86Rooster Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Macksam Couldn't be more wrong. The seven game series throughout is what makes the Stanley Cup the hardest trophy to win in the world. Why do you think the NBA copied that model? Money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 ^The NHL understands the global importance of other sports (basketball, soccer) so that it will adjust its organization to get maximum dollar impact. Look at the early experiments: franchises in the American sunbelt, changing the Conference and Division names from traditional (Campbell, Wales, Norris, etc), even letting Disney highlight the puck with red on TV. As for the original topic of Canadian teens losing interest in hockey, well that seem to reflect the changing Canadian and global demographics. How many countries play soccer and basketball, compared to the number of elite countries that play hockey? Hockey costs a lot of money, but many kids are attracted to other forms of leisure (Xbox, Wii, on-line games, etc.) as well. Hockey Canada gets the most funding of all the sports in Canada, yet if the dwindling numbers are correct, the stats are just a function of changing tastes and the reality that few countries (mostly rich ones) can afford that luxury. Canada still loves its hockey: look at the headline - Sidney Crosby brings home the Stanley Cup! So much for other global news ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyrus Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 quote:Originally posted by hectorj We were chumps to let the Americans join our league back in the 20's. Imagine a set up like English football and the Stanley Cup was like the FA Cup. The Premiership could have the existing 6 + Winnipeg, Hamilton, QC and Halifax. There could be 4 or 5 leagues with promotion and relegation and everybody would get a chance at the cup. My only worry is that without the US, the talent would flee for richer climes. Back when airplanes were of the type used by the Red Baron, it was quite an effort to play games against the likes of Dawson and Vancouver. Now, a nice small, six-team league, spread between Boston and Chicago, every city having great train links. That made sense. Regional rivalries, blue collar hockey-loving fanbases. Owner collusion keeps wages low, having the best six teams in the world keeps the talent level sky-high on the ice. Massive profits for the owners, and the fans in those six cities get a fantastic product to watch. But our current NHL looks nothing like that. Is the current NHL even profitable as a whole? Some franchises are, but the whole thing? Probably not. So another change will have to happen -- you can't have sports businesses that don't make money. And is MLS profitable as a whole? Probably not yet, but it seems to me to be on a slight upward trend. Which is much better than the alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macksam Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 quote:Originally posted by VPjr that is clearly your opinion. I have no use for hockey and can't/won't watch a split second of it. however, I will sit down and gladly watch a eurobasket match any night of the week and I share Raps seasons tickets So, if you ask me, Basketball is a much better sport than hockey Why so close minded? I watched both the Stanley Cup and NBA finals, and the NHL finals was clearly the better and more entertaining product. Even a few of my friends who were into basketball more even said the NHL finals was better. Also, don't you like a sport where all 18 guys contribute to victory rather than three of four narcissistic, arrogant freaks? Even the American media is realizing why the NHL is better than the NBA. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/letters/chi-090611jaros_briefs,0,7231201.story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoyleG Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Macksam Couldn't be more wrong. The seven game series throughout is what makes the Stanley Cup the hardest trophy to win in the world. Why do you think the NBA copied that model? The opening round of the NBA playoffs is a Best-of-5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soro17 Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 ^ The NBA hasn't had a best of five opening round for at least five years. As for basketball, my take is that the NBA version is bleh. I've enjoyed the Eurobasket stuff I've seen. Generally speaking, hockey and soccer are more enjoyable because there is a premium on scoring. The 40+ baskets per team per game in basketball are extremely tedious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackdude Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 quote:Originally posted by DoyleG The opening round of the NBA playoffs is a Best-of-7 since 2003. FYP The NBA did that to make more money and isn`t it strange that both leagues have 82 regular season games, 2 conferences, 6 divisions, 30 teams, 16 teams in the playoffs and best of 7 in all 4 rounds? Stern and Bettman are people who worked together in the Association. Mack, you`re talking about NHL Finals againts NBA Finals. A playoff series that goes to a game 7 won by the away team in any sport will be better than a team that crushes the other one in 5. If Detroit won in 5, they would disagree. And the Stanley Cup is not the hardest trophy to win in sports, you can say you are a hockey fan. Chris Bosh is everywhere. He does many ads on TV. I don`t see (insert canadian NHL team here) on TV. I`m sure that you`d put Chris Bosh and 80% of GTA teens would recognize. You`d