c9777666
Registered User
- Aug 31, 2016
- 19,892
- 5,875
I dunno, wasn't this the lowest rated Super Bowl in years despite a team from LA being in it? I think there's definitely fatigue setting in for the Patriots. This Super Bowl ultimately meant nothing for Brady or Belichick's legacy, they're already at the top.
NFL seems to be a finely tuned machine though, I don't think one team dominating means all that much.
I can't recall right off the top of my head but wasn't either the Pats/Falcons Super Bowl or last year's Pats/Eagles Super Bowl insanely high from a ratings standpoint? Like it or not, I think the Patriots are a draw.
A huge problem with the SB ratings was tied in with the other side. The Rams don’t exactly have a clear cut fanbase, the NFC CG controversy led to New Orleans basically boycotting, and it was such a 180 from last year when you got a team with an undeniably rabid fanbase (Eagles) that had been starving for a title
If the SB was Brady/Brees, I can guarantee the ratings would not have declined.
It was simply the imperfect storm of bad timing- a team with a lukewarm fanbase getting to the SB in shaky fashion against a team whose fans know nothing but winning at the expense of a starving fanbase (Chiefs) with a QB everyone wanted to see (Mahomes)
The Pats ARE a draw, but the LA Rams..... well, the other 5 NFC playoff teams would have probably brought more to the table.
Seattle, Chicago, Saints, Dallas, Philly: let’s just say that it wouldn’t have felt like Gillette Stadium South had any of them made the SB
Last edited: