There's a lot that's wrong with the way the NBA is potrayed and analyzed on ESPN. They can't market the NBA worth a damn.
all by design...to with spurs fans minds.also not at all surprised.they know how to create a storyline and drama.what better way than to paint the harmless spurs, (other than winning),as somehow the bad guy.
its all mind control and manipulation by the media,especially ESPN.
Is Duke Basketball sexy?
All Teams 1-5 in the NCAA's lost last week yet Duke goes to #5 and San Diego State, who still only has 1 loss to a Top 10 team in BYU at BYU, just moves to #4? Yeah...whatever.
The Golden State Warriors play a fast-paced sexy brand of basketball. Okay, it's losing basketball but it's still fun to watch.
There is a perceived media bias because the bias really exists. In the grand scheme, that doesn't prevent the Spurs from winning les, but what it does do is that them first portraying the Spurs as boring and then not saying anything additional until the Spurs make them by winning playoff series', means that no casual fan will have an easy way to discover what we already know, that Spurs basketball is both winning and exciting basketball.
Someone once asked Lisa Leslie why the WNBA doesn't get enough coverage, it's sad I'm using her statements as a compare and contrast but she makes a valid point.
"I think the NBA has stepped up to the plate by allowing us to have the WNBA," she continued. "What more could you ask from David Stern?"
So who is to blame, if anyone? Is it possible that the league has reached its peak within a niche audience or is there really some en y we can point the finger at for its lack of national regard?
"It's really more the media," Leslie told FanHouse. "It's ESPN. It's the TNTs of the world ... though, really, TNT has done a better job, I have to admit. They've covered the WNBA really well, if you have (NBA TV). But ESPN is probably the main focus that drives our sports. Ninety-five percent of sports, you know you can find it on ESPN.
"Maybe if we had a place [on ESPN] you would be more informed," Leslie pointed out.
The WNBA doesn't get enough coverage because people don't want to see it. It's hard enough to get interested in watching Pacers vs. Pistons, much less an inferior product. The gap in the skill set between the men and women is so vast that it's just not enjoyable to watch. And most of them aren't very pretty.
true.a difference between college and nba.more money.its interesting that about any nba fan pretty much ignores anything about the spurs.until you as a spurs fan brings it up.why?media manipulation.
theres no way anyone ignores the lakers,knicks,celtics,all large markets and fan bases being 46-10 in this day and age.to add to that,all you have to do is turn on your tv and media manipulation is oozing from every pore from anything and everybody whos mouth is running.not only ESPN,BUT especially ESPN.
its all by design.
Is it by design that they complain about low ratings when the Spurs kick everyone's asses on the way to winning a le? If it's Spurs-Celtics, the intensity would be higher than the level we saw when it was Spurs-Pistons. That would be amazing. If it's Spurs-Heat, just to watch the Spurs precision play and depth take down that the big 2 and 1/2 would be fun and a big FU to the 4-letter. If it's Spurs-Magic, that would be a ratings killer but again, it ain't about market size, it's about what you do DURING the season that helps people see a story. You don't have to create a story, I mean , that's all they did the entire All-Star Weekend. Rather than just let the event play itself out, they skewed everything towards the way that they wanted it to be.
Again, the NFL does it right. They don't give a about market size, they promote team over individuals and then when teams win, they don't talk about who's got the better pedigree or who's stadium has the most luxury suites or any of that , and if you as a media partner try to take it that way, they simply tell you to not to. END OF STORY. That right there is real power and protecting your brand.
The only thing that was important about what Leslie said is that 95% statement.
"It's really more the media," Leslie told FanHouse. "It's ESPN. It's the TNTs of the world ... though, really, TNT has done a better job, I have to admit. They've covered the WNBA really well, if you have (NBA TV). But ESPN is probably the main focus that drives our sports. Ninety-five percent of sports, you know you can find it on ESPN.
"Maybe if we had a place [on ESPN] you would be more informed," Leslie pointed out.
