News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

How to fix the NBA

Started by I-39, May 24, 2017, 09:28:17 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

SP Cook

Actually, the money in MLB is in the deals with the regional sports networks, which are just huge.  The live gate is important, but not nearly as much as other sports.

If you want to see a sport that "struggles" to sell seats, look at any regular season game in the urban niche NBA.  Or at what the new management has done to NASCAR.


Alps


I-39


Big John


I-39

Quote from: Big John on July 15, 2017, 05:05:10 PM
Quote from: I-39 on July 15, 2017, 04:55:12 PM
Quote from: Alps on July 15, 2017, 04:35:41 PM
Pay off the refs.

They already do that so..............  ;-)
As in Tim Donaghy 2007 betting scandal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_NBA_betting_scandal

And I am sure there is more behind the scenes that does not get reported (and that goes for all the major sports leagues).

Desert Man

The NBA stated they're not planning on expansion this decade, but c;mon, Seattle was a place where they shouldn't lose their Supersonics (now the Oklahoma city Thunder). And what about Las Vegas? Pittsburgh? Kansas City? Virginia Beach? and Newark, NJ? The NBA would have 36 teams (the most of any US/North American major sports league) in this scheme - more than the NHL's proposal to have 34, the NFL with 32 (future teams in Mexico City or Toronto?) and MLB in 30 (back in Montreal and one in Puerto Rico?). My opinion is they should expand their sport, their league and their fan base, if they want to be the #1 pro sports league, which the NFL claims and some say the MLB's 2 leagues.
Get your kicks...on Route 99! Like to turn 66 upside down. The other historic Main street of America.

Stephane Dumas

Quote from: Desert Man on July 27, 2017, 11:10:02 AM
The NBA stated they're not planning on expansion this decade, but c;mon, Seattle was a place where they shouldn't lose their Supersonics (now the Oklahoma city Thunder). And what about Las Vegas? Pittsburgh? Kansas City? Virginia Beach? and Newark, NJ? The NBA would have 36 teams (the most of any US/North American major sports league) in this scheme - more than the NHL's proposal to have 34, the NFL with 32 (future teams in Mexico City or Toronto?) and MLB in 30 (back in Montreal and one in Puerto Rico?). My opinion is they should expand their sport, their league and their fan base, if they want to be the #1 pro sports league, which the NFL claims and some say the MLB's 2 leagues.

The 1st incarnation of the ABA  (1967-76) had once a concession in Pittsburgh with the Pipers but it didn't worked as they planned.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Wv4ByDy7KQ

Edit: a vlogger wonder if a NBA expansion in Pittsburgh might work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOT0nMnBV8c

Henry

Knowing the color scheme of the other three Pittsburgh teams, the black and yellow would be the NBA team's choice there as well! :) (not to mention, the Cavs and 76ers could use a new rival in between)

Cincinnati, St. Louis and Baltimore should also be considered, past failures be damned. Charlotte and New Orleans got new teams back, so why not those three?
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

cjk374

Best way to fix the NBA? Dissolve it. Never bring it back into existence. Problem solved.
Runnin' roads and polishin' rails.

SP Cook

Quote from: cjk374 on July 29, 2017, 07:53:38 AM
Best way to fix the NBA? Dissolve it. Never bring it back into existence. Problem solved.

This.

ESPN's well documented decline is 95% relatable to its massive shoving it down our throats over-coverage of that niche sport.  It is just not that popular.  The vast majority don't care. 

As to expansion, the NBA's particular snake-oil is to take a AAA level city and convince the local powers to screw over the taxpayers on the theory that is presence makes the place "big time".  I doubt any of the big league cities mentioned will fall for that.


I-39

Quote from: Desert Man on July 27, 2017, 11:10:02 AM
The NBA stated they're not planning on expansion this decade, but c;mon, Seattle was a place where they shouldn't lose their Supersonics (now the Oklahoma city Thunder). And what about Las Vegas? Pittsburgh? Kansas City? Virginia Beach? and Newark, NJ? The NBA would have 36 teams (the most of any US/North American major sports league) in this scheme - more than the NHL's proposal to have 34, the NFL with 32 (future teams in Mexico City or Toronto?) and MLB in 30 (back in Montreal and one in Puerto Rico?). My opinion is they should expand their sport, their league and their fan base, if they want to be the #1 pro sports league, which the NFL claims and some say the MLB's 2 leagues.

There is no need for NBA expansion unless they make the league more competitive. All expansion would do right now is widen the gap between the two or three contenders and the rest of the league.

I do think the Thunder should move back to Seattle and the Kings should move back to Kansas City though.

triplemultiplex

Quote from: SP Cook on July 29, 2017, 08:35:01 AM
ESPN's well documented decline is 95% relatable to its massive shoving it down our throats over-coverage of that niche sport.  It is just not that popular.  The vast majority don't care. 

No, ESPN's decline is due to the rise of regional and sports networks and the ability to watch highlights on dozens, nay, hundreds of other outlets.  The market for sports television viewing has been diluted.
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

SP Cook

Not really.  ESPN built a huge NBA talk machine.  99% of its non-game time is devoted to constant coverage, even in the off-season, of this niche sport that the vast majority of even sports fans ignore totally.  Then  the contract came up for renewal.  ESPN's management paniced.  MASSIVE over-bid.  ESPN assumed that, since "everybody" has cable (or dish) the cable cos would just pass on yet another price increase.  But the price is so very high that it made alternatives acceptable. 

Many people now, and many more will in the future, seak ESPN free and sports free alternatives to traditional cable/dish.  All because of the huge price cable cos must charge for a sport that nobody much watches.


