Showing posts with label Football. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Football. Show all posts
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Philadelphia-a baseball or a football town?
There's been some controversy over whether Philadelphia is a "baseball town" or a "football town". Some guy named "guapo", in a Baseball Think Factory discusion of whether Boston is a baseball town (you have to be a true helmet-head to think otherwise), does a nice job in looking at various cities' loyalties.
This is how guapo sees it:
Anaheim: Disney town
Atlanta: Football town
Phoenix: Basketball town
Baltimore: Football town
Boston: Baseball town
Chicago: Basketball town
Cincinnati: Baseball town
Cleveland: Football town
Dallas: Football town
Denver: Football town
Detroit: Hockey town
Miami: Football town
Houston: Football town
Kansas City: Football town
Los Angeles: Basketball town
Milwaukee: Baseball town
Minneapolis: Hockey town
New York: Basketball town
Oakland: Football town
Philadelphia: Football town
Pittsburgh: Football town
San Diego: Baseball town
San Francisco: Football town
Seattle: Football town
St. Louis: Baseball town
Tampa: Football town
Toronto: Hockey town
Washington: Football town
Now, being Philadelphia born and bred, I can only weigh in on my city, although I think SF is more of a baseball town than guapo would claim. As to whether we're more partial to baseball or football, I can honestly say: Nether.
Philadelphia's favorite sport, a (well-informed) cynic would say, is to dump on the athletes it claims to love. It is sick, I tell you. Sick, sick, sick! An awful lot of fans seem to have a better time dumping on the "bums" when they lose than they have fun with winning teams, which, in all honesty, have been all too rare here. And there always has to be a scapegoat: Think, Von Hayes, Tom Bladon, and Norm Snead, for the Phillies, Flyers, and Eagles respectively.
And the guys who get it the worst are those from Philly themselves, like Del Ennis, who was a hell of a player for the Phils in the fifties. And Dick Allen, not from here but a guy with HOF talent, was essentially booed out of town.
For the region overall I guess the Eagles are number one-these are dumb, violent times and people enjoy their dumb, violent sport. Where I live, in Delaware County, I think the Phillies (and maybe the Flyers too) are bigger than the Eagles. I'm basing this on bumper stickers, clothes, etc. seen on the denizens of my fair county, or their vehicles.
My personal preference is for Australian Rules Football, or, in a pinch, New Zealand RF. No, of course baseball's my first love. It is the great American sport. The NFL, as I've written elsewhere, isn't a sport at all.
Labels:
Baseball,
Basketball,
Eagles,
Flyers,
Football,
Hall of Fame,
History,
Hockey,
Humor,
Philadelphia,
Phillies
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Charles Krauthammer is a Nationals fan
I'd be one too, if they weren't in the same division as the Phillies.
It's wonderful that baseball is back in the nation's capital, where it belongs, even if the Nats are about as good as the Senators typically were.
Krauthammer doesn't mind a bit:
Baseball, in other words, is a civilized sport for civilized people. In a violent culture, it's amazing that baseball's still as popular as it is. It's not a mere spectacle like football or basketball-it's an interesting, mind-expanding experience. The pace that so many criticize as slow is just right, actually-it lends itself to the talk between pitches among armchair experts that makes the game so much fun.
It's wonderful that baseball is back in the nation's capital, where it belongs, even if the Nats are about as good as the Senators typically were.
Krauthammer doesn't mind a bit:
You get there and the twilight's gleaming, the popcorn's popping, the kids're romping and everyone's happy. The joy of losing consists in this: Where there are no expectations, there is no disappointment...
No one's happy to lose, and the fans cheer lustily when the Nats win. But as starters blow up and base runners get picked off, there is none of the agitation, the angry, screaming, beer-spilling, red-faced ranting you get at football or basketball games.
Baseball, in other words, is a civilized sport for civilized people. In a violent culture, it's amazing that baseball's still as popular as it is. It's not a mere spectacle like football or basketball-it's an interesting, mind-expanding experience. The pace that so many criticize as slow is just right, actually-it lends itself to the talk between pitches among armchair experts that makes the game so much fun.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Baseball and NFL now tied in fans' team loyalty
The NFL now has a new, equal rival for fan devotion-Major League Baseball:
The MLB teams with the most loyal fans are:
1. Boston Red Sox
2. New York Yankees
3. Philadelphia Phillies
4. Anaheim Angels/Los Angeles Dodgers
5. Minnesota Twins/Milwaukee Brewers
After years in the #2 spot, Major League Baseball is now tied with the National Football League with the "most loyal fans," according to the 15th annual 2010 Brand Keys Sports Loyalty Index, a survey which helps professional sports teams increase broadcast, ticket and merchandise revenues by providing loyalty rankings and fan diagnostics in their home and national markets.
The Sports Loyalty Engagement Index gives an apples-to-apples comparison of the intensity with which fans support professional sport leagues and their home team vs. the corresponding values for the fans of other teams in the market," said Robert Passikoff, president of New York- based Brand Keys, Inc.The criteria are entertainment, authenticity, fan bonding, and history/tradition.
The MLB teams with the most loyal fans are:
1. Boston Red Sox
2. New York Yankees
3. Philadelphia Phillies
4. Anaheim Angels/Los Angeles Dodgers
5. Minnesota Twins/Milwaukee Brewers
Friday, March 26, 2010
Baseball vs. football-an apples and oranges comparison
I never quite understand the people who dump on baseball by saying it's slow, and then turn and around and tell us that football is a fast, action-packed game. Here I demolish (haha) those arguments.
First, pro football isn't a "game" at all- it's a strikingly successful TV show. NFL teams no more compete with each other (due to the enormous, evenly-split pile of national network cash) than my blog competes with Elmore Leonard's books. Of course, they need to appear to compete. So you have the weekly TV "event."
That lack of actual competition is exactly why the NFL union has so little pull-why would an NFL team owner hike salaries, make the money guaranteed, etc., when an NFL franchise is a money-printing machine even if you go 0-16? The financial incentives just aren't there-and the people who run football are, believe me, all about the money.
It's interesting to note, by the by, just how many NFL teams still can't sell out consistently. Baseball fans pay money and go to games...including spring training games-the Phillies have sold out nearly every meaningless spring training game this year. Football fans, even if there are more of them, watch on TV. There's a big difference in intensity of interest, I'd say.
And I really wouldn't want to argue football is faster than baseball. Time an NFL game, and see how much of the three hours is actually consumed by play. It's about 15 minutes...of three yards and a cloud of dust, over and over again. Exciting plays are few and far between. But I guess it's like NASCAR-their fans will wait endlessly for a crash, football fans will wait endlessly for that five yard TD pass, to be followed by guys strutting around in their ridiculously over-tight unis as if they'd just cured cancer. A huge number of them are fat, too..especially linemen. Only football players, of any major sport's participants, die younger than the population, on average. Wonder why that is?
If you want a continuous action sport, flip on soccer and see how thrilling that is.
First, pro football isn't a "game" at all- it's a strikingly successful TV show. NFL teams no more compete with each other (due to the enormous, evenly-split pile of national network cash) than my blog competes with Elmore Leonard's books. Of course, they need to appear to compete. So you have the weekly TV "event."
That lack of actual competition is exactly why the NFL union has so little pull-why would an NFL team owner hike salaries, make the money guaranteed, etc., when an NFL franchise is a money-printing machine even if you go 0-16? The financial incentives just aren't there-and the people who run football are, believe me, all about the money.
It's interesting to note, by the by, just how many NFL teams still can't sell out consistently. Baseball fans pay money and go to games...including spring training games-the Phillies have sold out nearly every meaningless spring training game this year. Football fans, even if there are more of them, watch on TV. There's a big difference in intensity of interest, I'd say.
