- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Does the Fact that Only 9 Teams Have Won in 30 Years Help or Hurt the NBA?
Posted on 6/14/13 at 7:19 pm to DURANTULA
Posted on 6/14/13 at 7:19 pm to DURANTULA
quote:
Dojo, there isn't a single NBA team in the red. Not a single one. Most owners use these teams as tax shelters when in reality, they are making bank.
could not be further from the truth
0
Posted on 6/14/13 at 7:20 pm to St Augustine
quote:
St Augustine
Posted on 6/14/13 at 7:21 pm to DURANTULA
quote:
Dude I know the business side of sports. There isn't a single NFL or NBA team in the red. They cook the books like all hell (paying themselves rental fees for arena/stadium usage, setting aside a healthcare "fund" for their volunteers and all kinds of other tomfoolery). Forbes is a great site and magazine and all, but they are EXTREMELY naive if they really believe that any franchise in the NFL or NBA is losing money.
Um, okay. Then maybe you should let Forbes know they don't know what they are doing?
Posted on 6/14/13 at 7:26 pm to SabiDojo
Oh how sweet it must be to be so naive.
Posted on 6/14/13 at 7:27 pm to td01241
quote:
Hurt. Its why the NBA is far, far worse than the MLB, NFL, and NHL
fify
This post was edited on 6/14/13 at 7:28 pm
Posted on 6/14/13 at 7:29 pm to DURANTULA
quote:
Oh how sweet it must be to be so naive.
Be careful who you talk to that way. The Doj actually invented the word naive to describe the complete opposite of what he is.
Posted on 6/14/13 at 7:30 pm to DURANTULA
I always love learning something new. If you can explain it to me and back up your argument with some data, then have at it.
I'd be naive to trust a random poster over Forbes.
I'd be naive to trust a random poster over Forbes.
Posted on 6/14/13 at 7:31 pm to ReauxlTide222
Posted on 6/14/13 at 7:34 pm to JabarkusRussell
quote:
Does the Fact that Only 9 Teams Have Won in 30 Years Help or Hurt the NBA? (Posted on 6/14/13 at 6:25 pm)
A Memphis Indiana finals would have had horrible ratings.
Posted on 6/14/13 at 7:37 pm to jacks40
quote:
A Memphis Indiana finals would have had horrible ratings.
Game 3 of Spurs/Heat Draws Lowest Ratings Since Spurs/Cavs
Posted on 6/14/13 at 7:44 pm to SabiDojo
I'm not saying Forbes is wrong about everything, just this. Then again, they are just passing along what they are hearing from the franchises themselves.
Team owners will very seldom say that they are making a profit. Some teams (not as common in the pros, but moreso in the lower levels) will actually say they are in the red as a part of their marketing strategy. They'll make the public think they could lose the team if they don't come out and support them. It's a good way to drum up some easy revenue, but it's horribly deceiving.
Minor league baseball teams will do this occasionally and its a damn lie. My friend was working for a AA team years ago and their Marketing/Promotions guy would go around telling the public that they were struggling to pay for the players' salaries and for them to eat and that if they didn't clear a certain number of tickets sold a game, that they wouldn't be able to travel for road games and shite. Gullible people would buy into that shite too.
In reality, the clubs' professional team was on the clip for the salaries for players and coaches. The owners of the teams (provided they weren't the same group that owned the professional teams) were on the clip for their own personnel (marketing, tickets, concessions, grounds crew, and such) and any additional expenses they may incur (stadium leases and maintenance).
Team owners will very seldom say that they are making a profit. Some teams (not as common in the pros, but moreso in the lower levels) will actually say they are in the red as a part of their marketing strategy. They'll make the public think they could lose the team if they don't come out and support them. It's a good way to drum up some easy revenue, but it's horribly deceiving.
