Reply With Quote
you sound way too smart to be a laker fan. cue drhouse or lakaluva.
I was reading Adandes chat and he mentions he would rather see Kobe vs. Lebron rather than Lakers/Celtics. Well I am not a Kobe fan I am a Laker fan and I am sick of this individualistic marketing bull .
There is a reason why the teams like the Spurs dont get their due, and thats because they are not about the individual.
For the sake of the NBA I pray to god that the Lebrons dont get near the finals. I would much rather have Lakers v. Celtics or Spurs v. Celtics than Lebron v. Lakers or Lebron v. Spurs.
That is why soccer never be rivaled in popularity, because American sports are not egalitarian
you sound way too smart to be a laker fan. cue drhouse or lakaluva.
it's all about the almighty dollar, what is so ing hard to understand about that? Your kids and the average fan don't give a about passing around the arch beautifully from a Tim Duncan postup for a wide open Bowen three in the corner. They will pick a LeBron james dunk 10000 out of 10000 times.
neither Kobe nor Lebron is more than Wade.
Nah, just sick of the BlowMe show over yonder in Fake Town.
Yeah I was just thinking about this the other day. This years NBA playoff commercials are all about individuals and I'm thinking why would they go through the trouble of marketing every individual player rather than the team? For instance instead of Coming Soon: Kobe it would be Coming Soon: Lakers - it's not that superficial.
I've thought about this a lot. The NBA has trapped itself, in a sense. It's the only major American sport where one individual can literally take over a game and win it for his team on a consistent basis.
This predetermines the fact that the NBA will be a more individually driven sport, but they have taken steps to further the stigma.
The Jordan era completely changed the way we think about sports stars. As a result, the NBA has become increasingly about the one player.
Why?
Well, there are a couple of reasons for this.
#1 is that the NBA operates under the faulty assumption that fans love single players more than the teams. I am unsure why they feel this way, but it probably has something to do with reaching out to younger people, who are just getting into sports and their main basis of knowledge comes from Sportscenter. It's much easier to tout a single player making highlight reel dunks, because the consumer will only have to remember names like James, Wade, and Kobe, rather than the Mikki Moore's of the NBA.
Secondly, the NBA, likely through it's many years as a sport appealing more to young black men than the others, has come to rely on it's apparel sales more than any other sport. You always see "jersey sales" thrown around in the NBA, who's sold more every year. I've never heard of such a thing in the NFL or the MLB. The NBA makes so much revenue from it's apparel that they are now tied into endorsing those players.
And I know what you're thinking, "Yeah, but couldn't they just market a team instead of a player?"
Not exactly. Not only would it be tough to convince fans to buy an anonymous Lakers or Celtics jersey, no casual fan would buy "The Oklahoma City Thunder's Shoes". However, if you can associate them positively with one player, they might buy Durant's shoe.
The NBA has been forced into this position by endorsing players like Jordan and touting their brands as independent from the team name. This isn't a problem in football, because no matter how good LaDanian Tomlinson is, he sucks without an offensive line, and almost every football fan knows this.
Also, the length of season in the NBA means they have to make as much money as possible in the regular season, because they have fewer fans watching every game and are making less of a profit margin. Where as in the NFL, every game matters and true fans watch every second of every season that they are able to.
I was Danny from Cleveland that asked that question......hollla
http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=25547
I been over this . I am just happy those threads aren't spawning every day like a couple months ago.
is that supposed to be a good ass in your sig? just so you know, its really not that appealing, not a very good ass.
The NBA is all about making money. They could care less about the quality and integrity of the game. Stern and his minions are going to milk Kobe vs. Lebron for all it's worth.
I feel ya. I've been sick of it for quite some time. The inevitable search for the next Mike or the next Big Thing. That's one reason I was glad the Spurs swept the Cavs two years ago. Just to piss off all the NBA marketing execs and the commish for anointing him too soon. They do pump Kobe a lot, and for good reason, but then the Colorado incident cast him in a bad light for a while. To his credit, he's back. However, the constant MVP talk and winning the scoring le, by analysts and media has nothing, whatsover to do with winning a championship. Personally, I try to ignore it.
Excellent post!!
Dude can you make the ass in your sig a little smaller? I was in class a few days ago catching up on some spurstalk reading and BAM! there is a big giant ass for the people behind me to see.
That's what you get for reading Mr. Adande.
I can't complain about those guys. They're the 2 most entertaining players to watch in the league right now.
You guys can say your sick of them but they are the most exciting ballers in the world today.......Oh yeah plus Dwyane Wade
I'm not sick of the players, I love watching them play. I'm sick of Stern & the gang shoving them down my throat.
It's not just a marketing thing though. You need a superstar to win a le. That's not an invention of marketers, it's the truth. What's the last NBA team to win a le without a true superstar? The 1979 Sonics?I was reading Adandes chat and he mentions he would rather see Kobe vs. Lebron rather than Lakers/Celtics. Well I am not a Kobe fan I am a Laker fan and I am sick of this individualistic marketing bull .
So if the superstars are over-emphasized, it's only in relation to their importance, which is greater in basketball than in any other sport. Their impact justifies the hype.
Come on, the Spurs are just as superstar-oriented and superstar-marketed as any other team. It's never just been "the Spurs" it's always been "the Admiral and the Spurs!" or "Duncan and the Spurs!"There is a reason why the teams like the Spurs dont get their due, and thats because they are not about the individual.
If the Spurs don't get their due, it has more to do with the size of their market and their overall style of play than anything.
2004 Detroit Pistons
Touche. Still, that's two teams in thirty years.
To answer the op... No.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
