English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The ratings were only 6.4million people watching i.e. 19percent of the TV viewers watched the game. What's up with that?

2007-06-08 16:06:19 · 13 answers · asked by robert f 1 in Sports Basketball

13 answers

It's a Spurs team who got there with help from the NBA when it rewarded Horry for a flagrant against Nash. They're great but boring.

Then it's bring on the all boring except for one man CAVs. Was it ever in question who's going to win? Is it now? Come on. When you know who's going to win...no one cares.

BTW, 'Bron is no where near as exciting as MJ to watch. He's a fantastic player, but not exciting. Kobe is exciting, but everyone (except Laker fans) hates him and doesn't want him to win. MJ had the mad game and a likeable personality. These teams have NO personality, likeable or otherwise.

When the NBA was getting the refs to help out the Lakers so they could get a dynasty to help the NBA they forgot you need players people like. There aren't many players that are likeable in the NBA anymore. The NBA is less about basketball and more about entertainment. NCAA is about the game.

If Phoenix or Dallas had been in it, more would have watched b/c they bring excitment. BTW, it's the NBA, no one's cared since the 90s.

2007-06-11 08:16:47 · answer #1 · answered by Marcus A 2 · 0 0

I tuned in just before the first TV timeout. Nothing remotely exciting happened. The next few minutes of play were similarly boring. Then they went to a SECOND TV timeout with 2:29 left in the quarter. At least I was pretty sure it was a TV timeout--the (THREE!) announcers didn't say otherwise. I turned it off. I have had about enough of NBA viewing without adding even more TV timeouts.

One refreshing thing was, I didn't notice a sideline reporter during the little time I did watch. Did they not have any? My guess is that they had at least two.

Overproduction is a turnoff. The networks seem to think their production is more important than the game, and do a lot of things to obscure clear viewing. Who needs a damned skycam that hovers over the court? Is this Deadvision, like I've died and left my body? Just gimme one angle during live action, the midcourt shot. All the other garbage can be saved for the excessive replays.

No surprise to me the ratings are down.

2007-06-08 17:32:06 · answer #2 · answered by wingo 4 · 1 0

The fact is both Cleveland and SA are small markets so you end up starting the whole thing with a small population base watching. The Spurs were obviously so much better than the Cavs the ratings plummetted because there was really no competition. The Spurs do have a lot of international players but I think really if Tim acted like a Garnett then he may get more fans. Hype is also a key. People get excited about players that get a lot of notice which works against teams like the Spurs.

2016-05-20 07:18:14 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

2 small markets (well, 1 med 1 small)
Mike was from Chicago, a large market. So hometown viewers make a difference when you're talking about a city of 7 million vs. 2.5 million.
People judging LeBron, favorably or unfavorably, he's 22 and that was ONE finals game...slow down! the man's got a dozen more years to impress you or piss you off. relax!

2007-06-08 16:26:37 · answer #4 · answered by sfdj66 2 · 0 0

The Cavaliers are not ready for prime time,obviously.I think most people believe the Spurs will win,so they figure LeBron wont be worth watching.Though,its kind of a shame that supposedly knowledgeable basketball fans cant embrace Tim Duncan.I swear if he played for the Bulls he would be bigger than Jordan.Of course,I wish he did play for the Bulls,then we would be talking 6 more championships.

2007-06-08 16:27:05 · answer #5 · answered by mikecubbie69 4 · 0 0

They should not compare him to Mike. I know Jordan is at home thinking "What did this guy do to prove himself to be on my level." Even if he wins a title this year, he has a looong way to go to be in Mikes class. And I also agree, Kobe is more comparable to Mike than Lebron.

2007-06-08 16:58:22 · answer #6 · answered by Tee W 2 · 1 0

Its not because of Lebron, Nobody wants to see the slow-poke Spurs. If this was SUNS-Cavs it would be highest rated in recent history 2000+ (even if it would've been a sweep)

2007-06-08 16:19:34 · answer #7 · answered by Jake S 4 · 0 0

No1 wants to see LeBron. I mean come on, this is the worst NBA Final ever! Nobody wants to see LeBron everybody wants to see Kobe and his fadeaways and amazing drive ins.

2007-06-08 16:37:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

yes that is true kobe is more like mike. Have u seen those stats, but look at the way kobe act like he freakin owns the nba. I never liked lebron anyway he was hyped up a little bit 2 much. people are gettin tired of him that's why people don't really wanna watch him.

2007-06-08 16:14:46 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Kobe is more like mike then lebron. and i was working on the night of the game but the game on Sunday i will see. You would think it would be higher since all the publicity lebron brings.

2007-06-08 16:11:22 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers