***2021-2022 NBA Season Thread***

[Spaceman Spiff]

8 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said:

 

Funny you say that, considering both NO and MIN have gotten 1st overall picks (AD and KAT), two blue chip players while NYC has gotten crickets. Dont buy that at all

 

They did get 1st overall picks but Zion is on a whole other planet as far as the excitement level goes.  AD and KAT were great prospects and have turned into great players but I have to believe that the league wants Zion in NYC more than any other lottery team.  

 

Plus, conspiracy theories are fun  

[samy316]

Zion is going to the Knicks.  There’s no doubt in my mind that’s happening.  You have the most talked about prospect in years, along with the Knicks’ mostly 20 year irrelevancy, and you have the ingredients for the Knicks to have their fortunes turn.  There’s NO way Cleveland, Phoenix or New Orleans get the #1 pick tomorrow night.  Phoenix already got the #1 pick last year, and Cleveland is NOT having  the fortune of getting ANOTHER #1 pick.  LeBron is not going back to Cleveland again, so they’re out.

 

Adam Silver is going to pull a David Stern tomorrow night, and set the Knicks up with the #1 pick one way or the other.  It’s what’s best for business.

Edited May 13, 2019 by samy316

[Spaceman Spiff]

14 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Well they are tied for having the best odds at getting the #1 pick.  It wouldn't be shocking if they got it.  DC's odds of getting it are only 9% and New Orleans' and Minnesota's are only 6% and 3% respectively.

 

They are tied for the best odds but there's no chance they let Zion rot in the desert of Phoenix and there's no way they'd let him go to Cleveland.   The Knicks have the 14% chance but it's them vs. the field, essentially.

 

 

[samy316]

IF the Knicks don’t get the #1 pick tomorrow night, the ONLY place I see Zion going is Chicago. It wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world for the Bulls to get a gift, due to Chicago being a great basketball town, and a huge market.  Forget about LA, the Lakers are not in a position to get #1.  If they had sit LeBron down at the All-Star break, they might’ve had a chance to enter the top 3, but that didn’t happen.

 

i think the top 3 tomorrow night will be New York, Phoenix and Chicago.

Edited May 13, 2019 by samy316

[Going Commando]

6 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

They are tied for the best odds but there's no chance they let Zion rot in the desert of Phoenix and there's no way they'd let him go to Cleveland.   The Knicks have the 14% chance but it's them vs. the field, essentially. 

 

If the Knicks get the #1 pick, it'd make it the fifth year in a row where the team with the worst record got the #1 pick.  It wouldn't exactly make for evidence of a conspiracy to rig the lottery.

4 minutes ago, samy316 said:

i think the top 3 tonight will be New York, Phoenix and Chicago. 

 

I'd like to see Chicago get the #2 pick.  I think Ja Morant is the missing piece for them.  He'd be the franchise player they need to make the kind of leap that Milwaukee made.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

3 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

It really isn't.  People want broad, authentic, consequential competition.  Having to settle for following the personal drama of the players and all of the consequential moments in the NBA coming in the offseason is terrible for the league because you don't actually have to watch any games to do that.

 

 Is Lebron better than Jordan?

 

Oh, wait, I'm sorry. Let's not have that debate since people clearly don't like it and would rather have a broad discussion about many players. People HATED the 90s with Jordan. I remember there being no NBA fans then.

[Going Commando]

49 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 Is Lebron better than Jordan?

 

Oh, wait, I'm sorry. Let's not have that debate since people clearly don't like it and would rather have a broad discussion about many players. People HATED the 90s with Jordan. I remember there being no NBA fans then.

 

I don't need to watch a single NBA game this year to participate in a barbershop debate about Michael Jordan vs LeBron James.  How does this being the league's central relevance actually help the NBA?  Isn't their fundamental goal to get as many people to watch as many games as possible?

 

One of the nice things about following the NFL is that I don't need to participate in a barbershop debate about Joe Montana vs Tom Brady for the league to be relevant.  It's in the moment competition is the league's central relevance.

[Mr. Sinister]

2 hours ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

They did get 1st overall picks but Zion is on a whole other planet as far as the excitement level goes.  AD and KAT were great prospects and have turned into great players but I have to believe that the league wants Zion in NYC more than any other lottery team.  

