IBJNews

Super Bowl just misses major-market TV-rating record

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The New York Giants’ 21-17 win over the New England Patriots in Sunday night’s Super Bowl narrowly missed drawing the highest major-market television rating in National Football League history, Comcast Corp.’s NBC network said Monday.

The game at Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis was seen in an average of 47.8 percent of households in the top 56 U.S. television markets. Last year’s NFL championship between the Green Bay Packers and Pittsburgh Steelers drew a 47.9 major-market rating, which tied a 1987 title game between the Giants and Denver Broncos for the previous high.

Full national ratings are due later. Last year’s Super Bowl was seen by 111 million viewers, making it the most-watched event in U.S. television history, beating the 1983 season finale of “M*A*S*H,” which was watched by 106 million people. It was also the fourth straight year of Super Bowl-record viewership.

Sunday’s game came down to a last-second heave from Patriots quarterback Tom Brady into the end zone. The ball bounced off of several hands before falling to the ground a few feet from diving New England tight end Rob Gronkowski.

The Giants’ Super Bowl victory, their fourth, in many ways mirrored their upset 17-14 win over New England in the 2008 title game, as Eli Manning led late-game touchdown drives in both contests.

The 2008 game had a television audience on News Corp.’s Fox of 97.4 million and a 43.1 national rating.

The average 30-second commercial during Sunday night’s game sold for $3.5 million, according to NBC.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. From the story: "The city of Indianapolis also will consider tax incentives and funding for infrastructure required for the project, according to IEDC." Why would the City need to consider additional tax incentives when Lowe's has already bought the land and reached an agreement with IEDC to bring the jobs? What that tells me is that the City has already pledged the incentives, unofficially, and they just haven't had time to push it through the MDC yet. Either way, subsidizing $10/hour jobs is going to do nothing toward furthering the Mayor's stated goal of attracting middle and upper-middle class residents to Marion County.

  2. Ron Spencer and the entire staff of Theater on the Square embraced IndyFringe when it came to Mass Ave in 2005. TOTS was not only a venue but Ron and his friends created, presented and appeared in shows which embraced the 'spirit of the fringe'. He's weathered all the storms and kept smiling ... bon voyage and thank you.

  3. Not sure how many sushi restaurants are enough, but there are three that I know of in various parts of downtown proper and all are pretty good.

  4. First off, it's "moron," not "moran." 2nd, YOU don't get to vote on someone else's rights and freedoms that are guaranteed by the US Constitution. That's why this is not a state's rights issue...putting something like this to vote by, well, people like you who are quite clearly intellectually challenged isn't necessary since the 14th amendment has already decided the issue. Which is why Indiana's effort is a wasted one and a waste of money...and will be overturned just like this has in every other state.

  5. Rick, how does granting theright to marry to people choosing to marry same-sex partners harm the lives of those who choose not to? I cannot for the life of me see any harm to people who choose not to marry someone of the same sex. We understand your choice to take the parts of the bible literally in your life. That is fine but why force your religious beliefs on others? I'm hoping the judges do the right thing and declare the ban unconstitutional so all citizens of Wisconsin and Indiana have the same marriage rights and that those who chose someone of the same sex do not have less rights than others.

ADVERTISEMENT