DuffMan
Well-Known Member
That's pretty much exactly what I said.
For those that think college basketball is not a good product
- Thread starter EddyP
- Start date
That's pretty much exactly what I said.
hawkfan340
Well-Known Member
Links, please?
Edit: In light of Drummers post, I'm incline to believe my first inclination: you have no idea what you are talking about.
Last edited:
Cyclones17
Well-Known Member
Iowa State plays 6 to 7 guys. Bubu is really the only guard that plays off the bench and he is a walk on. Godfrey comes off the bench in the post. I think DG has played all but 4 minutes in conference play. He rarely gets tired.
Last night was such a fun game to watch. ISU plays so hard and play so smart....until the end. They just don't know how to finish a game yet. 2nd time in conference play they have lost a game they had no business losing b/c they couldn't take care of the ball at the end of the game. 3-1 is now 1-3. But they are still a fun group to watch
EddyP
Well-Known Member
No, I capatilized the words you left out since you were suggesting that I haven't watched any college basketball in years. I knew I should have bolded them too. Would you all be happy if I edited out the part about the NBA? Geez. My point was that there is nothing wrong with college ball as some have suggested.
EddyP
Well-Known Member
Why on Earth would you give him the opportunity to talk about Clown b-ball?
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
Planned Special Events - Economic Role and Congestion Effects: Chapter 7 - National Estimates - FHWA Office of Operations -
Here is an older link that shows the NBA ranking third in revenue (which is really the only way to judge popularity) behind baseball (which I'm sure it's since passed) and college basketball is ranked 6th.
It's actually not even really close, in 2007 the NBA generated about 3.5 billion. College basketballs number back in 2002 was around 400 million. It's reasonable to assume it had increased some between 2002 and 2007 but nowhere near enough.
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
Your problem is the word you capitalized doesn't really change the argument much. But feel free to keep arguing semantics if it makes you feel better.
As far as the NBA goes, this is the best I've ever seen it. I have to give the NBA credit, they are trying to get rid of the gangster vibe that ruled the last decade (Iverson has been completely black-balled by the league).
Two aging teams (Lakers, Celtics) with recent titles trying to get back.
Young teams with great young players trying to knock them off (Chicago, Oklahoma City, & Orlando).
Old standbys (Dallas & San Antonio)
The team you either love or hate (Miami). They are the key. They have turned the sports villian (Kobe) into its best hope to stop the new villians (Wade & Lebron). This is what the NBA needs to bring back the common fans.
As far as college BB goes, my only issue is that the talent is gone. Even the one and done guys are rarely great players. Even if they are great, we barely get to see them because they are gone so fast.
Honestly, does Kyle Singler even start on Duke's 2001 NC team with Williams, Dunleavy, Boozer, Battier??
Could he even be 1st team All B10 during the early 1990s? I won't even ask about the 80s because that would be a stupid question. We are talking about the best player in college BB right now.
The talent level is so much different that what I grew up watching that its almost like watching a completely different sport. You really can't even compare the eras anymore because very few from this era could play 15-20 years ago.
Two aging teams (Lakers, Celtics) with recent titles trying to get back.
Young teams with great young players trying to knock them off (Chicago, Oklahoma City, & Orlando).
Old standbys (Dallas & San Antonio)
The team you either love or hate (Miami). They are the key. They have turned the sports villian (Kobe) into its best hope to stop the new villians (Wade & Lebron). This is what the NBA needs to bring back the common fans.
As far as college BB goes, my only issue is that the talent is gone. Even the one and done guys are rarely great players. Even if they are great, we barely get to see them because they are gone so fast.
Honestly, does Kyle Singler even start on Duke's 2001 NC team with Williams, Dunleavy, Boozer, Battier??
Could he even be 1st team All B10 during the early 1990s? I won't even ask about the 80s because that would be a stupid question. We are talking about the best player in college BB right now.
The talent level is so much different that what I grew up watching that its almost like watching a completely different sport. You really can't even compare the eras anymore because very few from this era could play 15-20 years ago.
hawkfan340
Well-Known Member
You obviously have never been to a T-Wolves game. One of the worst sporting events I have ever been to. I would put it slightly (and I mean slightly) above a Cedar Rapids Kernels game and definitely below a St. Paul Saints game.
The level of crowd excitement increased dramatically (like several orders of magnitude) during the breaks in the athletic action when the mascots were shooting stuff into the crowd and/or doing awesome dunks off of trampolines. To be fair, it was Crunch's birthday so there were some awesome mascots there for his party (TC, Viktor the Viking, Goldie, even some other NBA mascots).
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
Dude what are you talking about. That dude courtside in a suite who crouches on the floor the whole game while clapping his program against his hand is absolutlely electric!
hawkdrummer1
Well-Known Member
I'd disagree that revenue is "really the only way to judge popularity". It's certainly a good measure.
But professional and college sports function on different platforms. While college athletics certainly has become "big business" it has an entirely different economic structure than the NBA.
If revenue is the way you judge popularity then, of course, the pro sports would be more popular because they cost more to attend and all products they sell go towards that.
