They're lucky to still have sports events that capture that much audience these days.

It's a moot point regardless - another week of 3AM EST events and then we're not back in that part of that world until 2032 Melbourne, which should be three hours ahead of Beijing if Australia is observing DST at the time of the Games. Looking forward to LA 2028 and wherever 2030 ends up in this hemisphere.:)

Adam Seaborn @AHBSeaborn:

I thought it was going to be down a lot more since both teams don't have a huge following in Canada, plus there was no Mahomes or Brady.

What would be the ultimate Superbowl Matchup to attract the most Canadian viewers?
Would it be Seahawks vs Patriots/Bills? Just thinking of proximity to Canada. I've not lived in Ontario but I know on the West and East coasts the Seahawks and Patriots are top teams.

Probably Seahawks/Patriots, definitely would have been the case when Brady was with the Pats. Bills and Packers would also move the needle a bit. A lot of it comes down to major stars, whether it's Brady or Mahomes or whomever.

I think there are more broncos Vikings and packers fans in Western Canada then there is for the Seahawks

Speaking just for Quebec, big name NFL stars don't move the needle much in terms of ratings here, and neither do the big legacy teams.

But Laurent Duvernay-Tardif gave the Super Bowl a 30-50% ratings boost when he played in it, and he wasn't even scoring touchdowns or in a starring role.

So I suspect if you had Québécois player like, say, Antony Auclair playing a more visible role in the game, that is what would send the ratings through the roof.

Good game but wasn’t a marquee matchup this year.

Not sure what would be the ideal matchup for ratings here.
I think regional border following make the Bills, Seahawks, Packers and Vikings popular. Patriots, Cowboys and Steelers have a good following as well.
Then if you get star players like Mahomes involved, that moves the needle as well.

I got a glimpse at Canadian TV ratings from last weekend, courtesy of Adam Seaborn.

Interesting to see two matches played by the Canadian team at the women's world curling championships got 370k and 201k viewers, and that NCAA March Madness only got 174k.

And yet all of the marketing, promotion and attention on Canadian sports media is on NCAA (in a huge way) with almost nothing about curling.

Also, there was a shitstorm of sorts on social media targeting TSN for covering the curling and *not enough* NCAA March Madness. (I believe they have 1 TSN channel dedicated to MM but it's still enough because there are soooooooooo many important matchups that aren't being covered, and no one cares about curling WTF... :slob:)

I didn't watch either, but yes please to women's curling, especially over basketball lol.

I suppose it does make sense, to market the property with fewer viewers to try to build it up, and the one with lots of viewers doesn't need so much effort to attract more.

I sure wish they'd choose other things to build up though.

"Canada's Sports Leader" my ass.:hell:

I think there are a few factors at play here.

NCAA basketball is more of a key-in-hand product for TSN. They don't need to produce anything. They just pay the US networks and flick a switch. They don't change anything in the broadcasts except the commercial breaks.

Curling costs TSN more money to produce. This year the championships are in Prince George BC I think so pretty sure TSN needs camera crews and other technicians, plus of course the broadcast teams. Even when it's abroad if they get the live feed from the locals they still need their hosts and often some technical work too to add graphics, etc. for a Canadian audience.

Of course there is also the fact that if you think of who works at TSN they're probably all way more turned on by NCAA March Madness than women's curling. This plays into it as well.

It's still weird to have Canadians viciously bitching on Twitter and Facebook about a Canadian sports network showing a national team in world championship in one of our popular domestic sports, instead of a tournament with all of its teams in another country. (Yes, I know a number of Canadians are playing in the NCAA.)

If you sit on Twitter long enough you can find just about anyone bitching about anything. I wouldn't use it as much of an indicator of anything, really.

Such as? We're in Year One of CHL on TSN and numbers haven't been great - 53K last night for the CHL Top Prospects Game from Kitchener.

Demographics may play a factor here too.

Do we know what the average demographic is for curling compared to NCAA?

174k of a younger demographic would be worth more than twice the audience of an older demographic.
Don't know if that's the case here, but I suspect curling would skew older.

Canadian University Football, mostly. CHL is another good idea although I don't really watch hockey. CPL soccer (I know they don't have the rights), CEBL basketball, etc. Anything Canadian, basically.

Low numbers as an argument is a bit of a catch22 - were there low numbers due to ineffective promotion, or was there low effort in promotion due to low previously low numbers?

It would take a years of concerted effort to build hype around such things, but they did it with the World Juniors, which I understand is nowhere near as popular in any other country.

I know the reasons they don't, that bought-in US content is cheap and easy, etc. Doesn't mean I like it, or don't think they should do more.

Sports really is the perfect microcosm of much of Canadian society - even though we could have perfectly good things of our own, people are happier to ride the coattails of the Americans doing the same thing bigger and better. :shrug:

Then again, I still wouldn't watch anything besides football and rugby, so listening to me is probably a bad idea. I just get tired of non-stop US hype. I get tired of non-stop NHL and Jays/Raptors hype too, overall it would just be nice if there was a much more varied palette of hype.

You hit the nail on the head.

In terms of building for the future, I understand that.

But is it really true that younger audiences are more lucrative right now to advertisers than older ones? I suppose it depends on the products and services you're selling, but it seems to me that many basketball fans in Canada (assuming they're younger) are teens and university student types.

Most people I know in their 50s and 60s have more money and disposable income than people aged 16-30.

Our sports media have been trying their best to get me (and all Canadian sports fans) turned on to NCAA March Madness since I was in university over 25 years ago.

Since then they have considerably reduced their coverage (not just live games, but sportscasts especially) of the CHL.

Used to be there was a package of CHL playoff game highlights and when the Memorial Cup was on there would be pretty intensive coverage on sportscasts too.

Now out of the major networks I feel only RDS really gives decent live game, sportscast and magazine show coverage to the CHL.

The key demographic and most valuable is 18-34 for TV advertisers because most television ads are targeted to this age range.
I assume the average curling viewer is in their late 40s or older.

And there are plenty of NCAA basketball/football viewers in their 30s - it's not just university students.

And yet some people tell us younger people do not watch TV any more.