U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-21-2012, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
28,266 posts, read 26,237,774 times
Reputation: 11726

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life View Post
In football the face of the franchise is not the kicker or the punter. It's typically the quarterback. And that is a position that has a healthy proportion of white american players. It's why I also mentioned that even though the NFL has way more "black thugs" than the NBA does, it gets to avoid that "thug league" description because the most visible players to the public, are for the most part, white. And to be brutally honest, the NFL has been fortunate that those most visible players have kept their noses clean and out of trouble. At the end of the day, black people are our own worst enemy. As long as our big stars act stupid, whether its Kobe, Vick, or anyone else then the "thug" description will continue to get put out there.
I agree with this. I think the current racial composition of the NBA does indeed turn some people off. And I think that the racial composition of the NBA lends the League, and the sport, a certain perception. Basketball has gone from the "thinking man's sport" played by luminaries such as George Mikan and Bob Couzy to the "athlete's sport" dominated by guys with supposedly much brawn and little brain.

Just go to ESPN.com and read any of the archived stories about U.S. Men's basketball. You're likely to read comments like, "Those guys can jump out of the gym, but the Europeans understand the game better." The failure of the 2004 Olympic team was attributed to selfishness, valuing brawn over brains, athleticism over skills, etc. Very little consideration was given to the idea that the chemistry was just bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-21-2012, 04:27 PM
 
Location: The "Rock"
2,551 posts, read 2,413,490 times
Reputation: 1322
"Despite the problems in the early-to-mid-2000s, the NBA's regular season ratings average was (and is) on par with Major League Baseball's, and ratings for the finals continue to outdraw competing events that occur during the same month, such as golf's U.S. Open and the Stanley Cup Finals."

National Basketball Association Nielsen ratings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

NBA Finals stay on track to be highest-rated since 2004
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2012, 05:34 PM
 
Location: Fairfax County, VA
3,718 posts, read 4,785,954 times
Reputation: 1454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyc77 View Post
I thought they already did..haha
Sorry about that. I'll admit; I was lazy and didn't feel like searching through the pages. What page is it on?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2012, 07:22 AM
 
1,561 posts, read 1,659,887 times
Reputation: 1046
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
The big difference however is you cannot just BUY a good NBA team like you generally can in MLB.
This, more than anything, is going to kill baseball. Yeah, yeah, yeah the Yankees and Red Sox have more fans than all the other teams combined but fans in Kansas City, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Minnesota, etc... aren't going to watch as more and more of their home grown players develop and leave for the big markets.

Unless you are a monster market you simply cannot sustain sucess. You have to develop and build your team with zero chance for error and then you have a one to three year window to win. After that, all of your good players leave for NYC or L.A. or Boston b/c they can offer three times what you can.

The only sport that doesn't favor the big markets is the NFL. If you suck it is because you made bad decisions in the draft or free agency, not because the New York team outbid everyone for all the good players or because your big star wanted to go to a big market for endorsement reasons and cred in the hip hop community (NBA).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2012, 01:12 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA
167 posts, read 233,812 times
Reputation: 36
This year's World Series averaged just 12.7 million viewers. If you're still not convinced that baseball is a dying sport, there's your evidence.

Baseball is losing its muster. It has a well-deserved reputation of being a sport for grumpy old men. The fact that they refuse to implement instant replay pretty much says it all.

Basketball, on the other hand, is ascending in popularity. You can just feel it. Just wait until the Knicks are a powerhouse franchise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2012, 01:40 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA
167 posts, read 233,812 times
Reputation: 36
Reasons why the NBA is gaining ground on MLB:

1) The NBA is much, much more popular among the African American population in this country. That should be blatantly obvious to anyone with half a brain. I'd wager that it's also more popular among Asians, and about equal among Latinos.

2) The NBA is more popular among the younger age groups, as evidenced by its dominance in social media. For example, the NBA has over 6 million followers on Twitter while MLB has a little over 2 million.

3) The popularity of baseball is heavily dependent on the Yankees and Red Sox. The NBA is a star-driven league. There are always going to be stars, but the Yankees and Red Sox aren't always going to be legit contenders.

4) The NBA has a global audience... China, Taiwan, The Philippines, Argentina, Spain, Turkey, etc.

5) The nation's largest market (NYC) hasn't won an NBA championship since 1973, and yet the Knicks are still a popular franchise. What will happen if they win 3-4 titles within a span of a decade?

6) Most NBA franchises have only been around since the late 60's (many even younger than that), much younger than their MLB counterparts. Those franchises haven't had time to fully develop yet. If the Cubs and Indians were NBA teams, they'd have 0 titles. If the Red Sox were an NBA team, they'd have only 2 titles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2012, 01:32 PM
 
Location: Northridge, Los Angeles, CA
2,685 posts, read 6,358,494 times
Reputation: 2356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westsidelife View Post
This year's World Series averaged just 12.7 million viewers. If you're still not convinced that baseball is a dying sport, there's your evidence.

Baseball is losing its muster. It has a well-deserved reputation of being a sport for grumpy old men. The fact that they refuse to implement instant replay pretty much says it all.

Basketball, on the other hand, is ascending in popularity. You can just feel it. Just wait until the Knicks are a powerhouse franchise.
That's mostly because the World Series was a 4 game sweep. Most of the time, 4 game sweeps don't generate a lot of viewership because it's boring to watch something that the outcome has already been determined. Do you remember the 2007 NBA finals? Maybe you do if you watch basketball because of the sport (like me), but most people don't. Was basketball a dying sport in 2007?

6.2 rating. Followed closely by the non-sweep of the NJ Nets in the finals by the San Antonio Spurs in 2003 which got a 6.5 rating.

National Basketball Association Nielsen ratings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
NBA Finals numbers game. | Sports Media Watch

Maybe its because we both live in LA, and the NBA is obviously the largest talk of town here, but in every other part of the United States, that is not NEARLY the case in every other part of the United States. For other parts of the US, if you aren't the Celtics, Lakers, Heat, Thunder, Bulls, and to a much smaller extent Knicks/Nets, then the NBA takes a LARGE backseat to the NFL and MLB. The lack of parity in the NBA has made it for most people to watch because the outcome of the season always seems to never be in doubt, except if you're the 2004 Pistons playing the 2004 Lakers.

Yes, there is the social media element, but that has to do more with international viewership (most other countries don't really have popular basketball leagues, unlike baseball in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and to a smaller extent China where their leagues generate more interest than the MLB) than anything else.

I say this as someone who's from the Philippines and the NBA interest there is a lot higher on average than it is outside of LA in the United States.

Honestly, what I really don't understand is why people who don't watch MLB have to constantly comment on how its a dying sport. If it was, it obviously wouldn't generate more revenue than the NBA (a lot has to do with the 162 game season vs 83, but the same could be applied to NFL vs. MLB and NBA). I think the billionaires who run the show know where the money is.

The Average NFL Franchise Is Worth More Than $1 Billion - Business Insider


I started off by watching NBA first, but then I got into MLB, then into NFL (even though LA doesn't have a team), and started watching NHL BEFORE everyone here decided the Kings were worth watching. I find that as a lot of younger people get older, they start appreciating baseball more and more. I know I have, and so have a lot of my friends.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2012, 05:23 PM
 
51,928 posts, read 41,791,093 times
Reputation: 32398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lifeshadower View Post
That's mostly because the World Series was a 4 game sweep. Most of the time, 4 game sweeps don't generate a lot of viewership because it's boring to watch something that the outcome has already been determined. Do you remember the 2007 NBA finals? Maybe you do if you watch basketball because of the sport (like me), but most people don't. Was basketball a dying sport in 2007?

6.2 rating. Followed closely by the non-sweep of the NJ Nets in the finals by the San Antonio Spurs in 2003 which got a 6.5 rating.

National Basketball Association Nielsen ratings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
NBA Finals numbers game. | Sports Media Watch

Maybe its because we both live in LA, and the NBA is obviously the largest talk of town here, but in every other part of the United States, that is not NEARLY the case in every other part of the United States. For other parts of the US, if you aren't the Celtics, Lakers, Heat, Thunder, Bulls, and to a much smaller extent Knicks/Nets, then the NBA takes a LARGE backseat to the NFL and MLB. The lack of parity in the NBA has made it for most people to watch because the outcome of the season always seems to never be in doubt, except if you're the 2004 Pistons playing the 2004 Lakers.

