Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'MLS: Commissioner - You be The Don' started by Cyclonis, Feb 1, 2012.
That's because David Stern re-uped with Satan in order to make sure the NBA remains popular.
If he was smart, he'd make a December start the new norm, and cut the season to 56 games. The league will benefit in the long run.
I agree. A shorter NBA season would be awesome! Id love for MLB to cut down to 100 games but that aint happening.
And play a balanced schedule with no divisions and no interleague play; the two League Winners playing in a best-of-seven World Series. A boy can dream
Hey, just because I want my MLS to look more like the National Football League than the n-power Football League doesn't mean I don't wax romantically about the loss of the pennant races.
A shorter season would benefit the NBA but not compacted as it is this year, injuries are starting to pile up, and the level of play at the end of the back to back to backs is pretty awful.
Well, it would probably be good for TV (the reason the lockout ended when it did was that TV starts caring about the NBA approximately at Christmastime), but it would certainly adversely impact ticket revenue.
The Sixers have always been the ugly duckling of Philly sports, except for the peak of the Iverson years. From 1989 through 1996 they drew fewer fans per game than the Philadelphia Wings (NLL). The Philadelphia Soul outdrew them in 2007 and 08, and the Union in 2010 and 11.
Without knowing the Union's local tv ratings, I can't really say which is more popular. Anecdotally, I see more Union gear (shirts, hats, bumper stickers), than sixers around town. But if you go to a random bar, the sixers game will be on as a matter of course, even if no one is paying attention, while you have to ask, and often argue, to get the Union game on.
It's a matter of perspective, I think. When the Sixers are good, people care. That hasn't happened much lately. But in the 70s and 80s they were huge.
It also depends on the neighborhood--you never stopped seeing sixers gear in West Philly. Traditionally, in my experience, you can see anyone at Phillies and Eagles games, but Sixers crowds tend to be black and Flyers crowds tend to be white.
Black people like basketball and white people like hockey...
Thrilling sports take there.
Well if this Jerremy Lin does not come crashing down to reality and lives up to the hype, then Basketball will get a boost in China/Taiwan (and among Asian-Americans).
The NBA will be fine, as will the NHL, MLB, and NFL for the forseeable future.
Why can't we just have a "big 5" instead of having to "replace" one of those other leagues.
It's fun to poke fun at the NBA since the league is a joke anyway.
Seems to me the popularity of it has gone down a bit since the lockout.
Considering the fact that there may be yet another this coming summer, it may decline further
Well, that's totally not true.
The NHL is getting great ratings and great attendance. The last two Stanley Cup Finals series have produced some of the most watched games of the last 40 years. It's not all sunshine and roses, but no league is. The league will shuffle a couple of chairs around, but with Nashville and Tampa Bay putting down strong roots and Florida having committed ownership, some of the biggest gambles in the last round of expansion are very stable. Phoenix will likely move, but I would argue that they were destined to fail from the outset by playing in an arena that wasn't properly designed for hockey, and then playing in the relative middle of nowhere in Glendale.
The NBA is not "dying," either. Its ratings are just as strong, TV contracts are outrageously high, and so are ticket prices. So long as the Bulls, Celtics, Lakers, and Knicks exist, they will find teams to play against. The league might get leaner, but the markets they would consider contracting from wouldn't be huge revenue boosters anyway.
Can we get something straight about this thread? the NBA is NOT dying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! they may have a few teams that are terrible or get low attendances like every league but interest in the NBA is higher than ever.
Naturally it isn't dying. It is interesting to vet some of the other leagues for a change.
Two years ago there were 17 teams in the NBA that averaged over 90% capacity. Right now, there are 13. This season, there are 17 teams overall that are averaging below 90% capacity, with 6 averaging at less than 80% capacity, and 1 averaging 60%. To put this in perspective, there are only 9 teams in the NHL averaging at below 90% capacity.
It would be crazy to suggest that the league is in trouble, but I don't think it would be farfetched to say that the NBA should consider contraction. Contractions seems to be taboo, and I'm sure a few of the owners would not be too willing to part, but 30 teams for the NBA never really made sense. 24-28 is where it's natural number lies between I think, and it wouldn't be any worse off. You would get a greater concentration of talent, more games involving top end markets, and buzzing arenas country wide.
The NFL can handle 32 teams due to its popularity and its league structure. A (normally) 41 game home season does really stretch your fanbase with 30 teams. I think both NBA and NHL could afford to lose a few teams comfortably and still come out better off (anywhere between 2 and 6 teams).
Interest in the NBA is higher than ever? Show your work
Well at least rating are up according to this article.
"So what's going on with the NBA? At midseason, its ratings are up 26% on TNT and 15% on ESPN— and, albeit in a smaller sample, up 32% on ABC. Even in its proven bastions, ratings are jumping: TNT's ratings in Boston are up 50%, while ESPN is up 39% in Los Angeles."
"Through Thursday, NBA regular season games have averaged a 1.8 U.S. rating and 2.839 million viewers on TNT"
It's pretty simple. NBA fans always point to the big national ratings for the big bandwagon teams, but outside of those teams, the local support is no better than the NHL. The NBA thrives on bandwagons far more than any other league.
Basketball also has a huge advantage on other sports in that it is far more accessible to play, and basically designed for television with dozens of stoppages and slow, easy to follow play.
But I think a lot of basketball fans can only see the big ratings for national games and soaring dunks, where non-basketball fans picture basketball as half-empty stadiums and time-outs between free throws.
Much in the same way that us soccer fans see full stadiums, TV deals and other growth, only for non-soccer fans to point to dismal ratings, no mainstream media coverage, and so on.