No. 4 is USC at Stanford ($112) and No. 5 is BYU's visit to Texas ($98).
September 3rd, 2014 at 11:47 AM ^
I would love to have the historic numbers for this game really - I know it netted an average of 8.65 million last year, and NBC came in with an average of 6.4 million viewers for just our game with ND in 2012. I'd have to go back, but it was something north of 7 million for the first UTL matchup as well. I have to think that going back farther than that, the numbers are comparble most years, so from the standpoint of national interest, this is a game that is a high draw definitely.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:43 PM ^
10 lines... Perfect.
September 3rd, 2014 at 4:48 PM ^
I suffer from OCD and didn't notice that.
How exactly did you?
September 3rd, 2014 at 11:48 AM ^
that ND has chosen to chicken dance their way out of the series. I've heard some explanations, none of which are satisfying. Any new insights on why they bailed?
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:43 PM ^
I think there just trying to establish more games and rivarlies on the East and West coasts. They cut back on the MSU games as well, playing only 5 times over the next 15 years or something like that.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:37 PM ^
The story is that they couldn't keep Purdue, Michigan, and Michigan State all on the schedule. The ND-UM contract had recurring 3 year terms, and ND exercised it with an eye on scheduling big out of region games. You'll see that they have home and home with Texas in '15/'16, then UGA, and now in talks with Bama. Also, MSU is no longer annual, but rotating on and off. I'm sure UM-ND will resume on similar rotation by 2020 or so.
Then the hard-core traditionalist ND fans will say "well UM cancelled the series first (Yost) and again later, so whatever".
September 3rd, 2014 at 2:19 PM ^
who was alive when it happened.
September 3rd, 2014 at 2:29 PM ^
Notre Dame scheduled the home-and-home with Texas years before it joined the ACC. If you look at old schedule lineups, you'll see that ND had UT and Michigan in Weeks 1 and 2 of the 2015/6 seasons. Seeing that those games were put together in the BCS era, I thought it was pretty suicidal on the Irish's part to open those seasons with those two programs.
Because of that, it's no surprise that Swarbrick moved so quickly to cancel the series with Michigan so that the last game was in 2014. Instead of playing the Wolverines the following Saturday after opening with the Longhorns in 2015/6, Notre Dame will now play at Virginia in 2015 and Nevada in 2016.
I wouldn't be so sure that Michigan and Notre Dame will resume the regular season series in any way, shape or form during the next decade. UM AD David Brandon has home-and-home series with Virginia Tech and Washington in 2020/1, UCLA in 2022/3 and Oklahoma in 2025/6. He's also stated that he has had no talks with Notre Dame for future games and isn't planning on doing so either.
FWIW, Notre Dame is looking at pushing back the 2019/20 games with Texas because of the series with Georgia. Swarbrick doesn't want to play both UT and UGa in 2019. See http://www.fbschedules.com/2014/06/notre-dame-wants-to-postpone-2019-20…
September 3rd, 2014 at 6:10 PM ^
I think with the way this went down both ADs will be gone from their respective universities before a game is scheduled. Given 7-8 year lead times, I think 2030s is the next time these 2 will play.
September 3rd, 2014 at 11:55 AM ^
But is it relevant?
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:39 PM ^
THAT guy.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:51 PM ^
Does Jason Avant think it's relavant?
September 3rd, 2014 at 11:57 AM ^
This is a huge game for me. Very relevant .... er, not relavent.
Go Blue!
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:18 PM ^
one of the lucky DirecTV subscribers in Indiana that had NBC WTHR taken away this week? Really great timing with the game coming up on Saturday. WTHR can suck a bag of dicks.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:26 PM ^
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:19 PM ^
Go to Best Buy/Radio Shack and pick up an HD antenna for $30. The picture quality is great and easy to install so you can still watch at home.
September 3rd, 2014 at 9:09 PM ^
don't get sucker into buying an HD antenna. At work, I installed a 40" TV for online meetings, presentations etc. So it's hook up directly to a computer, however by simply sticking a paper clip into the antenna input I was able to get all my local TV channels in stunning HD. At home I use a UHF antenna for one of my TV's and "rabbit ears" for the other. Total cost for both was around $8.
Go Blue!
September 3rd, 2014 at 2:28 PM ^
As someone who works for a local television station and recently went through a similar issue with a cable company, telling the individual television station to "suck a bag of dicks" is misplacing your anger.
Cable and satellite providers often lowball television stations, hoping the threat of declining viewership entices them to take a substandard deal. The station claims DirecTV is lowballing them compared to other providers. DirecTV says they are trying to keep costs down for consumers. Considering WTHR is not a part of a giant media conglomerate and DirecTV is a large, multi-national corporation, I'm going out on a limb and saying DirecTV can probably afford it more than the station.
Especially since most local television stations operate on a very tight budget and the loss of substantial revenue from a cable provider could result in layoffs, cutbacks, etc.
September 3rd, 2014 at 4:48 PM ^
is actually more to blame here. They own WTHR and are trying to up the rate for DirecTV to carry them by 400%. They can suck a bag of dicks. I bought an HD antenna so I can watch the game. Something I shouldn't have to do when I already pay for satellite, but here we are.
On another note, WTHR's meteorologist , Anglea Buchman, makes a six figure yearly salary ($400K). Their budget isn't tight. They can still suck a bag of dicks.