Yes, there is the social media element, but that has to do more with international viewership (most other countries don't really have popular basketball leagues, unlike baseball in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and to a smaller extent China where their leagues generate more interest than the MLB) than anything else.

I say this as someone who's from the Philippines and the NBA interest there is a lot higher on average than it is outside of LA in the United States.

Honestly, what I really don't understand is why people who don't watch MLB have to constantly comment on how its a dying sport. If it was, it obviously wouldn't generate more revenue than the NBA (a lot has to do with the 162 game season vs 83, but the same could be applied to NFL vs. MLB and NBA). I think the billionaires who run the show know where the money is.

The Average NFL Franchise Is Worth More Than $1 Billion - Business Insider


I started off by watching NBA first, but then I got into MLB, then into NFL (even though LA doesn't have a team), and started watching NHL BEFORE everyone here decided the Kings were worth watching. I find that as a lot of younger people get older, they start appreciating baseball more and more. I know I have, and so have a lot of my friends.
Now go back 20-30 years and look at the gap in average franchise value between MLB and the NBA...... You are in for a shock.

I like to point out MLB is waning because their product sucks.

They lost a full season to strike, the last 20 years best players....probably half or more were on steroids which makes a farce of the records....the payroll imbalances are horrible allowing the Yankees to make the playoffs 95% of the time and the world series about 1 in 3 years.

The market imbalance has crippled once solid franchises like the KC Royals etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2012, 07:20 PM
 
Location: Northridge, Los Angeles, CA
2,685 posts, read 6,358,494 times
Reputation: 2356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
Now go back 20-30 years and look at the gap in average franchise value between MLB and the NBA...... You are in for a shock.
I don't have access to the historical stats of the MLB vs. NBA, but its worth remembering that before the 1980s, the NBA was a small league. In terms of relative growth, the NBA has grown much faster than the MLB.

If you do have them, I'll be happy to take a crack at it.

Quote:
I like to point out MLB is waning because their product sucks.

World Series television ratings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
National Basketball Association Nielsen ratings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MLB WS ratings:
2000: 12.4
2001: 15.7
2002: 11.9
2003: 12.8
2004: 15.8
2005: 11.1
2006: 10.1
2007: 10.6
2008: 8.4
2009: 11.7
2010: 8.4
2011: 10.0
2012: 7.6

NBA Finals ratings:
2000: 11.6
2001: 12.1
2002: 10.2
2003: 6.5
2004: 11.5
2005: 8.2
2006: 8.5
2007: 6.2
2008: 9.3
2009: 8.4
2010: 10.6
2011: 10.2
2012: 10.1

The World Series has had 4 seasons where the coverage was less than 10.0 while the NBA finals has had 6 seasons where the ratings were less than 10.0

Now, looking at the historical overall picture, neither the MLB or NBA are at any of their heights, and I would agree to say that the MLB is on a steeper decline than the NBA, but both in the larger scheme of things are in decline from their heydays. So saying that the MLB is waning is equivalent to saying that the NBA is waning as well. Since Jordan retired, the NBA finals hasn't gotten above a 12.0 rating even with the younger generation watching more and more hoops.

What that means to me: nothing. I'll still watch both.

Quote:
They lost a full season to strike, the last 20 years best players....probably half or more were on steroids which makes a farce of the records....the payroll imbalances are horrible allowing the Yankees to make the playoffs 95% of the time and the world series about 1 in 3 years.
Yeah, I'd agree that the 1994 strike really did kill a lot of the viewership for the MLB.

However, there's so much parity in the NBA that the Celtics and Lakers don't have more than half of the NBA championships combined.....its only in my imagination that 33/66 finals rings aren't divided between two teams (meaning that the Lakers and Celtics each own 25% of the NBA finals rings).

In addition
New York Yankees Team History & Encyclopedia - Baseball-Reference.com

Between 1982 and 1995, the Yankees didn't even make the playoffs. In the last 10 years, the Yankees have only won ONE ring. The Giants, Red Sox, and Cardinals have won more. Even taking the Yankees 27 rings into consideration, they in fact have less of a monopoly on MLB championships than either the Celtics or Lakers (24% of WS rings are owned by Yankees, which 26% of NBA finals are owned by Celtics and 25% are owned by Lakers)

You sound like you have an ax to grind with MLB, which is completely understandable. That doesn't mean the NBA doesn't have its own faults considering that most of the large trades that go on in basketball are to the benefit of a few teams because of the need for media exposure.

