AO, Hat Trick...Assist...{chirp, chirp}

[Chimaera]

and ManU has fans that come from... pretty much every damn corner of the globe...
i dont see how the Redskins are richer, maybe one leads in revenue and the ohter in profit or something i dunno
oops, didnt read that post above me, guess ur right

It's pretty easy how they're richer. The Redskins play in the most marketable league in the world. the NFL is a cash cow. Period. That is part of it. And then you're looking at the most valuable franchise in that said league. Manchester United 'might' (probably) have more fans, but it isn't based upon that. The Washington Redskins play in a stadium that holds more than 91,000 (think it's up to 93,000 or so now) that it owns. That stadium is relatively new, and they sell out every game. Period. There's a waiting list to get season tickets that sometimes can take 2-3 years plus to get the option to buy tickets.

Add that with the Redskins have consistently turned a large profit each year. They just make tons of money. From their sponsorships, to the league revenue sharing, they're a cash cow.

And part of the value does come from the amount paid for them at auction. They were sold for 800 million which at the time some thought was 200-300 more million than they were worth. However, that's proven to not be the case as Dan Snyder (the Skins owner) has quickly made an extremely large profit.

It also comes down to cost certainty. Part of the reason the owners in hockey were looking for a cap. Owners in football make tons of money because they know they're keeping costs down through a Cap. They're never going to pay more than 60-70 million or so a year on the team's roster.

 

[Randall Graves*]

you can feel that way.....but I dont think the figures back you up.

yearly attendance
79-80 10653
80-81 10335
81-82 11299
82-83 8408
83-84 6839

enter #66
84-85 10018
85-86 12576
86-87 14965
87-88 15166

Their attendance average for the 16 years prior to Mario is 9,741. Now Im not busting on them but that is not what I would call a very good hockey city.

Yeah and the red wings attendance was pathetic when they stunk, Detroit is a great hockey market isn't it?

 

[Absolut]

I agree, but in, say, the American media, on a night where Crosby and Ovechkin have impressive but equal games, they will probably go with Crosby headlining over Ovechkin, not picking the Canadian over the Russian so much as the 18 year old over the 20 year old.

I disagree. I think it's a clear-cut case of North American bias. If the ages were reversed, do you really think Ovechkin would be getting all the attention, with Crosby completely ignored?

 

[Crosbyfan]

I disagree. I think it's a clear-cut case of North American bias. If the ages were reversed, do you really think Ovechkin would be getting all the attention, with Crosby completely ignored?

Ovechkin is not completely ignored now, and I would say he would get more publicity if he was doing the same things at 18.

I am just saying that the age bias (very real) outweighs the Canadian/Russian bias especially in the USA.

 

[Mothra]

Yeah and the red wings attendance was pathetic when they stunk, Detroit is a great hockey market isn't it?

Its a much better hockey market than Pit is......and just when are you talking about their attendance being "pathetic"?

look at the late 70's and early-mid 80's......when they really stunk. Their attendance is great. During the 8 year span between 78-79 and 85-86 they never had 70 points or more.....and often in the 50's. Their average attendance was 15,207 (note: 80-81 not factored in....dont have those attendance stats)

nothing backs up what you are saying.....I am not bashing the Pit market. Like I said, its like most NHL cities in the states.....they do well when the team is good/very good.....but it is not a "very good hockey market"...and yes, Detroit is.

 

[Lionel Hutz]

I disagree. I think it's a clear-cut case of North American bias.

I disagree. I beleive that much to the chagrin of many of the posters in this thread, the majority of people in the audience of the North American sports media are just more interested in Crosby. The meida is just a reflection of the people they entertain.

 

[HockeyCritter]

I disagree. I beleive that much to the chagrin of many of the posters in this thread, the majority of people in the audience of the North American sports media are just more interested in Crosby. The meida is just a reflection of the people they entertain.

It’s the chicken and egg argument ------ does the media feed us what they think we want, or do we want something because the media feeds it to us?

 

[Randall Graves*]

Its a much better hockey market than Pit is......and just when are you talking about their attendance being "pathetic"?

look at the late 70's and early-mid 80's......when they really stunk. Their attendance is great. During the 8 year span between 78-79 and 85-86 they never had 70 points or more.....and often in the 50's. Their average attendance was 15,207 (note: 80-81 not factored in....dont have those attendance stats)

nothing backs up what you are saying.....I am not bashing the Pit market. Like I said, its like most NHL cities in the states.....they do well when the team is good/very good.....but it is not a "very good hockey market"...and yes, Detroit is.

81 12,096
82 12,496

i can't find figures for the other years, point was there were years where they struggled for attendance, but they are a great hockey market.

 

[Lionel Hutz]

It’s the chicken and egg argument ------ does the media feed us what they think we want, or do we want something because the media feeds it to us?

Its not really much of an argument.

 

[EroCaps]

It’s the chicken and egg argument ------ does the media feed us what they think we want, or do we want something because the media feeds it to us?

I tend not to buy in to the North American vs. Russian argument, not in the U.S at least. ESPN has always gone to mush over foreign-born phenoms, i.e Yao Ming, Ichiro, Sharapova, etc. etc. Americans eat it up.

In the States, it's a matter of timing w/the lockout. W/TSN and Canadian Media it's a bias.

But that's to be expected, seeing as it's Canada and starpower is at a premium.

 

[Absolut]

I disagree. I beleive that much to the chagrin of many of the posters in this thread, the majority of people in the audience of the North American sports media are just more interested in Crosby. The meida is just a reflection of the people they entertain.

We are talking about two young players who haven't seen a day in the NHL. It's tough to say that the audience would be more interested in one, both, or either of them without the media spotlight shining brightly on them. The spotlight so far has been on Crosby. If your assumption is that the audience is automatically more interested in a local boy, I agree. If your assumption is that the viewers would be more interested in Crosby all things being equal - I don't buy it.

Lets not be naive: viewers' opinions of players are, to a large extent, based on how the players are covered in the media. A couple of years ago I gave an example on this board, and I'll use it again: I had the misfortune of working on a commercial with a player who was a moody and condescending jerk, with a witch of a wife to boot. Yet his "media reputation" was spotless -- a true hero, really... Too bad it was nothing more then a carefully crafted PR creation. Never underestimate the power of the media.

 

[Sammy*]

In the States, it's a matter of timing w/the lockout. W/TSN and Canadian Media it's a bias.

But that's to be expected, seeing as it's Canada and starpower is at a premium.

Yeah, cause we all know how the US media promotes foreign born athletes at par with homegrown ones.
What a frickin joke your post is.
If theres one country in the world that doesnt look outside its boundries...

 

[EroCaps]

Yeah, cause we all know how the US media promotes foreign born athletes at par with homegrown ones.
What a frickin joke your post is.
If theres one country in the world that doesnt look outside its boundries...

Care to back that up?

 

[Sammy*]

Care to back that up?

Powers of observation.
You should try it there Bud. You may be amazed at what you actually see.

 

[Le Golie]

Care to back that up?

 

[Absolut]

Care to back that up?

He doesn't need to "back it up." How can anyone argue against a statement that US is an inward-looking nation? It's not a judgment -- it's just the way it is. Think about it: you turn on TV news in the UK, and get international coverage, followed by national and local. In the US, it's a complete opposite. You are lucky to get any international news at all, aside from coverage of high-profile tragedies.

 

[Lionel Hutz]

If your assumption is that the audience is automatically more interested in a local boy, I agree.

Ah, I think that's pretty much what I'm saying.

Media hype or no, the casual hockey fan couldn't care less about Ovechkin because he does not wear the maple leaf.

 

[Absolut]

Ah, I think that's pretty much what I'm saying.

Media hype or no, the casual hockey fan couldn't care less about Ovechkin because he does not wear the maple leaf.

