I hope ESPN is happy with what they did to hoops

[noeynox]

College basketball is cup cake city in November and December. They've done better in creating some early season excitement but slot of that early season stuff is unwatchable. Its why I feel if UCONN must play cupcakes, hook up the instate schools. At least then you might intrigue a few people instate.

 

[freescooter]

I think that attendance doesn't really matter to ESPN. It matters to the schools, but it isn't a big deal to ESPN whether there are 15000 or 1500 people. They care about the action on the field or court. What goes on in the stands is merely color/background. Not unlike the "crowds" on Letterman or Colbert. You don't need them to do the show or play the game. I could actually see it making sense to play in 5-6000 seat on campus arenas as opposed to 10-12000 seat "downtown" civic centers in a few years for many many teams.

 

[Husky25]

College basketball is cup cake city in November and December. They've done better in creating some early season excitement but slot of that early season stuff is unwatchable. Its why I feel if UCONN must play cupcakes, hook up the instate schools. At least then you might intrigue a few people instate.

Only for teams in "power" conferences. UConn will be in a mid-major next year. I expect them to be very difficult to beat, provided everyone comes back, but just in case they don't win the conference tourney, they better make sure they beef up the OOC a little more than CCSU and Saced Heart in order to increase their SOS and RPI.

 

[Husky25]

I think that attendance doesn't really matter to ESPN. It matters to the schools, but it isn't a big deal to ESPN whether there are 15000 or 1500 people. They care about the action on the field or court. What goes on in the stands is merely color/background. Not unlike the "crowds" on Letterman or Colbert. You don't need them to do the show or play the game. I could actually see it making sense to play in 5-6000 seat on campus arenas as opposed to 10-12000 seat "downtown" civic centers in a few years for many many teams.

Actually they probably care more about the eye-balls watching the broadcast who are not in the arena. It is not a far leap to pitch at their advertising partners that a full arena = the game is in high demand and therefore, there are that many more other people who aren't at the game in person who are probably watching it on TV.

 

[noeynox]

Only for teams in "power" conferences. UConn will be in a mid-major next year. I expect them to be very difficult to beat, provided everyone comes back, but just in case they don't win the conference tourney, they better make sure they beef up the OOC a little more than CCSU and Saced Heart in order to increase their SOS and RPI.

This is true now as we go forward, but playing Maryland eastern shore and Coppin State for years wasn't exactly must see TV.

 

[Husky25]

This is true now as we go forward, but playing Maryland eastern shore and Coppin State for years wasn't exactly must see TV.

And it wasn't supposed to be, But that is my point. Since 1992, UConn has had the luxury of scheduling and beating up on cupcakes because they could rely on their conference opponents to beef up their RPI and SOS. Syracuse can still schedule 13 straight games within the boarders of New York State. They will ride the strength of the ACC to the tournement. Connecticut, will have to forego the SUNY-Binghamtons of the world in favor of: Anyone, Any Place, Any time.
America 12 = WAC

 

[freescooter]

Actually they probably care more about the eye-balls watching the broadcast who are not in the arena. It is not a far leap to pitch at their advertising partners that a full arena = the game is in high demand and therefore, there are that many more other people who aren't at the game in person who are probably watching it on TV.

Yeah, but you can do that with a 5000 seat "sellout" which might be superior to a 15000 fans in a 17000 seat arena. Again, when you look like Letterman it looks like a huge crowd. it is really under 500. For tv purposes they are better off having a small "full house" than twice as many people in a three times the size arena.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I think the CFB playoff ratings are going to obliterate this theory.

So football copying basketball's postseason format is going to obliterate the theory that basketball's postseason format is better? Got it.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Why do you feel that football's popularity is about to fall off a cliff? It is instituting a 4 team playoff, and when the powers-that-be see all the roll in, there is little doubt that it will go to an 8+ team format. There are two reasons the current Bowl structure fails: 1) Too many bowl games between mediocre teams with no history that mean nothing to the respective fan bases or locales in which they are played. 2) HDTV. The In-home experience is far more cost effective and adaptable to everyday life (and sometime more enjoyable) than the in-stadium experience. Related, all the bowl games are on TV. It's not as big of a deal anymore to say that you were there.

Head injuries. When kids stop playing football, the interest in the sport will decline fairly rapidly. When fans realize that they are watching a sport where the participants are deliberately causing serious brain trauma to themselves, it will fall off a cliff (see boxing).

I think the biggest factor that has held the NFLPA on the same page with the NFL over concussions is the recognition that if fans realize just how brutal this sport is on the participants, many will stop watching and the golden goose will die.

