IF YOU BUILD IT THEY WILL COME...OR WILL THEY?

NBA. Yes, National Badminton Association now, but would you care to hear the rest of the story? You're going to irregardless. If

you are old enough you may even remember that at the turn of the century, 2010 to be exact, there still existed the National

Basketball Association. This was a mens professional league, much like the current day NFL. So how did it turn from an is to a was?

As you would expect the entities of the league simply got too greedy. The filthy rich owners and the filthy rich players were at a

point where the had to agree how the future money would be split, at least for a defined period. Naturally both sides were not

content with filthy, they wanted filthier, and it was pretty much a matter of one side gaining at the expense of the other. So when the

season rolled around, it was not rolling. It hadn't started. Both sides bantered back and forth, each side blaming the other for not

being able to reach an agreement. So, finally, at a standstill, they called in a professional mediator, Bill Murray who had at one time

been a comedic actor. The details are unclear, but some sort of agreement was finally pounded out.

First thing first, how to handle to 2011 season. It would be pushing things but both sides felt the schedule had to start in 2011, or

the season could only be called one of the 2012 seasons.

And this is where David Strum comes into the picture. He was commissioner, of the league, supposedly, but his only real duties

were to fine players who misbehaved. If, say, a player lost his cool and charged into the stands and stabbed an obnoxius fan, then

he could expect as high as a $1000 fine from the league via Strum. In rare cases, if the wounds proved fatal, that fine could even be

doubled. There is no evidence that an owner was ever actually fined, but I guess it would have been possible. But as the brainchild

of Strum there was quickly organized a season schedule, to be kicked off with the Superbowel. Heat v Lakers, no surprise there, but

the event was to be held in Texas Stadium, because it offered the largest capacity.

The plan was to sell 160,000 tickets. They knew they could squeeze 140,000 seats in there, and because seats were only reserved

until you vacated them, then that left 20,000 to be going to pee and buy more beer at any given time. And most of the seats would

have a court view. Well, the majority anyway. So at $15,000 a pop, that's $2.4 billion just in ticket sales. Add on concessions,

parking, souvenirs....it was certainly not going to be just pocket change. The TV package was estimated to pull in another 4 or 5

billion, based on a Nielsen rating of between 90-95. Strum actually later boasted that he felt the season would actually produce

twice as much revenue as the prior year, and with only half the number of games. No small feat.

So the big event finally rolls around. It's happening. But, not exactly as the league had expected. Attendance? Accounts vary, but

it is pretty well documented that at least 11 players moms were in the stands, some say 12, even 13. They did actually start the

game, apparently. But the clock operator sort of snuck out. The refs apparently flipped to see which 1 had to stay and officiate, the

others went to get pizza and a beer. So the single ref had to cover the whole floor, plus be timekeeper. He only called 93 fouls in

the first quarter because it was just him. But, the interesting thing is that the first quarter lasted a little over 2 hours. Started at 8pm

central, but that's 9 east coast, so at the end of just the first quarter it was already past 11 in NY. Could you call it a 2011 season if

the first game ended in 2012? That's correct - they had scheduled the game on New Years Eve. All things considered, the

scorekeeper having, by now, also left, the game was ended prematurely and declared a draw. What other choice did they have if no

one was keeping score. As things turned out, that was the only game, or part game of the 2011 season and there would not be

another season. Nielsen rating was said to be negative, which has never been understood.

So, what happened? Well, the one time fans, when the season didn't start like normal, just continued to watch football. Other

sports. Bridge clubs sprung up everywhere. Men decided if was fun to spend more quality time with their wives. Matter of fact,

approximately 9 months later occurred another baby boom. Even scrabble regained it's lost popularity. To make a long story just a

little longer, they simply didn't come.

Postscript: LeBron is said to have done very well in the used car business. Kobe-he was content to just be a beef. And, Shaq found
his niche as a grape crusher in Cal.

Sportcenter is now nothing but NFL, NHL and NASCAR. I fail to see the problem. Who complains about heaven on earth?

"If you build it..." Didn't most stadiums get built or at least partially funded by public money?