Alps

Quote from: SP Cook on July 31, 2017, 09:52:59 AM
Not really.  ESPN built a huge NBA talk machine.  99% of its non-game time is devoted to constant coverage, even in the off-season, of this niche sport that the vast majority of even sports fans ignore totally.  Then  the contract came up for renewal.  ESPN's management paniced.  MASSIVE over-bid.  ESPN assumed that, since "everybody" has cable (or dish) the cable cos would just pass on yet another price increase.  But the price is so very high that it made alternatives acceptable. 

Many people now, and many more will in the future, seak ESPN free and sports free alternatives to traditional cable/dish.  All because of the huge price cable cos must charge for a sport that nobody much watches.


More people watch basketball than hockey or soccer. Reality check. You're just upset that minorities tend to like basketball.

SP Cook

Thank you for your deep psychoanalysis.  Where did you get your PhD from and how many sessions have we had, because I don't recall any. 

There is no question that, in the USA the NBA is more popular than soccer (which is, by defination played by "minorities" ) .  ESPN pays $75M/year for it.

The NHL, which is on NBCSN, gets $200M/year.

ESPN pays $1.4BILLION/year for the niche sport NBA.  Which is, of course, passed on to you.  Ratings?  Regular season games average a 1.9.  Early rounds of the interminable playoffs, top out at 6.0.  The vaunted finals?  15.  15 is out of 100.  That was the high Meaning 85% of people did not watch the FINALS.

Massive overbid, which caused ESPN's rate to shoot to an astronomical $8.37/month/subscriber.   Which caused people to look for ESPN-free and sports-free alternatives.  Even with all its limitations, so called cord cutting is advantagous for many homes, because of ESPN's massive NBA over-bid.

triplemultiplex

But you stated that ESPN's decline was because they cover the NBA too much.  That's not the same as tuning out because it's getting too expensive as a result of the bad deal between ESPN and the NBA.
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

bing101

#41
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2017/09/23/stephen-curry-responds-trumps-tweet-its-not-what-leaders-do/696950001/

The Golden State Warriors find itself in a political fiasco with Donald Trump.

Post Merge: September 24, 2017, 04:39:02 PM

http://deadline.com/2017/09/golden-state-warriors-trumps-white-house-invitation-1202175629/

Update now the feud between the Golden State Warriors and President Trump has been confirmed.
Damn we have another feud between athletes and President Trump just the day before the NFL players were targeted for Trump rants.

Alps

Quote from: bing101 on September 24, 2017, 01:12:53 PM
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2017/09/23/stephen-curry-responds-trumps-tweet-its-not-what-leaders-do/696950001/

The Golden State Warriors find itself in a political fiasco with Donald Trump.

Post Merge: September 24, 2017, 04:39:02 PM

http://deadline.com/2017/09/golden-state-warriors-trumps-white-house-invitation-1202175629/

Update now the feud between the Golden State Warriors and President Trump has been confirmed.
Damn we have another feud between athletes and President Trump just the day before the NFL players were targeted for Trump rants.
Isn't it sad that our elected leader is causing controversies about sports instead of leading the nation?
I'm sorry, is this politics or How to Fix the NBA? Not sure with your posts

DTComposer

Quote from: SP Cook on August 01, 2017, 09:07:09 AM
niche sport NBA.

Ratings for 2017 Stanley Cup Finals: 2.7
Ratings for 2017 NBA Finals: 11.3 (you know, the one no one watched because it was a fait accompli)
Ratings for 2016 World Series: 12.9 (you know, the one everyone watched since it involved a team breaking a century-plus drought)
Ratings for 2017 Super Bowl 45.3 (granted, one game vs. multiple games, but still)

Average NHL team value: $517 million
Average NBA team value: $1.35 billion
Average MLB team value: $1.54 billion
Average NFL team value: $2.52 billion

I assume, then, you consider MLB a niche sport?

bing101

#44
Quote from: Alps on September 24, 2017, 04:39:57 PM
Quote from: bing101 on September 24, 2017, 01:12:53 PM
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2017/09/23/stephen-curry-responds-trumps-tweet-its-not-what-leaders-do/696950001/

The Golden State Warriors find itself in a political fiasco with Donald Trump.


Post Merge: September 24, 2017, 04:39:02 PM


http://deadline.com/2017/09/golden-state-warriors-trumps-white-house-invitation-1202175629/

Update now the feud between the Golden State Warriors and President Trump has been confirmed.
Damn we have another feud between athletes and President Trump just the day before the NFL players were targeted for Trump rants.
Isn't it sad that our elected leader is causing controversies about sports instead of leading the nation?
I'm sorry, is this politics or How to Fix the NBA? Not sure with your posts

Well its complicated than that though given todays update. My take would be that theres nothing wrong with the NBA mainly because in the area I'm in the Warriors vs. Cavs has taken on the comparisons to Lakers vs. Celtics in the 1980's. But at the same time yes there are teams that have never won an NBA championship and theres been questions whether or not to keep the team there in this case the Kings represent such an example though.

Post Merge: September 29, 2017, 10:08:44 PM

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/report-nba-sends-memo-reinforcing-rule-that-players-must-stand-for-national-anthem/

Here is an update.

dvferyance

Quote from: Henry on July 29, 2017, 12:35:49 AM
Knowing the color scheme of the other three Pittsburgh teams, the black and yellow would be the NBA team's choice there as well! :) (not to mention, the Cavs and 76ers could use a new rival in between)

Cincinnati, St. Louis and Baltimore should also be considered, past failures be damned. Charlotte and New Orleans got new teams back, so why not those three?
Pittsburgh is too small of a market for both the NBA and NHL. St Louis already has the NHL and Baltimore is too close to Washington which has a team. Remember the team that Baltimore once had is now the team in Washington. I can't see the NBA working out with teams in both cities. Cincinnati could work but I think the league is really looking more at Louisville right now.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.