Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Sunday, February 10, 2013

Startlegram: Rangers pass Cowboys as most popular team in DFW

The Texas Rangers are more popular than the Dallas Cowboys. That doesn’t sound right, does it?

Probably because it isn’t; or at least, the evidence is a single survey showing that, by a single percentage point, more D/FW folks watched a Rangers game last year than a Cowboys game (and remember that the Rangers play ten times as many games). 

I could not find the complete survey results, but basically there are a lot of cities where about as many people see a pro football as a pro baseball game each year.  The one interesting outlier is St. Louis, where evidently 81% of the population saw a Cardinals game last year as opposed to 48% watching the Rams.  Now that’s “more popular.”

BDC Posted: February 10, 2013 at 11:36 AM | 14 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: cardinals, rangers

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. puck Posted: February 10, 2013 at 04:37 PM (#4366673)
Even the few results in the article are interesting. Only 61% of DFW residents have "watched, attended or listened" to a Cowboys game in the past year? Only 65% of Boston (area?) has done the same for a Patriots game? (And 68% for the Sox.) 44% of New Yorkers for the Giants, 46% for the Yankees.

Compared to that, 81% for the Cards really stands out.
   2. TerpNats Posted: February 10, 2013 at 05:08 PM (#4366698)
It wouldn't surprise me if this were true; Cowboys support extends far beyond the Metroplex, compared to that of the Rangers. Many folks in DFW can't stand Jerry Jones or the way he runs his franchise (though they're probably thankful for all the revenue Cowboys Stadium brings in from a variety of events), whereas the Rangers have risen to prominence with a minimum of fuss.
   3. Petunia inquires about ponies Posted: February 10, 2013 at 05:11 PM (#4366703)
We're far from the target demographic here.

My responses would be 100% and 100% for every team in both leagues over the last year.
   4. RMc and the Respective Punishments Posted: February 10, 2013 at 06:19 PM (#4366738)
I love how 49% of San Franciscans follow the you-know-whos.
   5. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 10, 2013 at 08:07 PM (#4366781)
And how 47% of NFL season ticket holders take a tax deduction for their seats.
   6. depletion Posted: February 11, 2013 at 09:00 AM (#4366940)
Groups of people who tend not to watch sports teams: 1) people who work multiple jobs to get enough to eat, 2)people who don't understand English, 3) women.
   7. gef the talking mongoose Posted: February 11, 2013 at 11:10 AM (#4367011)
4) people with lives (a group I hesitate to include myself in, but still).
   8. Swedish Chef Posted: February 11, 2013 at 12:10 PM (#4367072)
2)people who don't understand English

When I'm somewhere where I don't understand the language, sports is usually one of the few things that are watchable on TV (the local music may or may not be in that category).
   9. phredbird Posted: February 11, 2013 at 12:49 PM (#4367101)
anything good that happens for baseball at the expense of football is allright with me.
   10. Greg Pope Posted: February 11, 2013 at 01:03 PM (#4367110)
more D/FW folks watched a Rangers game last year than a Cowboys game (and remember that the Rangers play ten times as many games).


So... which way is the parenthetical spinning this? Since there are 10 times as many games, it is much more likely that a person randomly saw a Rangers game than a Cowboys game, if they didn't go out of their way to watch either. But a single person watching a single game means less to the Rangers than it does to the Cowboys.
   11. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: February 11, 2013 at 01:27 PM (#4367129)
But a single person watching a single game means less to the Rangers than it does to the Cowboys.

Not really. NFL TV revenue is 100% shared. Ratings for the Cowboys mean very, very little to the Cowboys.
   12. spycake Posted: February 11, 2013 at 02:35 PM (#4367165)
But a single person watching a single game means less to the Rangers than it does to the Cowboys.

Not really. NFL TV revenue is 100% shared. Ratings for the Cowboys mean very, very little to the Cowboys.

I don't know that he was referring solely to TV ratings. I'm guessing fan interest in general. Catching one Rangers game out of 162 might mean you are a less avid fan than catching one of 16 Cowboys games, and less inclined to become a bigger fan, buy some merchandise, etc.
   13. Greg Pope Posted: February 11, 2013 at 02:44 PM (#4367174)
Yeah, I meant as a general rule of thumb, there. Like if measuring interest in the sport, the fact that someone watched 1/16th of the schedule should indicate more interest than watching 1/162nd. But again, I'm just kind of trying to figure out what the "remember" part is supposed to indicate. It's certainly easier to "accidentally" watch a Rangers game than a Cowboys game, since there's a ton more of them.
   14. Flynn Posted: February 11, 2013 at 04:47 PM (#4367280)
I think football being on network TV changes that equation somewhat. My mom (who actually likes baseball, but let's use her as a proxy for not a sports viewer) is not accidentally leaving the channel on CSN Bay Area because she never watches it. But she is much likelier to leave the TV on Fox and therefore be sucked into a 31-31 tie in the fourth quarter and I assume watching the end of the game counts as a yes in the poll.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
The Piehole of David Wells
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogMyself, OMNICHATTER, two droids, and no questions asked, for June 26, 2017
(14 - 8:19pm, Jun 26)
Last: AT-AT at bat@AT&T

NewsblogOTP 26 June 2017: Confederations Cup shows how sports media in Russia differs from politics
(1 - 8:19pm, Jun 26)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogDodgers rookie Cody Bellinger has never heard of 'Seinfeld,' teammates hilariously respond
(47 - 8:16pm, Jun 26)
Last: David Nieporent (now, with children)

NewsblogOTP 19 June 2017: Bipartisan baseball: Dems best GOP, give trophy to wounded Scalise
(1275 - 8:14pm, Jun 26)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogCreeping Coachism
(6 - 8:11pm, Jun 26)
Last: Nasty Nate

NewsblogBig Read: You should know Blue Jays prospect Bo Bichette - Sportsnet.ca
(5 - 8:09pm, Jun 26)
Last: Cowboy Popup

NewsblogEverybody wins by pushing the draft back
(11 - 8:08pm, Jun 26)
Last: PASTE does not get put on waivers in August

NewsblogEvery year, players emerge from nowhere to become All-Stars; here are this year’s candidates | The Seattle Times
(35 - 7:33pm, Jun 26)
Last: Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant

NewsblogThe Nationals' bullpen killed a man.
(17 - 7:31pm, Jun 26)
Last: Bote Man

NewsblogOT - March 2017 NBA thread
(7310 - 7:24pm, Jun 26)
Last: madvillain

NewsblogTim Tebow moves up a level, proving Mets only care about one thing
(39 - 6:49pm, Jun 26)
Last: Fadeaway: The Baseball History Podcast

NewsblogIronPigs' Crawford heating up after brief break | MiLB.com News
(5 - 5:52pm, Jun 26)
Last: Fadeaway: The Baseball History Podcast

NewsblogThe Giants chemistry is suffering because a guy they all hated is gone
(18 - 5:39pm, Jun 26)
Last: Jesus Frankenstein

Sox TherapyRed Sox Retire Rich Garces' Number
(16 - 5:35pm, Jun 26)
Last: Petunia inquires about ponies

Sox TherapyJust Keep It Rolling
(27 - 5:14pm, Jun 26)
Last: villageidiom

Page rendered in 0.2075 seconds
47 querie(s) executed