 

Plus, conspiracy theories are fun  

 

2 hours ago, samy316 said:

Zion is going to the Knicks.  There’s no doubt in my mind that’s happening.  You have the most talked about prospect in years, along with the Knicks’ mostly 20 year irrelevancy, and you have the ingredients for the Knicks to have their fortunes turn.  There’s NO way Cleveland, Phoenix or New Orleans get the #1 pick tomorrow night.  Phoenix already got the #1 pick last year, and Cleveland is NOT having  the fortune of getting ANOTHER #1 pick.  LeBron is not going back to Cleveland again, so they’re out.

 

Adam Silver is going to pull a David Stern tomorrow night, and set the Knicks up with the #1 pick one way or the other.  It’s what’s best for business.

 

I still dont get this. Its not like people arent watching the Knicks. Pretty sure they're the most valuable franchise in  the league still, packing MSG every night even though they've been complete and utter garbage for awhile now (and might have the worst owner in  sports) , bringing in more revenue from local tv deals than most teams in the league. And they play in the most famous arena in the United States

 

What's best for business imo is Zion going to a team where he  can improve their overall value and profitability and earn the league more money. All he would do going to the Knicks is make them stag right where they are at the top. It really does nothing for the league overall, other than making them the everyday focal point of national sportswriters and pundits (most of whom are in that tristate media bubble, and most of whom have a personal bias in the success of that franchise, whether through unabashed fandom or sports nostalgia).

 

And also, him going to NY would basically ensure that his career will be mired in turmoil.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

28 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

I don't need to watch a single NBA game this year to participate in a barbershop debate about Michael Jordan vs LeBron James.  How does this being the league's central relevance actually help the NBA?  Isn't their fundamental goal to get as many people to watch as many games as possible?

 

One of the nice things about following the NFL is that I don't need to participate in a barbershop debate about Joe Montana vs Tom Brady for the league to be relevant.  It's in the moment competition is the league's central relevance.

 

The NFL is a monolith. Saying that the NBA is not as popular as the NFL is like saying I'm not as rich and good looking as George Clooney. It's an obvious fact and is unlikely to change in the near term.

 

By and the large, the NBA is doing as well as it ever has.

 

You are obsessed with the problem that has existed in the league since George Mikan arrived. One really good player can totally dominate the league. Put two of them together and you get Magic and Kareem sleepwalking their way to the FInals every year essentially. There is literally nothing you can do to change this, and you are going to be ****ing about how the league only cares about Milwaukee in four years.

Edited May 13, 2019 by Lombardi's_kid_brother

[Going Commando]

26 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

The NFL is a monolith. Saying that the NBA is not as popular as the NFL is like saying I'm not as rich and good looking as George Clooney. It's an obvious fact and is unlikely to change in the near term. 

 

Don't you wonder why the NFL is so much more popular than the NBA?  Don't you think the NBA could learn something from the success of the NFL?

 

I absolutely do not believe that there is nothing that NBA can do to significantly expand their competition.  And I also think the NBA game is far, far more of a team game than most people recognize.

[Warhead36]

4 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Don't you wonder why the NFL is so much more popular than the NBA?  Don't you think the NBA could learn something from the success of the NFL?

 

I absolutely do not believe that there is nothing that NBA can do to significantly expand their competition.  And I also think the NBA game is far, far more of a team game than most people recognize.

There are things the NFL does that the NBA cannot do. First off, the one game a week for 16 weeks. Every NFL game is an event. Each one matters. Nobody cares about a random January NBA game between the Grizzlies and Hawks but even two terrible NFL teams on Thursday Night Football will draw.

 

And like LMK said above, the very nature of basketball allows 1-2 individuals to simply dominate and if you're fortunate enough to have two top 5-10 players at the same time, you're a Finals lock. Its just a different game that lends itself more to dynasties.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

2 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Don't you wonder why the NFL is so much more popular than the NBA?  Don't you think the NBA could learn something from the success of the NFL?

 

Because the NBA was the "Black league" in 1977, and a portion of the population will always stubbornly see it that way.

 

The NBA isn't chasing the same dollar as the NFL, because it can't compete on that Anheiser Busch wrap myself in the flag let's the support the troops we all conform to the Patriots way system.

 

The NBA has had three golden eras, and we are currently in one.

