I have always been for 82 games till Yao got injured. Then I realized maybe 82 games would be too grueling especially for the playoffs teams. Maybe 50 games regular season, and then have two playoffs. One for the top teams to compete for championship, another one for the bottom teams compete for draft picks. The bottom playoffs would be played after the top playoffs, so we still have some basketball to watch during off-season.
Count me in. ~60-70 games would be ideal. I'm not sure that the players would sign off on a reduction in salary, though.
There already is a premium on regular season games. It's called home court advantage. Check how often a road team wins a game 7. First round should be 5 games. I hated them extending that. Also there should not be 3, 4, 5 days between games in the playoffs so Stern can line up his TV schedule. That's just ridiculous. The season could be shortened simply by shortening the time between playoff games.
no, there's not. and the players don't play like it. the difference between playoff nba basketball and regular season nba basketball is measured in quantum leaps.
Doesn't the NCAA actually draw more interest than NBA basketball? I seem to remember reading something along those lines, but I'm not positive. Anyway, I'd be for a shorter season. I have always felt like there are portions of the season that nobody takes seriously. It's boring when it feels like the stakes are low. However, there is a flip side to a shorter season. It may be true that a player like Yao would be less likely to be injured, but it'd also be true that they'd have less time to rehab and return in a shorter season if they did get injured. Still, all in all, I'd prefer the season to be shorter. You wouldn't see players hitting that rookie wall as hard either.
I didn't imagine so many people support this idea before I read this thread. Yes, 82 games a season plus the pre-season games are too much. Someone sets up a poll and you will have my vote for a less demanding regular season.
Wow yall are crazy wanting to shorten this thing. Whats next? Yall suggest we ditch the NBA playoff system in favor of a BCS?
Shorten the amount of games played but not the length of the season. These stretches of 4 games in 5 nights are ridiculous IMO. I say 70 games sounds pretty good.
Shorter season = longer offseason So no, I don't want a shorter season lol. Besides much of player's salary is from revenues, primarily ticket sales but also merchandise and beer/food revenue from the games. Less games = less revenue from non-ticket items. Plus less games does not equal to more sell outs if ticket prices go up as well. Take a basic economics course, higher prices means less people will be willing to pay that much so its pretty much the same in terms of ticket revenue per game. Also, NBA type money is one of the reasons international players come over here to play. It is one of the many reasons why NBA is the premier basketball league of the world.
Notice that pretty much everyone has said "play less games, but don't shorten the season". 60-65 games over the same amount of time (22 weeks, 23 including All-Star break) is still 3 games a week. That's plenty in my opinion. It would allow for more practice, more meaning for each win/loss, and less injuries resulting from fatigue/stress. All those things would improve the product.
Not going to happen. They (the league) lose too much money if they shortened the season. Remember they expanded playoff games to seven for more money.
The number of games itself isn't the problem, I think... the problems are: 1. How tight the schedules are-- back to back, 4 games in 5 nights... when you have a tired team, and no time to practice, you decrease quality of product. I think one solution may be to spread out the season some more at the cost of reducing the offseason length. Don't know if the Union will buy it, though. 2. The apparent meaninglessness of some games. One point someone brought up is that people care about NFL more because every game seems to be important. In the NBA, 1 game doesn't mean a whole lot in the overall scheme of things (unless you are locked into a playoff race like the West teams are this season). Also, for the non-playoff teams, the latter half of the season is the equivalent of "garbage time." They teams tank and the quality sucks. I think perhaps there should be some sort of mid-season tournament, separate from the rest of the season... just a quick single elimination deal for one champion (I think in Europe, they have the season, and a "cup" type of tournament in their sports... tell me if I am wrong).
i don't think they'd lose too much money. i think there's a lot that can be done to make the game better and less taxing. I'd be happy with a scenario in which you have a 60 game season end in early april (right after march madness) and then have 9 game series instead of 7 game series. Players won't make less in a shortened season because you'd fill more stadiums and could charge a greater premium. But imagine a 9 game series. That would be sick.
Who, besides Yao Ming, has fatigue issues with the current setup? (besides rookies) I think it's fine the way it is. Unless someone can show me that a lot more serious injuries occur later in the season...
Good arguments for, good against. Bottom line, though, is that if anything we'll see MORE games. It's sad, but the game is now about dollar signs. I can't stand Mark Cuban, but I love the fact he's a true fan. Wish more owners were like that. A few Japanese businessmen own the Seattle Mariner's and have never even BEEN to Seattle. Tracy McGrady is making 19 some odd million this season. Anyone think he is worth that much? Is anyone on the planet worth that much? I'm a basketball fan for life, but its terrible money affects competition.
Why does it have to be later in the season to prove anything? It's not like these guys are computers that can be rebooted and defragmented at the end of a season and come back completely healthy. It's a cumulative effect over many seasons...over careers.
