29 replies to this topic

[VM1138]

Actually it's about right. TV ratings for the Stanley Cup Finals aren't even half of what they are for the NBA.

Really? Are you sure? I haven't seen numbers but I was under the impression that nobody watched the NBA finals.

[plopster]

I was actually under the impression that the NBA was on the decline while the NHL has been moving forward.

[Autika]

Really? Are you sure? I haven't seen numbers but I was under the impression that nobody watched the NBA finals.

Nah, it's just that we don't watch the NBA finals.

[Robby2419]

an espn poll doesnt tell me much. espn is a joke. for an entity that prides itself on being the world wide leader in sports, they sure are lacking in hockey and soccer coverage. 30 seconds of barry melrose each time sportscenter airs is a joke. and lets not even discuss its way over the top NFL coverage.

anyway screw that noise and screw espn. go wings!

[Frozen-Man]

That is awesome for Detroit but I think that the poll is probably pretty skewed. How many hockey fans regularly check ESPN? They pretty much ignore the sport. There are about a dozen places I would check before I go to ESPN, sort of an unofficial boycott I guess as well as the fact that their NHL coverage is horrible and they charge you for any real information.

[55fan]

There's this one chick I know. Her name's Amber. She's watching the NBA finals. I think she even knows who's playing.

[SouthernWingsFan]

Detroit is Hockeytown because it says so on the playing surface they play on! DUH!!!

There's my bad joke for the day. *shrugs*

[b.shanafan14]

I used to watch the Bulls when I was a young kid and everyone else on the planet was, but ever since, I just don't get the appeal. At all. If you catch the last 3 minutes of play, you'll get the gist of it, and about 20 minutes of inbound, foul, free throw, repeat. Honestly, once you've seen one slam dunk where the player pounds his chest and roars like "look how high I jump", you've seen it all. When games end 108 to 102, what is the significance of the first 45 minutes and 90 points or so?

Typical "exciting" Basketball play: player drives the net, maybe getting slapped on the hand and getting to halt play and get a free throw, maybe continuing for a lay up or dunk. Either way, limited impact on the game (0-2% of the final score), teams immediately start play the other way, whether there is a score or not.

Typical exciting Hockey play(s): player skates at 20+ mph along the boards before he is hit by an opposing player, knocking him off stride flat onto his back to free the puck; players work a give and go on a 2-on-1 break away where either the defenseman manages to prevent the pass or the goaltender makes a miraculous save, huge impact on the game (0-25%+ of the final score). Games can be won in the first period or in the final minute.

There is something very basic, boring, and beerpong-esque about it. Terrible comparison, but here goes: outside of the pay, the marketing, and the obvious athletic superiority, what separates the show-boating NBA player who sinks a basic jump shot and then leaves his hand goose-necked halfway back up the court from the ******-bag fratboy who drains a cup in beerpong and then chest bumps his "bro" and calls you a "***"? There are only 10 cups in beerpong

[Robby2419]

I used to watch the Bulls when I was a young kid and everyone else on the planet was, but ever since, I just don't get the appeal. At all. If you catch the last 3 minutes of play, you'll get the gist of it, and about 20 minutes of inbound, foul, free throw, repeat. Honestly, once you've seen one slam dunk where the player pounds his chest and roars like "look how high I jump", you've seen it all. When games end 108 to 102, what is the significance of the first 45 minutes and 90 points or so?

Typical "exciting" Basketball play: player drives the net, maybe getting slapped on the hand and getting to halt play and get a free throw, maybe continuing for a lay up or dunk. Either way, limited impact on the game (0-2% of the final score), teams immediately start play the other way, whether there is a score or not.

Typical exciting Hockey play(s): player skates at 20+ mph along the boards before he is hit by an opposing player, knocking him off stride flat onto his back to free the puck; players work a give and go on a 2-on-1 break away where either the defenseman manages to prevent the pass or the goaltender makes a miraculous save, huge impact on the game (0-25%+ of the final score). Games can be won in the first period or in the final minute.

There is something very basic, boring, and beerpong-esque about it. Terrible comparison, but here goes: outside of the pay, the marketing, and the obvious athletic superiority, what separates the show-boating NBA player who sinks a basic jump shot and then leaves his hand goose-necked halfway back up the court from the ******-bag fratboy who drains a cup in beerpong and then chest bumps his "bro" and calls you a "***"? There are only 10 cups in beerpong

i dont think youre that far off on the beer pong comparison.

also, your typical NBA fight consists of one guy taking a dainty little swipe at someone and then running off like a little ***** and a bunch of other guys bumping chests and talking s***. theres no running rfom a fight in hockey unless you want to be branded a gutless coward

Edited by Robby2419, 18 April 2011 - 12:03 PM.

[betterREDthandead]

Really? Are you sure? I haven't seen numbers but I was under the impression that nobody watched the NBA finals.

Positive. The most-watched NHL game since 1974 was last year's Game 6, which got a 4.7 rating.

http://en.wikipedia....evision_ratings

The lowest-rated NBA Finals game of the past fourteen years got a 5.2, which was in 2003. Last year's Game 7 got 18.2.

http://en.wikipedia....Nielsen_ratings