Nielsen ratings (1 Viewer)

[Rat]

why would you say that? - george's posts are always articulate
and worth reading, regardless of subject bias.

I second that Mike. That was outta line Paul. There are countless number of people on this site that can't accept someone's opinion. Opinion is the heartbeat of this site and if you can't take it, you need to leave.

 

[Rat]

I just don't see TV coverage even competing with Nascar for a race enthusiests attention anymore.
The NHRA is boring to the casual race fan.

Nascar racing has the drivers who put on a show each and every weekend. Talladega and Daytona were great, great finishes that could excite any race fan. Stuff that propels legends.
Who is going to pay attention to a 3 second squirt that comes across the tube as slow, with this year's version of some hot blonde rookie as a driver?
Sorry if this sounds sexist because it's not my intent, but it looks as if anybody in the world with money to buy a star crew chief can compete and instantly win in the NHRA. That removes the aura from the NHRA drivers that Nascar enjoys and deserves. To the casual fan, it looks like it takes far, FAR more talent to compete in any Nascar sanctioned race than it doe in Fuel, and I can't disagree.

So you name your poison..
1,000', 3 second long racing? It's a joke folks...
The influx of nobody drivers with zero personality?
The loss of, or the participation of the greats which carry instant name recognition when drag racing was in it's glory years like Big, Snake, Shirley and Ace and others from that time period with nobody stepping up and taking their place of respect in the racing world?
Too, too much reliance on Force, creating Force overload with nobody else helping out except the Ped Brothers once in a great while?
Four car teams in a sixteen car field where two owners own half of the field?

The NHRA has seemed to develop the perfect storm of redundancy in the world of racing, and it comes across on TV loud and clear.

After thinkin about this and as hard as it is to swallow, it's painfully true

 

[mw6789]

I felt the same way for the last 2 or 3 years. The only reason why I originally subscribed to cable television was so I could watch NHRA drag racing. Back then the only thing I watched on TV was the local news...... and drag racing. There was a time when I recorded EVERY race. Each race got it's own VHS tape and once it was recorded, the tab was broken off so it couldn't accidentally be recorded over. Now days.... with the invention of the DVR, it's easier to record the races but I usually find myself deleting the "qualifying" show and fast forwarding though the commercials and pro stock car/bike during the "eliminations" show. I went from a guy who couldn't miss one second of a any race broadcast, to a guy who fast forwards through 75% of each show or completely deletes everything without even watching it.

I've worked on a nostalgia nitro funny car team for the last few years and that has been a lot of fun! As far as I'm concerned, the NHRA "big show" is now filler for something to watch between nostalgia funny car events!

I absolutely agree with this poster. I remember moving into a new home in 1996 and being thrilled that my wife had the satellite TV guys come out and hook it up before labor day weekend so I could watch the US Nationals coverage. Now quite frankly, I wont go out of my way to even turn it on. If I happen to be in the house and it is on, I may watch it and I may not. For some reason it just doesnt hold the same excitement it once did. I miss the old American Sports Cavalcade shows, but unfortunately Steve Evans is no longer with us.

 

[mw6789]

I just don't see TV coverage even competing with Nascar for a race enthusiests attention anymore.
The NHRA is boring to the casual race fan.

Nascar racing has the drivers who put on a show each and every weekend. Talladega and Daytona were great, great finishes that could excite any race fan. Stuff that propels legends.
Who is going to pay attention to a 3 second squirt that comes across the tube as slow, with this year's version of some hot blonde rookie as a driver?
Sorry if this sounds sexist because it's not my intent, but it looks as if anybody in the world with money to buy a star crew chief can compete and instantly win in the NHRA. That removes the aura from the NHRA drivers that Nascar enjoys and deserves. To the casual fan, it looks like it takes far, FAR more talent to compete in any Nascar sanctioned race than it doe in Fuel, and I can't disagree.

So you name your poison..
1,000', 3 second long racing? It's a joke folks...
The influx of nobody drivers with zero personality?
The loss of, or the participation of the greats which carry instant name recognition when drag racing was in it's glory years like Big, Snake, Shirley and Ace and others from that time period with nobody stepping up and taking their place of respect in the racing world?
Too, too much reliance on Force, creating Force overload with nobody else helping out except the Ped Brothers once in a great while?
Four car teams in a sixteen car field where two owners own half of the field?

