[canadiancreed]

As mentioned briefly in the "Permanent NFL Team in London. Discuss?" thread, what makes a league worthy of being considered in the top echelon of sports? And why shoudl some leagues be considered, while others don't' make the grade and be exluded from the Top 3, 4, 5, 8, or whatever?

Discuss.

[canadiancreed]

jax's link of comparing NBA to NHL ratings is a good one (nice data here IMO, heres the link to it.) It's not a complete comparison (as unlike the NBA, the NHL has roughly 20% of their marketplace outside this study area focus....not that it would matter since only Toronto would be added.), but it'll work for what we're after.

The numbers that I"m seeing are pretty much on par with what I'd expect. Her'es an analysis.

Atlanta - NBA - NO surprise there. THe Thrashers have been **** for their entire existance.
BOston - NBA - I'd place this mainly on the Celtics winning the championship recently. Both teams have 2.+ ratings.
CHicago - NBA - In these stats the Bulls are kicking ass of the Blackhawks. However these stats are almsot a year old, and the situation n 'Hawk nation is radically different (aka they have an owner that gives a ****, and not driving fans away.) I'd place money that these ratings are a lot closer together if they were taken at this time next year.
Dallas - NBA - New market + slumping team = lower ratings. Surprised they're that low for the Stars though. The Mavericks aren't doing much better, barely getting over the 1.x mark.
Denver - NBA - GUess winning the big prize != better ratings than an average basketball team. .5 seperate the two.
Detroit - Tie - The NBA does lead here, but by .2, that coudl fluctuate with a playoff run one way or the other. Highest ratings yet for both sports with 3.9 and 3.7 respectively.
Miami - NBA - NO surprise here. NBA team with big names vs. expansion team that outside of 1996 has sucked ass for years . ANother poster child of the 90's expansion craze.
Los Angelas - NBA - The Lakers are Gods of the LA winter sports scene. Nuff said. Sucks that the two NHL teams get support on par with the Clippers. Then again in an area that has that many people, that's not as bad. Or so we'll tell ourselves. Lakers have the highest ratings of our list for the NBA at 4.2
Minnesota - NHL - Are we really surprised?
New York - Tie - The old guard (Knicks and Rangers) and the newer guard (Nets and Devils/Islanders) are pretty much square here, although the Islanders are slumping badly.
Philadelphia - NHL - Flyers pretty much own the winter scene in Philly. As one Philadelphian stated, they couldn't even name any players on the 76'ers right now.
Phoenix - NBA - Successful basketball franicase that has had free regin of the winter sports scene in Arizona, vs transplanted team that has to be managed by the league due to gross incompetence and general apathy. Ya I think we can guess who folsk would be tuning in to watch.
San Francisco - Tie - Apaprently the Warriors play here (was wondering where GOlden State was), but the Sharks have carved themselves out a nice niche here and if they coudl ever get past the first round, could probably take a decent lead.
Washington - Tie - Ovechkin. There's your reason for anyone in Washington even bothering to turn on the TV once the Redskins are out of the playoffs for the rest of the winter.

Also I'm not too familiar with the Neilson rating scale, but I'm guessing anything less then 2.x is not a good percentage. If so, both leagues have some serious issues, and half the markets here aren't meeting that percentage regardless of sport. Those that are:

NBA - Boston, Chicago, Denver, Detroit, Miami, Los Angelas, Phoenix
NHL - Boston, CHicago(*), Detroit, Minnesota, Philadephila

* - I really think that this year will show a marked improvement here to valut them over 2.x. If not, then I will freely admit my error.

So seven vs five, and the NHL doesn't have an American based major network (although from the memories of what ESPN, NBC and ABC have brought us, I"m wondering if that's not a good thing *shiver*), and even with that handicap, it's not a whitewash. Not too shabby. It flows more towards the NBA's favour when the cutoff for 2.x is removed, but then the ratings usually pludge into the 1.x area solidly.


Also to answer the statement about NBA fans being msotly watching from TV instead of attending, the NHL fits there as well. Hell trying to get a ticket for say a Leafs game? Might as well get in line for Packers tickets, they're just as easy to acquire. Same with other markets.

[jaxmagicman]

Yeah I was surprised by how close they come in ratings. I think the NHL is doing better than I thought they were but still lag behind the NBA in a few things, one is revenue. The NHL is hurt in that area by not having a major network showing their games. The other is marketability. The NBA sells its jerseys and sponsorships. It makes a lot in a bunch of different area, the NHL does not have a huge boom for selling jerseys like the NBA does.

