• The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.

Superbowl Commercials

There's no way that the Olympic audiance is bigger than the Super Bowl audiance.
Click to expand...

Especially the winter games, which are largely a collection of "sports" nobody watches anyway. Now that I have HD I might tune in a for few things, just to see how they look. (Maybe a little of the ice skating if the women are cute and the costumes skimpy enough. Some of the hockey since in HD you can actually see the friggin' puck - despite which fact it is still a pretty tedious sport.)

Regards,

Joe
 
Well, whatever the reason for the lame commercials -- we actually enjoyed the game more than the commercials (even though our team lost) since that was really why my friends and I got together. :p

Oh and to eat too -- the food was damn fine! :D
 
Yeah, there were some really stupid calls and I am not even well versed on football rules.

Now I remember why I don't watch football. Too many rules. :p
 
I'll grant that a few of the individual sports with no equipment (ball etc.) *and* no "judges" (in the sense that gymnaistics or diving have "judges" awarding scores to the competitors) have fewer things that need to be defined.

However, even in a track race there are considerably more rules than just "first one there wins". (If that was the *only* rule, then you would see racers outfited more like football players, to protect themselves from actions taken during the race to prevent them from finishing ahead of others.)

They don't allow a competitor to interfere with other runners, right? But there is some amount of "incidental contact" which doesn't get anybody disqualified. So how precisely does that get defined in the rule book? I haven't ever read through a track rule book, but I've seen enough other rule books to know that things like that, which sound simple at first, can lead to huge disertations when you really try to nail down an unambiguous rulebook definition.

And there are some limitations on what you can use to push off of .... that is to say, some definition of what constitutes a legal versus illegal starting block. That's another one of those things that tends to end up being a lengthy amount of verbage in a rule book. (Even in the sports for which I do periodically look in the rule books, I never take the time to read the entire sections devoted to what constitutes a legal "ball" for the various sports that use a ball.)

And, of course, all of the rules governing "false starts".
 
So what sports don't have "too many rules"?
Click to expand...

Australian Rules Football. From what little I've seen of it, the only actual rule they have is "no homicide". :)

And I thought the refs did a first-rate job in the game. :) (Of course, I was rooting against the evil, coffee-swilling Seattle Starbucks or whatever-they're-called, who cost my Giants their shot at the big game.)

Actually, I didn't think the refs were any worse than in any regular season game I saw, and better than in most of them.

Regards,

Joe
 
(Of course, I was rooting against the evil, coffee-swilling Seattle Starbucks or whatever-they're-called, who cost my Giants their shot at the big game.)
Click to expand...

The Giants lost to the Carolina Panthers in the playoffs.
 
(Of course, I was rooting against the evil, coffee-swilling Seattle Starbucks or whatever-they're-called, who cost my Giants their shot at the big game.)
Click to expand...

The Giants lost to the Carolina Panthers in the playoffs.
Click to expand...

Oh, my mistake then. I knew it was one of those boring expansion teams with the fuity uniforms. :)

Joe
 
I liked the Seahawks uniforms! I was like -- wow, when did they get all gussied up? ;)

Well, considering I don't like to watch sports at all -- it is amazing I watched the Superbowl. I do actually enjoy a sporting event if I am actually there but watching on TV is soooo dull. :rolleyes:
 
Especially the winter games, which are largely a collection of "sports" nobody watches anyway.
Click to expand...

I only have one thing to say to that...

:p

.. there. Said it :D

Though yes, I know, Austria is a strange place for its utter devotion to the winter games .. though I do think that over the whole event, the viewing numbers might be somewhere comparable to those of the suberbowl. In the US, no (except for Colorado maybe, but not even there) .. but globally, You will get quite big numbers of people in countries where the Winter Olympics are a big deal (to name a few big ones, Italy, Germany, France, Japan, Poland, Russia, Canada)

What I don't get though is how winter olympics sports are not real sports .. but rugby under a bunch of padding .. er .. I mean .. football :D .. is .. :rolleyes:
 
Eh, you Europeans are stll pissed that we called football by the same name you call soccer.