Last edited by Man In Black; 02-22-2011 at 03:48 PM.
well of course it is.people enjoy a nice drama.all the tv shows have them,even the comedy ones at some point.i think they (the media),realize theres nothing they can do about the spurs winning,but they CAN control perception.
and in fact if the spurs DO win they are perceived as somehow evil.i dont claim to know everything,but i would think market size would matter because thats the demographic they target, other wise every time kobe bryant takes a we wouldnt know about.ever wonder how it seems like ESPN almost appears to be ROOTING for the lakers,yankees,celtics,etc?theres a reason.
the nfl is different in that it doesnt have to rely on huge fan bases like the nba.its a much more popular sport.so they dont have to manipulate as much,but even they arent perfect.
and some point a player or team is getting jobbed.the profit the NFL has is beyond belief.but i believe theres still a lot of manipulation and media mind controlling going on even there.
San Francisco is Market size #6 with the Golden State Warriors, but we don't really see them all that much despite the fact that they have the highest scoring back-court in the league. They're in a large market and they play exciting basketball, but we don't see them much or hear about them. Why not? So it's not just market size. Is it their record? Okay so they're not making the playoffs, but as of today, neither are the Clippers, but because one guy could dunk over the HOOD of a car, they're now must-see TV? Why? Who chooses that? The network or you?
They would still be talking about how great the other teams are even if we were in the Finals up 3-0.
lol
Remember how much they were still talking about Lebron before we gave him the sweep
"This could be the first time ever a team has come back from 3-0" hahahahha
You guys do realize San Antonio is A OLD, don't you?
I mean, their franchise player (TD) is a dinosaur, and their two other good players are getting up there. Parker isn't that old, but he's been playing in the L since before he was 20 so I'm talking old here as in old to the viewers' eyes.
ESPN (and the NBA) hype the young players or players in their prime, not counting Kobe (who is arguably just past his prime but still dominant). Guys like Duncan and Manu won't get much love because they don't draw national audiences. They are old; if not in years, then in basketball mileage.
When I talk with my friends or in fantasy leagues, everyone is all about the younger guys, because they are more exciting and interesting. Get used to it...
Exciting now (even though maybe not as good/will never be as good):
Wade/James/Bosh/Durant/Westbrook/Melo/Amare/CP3/Kobe/Gasol/Bynum/Odom/Griffin/Monta Ellis/Curry/Noah/Rose/etc etc
Exciting up until about 2 years ago, but old now and considered washed up:
Nash/Manu/Duncan/Vince Carter/Billups/Yao/
Shock value/celebrity status/drama:
Artest/Birdman/DWill/Parker (until he broke up with Eva)/Melo
Gallinari
You only have so many minutes in a segment on a show that has to cover all sports news, so somebody on that list will get left out...
The NBA is a business. The guys at ESPN (and probably the NBA) all visualize thousands of people shutting their TVs off or changing the channel every time the Spurs are featured, because they are boring. It's like a Cardinals game in the MLB. Nobody cares about the Cardinals except for people in St. Lous who love them or the towns in middle America that hate them. People care about LA, NY and other teams on the coasts usually.
We can be Spurs fans and like their style of play, but we have to recognize that the NBA is a business and the exposure will go to whatever sells the most tickets, jerseys and gets the most hype.
ESPN chooses what they want you to see.and they work hard at ingraining things into peoples domes.so they are good at making it "seem" like YOU chose it.of course they can't endorse every team that has a large market,then people would get bored and wouldn't watch.they know when and where to pick their spots.
the clippers have blake griffin,and thats all they talk about anymore these days,BUT thats all they need.they don't need or care about the clippers.the clippers DO in fact play in LA,so they really don't need any more reason to talk about the clippers other than blake griffin.
ESPN has turned into more Entertainment Tonight/MTV/E! then CNN or Fox news and their writers are more like Star Magazine and US Weekly. They are more into catering to the casual fan. The fan that wants to pretend that they know what they are talking about (laker fan) when having a conversation with another fan either casual or hardcore. ESPN is all about making money and creating news. They know that these casual fans are laker, celtic, and heat (now) fans and want to hear about them or whatever is the sexy story or hot topic (Melo/Blake).