 

1. The mid to late 80s. This is because of Larry Bird. Larry Bird is the greatest white superstar in NBA history, and I'm not sure there is a #2. And the NBA knew how to sell him. Magic was the perfect foil to that, especially since he was probably the better player, and since they were tied at the hip thanks the FInal Four. The white "play the game the right way" guy versus the black athletic street guy who just happened to have the personality of a CEO got them into the mainstream.

 

2.  The Jordan Era. Jordan was a brand in 1986 before anyone knew what that meant. I had Air Jordans and the iconic poster on my wall before I had actually seen him play a pro game, I think. There are maybe five black guys who transcended race as a marketing force in American history. Jordan, Cosby, and Tiger are 1, 2, and 3. Jordan was black but you had to be a Klansman to really have an issue with that.

 

3. The Lebron Era. This era is two things. The first one is the greatness of Lebron and the greatness of his marketing machine. The second is the rule and philosophical changes that have made basketball fun to watch. 15 years ago, Russell Westbrook and Damon Lillard and Steph and all these insane guards would be held at the three point line by Mark Jackson and the games would be 82-81. And Giannis would be driving to a rim where 4 6'10 guys were standing. Two to defend and two waiting for an entry pass. And the league is letting these guys be personalities on social media.

 

The NFL sells the NFL. The NBA sells players. People will watch bad football - as the Super Bowl showed. People don't like bad basketball and won't watch it as the late 90s and early 00s showed.

(There are friends of my dad who would only watch an NBA game if Larry Bird or Jordan was playing. I think there's more of that particular customer than we let on. And it's why Colin Kaepernick threatened the entire NFL business model. Those guys watch EVERY NFL game, and if it gets a little too urban, they aren't going to like it).

[Going Commando]

36 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

There are things the NFL does that the NBA cannot do. First off, the one game a week for 16 weeks. Every NFL game is an event. Each one matters. Nobody cares about a random January NBA game between the Grizzlies and Hawks but even two terrible NFL teams on Thursday Night Football will draw. 

 

The NFL is only able to play a 16 game schedule because the sport is so violent that the strongest and most rugged athletes in the country can't physically handle more.  I think it is bizarre that people see this as anything other than a massive disadvantage for generating revenue and sustaining interest compared to leagues that can run an 82 or 162 game schedule.

 

If it were true that playing a small schedule would make their leagues more popular and increase revenues, then the NHL, NBA, and MLB would have cut their schedules down long ago.

 

Why is a 1:00 Sunday game in October between the Titans and Jaguars drawing so many eyes?  Why is this the case even when the teams in the match up aren't consequential to the playoff race?  Why isn't a January match up between the Grizzlies and Hawks popular?  Why isn't it popular even when the teams in that match up are consequential to the playoff race?

 

The answer is because the NFL has 32 strong fanbases consisting of millions of people who are invested in their teams.  The NBA has like five.

[ixcuincle]

People love "dynasties" yet people also have "Warriors fatigue" 

 

You can't have it both ways

[Going Commando]

57 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

The NBA isn't chasing the same dollar as the NFL, because it can't compete on that Anheiser Busch wrap myself in the flag let's the support the troops we all conform to the Patriots way system. 

 

First off, that is not the typical NFL fan, nor is it the reason people love football.  And the NBA chasing the same dollar as the NFL?  It's a pro sport entertainment league too.  It's the highest league for the second most popular sport in the world.

 

I just don't think "the NBA isn't as popular as the NFL because the huge majority of American sports fans are too racist to enjoy it" is the truth.  I think a lot of people view the NBA as unprofessional and uncompetitive and watching a sport without real competition is boring.  But it feels wrong to tie the NBA's relative lack of professionalism and farcical lack of competition up as an essential outcome of the "blackness" of the league.  The NBA doesn't have to lose its "blackness" at all, it just needs to become more professional and competitive.  I think the players themselves are desperate for increased professionalism from the league, and they are desperate to compete in meaningful contests in front of full arenas of fans who are invested in the game.

[PeterMP]

1 hour ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

First off, that is not the typical NFL fan, nor is it the reason people love football.  And the NBA chasing the same dollar as the NFL?  It's a pro sport entertainment league too.  It's the highest league for the second most popular sport in the world.