You tell me how you would feel if a trade was denied because of "reasons of basketball"

Quote:
The market imbalance has crippled once solid franchises like the KC Royals etc.
Because aside from the Thunder and Spurs, small market franchises in the NBA are doing so well. Let me know when the Charlotte Bobcats win the NBA Finals.

Remember the title of the thread: how close is the nba to passing major league baseball as the number 2 spot.

In the real world, for most of the country, the NBA is still behind the MLB, for better and for worse. All the statistics point to that.

As for the future trajectory, given how the past 10 years has gone for the NBA and MLB (as in both declined), it will be a while before the NBA passes the MLB. No amount of saying how much baseball sucks, its boring, etc. will change the current trends.

Last edited by Lifeshadower; 11-03-2012 at 07:33 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2012, 12:42 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA
167 posts, read 233,812 times
Reputation: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lifeshadower View Post
That's mostly because the World Series was a 4 game sweep. Most of the time, 4 game sweeps don't generate a lot of viewership because it's boring to watch something that the outcome has already been determined. Do you remember the 2007 NBA finals? Maybe you do if you watch basketball because of the sport (like me), but most people don't. Was basketball a dying sport in 2007?

6.2 rating. Followed closely by the non-sweep of the NJ Nets in the finals by the San Antonio Spurs in 2003 which got a 6.5 rating.

National Basketball Association Nielsen ratings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
NBA Finals numbers game. | Sports Media Watch

Maybe its because we both live in LA, and the NBA is obviously the largest talk of town here, but in every other part of the United States, that is not NEARLY the case in every other part of the United States. For other parts of the US, if you aren't the Celtics, Lakers, Heat, Thunder, Bulls, and to a much smaller extent Knicks/Nets, then the NBA takes a LARGE backseat to the NFL and MLB. The lack of parity in the NBA has made it for most people to watch because the outcome of the season always seems to never be in doubt, except if you're the 2004 Pistons playing the 2004 Lakers.

Yes, there is the social media element, but that has to do more with international viewership (most other countries don't really have popular basketball leagues, unlike baseball in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and to a smaller extent China where their leagues generate more interest than the MLB) than anything else.

I say this as someone who's from the Philippines and the NBA interest there is a lot higher on average than it is outside of LA in the United States.

Honestly, what I really don't understand is why people who don't watch MLB have to constantly comment on how its a dying sport. If it was, it obviously wouldn't generate more revenue than the NBA (a lot has to do with the 162 game season vs 83, but the same could be applied to NFL vs. MLB and NBA). I think the billionaires who run the show know where the money is.

The Average NFL Franchise Is Worth More Than $1 Billion - Business Insider


I started off by watching NBA first, but then I got into MLB, then into NFL (even though LA doesn't have a team), and started watching NHL BEFORE everyone here decided the Kings were worth watching. I find that as a lot of younger people get older, they start appreciating baseball more and more. I know I have, and so have a lot of my friends.
Wow, where do I even begin?

1) First off, I'm a HUGE baseball fan. I love MLB almost as much as I love the NBA. Just because I call baseball a dying sport (a sentiment echoed by longtime ESPN anchor Linda Cohn, also a huge baseball fan) doesn't mean I dislike it. Baseball is behind the times. Pretty un-progressive and too much emphasis on tradition. That's the truth.

2) I also started following the Kings before their improbable Stanley Cup playoff run. I love hockey too.

3) I wouldn't say the NBA lags far behind MLB in most other parts of the country. NFL? Absolutely. MLB? No.

4) The Giants-Rangers WS a couple of years ago also drew abysmal ratings, and that series went 6 games.

5) When I say that baseball is declining and basketball is ascending, I know full well that it's a recent trend.

6) Revenue... MLB plays twice as many games as the NBA, and in stadiums that hold twice as many people (if not more).

7) Franchise value... NBA is nowhere near as old as MLB. Give it time to develop. MLB is much closer to the NBA than it is the NFL is this category.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top