September 3rd, 2014 at 11:11 PM ^
Again, just speaking from experience here but it's extremely common for a select few "talent" to have six figures salaries in that range at mid-market stations. There are many, many more people that work for a local television station. Behind the scenes. Sales. Creative. Most of us don't make $400k. Budget issues are very, very real at local television stations despite the salaries of the on-air folks.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:00 PM ^
Using tv ratings as a metric - and assuming tv ratings matter to either school (I honestly don't know) - losing this game has to hurt both UM and ND. I assume visibility and relevance matter to programs that rely so much on *tradition*. Neither school is likely to immediately replace it with a series that has as much early-season cache.
September 3rd, 2014 at 11:59 AM ^
The Michigan Notre Dame game gets huge ratings regardless of the projected ranking of either team.
Lately, they've been pretty good games, too. Here's to hoping Saturday isn't because we put them away and keep them there.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:03 PM ^
I recall ND characterizing its relationship with UM as a "regional" rivalry and having limited relevance on a national scale.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:09 PM ^
and that, by default, means that their rivalry with Purdue is a National Rivalry. This is real academic fraud!
Go Blue!
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:28 PM ^
It can't be a national rivalry for ND if they lose more often than they win.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:16 PM ^
Honestly, I stopped listening to any rival's take on my school after a Spartan tried to convince me that Beilein's offense was something lifted from pick up church league basketball (he was serious and I'm not exaggerating).
There are good rival fans out there. There's just so much sifting involved.
I assume you're referring to a fan.
If it was Kelly, well I firmly believe he's a caricature of a notre dame football coach and I don't believe he actually exists.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:59 PM ^
Here:
"I really haven't seen it as one of those historic, traditional Notre Dame rivalries," Kelly said on a conference call. "I've seen it as just one of those great football games that Notre Dame has played. "For me, I've been in Michigan a long time, I've always felt the Notre Dame-Michigan game was a big regional game. But in the Notre Dame history books, this game has (been) played, but obviously there have been some years where it hasn't been played for a number of years."
He then recanted those words three days later:
Notre Dame coach Brian Kelly reversed fields on Tuesday, calling the Fighting Irish series against Michigan "a great and historic rivalry. "The proclamation in the opening statement during his weekly news conference was contrary to what he said during a teleconference Sunday, when he said: "I really haven't seen it as one of those historic, traditional Notre Dame rivalries," going on to call it a "big regional game."
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:06 PM ^
That's something you can (but shouldn't) say when you're dominating a rivalry. ND hasn't been.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:20 PM ^
That's probably why he's 1-3 against Michigan.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:14 PM ^
I actually think those were Kelly's exact words or close to it. But in all fairness, you can't expect him to say "look, they beat us every year even when they suck and we are sick of being irrelevant by the middle of September so we have to take them off our schedule and play Wake Forest," can you?
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:31 PM ^
That the top 5 games in total viewership (see OP) were all what ND would call "regional" rivalries which somehow, nevertheless, manage to attract a national audience?
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:02 PM ^
It also helps that the game has been at night the past three years and this coming Saturday, the ratings will likely be around the same.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:07 PM ^
ND cancelled the series with Michigan because they are tired of losing. The rest of the "reasons" are all smoke and mirrors.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:44 PM ^
^^^^^
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:08 PM ^
Rivalry or marquee matchup is a matter of semantics. This game is a big draw nationally. Regardless I like resting the game for some time.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:10 PM ^
I think the only two groups of people who claim this game isn't relative are the Notre Dame fans who need an excuse for the rivalry to end and SEC fans who think both Michigan and Notre Dame suck because "they play football above the Mason-Dixon line so they must suck."
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:11 PM ^
But playing Wake, Duke, NC State and Virginia just makes more sense for them...
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:52 PM ^
Showed them by giving us equally bad east coast teams in Maryland and Rutgers. Suck on that Notre Dame!
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:11 PM ^
*Relevant
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:48 PM ^
That odd impulse we have to correct grammatical errors. I resisted this time but still. It's the vigilante in all of us to keep law and order where it may be in need. Be it intervening at a bar if you suspect a man may strike a woman, or chasing down that A-hole who cut you off on the highway, or just rectifying someone's spelling error. Batman was a vigilante, as was Superman. You sir, are my Superman today.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:28 PM ^
ND doesn't care about ratings because they have that NBC deal, and every time they play on national TV and get waxed more and more people tune them out. Might as well keep feasting on the bad teams and keep the wins coming than risk being embarrassed against a rival again.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:30 PM ^
Well when you have two of the largest fan bases with a lot of history playing one another of course it will draw a high rating. There is no doubt that this game is relevant to each fanbase, but in terms of its importance to college football, its hard to say it has been super relevant the last few years. I think with both sides experiencing several coaching changes, littered with more than a few mediocre seasons, a lot of outside fans just view this as a game between two historic programs reliving their glory days. Sure there have been plenty of great games played, but the top ten matchups just haven't been there lately.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:20 PM ^
Bingo. Seeing a top 15 type matchup at least on both sides with 1 of the 2 teams in the top 5-6 more often would have been fun. Doesnt take away from the history and brands and all that but you'd have hoped to see more top 10 matchups especially early in the year when these type of programs get a major benefit of the doubt and usually a high ranking even in years they dont deserve it. But both programs have squandered that.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:30 PM ^
September 3rd, 2014 at 3:23 PM ^
Because Sparty.