SI. - Cavs making things so unpleasant to watch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da_suns_fan__

Oh i see...so the ratings system is completely screwed up, right?

The Spurs truly are a draw, its just the system for measuring that is bad.

Funny that these numbers are always significantly higher when the Spurs aren't around. Why is that?

Thats the dumbest excuse I've ever heard. Even if they only factor one out of seven houses, that doesn't negate the fact that the Spurs draw much less viewership from this sample than when they're not in the finals.

---

Here are some questions for you then:

Can you name even one person that you have ever even HEARD of that has a Nielsen's box in there house?

Also, since the NBA is for the most part an African-American sport, minus the white Eurotrash that has invaded, do you honestly believe that the demographic that the NBA largely markets to in this country would be represented by said rating system? With boxes in every ghetto household? There isn't one in my ghetto mansion.

Also, I'm guessing that the people that actually do have these boxes in their homes largely consist of those that can't wait to find out what happens on Grey's Anatomy next week. Or they are people who cheer for teams with players that leave their bench during altercations. Prolly not sports fans in general.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da_suns_fan__

Did u just miss that foxsports.com article I just posted (scroll up).

Thats from TODAY, pal!

---

AVERAGE NBA FAN

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The_Iceman_Cometh

Here are some questions for you then:

Can you name even one person that you have ever even HEARD of that has a Nielsen's box in there house?

Also, since the NBA is for the most part an African-American sport, minus the white Eurotrash that has invaded, do you honestly believe that the demographic that the NBA largely markets to in this country would be represented by said rating system? With boxes in every ghetto household? There isn't one in my ghetto mansion.

Also, I'm guessing that the people that actually do have these boxes in their homes largely consist of those that can't wait to find out what happens on Grey's Anatomy next week. Or they are people who cheer for teams with players that leave their bench during altercations. Prolly not sports fans in general.

---

Again, this doesn't negate the fact that WHEREVER these boxes are, more people watch the finals when the Spurs aren't in it. This is undeniable fact:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...ielsen_ratings

Youre "rating system doesn't work for the NBA (as a whole)" argument doesn't explain why the Spurs get a lesser rating than when other teams are in it.

Its really sad youve come up with silly theory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hater

AVERAGE NBA FAN

---

Eh..the AVERAGE NBA FAN isn't watching the NBA finals.

I think they care.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da_suns_fan__

Again, this doesn't negate the fact that WHEREVER these boxes are, more people watch the finals when the Spurs aren't in it. This is undeniable fact:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...ielsen_ratings

Youre "rating system doesn't work for the NBA (as a whole)" argument doesn't explain why the Spurs get a lesser rating than when other teams are in it.

Its really sad youve come up with silly theory.

---

How is your John Paxson/Robert Horry buzz?

Look, back to my original post. I don't really care. It doesn't bother me that the Spurs are boring to you or the rest of the country. I was simply proffering up a viable hypothesis that the ratings system is given too much credence.

The Spurs have won it, the Suns have not. I am truly sorry that your Suns' are just one "Doug Christie's-wife-figure" away from being the Kings and your window is closing but if you cannot get the gist of my argument then i am :bang .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da_suns_fan__

Oh i see...so the ratings system is completely screwed up, right?

The Spurs truly are a draw, its just the system for measuring that is bad.

Funny that these numbers are always significantly higher when the Spurs aren't around. Why is that?

Thats the dumbest excuse I've ever heard. Even if they only factor one out of seven houses, that doesn't negate the fact that the Spurs draw much less viewership from this sample than when they're not in the finals.

---

So who gives a shit about rating anyway? Since when do you have to have "ratings" to win the trophy?

Hell, the people in this country have been so dumbed down they woudln't understand half of what goes on on a basketball court anyway. Why watch something you are too stupid to understand?

Hell, just go watch a re-run of Law and Order for the 10th time. That way you already know the ending.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da_suns_fan__

Again, this doesn't negate the fact that WHEREVER these boxes are, more people watch the finals when the Spurs aren't in it. This is undeniable fact:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...ielsen_ratings

Youre "rating system doesn't work for the NBA (as a whole)" argument doesn't explain why the Spurs get a lesser rating than when other teams are in it.

Its really sad youve come up with silly theory.

---

One thing does explain the lower ratings and that is that the Finals lack a second huge market with a direct interest in the games to inflate the ratings. There are all sorts of problems that exist when trying to suggest that ratings have anything to say about how fans across the country view any particular team. One thing it might say, though, is that the primary markets involved -- the markets in which the participating teams are located -- aren't as big as the markets involved in other Finals.

Assume with me that you get a fairly consistent percentage of the total available viewers in the markets where the teams are located in any given Finals. You also get a small percentage of fans outside of those markets who will watch the games no matter what. And finally, you get a fractional percentage of viewers who will make choices based entirely on the teams involved. If you get exactly the same percentages of foreign fans (those who live outside of the home markets) from year to year and you get the same percentage of home fans regardless of the teams involved, ratings will necessarily decline when smaller market teams play in the Finals. That's fairly simple math.

Look at the last few Finals and tell me which ones would be expected to have lower ratings, based just on the size of the markets that are playing each other:

1999: San Antonio (37) v. New York (1)
2000: Los Angeles (2) v. Indianapolis (25)
2001: Los Angeles (2) v. Philadelphia (4)
2002: Los Angeles (2) v. New York/New Jersey (1)
2003: San Antonio (37) v. New York/New Jersey (1)
2004: Los Angeles (2) v. Detroit (11)
2005: San Antonio (37) v. Detroit (11)
2006: Miami (12) v. Dallas (6)
2007: San Antonio (37) v. Cleveland (17)

How surprising is it, really, that the ratings are lowest for the matchup between markets 17 and 37? Is it really that surprising that there wouldn't be as many viewers as there were when Markets 2 and 4 matched up; or when markets 1 and 2 played; or when markets 6 and 12 played? That's hardly a remarkable turn of events.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

One thing does explain the lower ratings and that is that the Finals lack a second huge market with a direct interest in the games to inflate the ratings. There are all sorts of problems that exist when trying to suggest that ratings have anything to say about how fans across the country view any particular team. One thing it might say, though, is that the primary markets involved -- the markets in which the participating teams are located -- aren't as big as the markets involved in other Finals.

Assume with me that you get a fairly consistent percentage of the total available viewers in the markets where the teams are located in any given Finals. You also get a small percentage of fans outside of those markets who will watch the games no matter what. And finally, you get a fractional percentage of viewers who will make choices based entirely on the teams involved. If you get exactly the same percentages of foreign fans (those who live outside of the home markets) from year to year and you get the same percentage of home fans regardless of the teams involved, ratings will necessarily decline when smaller market teams play in the Finals. That's fairly simple math.

Look at the last few Finals and tell me which ones would be expected to have lower ratings, based just on the size of the markets that are playing each other:

1999: San Antonio (37) v. New York (1)
2000: Los Angeles (2) v. Indianapolis (25)
2001: Los Angeles (2) v. Philadelphia (4)
2002: Los Angeles (2) v. New York/New Jersey (1)
2003: San Antonio (37) v. New York/New Jersey (1)
2004: Los Angeles (2) v. Detroit (11)
2005: San Antonio (37) v. Detroit (11)
2006: Miami (12) v. Dallas (6)
2007: San Antonio (37) v. Cleveland (17)

How surprising is it, really, that the ratings are lowest for the matchup between markets 17 and 37? Is it really that surprising that there wouldn't be as many viewers as there were when Markets 2 and 4 matched up; or when markets 1 and 2 played; or when markets 6 and 12 played? That's hardly a remarkable turn of events.

---

That was basically what I was trying to say but you put it into better words than I could. Larger markets inflate the ratings. Strangely though, I had heard last year's finals weren't rated that well either. I really do think people that are interested in the games are the ones that live in those cities participating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

One thing does explain the lower ratings and that is that the Finals lack a second huge market with a direct interest in the games to inflate the ratings. There are all sorts of problems that exist when trying to suggest that ratings have anything to say about how fans across the country view any particular team. One thing it might say, though, is that the primary markets involved -- the markets in which the participating teams are located -- aren't as big as the markets involved in other Finals.

Assume with me that you get a fairly consistent percentage of the total available viewers in the markets where the teams are located in any given Finals. You also get a small percentage of fans outside of those markets who will watch the games no matter what. And finally, you get a fractional percentage of viewers who will make choices based entirely on the teams involved. If you get exactly the same percentages of foreign fans (those who live outside of the home markets) from year to year and you get the same percentage of home fans regardless of the teams involved, ratings will necessarily decline when smaller market teams play in the Finals. That's fairly simple math.

