KENNEWICK, WASHINGTON - This week's radio pick comes from a new source. Saturday morning has become the morning for sports on public radio in the United States, in the case of some programs the only day of signifiant sports coverage. The Saturday coverage runs from local segments to hour-long programs, and in the former category Seattle Post-Intelligencer columnist Art Thiel's conversations with KPLU's Kirsten Kendrick show the best of the genre, often offering insights beyond sports as was the case this week in a five-minute segment.
Listen to MP3 of Art Thiel Conversation "Big College Football News"
Showing posts with label sports. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sports. Show all posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Media: Watch it on HD
TORONTO, ONTARIO - As long as twenty-five years ago, there was an interesting phenomenon amongst unlimited hydroplane racing fans. Enthusiasts of the sport that would attend every race that they could over the course of the year would not attend race day in Seattle, Washington. Why? It wasn't the weather or ticket prices. The Seattle race was always televised, and the coverage on the local station was often so good, and the views from the television camera so much better than what could be seen from the shore, that the fans thought the experience was more engaging at home on television than along Lake Washington.
In twenty-five years, a lot has improved in television technology. Large-screen televisions are far more commonplace for average consumers. Analog television has been replaced with digital television that makes the picture even more clear and real to the viewer. Watching television feels even more like actually being somewhere than it ever has before, and now the same phenomenon that was occurring long ago with unlimited hydroplane racing is happening to other sports.
The Toronto Blue Jays, the only major-league baseball team in Canada, is now receiving record television ratings. Despite being on a cable channel, the games are often viewed by more than 500,000 people (as cited in the Toronto Star). Meanwhile, the in-person attendance at the Rogers Centre is about as low as it has ever been. According to TSN, opening night aside, the team has averaged just 14,853 fans in its first 25 home games. Attendance has exceeded 20,000 only twice, in a stadium that holds nearly 50,000.
Clearly, the team doesn't have a popularity problem. Besides the record television ratings, their on-the-field record has exceeded expectations, competitive in the American League East and the wild card race. It just seems that the fans prefer their in-home television experience to the experience in the Rogers Centre.
Perhaps this isn't so surprising. Traffic and parking are huge problems in Toronto and around the Rogers Centre in particular. The amenities of the Rogers Centre pale in comparison with more modern stadiums from the new Camden Yards in Baltimore to Safeco Field in Seattle. Ticket prices effectively went up this year with the end of some package deals and most promotions.
Yet, the Blue Jays might really be canaries on this issue. As home entertainment technology improves (think live baseball in 3D), this phenomenon isn't going to be limited to Toronto. For that matter, it will not be limited to baseball. It is not inconceivable that within a decade, for most fans, the experience at home will be better than the experience in person. The whole business model for sports may need to be re-evaluated--and the teams and sports that anticipate this and create a new sustainable model will be the ones that will still be around in a generation.
In twenty-five years, a lot has improved in television technology. Large-screen televisions are far more commonplace for average consumers. Analog television has been replaced with digital television that makes the picture even more clear and real to the viewer. Watching television feels even more like actually being somewhere than it ever has before, and now the same phenomenon that was occurring long ago with unlimited hydroplane racing is happening to other sports.
The Toronto Blue Jays, the only major-league baseball team in Canada, is now receiving record television ratings. Despite being on a cable channel, the games are often viewed by more than 500,000 people (as cited in the Toronto Star). Meanwhile, the in-person attendance at the Rogers Centre is about as low as it has ever been. According to TSN, opening night aside, the team has averaged just 14,853 fans in its first 25 home games. Attendance has exceeded 20,000 only twice, in a stadium that holds nearly 50,000.
Clearly, the team doesn't have a popularity problem. Besides the record television ratings, their on-the-field record has exceeded expectations, competitive in the American League East and the wild card race. It just seems that the fans prefer their in-home television experience to the experience in the Rogers Centre.
Perhaps this isn't so surprising. Traffic and parking are huge problems in Toronto and around the Rogers Centre in particular. The amenities of the Rogers Centre pale in comparison with more modern stadiums from the new Camden Yards in Baltimore to Safeco Field in Seattle. Ticket prices effectively went up this year with the end of some package deals and most promotions.
