CBS scores with Super Bowl ratings
According to preliminary results, more people watched Peyton Manning and the Colts win Super Bowl XLI than last year's big game.
By Paul R. La Monica, CNNMoney.com editor at large
February 5 2007: 2:23 PM EST
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Preliminary ratings for Super Bowl XLI showed that more people watched the Indianapolis Colts' victory over the Chicago Bears than last year's game featuring the Pittsburgh Steelers and Seattle Seahawks.
According to a statement by CBS (Charts), which televised the game, the Super Bowl earned an average household rating of 42 and share of 63.
This means that 42 percent of all households in the U.S. were tuned into the game and that 63 percent of all households watching TV on Sunday night were watching the game.
These ratings, if they hold, are slightly higher than last year's ratings. And last year's game had been the most-watched Super Bowl since 1996. Last year's game, which aired on Walt Disney (Charts)-owned ABC, averaged a household rating of 41.6 according to Nielsen Media Research, and a household share of 62.
Nearly 90.7 million viewers tuned into Super Bowl XL last year. Figures for the number of viewers for this year's Super Bowl were not immediately available.
CBS also said that preliminary overnight ratings for a special episode of "Criminal Minds," which aired after the game, averaged a 15.3 household rating and 26 share, the highest ratings ever for the show, which usually airs on Wednesday nights at 9PM EST.
The average ratings for "Criminal Minds" this season are a 9.7 household rating and 15 household share, according to Nielsen Media Research.
But the post-Super Bowl episode of "Criminal Minds" did not appear to do nearly as well as last year's "Grey's Anatomy," which aired on ABC after Super Bowl XL. That episode averaged a 34 rating and a 21 share and was watched by 37.9 million viewers.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/05/news/companies/superbowl_ratings
15 comments:
Sucks that it didn't do as well as grey's. I say we blame it all on Morticia. *ha* If they didn't have that stupid cow on there, it probably would've done better.
Or it could be the fact that CM is a crime drama whilst Grey's is schmoopy romantic crap which, for some reason, just always seems to be more popular. But at least they did better than they do in the regular timeslot. If they hadn't, then I'd've been worried.
Why do the press always feel it is necessary to put the show down. The show did great in the ratings. Why was it necessary to even talk about last year's ratings? Milk costs 50 cents more this year but nowhere in the Got Milk commercials do they say milk is great for you but last year it was cheaper.
I do not know who Morticia is? Is she one of the writers because I thought it was very well written. I think the ratings were great and I am sure the network thinks so too.
It's all a bunch of numbers! (Be interesting to know how Reid summarizes that.).
WE KNOW IT IS "A,#1,TOP BANANA"...AND THAT IS WHAT MATTERS!
Sara,
Morticia is Emily Prentiss, played by Pagett Brewster--the person they got to replace Elle Greenaway played by Lola Glaudini. She isn't really popular in this group, but I guess we are just going to have to let her grow on us because I don't see them bringing Elle back.
She kind of looks like Morticia Adams from the "Adams Family"--a TV program that aired in the 1960's or the movies that were made in the 1990's. The Adams Family, although a comedy, were kind of creepy in a fun way.
Lori
The show did well and that is all I care about. Last year was last year. This show has done very well in the ratings since day one without media hype or attention and with almost no support from CBS. It made it this far because it is too good a show not to be talked about and because fans told others and this is our show and if the critics don't like the show or its ratings then I suggest they get LOST. You remember LOST? The show they all loved that bombed against our show. So we will be happy with our ratings and that the network gave the show this opportunity and everyone else can just get bent.
Great ratings.
We got outstanding ratings and I'm with Allie..whats the point of bringing up the past? Great analogy there by the way. :)
Lee
This is good news.
Slashgirl's right. Grey's is a different type of program. Serial killers aren't everyone's cup of tea. I think we did great considering the nature of our program. Incidently, the only time I ever say Grey's was after last year's Superbowl. Something about a guy with a bomb in his gut, right? Never watched the 2nd part to see how it ended. Not my cup of tea.
Ratings are always important when it comes time to sell commercials. I get the importance but I think what the critics are forgetting is that this show has always performed well in the ratings. Always. There is always a chance that a freshmen show will do well and then lose it in its sophomore season but our show has improved with its ratings. The show is a hit with the fans and the ad costs have had to rise at a good clip. I really do not know what else the critics want. Do they need to see the stars doing back flips in the CBS back lot? Screw Ausiello and the horse he rode in on. Screw them all. We should boycott the rags that rag the show. Betcha they would learn to love the show real quick then.
I am happy with these #s.
Awesome ratings. You can't really compare it with Grey's Anatomy. It's two completely different things. I love both of them. Our show more obviously and I agree with Allie, I blame Morticia.
I love it when they have nice things to say.
no one in Seattle would ever believe less people watched the Seahawks lose than watched the Colts win. Seattle kind of stood still for that game (and we were so robbed).
how can a show NOT get good ratings after a game with such high ones?
jacqui #192
Post a Comment