Offline
Noticed today that NBC had five and a half hours of coverage for the Kentucky Derby this afternoon/evening. TSN-4 had even more, with 7.5 hours. . Today's race was an exciting one with a long shot Rich Strike beating the two favourites.
Offline
It's such a non event. Horse racing like boxing died in the 1970s.
Last edited by cash (May 7, 2022 9:20 pm)
Offline
You wouldn't believe how much coverage a caught baseball got.
Offline
cash wrote:
It's such a non event. Horse racing like boxing died in the 1970s.
The 100,000 plus spectators today, the hundreds of race tracks around North America and the millions of viewers tend to disagree with you
Offline
Mr magoogain wrote:
cash wrote:
It's such a non event. Horse racing like boxing died in the 1970s.
The 100,000 plus spectators today, the hundreds of race tracks around North America and the millions of viewers tend to disagree with you
it's a niche sport. woodbine would be shut down if it weren't for the slot machines.
Offline
The story of yesterday's Derby would make a great movie...but reality was even better. Even if you didn't
know the details, the horse, jock and come-from-behind finish were amazing.
Somebody on the broadcast nailed it when he said (paraphrasing) the horse that won was the one that
nobody talked about. Delightful!
Offline
It was an exciting finish, for sure, but I think the original point of the thread is one that's all too common in sports: do we really need a four or five hour "pre-game" for an event that lasts less than five minutes? I know they make a fortune on all that hype, which is why it happens, but really - how many hours does it take to prepare for a two-minute horse race?
Not even the pre-Super Bowl gets quite that much time, although admittedly, the game is a lot longer and thus more space for the most expensive commercials of the year.
Offline
Like 24 hour news channels, 24 hour sports channels need content, even if it means talking, and talking about horse races or football games that are hours or even days away.
Offline
Broodcaster wrote:
Like 24 hour news channels, 24 hour sports channels need content, even if it means talking, and talking about horse races or football games that are hours or even days away.
Yes, but one of the sources was NBC. They don't have to fill non-stop sports hours. I wonder how many people actually watched the whole thing.
Offline
Did anyone actually watch it? Most of the undercard races were shown. In previous years the earlier races were relegated to NBC Sports Network while the main network was saddled with an NHL game that drew terrible numbers and often didn't end on time.
Despite that, it got 15.7 million viewers at its peak last year, that was a 54 percent increase from the pandemic delayed event the year before. That's more than the top 3 network shows this week combined.
Everyone here sounds like an expert until you fact check the conversation.
Offline
Not saying it's not a big draw - just questioning if a five hour preview set-up for a two minute race isn't a bit of overkill. And when I asked if anyone actually watched it, I wasn't referring to the main event, just to the endless filler that came before it.
Offline
I am wondering if we will be seeing more and more sports on OTA networks, especially in the US. In March CBS had a soccer tournament on mid week, 2 to 5pm in the afternoon for two days. I have noticed NBC is also picking up more sports weekend mornings with soccer and even rugby. I am not so sure affiliates actually are obligated to run these programs and some will likely opt for infomercials or some other paid programming.
Looking at the most popular programming on the big US networks last year, the top 100 was totally dominated by live sports, mostly NFL but by no means all. Live events like swimming, gymnastics, soccer, figure skating, golf, NASCAR racing etc. are cheap to produce, fill air time, easier to match up advertisers to the sport, and often bring in acceptable ratings.
Offline
Johnny Carson once called the Oscars 30 minutes of solid entertainment packed into a 3-hour show. That's what NBC's Derby coverage resembled. I watched for the 1st time in years because of a recent visit to Churchill Downs. Of course the race was terrific. But it was preceded by some analysis, a few good interviews with main characters, and a whole lot of inane interviews with spectators, sponsor plugs and lots of other time fillers. Overkill on steroids.
Offline
The USFL had a game on NBC yesterday afternoon between The Houston Gamblers and New Orleans Breakers. All of the new leagues games will be televised this season with Fox having 14,Fox Sports One 8, NBC 9, and NBC affiliates Peacock 4, and USA Network 9.
Not bad for a new league that they have split the games between Fox and NBC and associated networks.
NBC, Peacock and USA Network have picked up some of the programming and sports coverage that the new defunct NBCSN had been carrying. NBCSN went dark about 5 months ago. This is another sign that NBC intents to have more sports on their schedule.
Offline
RadioActive wrote:
Not saying it's not a big draw - just questioning if a five hour preview set-up for a two minute race isn't a bit of overkill. And when I asked if anyone actually watched it, I wasn't referring to the main event, just to the endless filler that came before it.
Like I said they showed other races and this is a race viewed by casual fans who don’t know the horses yet. The back story of the owners, trainers and horses makes the race itself much more compelling and allows the viewer to pick a favorite and possibly a villain. NBC does an excellent job and the ratings reflect that.
Offline
From The Hollywood Reporter:
How Much Sports Matter (or Don’t) to Network Viewership
Offline
RadioActive wrote:
From The Hollywood Reporter:
How Much Sports Matter (or Don’t) to Network Viewership
It looks like ABC has a strategy of not relying on sports programming until you remember that ESPN is part of the company and is the dominant sports broadcaster in the US.