How long have the networks been delaying prime time shows for sports?

[daniel anderson]

How long have the networks been delaying prime time shows for sports like the NFL or even MLB?

[Sport]

Since this: 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidi_Game

[neo_prankster]

4 hours ago, McCarthy said:

Since this: 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidi_Game

 

Is that also the reason for entire nights of programming being preempted?

 

Is it also the reason CBS says "Stay tuned for 60 Minutes after the game except on the west coast"?

[MJWalker45]

20 minutes ago, neo_prankster said:

 

Is that also the reason for entire nights of programming being preempted?

 

Is it also the reason CBS says "Stay tuned for 60 Minutes after the game except on the west coast"?

Exactly. For those not wanting to click on the link, NBC skipped the end of the Raiders vs Jets game to show the TV movie "Heidi". During the time the movie started and the game ended the Raiders went from losing the game to winning it. People on the East Coast called to complain about the game being switched off, some without even knowing the result of the game until it was posted up as an alert during the movie.  

[Sykotyk]

It became the standard to keep the game until the end on the air. The 'except the West Coast' is because 60 Minutes starts at a set time otherwise. And it's 7pm. Just as its planned to air on the east coast, if the game concludes in time.

 

However, I do remember NBC pre-empting an XFL game in 2001. I want to say it was a Las Vegas Outlaws home game somewhere around Week 6 or 7. I think the opponent was Birmingham. I'll have to look. But, the game was running real long, and NBC had gotten fed up with the ratings plummeting (this was before a 1.6 Saturday night rating wasn't considered a dumpster fire by the big networks). So, they announced they'd cut out early. But, the losing team didn't win. And it wasn't a ton of time left from what I can recall. Maybe a minute or two.

 

Strangely, even though NBC was done with XFL, UPN loved it, and wanted it for Season 2. And to be the primary broadcaster. But, they tried to leverage moving SmackDown from 2 hours to 1.5 hours so they could have a high-viewership lead-in for a 30 minute program of their own. WWFE (I believe they still were at the time) balked at it. So, that did in the XFL.

[daniel anderson]

2 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

It became the standard to keep the game until the end on the air. The 'except the West Coast' is because 60 Minutes starts at a set time otherwise. And it's 7pm. Just as its planned to air on the east coast, if the game concludes in time.

 

However, I do remember NBC pre-empting an XFL game in 2001. I want to say it was a Las Vegas Outlaws home game somewhere around Week 6 or 7. I think the opponent was Birmingham. I'll have to look. But, the game was running real long, and NBC had gotten fed up with the ratings plummeting (this was before a 1.6 Saturday night rating wasn't considered a dumpster fire by the big networks). So, they announced they'd cut out early. But, the losing team didn't win. And it wasn't a ton of time left from what I can recall. Maybe a minute or two.

 

Strangely, even though NBC was done with XFL, UPN loved it, and wanted it for Season 2. And to be the primary broadcaster. But, they tried to leverage moving SmackDown from 2 hours to 1.5 hours so they could have a high-viewership lead-in for a 30 minute program of their own. WWFE (I believe they still were at the time) balked at it. So, that did in the XFL.

NBC has delayed SNL for the NHL but the NHL is more popular than the XFL.

[daniel anderson]

I was thinking a few years ago when ABC had the TCU-Baylor football game running way over into the NASCAR race in Charlotte. They missed the start of the race, but it could have been worse.

[dfwabel]

10 minutes ago, daniel anderson said:

I was thinking a few years ago when ABC had the TCU-Baylor football game running way over into the NASCAR race in Charlotte. They missed the start of the race, but it could have been worse.

ESPN has a policy not to leave a live event while in action (game or race) from their beginning. After the Disney takeover, that ESPN/ABC policy has basically remained. NCAA games which go to OT stay until completion and then start of the following game must wait or goes to another channel.

 

The fact that there is now a digital option lessens the amount of those who are displaced.