The NHRA has seemed to develop the perfect storm of redundancy in the world of racing, and it comes across on TV loud and clear.

Thanks George---now I know why I no longer care. You nailed it.

 

[TR]

Thanks George---now I know why I no longer care. You nailed it.

I agree, and hope that maybe these ratings are a wake up call for NHRA and for ESPN. The telecast does not need to be 3 hours long, I even think 2 hours may be too long. They have way too much filler time which sadly is filled with John Force everything. Don't get me wrong I used to like John Force for his success but doggone, enough is enough. Cut the time back to reduce the redundant BS, and try something different. I agree with many on this blog, in that I do not even look forward to watching the races on T.V. because it is not exciting anymore. It is as long as a Pro Football game (and sometimes as boring as watching a bad game). Come on NHRA, do something for your viewers, like maybe take a poll on some of this stuff to get some feed back. I really don't think they want to do that because they will not like what they see. Just my 2 cents as a home spectator.
Rick

 

[Baron]

Sam,

I've been in the broadcast industry for 27 years now, and the Nielson (TV) and Arbitron (Radio) surverys are the most accurate analysis available. They are the best we have and we all use them to make programming decisions. Keep in mind, the methodology is the same in every market, for every station, and every network. Regarding samply size, it's the same in every market, relatively speaking. Both companies use the official population from the US Census and samples the same percentage per thousand persons in every market. The sample (then) is the same everywhere.

A DVR viewer is far less valuable than a viewer in real time. The reason...a real time viewer is usually reached by commercial messages. A DVR viewer almost always advances past the commercials. Since networks (and local stations) rely heavily on advertising revenue this is a major issue. Most corporate advertisers are now paying commercial rates based on actual measured viewers as opposed to anticipated viewers. That puts the pressure on the network to deliver the audience (consumers).

After each event someone usually posts something critical about ESPN delaying race coverage because of softball, or volleyball, etc. The reason (once again) is because those audiences are larger than ours and ESPN can then charge more for commercial messages ran in those broadcasts. On the flip side, you never see a NASCAR telecast delayed and that is because the audience is the largest the network can deliver to it's advertisers.

It's ALL about developing advertising revenue...and always will be.

John, the specific reason I record the events is that ESPN often moves the broadcast around to adapt to the schedules of the Major League Tiddley Wink League.
Thus, ESPN reports a recorded program and the advertiser eschews the NHRA ad buy. If the broadcasters could get their act in gear, they could report live eyeballs. ESPN's inability to schedule is considered a lack of interest on my part. Thus, the data are flawed and unreliable.
Cheers,
Ed

 

[George.]

Mike made another extremely valid point, and one I was also thinking about.
IMHO, Steve Evans MADE the NHRA what it "was", and not the other way around.

I think a direct correlation could be drawn between the NHRA and Steve. I believe when Steve died, the NHRA immediately began it's slow decent to where it is now.
The old Diamond P productions were simply the best in every area, and Steve had a knack to be able to translate that to anybody watching, Dave C had the voice, Brock Yates had the charm, but nobody could explain how a lock up clutch works in 10 seconds to a greenhorn spectator better than Steve Evans.. It was directed well and produced perfectly, and the racers were all interesting.

Paul Page may be one of the best motorsports anouncers in recent memory, but I think his best work was done with the Indycar circuit. He doesn't have the "filler" capability for Drag racing, and doesn't come across well to me.
Lord knows that the job is a lot tougher than it used to be because there is no three member crew like the "LaHaie family" or Tim Grose and current girlfriend wrenching the car against all odds, there is no Whit Bazemore pulling into the pits with a burned out body on top of his 30' tag-a-long trailer hoping to qualify on cubic "nothing", there is no King Kenny, and the mastermind of the 80's, Dale Armstrong and there is no Big daddy schooling young phenom Darrell Gywnn.

Look at it this way:
Try putting Shirley, Connie, Whit, Al Hofmann, Ace, Snake, Goose, Big, Amato, Force, Beck, Jeb and Beadle at the same track on the same day.
Used to happen at every race at one time, and I completely left out Pro Stock..
I could add another four dozen names that bring instant memory.
No disrespect to all of the hard working men and women of the NHRA, but can you name what drivers are the fields today, and when was the last time you were blown away from one team that did not qualify?

God it sucks now....

