-425gvs112408.jpg)
Over on the NHL side of the 'House, Eric McErlain did a little dance today because recent data has shown that attendance numbers for the NHL have surpassed those of the NBA. I have no interest in disputing this fact; the data seems to be accurate enough. But incredibly, Mr. McErlain jumps to the conclusion that the NBA's fan base is somehow disappearing, when even a half-hearted look at some data other than attendance figures would clearly show otherwise.
There's a very simple reason that attendance has declined in the NBA, and it has nothing to do with the sport's fans losing interest. It's because the NBA is available on a wide variety of television networks that people have actually heard of and have access to. The NBA is on ESPN Wednesdays and Fridays, TNT on Thursdays, and on ABC every Sunday beginning in January. Oh, and the late stages of the playoffs and Finals are also nationally televised on ABC. The NHL? They have that big network contract with ... Versus, which can be found on channel five-hundred-and-something on your local cable or satellite provider. Maybe.
A little deeper look into the television thing shows that when the NBA is on, people definitely are watching.
The 2008 Finals regularly allowed ABC to "win the night" in the ratings, with Game 3 registering a rating of 9.2. What happens when the NHL does get a shot to be televised on a major network? Not much. On New Year's Day, when nobody works and the NHL went to the (admittedly cool) gimmick of the outdoor game, it was shown live on NBC. In what was called a "ratings bonanza" for the sport, the game drew a whopping overnight number of ... 2.6.
The bottom line is this: gloating about attendance numbers in your favorite sport surpassing one that you aren't that into just shows how insecure hockey fans truly are. Seriously. You're beating your chests about something that isn't even close to a true indicator of a sport's popularity, in the hopes that someone, anyone will notice. The reality is that millions more people care about the NBA than the NHL. If television ratings don't do it for you, how about franchise values? I've maintained for a long time that there aren't that many hockey fans around; it's just that the ones that do exist all go to the games.
Based on the lack of availability of the sport on television, that's completely understandable.
Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Thanks for posting about it, Brett. Oh btw, if the NBA was losing its fan base (which it's not) then how come the NBA 2007-08 season (BOTH regular season and playoffs) got a bigger average rating than the MLB season, the so-called national pastime? How come the NBA Finals last season got a bigger average rating than the 2008 World Series? Sure, probably next season will be different and I'm not saying the NBA is bigger than baseball, but I'm just saying that a league (NBA) who occasionally gets bigger ratings than the World Series is not (and I repeat it..it's NOT) in trouble of becoming less popular than the NHL.
Another thing. I don't hate hockey, but I am getting really tired to see many hockey fans trashing basketball every chance they get. It's getting annoying. It seems to me they spend more time trashing basketball rather than worrying about their favorite sport. And, frankly, I've had enough. Hockey fans, watch your hockey and let basketball fans watch their basketball. Can't we all be friends?
Considering the NBA Finals "wins the night" against reruns of programming in June, that must be a huge feather in the NBA's cap. Plus, comparing the number of a Finals game against a regular-season contest in January is quite a reach, since Game Six of last year's Stanley Cup Final was greater than all but one of the NBA Playoff games played before that point, per Daily Variety.
Also, last time I checked, the Stanley Cup Finals are on NBC, one of the networks you may have heard of.
For a post calling hockey fans insecure, seems like this post is the one clutching the security blanket
http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/media_entertainment/sports-wrap-nba-teams-putting-up-big-local-numbers/
btw, I found this. Look at this season's tv ratings. The NBA is getting huge ratings, both locally and nationally, and several teams are getting extraordinary tv ratings in their local markets. Once again, it doesn't seem to me the NBA is in trouble. If anything, it's the other way around. Plus, I know lots of NBA fans. As far as hockey, I can't say the same thing.
Since Zilla seems mad at Brett for comparing the NBA Finals to an hockey regular season game, here's a more fair comparison (I hate those bball/hockey comparisons, but since our friendly hockey fans love it, I am gonna do the same thing):
the NHL Finals on NBC averaged a 3.1 rating (5.3 million viewers) and the clinching game of the finals got a 4.0 rating with 6.8 million viewers.
the NBA Finals on ABC averaged a 9.3 rating with 14.9 million viewers. Deciding game 6 averaged a 10.7 rating with 16.9 million viewers. Huge gap.
And so what if game 6 of the SC Finals got bigger ratings than all but one NBA playoffs games? Do you really need to wait until game 6 of the SC Finals to beat the ratings NBA playoffs games get? This should tell you how big the gap between the NBA and NHL is.
It's odd to me that no one takes into consideration that hockey is NOT a good television sport. This is for several reasons but, in my opinion, the main two are: 1.) A hockey puck is a small and incredibly fast moving object that gets lost in bodies very easily and 2.) The cameras have trouble staying with the puck at all times. On the other hand, basketball is incredibly TV friendly so this explains the massive difference in ratings. All in all, both of these sports serve their purpose and are enjoyable to watch so everyone needs to sit down, grab a brew, and watch your sport of choice.
This gets to the split between hockey and basketball that so often gets brought up -- hockey has more die-hard fans (per polling numbers), but the NBA has more casual fans.
Neither of these situations is inherently better. Television audiences (or, more specifically, commercial prices) and tickets sold are just revenue streams. The importance of a broader, less devoted audience vs. a smaller, more dedicated one has no unequivocal answer, except in terms of money. You can make equally valid arguments for wanting to be a part of a more accessible sport (better for casual conversation, a higher premium on minutiae [see: baseball]) or for one with a more rabid fanbase (higher quality discussions, ease of mobilizing like-minded people).
Unless you define in what way you're valuing these sports, you're arguing around each other rather than moving the conversation forward.
as far as what McErlain posted in the NHL section, I'm not even going to read it. Why should I waste my time giving more hits to his post? It's not even worth it.
Of course, the Lakers-Celtics was a dream TV matchup featuring two top markets, while the previous year's rating was a 6.2 with one of the NBA's biggest stars involved.
And, the Stanley Cup number is even lower than it actually is thanks to the fact that CBC's ratings aren't metered in one of the participant's markets.
Besides, one of the NBA's influential owners always admits the NHL is on par with the NBA in North America.
correct me if I'm mistaken, zilla, but wasn't Detroit/Pittsburgh the dream NHL matchup or something close to it? kind of like Celtics/Lakers was for the NBA?
but really, i come here to read about the NBA, not to fight with hockey fans about which sport is bigger or better.
Rangers/Wings would generate the most viewership, especially since Pittsburgh's just the 24th largest market in the U.S. It's not a bad matchup, but certainly not the cache of Celtics-Lakers. And, with the CBC factor, a number of viewers who tune in to that feed aren't accounted for, meaning the number was certainly higher than 4.0.
With Celtics-Lakers, that's No. 6 market vs. No. 2 market with two highly-ranked teams. Maybe Knicks-Lakers would push it a bit further, but that's about as good as you're going to get for an NBA Finals matchup.
This argument is horrible. You might be right, but your reasoning isn't. People don't go to NBA games because it's on major national tv networks? I can see Hornets-Thunder on ESPN tonight, so I'm not going to the Pistons game? That makes no sense.
It's not like hockey fans go to the games because they have no other option. Local tv covers NHL games in NHL markets, so they can watch their home teams if they want.
And the New Year's Day Outdoor Game went up against a bevy of College Football Bowl games. To even draw a 2.6 is impressive.
at the end of the day its still hockey. the average person does not care about it.
Whats the average hockey ticket cost compared to a nba game?
"Whats the average hockey ticket cost compared to a nba game?"
The difference is less than a dollar, so they're both comparable with NBA tickets averaging 49.47 in 2008, and NHL tickets averaging 48.72.
Hasn't the NBA been on these networks since 2003, the first year of the data? So why is this all of a sudden impacting attendance?
Um... people, we're completely overlooking the MASSIVE global TV audience the NBA brings in... kids from Belgrade to Beijing to Boston are all obsessed with the NBA. Hockey? Half the world's population doesn't even know its played on ice.
Yes, because no one watches Hockey in Finland, or Russia, or Belarus, or Sweden or Canada, or Germany, or most of Europe
Two thoughts: maybe the fans of the NBA just watch more TV in general. That's probably true. And, basketball is a batter game watched on TV, according to your logic.
someone please tell me why it's important how many fans watch which sport??? why is this even an issue...who freakin cares.... are Hockey fans so in need of an ego boost they need to use attendance at games figures to justify their love of their sport as if it's "special" now somehow or better than NBA? Are NBA fans so deprived of self that they need to rally around big numbers of fan viewership to validate their sports value in the world and thereby make them "special" by association....GET OVER IT...IT'S A GAME! and while I don't like Hockey anymore (used to love it when it was not a goon game justified as "tough") it's still a sport that has its moments...as for NBA...well, I enjoy watching it more...I even find I have to fast forward through MLB these days...which I also used to enjoy...oh well...ch...ch...changes....
@RC:
There's a lot more people in China alone than in all the countries you mentioned combined.
See: how Kobe and Lebron were treated better than heads of states this summer.
Again, why is attendance down for basketball games? It's not because of TV ratings. As someone pointed out - it's been on the same channels since 2003.
If you want to argue fans are being priced out - well tickets cost the same for each. Pittsburgh is sold out mostly and they are a poor area.
So yes, NBA gets better TV ratings - but why don't people go to the games? Still waiting to hear a good argument of why.
By the way, you can say what you want about hockey but basketball in general is boring. The first 45 minutes don't matter except for fouls in 95% of the games. Than it's a foul frezy in the last 1 minute.
Yes, I cheer for the Houston Rockets but no I won't go to the game. I do have the game on in the background but I will watch a hockey game when it's on and support the local hockey team because it's fun to be there.