Picking on the NY Times again...

Does anyone -- even the columnist -- ever read this stuff before going to press? From yesterday's ad column:

Madison Avenue may be rethinking a common belief about advertising on the Super Bowl — avoid buying spots that will run in the fourth quarter, for fear of blowouts — after the second championship in a row was decided in the final moments of play.

Never mind the fact that the article contains not a single fact or quote to back up this assertion.  Let's put it to the test of common sense:  If advertisers fear "blowouts" that diminish audience levels by the fourth quarter -- and given the price of airtime, why shouldn't they be wary of not getting the biggest bang for their bucks -- in what way are two consecutive close games at all predictive of future outcomes?  

Or let me put it this way.  If the "common belief" is to avoid buying fourth-quarter spots, does the columnist really mean to imply that the common belief may change to that of buying fourth-quarter spots because the audiences will be reliably as large?  Does that really make sense? 

 Of course, if you're wasting your ad dollars on a venue as persuasion-free as the Super Bowl has become, maybe you don't care that much about money.