[daniel anderson]

On 6/24/2016 at 10:49 PM, Sykotyk said:

It became the standard to keep the game until the end on the air. The 'except the West Coast' is because 60 Minutes starts at a set time otherwise. And it's 7pm. Just as its planned to air on the east coast, if the game concludes in time.

 

However, I do remember NBC pre-empting an XFL game in 2001. I want to say it was a Las Vegas Outlaws home game somewhere around Week 6 or 7. I think the opponent was Birmingham. I'll have to look. But, the game was running real long, and NBC had gotten fed up with the ratings plummeting (this was before a 1.6 Saturday night rating wasn't considered a dumpster fire by the big networks). So, they announced they'd cut out early. But, the losing team didn't win. And it wasn't a ton of time left from what I can recall. Maybe a minute or two.

 

Strangely, even though NBC was done with XFL, UPN loved it, and wanted it for Season 2. And to be the primary broadcaster. But, they tried to leverage moving SmackDown from 2 hours to 1.5 hours so they could have a high-viewership lead-in for a 30 minute program of their own. WWFE (I believe they still were at the time) balked at it. So, that did in the XFL.

Your right, its the standard to keep the game until the end on the air. There are some exceptions like ABC switching a NASCAR race to ESPN2 for America's Funniest Home Videos and NBC switching a NHL game to NBCSN for the Preakness, but those are far and few between. In fact, the same night as the NASCAR race i mentioned, CBS stuck with the Chiefs-Chargers game in San Diego, delaying 60 Minutes.

[Sykotyk]

On 6/25/2016 at 1:11 AM, daniel anderson said:

NBC has delayed SNL for the NHL but the NHL is more popular than the XFL.

Actually, the lowest 1.5 rating for XFL was 0.1 behind the lowest NHL rating. So, not exactly that much more popular. It's just NBC was part owner of the XFL, so at worst, they'd only piss off half of themselves by cutting the end of the game.

 

On 6/25/2016 at 3:26 AM, daniel anderson said:

Your right, its the standard to keep the game until the end on the air. There are some exceptions like ABC switching a NASCAR race to ESPN2 for America's Funniest Home Videos and NBC switching a NHL game to NBCSN for the Preakness, but those are far and few between. In fact, the same night as the NASCAR race i mentioned, CBS stuck with the Chiefs-Chargers game in San Diego, delaying 60 Minutes.

 

Bumping games to another network is entirely different than switching the programming from the game to another program. In fact, now for a lot of networks, it's common to bump the start of games to other networks if another event is running late. However, it's still extremely rare for the end of a game to be bumped to another channel after starting on it's originally intended station.

 

I remember ABC had the MLS All-Star Game years ago, I believe in DC at RFK, and a storm postponed about 30 minutes in the first half. When they came back from the break, or halftime, they announced they'd be switching coverage to ESPN because of just how long the delay took (a soccer friendly almost never goes beyond it's 2-hr window since there's no overtime or shootout in most cases). But, that was also a non-competitive game, in a sense. Not regular season or post-season.

[Gothamite]

9 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

Actually, the lowest 1.5 rating for XFL was 0.1 behind the lowest NHL rating. So, not exactly that much more popular. 

 

Yeah, but you can't just compare the two outliers.  You have to look at averages, and the average viewership for the XFL was pathetic.  Started strong, sank like a stone.

[Sykotyk]

On 6/27/2016 at 10:40 AM, Gothamite said:

 

Yeah, but you can't just compare the two outliers.  You have to look at averages, and the average viewership for the XFL was pathetic.  Started strong, sank like a stone.

The XFL ratings started out great. Though they 'sank', they petered out over a few weeks before reaching the lower levels.

 

Regular season hockey, at the same time?...

 

99-00 4 games, 1.3 average

00-01 5 games, 1.1 average

01-02 5 games, 1.4 average

02-03 5 games, 1.1 average

03-04 5 games, 1.1 average

 

That was the last year on ABC for the NHL. After that, it moved on to the OLN (with the year off), Versus, and then NBC/NBCSN.

 

Meanwhile, these were NBC's XFL numbers:

 

9.5

4.6

3.1

2.6

2.4

2.4

1.6

1.8

N/A

1.5

1.5

 

The playoffs were 1.8 and title game 2.1.

 

This year's Stanley Cup Final averaged 2.3 for primetime every game on NBC. The problem is, network television doesn't consider a 2.1 or 2.3 'good' for primetime. Cable networks not named ESPN or AMC would drool like mental patients if they could get a 2.3 rating for three hours on a Tuesday night.

 

Truth is, NHL is leveraged by the fact that it's been a longstanding sport that ABC and NBC have to swallow in order for them to have a litany of games to air on their cable network (ESPN and NBCSN respectively). If it weren't for the contract being all-included, there's no way NHL would ever see network television. But, it's a small pill to swallow when you can get many games a week that garner 'decent cable ratings' throughout the week.

[OnWis97]

I have been subject to some regional-coverage shenanigans.

 

In 1994, I was waiting out a Georgetown NCAA tourney game in my dorm in Madison so I could catch the end of Minnesota/Louisville (a much closer game).  I accepted that Georgetown (and their easy win dragged out by fouls and time-outs) was the "feature" game.  When it finally ended, they cut to studio, which said "Minnesota/Louisville is still being played; unfortunately we cannot bring that to you; we are going to bring you to 60 Minutes."  I was irate...I know it's not quite the same thing, as that game was never really "on."  But that and the two-hour Oprah/News break really contributed to my distaste for CBS's "exclusive coverage."  In those days, that was it.  There was no way to find it on the Internet.  They were not moving it to some other channel.  So, as I said, it's not quite the same thing.  Now with the four-network coverage, cable subscribers are not going to run into this kinda thing.  But this showed that "regular programming" is preferred by more viewers and the network really wants to get to their schedule.  In a Big-Ten town, they really should have gone to that game.

 

A more egregious example was, I think, 2003...I was l watching a nail-biter between Wisconsin and Ohio State.  In the 4th, it went to commercial.  It came back to USC beating the snot out of someone.  It was ABC's regional SAT afternoon game.  Then when that game ended, they went to local news.  In this case, I'd invested a few hours into watching this game and then they changed games simply to get to the one that would end faster (at least I assume that's why; it's gotta be).  Someone found an end-around to showing the full game.  It's the only time I've ever called a TV station...the person on the other end claimed it was ABC that did that.  I've always kinda suspected it was a local affiliate decision because it was the local news that came on next and given that plenty of viewers (I assume, at least in Ohio and Wisconsin) were going to see the game thorough to the end, I don't think ABC would want to do that.  I think I've brought it up on this board and I actually think some of you in the field suggested that it probably was ABC.  That seems counter-intuitive.  I know this is not quite the same thing either, but I was totally "Heidi-ed" (except that that Wisconsin held its lead and won the game).

 

As unfair as it would be to lower-income folks that cannot afford cable, I'd almost prefer networks never show sports.  It's just not a high enough priority.  Barring the Super Bowl or something.

[daniel anderson]

7 hours ago, OnWis97 said:

I have been subject to some regional-coverage shenanigans.

 

In 1994, I was waiting out a Georgetown NCAA tourney game in my dorm in Madison so I could catch the end of Minnesota/Louisville (a much closer game).  I accepted that Georgetown (and their easy win dragged out by fouls and time-outs) was the "feature" game.  When it finally ended, they cut to studio, which said "Minnesota/Louisville is still being played; unfortunately we cannot bring that to you; we are going to bring you to 60 Minutes."  I was irate...I know it's not quite the same thing, as that game was never really "on."  But that and the two-hour Oprah/News break really contributed to my distaste for CBS's "exclusive coverage."  In those days, that was it.  There was no way to find it on the Internet.  They were not moving it to some other channel.  So, as I said, it's not quite the same thing.  Now with the four-network coverage, cable subscribers are not going to run into this kinda thing.  But this showed that "regular programming" is preferred by more viewers and the network really wants to get to their schedule.  In a Big-Ten town, they really should have gone to that game.