And the main problem I see with the NBA vs NHL is the NHL is a hell of a better sport to watch in person than the NBA is. Though I think the NHL has a fan friendlier TV presentation (less commercials, less downtime), I find watching the NHL on TV leaves something missing. That does not happen in the NBA.

So while I was quick to judge the NHL as not being fully back, it certainly has some way to go to get a foot hold again in the mainstream as being a major sport again. The lost season and lost TV deals are hurting it in the minds of most right now. While the NBA is about to run into that problem with a Lock-out looming.

The ironic part about it is, the NHL lock-out lasted so long because the players are good with their money. An NBA lock-out would last 2 months at most because the players are so bad with their money. A lot of NBA players live pay check to pay check.

[Goody]

The NBA has gone to crap because of the players attitudes over the years. Its not even really basketball anymore, which is why our professionals started losing in the Olympics to teams that play defense and run real plays.

Its more of a niche now. The average sports fan doesn't really care anymore.

[Le Grande Orange]

All I can say is that any league which rewards a club which loses a game with a point (I'm looking at you, NHL) doesn't deserve to be in the upper echelon.

[stevebydac]

I think a "major league" needs to fulfill three requirements:

1. It has to make an OBSCENE amount of money. When you cross borders, it's hard to compare TV ratings. But money is money.

2. It has to be considered the dominant league of its sport in the world, or virtually tied for that dominance.

3. It has to be on a major TV network regularly in its home country.

By those measures, I'd say the NFL, MLB, NBA, EPL, La Liga, Serie A, Bundesliga, Nascar & Formula One make the cut.

I don't think the NHL (TV exposure lacking?) or NPB (vs. MLB) quite make the cut. MLS definitely doesn't.

[phightin]

Originally Posted by stevebydac

I don't think the NHL (TV exposure lacking?) or NPB (vs. MLB) quite make the cut. MLS definitely doesn't.

It's funny though cause I mentioned previously on here that while the mls won't ever be an upper echelon sport here in the us I wouldn't be surprised at all to see it pass hockey in as little as 10-15 years especially the way both leagues seem to be heading in opposite directions. I say this for a few main reasons. First off between the MLS and the US Men's National team both being carried on ESPN they actually have national exposure unlike the NHL. Secondly, the US Men's National team has a following that has been building over the last couple decades and now is covered extensively. It's proven to be a driving force for the sport in the country, is taken seriously by the major networks, and has tremendously helped advance the sport on many levels. US Men's Hockey the NHL's only equivelent doesn't come close to this. Also, while the MLS is expanding if the league does in fact drop it's foreign restrictions and opens its teams up to bringing in more talent from abroad as it plans to do then it will go another step in the right direction. Lastly, I would go as far to say that soccer in the US overall has a much stronger following from the under 25 generation who have really been the first generation to be widely exposed to the game, than hockey does at this point. Many of them attend mls games, follow the epl, etc. The NHL if anything has lost a tremendous amount of interest among this demographic and its going to hurt them in the long run. All in all maybe even 10 years till the MLS passes it.

[Jason Moyer]

I thought the NBA ceased operations when Jordan retired.

[mlyons]

Originally Posted by Jason Moyer

I thought the NBA ceased operations when Jordan retired.

Which time?

[Jason Moyer]

All 3. Although, admittedly, there was still some good basketball being played when he retired the first time.

[stevebydac]

Originally Posted by phightin

It's funny though cause I mentioned previously on here that while the mls won't ever be an upper echelon sport here in the us I wouldn't be surprised at all to see it pass hockey in as little as 10-15 years especially the way both leagues seem to be heading in opposite directions.

I agree with you. And I also think MLS will someday be the equal of at least leagues in France, Portugal, Scotland, etc. but that will take 20-30 years.

I think hockey, instead of conquering the US, has the best chance of becoming a global league instead, better than the NFL or NBA. There is a lot of hockey interest in the northern countries. Why try to conquer the hot South of the US, when you can instead incorporate existing pools of interest in Europe? And while I see some resistance by the European leagues vs. the NBA, you don't hear too much of that from Euro hockey leagues vs. the NHL. I can foresee NHL divisions or a conference in Europe easily.

