Why do people watch sports? Help me understand.

[Joe the Liberal]

I don't mean to offend any fans here of spectator sports but I just don't get it. My brother was watching the basketball finals game today and was so interested, so compelled to watch it and I just don't know why and it got me thinking.

You sit in you're house for hours on end watching other people play a game and have fun while getting paid millions to do it. It seems rather pointless and a waste of time, they are fun to play them yourself with others and good exercise too but to watch? I used to play football all the time with my friends a few years back but I just don't get how anyone would sit there and watch others play.

I can get why some people watch them to see if anything controversial happens or to hopefully watch a fight, crash or accident but that rarely happens. They have no story, nothing that draws you in, I know some will say it's entertainment but I don't see how it could be entertaining. I know some watch because of bets and to see who will win but why would anyone who doesn't bet care which team wins?

to me it's no different than watching someone, play a video game or read a book or swim around in a pool. Again I don't mean to offend anyone here who may watch sports, that is not my intention at all. I just don't understand why millions think it's worth sitting around and watching, can anyone tell me why?

[Occam Bandage]

1. You post on DU. Surely you understand the appeal of tribalism. nt

[Sal Minella]

14. But we don't dress up in silly costumes and chase balls around and

bash into each other, yanno? ....:)

[rug]

26. Where were you during the primaries?

[Sal Minella]

29. erm. umm. ah. The primaries. Yes. Forgot about those games.

But the "teams" or "tribes" were representing different political philosophies, not just wearing different colors or chasing a ball around.

[nichomachus]

195. We don't? Uh Oh

[tavalon]

199. Really?

Go to GDP and watch the posturing and bashing that is going on right now. And we more prefer to chase our proverbial tails around and smash horses into glue.

[Joe the Liberal]

24. Yes but DU is different.....

We gather here because it's a place where we can talk to others who seem to feel the same way about certain things. We talk politics, issues and various things going on the world, you can't do that watching some game.

[imdjh]

41. And when I have finished a DU session, I usually know something I didn't know before.

The same simply cannot be said about watching sports on TV.

I had a roommate who had, at a minimum unmedicated ADD and probably borderline manic depressive, but mostly manic. He would almost literally bounce off walls when he came home from work, and then go in the TV room and turn on football. A few minutes later, I would walk by and he would be out like a light. This is the same guy, who would go around the house and dim lights and talk in a quiet voice two hours before bedtime on another day to "keep from getting over stimulated". He would get irritated at me, because I could have a spirited discussion at midnight and be fast asleep in my bed a half hour later.

I think that the football actually helped him sleep. It was like white noise, but more like even level distraction which have his brain something to work on that wasn't exciting and wasn't boring. Hearing it in his sleep kept him from dreaming and waking up. That's my theory, anyway.

[tavalon]

200. It is less different than you seem to think

We all have our games. DU happens to be a big one for many of us.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

207. I like football because it's civil

Hell, the Giants/Eagles rivalry is love and hugs compared to most of the crap that gets posted in GD:P.

[keep_it_real]

79. I'm with you - I don't get either

[saltpoint]

2. I saw Cesar Geronimo throw a perfect strike from the right-centerfield

warning track at Riverfront Stadium once to home plate like a laser.

That's one reason to watch sports.

[TahitiNut]

43. I saw Al Kaline do the same thing at Tiger Stadium.

It was AWESOME. :wow:

[saltpoint]

44. Kaline was indeed awesome. An old-time all-time favorite of a lot of

Tiger fans.


:thumbsup: :hi:

[1]

69. al kaline used to wait on a fly ball... far longer than any human being would...

and then charge the fly... catch it at full running speed and in one swift beautiful motion throw out the runner trying to advance.

al kaline was a god. the consummate right fielder.

mr. fucking tiger...

[saltpoint]

85. I used to have his baseball card. I can still see the image of Kaline

on the card.

People who still love baseball loved Kaline from the very start.

[michreject]

91. He turned down a 100,000 contract

Thought no one should make a 6 figure salary. Signed for 99,000.

[bvar22]

197. AND...

that was BEFORE "Performance Enhancing Drugs".

[saltpoint]

204. Good point. Those were arms and muscles and bones -- real ones.

I am getting very homesick for that era of pro sports.

[cherokeeprogressive]

80. I saw Joe Ferguson jump in front of Jimmy Winn to catch a fly ball and throw Sal Bando out

at the plate. In the World Series. The ball and Bando got to the plate at the same time... Bando ran over Yeager, who rolled a couple of times, and held the ball up in his fist.

Yep yep. I love sports.

[saltpoint]

86. I have not heard those names in quite a while. Sal Bando. My god. Is this

even the same life I'm remembering?

I miss the old baseball stadiums and the players of their era. As a very young sprite I was taken to Crosley Field (!) in Cincinnati and was transfixed by the "terrace" leading to the outfield walls -- I believe the last of its kind -- before major league parks all converted to "warning tracks."

[Oeditpus Rex]

123. Nobody blocked the plate better than the Boomer

Well, except maybe Bench.

Steverino — my third all-time favorite Dodger. Invented the catcher's neck flap* and appeared in "Major League" as a Jankees reliever.



*Did it after getting hit in the neck by the fat end of a broken bat as he crouched in the on-deck circle in a game against the Giants. I saw it on teevee.

[ieoeja]

143. I was at that game!

I would love to have seen the face on the guy who had tagged up at 3rd and jogged toward home plate!

To top it off, Geronimo hit one of his rare homeruns on his next at bat. I think it was the bottom of that same inning. And I think it was the game-winner. But not sure on those last two points.

On a team full of superstars, Geronimo was my favorite for some reason. Maybe because he was the only starter that was not a superstar. Or more likely, as a kid, I just liked his name.

[saltpoint]

181. If you saw that game, you are one fortunate soul. What an arm that

man had.

I gravitated toward Cesar Geronimo, not for any reason against the superstars around him in the lineup but because he was so far away from the sports-ego matrix. Wildly talented athlete and a quiet, unassuming personality.

And did I mention he had one of the best arms in the history of baseball?

[napoleon_in_rags]

3. I used to feel the same way.

Then I realized war, corruption, poverty etc are so real. Watching healthy people enjoy express physical mastery whether in sports or dancing is one bright spot in an otherwise dark world.

[bunkerbuster1]

113. K&R'd

if one could k&r a sub-thread. I could not agree more.

I came to pro baseball appreciation late in life (~30). I find it joyful, myself, to see the very best practitioners of a game I used to play as a boy with a ball and a stick, out on the field. call me silly.

[Gemini Cat]

202. Exactly.

You get it.
Baseball kept my head together during the bush years.

[scheming daemons]

4. Because it is entertainment in which the outcome is unknown

Every game is a completely new "episode" and not even the "actors" know the script.

It unfolds before our eyes... in real time.



If game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals... especially the final 6 minutes.... didn't entertain everyone who watched, I'd have to conclude that those that were not entertained are emotionally dead.

It was compelling entertainment... and the 9.5 million that watched had NO IDEA how it would end.



It beats scripted sitcoms or cookie-cutter-plot movies.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

15. I happen to think the NBA IS scripted......

....but that's another story.

[scheming daemons]

17. Maybe... but A) the OP asked about sports in general and B) the FANS still don't know the outcome

[imdjh]

49. OK, but what I don't get is why you care.

There is an old saying, something like "to play football you have to be smart enough to play to win and dumb enough to believe it matters".

I don't care how the game ends. I don't care if they dismantle Bucs Stadium. I really don't care who wins the World Series. I couldn't care less who wins the PGA. I am only minorly interested in beach volleyball and then only if it's guys and if they are what I consider hot (and most I don't).

I also didn't care how Thirtysomething ended. In fact, if the entire case were exiled to Siberia, I would consider the world a better place. The same goes for Dawson's Creek. I am only mildly amused by Buffy The Vampire Slayer, but like Highlander it got old quickly.

The closest thing to football that I watch is Star Trek.

[scheming daemons]

87. Why do you care about what happens in Star Trek?

[imdjh]

89. I don't. It has pretty colors and a pleasant soundtrack.

Even when they are having battles, there are no harsh noises, no asshole screaming into his microphone "Oh my God, oh my God, he's gonna do it! He gonna do it! Sampson Sliznalik has broken the world record for (whatever)!"

My other and major complaint is that football and baseball games are stretched out to last for hours. I wonder if anyone has ever considered that some of the records that get broken, get broken because the game is dragged out so long that players get a lot more rest between plays than they did when the game was actually played in the time alloted for it.

[Raskolnik]

119. If you don't like stories of any kind, that's fine, but you certainly are in a small minority.

If you don't like movies, tv shows, books, or sports that tell a story, that's fine, but I'm not sure why you're so baffled that other people *do* enjoy stories being told in various forms.

[BolivarianHero]

145. Exactly...

It beats the Hell out of watching Survior or American Iduhl...Hockey's the best though; rather than saying "PRAISE JEEBUS!!!!1!!!1!11" they actually focus on their families and their teammates when talking about their successes on the ice. LET'S GO PENS!!!!!!

[hfojvt]

that, and what another poster mentioned

you get to see some amazing feats. The quarterback who fights off, scrambles from the rush and throws a crossfield pass. The receiver making a diving catch, or catching one in stride and burning the defense. A cornerback who intercepts one and takes it all the way back (especially after the opposing quarterback said after winning the toss in overtime 'we want the ball and we're gonna score'). A power dunk, alley oop or behind the back pass. The last second three pointer that hits nothing but net. Etc.

[lindisfarne]

5. Same reason people watch TV in general. n/t

[Ilsa]

6. College sports are my favorites. There is real drive and excellence,

and it isn't about money for all of them. Sure, some will go on to play pro sports, but most don't.

Yes, tribalism is a big part of it. Sometimes, the physical abilities are beautiful to behold, like performance art.

[anonymous171]

7. Why do people knit? Why do people get involved in politics?

Shit, why do people do anything besides eat, have sex, and die?

[Sal Minella]

19. You're being disrespectful.

It's lovely for people to have nice sweaters to be buried in.
(I shouldn't try to be funny when I'm this tired.)

[nolabels]

46. The reason people do more than 'eat, have sex, and die' is because.........

that basketball players need support for their employment aspirations too :shrug:

[MikeNearMcChord]

8. Same reason people go to the theatre, galleries or just go out.

Get away from the daily grind. Each is own, way of blowing off steam. Whether going to see Dave Matthews, the opera, local playhouse, or going to see the local team choke another game. Nothing to wrong to get away for a few hours.

[mamaleah]

9. Why do people watch political debates/political shows?

You sit in you're house for hours on end watching other people play a game and have fun while getting paid millions to do it.

Could also read: You sit in you're house for hours on end watching other people debate and argue and have fun while getting paid millions to do it.

Yup.

[shanti]

10. because it's exciting and entertaining

:eyes: aren't you entertained by things? i don't understand why you don't understand.

[Joe the Liberal]

38. I am....

but just not by spectator sports, the things I find entertaining usually involve myself doing those things as opposed to watching others do them.

[onenote]

96. do you read books or only enjoy writing them?

Do you enjoy going to a movie or only enjoy being in one?

Do you enjoy going to an art gallery or museum or only enjoy paintnig or sculpting when you are doing it yourself?

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

11. "I know some will say it's entertainment but I don't see how it could be entertaining."

And there lies your answer. Similar to how I can't understand why people watch certain movies or tv shows.

I actually don't find the NBA entertaining, but college basketball, pro football and hockey are entertaining to me. The drama of human competition at a pace you can follow is that entertainment

[obliviously]

12. I am the same way

when i was a kid I lived and breathed hockey but to watch an sport being played on tv puts me to sleep.

[obliviously]

18. And this brings me to another point

if we would put the same effort into understanding government and politics that we do into understanding sports the last eight years would have been much different. Now I am sure I have pissed somebody off.

[Drunken Irishman]

25. Oh please. The same could be said about any form of entertainment.

:eyes:

[obliviously]

31. Another good point

more people voted in american idol than for president.

[Drunken Irishman]

33. But also remember many of those who voted and who love politics, love sports.

Like me.

In fact, I love them equally. Hell, politics is very similar to sports if you think about it.

[onenote]

97. obviously not true that more people voted in American Idol than for president

130 million votes were cast in the 2008 presidential election. 28.8 million people tuned into the American Idol finale.

[Mike Daniels]

104. You realize the AI v. Presidential election argument is BS?

I guess this canard doesn't die because it allows people to bitch about an apatheic country using flawed "apples and oranges" comparisons.

American Idol this year pulled around 100 million VOTES, not VOTERS. As people can vote as many times as they can text or dial their choice into the program the number of votes is a false indicator of how many people actually participated in the voting.


The Presidential election had 131 (rounded) million VOTERS/VOTES.


Looks like your statement has no basis in fact.

[Drunken Irishman]

13. I don't know, you might enjoy watching someone swim if they were being chased by sharks.

[saltpoint]

16. And with any luck, that someone would be either of Oklahoma's two

U.S. Senators.

Preferably both.

[ieoeja]

150. Do they have sharks in Oklahoma waters?

[saltpoint]

205. I'd be willing to pay for the gas to

TRANSPORT the said individuals to a venue that DOES have shark-infested waters.

Worth every nickel!

[scheming daemons]

20. Do you watch concerts? Opera? Ballet? How do those differ?

Is it any different to watch and appreciate a world-class athlete at "their craft" than it is to watch a world-class cellist?

your "I don't see how it could be entertaining" statement is arrogant and dismissive - and others could just as easily apply it to other "performance arts".

[davepc]

21. I think there's something in our biology that appreciates demonstrations of physical skill

I'm sure pre-historic man gave each other the equivalent of fist bumps and high fives after watching the star player (hunter) make an athetic move in the process of catching dinner.

Then afterwords around the dinner table they went "did you SEE that spear throw??!"


As we developed civilizations we found new outlets for the behavior...whether it was the ancient Olympics in Greece or the Mayan ball courts in South America.

Today we have soccer and baseball and football etc.

At lest we've moved away from pure bloodsports like gladiator combat of ancient Rome.

[Rhiannon12866]

22. I rarely watch sports today, but I used to in the past.

I think it's like watching anything else on TV, entertainment, and you get to know and care about the characters. I used to watch NBA with my Dad, football with my former boyfriend, and did get into it, but only when I was familiar with the team and the players. When you've been following a team, get to know the players, you kind of feel like you know them, so get to care about them, want them to do well, like any other show on TV, only this is live and you don't know the outcome. :shrug:

However, I do understand what you mean. I never understood why girls would want to be cheerleaders when I was in high school. Why root for a team when you could be on one, definitely more fun, as you said. Also, I thought it was kind of anti-feminist, girls cheering on the boys' teams. I was on a team myself, the rifle team and I was "second man," LOL. I got my varsity letter... :D

[stevedeshazer]

23. I'm a basketball geek. It's art.

I love the game. I used to play it. To watch the best players in the world is a never-ending source of amazement. The movement on the floor. The athleticism. The ebb and flow of the game; sometimes you're way ahead, sometimes you're way behind but rarely are you out of it completely because the breaks may start going your way as suddenly as lightning.

It's hard to explain, but when you love doing something, you want to see the best do it.

It's art.

[scheming daemons]

28. Exactly... it's no different than any other form of performance art

If the OP like ballet, opera, rock concerts, symphonies, etc... then the OP is a hypocrite.

[cherokeeprogressive]

82. When I'm stoned, it's poetry in motion. n/t

[wolfgangmo]

245. It is many good things

but it is not art.

[fishwax]

27. plenty of reasons

A sense of community, the uncertainty, the enjoyment of vicarious competition, the drama and storylines (you say there is no story, but there are actually any number of stories), the enjoyment of watching people do things that don't seem physically possible to most of us, and any number of other reasons for any number of fans.

[Drunken Irishman]

30. Nothing beats a game seven in any sport (whether it's MLB, NBA or NHL).

The thrill of everything being on the line. Oh man.

My Jazz were in a game seven back in 2007 against the Houston Rockets. I was more tense than at any point during election night last November. I seriously was about to keel over. However, when they won, on Houston's floor, it was such an amazing moment.

I'm tearing up just thinking about it.

[fishwax]

37. yep, it's hard to beat a game seven

all that drama and momentum building up through the first six games and suddenly everything is on the line :)

[Drunken Irishman]

47. There have been some classic game 7s.

Like this year's Stanley Cup Finals.

Then there have been some really bad ones, like last year's first round game seven between the Celtics and Hawks.

The one I remember the best, though, was the 1996 Western Conference Finals between the Jazz & Sonics. Utah was down 3-1 to the Sonics, won two straight and forced a seventh game. Nearly won up in Seattle, but eventually lost in overtime.

Not that it would've mattered. The Bulls were amazing that year and probably would have knocked the Jazz off. However, I think it would've given them the experience needed to eventually beat the Bulls (probably in 1997, one of the greatest Finals series ever).

[fishwax]

51. my favorite was the 1992 NLCS

Sid Bream and the slide :)

I wish I could remember that Jazz-Sonics game 7, but I definitely remember the finals the next year--you're certainly right to call them one of the greatest Finals series ever ...

[Drunken Irishman]

53. It got lost in the shuffle, I think, because the Bulls were having the best season in history.

Winning 70+ games, they were the show and every other team and series took a backseat to them.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

52. Pens/Wings was great

I wasn't really rooting for either team, which is much better for your blood pressure!

[Drunken Irishman]

56. Most definitely.

Though I always find myself pulling for one team or another when I supposedly enter a series neutral.

And sometimes, I flip.

Just depends on the teams, I guess.

[endarkenment]

151. actually I find the sudden death elimination NCAA tournament more compelling

every game has everything on the line. The NFL playoffs are the same way. The NBA and NHL could adopt a single elimination tournament that would put more teams into the playoffs and make each game an all or nothing event. MLB is different as it is your pitching roster that gets you into the playoffs and you have to put bullpen against bullpen to have a fair matchup. (Although there would be the equivalent if there were no days off between games.)

[Speck Tater]

32. People identify wiyth their chosen team. Thus the team's victory becomes their victory.

They imagine themselves to be part of the team, in the sense of being in the team's "extended family" or tribe. Competitive sports is a stand-in for warfare.

This is the same emotional transference you see in people who get excited about war. Blowing up "the enemy" in places like Iraq gives many people the same vicarious thrill as sporting events. Again it's "my team" beating the other guys, and the team's victory is their victory. It was fascinating watching the people I worked with on the day they televised the tearing down of the Saddam statue. There was very much a football game atmosphere about the whole thing.

I, (as a 64-year old guy), just don't get it myself. I got slightly interested in baseball for about half a season back in the 1980's, but I really couldn't stay interested.

[fishwax]

36. for some people and in some situatinos, perhaps

But that hardly explains it all ... there are plenty of people, for instance, who enjoy watching sports even without particularly caring about the outcome.

[Speck Tater]

40. I can see that. Especially art-like sports like track and field events. nt

[pnwmom]

34. Different people for different reasons. But for people who played the sport

in high school, I think there's some fun in vicariously participating in someone else's game.

[saltpoint]

35. Sports offer secularists adequate ritual.

[MADem]

39. Because, if the teams are evenly matched, or fairly so, the outcome is not determined.

Anything could happen. There are little story arcs in sports contests and the lives of the players, too, aside from the tribalism, amusement, and "betting on it" aspects of the contests.

If you don't like it, go for a walk, vote with your remote, take out the garbage, go trim the hedge.

If you don't get it, don't worry about it. You don't have to "get" everything to live happily in this world.

I don't "get" the appeal of Paris Hilton. I don't think I ever will. I won't lose sleep over that, though!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

42. Objectivity Isn't Your Strong Suit I Guess.

One must wonder how you could be of such an age yet still be so sheltered within your own world that you are unable to understand freely such a simple concept as why people enjoy sports. Oy vey.

[DKRC]

45. Rugby + Aussie Rules Football = Men without distracting pads

And they put out great calendars with the proceeds going to breast cancer research.

:evilgrin:

[Oeditpus Rex]

128. I'd actually rather watch footy than baseball

Baseball's a great radio game. Footy has to be seen to be appreciated.



Oh, ripper mark! Essendon Bombers, OI! :headbang:

[DKRC]

191. Absolutely!

North Queensland Cowboys :headbang:

[saltpoint]

48. The ancients held funeral games.

It was a good idea.

[SoxFan]

50. "They have no story, nothing that draws you in"

[Drunken Irishman]

58. I regret to post this because it kills me every fucking time I see it...

Even IF he pushed off, it was still a great moment in league history.



And I'll counter it with:

[Catherine Vincent]

54. I like to watch the ball players for their physique! :)

[Catherine Vincent]

55. I like to watch the ball players for their physique! :)

[paulsby]

57. many reasons

because competition helps reveal character. we have a quote at my team's training facility (i am a competitive athlete) "sports don't build character, they reveal it"

because it's beautiful - mixed martial arts is very beautiful at times. the ground game

because we get to see some beautiful extremes of human performance

because we get to see inspiring stories

watching strategy is exciting

[bridgit]

59. It is not a game, Jonathan ~

[SoxFan]

60. Go to a Bruins game and you realize rollerball is for weenies

[bridgit]

62. hahahaha, ding! then there's that ~

UCLA alum here ;) :kick:


we'll maybe discuss the pros & cons of American corporate sports franchises at another time :hi:

[Missy Vixen]

61. I enjoy it

I enjoy a lot of things in life you may not enjoy. It's a good thing I don't criticize the things you enjoy doing, huh?

[MichaelHarris]

63. For any number of reasons; photos ahead!

Choose one:

















All photos ©Michael Harris

[bunkerbuster1]

114. I choose the last pic

for shallow, obvious reasons.

(ooh la la!)

[MichaelHarris]

178. that does seem

to be a very popular shot

[BigBluenoser]

179. Damn dude...

You are a heck of a photographer...

While I too like the last one for shallow reasons, I gotta go with the hurdler (a sport I wouldn't watch if you paid me) for my favorite picture.

I grant you one free post in the gungeon in honor of your talent.

[MichaelHarris]

180. LOL thanks

That shot of the hurdler was so hard to get. They have this "bubble" on the WSU campus with horrible lighting. There was one spot where you could get the shutter speed high enough to freeze some of the movement and then I shot straight on hoping to get soem detail in the face. I was the only sports shooter to even try in the bubble, most just give up.

[BigBluenoser]

206. Got any pictures of the powerlifting / olympic lifting events?

While everyone else was watching track & basketball the wife and I were watching ripped Chinese women and fat eastern European men bending bars. We calculated we watched over 30 hours of weightlifting during the Beijing olympics.

I just like looking at iron sports pics I havn't seen before :)

[Zavulon]

64. It gets instilled in you when your dad takes you to games when you're young.

After that, it's hard to give up.

Unfortunately, I'm slowly coming around to your way of thinking. I'm too far away to see the only two teams I care about in sports (Montreal Canadiens / Alouettes), I follow the NFL only to be competitive in my long-running fantasy league and couldn't care less who wins the actual NFL games, I lost my baseball team (the Expos), and the officiating in the NBA and NHL has truly soured me on those two sports (admittedly, the former more than the latter). I haven't watched a Super Bowl in a few years even though I always have that day off, I haven't watched a baseball game from start to finish since 2004, etc.

Dad pretty much feels the same way. We were in on the ground floor with the Expos, and now even though their successor is in my backyard, I haven't gone to a game. Dad came down to visit and didn't want to go, either.

It was fun while it lasted, though. When you're a kid, going to the park or arena with Dad to see the local boys play is as good as it gets.

[Rowdyboy]

65. I will never understand....Unless I personally play a sport then

why should I take pleasure in watching someone else excel or fail at it? I've never gotten it.

[onenote]

98. do you feel that way about art and music?

[nini]

66. How lame would it be if we all liked the same stuff?

I have no idea why I love sports. I love basketball more than tennis - I don't know why, I just do.

Competition is fun for me whether back in the day when I played or watching my favorite teams.

I don't like to watch soap operas - but others do. We're all different.

[GaYellowDawg]

67. For me it's about family.

I saw my dad cheering for his team, and wanted to do what he did. It gave us some common ground when we had virtually none. We have been to football and basketball games together for almost 30 years and have had a great time - they are some of my fondest memories. I've also got a group of friends who have become close whom I tailgate with. For me, being a Georgia Bulldog fan is intertwined very much with loving my dad, and having good friends. I don't really watch pro sports.

A lot of people watch because they've played those same games, and enjoy seeing them played at the highest level with the greatest skill - I'm sure you could understand someone who sings tenor in a community choir wanting to see Placido Domingo in concert to hear things he could not do himself, right? Same principle.

[Joe the Liberal]

68. I can understand that....

Being around the family and all but wouldn't you agree that without the family aspect it would be pointless? I mean if you didn't need it to have some common ground with your dad you would probably feel the same way as me right now.

I enjoy doing a lot of things and one of them is playing video games on occasion but I don't know anyone who would enjoy seeing other people play them at the highest level and with the greatest skill.

[mamaleah]

72. Then how can you enjoy anything you are not doing yourself?

When you listen to music, you are not playing, writing, singing (at least maybe not that well), or performing the music. You are instead listening to someone else make millions.

When you watch a movie, you are not directing, editing, acting, hairstyling, lighting, catering, etc. You are simply...watching people make millions.

Last time you tuned into any radio or television political program, you are again merely being a spectator.

Sports are quite interesting. I know for a fact I could not rip down an ice rink at who knows how fast smacking a puck around and actually have a hope of getting it into the net. Same with baseball. I couldn't hit a barn with a Buick. But I love watching people who are able to do so beautifully. Same reason I love movies and music. I enjoy seeing the strengths of others. it keeps life interesting.

[Joe the Liberal]

75. Music and movies are different.....

With music you listen to it for a whole bunch of reasons, perhaps you like the tune, maybe there is something in the lyrics you can relate too, maybe it helps you get to sleep, or maybe you need inspiration ect

With movies you watch them for many reasons too, you like the story, you want to learn something (documentaries), you want to be scared (horror), you need something the kids can watch, you want to see how life was/is like for other people ect.

With sports it's just watching a bunch of guys throw or kick a ball around, I just don't see the point, I don't see what's so interesting about it. No offense.

[mamaleah]

77. It's really all the same.

You see music or movies as something you can relate to, but not sports.

Many people do find things they can relate to in watching sports. Most people I know have played baseball, soccer, basketball, football, or hockey. For those of us who have played a sport at one point, there is something to relate to while watching a game. Especially for the athletically challenged like myself. :P

And some people watch television, movies, or listen to music for no real reason but just as a minor entertainment or escape. Same as watching sports.

taking a family outing to watch the Dodgers is really no different from taking a family outing to go see a movie.

[cherokeeprogressive]

83. "It seems rather pointless and a waste of time"

No offense? WHAT THE FUCK is that if not an attempt to denigrate those who like to watch sports?

[onenote]

100. truly pathetic

I'm sorry, but you don't deserve the courtesy of a polite response. You are either intentionally obtuse or just too dense for words.

To put it in your terms: with watching (as opposed simply to listening) to a musical performance, its just a bunch of guys (and women) plucking strings or poking at keys, or blowing into a horn and wiggling their fingers.

with watching ballet or other dance, its just a bunch of guys (and women) jumping around on their toes wearing silly costumes.

with watching a movie: its just a bunch of guys (and women) pretending to do things, and often its just the product of computers

When you read a book, do you know how it turns out? No, but you are interested in the story. Sporting events are mini-dramas, a story that unfolds each time the participants engage.

Maybe the real problem is that people who can enjoy not only movies, music, books, and other forms of entertainment but also sports are more well rounded than you are.

[GaYellowDawg]

78. I don't think I'd feel the same passion, but...

I don't think I'd find it totally uninteresting either. Watching people do things that I don't have the physical capacity for is pretty neat. One time I was at a Georgia-Tennessee game, and our middle linebacker blocked a field goal. Look at the picture:



The guy holding his waist (illegally, I might add), is 6'7". For our linebacker to jump that high, with enough precision timing to block a kicked ball, with someone trying to drag him out of the air, is an absolutely incredible feat. There are plenty of people who watch sports for moments like that - when someone human does something that almost seems superhuman. That's the beauty of sports.

[Occulus]

70. For "the thrill of competition and the agony of defeat".

I love watching hockey (even though my home team just lost the Stanley Cup because, in the last two games, they were skating the way a drunken goldfish swims, bless their hearts), but I know for a fact that I can't skate to save my life. Learning that was a bruising experience (ba-dah tss).

"They have no story, nothing that draws you in, I know some will say it's entertainment but I don't see how it could be entertaining."

Did you know, there's a musical sport? Perhaps it would be more to your liking. It's called DCI.

Here's an excellent example:

Constantly Risking Absurdity

(The Blue Devils of Concord, CA, at the 2008 DCI World Championship)

Part One

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xyzgo2WgfFE

Part Two

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ait0RWJpi58&feature=related

Final score: 98.100. Second place... by .025. In all honesty, the winning show given by Phantom Regiment from Rockford IL (titled "Spartacus") was that tiny little bit better, but YouTube doesn't have a decent video of it and I won't link to what's there because justice just isn't done to their program by that recording. I mean, come on- "Spartacus" had two murders. To my knowledge, that's never been done.

Screw that crap I wrote. The video is poor quality, but the audio is perfectly good. The following show won the gold medal at DCI (rings got too expensive several years ago):

Spartacus

(The Phantom Regiment, from Rockford/Loves Park, IL, also at the 2008 DCI World Championship)

Part One

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j547vsvMd9I

Part Two

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63nFUf5drX0&feature=related

Final score: 98.125. By the way, the perfect score- 100.000- has never been reached because it's impossible.

I've done this, at the level of competition shown in the video (I was in one of the top six in 1994), and it's just as hard as, or even harder than, than anything we consider a "sport"- and the participants pay to do it. It might be difficult to play football or baseball at the NFL or MLB level, but the level of precision required in DCI is light-years beyond any sport, and the people doing it pay through the nose.

It's self-abuse, physically, emotionally, and financially, and I'd do it all over again if I weren't too old per the rules. 1994 was for me, all things considered, one righteous frak of a summer.

[Skittles]

71. it mystifies me too

it's juvenile behavior - not people watching the occasional game but the people who are obsessed with it

[The Straight Story]

73. It is the ultimate in reality TV for one thing (more:)

Real people doing their best against others within a framework we can understand and relate to.

I played on the chess team in high school and I could watch others play in tournaments for many hours, I could relate to the experience of it all.

Most though were not on the chess team :) they played football, basketball, baseball - the things they enjoyed and liked. So I see it as only natural that they would watch such sports later in life and find something common amongst each other in that regards.

One learns to appreciate what others go through in such things, just like we learn to appreciate what others go through on certain issues (poverty, health care, etc) because we have been there and done that.

Ever read a wonderful book and found countless hours of joy talking about it to others? Sports is the same thing really.

I watched my daughter play kickball this weekend at my niece's graduation party and could not help but watch and smile. Many a fond memories of playing that game myself.

I don't enjoy watching racing or golf, but then I have never done those things.

People watch because it is something they have in common with others for any number of reasons.

[islandmkl]

74. why do people listen to music? why do people look at art? why do people watch movies?..

jesus...i love it when someone attacks sports or any other activity they neither participate in nor appreciate....

it's okay that you 'don't get it'...BUT THAT'S JUST YOU...

you left about a million comparisons to your concluding remarks about what what watching sports is 'no different than...'...

the beauty of it all is, is that you don't have to engage yourself in something you don't enjoy...why ponder why others DO enjoy it?...

what truth are you seeking?

...also, is there anything else you don't understand that you feel you should share?

[givemebackmycountry]

76. It's something that is ingrained in you since childhood.

I'm so old I saw the Mets play in the Polo Grounds when I was like 7 years old.
Black and white TV with the New York Rangers in the winter and the New York Mets in the spring and summer.
They never made it to the fall when I was little.

I blame my Dad, and my friends, and baseball cards, and stickball, and hours and hours playing on the NYC basketball courts in the City Parks of Queens.

Few years back, I was in the new Mile High in Denver for the MNF game between the Brett Farve led Packers against my beloved Denver Broncos.

Game goes into overtime, crowd going nuts for the defense to stop the Packers and get the ball back.

First play of overtime on one play, one pass, Brett Farve sucked the life out of 79 thousand fans in 7 seconds.

That's why I love sports.

Plus, it's 'mericun dont'cha know?

[cherokeeprogressive]

81. It's called "living vicariously". You should neither judge it, nor denigrate it. n/t

[BlooInBloo]

84. omg! Other people are different from me! It's sooooo impossible to understand!!

:rofl:

[lildreamer316]

88. Why does anyone do anything?

Are you serious with this?
We can't all be the same. There are as many reasons as there are stars. I don't know why it's even important to you to find out.
Don't we have better questions to ask?

[JackRiddler]

90. Cause they like to watch the bouncing ball.

[ebdarcy]

92. Sports do have a story. However, it's not always the game itself, but what you bring

to it that makes it a story. I'm from Columbus, Ohio. You have no idea how important the Buckeyes are here. My grandfather was a huge OSU fan. He watched and followed all OSU sports. I loved talking sports with him. Some of my favorite memories involve sitting on his couch watching the games with him. My first game without him was so painful.

On a happier note, I graduated from college yesterday. After sitting in the stadium for hours and having a family "party" yesterday evening, I sat down to watch baseball on ESPN. My favorite team was playing and the starting pitcher, Cliff Lee, took a no-hitter into the eighth inning. Great ballgame, and a perfect way to end a busy weekend.

Everyone enjoys different things. We'd be boring if we all had the same interests.

[reflection]

93. What's not to like?

Two teams comprised of people at peak physical condition, intensely motivated (money, fame), performing to the best of their ability. Throw in an arena setting with roaring fans, sprinkle in some lucky bounces, and what you have is the ultimate unscripted reality show.

(And this doesn't even take into account the whole team identification concept, where you "pick" a team and ride out the yearly rollercoasters with them.)

[Are_grits_groceries]

94. This is why I watch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuoVM9nm42E

Jimmy Valvano's 1993 ESPY Speech. "Don't give up, don't ever give up."

The V Foundation for Cancer Research was founded in 1993 by ESPN and the late Jim Valvano, legendary North Carolina State basketball coach and ESPN commentator. Since 1993, The Foundation has raised more than $70 million to fund cancer research grants nationwide. It awards 100 percent of all new direct cash donations and net proceeds of events directly to cancer research and related programs. The Foundation, which has received five consecutive top 4-star ratings from Charity Navigator, awards grants through a competitive awards process strictly supervised by a Scientific Review Committee. For more information on The V Foundation or to make a donation, please visit www.jimmyv.org.

Dick Vitale was standing there to catch him in case he passed out. Valvano was in tremendous pain from his cancer.

[aikoaiko]

95. sports are epic dramas unfolding live

[mainer]

99. And why do we have to have so many darn sports channels?

When I channel surf in hotel rooms, I can find about three dedicated news channels and at least ten dedicated sports channels. What's more important to us, anyway? Breaking current events that can affect our jobs, our government, our lives? Or watching a bunch of guys chase balls around? The same with newspapers. There's always a whole section devoted to sports, and very often it's the same size as the section with international news, or business. I don't understand peoples' priorities.

But then, I'm just a woman whose life revolved around trivial pursuits like, oh, raising kids and making a living.

[onenote]

102. so would you like more programs like Jon and Kate?

y'know, programs that revolve around raising kids and making a living?

[mainer]

105. Which channel is dedicated to "raising kids and making a living?"

I don't know of a single one. Jon & Kate is a single show, not a channel. While there are many, many channels ENTIRELY DEDICATED to sports.

[alfredo]

101. Soap Operas for men

[Rebubula]

103. I guess...

...that the answer that you are looking for is that they are vapid morons and you feel superior to them?

Am I close?

For the record, sports bore me - but I spend a lot of time watching Law & Order\Burn Notice\NCIS\Family Guy\Futurama because I can only take so much reality.

[dmallind]

106. Same reason I look at art

The reason it's enjoyable to watch these guys play basketball is because they are so very very good at it. I'm not. It's a different kind of fun to play basketball of course. But to watch people like me play basketball would not be at all fun.

Again it's enjoyable to study Titian paintings or Rodin sculptures because they were consummately skilled at it. I'm not. Me trying to paint might be fun for me again in a different way, but looking at it would be no fun at all for you.

As far as basketball goes, these guys are artists, and watching them do that is fun.

[road2000]

107. One of the answers...

One of the answers to your question can be found by watching Bob Costas's final interview with Mickey Mantle.

[LWolf]

108. Vicarious warriors,

pumping up the cultural worship of competition, which of course supports the corrupt 2 party political system, the capitalist economic system.....

Gives everyone a chance to pump themselves up by "defeating" someone, which feeds the American social norm of put-downs to establish status.

Games are fun. In moderation, they can be productive.

Are Americans ever moderate about their competitions?

[Romulox]

109. Pure competition can be exhilarating. Pro sports are more or less rigged.

Which means good sports fans are well trained at cognitive dissonance and denying the obvious.

[Raskolnik]

120. Now you wouldn't be saying that just because the Redwings lost, would you? n/t

[Romulox]

131. Not "just". But there was surely some "Deus Ex Gary Bettman" going on in the SCF.

Reminded me a lot of the 1999 SCF.

Edit: I guess that should be "Gary Bettman Ex Machina"! I'll let my original stupidity stand!

[onenote]

136. as a caps fan I feel your pain

after all, the caps had the pens 2-0 and managed to lose three straight before tying up the series and then going on to lose. But having attended some of those games (and having issues with some of the calls), in the end it wasn't the referees that made or didn't make saves or that found the five hole or hit the post.

[Romulox]

138. Hey--the league tilts the field, but the players still have to take advantage.

That's part of being a "champion"--you have to make the best of your opportunities.

But it insults our intelligence to pretend that the league doesn't tilt the field every now and again! :hi:

[scheming daemons]

225. I agree...

By giving the Wings 23 power plays to just 14 for the Penguins... the NHL tilted the playing field toward Detroit.... but they couldn't take advantage of it.

Even though they got two power plays in the third period of game 6 (the Pens got none).

Even though they got a power play in the third period of game 7 (the Pens got none).



Even with the ice tilted in their favor, they couldn't pull it off.


Oh well... maybe there'll be a rematch next year.

[onenote]

121. more or less rigged how?

Specifics?

[scheming daemons]

125. His Redwings choked away a 2-0 and 3-2 series lead, therefore the result must've been "rigged"

Had Osgood not given Talbot so much room on his glove side on the cup-clinching goal, the poster would not be of the same opinion regarding the "rigging" of sports.

[Romulox]

133. They started running Penguins commercials during Round 1 of the Western Conference Finals.

:shrug:

[scheming daemons]

141. So? The NBA ran commercials with Kobe and Lebron puppets...

...didn't get Lebron to the finals...

[Romulox]

142. So? The Detroit Red Wings were the defending champs. And were PLAYING in the WCF.

No commercials. :wtf:

[scheming daemons]

147. Um.... commercials are meant to SELL PRODUCTS

not to satisfy fans' sense of "fairness".

The Redwings don't have commercials because 75% of the team members are boring swedes that won't help products sell.


Reebok signed Crosby because he sells. Kris Draper.. not so much.

[Romulox]

156. You and I agree. The are intended to SELL a PRODUCT.

It was Gary Bettman's job to manufacture that product.

[scheming daemons]

214. The product is the game... not the outcomes of the game

If that were the case, the NJ Devils and their boring Left-Wing Lock would've never won a Stanley Cup.


Hell.. if that were the case, the Penguins would've beaten the Red Wings *LAST* year.


Your biggest proof that there was no conspiracy is the 2008 finals. How did the Red Wings beat the Pens in '08 if the games were "rigged" to provide Sidney Crosby with a cup?


Again.... how did Talbot score two EVEN-STRENGTH goals against the mighty Red Wings if the games were rigged?

How did the Penguins end up with only one power play in each of the final two games... both coming in the 1st periods.... if the games were rigged?

How did the Red Wings end up with power plays in the 3rd periods of both games 6 and 7... if the games were rigged?



Your "rigging" claim doesn't mesh with the evidence. Your only "evidence" is that the Penguins won and Bettman likes Crosby.

That's not evidence... that's sour grapes.

[Romulox]

220. Downthread you admit your experience with the NHL doesn't even go back 10 years

No offense, but if you haven't watched the bizarre rule changes, the massive inconsistencies, and the "call downs" from Toronto, you just don't have the perspective to discuss this, sorry.

"Your biggest proof that there was no conspiracy is the 2008 finals. "

Nope. You mischaracterize my argument. I didn't say that the SCF are manipulated in favor of Sidney Crosby and the Penguins every year. I said they were manipulated in their favor this year. They have undoubtedly been manipulated in favor of other teams in other years (e.g. the 1999 SCF--you might want to google this one--it's not like its ancient history!) This includes the Red Wings, no doubt.

And there's other proof, to whit:

1) the NHL accelerated the schedule for the SCF after Detroit's bruising series with Anaheim and Chicago. Detroit got a mere 2 days off before the SCF began.
2) for the first time in 50+ years, the SCF were scheduled on consecutive nights (but only for the home team?).
3) The NHL began running adds celebrating the Penguins game 5 victory in the 2008 SCF during the first round of the playoffs. The ads did not mention that the Penguins actually LOST the 2008 SCF. No other teams were featured in similar ads--they ran the Game 5/Penguins ad every game that was shown on versus.
4) Malkin's automatic instigator suspension for game 3 was waived off, because, despite starting a fight against a star player in the dwindling minutes of a losing effort--precisely what the rule is meant to prevent--"Geno just isn't that type of player."
5) Game 3--goal scored after Pens player was at least a foot offside.
6) 25 second too many men on the ice in game 6; linesmen tells the extra man to leave the ice! No penalty.
7) Game 7, the Penguins first goal was scored after a missed icing.

But, perhaps most importantly,

8) A league that has been calling "touch" interference calls since the lockout, and throughout the first three rounds of the playoffs allowed the Stanley Cup Finals, supposedly the biggest showcase for the NHL on the world stage, to revert to "clutch & grab" hockey straight out of the pre-lockout era. The true irony here is, It was Pen's owner Mario Lemieux whose complaints in the late 1990's led the league to promise to change the rules to eliminate "clutch and grab", and to "allow the stars to play their game".

Whatever happened in the Stanley Cup Finals, the best players weren't allowed to play their best game--too often, the camera would focus on Orpik or Gill putting a bear hug on one of our skill players in the corners. This is NOT what Mario Lemieux had in mind, but what could he say?

[scheming daemons]

222. Actually, I admitted no such thing.

I've been watching hockey for decades.

I don't recall the '99 finals because my team (Penguins) were eliminated by Toronto in the 2nd round. After that, I didn't pay attention.

By the way... your Red Wings didn't make it the finals that year either... Dallas beat ya.


Replies to your 8 points:

1) The NHL didn't accelerate the schedule. NBC did. NBC didn't want to pre-empt their weeknight programming during May sweeps (which is why games 3 and 4 were on Versus). Detroit got 2 days off, Pittsburgh got 3 days off. And Detroit didn't have to travel (since game 5 vs Chicago was at home). That's a wash.

2. Scheduling on consecutive nights hurts the VISITING team more than the home team. And it showed.

3. What affect does running an ad that included the Penguins have on "manipulating the series". This is laughable. That's like saying a Kobe Bryant ad during the Orlando-Cleveland series helped the Lakers. Assinine.

4. Ovechkin's automatic instigator penalty in game 4 of the second round was waived off too.... and this time it was AGAINST the Penguins' interest. The "conspiracy" here is that the NHL doesn't want to suspend its stars - not that it is favoring one team over another.

5. That offsides was bang-bang. And there's no way you can tell me that a line judge could process the information so fast in his head during that play as to A) know the Pens would score and B) remember to let the offsides "go" because of a league dictum - in a bat of an eye. This is ludicrous. It's like saying an umpire "cheated" because he called a bang-bang play safe instead of out in the World Series.

Besides... counterevidence: Game 1 and 2... Zetterberg closes his glove on the puck in the crease with the Pens down 2-1. Both should have resulted in a penalty shot by the Penguins. Neither did.

6. Yes.. the Pens had too many men on the ice for 21 seconds. But the linesman never tells anybody anything. Watch the replay, the linesmen is not even looking back at Eaton. The Penguins bench told Eaton to get off of the ice.

Also... no goals resulted from the play... the Penguins didn't even get a shot on net during the play. The only result was a missed power play by the Redwings. But that made up for the Red Wings game-winning goal in game two which should have not occurred because of a slash that occurred right before the goal that was ignored.

The Red Wings had 23 power plays in the series... the Penguins had 14. The calls most definitely tilted one way: Detroit's!


7. I have been watching hockey for 20+ years and so have you. It is *NOT* icing if the player crosses the red line during his FOLLOW THROUGH when dumping the puck in. Hal Gill CLEARLY crosses the red line during his follow through. It was CLEARLY not an icing call. 1000 out of 1000 times, that is NOT icing.

8. The lack of calling "touch interference" calls in the finals helped the Red Wings more than the Penguins. The reason Zetterberg was able to so effectively shut Crosby down was that he interfered with Crosby the entire series. Like I said... 23 power plays for Detroit, 14 for Pittsburgh. The lack of calling touch interference helped Detroit more than Pittsburgh.


And finally... your last statement:

Whatever happened in the Stanley Cup Finals, the best players weren't allowed to play their best game--too often, the camera would focus on Orpik or Gill putting a bear hug on one of our skill players in the corners. This is NOT what Mario Lemieux had in mind, but what could he say?

I agree. Crosby and Malkin spent the entire series being held and interfered with by Zetterberg and the Detroit defense (especially Stuart). And the Pens didn't get power plays out of it.

Your team got 60% more power play time than Pittsburgh... and yet STILL couldn't win the series. When they had the "short rest", Detroit won the games. When there were 3-days off between games (before #6 and #7), the Pens won.

The schedule helped you.
The refs helped you.

But the Pens won anyway.


You're full of sour grapes.

[Romulox]

226. You're turning this into a "you're as guilty as I am" argument. That's not my point.

My point is that the league changed the rules for the SCF. We all noticed. Stop pretending like we're not supposed to notice! We all noticed!

I am not saying one team is honorable, rule abiding, etc. etc., and the other is not--both teams play within the rules laid out by the league, to the best of their abilities. However, it is clear that those rules are subject constant change, and it bears wondering, "why? to what end are the rules being constantly changed?"

Your "parity" arguments (i.e. that teams should get roughly the same amount of power plays, regardless of what they put on the ice) is exactly the opposite of what Mario Lemieux demanded back in the late '90s. Comparing power play time proves nothing. If one team slashes another team's player in the mouth, there should be more power play time for the team that drew the infraction. In addition, a HUGE portion of the power play minute disparity in this series is due to garbage time penalties given for pissy crap is losing efforts (e.g. game 5.)

But back to my point.

If we all noticed that the rules were changed for the SCF, we have to wonder, "why"? The most logical conclusion is that it was to favor the team that the NHL had been incessantly marketing (to the exclusion of ALL other teams) throughout the playoffs.

[scheming daemons]

231. And you're missing my point...

If we concede that the rules were changed for the SCF, I dispute that they were changed to favor the Penguins. All empirical evidence points to the fact that... if they were changed at all, it was in Detroit's favor.


In game 6, despite being badly outplayed for most of the game, the Red Wings got 3 power plays to Pittsburgh's 2. Included in that were two questionable 3rd-period penalties with the score 2-1.

In game 7, despite being badly outplayed for the first two period, the only power play in the final 40 minutes of the game was awarded to Detroit. On an iffy call that came as a result of a Datsyuk dive when he felt Gill's stick between his legs.


With a 3-2 series lead, Detroit was given almost *ALL* the breaks by the officials in the final 2 games... but still lost.


My two concluding points are this:

A) For as long as I can remember, refs have let more go in the playoffs than in the regular season and progressively moreso later in the playoffs. This is not a new development this year. It has been this way for decades.

B) To the extent that the "rules changed" during the SCF, the result favored the Red Wings. The two most dynamic offensive players in the series were Crosby and Malkin. "Letting stuff go" hurts them more than any of the other skaters on either team.

Using "regular season rules", Zetterberg would've spent half the series in the penalty box.


Detroit got the breaks by "having the rules changed", not Pittsburgh. And they still lost. Your team didn't lose because of a grand Bettman-NHL-NBC conspiracy. If anything, they lost DESPITE getting the benefits of such a conspiracy.

[Romulox]

233. Go back and watch your 2008 tapes. There was a HUGE change in officiating from last year.

"B) To the extent that the "rules changed" during the SCF, the result favored the Red Wings. The two most dynamic offensive players in the series were Crosby and Malkin. "Letting stuff go" hurts them more than any of the other skaters on either team."

Slow down a bit. You seem to concede a significant rule change in the SCF. Without jumping to who that change favored. Let's consider why that change was made for a moment! The most logical conclusion is that it was as obvious a tie in to the NHL marketing plan for the Penguins as a happy meal toy is to a summer blockbuster. This is the Occam's Razor explanation. I'm open to other suggestions, but you don't address this issue, even though I've brought it up a few times now: Why? Why were the rules changed so dramatically for this years SCF? To what end? If it's all above board and routine, why is the North America media asking questions about it this year? If it is standard to change the ruleset in the SCF, why won't Gary Bettman just explain it to us?

Again, you're making it into a "you're guilty too!" argument, but I'm not calling out the Pens for doing anything wrong. I'm calling out the league for manipulating the SCF to please their marketing department. It's simply not credible to argue that:

a) that the rules WERE changed for the SCF;
b) that Detroit players "aren't marketable" (according to the conventional wisdom, with which I disagree);
c) the league began marketing the Pens (and no other team) at the beginning of the playoffs; AND

d) a-c have absolutely zero causal relationship with one another.

[scheming daemons]

235. I think the tenor of the officiating for 2009 was similar to 2008

...and to 2007, 2006, and the years before that too.


In 2008... there were 34 penalties called on Pittsburgh, 36 on Detroit. (Yes it was 6 games, but one game was 3 overtimes... so it was still 21 periods of hockey)

In 2009... there were 30 penalties called on Pittsburgh, 18 on Detroit.

Pittsburgh's penalty total: about the same
Detroit's penalty total: HALF



In 2008... The Pens scored 5 power play goals, and the Wings scored 4 power play goals

In 2009... the Pens scored 4 power play goals, and the Wings scored 4 power play goals



I think it is your perception that this year was markedly different than last year... and you have that perception because this year your team lost.


To answer your bullet points:

A) I don't concede that the "rules WERE changed". Bill McCreary called the games like he always does. Same with Devorski.
B) It's not that the Detroit players aren't marketable... it's that Crosby is *MORE* marketable.
C) I disagree strongly with this. I saw TONS of marketing for Ovechkin at the beginning of playoffs, and of the Wings too for that matter.

D) I don't see how there can be a causal relationship between your A, B, and C when ... as I have already proven... if the rules WERE changed for the SCF, they were changed in Detroit's favor.

(but the bottom line is they weren't changed. Just called looser... as almost every SCF has been called in my lifetime.)



Game 6 and 7... in which the Red Wings only needed to win ONCE... were *VERY* fairly called games. I thought the Pens got homered in games 1 and 2... and I'll concede they got the breaks in game 3. But games 6 and 7, you'd be hard-pressed to find a valid case of bias or favoritism.


The bottom line is... if Kronwall's shot is an inch lower with 2:17 left in game 7, you're not arguing that the series was tilted in Pittsburgh's favor by the NHL.

(and to be fair... I'd probably be arguing that it WAS tilted in Detroit's....)

[Romulox]

238. Again, argument by PIMs doesn't work. Pitts didn't play a clutch and grab game in 2008 SCF

They played more of a uptempo, run & gun, iirc.

"C) I disagree strongly with this. I saw TONS of marketing for Ovechkin at the beginning of playoffs, and of the Wings too for that matter."

Do you have a Youtube link? There were no (zero) NHL commercials for the Wings played on versus this year during a Red Wings games. They played the Game 5 (Pens win the cup?) 2008 commercial during every Wings game on versus, however. :hi:

"D) I don't see how there can be a causal relationship between your A, B, and C when ... as I have already proven... if the rules WERE changed for the SCF, they were changed in Detroit's favor."

You haven't proven anything. It's the same argument teams like the Flames and Ducks try to mount: if one team has more PIMs than the other, then the game couldn't possibly be tilted in favor of the more penalized team. This ignores the play on the ice entirely (not to mention garbage time, "even up" penalties in games that are foregone conclusions.) It's a silly argument. My neighbor has a $1000 fine for drunk driving, and I have a $0 fine. No fair! (Guess what, I don't drink in drive. It's bizarre and illogical to think we should be penalized with the same frequency for that infraction!)

Your argument is that Detroit clutched and grabbed too. I don't disagree. My argument is that Detroit did not choose or want these rules--they are known as a small, fast, skilled team, and a clutch and grab game invariably favors the bigger, slower, team. Both teams clutched and grabbed, because that was the ruleset the league put into play for the SCF. This is NOT the way either Stanley Cup Finals or Stanley Cup Playoffs have been called post-lockout. This is a reversion to pre-lockout style hockey.

To say that clutch and grab favors the smaller, faster, more skilled (over all 4 lines, I give full respect to Geno and Sid) is silly. Detroit would've much preferred to play by the same rules they had in the Anaheim 7 game series, which featured MUCH better hockey than the SCF, btw.

[scheming daemons]

241. The Penguins are more uptempo "run and gun" under Bylsma than they were under Therrein

In fact.. that was the main reason for the coaching change.


Bylsma instituted a more uptempo, aggressive forechecking game that emphasized puck-possession in the offensive zone.... a lot like Detroit, actually. The Pens went 18-3-4 to close the season after the change, because of the change in style. Their shots per game went up 25%. Their chances went up too.

It was Detroit's inability to deal with the NEW style of the Penguins that resulted in the Cup Final result more than anything else.



Your last statement shows the bias and arrogance of your argument. You cannot even begin to grasp the proposition that the Penguins are just as fast, just as skilled as the Wings. Or that ANY team is just as fast or skilled as the Wings. Therefore, in your mind, if the Wings lose a series, it MUST be because of shenanigans - since no team is as good as they are in your mind.

You cannot even begin to accept in your mind that the Penguins are just as skilled, if not moreso, than the Wings. It's not fathomable by your brain. Therefore, in order for the Wings to lose the series, it MUST'VE been rigged.


It's actually the same reason that Republicans can't accept Obama's victory. After all.. AMERICA IS A CENTER-RIGHT NATION! There either were shenanigans (ACORN) or the public was duped by the "left-wing" media.

The possibility doesn't even exist in their minds that the American people actually rejected their point of view.


Just like the possibility doesn't exist in your mind that the Penguins are equal to or greater than the Red Wings in talent, skill, drive, and intangibles.

[Romulox]

157. BTW, thanks for underlining the Don Cherry-esque xenophobia that permeates the NHL!

"The Redwings don't have commercials because 75% of the team members are boring swedes that won't help products sell."

Pavel Datsyuk is perhaps the best 2 way player in the NHL. And he ain't no Swede (so what if he were?) :hi:

[scheming daemons]

212. The bottom line is this...

Datsyuk, Malkin, and Ovetchkin are EXTREMELY fantastic hockey players.

None of them is going to be the "face" of the NHL, because they are not North American.

When it comes to selling products and selling the game to North American audiences, a North American face will do much better.


I'm a Penguin fan who thinks that Crosby is not even the best player on his own team (Malkin is)....

...but Malkin isn't going to help sell anything.


It has nothing to do with Don Cherry or Xenophobia... it has everything to do with Marketing 101 and advertising in America.

[Romulox]

219. Women in Detroit swoon over Hank Zetterburg, men admire him. WHY is he not marketable?

"It has nothing to do with Don Cherry or Xenophobia."

Don Cherry is a noted Canadian hockey commentator whose schtick is complaining about "sissy euros". It has everything to do with both Don Cherry and xenophobia. :hi:

[scheming daemons]

223. I know who Don Cherry is...

And Hank Zetterberg is VERY marketable ..... in Detroit.



But not in North America as a whole.

[Romulox]

227. Provincial attitude that says NHL's best players aren't marketable because of ethnicity = xenophobia

of the Don Cherry variety.

[scheming daemons]

229. Xenophobia by the sporting PUBLIC yes... by the NHL, no...

The NHL knows the American audience.

The NHL didn't MAKE the American/Canadian audience xenophobic. The NHL is only interested in the raw numbers of it.


If studies showed that the American/Canadian audience would prefer Bilbo the Clown on skates, then Bilbo the Clown would be signed and marketed to the hilt.


Sydney Crosby sells product. Just like Gretzky, Messier, and Lemieux before him.


Evgeni Malkin, Alex Ovechkin, Hank Zetterberg, Pavel Datsyuk do NOT sell product.... despite their on-ice superiority.



That's the bottom line.

[Romulox]

230. Bullshit. Americans love latin MLBers, but will only accept Canadian NHLers?

Again, it's utter nonsense. :hi:

Oh yeah. And those fans who "will never accept europeans"? They all live in Arizona and Las Vegas! :rofl:

[scheming daemons]

232. Look at the NBA... does Yao Ming sell? Dirk Nowitski? Manu Ginobli? Mehmet Okur?

Not like Kobe, Lebron, and D-Wade.


It's a fact.

[Romulox]

234. The league markets ALL those stars. Extremely bad examples!

All those guys are household names to ESPN viewers. :hi:

One thing that becomes clears is that the NBA markets a cast of stars. The Jordan plan that Bettman is attempting is long out of favor in the NBA. :wtf:

[Romulox]

144. And the Kobe/Lebron ads were run by Nike, btw. Not by the league and its official broadcaster.

Not evenly remotely similar.

[Romulox]

132. Steroids, refs admitting rigging games, for two main issues.

Our Congress had hearings about one, threatened hearings about the other. :hi:

[endarkenment]

154. steroid abuse does not imply 'rigged games'

as for the 'refs admitting rigging games' - yes there have been refs who have been caught trying to alter the outcome for their own personal enrichment. That is bad enough, but it does not at all establish your broad brush assertion that all of these games are rigged. The NBA, NHL, MLB, NFL are not WWE.

Doping doesn't rig games, it discriminates against players who refuse to use performance enhancing drugs. It is a nightmare for individual athletes, but it really doesn't affect the outcome of team sports over a season or even in an individual game, it just drives out the athletes who refuse to use.

[Romulox]

159. Turning a blind eye to it DOES. (cough cough Dwight Howard.)

"That is bad enough, but it does not at all establish your broad brush assertion that all of these games are rigged. "

Right, but the fact that games have been rigged in recent games proves that it is entirely possible that they are rigged in other cases, too.

"Doping doesn't rig games, it discriminates against players who refuse to use performance enhancing drugs. "

It's cheating, and turning a blind eye to it is manipulating the league.

"it really doesn't affect the outcome of team sports over a season or even in an individual game"

Come on now. Players take steroids because it makes them better. Period.

[scheming daemons]

124. Said by anyone who's team just choked away a 2-0 and 3-2 series lead

..

[Romulox]

135. The NBA had admitted to games being rigged in the recent past. So not JUST the SCF.

But the SCF were clearly manipulated. It is beyond credibility that the NHL has one set of rules during the regular season, one during the first three rounds of the playoffs, and another in the finals.

After the first two losses in Detroit, the Penguins organization was demanding that "picks" (i.e. non-contact interference) be called as penalties. By game 6, the Pens scored their first goal after Dan Cleary had been pinned by Pen's D-man away from the puck in the Penguin's defensive zone for about 20 seconds. Of course, the players play the game the way it's called.

But the bizarre changes in scheduling, the incessant marketing of Sidney Crosby (they began running commercials heralding the Pen's win in game 5, 2008 SCF--and neglecting to mention the series' overall victor!-- during Round 1 of the Western Conferences playoffs! :wtf: ) and the bizarre, repeated, and manic rule changes leave a bizarre taste in my mouth, for sure!

[scheming daemons]

146. LOL

Factoid one:

Power plays in the series:

Detroit, 23
Pittsburgh, 14


Factoid two:

In both games 1 and 2, Henrik Zetterberg covered the puck in the crease with his glove - which should have resulted in penalty shots for the Penguins... but didn't. There's always bad calls.




As for the marketing of Sidney Crosby... it doesn't really differ from the marketing of Lebron James by the NBA... but that didn't get Lebron James to the finals, did it?

Of COURSE the NHL is going to market its attractive young stars. So?



As for your conspiracy theories:

What NHL official told Chris Osgood to lose his angle and give Max Talbot an extreme amount of open net on the glove side for Talbot to shoot the cup-winning goal into?

Is Osgood "on the take"?

What about Brad Stuart? Was he told by the league to give the puck away behind the net to set up the first goal?

And how about Kronwall? Did he hit the crossbar ON PURPOSE with 2:17 left to help the Pens preserve the lead? If he wasn't on the take, would he have shot the puck and inch lower?

[Romulox]

161. Do you think Gary Bettman improperly influenced the outcome of the 1999 Stanley Cup Finals?

I'm not saying Gary Bettman chooses which shots go in. But he DOES set the schedule, he does choose which players to market, and he does decide that what was interference in game 7 of the WCF is NOT interference in game 7 of the SCF (something he has repeatedly promised not to do, by the way.)

At any rate, this conversation really hinges on one factor for me: Do you think Gary Bettman improperly influenced the outcome of the 1999 Stanley Cup Finals?.

If you say "no", then we probably don't have much to talk about. If you say "yes", then you are just arguing that Bettman didn't gin up the result this time--a relatively weak argument, imo. :hi:

[scheming daemons]

211. Remind me who was in the '99 finals?

A) Bettman does NOT set the schedule... at least not this year. NBC did.

B) The most marketable players are the ones that are chosen to be marketed. This doesn't have anything to do with influencing the outcome of games, just which games get the coverage. Just like the NFL puts the best teams on Monday night football, that doesn't necessarily put those teams in the Super Bowl.

C) Where is your evidence for the statement "he does decide that what was interference in game 7 of the WCF is NOT interference in game 7 of the SCF"? That is nothing but conjecture on your part.


I don't remember the circumstances of the 1999 finals.

[Romulox]

218. No offense, but if you don't remember the 1999 Stanley Cup Finals, you're not in a good position

to discuss NHL refereeing/rule changes. :shrug:

[scheming daemons]

224. That was the Dallas-Buffalo year, right?

Yeah... I remember the Sabres losing and there being some controversy.

But I don't remember the controversy having anything to do with "rigging".... wasn't it Brett Hull scoring while in the crease?

[Romulox]

228. LOL. You remember "some controversy", in 1999, but you insist on the integrity of the league?

I don't mean to get pissy here, but gimmeabreak!

"But I don't remember the controversy having anything to do with 'rigging'"

Your memory is hazy. The game was decided on a very unorthodox interpretation of the rules in order to please the TV network (ABC iirc), as the game went to triple OT...

Notice the fine distinction between "rigging" and "manipulating" the game. The latter occurs without question. The former is debatable.

[scheming daemons]

239. "Controversy" does not necessarily equal "rigging"

There are lots of controversial calls in sports. To argue that they are purposely bad calls is, pardon my bluntness, bullshit.


I've umpired youth and high school baseball for 26 years. I'm sure I miss calls every game. I'm sure some of my missed calls affected the outcome of somes games.

Doesn't mean I "rigged" the game. It means I'm human and I blew a call or two. All I can do is make sure I'm in the right position, and I call it as I see it.


To argue (as you have) that a linesman didn't call a bang-bang offsides because he was favoring one team over the other is to argue the OPPOSITE of Occam's Razor. The simplest explanation is that the linesman called it as he saw it and didn't have the benefit of super-slo-mo replay.

To argue (as you have) that a linesman didn't call icing on Hal Gill in game 7... when video evidence shows Gill crossing the red line on his follow through... is to argue from a point of view of not understanding the rules of the game.

To argue (as you have) that a linesman told Mark Eaton to leave the ice to avoid a too-many-men penalty, when video evidence shows the linesman never even looked at Eaton during the 21 seconds he was on the ice, is to flat out lie.

To argue the above 3 calls are evidence of a anti-Detroit conspiracy (as you have), but to at the same time completely ignore the missed calls that went in Detroit's favor (the two Zetterberg puck-coverings in the crease, the Franzen slash right before the game-winning goal in game 2) is to engage in disingenuous arguing.

You're highlighting the "evidence" that supports your conspiracy theory, while ignoring the evidence that doesn't.

That's sour grapes, my friend. You'd lose the argument in front of a jury.



2+2 doesn't equal 5.

[Annces]

110. I think it has something to do with your upbringing

father to son type of thing, or in some way a person has it as part of their childhood very strongly. I am similar though, in that I like to experience things, and not watch, even if I am not good at it.

[redqueen]

111. Why do people watch movies? Why do people watch ballet? Why do people watch opera?

Why do poeple watch dog shows? Why do people watch other people?


etc. etc. etc.

[TexasObserver]

112. Why do people post on internet message boards about why people watch sports?

You don't understand why some people watch sports? Or watch Opera? Or watch MTV? Or watch political shows? Or watch reality shows?

Really?

Why do millions of people sit at home every day posting on message boards about why everyone doesn't share every personal choice they have? Because in life, people do what interests them, just as you do what interests you.