put any Maple Leafs player and he won`t be as recognized. It is more because hockey isn`t anymore the only sport. In 1992, only the MLB was in Canada. Now, the NFL is now playing regular season games at the Rogers Centre and the NBA added 2 teams. Yes, I know the Grizzlies are in Memphis, but those sports are implemented. Same thing about soccer, TFC plays games on CBC and the Impact on SRC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macksam Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Blackdude FYP The NBA did that to make more money and isn`t it strange that both leagues have 82 regular season games, 2 conferences, 6 divisions, 30 teams, 16 teams in the playoffs and best of 7 in all 4 rounds? Stern and Bettman are people who worked together in the Association. Mack, you`re talking about NHL Finals againts NBA Finals. A playoff series that goes to a game 7 won by the away team in any sport will be better than a team that crushes the other one in 5. If Detroit won in 5, they would disagree. And the Stanley Cup is not the hardest trophy to win in sports, you can say you are a hockey fan. Chris Bosh is everywhere. He does many ads on TV. I don`t see (insert canadian NHL team here) on TV. I`m sure that you`d put Chris Bosh and 80% of GTA teens would recognize. You`d put any Maple Leafs player and he won`t be as recognized. It is more because hockey isn`t anymore the only sport. In 1992, only the MLB was in Canada. Now, the NFL is now playing regular season games at the Rogers Centre and the NBA added 2 teams. Yes, I know the Grizzlies are in Memphis, but those sports are implemented. Same thing about soccer, TFC plays games on CBC and the Impact on SRC. Not to sound like a biased hockey fan, but it is widely considered the hardest trophy to win in sports. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/88331-lord-stanleys-cup-hardest-trophy-to-win-in-professional-sport As for Chris Bosh's popularity, that's what the NBA does best. They know how to market their stars. However, the Leafs right now don't have one since Sundin left. I bet a couple years ago, GTA teens probably could recognize Sundin just as much (probably more so) as they do Bosh now. Anyhow, even though that particular 5000 sample showed more teens followed basketball more closely, if you took a survey of the whole teen populace in the GTA (which would be nearly impossible to do) hockey would come out on top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJB Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Macksam Why so close minded? I watched both the Stanley Cup and NBA finals, and the NHL finals was clearly the better and more entertaining product</u>. Even a few of my friends who were into basketball more even said the NHL finals was better. Also, don't you like a sport where all 18 guys contribute to victory rather than three of four narcissistic, arrogant freaks? Even the American media is realizing why the NHL is better than the NBA. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/letters/chi-090611jaros_briefs,0,7231201.story Must we refer to sports as a product? It's a sport! If any sport is a product, then you are a consumer, not a fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 quote:Originally posted by VPjr ^ what do you mean? GTA Teens can go to hockey games too? A good ticket to a Raptors game ain't cheap. If a teen in Toronto likes hockey but cant afford Leafs tickets, they can go see a Marlies game for a a very reasonable fee (or Junior A). I believe the original poster was correct, as saying that if you're into hockey you can catch AHL or Jr. A is not particularly relevant. If it were, Hamilton wouldn't have 14 000 (or whatever) people signing up for seasons tickets for an NHL team that doesn't exist, but 5000 showing up for the Bulldogs. (I'm not dissing AHL or Jr.A - AHL is my fav of the three leagues - I like and watch AHL/Jr.A, but the average fan does not.) I think the thing that's missing in the discussion is not just the affordability of Raptors, but accessibility</u> to tickets as well. Almost everyone I know, fan or non-fan, has been to a Raptors game; whereas almost no-one has been to a Leafs game, simply because it's hard to get a ticket, and when you do get one, it is much more expensive than the Raptors. I mean, the Raps had the sprite zone. The Raps still have group sales. When's the last anyone went to a Leafs game as a team building exercise for work, or as an after-class outing in high school or univ.? Attending an NBA game is starting to become a shared experience for many middle-income younger Torontonians, whereas the commonalities associated with attending NHL games are largely rooted to "My Dad took me once, I saw them play the Isles in 1995" or "for my 9th birthday, I got to see them play pre-season at Copps" or "I saw them in Tampa when I was on vacation" etc. -- a commonality that is expressed as a one-off or past experience, not one going forward. IMHO I guess what I'm saying (albeit not concisely or clearly) is that, even as a non-fan of basketball, if you're middle income the Raptors are seen as something you can do once in a while as a treat. You can generally get a ticket, and can generally afford it. Not so for NHL, in Toronto at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vic Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Jim Balsille is trying to change that, and you can thank Gary Bettman for making sure it doesn't happen. If London had one EPL team, no one, and I mean no one, could ever afford to attend a game in their lifetime. Edmonton, Calgary and