Reply With Quote
ESPN is a business. Not sports analysis. A Business. Accept it and quit giving them ratings if it affects you that much.
Yeh Lakers do no running and move the ball horribly they have turned Showtime into snoretime - Lakers are absolutely a more boring team than the Spurs = just living off the big market reputation.
ESPN is a business. Not sports analysis. A Business. Accept it and quit giving them ratings if it affects you that much.
First, you can't compare the NBA to the NFL. The NFL sells itself. It's not the NFL front office and PR machine. The nature of football, so few games, highly dangerous game that sells itself to the fans and make them "fanatic." It's not how the league promotes itself. Oakland, St. Louis, Buffalo among other places don't sell out. For a long time, Arizona looked like it had about 50% attendance at their home games. When's the last time the league promoted Buffalo or Carolina? There are 8 home games in the NFL, not 41. The game itself and the format and the importance of each game is what sells the game to its fans. Not the league. It's the same reason why the MLB is boring to a lot of sports fans and regular season baseball games are ehhhhh unless you're talking about ditching school or work and drinking beer at an afternoon game. It's naive to think that the NFL has figured things out. Look at what Goodell has done with players can't even celebrating and getting fined for every little thing that now it's the No Fun League. AND YET it doesn't hurt their ratings or attendance or merchandise sales. It's the game itself, not how the league promotes it.
Secondly, the league was ready to die out in the late 70s and what saved it was two individual players, Magic and Larry. It wasn't the league promoting all what 26 teams? back then. It wasn't making sure every market getting the pub and the hype. Then what's considered the best era of exposure of the NBA is due to one single individual player, Jordan. Don't tell me the NBA would be better served if they focused on teams and giving exposure to the small market teams just as much as the big markets and the superstars. It's pretty much been proven otherwise. People watch the Lakers and the Celtics. People watch LeBron and Blake Griffin. They don't tune in for that ever exciting Memphi v. Milwaukee match-up.
I think you're naive if you think the NBA hasn't figured out how to market themselves. The only reason the NBA is where it is today is because of how they were able to market guys like Magic and Bird and Michael, subsequently Shaq and Kobe and LeBron. You can hate it all you want. You can call it the equivalent to the WWE. That very well may be true. But it's why the NBA remains as big as it is, especially now internationally.
Jamstone with the goods, but I will quickly say that Arizona had 50% attendance largely due to the ty ass Sun Devil college field they had to play on. They've sold out nearly every game in their real stadium.
This is not even about just the Spurs... I had no idea that the Mavs started in such a hole, and turned the game around. They showed 1 or 2 Toronto plays, and pointed out they started on a 22-3 run, then showed 1 play with the Mavs tying the game, then 2 more plays with the Mavs winning by 20 or so. And when I say plays, I mean the guy already shooting the ball. All packaged in about 20 seconds.
I bet, Spurfan is probably livid they couldn't catch more highlights of the Mavs Raptors game!
The situation is that their opponents were the Grizzlies and Raptors.
Are you serious right now, bro?
This would make sense except for the fact that year after year the Super Bowl draws in record numbers, regardless of the teams that are playing in it, while the NBA Finals are completely dependent on who's playing. The biggest 4-7 games of the year for the NBA should be off the charts, year after year, and there's just too much fluctuation to say that it's all due to the format.
I'm not sure this comparison can be made, either. Baseball is an incredibly slow-paced game. There is far more downtime in baseball than actual action on the field, and oftentimes the result is not relevant to the final score. In football, you have a lot of downtime, but every play has EVERY player interacting on the field and teams going at full speed. A sweep off the right side might be shut down before it goes anywhere, but it's still a lot more active than watching ball 1, ball 2, strike 1, foul for strike 2, pop fly to center, etc.It's the same reason why the MLB is boring to a lot of sports fans and regular season baseball games are ehhhhh unless you're talking about ditching school or work and drinking beer at an afternoon game.
Chicken, egg. You can't say that for sure because the NBA has promoted the individual for so long. It's also been proven that if you market something well, people will scoop it up like candy and beg you for more. The NBA does a good job of marketing to the casual fan, and that's the problem. Casual fans do not delve into the game and truly appreciate it. They want Sportscenter highlight dunks. If they don't get that, they turn their TV off. Developing a fanbase that really loves the game for itself, not for the highlights, should be the goal of the NBA. It's why the NFL still sells out teams that are going to win 5 games a season next year, and because those teams have a shot a few years down the road of being in the NFC/AFC Championship game, if not the Super Bowl, if they make the right moves (St. Louis, New Orleans, Arizona).Secondly, the league was ready to die out in the late 70s and what saved it was two individual players, Magic and Larry. It wasn't the league promoting all what 26 teams? back then. It wasn't making sure every market getting the pub and the hype. Then what's considered the best era of exposure of the NBA is due to one single individual player, Jordan. Don't tell me the NBA would be better served if they focused on teams and giving exposure to the small market teams just as much as the big markets and the superstars. It's pretty much been proven otherwise.