 

I just don't think "the NBA isn't as popular as the NFL because the huge majority of American sports fans are too racist to enjoy it" is the truth.  I think a lot of people view the NBA as unprofessional and uncompetitive and watching a sport without real competition is boring.  But it feels wrong to tie the NBA's relative lack of professionalism and farcical lack of competition up as an essential outcome of the "blackness" of the league.  The NBA doesn't have to lose its "blackness" at all, it just needs to become more professional and competitive.  I think the players themselves are desperate for increased professionalism from the league, and they are desperate to compete in meaningful contests in front of full arenas of fans who are invested in the game.

 

The NFL was way more popular than the NBA before the NFL had a hard cap, and a good chunk of it was absolutely pretty blatant racism, and then there is part that is less blatant, but still real. 

 

Then you just sort of get inertia where people pass what they know down to their kids.  My grandfather watched the NFL and not the NBA because he was racist.  My dad grew up playing and watching football and continued that because that's what he knew (my dad wasn't racist).   When I was very young I watched and played football and didn't get into basketball until it was something people I knew at school were into.

 

From there, the NBA has absolutely closed the gap to the NFL over the last 40 years through much of that time the NFL has a hard cap, and the NBA has not.

You're acting like the differences in the sports just came up in the last 15 or 20 years.  That's not the case.

 

The Super Bowl had a rating of 44.2 and a share of 74% in 1972.  They don't even have ratings data for the NBA finals in 1972 (and my guess is that it wasn't broadcast nationally).

 

Up through 1981, some NBA final games were shown on tape delay on the East Coast after the late news and that's only because the NBA moved their season start time so the finals wouldn't be during sweeps weeks.

 

Certainly, part of the difference between the NBA and NFL is the result of racism and then sort of an inertia from that no different than red lining has had longer term impacts on the wealth of people of different races (compounded by the actions of explicit racism and less obvious biases that still exist today).

Edited May 14, 2019 by PeterMP

[Going Commando]

28 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

Certainly, part of the difference between the NBA and NFL is the result of racism and then sort of an inertia from that no different than red lining has had longer term impacts on the wealth of people of different races (compounded by the actions of explicit racism and less obvious biases that still exist today). 

 

You and LKB are arguing that the majority of the difference in popularity between the NFL and the NBA is because of racism right?  What is the mechanism of this racism that suppresses the popularity of the NBA but not the NFL?  Why can the racist American sports fan can embrace watching black athletes compete in the NFL but not the NBA?  If race can explain the levels of popularity of the pro-leagues, why has the MLB declined so significantly in popularity?  Why is the NHL less popular than the NBA?

 

I think it is so much more obvious and true that the reason the NFL is so much more popular than the NBA is because the NFL has cultivated 32 strong franchises where each has at least several million fans who are committed supporters, and the NBA has only developed a handful of those kinds of franchises and fanbases.  And I think the biggest thing that has suppressed the growth of the size of NBA fanbases by far, is the lack of broad, consequential competition.  What is the point in being a committed fan and watching most of the games for the majority of the franchises in the league?

[PeterMP]

9 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

You and LKB are arguing that the majority of the difference in popularity between the NFL and the NBA is because of racism right?  What is the mechanism of this racism that suppresses the popularity of the NBA but not the NFL?  Why can the racist American sports fan can embrace watching black athletes compete in the NFL but not the NBA?  If race can explain the levels of popularity of the pro-leagues, why has the MLB declined so significantly in popularity?  Why is the NHL less popular than the NBA?

 

I think it is so much more obvious and true that the reason the NFL is so much more popular than the NBA is because the NFL has cultivated 32 strong franchises where each has at least several million fans who are committed supporters, and the NBA has only developed a handful of those kinds of franchises and fanbases.  And I think the biggest thing that has suppressed the growth of the size of NBA fanbases by far, is the lack of broad, consequential competition.  What is the point in being a committed fan and watching most of the games for the majority of the franchises in the league?

 

Are you really arguing on a Redskins message board that the NFL has 32 strong franchises?

Edited May 14, 2019 by PeterMP

[Going Commando]

4 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

Are you really arguing on a Redskins message board that the NFL has 32 strong franchises? 