While they bicker, I wonder if it would be possible for a city / state that provided public funds, can now sue the teams for failing to play as promised. Sue for the loss of the expected boost to the local economy on game day, as well as the taxes associated with it.

For what it's worth, I'm not a sports fan at all. I'll watch a game that's on TV. And I'll root for the home team.

But I root for the home team because it's good for the local economy.

A lockout isn't good for anybody.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

A lockout isn't good for anybody.

Well certainly a lock-out isn't good for the part-timers
who are ushers, concession stand workers, car lot
attendants, etc.

But I'm not convinced there is a huge economic
benefit impact one way or the other.

For example, if you don't drop
$ 100 going to a game, aren't you going to
spend that money on something else, maybe
even something that created a manufacturing
job, etc, etc ?

Overpaid whiny players and Ritchie Rich
owners... Who cares ?

DJ I think mistook my meaning. I didn't mean physically build, I meant just the brand. Whatever crap we feed to the fans, they will come back for more. It was just a dream, really, that they would finally reach an agreement and no one would give a shit. They would have found other BETTER things to spend their time on. No one would go to a game or watch a game on TV. The players would have to get a job like the rest of us. They'd make great painters-paint the ceiling with no ladder-how cool is that.

DM -

No, I understood you right.

But nobody is going to become a fan if there isn't a place to sit and watch the game. Once you attach a single spectator chair to the sport, you automatically attach an entire stadium, and the concessions and ancillairy jobs and taxes that go with it. And where there's taxes, there's public money to build the staduim.

Have you ever been in a sports bar, when the only sport available on TV was soccer from Uruguay? How exciting is that?

Quote: JohnnyQ

For example, if you don't drop
$ 100 going to a game, aren't you going to
spend that money on something else, maybe
even something that created a manufacturing
job, etc, etc ?

Yeah, but is that job local, in another part of the country, or overseas?

Why do you think cities that don't have professional sports, want them? Or that cities that have them, fights to keep them when the team threatens to move?

There are two types of economists: those that say sports stadiums benefit the cities in which they are located and those who do not.
Economists uniformly render such opinions based on whether they've been employed by the sports industry or not.

Quote: FleaStiff

There are two types of economists: those that say sports stadiums benefit the cities in which they are located and those who do not.
Economists uniformly render such opinions based on whether they've been employed by the sports industry or not.

What?!?!? I thought it was well understood that you can ask most any question of any two economists and get three opinions.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

DM -

No, I understood you right.

But nobody is going to become a fan if there isn't a place to sit and watch the game. Once you attach a single spectator chair to the sport, you automatically attach an entire stadium, and the concessions and ancillairy jobs and taxes that go with it. And where there's taxes, there's public money to build the staduim.

Have you ever been in a sports bar, when the only sport available on TV was soccer from Uruguay? How exciting is that?

Yeah, but is that job local, in another part of the country, or overseas?

Why do you think cities that don't have professional sports, want them? Or that cities that have them, fights to keep them when the team threatens to move?

Question 1-never been in a sports bar-I won't go mooch free TV and not pay $20 bucks for a drink

2-political ego, chance for kickbacks maybe, the mayor owns the land he has in mind for the location

Question 3 is for you-why do you assume cities that don't have professional sports, want them? Don't cities often find out later that they didn't want them, after all?

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Have you ever been in a sports bar, when the only sport available on TV was soccer from Uruguay? How exciting is that?

Heck, two rain drops dripping down a window pane ain't particularly exciting, but people still bet on them! And why is the bar only getting Uruguayian Soccer, won't the local bookies pay the bar owner to get a satellite dish? Its like the town that was too small to support a lawyer but large enough to support two lawyers. A sports bar that is too broke to afford anything but Urugurayian Soccer will be making money hand over fist if a bookie buys them a satellite feed.

Excitement? Urouguayian soccer players are exciting to American females, so there will be males in the sports bar betting on the game. Heroin addicts are rarely addicted to the heroin, they are addicted to the needle! The bar provides the booze and the females provide the pheremones and the males pay the vigorish.