West Coast Connection Forum
Lifestyle => Sports & Entertainment => Topic started by: GangstaBoogy on June 08, 2007, 07:56:09 PM
-
Game 1 of the NBA Finals drew the lowest rating ever for an opening-game in prime time, dropping 19 percent from last year.
The San Antonio Spurs' 85-76 victory over the Cleveland Cavaliers on Thursday night earned a 6.3 rating and 11 share on ABC. The previous low was a 6.4/11 in 2003.
Last year's Game 1 between Miami and Dallas earned a 7.8 rating and 14 share.
The rating is the percentage watching a telecast among all homes with televisions, and the share is the percentage tuned in to a broadcast among those households with televisions on at the time. A ratings point represents 1,114,000 households.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2007/news/story?id=2898196
-
Not really surprising...Especially with ABC's whack ass telecasts.
-
dude abc is gay as fuck... all they got is jimmy kimmel lol spurs all the way!!!
-
Well the Spurs ain't appreciated by the average B-Ball fan.. let's be honest this 1st game was boring
-
Well the Spurs ain't appreciated by the average B-Ball fan.. let's be honest this 1st game was boring
The truth is the Cavs and the Spurs are two of the best DEFENSIVE teams in the NBA. And the average b-ball fan wanna see dunks, high-scoring games, great rivalries, Kobe, Shaq, Kobe vs Shaq... those things. I personally appreciate a lot those DEFENSIVE teams, and for me it's always a pleasure to watch the Spurs, who are one of the best defensive teams ever. But i understand common people doesn't give a flying fuck about how the Spurs rotate defensively or how they defend against pick-n-roll's.
-
^^^^ I appreciate defensive teams too but I still think this game was boring... yeah SAS and Cavs are great defensive teams, SAS got a very good execution on the offensive end too.. but some highlights or very closed games are needed too.. especially when I don't care which team gonna win
-
^^^^ I appreciate defensive teams too but I still think this game was boring... yeah SAS and Cavs are great defensive teams, SAS got a very good execution on the offensive end too.. but some highlights or very closed games are needed too.. especially when I don't care which team gonna win
Def.
-
LOL, I forgot it was even on.
-
It's boring cuz it's not competitive...
-
D.Wade = More rating than L.James?
-
D.Wade = More rating than L.James?
D.Wade & S.Oneal = More ratings than LBJ & Duncan, Parker & Ginobili.
-
If Horry had not bodychecked Nash in Game 4, the Finals would have much better ratings.
-
If Horry had not bodychecked Nash in Game 4, the Finals would have much better ratings.
Horry is God.
-
That is definitely surprising....I understand the Spurs don't have a large fanbase like that...but isn't Lebron supposed to be "Jordan" and all that to the rest of the world? I would think it would have very high ratings because of him alone, and the way that they have been pumpin him up since he was 15.
-
If Horry had not bodychecked Nash in Game 4, the Finals would have much better ratings.
Horry is God.
lol @ that one trick pony
-
I, for one, could care less about the Cavaliers and especially the Spurs, so maybe other people feel that way also and don't even bother watching.
-
Not really surprising...Especially with ABC's whack ass telecasts.
-
Stern speaks out...
Commissioner David Stern responded to the record-low TV ratings for the NBA Finals by saying that they were a sign of the changing media times.
"What it means to us is that we had two very bad games, and you would expect bad ratings,'' Stern told SI.com during halftime of Game 3 Tuesday. "But what it also means is that we led the night in the key demographic on our network, and increasingly it's not about how you did last year. It's about how you did against your competition. And against our competition we're doing great.''
The 6.3 rating for Game 1 of the Cleveland Cavaliers against the San Antonio Spurs on ABC amounted to a 19 percent drop from last year, setting a record low for an NBA Finals opening game in prime time. They fell even further for Game 2, earning a 5.6 national rating and a 10 share on Sunday night -- plummeting 30 percent from the numbers of 8.0 and 14 drawn by the Miami Heat and the Dallas Mavericks in the Finals last year.
An NBA official said that the ratings were affected by the competition in the East and Midwest against the finale of The Sopranos,' which was watched by an estimated 11.9 million people on HBO.
Lmao. Nice excuses.
-
The Cavs play in CLEVELAND...The Spurs play in SAN ANTONIO....Think about it.
-
This has been one of the worst seasons in the NBA since i began watching (late 80's).
-the conference are horribly mistmatched (even worse than usual......everyone except the Lakers (actually they would have a chance too) could possibly beat Cleveland)
-the seeding is ridiculous, meaning you had the Suns and Spurs(two of the top 3 in the league) playing in the 2nd round
-the reffing has been brutal all year
-shitty finals; everyone knows the final was played in the 2nd round
-Only two entertaining series in the whole postseason- Spurs vs SUns (INCREDIBLE BALL) and the Warriros defeating the Mavs
-two of the top talents in the league are surrounded by lacklustre squads (Kobe on the Lakers and LBJ on the Cavs)
-and lastly, the retarded suspension of Stoudemire! Bowen can knee someone in the balls during the same series, but Stoudemire steps on the court to defend his captain, is retrained before anything happens, and still gets suspended!
People are frustrated with the NBA right now, believe that. There is an ABUNDANCE of great players in the NBA, so i am sure if some changes are made, the ratings will be back.
And like NIK said, people don't want to see S.A. or the Cavs in the final. They want a big market
-
The biggest problem is too many teams. As opposed to the 80's and early 90's it was common to have two or more superstars on a team. Now it isn't.
It will never happen because of money, but if the NBA took two or three teams away from each conference, it would make a big difference. If they seeded the playoffs like the NFL then we wouldn't have seen Spurs/Suns until the WCF. The league is just too watered down right now.
-
The main factor is competition...Teams simply aren't the same as they were in the 80s. Showtime Lakers of the 80s would probably go 82-0 and 16-0 in the playoffs nowadays. :-X
-
The main factor is competition...Teams simply aren't the same as they were in the 80s. Showtime Lakers of the 80s would probably go 82-0 and 16-0 in the playoffs nowadays. :-X
Or even the 90's, but exactly. Imagine if T-Wolves, Grizzlies, and Sonics were taken away from the West. That would leave KG, Allen, and Gasol as superstars as well as players like Rashard Lewis, Nick Collison, Luke Ridnour, Ricky Davis, Randy Foye, Troy Hudson, Rudy Gay, Hakim Warrick, and others to fill starter spots or reserve roles.
Of course, like I said, it'll never happen because the league would lose ticket and concession sales...but it would make for a better product to have less teams.