An average Canadian hockey fan likely cares LESS about Ovechkin then Crosby. But to say that they don't give a flying fig about a phenomenal hockey talent just because he is a foreigner, is kind of insulting to Canadian hockey fans.

 

[Lionel Hutz]

An average Canadian hockey fan likely cares LESS about Ovechkin then Crosby. But to say that they don't give a flying fig about a phenomenal hockey talent just because he is a foreigner, is kind of insulting to Canadian hockey fans.

I said casual. Get off your high horse, your changing my words is kind of insulting.

 

[EroCaps]

Powers of observation.
You should try it there Bud. You may be amazed at what you actually see.

I was refering to the issue of bias in the sports media in the U.S (seeing as that this a hockey board), not American culture- which in many ways is inward looking, IMO. If you're at all qualified to make those generalizations.

 

[Absolut]

I said casual. Get off your high horse, your changing my words is kind of insulting.

What's your definition of casual? If it's somebody who only watches hockey highlights on ESPN, they are irrelevant to this discussion. Most Canadian fans are a lot more sophisticated then that; they constitute the majority of target audience for Canadian TV networks and print media.

 

[Sammy*]

I was refering to the issue of bias in the sports media in the U.S (seeing as that this a hockey board), not American culture- which in many ways is inward looking, IMO. If you're at all qualified to make those generalizations.

Yeah , I see Americans are obsessed with the likes of Roger Federer,notwithstanding hes the best tennis player on the planet, by a mile.
I dunno, try watching Canadian covereage of the Oly's compared to American & then come back & play.
If you cant see the obvious bias & by the US media & the virtual ignoring of Athletes from other countries when lined up against American Athletes, your not worth dealing with.
Its actually kinda hilarious your debating this point, when its patently obvious to most non Americans.
Keep deluding yourself there Bud, its quite humorous.

 

[EroCaps]

Yeah , I see Americans are obsessed with the likes of Roger Federer,notwithstanding hes the best tennis player on the planet, by a mile.
I dunno, try watching Canadian covereage of the Oly's compared to American & then come back & play.
If you cant see the obvious bias & by the US media & the virtual ignoring of Athletes from other countries when lined up against American Athletes, your not worth dealing with.
Its actually kinda hilarious your debating this point, when its patently obvious to most non Americans.
Keep deluding yourself there Bud, its quite humorous.

The Olympics? An open athletic competition between nations? Yeah I guess the U.S is guilty marketing/covering U.S athletes there.

And Federer? Do you watch ESPN? All they did is acknowledge that he is hands down the best tennis player in the world. He just doesn't get the press coverage bc he's so milquetoast- that and tennis is barely a top 10 sport in the U.S.

You can't begin to compare the journalistic objectivity of ESPN to TSN. ESPN covers winners and TSN covers Canadians. That's patently obvious.

 

[Sammy*]

The Olympics? An open athletic competition between nations? Yeah I guess the U.S is guilty marketing/covering U.S athletes there.

And Federer? Do you watch ESPN? All they did is acknowledge that he is hands down the best tennis player in the world. He just doesn't get the press coverage bc he's so milquetoast- that and tennis is barely a top 10 sport in the U.S.

You can't begin to compare the journalistic objectivity of ESPN to TSN. ESPN covers winners and TSN covers Canadians. That's patently obvious.

Yeah ok there Bud. Keep on thinking Americans really pay alot of attention to athletes from othe countries.
Oh, & btw , the Americans & their networks basically ignore athletes from other countries in competitions like the Olys. Its not a question of covering their own, Canadian networks do that as well. They simply dont go on as if the rest of the world doesnt exist.

 

[EroCaps]

Yeah ok there Bud. Keep on thinking Americans really pay alot of attention to athletes from othe countries.
Oh, & btw , the Americans & their networks basically ignore athletes from other countries in competitions like the Olys. Its not a question of covering their own, Canadian networks do that as well. They simply dont go on as if the rest of the world doesnt exist.

Agree to disagree?