As many people know, the rating for the NBA finals were horrible. Many "experts" suggest that the reason the ratings were horrible were the teams. This may be true, but the NBA has been in a decline for quite some time now. In my humble opinion, what is happening to basketball is a lot like what is happening to baseball. The leagues are trying to change the way the game is played. In baseball, the league thought that an increase in home runs would improve ratings even though the rating were not that bad. So the baseball was "juiced up" in a sense that more homeruns are now being hit. What has that lead to? A decline in ratings. In basketball, the league decided to allow zone defense. The league said that one-on-one basketball was boring to watch. But, if i am not mistaken, now the rating are worse then they were before. Do not get me wrong, zone defense alone did not cause this. Have any of the fans other then me noticed that on almost every single possesion, traveling occurs? I know this may not seem like a big deal, but come on. I think that when a player is allowed to take two steps before he even dribbles once is a bit obsurd. The NbA shouldn't only worry about its rating either, but about the future of basketball. When all the hype is around players like allen iverson, tracy mcgrady, kobe bryant, and Shaq, how will todays youth learn basketball the way it should be learned? Instead of JUST hyping up these "flashy players" how about giving credit to players like Tim Duncan, Jason Kidd, Kevin Garnett, and now even Yao Ming. All of these players know the fundamentals of basketball and know how the game is suppose to be played. The game is not just offense, but defense and intelligence. What would the NBA be like without the "fundamental" players? It would be the same as streetball. The point is, when the league began to change the way basketball was being played, rating went down. Now they complain about the ratings??? The league brought that upon itself.
Actually the point of the zone was to force teams to shoot better and speed up the tempo of the game, which is stupid because a zone does the exact opposite. I went on a rant the year they instituted it and I'll keep on ranting, a zone DOES NOT speed up a game, you can't shoot over a zone and it's hard to penetrate, thus the pace of the game is slowed considerably. Get rid of the freaking zone.
hahaha. but hey, we had 2 amazing guards that could take advantage of isos. do you really blame the rockets for utilizing it?
Actually, the zone does in fact encourages outside shooting. When a player pentrates, there are usually two defenders (guards) who cover down on that player in an attempt to stop him, resulting in another player being wide open. Usually that open player would be a three point shooter. While the zone makes penetrating to the hoop a lot harder, it allows teams to improve their shooting.
The zone was to FORCE players to learn how to shoot and not drive on iso plays all the time (not sure I agree with that). Ha ha ha!!! Like that is going to happen. "You can lead a horse to water....etc, etc..." What happens is that you still have one-on-one players, but now there're taking shots (from the outside in order to beat the zone), those of which don't go in (because they were bad shooters to begin with).
laker fans would argue that the zone was solely put in to stop shaq in an effort to thwart the lakers championship runs. i swear, i saw some people at lakersground talking about it.
The best way to beat a zone is to get layups on it. The only problem is it takes awhile to break a zone down. The first few possesions can be some what long. The offense needs time to feel a zone out and get an idea of what the rotation is. Once that is figured out a team can relly burn a zone. However, in the NBA teams are not given the opportunity to feel a zone out with the 24 second clock. Its a mistake to try and shoot a team out of a zone. Thats what they want you to do shoot long shots, ie harder shots. Call me crazy but I think the game would be sped up considerably if they changed the shot clock to 30 seconds, started calling 5 seconds closely gaurded and . . . . lengthened the court. The athletes of today are much bigger than before, this would facilitate more fast breaks and give the offense more room to opperate. But this is JMHO.
If you want to know what's wrong with the NBA, look at Tiger Woods and the PGA. Golf has honor and tradition. NBA basketball does not. The kids that buy the sneakers and the jerseys are not the kids who buy the expensive courtside tickets to go to the games-- much less the luxury boxes. Who advertises on NBA telecasts? Sneaker companies, Gatorade, and who else? No luxury car companies, No real estate companies, no Investment or Insurance companies ... if I'm not mistaken. The playoffs might be slightly different. The whole NBA culture has changed to streetball and not everybody gets excited about that. And then they try to televise it? Instead of elevating the game and the young fans, they have stooped to a lower level. The game is likewise tolerated in that fashion. It used to be Laker vs. Celtics. Then it became Magic Johnson's Lakers vs. Larry Birds' Celtics. Now it would be Magic vs. Larry. You never used to hear Jerry West leads the LA Lakers into Boston Garden to take on Bill Russell and the mighty Celtics. That's what's wrong, IMHO.