[canadiancreed]

Originally Posted by stevebydac

I don't think the NHL (TV exposure lacking?)

Tonight I was able to watch two hockey games during prime time on a Wednesday. I'm guaranteed at least one game every Saturday, with a very good chance at two. Considering that those teams play at two to four times a week, that's not too shabby.

Originally Posted by stevebydac

3. It has to be on a major TV network regularly in its home country.

Guess all three are met by the the NHL after all. Heck even the CFL gets #3, as both are on major networks in their home country. (being CBC, CTV, and maybe TSN? Depends on the definition of major I suppose)

[stevebydac]

Originally Posted by canadiancreed

Tonight I was able to watch two hockey games during prime time on a Wednesday. I'm guaranteed at least one game every Saturday, with a very good chance at two. Considering that those teams play at two to four times a week, that's not too shabby.



Guess all three are met by the the NHL after all. Heck even the CFL gets #3, as both are on major networks in their home country. (being CBC, CTV, and maybe TSN? Depends on the definition of major I suppose)

I totally agree that Canada is the "heart" of North American hockey. But my point was (maybe worded incorrectly) that most of the NHL teams are in the US and TV coverage is poor compared to the MLB, NBA, and NFL. So I can't place the NHL on that level. Just my opinion, FWIW (not much ).

[Hazza]

Originally Posted by stevebydac

I agree with you. And I also think MLS will someday be the equal of at least leagues in France, Portugal, Scotland, etc. but that will take 20-30 years.

In order: God no, maybe not, and you aren't already?

But seriously, its unlikely. Soccer arrived too late and really doesn't have the grass routes support to make it. Great players are playing soccer as kids, and being scouted as kids, and being signed by Real Madrid as kids. Until LA Galaxy has the youth setup to rival Madrid, and starts signing kids at that age (Providing the MLS doesn't go bust before then.) you don't have a prayer.

I mean, lets face it, the US Mens national team isn't really that good. You just get a free pass to the world cup, and a free pass to the Confederations cup (Like Australia used to) and thats it. Saying that the US is going to be a power in a sport that the other countries have been playing for a lifetime is silly. And just because you get to the final in the Confederations cup doesn't mean that you are going places. See: Japan, Australia.

[phightin]

Originally Posted by Hazza

In order: God no, maybe not, and you aren't already?

But seriously, its unlikely. Soccer arrived too late and really doesn't have the grass routes support to make it.

Have you ever been to a sounders game or a few of the other top clubs in the league. The sounders averaged 30,000 throughout the year and while the average league attendance was down due to the economy the top half of the league draws much more than many of the teams in the nhl. Have a look MLS Daily: 2009 MLS Attendance Figures

Great players are playing soccer as kids, and being scouted as kids, and being signed by Real Madrid as kids. Until LA Galaxy has the youth setup to rival Madrid, and starts signing kids at that age (Providing the MLS doesn't go bust before then.) you don't have a prayer.

You must not be involved in the youth soccer scene in the US because that's exactly what the galaxy has now as every MLS team does an Academy program. Basically since ODP has never really worked, US soccer adopted a Developmental Academy Program 2 years ago where around 75 or so clubd soccer program have been designated developmental academies, with every MLS team having one. Granted it's only for the U13/14-U17/18 levels and needs to go slightly younger still, but these teams train 5 days a week, play each other throughout the year, and are scouted by the national program on a consistent basis. While the NCAA prevents it from ever truly being like Europe over the next few years you're going to see more and more kids choosing to go straight to the MLS instead of college because of this.

I mean, lets face it, the US Mens national team isn't really that good. You just get a free pass to the world cup, and a free pass to the Confederations cup (Like Australia used to) and thats it. Saying that the US is going to be a power in a sport that the other countries have been playing for a lifetime is silly. And just because you get to the final in the Confederations cup doesn't mean that you are going places. See: Japan, Australia.

I never said the US is going to be a power or that the CONCACAF is difficult to get out of, or their Confederations performance was something to write home about. But we're producing better overall players capable of handling themselves at the highest level abroad Dempsey, Gooch, etc. The problem is we can't get a high level pure striker still due to our coaching at the youth level. But I do think there's a certain respect the MNT has gained over the course of the past decade and if you turn on sports center its extensively covered. It's our only real national team that is followed year round at this point. The US will never be France, England, Spain etc. But there's no reason for me to believe that within a decades or so time we couldn't pull off what Greece did in Euro 04 and run through the best in the world when it means the most.

[stevebydac]

Originally Posted by Hazza

In order: God no, maybe not, and you aren't already?

As I said, I know enough (a little) about soccer to be dangerous in my opinions.

I fully realize France has a much better national team than the US - the US isn't going to win a World Cup in my lifetime probably. But what I meant is the potential for MLS to someday be as good as the French league. The French top league isn't as strong as the leagues in England, Germany, Italy or Spain, right? Or am I wrong? My perception is that most of the top players are in those four (though I realize some top French players do stay in their home league). Please correct me if I am loony with this opinion.

Back on topic, I guess the real question here is whether or not people think MLS will catch up to or pass the NHL in the US (not going to happen in Canada).

[Hazza]

Originally Posted by stevebydac

As I said, I know enough (a little) about soccer to be dangerous in my opinions.

I fully realize France has a much better national team than the US - the US isn't going to win a World Cup in my lifetime probably. But what I meant is the potential for MLS to someday be as good as the French league. The French top league isn't as strong as the leagues in England, Germany, Italy or Spain, right? Or am I wrong? My perception is that most of the top players are in those four (though I realize some top French players do stay in their home league). Please correct me if I am loony with this opinion.

Watched a bit of French ligue. The teams have an innate understanding of the game that will take quite a long time to develop over in the US. Literally, a lot of the good teams play like Arsenal in their style of play. Just because Lyon or Marseille have not made it to the Champions League Final doesn't mean that their not incredibly good footballing teams.

Just for some information, Lyon is 10th in the UEFA Club rankings, Marseille, Lille and PSG are 39, 40 and 42nd respectively. which is ahead of Fiorentina, Atletico Madrid, Udenese, Parma, Bolton, Everton and Man City.

phightin, most of your points are exceptionally well argued, and unfortunately true. But I stand by the belief that the culture of football is still not around. There is a difference between 30,000 people at a sounders game for the first year before the novelty wears off, and Fenway Park selling out every game for the last however many games. The difference is that Baseball is firmly entrenched in the psyche of the American public, where as I am arguing that it isn't for football. The Revoloution played in front 11,000 for a playoff game and Utah played in front of 7,000. Why was the Revolution crowd so down? Was there a NFL match on that day? If so there is my point.

Also have you won a Pan Pacifc Championship yet?

And I agree that Greece sucked and shouldn't have won that Euro. And if America did do that they'd do it with more poise and grace than they did.

And for the Youth system, I'm sure LA Galaxy has a fine youth system, but the difference is that they're not Real Madrid, and that's because Football arrived too late in America for there to be Real Madrid. If I argued that the Italian Baseball League in a few years would be as good as the Nippon League would you agree with me? In fact thats unfair, compare it to the Sporting CP youth system. That's a smaller youth system and they've produced Ronaldo, Nani, Velouso, Boa Morte, FIGO, Quaresma and Viana.

Football in the US is always going to compete with NFL, Baseball and Basketball and will never be as strong as France and Portugal for that reason.

Will it be bigger than the NHL? Probably.

[marc]

Originally Posted by Jason Moyer

All 3. Although, admittedly, there was still some good basketball being played when he retired the first time.

Pretty much all of the things that people hate about the NBA right now were brought into the league by Jordan so I don't really get this comment.

Jordan's legacy and reputation has to be the biggest sham in the history of professional sports.

Unreal player but his image is a joke and all of this one-on-one isolation crap, traveling, and everything else that people whine about with the NBA are things that exist in large part because of him.

[eriqjaffe]

Originally Posted by marc

Pretty much all of the things that people hate about the NBA right now were brought into the league by Jordan so I don't really get this comment.

Jordan's legacy and reputation has to be the biggest sham in the history of professional sports.

Unreal player but his image is a joke and all of this one-on-one isolation crap, traveling, and everything else that people whine about with the NBA are things that exist in large part because of him.

^^^^^
Gets it.

MJ was a singular player, a transcendent player. Ironically, that has really ruined basketball for me. It really feels like the game has become a "look at the cool **** I can do" thing, rather than a sport. I used to watch basketball when I was younger, but now I'd rather watch...pretty much any other sport.

Mind you, I don't feel the same emnity towards college ball as I do towards the NBA. The atmosphere is so much different, and it's really enjoyable to watch, even with the showboating.