 

Yes.  The Redskins have millions of fans.  They make hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue each year and the franchise valuation is 3.1 billion dollars.  Compare that to the Wizards, who are about a third of the value and bring in only a quarter of the revenue despite serving the exact same regional market and playing many more games, and you can clearly see the difference in the strength of the leagues.  The NFL is full of fanbases like the Redskins, where even bottom feeders like us have millions of fans.  The NBA has five NFL-strength franchises: the Knicks, Warriors, Lakers, Bulls, and Celtics.  They haven't cultivated broad enough competition to grow other fanbases.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

33 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

You and LKB are arguing that the majority of the difference in popularity between the NFL and the NBA is because of racism right?  What is the mechanism of this racism that suppresses the popularity of the NBA but not the NFL?  Why can the racist American sports fan can embrace watching black athletes compete in the NFL but not the NBA?  If race can explain the levels of popularity of the pro-leagues, why has the MLB declined so significantly in popularity?  Why is the NHL less popular than the NBA?

 

 

It's not entirely racism, but anyone who thinks that the NBA didn't have a race issue for most of its history did not have a Sports Illustrated subscription in the 70s and 80s where this would be a cover story once a year or so.

 

But these are easy questions.

 

1. The NFL turns its players into nameless, faceless cogs. Everyone has on a helmet. Everyone switches teams every three seasons except a handful of stars. And even then 99 percent of sports talk radio during the season is about black diva wide receivers needing to act like they've been there before. The NFL will break even Terrell Owens. Ain't no one breaking Russell Westbrook. And there certainly was no one breaking Allen Iverson. The NBA is "defiantly black."

 

I mean, David Stern instituted a dress code because dudes were showing up to press conferences dressed like members of the Wu Tang Clan, and it was scaring the sponsors. So what did the players do? They went the other way and became high-end fashion icons. NBA players are now friends with Anna Wintour.

 

2. MLB is weird. For one, I grew up loving baseball more than anything. I would plan my Saturdays around the Game of the Week. I kept book while watching games on TV. I'm not sure I have watched an entire MLB game from start to finish in five years. It's incredibly slow and nothing happens and it takes forever. As for its race issue, I do think the fact that it is so Latino right now is probably a small problem with its popularity. It's the only sport where there are major stars who can't talk to the media.

 

3. Hockey is and always has been a niche sport except in a few major cities. It's hard to really like a sport that you can't play. I have a cousin that plays youth hockey. He has to drive 45 miles to do it.

[PeterMP]

21 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Yes.  The Redskins have millions of fans.  They make hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue each year and the franchise valuation is 3.1 billion dollars.  Compare that to the Wizards, who are about a third of the value and bring in only a quarter of the revenue despite serving the exact same regional market and playing many more games, and you can clearly see the difference in the strength of the leagues.  The NFL is full of fanbases like the Redskins, where even bottom feeders like us have millions of fans.  The NBA has five NFL-strength franchises: the Knicks, Warriors, Lakers, Bulls, and Celtics.  They haven't cultivated broad enough competition to grow other fanbases.

 

You're making a circular argument.  The NFL is popular because they have a strong franchises.  They have strong franchises based on measures of popularity.

 

Again, you're looking at something that happened before I was born (the NFL became more popular than the NBA) and trying to describe things today based on what you see today.

 

The MLB has several issues.  Part of it is their history with the labor dispute.  Cancelling a World Series certainly didn't help their tv ratings.

[Going Commando]

23 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

1. The NFL turns its players into nameless, faceless cogs. Everyone has on a helmet. Everyone switches teams every three seasons except a handful of stars. And even then 99 percent of sports talk radio during the season is about black diva wide receivers needing to act like they've been there before. The NFL will break even Terrell Owens. Ain't no one breaking Russell Westbrook. And there certainly was no one breaking Allen Iverson. The NBA is "defiantly black." 

 

Come on man.  You're essentially saying black guys in the NFL are inauthentic.  The NFL is full of black men who are hard as Hell and who make Russell Westbrook look like a pansy/geek.  How is Odell Beckam Jr that different from him anyway?  Not to mention the NBA has more than its fair share of Malcolm Brogdons.  The NBA is way more hipster and boujee than the NFL.  It's got a way higher percentage of nerd fans too.  White people have been enthusiastically embracing black culture and famous black artists, athletes, and entertainers for a long time now.  I don't think it's the turnoff that you think it is, nor has it been for 30 years.