 

A more egregious example was, I think, 2003...I was l watching a nail-biter between Wisconsin and Ohio State.  In the 4th, it went to commercial.  It came back to USC beating the snot out of someone.  It was ABC's regional SAT afternoon game.  Then when that game ended, they went to local news.  In this case, I'd invested a few hours into watching this game and then they changed games simply to get to the one that would end faster (at least I assume that's why; it's gotta be).  Someone found an end-around to showing the full game.  It's the only time I've ever called a TV station...the person on the other end claimed it was ABC that did that.  I've always kinda suspected it was a local affiliate decision because it was the local news that came on next and given that plenty of viewers (I assume, at least in Ohio and Wisconsin) were going to see the game thorough to the end, I don't think ABC would want to do that.  I think I've brought it up on this board and I actually think some of you in the field suggested that it probably was ABC.  That seems counter-intuitive.  I know this is not quite the same thing either, but I was totally "Heidi-ed" (except that that Wisconsin held its lead and won the game).

 

As unfair as it would be to lower-income folks that cannot afford cable, I'd almost prefer networks never show sports.  It's just not a high enough priority.  Barring the Super Bowl or something.

it wasn't a regional coverage issue but it was a incident that my parents got mad about CBS switching to a game they should have NOT done so...  in 1986 we were watching the Falcons Dolphins game. when that game ended rather than go to 60 Minutes, they switched to the Raiders Eagles game. needless to say, that game ran really long...it lasted 3 hours and 54 minutes. In your case they said they had to show 60 Minutes but they could have waited till the Louisville Minnesota game was over to start 60 Minutes. in my case, my parents were bitching about the "stupid football"  cutting into their show and in your case you got mad they didn't delay 60 Minutes to finish a game that would have kept the whole network on the same page.(wouldn't make sense for CBS to have the whole network join the Louisville game so that they were on the same time schedule?) Ironically, a few months before the Louisville game you mentioned, CBS switched to a Giants/Cardinals game in Phoenix and it made my parents mad because they wanted to watch the Waltons Thanksgiving reunion movie and the game delayed the entire schedule so the movie started at 9:30 and ended at 11:30

[greyraven8]

Heidi game was before my time.

 

I do remember the end of Dave Hodge's tenure at CBC - with the Hockey Night in Canada pen flip incident.

http://classicshowbiz.blogspot.com/2011/05/hockey-night-in-canada-1986.html

[daniel anderson]

haha Dave Hodge got mad that the CBC would switch to the news in the middle of the curling match. Well the next thing that happened was that they got into the same problem with the Habs/Flyers game in Montreal the same night. i know, it was CBC policy but at some point they had to change the rules to make sure a sporting event ended before the news started. Even viewers lit up switchboards at CBC stations across the country as well as at the network's Toronto headquarters the next Monday. So CBC changed their policy so that the news would not start until a game was over.

[daniel anderson]

On the flip side, i've seen ESPN stay with a Busch race into CFB and even the Breeders Cup when they had the rights  too. One time, because they had three NBA Playoff games at the same night, the Busch race had to air on ESPN Classic. FOX usually doesn't have issues with NASCAR, i've seen them stay with not just the Sprint Cup races, but they even stayed with a few Busch races into prime time.

I know that for the most part the local news is delayed until a game is over...I remember a US Open match between Jimmy Connors  and  Aaron Krickstein that lasted long enough, it wiped out boith the local and network news. Those tennis matches can last a long time sometimes.

[The SHOW]

I remember back in 99 the MLS All Star game in San Diego on ABC was preempted cause of the disappearing of JFK Jr

[daniel anderson]

Has a network delayed the Emmys for the NFL or NASCAR or even Golf? i've seen CBS hand off a Golf event to The Golf Channel for the Grammys, but have they delayed the Emmys?

[daniel anderson]

ESPN has switched NASCAR  to ESPN2 for Sunday Night Baseball if there is a rain delay in the past. one time though, they did preempt SNB to finish a race.