Again, this has nothing to do with the fact that Memphis and Milwaukee are never even mentioned on Sportscenter except in passing? Do either of those teams have a prayer in of a le in the next 5 years?People watch the Lakers and the Celtics. People watch LeBron and Blake Griffin. They don't tune in for that ever exciting Memphi v. Milwaukee match-up.
It really doesn't bother me that the Spurs don't get the attention, as I've long since enjoyed the role of unspoken fly-by-night underdog. It's fun to watch my team get token attention all year and then all of a sudden the playoffs start and everyone says, "Wow, who knew the Spurs were so good!?" (I doubt it will catch many off guard this yearI think you're naive if you think the NBA hasn't figured out how to market themselves. The only reason the NBA is where it is today is because of how they were able to market guys like Magic and Bird and Michael, subsequently Shaq and Kobe and LeBron. You can hate it all you want. You can call it the equivalent to the WWE. That very well may be true. But it's why the NBA remains as big as it is, especially now internationally.) I just think the NBA could do a much better job at creating a culture around their product, like the NFL has, and even more so, like futbol in Europe. It's a discussion point, not something I rage about.
The NFL has 32 teams......the NBA has 30......
The NFL has more teams than the NBA. And each NFL team roster is what, 53 players? Something like that. NBA teams have a maximum 15 players on their rosters.
Good talk.
The only thing the league would like more than the Lakers doing well is the Knicks doing well, that's why. It's not surprising.
Damn you DoK.
Livid? No. Annoyed, yes. They're a team that is on a tear right now. I was looking forward to seeing some Roddy since people are saying he's playing well. I guess I'll have to wait until Amare and Melo are not front page news anymore.I bet
20 secs on the #1 and #3 teams respectively now in the league?
Are they serious?
The NFL s all over the NBA and it's not even a contest
It's this in simple, football is more of a team sport than basketball and basketball is a lot more of a star-driven sport. Basketball is the only major sport where having the best player on either team automatically gives you a very good shot at winning. In football you can have a stud QB who has the ability to impact the game more than any player on either team, but if you have a ty offensive line it doesn't matter. It's easy to market football as a "team first, winning = class" sport because it is a lot more of a team sport. Basketball is a star-driven sport where no amount of teamwork (
I personally blame it on the 1 year rule in college. IMO, the NBA should force their players to develop in college like the NFL does. If players like Eddy Curry, Tyson Chandler, Demarcus Cousins and Greg Oden were forced to play 3-4 years of college ball, we might actually have big men in the NBA.
, they had a feature on Kevin Love and his 20/11 first half that was longer than the Spurs and Dallas highlights...
The opponents they played sucked ass and the games weren't that interesting. 30 seconds each is all their games really warranted.
I find it interesting, however, that there's a counter-culture to ESPN that thinks their respective team doesn't get enough publicity, but simultaneously screams that the other teams are just hyped. I want them to be a media organization that does more than pretend to be a news network.
ESPN, in a perfect world, would chase what is newsworthy. They wouldn't give equal time to all the sports, the same time for each game. They would skip some games and do more features on the players making an impact. They would probe deeper than the canned answers of professional athletes. And they would come to be viewed by the Sporting world as a boil on their ass, not a partner in promoting the league or themselves. They finally showed some Kevin Love highlights last night as well. It took them long enough. If Fox Sports was still competing with them, I think they would've been out-scooped on this story. Like much of the news media, they have chased what sells more than what stories have value.
They ask "fans" to participate in polls and watch compe ive banter. In this age of user-informed news pieces, why aren't they demanding that we tell us when we think we have a news story?
And believe me, Milwaukee does not want their words parsed and analyzed through the same mechanisms of Lebron James for media attention. There would be mini-controversies all over the place. You would have more PR consultations and canned answers to questions and stricter rules from the NBA. I don't want that. I want something genuine.
ESPN is about entertaining the average sports fan. They respond to the information given to them to tailor their shows accordingly and suddenly you don't know what came first--ESPN covering games this way or the general public demanding they be covered this way. They are broadcasting games the way TCM shows a movie. They may have a movie expert on to tell you the significance of what you are about to watch, but they aren't in the movie industry.
It isn't reality or what's news-worthy. It is what entertains. Once I figured that out I stopped complaining and came to view ESPN how I view my hand during masturbation. I need it to get off, but I'm not aware of my hand while I'm doing it.
Knix have been irrelevant for years. Beat HeatSPN. Now east coast sports news station have something to talk about. To be expected.
The Knicks are somewhat back and relevant. What's not to love about that?
Gee, that couldn't possibly be because you only need 10 guys + a basketball for a pickup game, while in football you need 22 guys + equipment. Great argument
The Spurs aren't getting enough attention
In football, the difference in payroll between the #2 team and the #28 team is 26%.
In basketball, the difference between the #2 and the #26 team is 40%. And consider that's between far fewer players than the NFL has.
It's not the only problem, but it's a big one. Why should NBA fans go to see the Wizards right now, especially if they're just casual NBA watchers?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions