LadyStanley
Registered User
http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/numbers-prove-hockey-has-the-most-action-per-game/
But can that convert to $$ for league?
But can that convert to $$ for league?
Hockey has the most action per game (of 5 major sports)
- Thread starter LadyStanley
- Start date
Kane One
Moderator
If you consider only the Big 4 sports leagues in that chart, the answer should be no.
It looks like the least amount of action the sport has, the more money it makes.
I also don't get why they didn't use a percentage instead of minutes. Basketball's action is 100% of it's game time, just like the NHL.
Also, what are they considering action for the MLB? There's no clock in baseball, so it looks like they are just deciding on their own where to start and stop their stopwatch. When a catcher is giving his signals to the pitcher, is that not part of the time? How about pick-offs to first? A mound visit? Those are all important parts of the game, but usually people don't decide to count that in their clock.
It looks like the least amount of action the sport has, the more money it makes.
I also don't get why they didn't use a percentage instead of minutes. Basketball's action is 100% of it's game time, just like the NHL.
Also, what are they considering action for the MLB? There's no clock in baseball, so it looks like they are just deciding on their own where to start and stop their stopwatch. When a catcher is giving his signals to the pitcher, is that not part of the time? How about pick-offs to first? A mound visit? Those are all important parts of the game, but usually people don't decide to count that in their clock.
disfigured
Registered User
Well no, because action requires coverage, where as inaction can provide ad space. Hence football being the most lucrative. There's so little action per time in the NFL that the space can be filled with ads.
I think this is leaving out something important, that is completely outside of action.
The NHL is an ice based game kinda trumps out how good it is, if most folk can never play it.
Basketball itself I think is just too simplistic relative to the other sports mentioned. It's obviously very fast and athletic however I never get the sense it has this great dynamic of a story being told.
The NHL is an ice based game kinda trumps out how good it is, if most folk can never play it.
Basketball itself I think is just too simplistic relative to the other sports mentioned. It's obviously very fast and athletic however I never get the sense it has this great dynamic of a story being told.
42
Registered User
Perfect for those with the attention span of a hamster.
Incidentally, that is why I could never get into football. Waaaay too much downtime and I get really impatient waiting for the next play.
Yes, I'm very surprised that basketball is lower than soccer; it makes no sense. I dislike both sports, but definitely basketball challenges hockey for being almost continual action. It's truly as if the numbers for those two sports, soccer and basketball, should be reversed.
I wonder what the numbers would be for Rugby and Aussie Rules Football. AFL does not even stop for injuries, they just rush on with a stretcher and carry them off, with the game going on around them.
FYI: I love both Hockey and Test Cricket, that latter lasting 5 days and 60% ending in a draw (not a tie, which is very rare), the opposite ends of the action junkie spectrum.
FYI: I love both Hockey and Test Cricket, that latter lasting 5 days and 60% ending in a draw (not a tie, which is very rare), the opposite ends of the action junkie spectrum.
I recommend watching a condensed version of a game.
Most are about 40 mins long and actually has more going on than is easy to keep up with. I'd argue that a football game is quite comparable to 60 mins of hockey.
I think the bigger problem is all the commercial imagery being shoved down your throat it just takes one out of the mood.
Last edited:
Vegeta
God Dammit Nappa
This. The only inaction in baseball is when the teams have to swap roles after the end of a half inning. Anyone that says that baseball has no action aside from hitting/fielding clearly doesn't have a good (or even mediocre) grasp of the game.
....actually your compulsive need to always be watching moving objects is more reminiscent of a hamster than a football fan that is willing to wait between plays.
I agree it needs to be percentage based and should include total time from opening play to the final play aka total game time or total broadcast time. After all we are trying to argue entertainment value.
Hockey has 60min of live action. Then as dead time 34 min of intermission plus time between whistles. Though one could argue that a skater standing behind his net unchallenged by the opposing team while a line change occurs, is dead time.
Basketball has 48 min plus free throws, which this didn't take into account. Then dead time of 19 min of intermissions plus numerous time outs plus time between whistles.
Soccer should be 90 min plus extra time minus all time run off the clock while the ball isn't live for both teams to play. Half time is 15 min.
Football is the hardest. You can't just count the time between ball hike and tackle. As soon as both teams are lined up at the line of scrimmage they begin to make adjustments and play calls. Teams can be drawn offside before the snap, so that's live action.
Baseball really does have a lot of dead time but short intermissions. I'd measure live play as anytime the pitcher and batter are set and of course any resulting hit. But if a batter steps out of the box during his at bat, that's dead time.
Hockey has 60min of live action. Then as dead time 34 min of intermission plus time between whistles. Though one could argue that a skater standing behind his net unchallenged by the opposing team while a line change occurs, is dead time.
Basketball has 48 min plus free throws, which this didn't take into account. Then dead time of 19 min of intermissions plus numerous time outs plus time between whistles.
Soccer should be 90 min plus extra time minus all time run off the clock while the ball isn't live for both teams to play. Half time is 15 min.
Football is the hardest. You can't just count the time between ball hike and tackle. As soon as both teams are lined up at the line of scrimmage they begin to make adjustments and play calls. Teams can be drawn offside before the snap, so that's live action.
Baseball really does have a lot of dead time but short intermissions. I'd measure live play as anytime the pitcher and batter are set and of course any resulting hit. But if a batter steps out of the box during his at bat, that's dead time.
42
Registered User
I've always thought that NOT broadcasting hockey live could bring more people in. Increase the production quality with multiple camera angles that are chosen after the play is made. Incorporate some slow motion or instant reply during the middle of the play and use audio clues so fans don't get whiplash.
The game then feels like a movie, and your commentators can still present off-the-cuff remarks as they watch the game with you (though they would be cued before us concerning camera changes). Advertising time then could also be distributed in whatever manner the broadcast company determines is best.
If your production team is good, you can broadcast with less than 5 or 10 minutes delay.
Oh, and add a Skycam.
The game then feels like a movie, and your commentators can still present off-the-cuff remarks as they watch the game with you (though they would be cued before us concerning camera changes). Advertising time then could also be distributed in whatever manner the broadcast company determines is best.
If your production team is good, you can broadcast with less than 5 or 10 minutes delay.
Oh, and add a Skycam.
Major4Boarding
Unfamiliar Moderator
Vegeta
God Dammit Nappa
Haha. But the moving objects are so mesmorizing
Fair enough.
In regards to the Op, hockey is a great sport that deserves more attention, I just don't think these numbers are necessarily accurate. Based off of my experience watching all of the sports I would rank the amount of action in a game as follows:
1) Baseball (though it is subtle, every pitch, pickoff, and signal is an intricate part of gameplay. To get full entertainment out of baseball, you need to be very observant. As a game to have on in the background, it does come off as being slow.)
2) Hockey (60 mins of up and down action)
3) Basketball (Similar to hockey in terms of action)
4) Soccer (Lots of dead time in midfield.)
5) Football (You get about 15 minutes of gameplay per game.)
The problem I have with the stat is, it doesn't deal with the amount of time it takes to watch a game. For instance it is true there is 60 minutes of action in a hockey game but it takes 2.5 hrs to watch a game. 48 mins of action in a basket ball game but it takes 2 hrs to watch a complete game.
The way I see it soccer would've been the winner. You can usually watch a 90 minute game in 2 hrs. With very little dead time.
Football and baseball are best watched with someone else, maybe even the more the better. Plenty of time to discuss strategy and players between tbe actual action. Hockey is best viewed alone if you aren't paying attention 100 percent of the time you lose the feel of the game.
The way I see it soccer would've been the winner. You can usually watch a 90 minute game in 2 hrs. With very little dead time.
Football and baseball are best watched with someone else, maybe even the more the better. Plenty of time to discuss strategy and players between tbe actual action. Hockey is best viewed alone if you aren't paying attention 100 percent of the time you lose the feel of the game.
Last edited:
Trottier
Very Random
hatterson
Registered User
Yea that seems like it's only counting time from when the ball leaves the pitchers hand until it gets to the catcher or is in play/baserunners are moving.
Sure you can't count the entire time between pitches, but you have to count at least some of it. It's the same as only counting the NFL time as from the time of the snap until the whistle blow. Just because it's not "live" game time doesn't mean something interesting isn't going on.
I'm also curious about the soccer number. Sure you have delays for throw-ins, goal kicks, free-kicks etc, but given that you have ~95 minutes of running clock in the average game, 57.6 minutes seems very low based on anecdotal experience. That leads me to believe that they're excluding certain things in the game which seems disingenuous.
Maybe I'll fire up my stopwatch app next Saturday and time some stuff
Fair enough.
In regards to the Op, hockey is a great sport that deserves more attention, I just don't think these numbers are necessarily accurate. Based off of my experience watching all of the sports I would rank the amount of action in a game as follows:
1) Baseball (though it is subtle, every pitch, pickoff, and signal is an intricate part of gameplay. To get full entertainment out of baseball, you need to be very observant. As a game to have on in the background, it does come off as being slow.)
2) Hockey (60 mins of up and down action)
3) Basketball (Similar to hockey in terms of action)
4) Soccer (Lots of dead time in midfield.)
5) Football (You get about 15 minutes of gameplay per game.)