Now I'm off to have me some freedom fries...
 
[though I do think that over the whole event, the viewing numbers might be somewhere comparable to those of the suberbowl. In the US, no (except for Colorado maybe, but not even there) .. but globally, You will get quite big numbers of people in countries where the Winter Olympics are a big deal (to name a few big ones, Italy, Germany, France, Japan, Poland, Russia, Canada)
Click to expand...
If you're totalling over the whole 2 week or so event and over the whole world, then I don't doubt that there are more total viewers for the Winter Games than for the Super Bowl.

However, since the original context in which this came was the cost-benefit ratio for American advertisers buying commercial time during US broadcasts (that's an area where the Super Bowl has a tradition of being a special event with lots of new, expensive, and star studded ads being showwn for the first time) ...... the world outside the US, and totaling over multiple broadcast times wasn't relevent to what I was talking about when I made the original statement that the Super Bowl will have more viewers see any given 30 second (or 60 second) broadcast of a commercial.

Like any sport, the Winter Games draw more viewers in areas where participation in the sport in question is more common. The Winter Games do draw pretty good TV ratings in the northern tier of the US, where we have winter and therefore winter sports. It does much less well in the "Sun Belt", where they don't.



What I don't get though is how winter olympics sports are not real sports .. but rugby under a bunch of padding .. er .. I mean .. football :D .. is .. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
From my POV, it varies with the sport. Any competition where the winner is determined by who a group of judges votes that they thought performed better .... is a specialized dance contest, not a sport.

That applies to such things as figure skating and "hotdog" skiing in the Winter Games ...... and to such things as gymnastics, diving, and synchromized swimming in the Summer Games.

That doesn't mean that I don't think those activities require a great deal of athletic ability. They absolutely do. But so does being a top notch ballet dancer, and that isn't a "sport" either.

So that means that in the Winter Games there are a fair number of things that are "sports" by my personal defintion. Those would include all of the timed races (whether on skis or some sort of sled or other) and ice hockey.
 
Eh, you Europeans are stll pissed that we called football by the same name you call soccer.

Now I'm off to have me some freedom fries...
Click to expand...

Err, you call soccer what is rightly football.

We had the game first. :p
 
Well .. I'll agree with PR on the sports listed, wouldn't say anything with a jury falls out automatically though - it depends on what the jury bases its decisions on. For example, I would never disqualify skijumping as a real sport .. but then, in skijumping, the jury bases its decisions on strict guidelines, not on what "looks nice"

As for (American) football .. I*ve never got why it's called *foot*ball to be honest :D .. you can call it what you want of course, but don't foot kicks play a relatively minor roll in the sport compared to other things, like scoring touchdowns .. which you do with your .. hands? :confused:
 
I assure you every American is aware of how the name of the sport isn't completely logical. Most of us are also aware that some things are not named perfectly. We somehow manage to live with it.

Why do we park in a driveway and drive in a parkway?
 
Any competition where the winner is determined by who a group of judges votes that they thought performed better .... is a specialized dance contest, not a sport.
That applies to such things as figure skating and "hotdog" skiing in the Winter Games ...... and to such things as gymnastics, diving, and synchromized swimming in the Summer Games.
Click to expand...

I can't speak for gymnastics and synchromized swimming, but diving isn't as random as it seems. Each dive combination has a difficulty level as laid out in an established formula and there is an ideal method to execute that particular dive. The activity is so complex that human observers have to "judge" the diver's success since there isn't yet a machine which can handle all the variables. Heck, Wimbledon can't even knock together a machine to make reliable line calls in tennis.

So, I wouldn't classify a sport as only being an activity with an easily measureable result.
:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 104 (members: 0, guests: 104)

Share this page

Back
Top