Look at the last few Finals and tell me which ones would be expected to have lower ratings, based just on the size of the markets that are playing each other:

1999: San Antonio (37) v. New York (1)
2000: Los Angeles (2) v. Indianapolis (25)
2001: Los Angeles (2) v. Philadelphia (4)
2002: Los Angeles (2) v. New York/New Jersey (1)
2003: San Antonio (37) v. New York/New Jersey (1)
2004: Los Angeles (2) v. Detroit (11)
2005: San Antonio (37) v. Detroit (11)
2006: Miami (12) v. Dallas (6)
2007: San Antonio (37) v. Cleveland (17)

How surprising is it, really, that the ratings are lowest for the matchup between markets 17 and 37? Is it really that surprising that there wouldn't be as many viewers as there were when Markets 2 and 4 matched up; or when markets 1 and 2 played; or when markets 6 and 12 played? That's hardly a remarkable turn of events.

---

Flaws:

1) You overlook the fact that the New York/New Jersey market is twice the size of every other market...yet the Spurs/Nets series currently has the record for ratings futility (until this series is over).

2) 1998 Saw the highest viewership (Bulls/Jazz). Then there was a tremendous drop off for Spurs/Knicks (again, New York is a MUCH bigger market than Chicago...just ask George Steinbrenner).

3) Orlando was the NBA's biggest draw during the mid ninetees (with Shaq and Penny). No one ever claimed they were boring even though they were in a smaller market than San Antonio.

Nope...market sizes is just more lame excuses Spurs fans like to spew out.

All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one.

This country finds the Spurs boring. You can claim that the entire country is made up of idiots, but that won't help the NBA's dwindling popularity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da_suns_fan__

Did u just miss that foxsports.com article I just posted (scroll up).

Thats from TODAY, pal!

---

Sun's fan, it's common knowledge that your team was beaten by another that outscored you, trumped whatever defensive prowess you were claiming to have had, and the most significant part, outhustled you body, mind and spirit.
Now go round up your frankenstien-like team if you want to see them play and lose again, because last time I heard, it's parts are scattered all over the country, thankyou general manager for dissecting that abberation in the desert.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da_suns_fan__

This country finds the Spurs boring. You can claim that the entire country is made up of idiots, but that won't help the NBA's dwindling popularity.

---

Alright, then so what?

Does it diminish the Spurs' championship (if they get it)? No.

Does it change the fact that the Spurs will be favored to reach the Finals again for the next few years? No.

Does it require the league to change its format to ensure that the Spurs won't reach the Finals again? No.

Should it change the way games are officiated to ensure that the Spurs don't reach the Finals again? No -- unless, of course, those who are convinced that there is some odd conspiracy at play to make the Spurs champions now somehow want the league to affirmatively manipulate games.

This is the thing that I don't understand about threads like this one. People don't watch the Spurs? People think the Spurs are boring? People would rather see other teams in the Finals?

SO WHAT?

da suns fag is one crybaby bitch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da_suns_fan__

LMAO @ Spurs fans calling any team "boring".

Whats the one constant with NBA's worst ratings?

Answer: The Spurs.

People are completely indifferent to the Spurs. They would rather watch something else.

---

Personally I'm all for the 4 titles rather then your horseshit TV ratings. But please continue to grip at straws here. Maybe you'll come up with something good eventually. Doubtful, but possible

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da_suns_fan__

1) How many times have we watched Duncan hold the ball for 15-20 seconds before shooting a bank shot?

2) Tony Parker walks the ball up the court on nearly every possession.

3) The Spurs (almost in unision) look to Popovic nearly every time they get possession of the ball for their next set play (they might as well just huddle up).

4) The Spurs are the best in the league at imposing their will (style of play). But you want to pretend the tempo/style of these games has been determined by an extremely unexperienced Cavs team?

Try again.

---

That type of thinking is part of the reason the Spurs keep winning and the Suns keep whining.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da_suns_fan__

And yet everyone is pissed off they don't get to watch them.

What does that say about the Spurs?

---

I know not one person who's pissed off about the Suns. What now?

Let me put it this way: WHO THE FUCK CARES ABOUT RATINGS? WE JUST WANNA SEE OUR TEAM WIN. THAT is ALL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

Alright, then so what?

Does it diminish the Spurs' championship (if they get it)? No.

Does it change the fact that the Spurs will be favored to reach the Finals again for the next few years? No.

Does it require the league to change its format to ensure that the Spurs won't reach the Finals again? No.

Should it change the way games are officiated to ensure that the Spurs don't reach the Finals again? No -- unless, of course, those who are convinced that there is some odd conspiracy at play to make the Spurs champions now somehow want the league to affirmatively manipulate games.

This is the thing that I don't understand about threads like this one. People don't watch the Spurs? People think the Spurs are boring? People would rather see other teams in the Finals?

SO WHAT?

---

Dude this is the only thing this fuckwipe has left. He can't talk about the playoffs b/c they're done. He can't talk about titles b/c they've never had one. His only defense is TV ratings. And yes, that has to be the worst "smack" one can ever talk about. That or "derrrrrrr SA's riverwalk is the dirtiest place everrrrrrrrrr".

We feed this fucking troll and he gets off on it. Cut him off

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 703 Spurz

Dude this is the only thing this fuckwipe has left. He can't talk about the playoffs b/c they're done. He can't talk about titles b/c they've never had one. His only defense is TV ratings. And yes, that has to be the worst "smack" one can ever talk about. That or "derrrrrrr SA's riverwalk is the dirtiest place everrrrrrrrrr".

We feed this fucking troll and he gets off on it. Cut him off

---

Look at the title of this thread buddy.

Spurs:

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/04/10/ph...rientrophy.jpghttp://www.sptimes.com/2003/04/10/ph...rientrophy.jpghttp://www.sptimes.com/2003/04/10/ph...rientrophy.jpghttp://www.sptimes.com/2003/04/10/ph...rientrophy.jpg

Sun fan does have a championship t-shirt, tho:

http://thecradlerocks.com/images/wee-rock-waah.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clutch20

Here's another snippet from Sportsline.com:
http://www.sportsline.com/nba/story/10223462

"While these Finals could go down as the worst in modern history they still add to the legend of this San Antonio dynasty, which has proven they can play up-tempo or play the dismal NFC East-style of basketball Cleveland enjoys." :clap

---

NFC East > all

go cowboys

-Mars

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da_suns_fan__

Basically every NBA fan has said "This Sucks" and changed the channel.

Stern has no one to blame but himself.

---

one problem

NO SPURS FAN GIVES A FUCK ABOUT RATINGS.

STFU, AND GTFO while you're at it.

also cocks

-Mars

Simmons has just added his opinion......look how far down the Spurs are on the list:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...x?name=simmons

God I love Simmons:

Now, I've already written about 1 through 6 (see the corresponding links). But No. 7 has to be one of the weirdest subplots in recent sports history. We've reached a point with the NBA when its offseason somehow became more interesting than its actual season. I have no idea what this means. I have no idea how to interpret this information. For whatever reason, people are more interested in figuring out how the Suns will win the 2008 title over how the Spurs are winning the 2007 title. They're more interested in wondering what the Celtics will do with the No. 5 pick versus the Duncan/Parker battle for Finals MVP. They're more interested in figuring out how Cleveland will find help for LeBron in 2008 than the help he's getting right now.


Where's that guy who said everyone's forgot about the Suns?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da_suns_fan__

God I love Simmons:

Now, I've already written about 1 through 6 (see the corresponding links). But No. 7 has to be one of the weirdest subplots in recent sports history. We've reached a point with the NBA when its offseason somehow became more interesting than its actual season. I have no idea what this means. I have no idea how to interpret this information. For whatever reason, people are more interested in figuring out how the Suns will win the 2008 title over how the Spurs are winning the 2007 title. They're more interested in wondering what the Celtics will do with the No. 5 pick versus the Duncan/Parker battle for Finals MVP. They're more interested in figuring out how Cleveland will find help for LeBron in 2008 than the help he's getting right now.


Where's that guy who said everyone's forgot about the Suns?

---

why don't you go blow him then?

spurs fans DON'T GIVE A FUCK unless you're talking about our soon to be 4th championship.

ratings are stern's business, winning championships is ours

-Mars

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da_suns_fan__

LMAO @ Spurs fans calling any team "boring".

Whats the one constant with NBA's worst ratings?

Answer: The Spurs.

People are completely indifferent to the Spurs. They would rather watch something else.

---

id rather see rings at the end of the tunnel then summer break...

boring? spurs have never been boring to me... boring is all these weak ass pussy crying bitches that are supposed to uphold the wests domination but instead insist on crying about every little thing that doesnt go their way.

fuck your boring ass suns! wheres your ring(s) at bitch?

we be blingin down south while yall just fishin in the desert.