Reply With Quote
Not really. Spurs/Nets brought a much lower rating than Lakers/Nets in back to back years.
Its pretty simple to see that when you block for the opponent, the Spurs consistently bring in a much lower rating.
So the point of this thread is to point out that the spurs actually are boring and it has nothing with SA being a small market?
Not really. Spurs/Nets brought a much lower rating than Lakers/Nets in back to back years.
Its pretty simple to see that when you block for the opponent, the Spurs consistently bring in a much lower rating.
You cant be this dense. Oh you can be. You use Chicago as the highest rated finals and then use other Jordanled Chicago teams for your stats. Then you say a Jordanless league wouldn't affect ratings? ....you're as dense as it gets.
Whether or not they are "boring" is subjective.
Whether or not small markets=small ratings is not.
No kidding! There were daily polls being run "Is Lin a top five point guard?"
Olajuwon vs Oneal was a good draw. JORDAN was back but 45 wasn't as good as 23. But he brought casual fan back.
Not at all, son. I said the majority of Spurs fans were willing to accept that the early-to-mid 2000s spurs teams (includes 1999-2007) garnered an unfavorable media narrative, because the defensive strategy brought championships. Key word there is majority.
1) So you claim that Spurs fans are under the opinion that their team failed to get finals ratings because of their small market size? I have 7 years of threads from this board to dispute that.
Also, it would be hard to deny that market size plays a role in TV ratings — for instance, a Lakers-Heat matchup would undoubtedly generate better ratings than even Thunder-Heat. But in the case of the Spurs, it seems pretty evident that media narrative is the determining factor here, not market size. Spurs fans have largely accepted the truth that one is a much greater factor than the other.
Seen the ratings for the 2012 WCF, son? You should look 'em up.
Market size makes all the difference when you are methodical and boring, which the Spurs were. OKC isnt methodical and boring.
Im going to explain it to you one more time, but thats it. If you dont get it then you dont get it:
The Bulls played in six NBA finals. The highest rated finals they had was against Utah even though their other four respective opponents were all in larger markets than the Jazz (the biggest being the Los Angeles Lakers). Thus, blocking for Chicago shows that smaller market teams can still pull in ratings.
LIKEWISE, Orlando vs Houston pulled in a bigger rating than New York vs Houston in back-to-back years. Again, this proves that market sizes have no effect on ratings as Orlando is much, much smaller than New York.
Do you get it now? Its not THAT hard. Jordan being retired has NOTHING to do with the fact that Orlando had a better rating against Houston than New York did.
Do you understand now?
At the end of the day controversy sells and the hate and love for a team sells. Media has painted OKC to be the good guys they come up the right way blah blah and the media has painted Miami to be the bad guys they came up wrong self en lement all that. The media has a big impact on how people feel about certain teams.
The Heat bring in ratings
And who cares? Spurs lost so whatever....
Why is this such a important matter to you?
Man in black, lemme try this:
I am showing you TWO different examples of where a smaller market team got a higher rating than a larger market team against the same opponent.
example 1: Utah got a better rating against Chicago than the Los Angeles got against Chicago.
Example 2: Orlando got a better rating against Houston than New York got against Houston.
Does that clear it up?
Umm..because I like basketball? Why is anyone on this board?!! Why is it so important to them?
There was that time Duncan went hard at the rim and Shaq was there to try and get a highlight block but instead Duncan avoided the block and gently laid it in over Shaq. Then Duncan turned and headed down the court expressionless. That was cool.
Also the time Garnett was guarding Tim on the wing and Tim made a bank shot and got the foul. Then Tim made the fta and turned and headed down the court expressionless. That was pretty cool too.
It's not important to anybody but you everyone just likes giving you because you your pants and its funny when you throw your temper tantrums tbh. Ratings don't really matter though to me as a basketball fan why should I care if anybody else watch's my favorite team if I enjoy them than I enjoy them I give 2 s if my neighbor does.
Umm..because I like basketball? Why is anyone on this board?!! Why is it so important to them?
I get it..you simply do not...OBSERVE.