 

Nobody plays football outside of Texas and the corridor that runs from South Carolina to Mississippi any more.  They're eventually going to frickin ban tackle football under the age of 12 in most of the country sooner rather than later.  The vast majority of NFL fans have never put on pads and a helmet.  Absolutely no one except the most serious and elite players still plays the game after grade school.  And every boy in America has played youth basketball and tons of people still play the game in adulthood.  Rates of participation don't account for the NFL's massive popularity.

 

It's the competition of the league.  It's fast, brutal, high-stakes, broad, and dynamic.  That is the fundamental appeal of the NFL.

[Going Commando]

23 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

You're making a circular argument.  The NFL is popular because they have a strong franchises.  They have strong franchises based on measures of popularity. 

 

This is the argument: the NFL's popularity comes directly from the broad popularity of their constituent franchises.  Each franchise has millions of people that tune in to watch them play every game, and the national broadcasts draw 15 to 30 million viewers.  Even the NFLN broadcast of the Redskins-Titans game in week 16 drew 6 million viewers.  That is a game where literally the only people watching are Redskins and Titans fans who have an NFLN subscription.  And yet it's millions.

 

The biggest reason so many NFL franchises got so popular is because the competition of the NFL is so broad and dynamic and compelling.  IMO the tried and true way to accumulate loyal fans into your fanbase is to compete at the highest level of your league and be successful on the court/field.  You can not build a fanbase in a league where the true competition is restricted to about one to four teams for several years running.

[Destino]

Wha Steve is saying isn’t complicated.  There’s only so many bandwagon fans in patriot caps and Lebron jerseys.  There’s only so many front running fans “of greatness”.  If the nba wants what soccer and the nfl enjoy, they need to make each season seem less predestined and less about just one team or player.

 

More fans of individual teams need to feel like their team might have a shot, for at least half a season.  They can’t know, most of the time, which team is going to win the finals before the season starts.  That makes fans much less likely to show up, tune in, or spend money on a their chosen franchise.  

 

Personally I think the nba needs to become less American and more international if they really want to be much larger than they are.  They won’t beat the nfl here, not ever, but they can beat them globally.  Basketball beats football globally and the nba is the mountain top.  How to do that, without angering the current owners, is a difficult question.  

 

[PeterMP]

7 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

The biggest reason so many NFL franchises got so popular is because the competition of the NFL is so broad and dynamic and compelling. 

 

Okay, but that's not really true.  You are looking at the NFL's popularity through the modern scope of the NFL, but the NFL was already clearly more popular than the NBA by the early 1970s.  At the time the NFL was becoming hugely popular, the Eagles were fielding bad teams that had no shot at championships, but they still were able to develop a huge fan base.

 

75% of white people watch the NFL.  Only 15% of blacks.

 

45% of blacks watch the NBA.  Only 40% of whites.

 

(Noting there's 30% gap in one direct, and a 35% gap in the other, but in terms of number of people since there are many more white people in this country than black that makes a large difference in terms of number of people.)  From there, white people have (and have had) more economic power and more disposable time and money and so white people spend more time watching and spending money on sports. 

 

http://spokesman-recorder.com/2014/03/06/nielsen-report-reveals-racial-divide-in-sports-media-viewership/

 

if there were an equal number of blacks and whites in this country and blacks watched as much sports as whites, the viewership would be about equal.

 

Most of the difference between the NBA and NFL can be seen by differences in patterns how much different races watch the sport, the amount that race makes up the US (whites are a larger percentage of the US population), and the economic and time ability of that race to invest into sports.

 

Now, what sport through to the 1980s largely refused to play black players at the most important position on the field because of racial stereotypes (and I'm not blaming the NFL for this.  In the 1980s, it started in high school where high school football was largely popular where?)?

 

Given that sport is more popular today largely because of white viewership and that sport gained its greater popularity when this country was much more racist is not a coincidence.

 

(At some level this argument is academic.  I grew up in a town where some people were openly racist.  I grew up with (at the time young) people that openly would tell you that they listened to the Beastie Boys, but wouldn't listen to Run DMC and LL Cool J because of race.  I've heard people that watched and played football say they didn't like basketball because it is a sport for racial slur.  To then say race isn't relevant just doesn't jive with my personal experiences growing up.)

 

The simple fact is that if there were as many blacks in this country and blacks had as much time to watch sports on tv, the NBA would be as popular as the NFL.

Edited May 14, 2019 by PeterMP