Ottawa are 1 million people and support NHL teams. The GTA is over 5.5 million and Montreal is almost 4. Both can support additional teams and make the game affordable for more Canadians. Not doing so is simply greed, and if we are apathetic enough to let entities like MLSE decide the future according to their bank account, then it serves us right to have basketball become the national game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VPjr Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Macksam Why so close minded? I watched both the Stanley Cup and NBA finals, and the NHL finals was clearly the better and more entertaining product. Even a few of my friends who were into basketball more even said the NHL finals was better. Also, don't you like a sport where all 18 guys contribute to victory rather than three of four narcissistic, arrogant freaks? I'm not closed minded. I was subjected to hockey all my life but I just don't like the sport. I've always prefered basketball to hockey. In the last 5-6 years, with the advent of specialty channels on cable, I've started to watch ALOT more soccer. Those two sports are basically the only two I watch in winter. I can't tell you if the NHL finals was better than the NBA finals because I didn't watch the NHL finals at all. No interest. I did watch the NBA finals and enjoyed it but it certainly wasn't the best finals of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 "Must we refer to sports as a product? It's a sport! If any sport is a product, then you are a consumer, not a fan." That is the reality of the modern professional sports entertainment business. The sport is a product, the athletes are commodities and the fans are consumers to be marketed to and courted for their money. The only sport where this is not the case is the truly amateur sport which now really only exists at the community level with few exceptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squizz1402635577 Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Richard "Must we refer to sports as a product? It's a sport! If any sport is a product, then you are a consumer, not a fan." That is the reality of the modern professional sports entertainment business. The sport is a product, the athletes are commodities and the fans are consumers to be marketed to and courted for their money. The only sport where this is not the case is the truly amateur sport which now really only exists at the community level with few exceptions. There's no better evidence of this than teams going on transnational, transoceanic journeys in an effort to "expand their brand". I personally hate hearing games and teams and leagues being referred to as "product"... but just because I hate the reality, doesn't mean it isn't reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 ^^ I agree, Richard. My rule on the subject is based on the following: Did you pay for a ticket to a match? Did someone sponsor the team or arena or stadium or the game? If the answer is yes, then to a large extent, it's a sport AND a product. The Olympics is a product. The World Cup, the Gold Cup, and Euro are products. MLSE sees Toronto FC as a product that it can market and make fans and sponsors PAY for the product. And TV provides revenue for the product. Anyone can make a case against, but without it the sport will not exist at that level or higher. Even some sports franchises are owned by shareholders and must be profitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macksam Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Vic Jim Balsille is trying to change that, and you can thank Gary Bettman for making sure it doesn't happen. If London had one EPL team, no one, and I mean no one, could ever afford to attend a game in their lifetime. Edmonton, Calgary and Ottawa are 1 million people and support NHL teams. The GTA is over 5.5 million and Montreal is almost 4. Both can support additional teams and make the game affordable for more Canadians. Not doing so is simply greed, and if we are apathetic enough to let entities like MLSE decide the future according to their bank account, then it serves us right to have basketball become the national game. I agree with everything (well soccer would realistically become the national game instead of basketball but never the less). However, I have heard that MLSE isn't too opposed to the idea of a second NHL team in the GTA. For the right relocation fee of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macksam Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 quote:Originally posted by VPjr I'm not closed minded. I was subjected to hockey all my life but I just don't like the sport. I've always prefered basketball to hockey. In the last 5-6 years, with the advent of specialty channels on cable, I've started to watch ALOT more soccer. Those two sports are basically the only two I watch in winter. I can't tell you if the NHL finals was better than the NBA finals because I didn't watch the NHL finals at all. No interest. I did watch the NBA finals and enjoyed it but it certainly wasn't the best finals of all time. Well to each his own. I will say this, I was at Ryerson's pub, Ram at the Rye to watch the games 3 and 4 of the NBA finals and it was fairly busy for those games, so it is attracting the younger crowd fairly well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_AM_CANADIAN Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 This Canadian teen has completely lost interest in hockey, for the record. So there is some truth to the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.