Super Bowl ratings top "MASH" finale

Mary Lou Wallace

unread,

Feb 8, 2010, 3:18:50 PM2/8/10

to

It took just under 27 years for it to happen:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/02/saints-super-bowl-win-is-.html

Mary Loou Wallace
"Ahhhh,,,,Bach!"

Mary Lou Wallace

unread,

Feb 8, 2010, 6:31:21 PM2/8/10

to

On Feb 8, 3:18 pm, Mary Lou Wallace <mlwallace...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It took just under 27 years for it to happen:
>

> http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/02/saints-...
>
> Mary Loou Wallace
> "Ahhhh,,,,Bach!"

Good Grief....I can't even spell my own name! LOL

Mary Lou Wallace
"Ahhhh....Bach!"

Brad

unread,

Feb 9, 2010, 4:31:25 AM2/9/10

to

On Feb 9, 7:18 am, Mary Lou Wallace <mlwallace...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It took just under 27 years for it to happen:

Must have been some Super Bowl. Especially with all the channels
available now, compared with 27 years ago.

M*A*S*H is still the best sitcom of all time, ratings for the finale-
wise, but one wonders, would this Super Bowl have beaten the M*A*S*H
finale if shown at the same time, 27 years ago? Hmmm.

So how did the plumbing go this time? Did everyone flush at the same
time when the game was over?

Brad (In Oz, where the Super Bowl means very little...)

Message has been deleted

Eddie

unread,

Feb 10, 2010, 2:56:10 PM2/10/10

to

"Mary Lou Wallace" <mlwall...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:53537376-7818-4b4b...@s17g2000vbs.googlegroups.com...

All in all, doesn't seem a fair comparison.

Message has been deleted

Eddie

unread,

Feb 10, 2010, 6:06:23 PM2/10/10

to

"A" <aa...@att.net> wrote in message
news:1ZqdnUX-ccjqqe7W...@earthlink.com...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> "Eddie" <Pba...@Gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4b730f54$0$31274$607e...@cv.net...

> When the number of US households expands from 83.3 mil. (1983) to
> almost 115 mil. (2010), it is inevitable the number of raw household
> numbers and viewers will also increase and break the previous viewing
> records, and the win by Super Bowl XLIV (44) was made by the proverbial
> nose.
> However, in terms of % of Households, and % Share of the market,
> GFA still reigns at #1:
>
>
> Feb. 28, 1983 GFA Feb. 7, 2010 Super Bowl
>
> Viewers (mil.) 105.9 (#2) 106.5 (#1)
> Households (mil.) 50.15 (#2) 51.73 (#1)
> Household Rating 60.2% (#1) 45.0% (#26)
> Share 77% (#1) 68%
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-watched_television_broadcasts#Highest_rated_network_telecasts
>
> The 'Who Shot J.R.?' episode of "Dallas" (Nov. 21, 1980) is by far the #2
> rated show in terms of Household Rating (53.3%) and Share (76%), behind
> only GFA, and both way ahead of S.B. 44.
>
> The 2010 Super Bowl was only 26th in Household Rating.
>
>
> Somebody (Jeff M., for example) relay the news to Alan, Mike, Harry,
> Loretta, Jamie, David, and the others involved in the GFA episode, so they
> know only the raw number of viewers and number of households to GFA were
> passed (football pun), but not the Household Rating and Share.
>

Part of what I mean by "not a fair comparison" is the Super Bowl is not just
the game anymore. Of course, most, including me, look forward to the game
itself. But now you have these huge halftime shows and the mini-movie 3
million dollar commercials, which have become a show of their own. Some tune
in to see The Who who are not football fans. Couple all this with some of
the stats you provided and it just isn't fair to compare a sports event to a
television series finale. Two different entities.