 

[Rat]

George I agree with you completely, I became a spectator in 1998 as I was 14. Aside for the stable big names in the sport, the sport's character left. Sure you still got a few drivers and teams that make it colorful, it's just that it seems even back in 1998 alot of the sports originality and flavor still had alot of life. Now 13 years later the sport refuses to sell itself beyond using the same teams and drivers to promote.

I feel most of the fans that go to a race sure wanna see the army dragster swing for the fence as they use them to promote a race, but i feel the overwheming majority of fans who just go to the race for the thrill of experience don't care if you use Schumacher or Chrisman to promote the race. I say stop using top stars, use more non big time teams. Buff, haddock, sanity, chrisman, why not try and help fan bases of the underfunded and give them the tv time they deserve. I guarantee you it may help ratings.

 

[TR]

George I agree with you completely, I became a spectator in 1998 as I was 14. Aside for the stable big names in the sport, the sport's character left. Sure you still got a few drivers and teams that make it colorful, it's just that it seems even back in 1998 alot of the sports originality and flavor still had alot of life. Now 13 years later the sport refuses to sell itself beyond using the same teams and drivers to promote.

I feel most of the fans that go to a race sure wanna see the army dragster swing for the fence as they use them to promote a race, but i feel the overwheming majority of fans who just go to the race for the thrill of experience don't care if you use Schumacher or Chrisman to promote the race. I say stop using top stars, use more non big time teams. Buff, haddock, sanity, chrisman, why not try and help fan bases of the underfunded and give them the tv time they deserve. I guarantee you it may help ratings.

I agree, something needs to change or it may be the end of T.V. and NHRA,
I just hope those ego maniacs that are running the show now don't run NHRA into the ground. Again a 90 min show is plenty in my view.
Rick

 

[mick]

i agree i do not think the present espn coverage is leaps and bounds better
than the tnn/sports cavalcade presentations of yesteryear.
i'm like others here; would do almost anything to be in front of the tv for these broadcasts; today, not so much.

a tnn blast from the past with Big and PP in the mix.......
YouTube - 1989 NHRA U.S Nationals; Part 8

here's the late, great mr. evans taking us thru the first 2:43 of the show
like only he could.
and then can you imagine having the talents of mr. bob frey trackside
because mr. mcclelland is calling the show from tower!?
YouTube - 1993 NHRA Mile High Nationals; Part 1

rick, if memory recalls, i think the tnn shows were 90 minutes

 

[sdwarf36]

Maybe to us old+ jaded-but what about the 14 y/o in the stand now? "These" are his golden years. (Amber Force? Pfft--I remember when her grandfather was racing!)
I too loved the Diamond P shows-but be fair-not all those names were "big" names back then-they became that after years-and lore-past by. And I think the racing itself is better now-back then when people were on a roll (say-Glidden) they had the field covered by tenths. And there was alot less races where 2 cars crossed the line side by side-from either disparity or breakage.
I think we are all spoiled a bit-we can watch all 23 races each+ every season-and have for years-back when Diamond P came out-you would stop what you were doing to see it-cuz who knows when you'd get to see another.

And as far as ratings go, good show or crappy-it doesn't matter-the only thing that improves ratings is to get people who haven't been tuning in to start.

 

[Dave]

i agree i do not think the present espn coverage is leaps and bounds better
than the tnn/sports cavalcade presentations of yesteryear.
i'm like others here; would do almost anything to be in front of the tv for these broadcasts; today, not so much.

a tnn blast from the past with Big and PP in the mix.......
YouTube - 1989 NHRA U.S Nationals; Part 8

here's the late, great mr. evans taking us thru the first 2:43 of the show
like only he could.
and then can you imagine having the talents of mr. bob frey trackside
because mr. mcclelland is calling the show from tower!?
YouTube - 1993 NHRA Mile High Nationals; Part 1

rick, if memory recalls, i think the tnn shows were 90 minutes

That 89 U.S. Nationals clip reminds me... Why don't they ever promote joining the NHRA on tv anymore? They used to have it on every event show and every NHRA Today episode. Seems to make sense doesn't it? Join and get 48 issues of National Dragster, a rulebook, a pin, a patch, a decal, and your choice of the new NHRA member t-shirt or your copy of Drag Racing XX whatever year it was. Boy have I heard that line a million times in my life.