You conveniently leave out the fact that Jordan was slated to retire and that Reinsdorf and Krauss had publicly let it be known that this would be the last year the Bulls were going to be THOSE BULLS.The Bulls played in six NBA finals. The highest rated finals they had was against Utah
BLOCK REMOVED.
The Laker finals was the Lakers on a decline and Chicago vying for it's first le in the Jordan era but yeah...whatever.even though their other four respective opponents were all in larger markets than the Jazz (the biggest being the Los Angeles Lakers). Thus, blocking for Chicago shows that smaller market teams can still pull in ratings.
Like I said. People came back because Jordan came back and even though #45 Jordan wasn't strong enough to play like #23 Jordan, he still brought back the masses...enough to the point that having an Olajuwon vs O'Neal matchup was a decent enough draw. No Jordan at all plus New York playing Houston meant that no one gave a about that series except for New York and Houston. But you knew that right? So again....A Jordan led playoffs even with him not being in the Finals was a better lead-in than no Jordan at all the 2 season prior...Get that?
Blocked and Owned by the Man In Black. You're really making this easy.. Again, this proves that market sizes have no effect on ratings as Orlando is much, much smaller than New York.
March that year 1994-1995 Jordan unretired and came back. You left that part out...why because it doesn't help your stance?Do you get it now? Its not THAT hard. Jordan being retired has NOTHING to do with the fact that Orlando had a better rating against Houston than New York did.
I understand it perfectly...it's apparent that you do not.Do you understand now?
New question: What do you want all of us to do with this information? Should we all agree with you? Small market doesn't mean bad ratings? Ok, cool story bro. It doesn't. Now, you wanna find something more productive to do with your time? You've been here for hours hammering the same point home. WE GET IT. WHO CARES.
Timmy faking out I think it was mutombo was just hilarious and awesome also this past playoffs against utah and clips duncan was destroying cats just out classing them tbh.
You cant make this stuff up.
Only a Spurs fan would claim that THE REASON that Orlando pulled a better rating than New York was because Jordan was back in the league in 95.
Nevermind that Jordan wasnt in the freaking Finals!!!! His simply "being in basketball" cons uted a ratings increase for Orlando/Houston?!!!!!
Is that your theory? Holy that stupid!
So it had nothing to do with the fact that Shaq (in his media prime) and Penny Hardaway (who had national Nike commercials with Chris Rock as 'lil Penny') were infinitely more interesting and watchable than Patrick Ewing's Knicks?!!!!
I whole-heartedly disagree.
Likewise, you claim the only reason peeps watched in 98 was because everyone "knew" it was the last Jordan/Bulls year. Okay, well second best finals was Phoenix/Bulls. Phoenix is STILL a much smaller market than LA. You lose again.
You sound like Floyd Mayweather. Mayweather takes the stance that he has a huge draw and points to the fact that De La Hoya Mayweather is the largest PPV pays in boxing history. Yet, like you....little boy floyd never points out that the fight was DE LA HOYA mayweather and that floyd was the b attraction.
Dumbass Suns fan....Utah was the b attraction. RECOGNIZE.
Holy you are as dense as they come dumbass suns fan. Hey I get that it doesn't rain for over 100 days in the valley of the Sun...but you can't be suffering from heatstroke can you? Only then would you being this dense make sense.
As if Barkley vs Jordan isn't an intriguing enough matchup. HA! I'm laughin' my ass over here...AT YOU.
Man in Black, something else. Youre claiming that Jordan affected ratings and it had nothing to do with market sizes.
If that were true, that would prove that market sizes still dont matter. National interest isnt tied to market sizes, only whether or not Jordan was in the league (according to you...which is still a STUPID theory).
It was an intriguing matchup. Which is why it had a high rating.
A higher rating than Bulls/Lakers even though LA is a larger market than Phoenix.
Do. You. Get. It. Now?
Jordan as a lead-in means nothing to ratings?
....him and the Dream Team are on 2 channels right freakin' now and he's the principal topic.
If that doesn't cement why your ratings argument is baseless that you simply cannot be reached. Diamond Hard dense. RECOGNIZE.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