In college the games cost less and you can't figure in most of the product sales to one sport. I would venture to guess that most major universities sell just as much if not more product than pro sports but you can't count that toward football revenue or basketball revenue because someone bought a Hawkeyes jacket, where as if you by a Celtics Jacket that can only go towards the revenue of one sport.
Polls and statistics can be fanagled to say whatever you want them to say. The NBA is popular but if you are going by TOTAL number of fans (casual fans) I don't think there is any comparison to college bball.
Iowafarmgirl
Banned
Drummer, that survey you posted was so flawed it is laughable. You honestly think that NHL hockey and NASCAR are in the top 4 of popular sports while NBA is #5?
College basketball is a big sport in the middle of nowhere like Iowa, upstate New York, and Kansas, and smaller cities like Cincinatti, Raleigh, and Detroit, whereas the NBA is immensely popular in places like NYC, LA, Chicago, Miami, Dallas, Philly, Boston, Atlanta...i.e where people live.
75% of college basketball's popularity is fueled by 8 days of gambling in March, and besides that, most people don't care. Just look at ESPN's NBA ratings on wednesday and Friday vs. NCAA ratings every other day (since they oversaturate the airwaves with NCAA games). The NBA blows NCAA out of the water. Simple as that. Hate to burst your bubble.
College basketball is a big sport in the middle of nowhere like Iowa, upstate New York, and Kansas, and smaller cities like Cincinatti, Raleigh, and Detroit, whereas the NBA is immensely popular in places like NYC, LA, Chicago, Miami, Dallas, Philly, Boston, Atlanta...i.e where people live.
75% of college basketball's popularity is fueled by 8 days of gambling in March, and besides that, most people don't care. Just look at ESPN's NBA ratings on wednesday and Friday vs. NCAA ratings every other day (since they oversaturate the airwaves with NCAA games). The NBA blows NCAA out of the water. Simple as that. Hate to burst your bubble.
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
Revenue is the only way to judge popularity. People vote on whats popular by how they spend thier money. The way you judge the most popular movie is by the size of the box office numbers, the one with the biggest revenue wins. That's it exactly.
It costs more for the NBA ticket because there is a larger demand hence the event is more popular. There is really no other way to look at it.
ibahawkeye
Well-Known Member
If I watch any college basketball other than the hawk games... I would rather watch two Big East teams play that I have no rooting interest in rather than watch the slow Big 10 style of play.
Your points are good, and I would guess that the ratings of NBA games are higher than college because, like you said, they are located in large cities and if those cities tune in to watch the ratings will naturally beat that of the colleges, but you also have to remember they aren't putting on Sacremento vs Memphis either.
Ratings for college are smaller but if you add up all of the fans that watched a college game last night compared to all the fans who watched a NBA game, I bet their were more viewers of the college games. I watched 3 college games last night and never once turned over to Mavs / Lakers on ESPN. I know that is just me.
Ratings show a snapshot of time and not an overall picture.
hawkdrummer1
Well-Known Member
People "vote" with their dollars, that's true. But it's not a simple linear equation where 1 dollar = 1 share point of "interest". The economic platforms are very different from sport to sport...particularly when you compare pro to college.
Boatloads of people watch sports on TV and don't pay a dime for it (directly). My DirecTV bill is the same whether I watch college bball, the NFL or the NBA. Yes, advertising revenues are linked to that, and we all know that TV is a huge source of income. But I can be a huge NBA fan...not give a damn about the NFL and it would never show up on the bottom line $$ unless I bought game tickets or mechandise. (and most people fall into that "TV only" category)
Your supply and demand theory is also a bit flawed. NBA tickets are a bit unique as there are some very very close to the action which are very high priced. The worst seat in a 18,000 seat NBA arena is cheap compared to the worst seat in a 60,000 seat NFL stadium.
NBA arenas are roughly 25-30% the size of NFL stadiums. So under a strict supply/demand theory NBA nosebleeds should be a LOT more expensive than the NFL nosebleeds. They are not. As a matter of fact, in many cities the nosebleed NFL seat is a tougher ticket.
Again, you make some good points...but there are a few holes in your assumptions.
hawkdrummer1
Well-Known Member
I have no bubble to burst honey
I'm just digging through the numbers. I made no assertion that college bball was "bigger" than the NBA. Obviously the NBA makes much more $$. I said I didn't care for the "game" and that it wasn't the second most popular sport.As I said, every survey is defined by its metrics. Each has its "bias". But Harris poll is pretty damn reputable compared to some of the schlock operations out there. I can't stand NASCAR, but like it or not...it's hugely popular. Lots of data shows that it's even higher than #4.
The point is...combine all these surveys (reread my post and you'll note I said "here's ONE"...not "here's the final word")...toss out the highs and lows...and still...no way is the NBA the second most popular sport.
Last edited:
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
"TV fans" do indeed vote with $$ and it can be gauged in the form of advertising revenue. When the advertising revenue generated by the TV contracts 30 professional basketball teams exceeds that of 344 division 1 basketball teams it's a pretty strong argument.
The bottom line is the NBA is a far more popular sport in the United States (not to mention world wide) than is college basketball and I'm not sure it's even close or arguable.
The bottom line is the NBA is a far more popular sport in the United States (not to mention world wide) than is college basketball and I'm not sure it's even close or arguable.