 

[clwill]

That 89 U.S. Nationals clip reminds me... Why don't they ever promote joining the NHRA on tv anymore? They used to have it on every event show and every NHRA Today episode. Seems to make sense doesn't it? Join and get 48 issues of National Dragster, a rulebook, a pin, a patch, a decal, and your choice of the new NHRA member t-shirt or your copy of Drag Racing XX whatever year it was. Boy have I heard that line a million times in my life.

Because you don't get a rulebook, a pin, a patch, or a t-shirt. You get a magazine subscription, a decal, a pile of ads/coupons, and a login to download the rulebook and listen to the audiocast on qualifying days. Woohoo!

 

[Johnny Mopar]

John, the specific reason I record the events is that ESPN often moves the broadcast around to adapt to the schedules of the Major League Tiddley Wink League.
Thus, ESPN reports a recorded program and the advertiser eschews the NHRA ad buy. If the broadcasters could get their act in gear, they could report live eyeballs. ESPN's inability to schedule is considered a lack of interest on my part. Thus, the data are flawed and unreliable.
Cheers,
Ed

Ed,

The audience data is not flawed or unreliable. Only personal opinions, tainted with emotion are. The data elimnates guessing, and without data...that's all we're doing.

 

[vegasnitro]

Ed,

The audience data is not flawed or unreliable. Only personal opinions, tainted with emotion are. The data elimnates guessing, and without data...that's all we're doing.

I was an RF engineer for the cable company here in Vegas for 10 years. I can not only tell you that the data is NOT flawed, but it is far more specific and accurate than you could ever imagine. So much so, that Nielsen will probably be put out of business soon.

DVRs are INCREDIBLE machines for data collecting purposes. They report back to the cable/satellite company EVERYTHING. They report all season pass/favorites you have set to record, before you ever record them. Basically as soon as you select a program to record, that data is collected and processed. They report back the time it spent on your DVR before you watched it. It reports the average amount of time spent fast forwarding, rewinding and paused. It also reports, in REAL TIME, all "live" TV viewing statistics, what channels you watch, how often you change channels, if you rewound any part, etc. It will tell how much time you spent looking at the on-screen guide and which programs you hit more info on, and if you subsequently viewed the program. This is the REAL reason Cable companies tell you to turn your box off when you are not watching TV, it skews their statistics.

Lastly, DVRs will change everything in a few years, once everybody has them. The fastest growing segment in the TV viewing audience is the "Live Commercial Avoidance" segment. These are people who will watch a show (the most popular is American Idol), set their DVRs to record it, then come in about 20 minutes into the show, watch it from the beginning, fast forwarding through all the commercial segments, and arriving at the end of the show about the same time it ends in real time. The second fastest growing segment is the same day urgent viewer. These are people who record a show, but watch it within 2 hours, again specifically for the purpose of commercial avoidance. As these trends continue to increase, and they increase exponentially every year as people adopt and become familiar with the technology, advertisers are going to have to adapt. We may even get to a point where there will be no commercials because of DVRs, every show will be sponsored with a logo on the screen, or there will be ridiculous amounts of product placement. Again, American Idol leads the way in this department, with a Coke and Ford segment of every show.

 

[DrRocket]

We may even get to a point where there will be no commercials because of DVRs, every show will be sponsored with a logo on the screen, or there will be ridiculous amounts of product placement. Again, American Idol leads the way in this department, with a Coke and Ford segment of every show.

None of that is new, of course. The old Gary Moore show, when sponsored by Oldsmobile, would have the name, and the logo omnipresent on the backdrop curtain. On the Jack Benny show, they were forever working the State Farm Insurance name and logo into the show's story line.

There's also rumors floating about I've seen that the networks and advertisers are trying to work out a deal with TIVO and other DVR providers to disable the fast forward and skip 30 seconds functions on the boxes when commercials are on. I predict mass rebellion if that happens.

 

[sdwarf36]

I was an RF engineer for the cable company here in Vegas for 10 years. I can not only tell you that the data is NOT flawed, but it is far more specific and accurate than you could ever imagine. So much so, that Nielsen will probably be put out of business soon.

DVRs are INCREDIBLE machines for data collecting purposes. They report back to the cable/satellite company EVERYTHING. They report all season pass/favorites you have set to record, before you ever record them. Basically as soon as you select a program to record, that data is collected and processed. They report back the time it spent on your DVR before you watched it. It reports the average amount of time spent fast forwarding, rewinding and paused. It also reports, in REAL TIME, all "live" TV viewing statistics, what channels you watch, how often you change channels, if you rewound any part, etc. It will tell how much time you spent looking at the on-screen guide and which programs you hit more info on, and if you subsequently viewed the program. This is the REAL reason Cable companies tell you to turn your box off when you are not watching TV, it skews their statistics.