Yet, the Blue Jays might really be canaries on this issue. As home entertainment technology improves (think live baseball in 3D), this phenomenon isn't going to be limited to Toronto. For that matter, it will not be limited to baseball. It is not inconceivable that within a decade, for most fans, the experience at home will be better than the experience in person. The whole business model for sports may need to be re-evaluated--and the teams and sports that anticipate this and create a new sustainable model will be the ones that will still be around in a generation.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Culture: On Commercial Sports
TORONTO, ONTARIO - I've always had mixed emotions about commercial sports (I prefer that term to "professional" sports, as few sports besides the "major" leagues actually allow people to earn their living from the sport, but a lot of money goes into commercial sponsorship of minor-league and other seasonal sports such as powerboat racing). At times, I've considered them a complete waste of money and a sign of the misplaced priorities of North American culture, and at other times I've been considerably more sympathetic to the community-building nature of commercial sports. There are only two subjects that are safe to talk about with a stranger on public transit--the weather, and the local sports team.
The Christian Science Monitor seems to be equally conflicted. In a recent article, they tried to explore whether an emphasis on sports was a "great unifying force or a sign of misplaced priorities." I'm not sure the article actually made any progress, but some of the statistics they brought up surprised me.
$2.5 billion is bet on March Madness brackets by 30 million Americans. Basically, ten percent of the population spends money, much of it technically illegal, on a basketball tournament in which supposedly-amateur athletes compete. Try to tell me that NCAA basketball isn't a commercial sport.
6.4 million Americans play participatory soccer. That's as many as play touch football. If there were ever a marketing gap, it's between soccer and the established "major league" sports in the United States. People ought to be able to get excited about the commercial version of a sport they actually play, yet the soccer leagues can't seem to find a way to tap into that enthusiasm.
41% of all sports television viewing in the United States is of football (American football, that is), four times greater than baseball despite baseball having about ten times as many games. It's hard for baseball or basketball (much less hockey or NASCAR) to claim to be the American sport in the face of that kind of statistic, and not hard to see why advertisers emphasize football.
$114.10 is the average ticket price for the Toronto Maple Leafs. Only the Dallas Cowboys and New England Patriots have higher average ticket prices in the "big four" sports. Canada can't claim to be immune from this discussion.
What do any of these statistics mean with respect to what should be done with commercial sports in North America? I ultimately agree with the implicit position of the Christian Science Monitor that there are two ways of looking at the situation that have some validity. Ultimately, if we decide that commercial sports have any benefit at all, then the only way to maintain that benefit is to let them be commercial, which seems to have been the default position in all of North America for generations. It probably will remain that way, so all we can do is try to get what community benefit we can. Keep asking strangers about your favorite team, I guess.
The Christian Science Monitor seems to be equally conflicted. In a recent article, they tried to explore whether an emphasis on sports was a "great unifying force or a sign of misplaced priorities." I'm not sure the article actually made any progress, but some of the statistics they brought up surprised me.
$2.5 billion is bet on March Madness brackets by 30 million Americans. Basically, ten percent of the population spends money, much of it technically illegal, on a basketball tournament in which supposedly-amateur athletes compete. Try to tell me that NCAA basketball isn't a commercial sport.
6.4 million Americans play participatory soccer. That's as many as play touch football. If there were ever a marketing gap, it's between soccer and the established "major league" sports in the United States. People ought to be able to get excited about the commercial version of a sport they actually play, yet the soccer leagues can't seem to find a way to tap into that enthusiasm.
41% of all sports television viewing in the United States is of football (American football, that is), four times greater than baseball despite baseball having about ten times as many games. It's hard for baseball or basketball (much less hockey or NASCAR) to claim to be the American sport in the face of that kind of statistic, and not hard to see why advertisers emphasize football.
$114.10 is the average ticket price for the Toronto Maple Leafs. Only the Dallas Cowboys and New England Patriots have higher average ticket prices in the "big four" sports. Canada can't claim to be immune from this discussion.
What do any of these statistics mean with respect to what should be done with commercial sports in North America? I ultimately agree with the implicit position of the Christian Science Monitor that there are two ways of looking at the situation that have some validity. Ultimately, if we decide that commercial sports have any benefit at all, then the only way to maintain that benefit is to let them be commercial, which seems to have been the default position in all of North America for generations. It probably will remain that way, so all we can do is try to get what community benefit we can. Keep asking strangers about your favorite team, I guess.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)