Minor league baseball teams will do this occasionally and its a damn lie. My friend was working for a AA team years ago and their Marketing/Promotions guy would go around telling the public that they were struggling to pay for the players' salaries and for them to eat and that if they didn't clear a certain number of tickets sold a game, that they wouldn't be able to travel for road games and shite. Gullible people would buy into that shite too.
In reality, the clubs' professional team was on the clip for the salaries for players and coaches. The owners of the teams (provided they weren't the same group that owned the professional teams) were on the clip for their own personnel (marketing, tickets, concessions, grounds crew, and such) and any additional expenses they may incur (stadium leases and maintenance).
Posted on 6/14/13 at 7:46 pm to JabarkusRussell
I would have watched every minute of a Pacers-Spurs, Pacers-Grizzlies, or Heat-Grizzlies Finals. Why? A chance to see a team who hasn't won a title, win a title.
Plus I like teams that have a stud frontcourt.
Plus I like teams that have a stud frontcourt.
Posted on 6/14/13 at 8:14 pm to JabarkusRussell
Since '83
MLB
Orioles - 1
Tigers - 1
Royals - 1
Mets - 1
Twins - 2
Dodgers - 1
A's - 1
Reds - 1
Blue Jays - 2
Braves - 1
Yankees - 5
Marlins - 2
D-Backs - 1
Angels - 1
Red Sox - 2
White Sox - 1
Cardinals - 2
Phillies - 1
Giants - 2
1994 no WS
19 teams
NHL
Islanders - 1
Oilers - 5
Canadians - 2
Flames - 1
Penguins - 3
Rangers - 1
Devils - 3
Avalanche - 2
Red Wings - 4
Stars - 1
Lightning - 1
Hurricanes - 1
Ducks - 1
Blackhawks - 1
Bruins - 1
Kings - 1
2005 no SC Finals
16 teams
MLB
Orioles - 1
Tigers - 1
Royals - 1
Mets - 1
Twins - 2
Dodgers - 1
A's - 1
Reds - 1
Blue Jays - 2
Braves - 1
Yankees - 5
Marlins - 2
D-Backs - 1
Angels - 1
Red Sox - 2
White Sox - 1
Cardinals - 2
Phillies - 1
Giants - 2
1994 no WS
19 teams
NHL
Islanders - 1
Oilers - 5
Canadians - 2
Flames - 1
Penguins - 3
Rangers - 1
Devils - 3
Avalanche - 2
Red Wings - 4
Stars - 1
Lightning - 1
Hurricanes - 1
Ducks - 1
Blackhawks - 1
Bruins - 1
Kings - 1
2005 no SC Finals
16 teams
This post was edited on 6/14/13 at 8:15 pm
Posted on 6/14/13 at 8:32 pm to JabarkusRussell
Hurts.
Posted on 6/14/13 at 8:33 pm to Tactical1
Wow, over half the league won a title in every sport but the NBA. It's such a joke.
Posted on 6/14/13 at 8:35 pm to DURANTULA
Very compelling, yet you have no data to prove your point. However, I do understand that, if such data existed, it would be almost impossible to obtain.
Since I only have your word, I hope you will understand my skepticism to believe you.
Since I only have your word, I hope you will understand my skepticism to believe you.
This post was edited on 6/14/13 at 8:48 pm
Posted on 6/14/13 at 9:11 pm to JabarkusRussell
quote:
Wow, over half the league won a title in every sport but the NBA. It's such a joke.
What's your solution for the problem then?
This post was edited on 6/14/13 at 9:13 pm
Posted on 6/14/13 at 9:15 pm to SabiDojo
Dojo, if you don't believe, then that's on you bruh. No skin off my back. Enjoy the ignorance though.
This post was edited on 6/14/13 at 9:16 pm
Posted on 6/14/13 at 9:18 pm to DURANTULA
Fair enough.
Posted on 6/14/13 at 9:23 pm to Xenophon
MLB
And that's without a salary cap. I love baseball.
quote:
19 teams
And that's without a salary cap. I love baseball.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News