However, I think that figure is an egregious load of bullcrap and I for one am not stupid enough to accept it. There are 307 million people in the country. Are we really supposed to believe that 196 million Americans did NOT watch the Super Bowl? Think about it. How many people do you know that didn't watch the game? I can't think of a single person. Even people who abhor football show up at Super Bowl parties for the food. Not to mention the commercials.
I think the people who determine TV ratings should be fired. Every single one of them. They are obviously doing a terrible job. They are obviously lazy and aren't striving for accuracy. How do they know how many people showed up at my parent's house for the Super Bowl party? It started as just 6, but it became 12. Do they know about the two children who were there? I mean, Jack sat in front of the TV, clapped a couple times and wore a Steelers onesie while eating pretzels. What else do he have to do to be counted? I mean he probably watched the game in a more intelligent manner than 99% of Steelers fans.
The whole thing is absurd. It really bothers me. Who do they think they're fooling, saying that 196 million Americans didn't watch the Super Bowl? That's completely asinine, and I have a solution: they need to hire me to come up with a better guess. I'll be the official Super Bowl Ratings Vice Counselor. Here's my guess: 250 million Americans watched at least 1 hour of the Super Bowl. That guess is based on nothing in particular and I came up with that guess in less than 3 seconds. But I would bet my life and all my possessions that my guess is closer than the nonsense coming from the so-called experts.
The problem is that they are counting how many TVs are tuned in to the station. For something like Seinfeld, that makes sense. But the Super Bowl is a party event. How many people are watching the average TV set? Are they counting bars and restaurants? What about church parties? When I was in college, two-hundred students would gather in the lounge and watch the game. And I went to a small college. The 111 million figure makes about as much sense as saying 20% of Americans celebrate Christmas each year, because that's how many Christmas trees are purchased. Give me a freaking break.
2) On a more positive note, Celtics guard Ray Allen is going to break one of the NBA's most impressive records on Thursday night. He made his 2,559th three-pointer on Monday against Charlotte, putting him just one behind Reggie Miller for the all-time mark. That's an average of 2.4 threes per game over the course of 1,073 games and 15 seasons. Allen made 41% of them as a member of the Milwaukee Bucks, 34% with the Sonics, and 25% with the Celtics. Fans across America, not just in Boston, will be celebrating Allen's accomplishment.
When Ray breaks the record on Thursday, it will be with 60 less attempts than Reggie Miller, and it will mean he has 813 more threes than the next active player (Jason Kidd). So, all Kidd needs to do is play another 6 seasons. The problem is, he's 37. Allen's only 35.
By the time he's done, Ray might have 600 more threes than Miller and be completely uncatchable. But let's not go there yet. Let's talk about the significance of Thursday's game. First off, it's the NBA's best rivalry, Celtics vs. Lakers, in the NBA's best stadium, the Boston Garden. My contention is that Allen could have broken the record in Charlotte, but purposely chose to wait until this very game. He went 2 for 2 from behind the line in the first half against the Bobcats, and didn't take another three for the rest of the night, despite being on the court in a close game which they ended up losing.
Allen wants to break this record in front of his own fans, the NBA's best fans, in Boston. And he wants to do it while being guarded by the greatest active player, five-time champion Kobe Bryant. The historic scope of breaking this record goes from an 8.3 to a 9.7 just because of the setting.
Only one problem: Kobe is a pretty good defender.
3) Speaking of impressive NBA records, the Cleveland Cavaliers lost on Monday for the 25th consecutive time. That my friends, is the worst losing streak in pro basketball, ever. Which makes me feel like a prophet, because last spring, after the Celtics beat up the Cavs in the playoffs and LeBron essentially quit, I wrote:
"No question about it, Cavs-Celtics 2010 is going to go down as the worst thing that ever happened to Cleveland sports."
Without LeBron, Cleveland started the season with a little oomph, trying to beat the odds, and was 7-9 through November. Then came a 10 game losing streak. Then a single win, 109-102 in overtime, against the Knicks. Then 25 straight loses. Remarkably, the Cavs would be on a THIRTY-SIX game losing streak if Amare Stoudemire's 12-footer as regulation expired would have gone in n December 18th.
During this current losing streak, Cleveland lost leading scorer Mo Williams to a two-month injury. Defensive stalwart Anderson Varejao is already lost for the year. Lately, third-year scrub Ramon Sessions is leading the team in minutes as well as scoring. (he's also averaging 20 points and 10 assists for my fantasy team!)
With an 8-game home stretch and games against Detroit and Washington coming up, Cleveland will break the streak sometime in February. They'll probably get Williams back soon and finish the season with at least 15 wins. Hopefully they'll get a top 3 pick and start rebuilding sooner than later.
But as for Cavs' owner Dan Gilbert and his "guarantee" after the Decision (If you don't remember, he promised that Cleveland would win a title before Miami) ... well I think Abraham Lincoln said it best:
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.
That's all I have for today. February is notoriously the worst sports month of the year. Good thing I'm going to Mexico in 2 weeks. Go Lions!