 

[tzznandrew]

Head injuries. When kids stop playing football, the interest in the sport will decline fairly rapidly. When fans realize that they are watching a sport where the participants are deliberately causing serious brain trauma to themselves, it will fall off a cliff (see boxing).

I think the biggest factor that has held the NFLPA on the same page with the NFL over concussions is the recognition that if fans realize just how brutal this sport is on the participants, many will stop watching and the golden goose will die.

I actually think this is a danger in the future. Football needs to change so that the injuries aren't so severe, and there are not the issues of brain damage, and they need to do it in a way that the fans only realize what happened long after.

I don't have kids, but when I do, they're not playing football (although, not really football's loss since I'm short and unathletic). I didn't feel this way 5 years ago...

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I actually think this is a danger in the future. Football needs to change so that the injuries aren't so severe, and there are not the issues of brain damage, and they need to do it in a way that the fans only realize what happened long after.

I don't have kids, but when I do, they're not playing football (although, not really football's loss since I'm short and unathletic). I didn't feel this way 5 years ago...

I agree, and I know a lot of parents in the same boat. Pop Warner coaches are having to recruit kids now, whereas a few years ago they were trying to find playing time for everyone. Dumb jocks were often dumb for a reason. By high school, many football players have already experienced multiple concussions.

 

[Husky25]

Head injuries. When kids stop playing football, the interest in the sport will decline fairly rapidly. When fans realize that they are watching a sport where the participants are deliberately causing serious brain trauma to themselves, it will fall off a cliff (see boxing).

I think the biggest factor that has held the NFLPA on the same page with the NFL over concussions is the recognition that if fans realize just how brutal this sport is on the participants, many will stop watching and the golden goose will die.

Much like it's participants, football fans have a knack for thinking it won't happen to me and their behavior won't change until an injury hits close to home. Rule changes will occur before that happens on a wide-spread basis. Football was under Presidential review once before due to its brutality and its still around. The Powers-that-be will continue to tweak the engine to guard against widespread negative perception. That's their job.

 

[Husky25]

There are reasons boxing is not as popular and head injuries is not necessarily at the top of the list. At every level other than professional (where knockouts are encouraged, because that is what the American public wants), Boxers wear headgear, they are not allowed to fight until they pass concussion tests, and it is generally very safe (a lot safer than slinging rock on an urban street corner. Yes, a dispproportionate number of true boxing gyms are in urban environments). Boxing is down for four reasons...

1) The most historically prestigious division sucks. There is very little action in the heavyweights except for a few flurries here and there. Much of what they do is circle around the ring, throwing a few jabs per round. The two best Boxers happen to be brothers and refuse to fight each other. It's just not that entertaining to the general public.

2) Lack of Characters/Personality - Fans cannot get behind or relate to today's boxers like they did Ali, Foreman, Liston, Homles, or Tyson.

3) International Growth and Talent outpaces American - See Olympics, Summer, 2012.

4) Perceived wide-spread corruption.

Likewise, football is much safer at the youth level. The players are virtually equal in size and do not approach 150 lbs. (by rule), let alone averaging 280lbs of solid granite muscle. There are certainly some freak injuries, but concussions are typically monitored to the nth degree at the lower levels and they are not allowed back on the field until they are cleared. You are certainly correct that a concerted effort needs to be curtailed at higher levels regarding head trauma, but an argument can be made that awareness of these injuries is as high as it is because the sport enjoys such a degree of popularity. As I said rule changes will certainly go into effect before the golden goose is cooked.

 

[noeynox]

Boxing has not fallen because of any,injuries,the fighters incurred while fighting.
Boxing problem has been the competing promoters have kept the best boxing fights from being made. I love boxing. There didn't use to be a decent pay per view card that I wouldn't buy.

IM not shelling out money to watch Mayweather pound on a 40 year old Moseley. MMA is very popular right now because all of the perceived best fighters are under the same promotion so you don't get the politics that kept a Mayweather PAC man fight from ever happening.

We won't stop watching football cause of head injuries. ,we know they exist now AND still watch. Now the sport being outlawed all together is another thing but were a long way from that.

 

[tzznandrew]

Boxing has not fallen because of any,injuries,the fighters incurred while fighting.
Boxing problem has been the competing promoters have kept the best boxing fights from being made. I love boxing. There didn't use to be a decent pay per view card that I wouldn't buy.

IM not shelling out money to watch Mayweather pound on a 40 year old Moseley. MMA is very popular right now because all of the perceived best fighters are under the same promotion so you don't get the politics that kept a Mayweather PAC man fight from ever happening.

We won't stop watching football cause of head injuries. ,we know they exist now AND still watch. Now the sport being outlawed all together is another thing but were a long way from that.

I agree with parts of this.

Here's the difference: football needs people to train and learn the game. It's very complicated at its highest levels. You come to MMA through different levels, none of which have to be sports that cause brain injury. You don't train to be an MMA person--you train to be something else, and then move over.

Football needs kids in from a young age. I think it happens--I think they make enough rule changes to avoid these very serious injuries...and then the problem becomes that the game won't be the same game we're watching now, let alone in the 80s.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Head injuries. When kids stop playing football, the interest in the sport will decline fairly rapidly. When fans realize that they are watching a sport where the participants are deliberately causing serious brain trauma to themselves, it will fall off a cliff (see boxing).

I think the biggest factor that has held the NFLPA on the same page with the NFL over concussions is the recognition that if fans realize just how brutal this sport is on the participants, many will stop watching and the golden goose will die.

And the NFL is issuing new rules, as reported today, that backs (and presumably receivers) will no longer be able to lower their heads when engaging the defense. So this is for real, and parents will turn their kids to soccer and other sports.

The biggest problem the sport has is the helments, designed to protect, they also inflict a lot of damage. Some sort of spongy, softer helmet is needed.

 

[tduconn]

Although I have supported UConn in all sports for decades, I found basketball preseason to be so annoying that most contests shouldn't count in the overall team record. This years UConn played UMass-Lowell.......which is a division 3 team (Eastern CSU "Little East" league)......and there are quite a few not much more of a challenge. And its not just UConn......it seems a lot of major college BB teams use this ploy for preseason entertainment to boost their post season chances at the "big dance".......while they struggle to a 0.500 record in legitimate division I competition. If they want to play a lot of these preseason marshmellows to help a lesser team improve their revenue.....fine. Just don't let it count for "big dance" justification.

The new UConn league is far better than their current preseason schedule......for the most part. Scheduling their new preseason to include a few "name teams" to improve UConn's overall seasonal SOS will not hurt their overall recognition in college BB's elite.

At least in college football, if you play more than 1 team in a Division 1-aa or 2 level, it won't count towards selection for participation in bowl games......no matter how minor the bowl.

Sports "authorities" have long suggested that the Super Bowl produces far more revenue that any other sport post season playoff system.....college or pro.

The same "authorities" suggest a college football playoff "has a good chance" of surpassing post season FB and superbowl contests. Won't happen with weak "preseason/league" contests......too much money to be made or lost.

 

[Husky25]

And the NFL is issuing new rules, as reported today, that backs (and presumably receivers) will no longer be able to lower their heads when engaging the defense. So this is for real, and parents will turn their kids to soccer and other sports.

The biggest problem the sport has is the helments, designed to protect, they also inflict a lot of damage. Some sort of spongy, softer helmet is needed.

This rule won't be implemented because enforcement will be near impossible.

Helmets protect against skull injuries. They do nothing to protect against brain injuries. I am for your idea of a soft cap. I'd also be interested in exploring getting rid of the neutral zone and potentially starting a play in a rugby-like scrum. This would cut down on the 60+ low speed car accidents to which the linemen are subject.

 

[noeynox]

Mma is now being taught exclusively from a,young age so in essence people are trying to become an mma guy. Rory McDonald is called the first true mma guy because he didn't practice wrestling or ju jitsu or anything else but mma from he start.

 

[freescooter]

I don't know about the head injuries. I suspect through a combination of equipment and rules changes that will get under control. Lots of interesting work in this area. One interesting finding about concussions is that women and girls tend to get significantly more than men in the same sports. In high school basketball, for example, girls have 4 times as many concussions as boys. In soccer it isn't as dramatic, but it is still pretty significant, something like 1.5 times more. While neither were as high as football, for every sport where both boys and girls compete, the rate for girls is dramatically higher.

But football has dealt with things like htis before and managed the problem. During the 1970s and into the early 1980s, huge numbers of stars went down with knee injuries, many attributed to artifical playing surfaces. Knee injuries still occur, of course, but not nearly at the same rates they did at that time. A number of factors contributed including new surfaces like field turf with more give than the old astro-turf fields, better equipment, and various rules changes like "in the grasp" and some blocking rules. I anticipate we'll see similar things happening with regard to football going forward.