Lastly, DVRs will change everything in a few years, once everybody has them. The fastest growing segment in the TV viewing audience is the "Live Commercial Avoidance" segment. These are people who will watch a show (the most popular is American Idol), set their DVRs to record it, then come in about 20 minutes into the show, watch it from the beginning, fast forwarding through all the commercial segments, and arriving at the end of the show about the same time it ends in real time. The second fastest growing segment is the same day urgent viewer. These are people who record a show, but watch it within 2 hours, again specifically for the purpose of commercial avoidance. As these trends continue to increase, and they increase exponentially every year as people adopt and become familiar with the technology, advertisers are going to have to adapt. We may even get to a point where there will be no commercials because of DVRs, every show will be sponsored with a logo on the screen, or there will be ridiculous amounts of product placement. Again, American Idol leads the way in this department, with a Coke and Ford segment of every show.

LOL-I just had to read this off to the wife-this describes EXACTALY what she does-and yes-that silly singing show.

 

[George.]

Maybe to us old+ jaded-but what about the 14 y/o in the stand now? "These" are his golden years. (Amber Force? Pfft--I remember when her grandfather was racing!)
I too loved the Diamond P shows-but be fair-not all those names were "big" names back then-they became that after years-and lore-past by. And I think the racing itself is better now-back then when people were on a roll (say-Glidden) they had the field covered by tenths. And there was alot less races where 2 cars crossed the line side by side-from either disparity or breakage.
I think we are all spoiled a bit-we can watch all 23 races each+ every season-and have for years-back when Diamond P came out-you would stop what you were doing to see it-cuz who knows when you'd get to see another.

And as far as ratings go, good show or crappy-it doesn't matter-the only thing that improves ratings is to get people who haven't been tuning in to start.

The difference is this....
Back then during th golden years, the records were always up for grabs. E.T., speed.. You name it, we went and we saw records tumble at the technology grew. Everybody couldn't wait to see what Eddie Hill would run at Ennis, or what record Kenny would break at the Reading race, or what crazy numer Prock would pull out of the hat for Cory.
Now, there aren't any of those records to chase, but rather the new, stand-in "fake" BS records like 1000' E.T. and speed.
It's all so hysterically moot to those who were apart of the NHRA back then, so the question is this, what are we tuning in to see?.

Unfortunatly, it's not the NHRA's fault that technology passed right by and with that, the ability to contain it safely, but it is their fault for not preparing for it earlier in track safety and maintaining a safe 1,340 race by slowing things down a little sooner with the cars. The NHRA liked feeding that performance animal, it was good for ratings and the product was spectacular to say the least.
So like General Motors finances, one day, the NHRA's safety "performace" bill (at the cost of lives) comes due, and here we are...
Kind of an impossible situation to fix, I think.

 

[Nunz]

George, you've made some great posts. And like someone posted, somewhat hard to accept, but given a lot of thought, pretty much dead-on. I've grown up around this sport, and am a true die-hard. But what was once the most colorful sport on the planet, has become very vanilla. Some things are nobody's fault, like records. We just can't have 350 mph 1/4 mile cars. Remember being at a race when someone put a "NUMBER" up on the scoreboards? Man it was nuts. And the variety of people, personalities, and cars seemed endless. I still love it, and I'm sure things can be done to improve both the live show and TV, but it's a different animal. Of course, like everything in life, nothing stays the same.
Lastly, does anyone really think Cory got replaced because of his age?

 

[George.]

George, you've made some great posts. And like someone posted, somewhat hard to accept, but given a lot of thought, pretty much dead-on. I've grown up around this sport, and am a true die-hard. But what was once the most colorful sport on the planet, has become very vanilla. Some things are nobody's fault, like records. We just can't have 350 mph 1/4 mile cars. Remember being at a race when someone put a "NUMBER" up on the scoreboards? Man it was nuts. And the variety of people, personalities, and cars seemed endless. I still love it, and I'm sure things can be done to improve both the live show and TV, but it's a different animal. Of course, like everything in life, nothing stays the same.
Lastly, does anyone really think Cory got replaced because of his age?

Can I answer with another question?
Did Cory replace "Ace" because of his age?