And I really wouldn't want to argue football is faster than baseball. Time an NFL game, and see how much of the three hours is actually consumed by play. It's about 15 minutes...of three yards and a cloud of dust, over and over again. Exciting plays are few and far between. But I guess it's like NASCAR-their fans will wait endlessly for a crash, football fans will wait endlessly for that five yard TD pass, to be followed by guys strutting around in their ridiculously over-tight unis as if they'd just cured cancer. A huge number of them are fat, too..especially linemen. Only football players, of any major sport's participants, die younger than the population, on average. Wonder why that is?
If you want a continuous action sport, flip on soccer and see how thrilling that is.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Bashing the NFL for fun, if not profit
On the eve of yet another Roman-numeraled Super Bowl and a rescheduled Pro Bowl, herewith are one sports fan's gripes about football:
I guess on a basic level I don't really understand the appeal of football. It's not that I don't like sports. I'm a huge fan of sports that have an element of real competition.
It's just that professional football is a charade, as a competitive enterprise. There's so much national TV money, equally divided among the teams, that the notion that these teams compete with each other is silly. Each team makes huge profits, regardless of whether they go 0-16 or 16-0. And that's why the NFL Players' Association is so weak-putting together a good team is largely irrelevant to profitability, so the players have no leverage over management. It's hard to charge a premium for athletic talent when acquiring more talent doesn't significantly affect whether you make money. This isn't so with real sports.
I have a lot of other problems with football, but, to single out one more, as with all other sports with a clock, a decisive lead late in the game settles the issue. What could be more anti-climatic than the last few minutes of a football game when one team has a big lead? If they're ahead, they run out the clock, culminating with the thrilling walk off the field before the clock has even run out. If they're behind, they take a bunch of timeouts to organize hopeless plays, and two minutes of clock time can take 25 of real time. Dull as dishwater.
As George Will wrote, football features two of the worst aspects of contemporary American culture-violence interspersed with committee meetings (huddles.)
I'll add that the NFL also has a shameful record when it comes to taking care of its retired players with medical issues-which is most of them.
This isn't surprising, though, when you consider that history doesn't matter in the NFL. There was a poll in the Philadelphia Inquirer today asking if the current Patriots are the best team of all time. None of the other choices go back farther than 1962. Imagine a poll like that in baseball, or even basketball. Fans of other sports realize that their sports' history didn't begin with national television contracts, but nobody cared about football before the early '60's.
This was originally posted on my other blog, Rene's Apple, on Feb. 3, 2008.
I guess on a basic level I don't really understand the appeal of football. It's not that I don't like sports. I'm a huge fan of sports that have an element of real competition.
It's just that professional football is a charade, as a competitive enterprise. There's so much national TV money, equally divided among the teams, that the notion that these teams compete with each other is silly. Each team makes huge profits, regardless of whether they go 0-16 or 16-0. And that's why the NFL Players' Association is so weak-putting together a good team is largely irrelevant to profitability, so the players have no leverage over management. It's hard to charge a premium for athletic talent when acquiring more talent doesn't significantly affect whether you make money. This isn't so with real sports.
I have a lot of other problems with football, but, to single out one more, as with all other sports with a clock, a decisive lead late in the game settles the issue. What could be more anti-climatic than the last few minutes of a football game when one team has a big lead? If they're ahead, they run out the clock, culminating with the thrilling walk off the field before the clock has even run out. If they're behind, they take a bunch of timeouts to organize hopeless plays, and two minutes of clock time can take 25 of real time. Dull as dishwater.
As George Will wrote, football features two of the worst aspects of contemporary American culture-violence interspersed with committee meetings (huddles.)
I'll add that the NFL also has a shameful record when it comes to taking care of its retired players with medical issues-which is most of them.
This isn't surprising, though, when you consider that history doesn't matter in the NFL. There was a poll in the Philadelphia Inquirer today asking if the current Patriots are the best team of all time. None of the other choices go back farther than 1962. Imagine a poll like that in baseball, or even basketball. Fans of other sports realize that their sports' history didn't begin with national television contracts, but nobody cared about football before the early '60's.
This was originally posted on my other blog, Rene's Apple, on Feb. 3, 2008.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)