 

[Husky25]

Although I have supported UConn in all sports for decades, I found basketball preseason to be so annoying that most contests shouldn't count in the overall team record. This years UConn played UMass-Lowell.......which is a division 3 team (Eastern CSU "Little East" league)......and there are quite a few not much more of a challenge. And its not just UConn......it seems a lot of major college BB teams use this ploy for preseason entertainment to boost their post season chances at the "big dance".......while they struggle to a 0.500 record in legitimate division I competition. If they want to play a lot of these preseason marshmellows to help a lesser team improve their revenue.....fine. Just don't let it count for "big dance" justification.

The new UConn league is far better than their current preseason schedule......for the most part. Scheduling their new preseason to include a few "name teams" to improve UConn's overall seasonal SOS will not hurt their overall recognition in college BB's elite.

At least in college football, if you play more than 1 team in a Division 1-aa or 2 level, it won't count towards selection for participation in bowl games......no matter how minor the bowl.

Sports "authorities" have long suggested that the Super Bowl produces far more revenue that any other sport post season playoff system.....college or pro.

The same "authorities" suggest a college football playoff "has a good chance" of surpassing post season FB and superbowl contests. Won't happen with weak "preseason/league" contests......too much money to be made or lost.

I'm glad you feel that way because that is exactly what happens. The game vs Umass Lowell, a Div. II program, did not count toward UConn's regular season record. Only games played vs schools in Div. I count. There are over 300 Div. I basketball programs.

 

[Husky25]

I don't know about the head injuries. I suspect through a combination of equipment and rules changes that will get under control. Lots of interesting work in this area. One interesting finding about concussions is that women and girls tend to get significantly more than men in the same sports. In high school basketball, for example, girls have 4 times as many concussions as boys. In soccer it isn't as dramatic, but it is still pretty significant, something like 1.5 times more. While neither were as high as football, for every sport where both boys and girls compete, the rate for girls is dramatically higher.

But football has dealt with things like htis before and managed the problem. During the 1970s and into the early 1980s, huge numbers of stars went down with knee injuries, many attributed to artifical playing surfaces. Knee injuries still occur, of course, but not nearly at the same rates they did at that time. A number of factors contributed including new surfaces like field turf with more give than the old astro-turf fields, better equipment, and various rules changes like "in the grasp" and some blocking rules. I anticipate we'll see similar things happening with regard to football going forward.

Issue: Broken knees can be fixed and the person lives. Broken brains = incapacitation, up to and including death. No cure for death yet, as far as I know...
I agree though. It is an issue, it is recognized, and people are addressing it. Football's popularity is not exactly in danger.

 

[upstater]

Although I have supported UConn in all sports for decades, I found basketball preseason to be so annoying that most contests shouldn't count in the overall team record. This years UConn played UMass-Lowell.......which is a division 3 team (Eastern CSU "Little East" league)......and there are quite a few not much more of a challenge. And its not just UConn......it seems a lot of major college BB teams use this ploy for preseason entertainment to boost their post season chances at the "big dance".......while they struggle to a 0.500 record in legitimate division I competition. If they want to play a lot of these preseason marshmellows to help a lesser team improve their revenue.....fine. Just don't let it count for "big dance" justification.

The new UConn league is far better than their current preseason schedule......for the most part. Scheduling their new preseason to include a few "name teams" to improve UConn's overall seasonal SOS will not hurt their overall recognition in college BB's elite.

At least in college football, if you play more than 1 team in a Division 1-aa or 2 level, it won't count towards selection for participation in bowl games......no matter how minor the bowl.

Sports "authorities" have long suggested that the Super Bowl produces far more revenue that any other sport post season playoff system.....college or pro.

The same "authorities" suggest a college football playoff "has a good chance" of surpassing post season FB and superbowl contests. Won't happen with weak "preseason/league" contests......too much money to be made or lost.

Those games don't count in the teams record.

 

[freescooter]

Those games don't count in the teams record.

I believe he is referring to games like MdEastern Shore, Texas southern, and some of the other creampuff. Games like that count bu tthe teams are really no better than the D-3 teams we play in the pre-season. And that's a big issue. How do you get to 20 plus wins without lots of creampuffs? As an aside it is also why I didn't think Ollie owuld have too much trouble winning more than half his games.

 

[tzznandrew]

I believe he is referring to games like MdEastern Shore, Texas southern, and some of the other creampuff. Games like that count bu tthe teams are really no better than the D-3 teams we play in the pre-season. And that's a big issue. How do you get to 20 plus wins without lots of creampuffs? As an aside it is also why I didn't think Ollie owuld have too much trouble winning more than half his games.

Those teams would kill DIII schools. Let's not kid ourselves.

Do the games suck? Yes.