<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: October Ratings Dip Without Yanks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://waswatching.com/2008/10/10/october-ratings-dip-without-yanks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://waswatching.com/2008/10/10/october-ratings-dip-without-yanks/</link>
	<description>Laconic Commentary From A Yankeeland Zealot</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:50:57 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: butchie22</title>
		<link>http://waswatching.com/2008/10/10/october-ratings-dip-without-yanks/comment-page-1/#comment-49538</link>
		<dc:creator>butchie22</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 17:12:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://waswatching.com/?p=7908#comment-49538</guid>
		<description>Right now the biggest pull would have been the Cubsters. Forget about Red Sox/Cubs Fox would take the AAA Mudhens against the Cubs. ANYONE against them. That story is the most annoying of the curses,more than the Black Sox scandal or the curse of the Bambino. I was very happy the Palehose actually won one back in 2005 because I was sick and tired of the Cubbies whining all the time.

Look YES ratings being down 10 percent for the games  is what from a 3.5 to 3.1? That is a damn good rating in the New York market BUT as I always intimate those million dollar seats and the TV ratings will bomb if the team is not competing. This is not Boston or Podunk Iowa, there are choices. That being said the Yanks still carry some juice as &quot;America&#039;s Team&quot; but they haven&#039;t won lately so who cares?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="comment-toolbar" style="text-align: right"><input type="button" value="Reply" onclick="CF_Reply('butchie22');" /><input type="button" value="Quote" onclick="CF_Quote('co_49538','butchie22');" /></div><span id="co_49538"><p>Right now the biggest pull would have been the Cubsters. Forget about Red Sox/Cubs Fox would take the AAA Mudhens against the Cubs. ANYONE against them. That story is the most annoying of the curses,more than the Black Sox scandal or the curse of the Bambino. I was very happy the Palehose actually won one back in 2005 because I was sick and tired of the Cubbies whining all the time.</p>
<p>Look YES ratings being down 10 percent for the games  is what from a 3.5 to 3.1? That is a damn good rating in the New York market BUT as I always intimate those million dollar seats and the TV ratings will bomb if the team is not competing. This is not Boston or Podunk Iowa, there are choices. That being said the Yanks still carry some juice as &#8220;America&#8217;s Team&#8221; but they haven&#8217;t won lately so who cares?</p>
</span>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: OnceIWasAYankeeFan</title>
		<link>http://waswatching.com/2008/10/10/october-ratings-dip-without-yanks/comment-page-1/#comment-49393</link>
		<dc:creator>OnceIWasAYankeeFan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 04:34:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://waswatching.com/?p=7908#comment-49393</guid>
		<description>The NYT sports business columnist reported it this week.  YES ratings were down 10%.  And yes, I know its apples and oranges, but its still amusing that a team that couldn&#039;t get its own fans excited enough to watch in the same numbers as last year is now being blamed for declining numbers in the post-season.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="comment-toolbar" style="text-align: right"><input type="button" value="Reply" onclick="CF_Reply('OnceIWasAYankeeFan');" /><input type="button" value="Quote" onclick="CF_Quote('co_49393','OnceIWasAYankeeFan');" /></div><span id="co_49393"><p>The NYT sports business columnist reported it this week.  YES ratings were down 10%.  And yes, I know its apples and oranges, but its still amusing that a team that couldn&#8217;t get its own fans excited enough to watch in the same numbers as last year is now being blamed for declining numbers in the post-season.</p>
</span>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: butchie22</title>
		<link>http://waswatching.com/2008/10/10/october-ratings-dip-without-yanks/comment-page-1/#comment-49325</link>
		<dc:creator>butchie22</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 21:27:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://waswatching.com/?p=7908#comment-49325</guid>
		<description>Mike Kay always harps that the Yankee World Series games weren&#039;t as highly rated as the most recent ones( with the exception of the Stros/Palehose WS in 2005). The Yankees bring some juice to the playoffs but sadly don&#039;t have the pull of the Red Pox or the Unlovable Crappy and loathsome Cubsters and their happydick fans.

Once I was, that is a question of apples and oranges. I don&#039;t know that YES rating went down 10 percent . Secondly, national ratings are a different kettle of fish. The Yanks not being in the playoffs takes juice away from the playoffs BUT they still are not the draw this writer makes them out to be. They were the Evil Empire not too long ago. Now there is a new one up in Beantown and they are (for the time being) a bigger draw. That goes with the territory, when a team wins and has two chamiponships in 4 years you have that juice. Sadly enough, the Yanks are becoming a lumbering, overpaid underdog! Their status is not what it was in the days before 2004.........</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="comment-toolbar" style="text-align: right"><input type="button" value="Reply" onclick="CF_Reply('butchie22');" /><input type="button" value="Quote" onclick="CF_Quote('co_49325','butchie22');" /></div><span id="co_49325"><p>Mike Kay always harps that the Yankee World Series games weren&#8217;t as highly rated as the most recent ones( with the exception of the Stros/Palehose WS in 2005). The Yankees bring some juice to the playoffs but sadly don&#8217;t have the pull of the Red Pox or the Unlovable Crappy and loathsome Cubsters and their happydick fans.</p>
<p>Once I was, that is a question of apples and oranges. I don&#8217;t know that YES rating went down 10 percent . Secondly, national ratings are a different kettle of fish. The Yanks not being in the playoffs takes juice away from the playoffs BUT they still are not the draw this writer makes them out to be. They were the Evil Empire not too long ago. Now there is a new one up in Beantown and they are (for the time being) a bigger draw. That goes with the territory, when a team wins and has two chamiponships in 4 years you have that juice. Sadly enough, the Yanks are becoming a lumbering, overpaid underdog! Their status is not what it was in the days before 2004&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;</p>
</span>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MJ</title>
		<link>http://waswatching.com/2008/10/10/october-ratings-dip-without-yanks/comment-page-1/#comment-49198</link>
		<dc:creator>MJ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:42:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://waswatching.com/?p=7908#comment-49198</guid>
		<description>That’s pretty funny - the *absence* of the Yankees has reduced the post-season ratings, yet the *presence* of these same Yankees on YES managed to reduce their ratings by 10%.
------------------
You realize how the two are different, right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="comment-toolbar" style="text-align: right"><input type="button" value="Reply" onclick="CF_Reply('MJ');" /><input type="button" value="Quote" onclick="CF_Quote('co_49198','MJ');" /></div><span id="co_49198"><p>That’s pretty funny &#8211; the *absence* of the Yankees has reduced the post-season ratings, yet the *presence* of these same Yankees on YES managed to reduce their ratings by 10%.<br />
&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<br />
You realize how the two are different, right?</p>
</span>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: OnceIWasAYankeeFan</title>
		<link>http://waswatching.com/2008/10/10/october-ratings-dip-without-yanks/comment-page-1/#comment-49176</link>
		<dc:creator>OnceIWasAYankeeFan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:54:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://waswatching.com/?p=7908#comment-49176</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s pretty funny - the *absence* of the Yankees has reduced the post-season ratings, yet the *presence* of these same Yankees on YES managed to reduce their ratings by 10%.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="comment-toolbar" style="text-align: right"><input type="button" value="Reply" onclick="CF_Reply('OnceIWasAYankeeFan');" /><input type="button" value="Quote" onclick="CF_Quote('co_49176','OnceIWasAYankeeFan');" /></div><span id="co_49176"><p>That&#8217;s pretty funny &#8211; the *absence* of the Yankees has reduced the post-season ratings, yet the *presence* of these same Yankees on YES managed to reduce their ratings by 10%.</p>
</span>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