It seems you're applying a vastly different standard to measuring time even between roughly similar sports. You have basically two groups. Flowing sports (Hockey, Basketball and Soccer) and start/stop sports (Football and Baseball)
Baseball and Football have a lot in common in the sense that both have small amounts of "live" play, however for some reason you're counting the tactical play that occurs between these live plays in baseball, but ignoring it for Football. Each play becomes interesting at least 5 seconds ahead of the snap, many times closer to 10 seconds. You can see how the offense is lining up, how the defense is countering it, seeing if the QB sees a blitz coming and adjusts, etc.
Then you have the three flowing sports. I find it odd that you're counting hockey at 60 minutes and basketball at presumably 48, but yet excluding time from soccer because of dead midfield time. Surely if you're excluding midfield time in soccer you must also exclude time spent retrieving icings, or cycling in the defensive zone before a powerplay, or the dump offs to go for line changes in hockey. And you'd also have to exclude a good amount of back court play in basketball when you have an unpressured guy just walking the ball up the court into the half-court set offense.
I suppose the overall point is that it's virtually impossible to apply a standard metric to action time in a game because it changes so much based on what you're looking for. If you want the tactical side of baseball there's a ton of stuff going on, but if that doesn't really interest you there's not much going on for 95% of the game. The same with football, and hockey and basketball and soccer.
Last edited:
Hammer Time
Registered User
- May 3, 2011
- 3,957
- 10
Don't forget fouls. There's probably at least 20 of them in a typical game. Especially if it causes a free kick close to goal, setting up for that could take a couple of minutes. Not to mention if there's a yellow or red card, you can expect delays while players argue with the ref before play can restart. Fouls alone probably cause about 15-20 minutes of dead time per game. Each goal probably also causes about 2 minutes of dead time (so if we're seeing 2-3 goals in an average game ... that's 5 minutes right there).
Abs hockey has the MOST action. It plays every second of its time and hardly ever a time where a team is just relaxing. Its why there are 20 man rosters.
I love other sports too but each one has something wrong with it. Football has way too many commercials and 6 minutes of playing time isnt cutting it. Basketballs last 2 minutes can take 20 minutes. Baseball shouldnt be 4 hours long.
Here is the issue with the NHL
Horrible job in marketing its players. It markets its team pretty well which is important but its players are unheard of. Its Sidney Crosby and thats pretty much it. There limiting themselves to making their teams do all the local advertising. Malkin, Stamkos, Lundqvist, Kane need to be marketed more. And the other dozen popular faces. Use commercials to inspire kids to watch and play. Get involved with tv shows and put the game out there more often.
And the NHL games have to start on time. No reason for a 8pm start time and 8:20 drop of the puck. Ridiculous. Why can FIFA always start on the minute. But NHL cant.
I love other sports too but each one has something wrong with it. Football has way too many commercials and 6 minutes of playing time isnt cutting it. Basketballs last 2 minutes can take 20 minutes. Baseball shouldnt be 4 hours long.
Here is the issue with the NHL
Horrible job in marketing its players. It markets its team pretty well which is important but its players are unheard of. Its Sidney Crosby and thats pretty much it. There limiting themselves to making their teams do all the local advertising. Malkin, Stamkos, Lundqvist, Kane need to be marketed more. And the other dozen popular faces. Use commercials to inspire kids to watch and play. Get involved with tv shows and put the game out there more often.
And the NHL games have to start on time. No reason for a 8pm start time and 8:20 drop of the puck. Ridiculous. Why can FIFA always start on the minute. But NHL cant.
Doctor No
Registered User
Stonewall
Registered User
- Jan 14, 2013
- 2,398
- 50
What is action?
For example, in football, are portions of a no-huddle drive before the snap considered action? Are audibles and defensive adjustments considered action?
And there is no way the 60 minutes of recorded time during a hockey game is all "action".
And why does this matter? One of the great things about football is the constant amount of strategy during a game.
For example, in football, are portions of a no-huddle drive before the snap considered action? Are audibles and defensive adjustments considered action?
And there is no way the 60 minutes of recorded time during a hockey game is all "action".
And why does this matter? One of the great things about football is the constant amount of strategy during a game.
Doctor No
Registered User
This is something that I intended to bring up as well. If you only count snap to tackle, then football doesn't have a lot of action. A lot of football's intrigue comes in between plays.
Similarly for baseball, if you only count each "play", you're missing out on 95% of the intrigue.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
GAME 5 - Cape Breton Eagles @ Baie-Comeau Drakkar - Baie-Comeau Drakkar leads series 3-1Wagers: 3Staked: $225.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 3 Rochester Americans @ Syracuse Crunch - Series tied 1-1Wagers: 5Staked: $1,285.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
