5 Reasons the NFL is more popular than the NBA (via BlazersEdge)

[slamtheking]

The NFL is more popular because American Football is now America's past time.  It is a better more exciting game.  You only play 16 games with just 8 at home making it harder to get a ticket and much more rare to watch.  The games aren't throughout the week (for the most part) so you only have to watch on Sunday (and Saturday for college).  The hard cap and free agency make it much easier for a bad team to become good and the games for the most part anyone can realistically win every single game they play. 

All of that other stuff may have some truth in it, but the reality is football is just a better more exciting watch than any other sport to the main stream and that is really all that matters.

sums up all the things I wanted to say! Though I enjoy basketball a lot more, but I do agree football is more popular. I assume that it is probably the most popular sport in the US if not on par with baseball.

In terms of international spotlight, I think if you ask any foreigners what sports would the US most likely or definitely dominate - basketball

if football was played internationally, I bet that would also be the answer. I can see the US lose in baseball, track, soccer, and hockey to other countries

Yeah and I didn't even mention betting or fantasy sports, which are a lot easier with football than any other sport.

I think the betting aspect plays a large part in the popularity of the sport. 

as a game, I find it rather boring.  I've seen the same plays over and over.   I think not a whole lot to get excited about except broken plays. 

You can gamble on any sport though.

And on your second point, there is so much tactically that goes into football I'm not sure how much you're paying attention. Though to be fair the TV shot cuts off a lot of the interesting stuff because it always stays on the ball.

true, you can gamble on any other sport but with Hockey and Baseball there aren't the variation you see with football and the betting line if much easier to understand for the casual bettor.  Vegas does most of its sports betting business on football.

as for paying attention, I do.  I'm not analyzing every player and where they're standing in relation to the field and the opposition.  some of that is the camera work but some of it's just a lack of interest in trying to track 22 guys at once on any single play. 

[angryguy77]

Yeah the author of that piece is dead-on. That's why the NHL, Nascar and Bowling are the dominate sports in the US.

[Moranis]

Yeah the author of that piece is dead-on. That's why the NHL, Nascar and Bowling are the dominate sports in the US.

I must admit this post cracked me up.  I literally made a noise in my office.  Hilarious.

[LooseCannon]

Yeah the author of that piece is dead-on. That's why the NHL, Nascar and Bowling are the dominate sports in the US.

It's possible to go in the other direction and be too white.  Or too regional.

[Celtics18]

Though to be fair the TV shot cuts off a lot of the interesting stuff because it always stays on the ball.

This is one thing that definitely bothers me about football on television.  I don't like that I never get to see the whole field.  So much of the game is missed. 

[JSD]

Quickly: Schedule, Rooting for teams--rather than players, better rivalries,  "The NBA is too black", "The NBA is too fake."

http://www.blazersedge.com/2013/9/9/4711632/nba-nfl-popular

Those last two are pretty interesting.

America has accepted tacitly for years that Caucasians are a minority in professional sports.  White athletes are marketed more prominently than their African-American counterparts (Quick!  Name 4 NFL players off the top of your head!) but glitz and hype can't cover the fact that professional sports rosters are heavily populated with ethnic minorities.

Athletes in the other two major American sports wear body-length uniforms with some kind of head covering.  You can tell the ethnicity of a given athlete, of course, but NFL players are 98% uniform and 2% skin.  MLB is not that far behind with visor-heavy headgear, gloves, and equipment.

NBA players are out there for the world to see.  They're essentially playing in over-sized underwear.  You can't mistake it.  These guys are African-American.

The NBA became a major media phenomenon on the backs of three players:  Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, and Michael Jordan.  All three were marketed in alignment with the predominant culture.  Bird was white and had an easy in.  But what do you remember of Magic and Jordan?  Magic presented a broad, smiling face whenever the cameras rolled.  Michael rose to pop culture fame on the back of a Gatorade jingle.  I am not suggesting that either image was inauthentic, let alone outside the circle of African-American culture.  Both men were, and are, African-American.  But any parts of their make-up that went beyond their commercially-appealing image did not make the national airwaves.  Spike Lee movies aside, we were still in the era where the commercial face of "African-American" didn't scan as different, an era where racial equality meant saying, "Hey...we're all the same (meaning in accordance with the dominant culture) after all."  Sometimes I dream...that he is me...

As our culture moved forward into a new millennium so did our understanding, and expression, of culture.  Jordan's jingles gave way to hip-hop, varying hairstyles and clothing styles, and ever-more-prominent tattoos.  Racial sensibility changed from "we're all the same" to, "No, I'm different.  Respect that."

Some folks have gotten on board with that.  Some folks have embraced it.  Others see it as a threat.  A substantial portion of the population seems to fall into the category of, "That's all fine, but I don't want to be bothered with it in my entertainment choices.  I'm just here to enjoy.  Don't disturb my narrative.  Let me watch my movie or listen to my radio or watch my team in peace without having to deal with you being different."  In the face of that impulse we have:

NFL?  98% uniform coverage.  Most of the public figureheads and guys interviewed on TV are coaches or white players.  No problem at all.  Go Packers!!!

MLB?  90% uniform coverage.  Organs playing "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" during the stretch.  Nothing much is going to change here.

NBA?  Oh...my...God.  Tattoos!  Hairstyles!  Hip-hop culture everywhere!  What happened?  Why do they do that?

When people find out that I write about the league they often talk about their perceptions of it.  One oft-repeated story runs, "I used to like pro basketball back when [insert former star from the 80's or 90's] played but nowadays it's all selfish play, loud music, etc. [insert grimace here]."   Though it reads racist, that's not the intent.  I would wager that to a person, they'd say that they support racial tolerance even if they're uncomfortable with some of its manifestations.  Rather they're reacting to the NBA the same way they react to turning on their comfortable FM popular music station and finding rap getting airplay.  "Augh!  What's that? Where are the Eagles and The Temptations?" [flip station]   Even if they think racial tolerance is an important goal, folks just aren't comfortable disrupting their "private" entertainment choices for it, or even having the two concepts mix much.

Sports are entertainment.  Every league makes choices that balance the tradition/integrity of the sport with its entertainment value to the public.  Of the three major U.S. sports leagues, the NBA is perceived as the most willing to sacrifice integrity to attract viewers...and this in a race with Major League Baseball and its full-fledged, home-run heavy steroid era.

Every league is accused of having bad referees.  No league is suspected of actually cooking the books, using refs to obtain desired outcomes for favored teams, like the NBA is.

Every league has star players, marketed and protected.  No league markets its superstars more heavily, depending on them so much.  No league is accused of having such a strong "star system" in place where the rules actually bend for favored players.  I say "accused", but is it even a question anymore?  Don't most people just accept that superstars will get calls that other players will not?

Every league has marquee matchups.  No league bows to those matchups more than the NBA, particularly in their playoff coverage.  If the best basketball is being played between Milwaukee and Cleveland but the Lakers and Mavericks are on the air, most of America won't know that Milwaukee and Cleveland exist.  Who cares if the play is second-rate as long as the right names appear in the TV Guide?

The instant the NBA instituted a lottery they were accused of fixing it.

David Stern is spoken of as a history-making Commissioner and a really smart guy.  He's also painted as the master manipulator willing to bend any kind of rule in order to achieve his desired outcome...Vince McMahon in a legitimate sport.

Each of these points contains veracity and falsehood.  Those are less important than the fact that nothing I just said was a surprise to you.  These perceptions are common knowledge, attached irrevocably to the NBA name.  It's sports.  It's entertainment.  Which will predominate?  Honestly, people aren't always sure.

Plenty of institutions walk the line between reality and show.  Most of television qualifies nowadays, including the news.  But that line brings with in an inherent transience.  Institutions with substance get passed on from generation to generation.  It doesn't matter how much actual integrity the institution has as long as it can be called integral.  "Our family is Republican," or, "We've farmed this land for four generations," or, "We drive Chevy Trucks" can all form solid roots for a family tree.  But entertainment never gets passed on from generation to generation.  How many children listen to their dad's music or watch their mom's TV shows and say, "This is the best thing ever and I will adopt it for my own, forever"?

To the extent an NBA franchise is whole, integral, attached to something permanent that you can trust, it can be passed on.  "The Trail Blazers are God's team, son.  The Lakers are pure evil."  It doesn't matter if those statements are empirically true.  If the league structure around those two teams remains sound and they continue to compete in fair fashion we are free to build our own meaning into the exercise and make it mean more than it otherwise would have.  As soon as that integrity fails, so does our ability to build on it and pass it on.  "Things are kind of rigged here to favor certain teams but I grew up watching the Trail Blazers, son, and it's a fun game to watch anyway!"  That's not going to transfer to the next generation.

Thoughts?

[LooseCannon]

Though to be fair the TV shot cuts off a lot of the interesting stuff because it always stays on the ball.

This is one thing that definitely bothers me about football on television.  I don't like that I never get to see the whole field.  So much of the game is missed.

There are some things that should remain special for fans who actually go to the stadium.

[D.o.s.]

Quickly: Schedule, Rooting for teams--rather than players, better rivalries,  "The NBA is too black", "The NBA is too fake."

http://www.blazersedge.com/2013/9/9/4711632/nba-nfl-popular

Those last two are pretty interesting.

America has accepted tacitly for years that Caucasians are a minority in professional sports.  White athletes are marketed more prominently than their African-American counterparts (Quick!  Name 4 NFL players off the top of your head!) but glitz and hype can't cover the fact that professional sports rosters are heavily populated with ethnic minorities.

Athletes in the other two major American sports wear body-length uniforms with some kind of head covering.  You can tell the ethnicity of a given athlete, of course, but NFL players are 98% uniform and 2% skin.  MLB is not that far behind with visor-heavy headgear, gloves, and equipment.

NBA players are out there for the world to see.  They're essentially playing in over-sized underwear.  You can't mistake it.  These guys are African-American.

The NBA became a major media phenomenon on the backs of three players:  Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, and Michael Jordan.  All three were marketed in alignment with the predominant culture.  Bird was white and had an easy in.  But what do you remember of Magic and Jordan?  Magic presented a broad, smiling face whenever the cameras rolled.  Michael rose to pop culture fame on the back of a Gatorade jingle.  I am not suggesting that either image was inauthentic, let alone outside the circle of African-American culture.  Both men were, and are, African-American.  But any parts of their make-up that went beyond their commercially-appealing image did not make the national airwaves.  Spike Lee movies aside, we were still in the era where the commercial face of "African-American" didn't scan as different, an era where racial equality meant saying, "Hey...we're all the same (meaning in accordance with the dominant culture) after all."  Sometimes I dream...that he is me...

As our culture moved forward into a new millennium so did our understanding, and expression, of culture.  Jordan's jingles gave way to hip-hop, varying hairstyles and clothing styles, and ever-more-prominent tattoos.  Racial sensibility changed from "we're all the same" to, "No, I'm different.  Respect that."

Some folks have gotten on board with that.  Some folks have embraced it.  Others see it as a threat.  A substantial portion of the population seems to fall into the category of, "That's all fine, but I don't want to be bothered with it in my entertainment choices.  I'm just here to enjoy.  Don't disturb my narrative.  Let me watch my movie or listen to my radio or watch my team in peace without having to deal with you being different."  In the face of that impulse we have:

NFL?  98% uniform coverage.  Most of the public figureheads and guys interviewed on TV are coaches or white players.  No problem at all.  Go Packers!!!

MLB?  90% uniform coverage.  Organs playing "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" during the stretch.  Nothing much is going to change here.

NBA?  Oh...my...God.  Tattoos!  Hairstyles!  Hip-hop culture everywhere!  What happened?  Why do they do that?

When people find out that I write about the league they often talk about their perceptions of it.  One oft-repeated story runs, "I used to like pro basketball back when [insert former star from the 80's or 90's] played but nowadays it's all selfish play, loud music, etc. [insert grimace here]."   Though it reads racist, that's not the intent.  I would wager that to a person, they'd say that they support racial tolerance even if they're uncomfortable with some of its manifestations.  Rather they're reacting to the NBA the same way they react to turning on their comfortable FM popular music station and finding rap getting airplay.  "Augh!  What's that? Where are the Eagles and The Temptations?" [flip station]   Even if they think racial tolerance is an important goal, folks just aren't comfortable disrupting their "private" entertainment choices for it, or even having the two concepts mix much.

Sports are entertainment.  Every league makes choices that balance the tradition/integrity of the sport with its entertainment value to the public.  Of the three major U.S. sports leagues, the NBA is perceived as the most willing to sacrifice integrity to attract viewers...and this in a race with Major League Baseball and its full-fledged, home-run heavy steroid era.

Every league is accused of having bad referees.  No league is suspected of actually cooking the books, using refs to obtain desired outcomes for favored teams, like the NBA is.

Every league has star players, marketed and protected.  No league markets its superstars more heavily, depending on them so much.  No league is accused of having such a strong "star system" in place where the rules actually bend for favored players.  I say "accused", but is it even a question anymore?  Don't most people just accept that superstars will get calls that other players will not?

Every league has marquee matchups.  No league bows to those matchups more than the NBA, particularly in their playoff coverage.  If the best basketball is being played between Milwaukee and Cleveland but the Lakers and Mavericks are on the air, most of America won't know that Milwaukee and Cleveland exist.  Who cares if the play is second-rate as long as the right names appear in the TV Guide?

The instant the NBA instituted a lottery they were accused of fixing it.

David Stern is spoken of as a history-making Commissioner and a really smart guy.  He's also painted as the master manipulator willing to bend any kind of rule in order to achieve his desired outcome...Vince McMahon in a legitimate sport.

Each of these points contains veracity and falsehood.  Those are less important than the fact that nothing I just said was a surprise to you.  These perceptions are common knowledge, attached irrevocably to the NBA name.  It's sports.  It's entertainment.  Which will predominate?  Honestly, people aren't always sure.

Plenty of institutions walk the line between reality and show.  Most of television qualifies nowadays, including the news.  But that line brings with in an inherent transience.  Institutions with substance get passed on from generation to generation.  It doesn't matter how much actual integrity the institution has as long as it can be called integral.  "Our family is Republican," or, "We've farmed this land for four generations," or, "We drive Chevy Trucks" can all form solid roots for a family tree.  But entertainment never gets passed on from generation to generation.  How many children listen to their dad's music or watch their mom's TV shows and say, "This is the best thing ever and I will adopt it for my own, forever"?

To the extent an NBA franchise is whole, integral, attached to something permanent that you can trust, it can be passed on.  "The Trail Blazers are God's team, son.  The Lakers are pure evil."  It doesn't matter if those statements are empirically true.  If the league structure around those two teams remains sound and they continue to compete in fair fashion we are free to build our own meaning into the exercise and make it mean more than it otherwise would have.  As soon as that integrity fails, so does our ability to build on it and pass it on.  "Things are kind of rigged here to favor certain teams but I grew up watching the Trail Blazers, son, and it's a fun game to watch anyway!"  That's not going to transfer to the next generation.

Thoughts?

I'm going to save that for the next CB 2nd Amendment thread.

[Eja117]

I notice the article says nothing about guys like Kobe (or Ben Rothlisburger) being rapists or Sully and Jason Kidd beating their women, or guys pulling out guns in the locker room, or guys like LeBron and DWade just being jerks or guys creating superteams because they're afraid to compete.  Also says nothing about how awesome it is to watch people smash each other..both in college, and in the NFL

Look at Bird, Magic, MJ.....how did we meet them? College championship games. The last great player we met in a championship game was Melo..then he left.