Then they complain about how the Spurs bring bad rating when they are in the finals. A lot of casual fans turn into the finals...well if the only teams that you push are the Lakers, Lakers, Lakers, then Celtics, Cavs/Heat then when they don't make it to the finals then what do you expect? If you don't push other teams or players then the casual fan does not know who they are and there is no real interest in the team.
I like to see what they do when the lakers fall off in a few years and they have to have the Thunder or some other team in the finals. Oh, I forgot they are getting Dwight Howard and Deron Williams in 2012. Problem solved.....now that I thing about it....the west is turning into the East now and if the lakers get those players then get ready for lakers in the finals every year.
Either way its not going to change anything or anytime soon. So real NBA fans just have to deal with it.
I agree, but I also think it's difficult to.
NBA vs. NCAA hoops
NBA:
82 game drawn out pointless season where the goal is to coast and survive injury
Playoffs: Take almost 2 months to complete...very slow process
Fans: ING LAME (stadiums half empty to begin with, 25% composed of clueless moms, girlfriends, and kids)
NCAA:
Shorter, 26-ish game season, every game is a relatively important game.
Playoffs: Short amount of time, win or go home
Fans: bunch of hyped college kids + alumni + general fans
The NBA is just lame, it can't be as popular to the NFL or other leagues where every game matters and where the stadiums are packed and loud. There just isn't a huge following with the NBA, even though as big as the league's market is, it is very spread out and unconcentrated. Only the top 4-5 teams in the league typically command sell out, loud ass arenas, and even then they aren't even that loud at all.
They need to shorten that lame ass season, otherwise it's gonna be the same old that no one cares about.
The journalistic media has an obligation to be honest.
Omitting the best team in the NBA from discussions consistently for increased $$ is patently dishonest and fraudulent.
Stop watching and listening to ESPN, and everyone else. Start demanding a much better product that isn't geared towards the suckers.
all the sports stations suck. Local broadcasts of the game by Fox or Kens are always 100 million times better, for example. 10x more replays, the commentators actually talk about the current game and the players almost exclusively, and no political NBA mumbo jumbo for the re ed casual fan.
The incredulous lack of replays on the major networks so they can pimp their commentators' personalities and sponsors is laughable, yet everyone just keeps drinking it up like they actually bring something cutting edge.
Reminds me of the NBA forum. Mostly stupid trolls and shticks that tons of idiots actually buy into, laugh at, and get offended by without ever realizing the reality of the situation.
If all 16 of us Spurs fans stopped paying attention to ESPN, nobody would notice. Maybe ESPN and the NBA are conspiring to drive down interest in the Spurs in the hopes that they can be moved to Las Vegas. If the Spurs were in any danger of leaving San Antonio I bet there'd be no shortage of cities clamoring for them.
More than we spurs fans should notice that the Spurs have been omitted from discussion. I don't watch ESPN, ever, so I actually can't make a judgment on their coverage of the Spurs. But if such omission is occurring as described, fans of the game should be outraged.
perhaps I'm right and simply way late. Only idiots and casual fans watch/listen to espn anyway, so they've lost no ratings with their anti-basketball fluffery.
regardless, their obscene lack of journalistic standards is sickening.
I just can't imagine Ron Jaworski writing off a team with the best record in the NFL as "washed up" or "finished" or "old" and keeping his job.
I'm amazed you listen to Mike & Mike more than anything else.
Yes, it is crazy that the NBA actually promotes this ty, individual/personality driven angle.
The Seattle Spurs...hmmm
They talked basketball for a change. I had it on while I was working. If the omissions weren't so laughable I wouldn't have even started the thread.
They'd best keep that up and make sure to sell out every game if they want to keep the team in town. They aren't getting any help from anyone else.
You're damn right. Keep buying and watching FOX product then. I hopefully will soon enough when I have enough money to be spending on whatever.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