Ok well...I'd have to say ratings for all sports events have been dropping...I haven't heard about any significant increases in ratings any sports lately and I think it is some sort of phenomenon. Maybe this is only what I am selectively remembering, but I think I am correct that ratings have been declining for all televised sports. Also, I don't think there was any sort of collusion on the part of MLB to juice up the baseball to get more homeruns. I mean they have done testing on balls and the balls haven't changed any. The only documented change in baseballs that MLB has taken was to decrease the scoring at Coors by allowing them to put the balls in a humidor. Quite frankly I just think the players of today are a hell of a lot more conditioned than the players of baseball's past ever were. I think this more conditioned stronger player has led to more homeruns being hit. That is only one aspect of why I think more homeruns are being hit, but it is the biggest one in my opinion. Also I think you are going to far with the conspiracy theory in baseball here and trying to equate the rise in homeruns in baseball to the drop in the public's interest in baseball. Baseball is declining now because more of today's youth play other sports now (ex. basketball) and the financial situation in baseball has turned many long time fans away from the game. Baseball has not declined because more runs are being scored, but because of the flippant attitude of the players and owners to the fans disgust for the financal situation of the game today. Well, all I know personally is that I did not watch the last two games of the finals simply because I didn't remember they were on. I forgot about them because I didn't care. I didn't care because I didn't care about either of the teams involved. I don't like the Spurs because they had a knack for choking away big leads and I don't give a rat's ass about any team from the East. I don't think rule changes effected the ratings of the game. Ok now this is where you really lose me. I can understand you having a beef with zone defenses and being mad with the rule changes, but when you pretty much imply that AI, T-Mac, Kobe, and Shaq don't know how to play the game you have completely lost it. If every player in the league played like AI then you would have a hell of a lot better league than you do now. AI busts his ass in every game and sacrifices his body every game. His attitude towards practice isn't good, but his in game demeanor is 2nd to none. How can you say Kobe doesn't play the game how it should be learned? Kobe is one of the best offensive AND defensive players in the league. The same goes for T-Mac. Both players know how to make their teammates better too. I know Shaq is a polarizing player to some people, but the guy knows how to play the game. How often do you see a 7'2 350 lb. guy running a fast break? Shaq can do it and that is something you will never see Yao doing. Then you go onto rant about how TD, J-Kidd, KG, and Yao don't get enough hype...what you are smoking? Did you watch any of the pre-finals hype? They were practically turning Jason Kidd into the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ. Yao didn't get any slack at 1st, but now everyone loves him and raves about him and if you say something bad about him then it is like heresy. People all over the NBA love Yao, not just us in Houston. I agree that TD doesn't get the hype that he deserves, but thats how it is when you are a guy who is known as a quiet sort of character who doesn't seek attention. Then with KG, I dunno the guy seems like he gets enough hype to me. The biggest rule change that revolutionized the game of basketball was the 3-point line. When I say revolutionized I don't necessarily mean it in a good way, but I mean to say that it forever altered the game. The unintended negative effect of the 3-point line has been the extinction of the mid-range jumper and that has been clearly been on display for all of the Rockets fans to see now that zone defenses have been in effect. If there were more players who hit those shots a couple steps inside the 3-point line, then there would be higher percentage shooting. Now as I was writing that I wondered whether adjusted FG% is comparable with the FG% of pre-3pt shooting days. The FG% being adjusted because shooting 33% from 3's is equal to shooting 50% from 2's. Ok I am tired of rambling...and I need to get outta here, but thats my take on the biggest rule change to the game.
All sports commissioners one ONE thing foremost! A SPECTACULAR, whatever that may be: A Shaq, a Yao, a Jordan... ...in baseball that would be a "juiced up" Mark McGwire, or Sammy Sosa hitting record breaking home-runs...etc.. Those "spectaculars" come every once in a while, but oh do they bring in the bucks! "Spectaculars" bring in EVERYBODY, not just sports fans. The rest of the time the NBA (or sports) just needs good hard competition. People hate it when there's ONE dominate team, and that team just mows over all the other teams. It's boring. Either two dynasties going at it (West vs East, like the Lakers vs Celtics) or one dynasty with a pesky underdog that wont die that ends up upsetting the dynasty. As far as "style of play" and "knowing the game." Well thats more for the purist of the game. But it still has an effect on the aesthetics of the game. McGuier (home-run record) and Jordan increased ratings because they attracted everybody, not just sports fans. Example, Jordan brought in: Bulls fans NBA fans from non-Chicago cities Sports fans in general (some that never watch NBA) Non-sports fan (those that never watch sports) True, the two of the Spurs vs Nets games were horrific! Two of the ugliest games I've ever seen. The Nets with their defense-only team. And the Spurs with their bad outside shooting! Yuk! But that's only half the story. The two stars (Duncan and Kidd) do NOT attract many fans outside of the NBA. Sure, some NFL, NHL fans like to watch Ducan and Kidd. But not many. Do you think that there are a lot of NASCAR fans that actually tune-in to see Ducan and Kidd? No. What about non-sports fan? No. That's why Shaq, Jordan and Yao brought in more fans. They exceeded their own sport. Do this experiment. Walk up to a friend or family member you know that is NOT a sports fan. Ask them if they know who Jordan is. Ask them if they know who Shaq is. Ask them if they know who Yao is. If they can't place the name "Yao." Remind them with "Yo!" They'll remember! Then, ask them the same question about Duncan, Kidd, and Francis. Remember, I'm talking about NON-SPORTS FANS. If you ask your non-sports watching grandmother if she's heard of the name "Yao Ming" and she starts saying, "Yo, Yo!" That's ratings! And that's a "spectacle" that will bring in big bucks. Most of the time I ignore ratings, because I'll be a basketball fan no matter what. I ejoyed the Spurs play-off run, although I did not enjoy the Finals as much.
I understand what you are saying, but I dont' think that's the problem. NBA ratings are still far and above golf ratings. So making the NBA more like Golf won't help their ratings.