I don't understand why people talk about their cats, like anyone cares about their cat but them, but I accept that they do it because it is one of the things they like to do. I don't understand why people knit, or play Pinochle, or play checkers, or watch soap operas. But I accept that such activities make sense to those persons, because people do what they like to do.

[Hippo_Tron]

115. Sports fans feel the same way about a big game that political junkies do about a big delection

Personally I'm not a huge sports fan but I do get excited if a team I root for is doing well.

The reason I get more excited about politics, though, is that it never ends. If your team wins that big championship game it's great that night and then it starts all over again the next day with the new season. If your candidate wins a big election, you actually get to see them take office and the implications of them being in that office and to me that's far more satisfying in the long run than winning a big game.

For me, I just can't get excited about sports over the long run. In the short run, I definitely can, though.

[dem629]

116. I'd like to know why people listen to folk music or watch painting shows on PBS.

Actually, no I wouldn't.

[Telly Savalas]

187. Nothing soothes a hangover better than that "Joy of Painting" guy.

That's a good reason.

[LanternWaste]

117. Most likely, it's simply entertainment...

Most likely, it's simply entertainment-- all of it emotional drama contained within predefined social parameters.

Some people like to watch over paid athletes perform, some people like to watch over paid musicians perform, other people like to watch over paid actors perform. Each of which, fits quite neatly into the pejoratives you gave for us.

[ZombieHorde]

118. I think the real question should be; "Why do people go crazy over sports?"

Why are soccer riots so common?

Why do people memorize other people's sports stats?

Why do people pay lots of money for sports collector cards?

[scheming daemons]

127. Why are riots at rock concerts common? Why do people memorize lyrics? Why do people pay lots of...

...money for "greatest hits" albums when they already have all the songs?

[ZombieHorde]

155. How often are there riots at rock concerts?

Why do people memorize lyrics?

Comes naturally from words put to music.

"greatest hits" albums when they already have all the songs

I don't know a single person who does that.

[LanternWaste]

162. However, I'm sure you can see the poster's point

However, I'm sure you can see the poster's general point-- we many of us tend to obsess over the world of entertainment-- regardless of whether it's sports, music or movies.

I've known people to stand in line for hours and hours to score tickets to a Springsteen concert or waited half a day in line for some new movie. I've known people to own every bit of memorabilia they could get their hands on for a movie, or for some pop band.

One person's waste of time is another person's entertainment.

[ZombieHorde]

166. "One person's waste of time is another person's entertainment."

I would not refer to an obsession as a waste of time.

many of us tend to obsess over the world of entertainment

Why do you think that is?

[LanternWaste]

172. I'm sure many other people wouldn't either

"I would not refer to an obsession as a waste of time."
I'm sure many other people wouldn't either-- they'd call it entertainment.


"many of us tend to obsess over the world of entertainment - why do you think that is?"
Better men than we scratch their heads at that one-- I'm sure no one here is qualified to answer that with absoluteness, any more than no one here is qualified to diagnose Obsession-- though I imagine may of us think we are...

[onenote]

169. more than once a century, which seems to be your standard

referencing post number 160: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5850286&mesg_id=5854975

And the answer is, more often than you apparently realize:
http://www.gibson.com/en-us/Lifestyle/News/ac-dc-concert-ends-in-riot-220/
http://www.sbsun.com/ci_3570768
http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/b51730_stones_fans_rock_roll_riot.html
http://cbs13.com/local/El.Tri.Watsonville.2.476342.html
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2002/05/14/MN95221.DTL&type=printable

[ZombieHorde]

176. The people in the first link rioted because they realized they spent money on AC/DC.

The riot in the second link was started by white supremacists.

The riot in the third link was started by people who were not attending the concert, but wanted to. Apparently they were unaware of the fact The Rolling Stones were playing music at this concert.

The riot in the forth link was obviously about people's disdain for snow related car accidents.

The riot in the fifth link was started because people realized they paid money to see Usher.

Technically speaking, the only riots which started at a concert from the links provided was the first and final link, and one has to admit that AC/DC and Usher are bad enough to instill feeling of violence in the average listener.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

208. No joke

I was at an Indigo Girls concert that got out of hand.

Never been at a Giants game that got out of hand.

[ZombieHorde]

216. I thought Giants was football. What happened at the concert?

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

217. The Giants are football

When I saw the Indigo Girls at Waterloo Village (which seemed to hire mostly elderly women as "security") fans swarmed the stage towards the end of the concert. It ended abruptly and apparently, a guitar was stolen.

[onenote]

130. shouldn't that be why do a few people go crazy over sports?

You assume soccer riots are "common" -- I'd like to see some back up about that, keeping in mind that the number of spectators at soccer matches, professional and amateur, world wide probably is in the billions annually. Just focusing on professional leagues, annual attendance in countries like Germany and the UK is in the tens of millions annually. In the US, its around 3.5 million (professional only) -- when was there a 'soccer riot' in the US?

And major league baseball draws nearly 80 million fans to live events annually -- can't remember the last "baseball riot".

Why do people memorize sports stats? Not everyone who attends or watches sporting events on tv does that. In fact, its probably a very small number that do. Why do they do it? Because its one way that some people enjoy the game, just like the way some people memorize which bands Eric Clapton has played with or who played on what album by a particular group is something some people who like music do.

Why do people pay lots of money for sports collector cards? Why do people pay lots of money for any commodity -- supply and demand. If its a rare card, a rare coin, a rare book, a rare album, a rare piece of antique furniture, a rare piece of campaign memorabilia -- people will pay lots of money for it.

I get that sports isn't everyone's cup of tea, just as I get that opera or collecting porcelain figures, or reading/collecting comic books, etc etc etc isn't everyone's cup of tea. But what I can't get is how someone could be so out of touch with the rest of humanity as to have no understanding of why people like things that they don't particular like or find interesting (and vice versa).

[ZombieHorde]

160. More than zero soccer riots per century is bizarre.

can't remember the last "baseball riot"

Has anyone in this thread other than you mentioned baseball riots?

Not everyone who attends or watches sporting events on tv does that.

I never made that claim. I know I did not specifically say "some but not all people", but I was not expecting people to be so defensive about their amusement.

people will pay lots of money for it

Why?

But what I can't get is how someone could be so out of touch with the rest of humanity as to have no understanding of why people like things that they don't particular like or find interesting (and vice versa).

I admit I have a hard time relating to those around me, and vice versa.

[onenote]

163. when you use generalities, don't be sensitive when you're called on it

Saying why do people go crazy is much different than why do a few people go crazy. But I'm guessing you knew that but it didn't serve your purpose to include the factually accurate qualifier.

And you spoke of sports in general, so using other sports to debunk your example based on soccer was accurate and appropriate.
And while more than one sports riot is too many, so are hooligans trashing an area after a rock concert, which sometimes happens too.

As for "why"? -- the answer was in my post -- supply and demand. You might just as easily ask why would someone pay a lot of money for a rare campaign poster or a rare coin or a rare stamp or a rare record album or manuscript. If you think paying a lot for a rare sports collector card is different (and you are the one that singled sports cards out, not me), you might want to explain your position rather than hiding behind "why"

Your last point sort of says it all. And your honesty is refreshing.

[ZombieHorde]

171. The only sports related riots I am familiar with are soccer riots.

So I specifically mentioned that sport in regards to riots. I don't know why other sports don't have the number of riots soccer has.

[Raskolnik]

122. Because people competing with each other can be very entertaining.

When person A is very good at accomplishing a task, and person B is very good at preventing that same task, interesting things often happen.

Now, if person A and B both happen to possess one in a million skill level, its probably going to be very interesting to watch those two people compete to see which is better.

[Oeditpus Rex]

126. Because we enjoy it

:shrug:

[Stevenmarc]

129. Because it's fun to see who God likes better.

and who has the ear of the Heavenly Micro manager.

[scheming daemons]

149. And God... like Obama... clearly prefers Pittsburgh teams at the moment...

....

;-)

[gmoney]

134. "It offers people something to pay attention to that's of no importance." -- Noam Chomsky

"It's a way of building up irrational attitudes of submission to authority."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLbckGjuYpk

From "Manufacturing Consent"

[Raskolnik]

137. Don't forget that sports also provide stick-up-their-ass know-it-alls a chance to feel morally

superior to the great unwashed. That's undoubtedly a valuable public service.

(and to be clear, I'm referring to Chomsky, not you)

[dysfunctional press]

139. if it's really that difficult for you to understand, you'll probably never 'get it'...

to each their own. i'm sure that there are plenty of sports fans who can't understand why anyone would want to sit at a computer typing out random thoughts when you could be watching sportcenter on espn...:shrug:

[onenote]

140. we have a winner!!

[Recursion]

148. Personally I only watch sports I've played

Baseball, boxing, fencing, and football (and good luck finding fencing on TV). I'll occasionally watch basketball and hockey (championships, etc., more out of a sense of cultural obligation since I live in Boston). The sports I enjoy watching I enjoy because I really appreciate the skill of these players and I know how hard it was for me to play at a much lower level than they do. So, in short, admiration.

[pipi_k]

152. Watching others play sports...is it anything similar to

watching other people have sex?

Sometimes I wonder which one...sports or sex...draws the most interest.


Anyway, sometimes when I'm sitting around not watching my team play football, I think about what an intelligent being from another planet would think about us watching each other doing various things like playing sports or having sex. Why are we all so interested in what others are doing?

I dunno...


PS...I can't wait for football season to start again :7

[dysfunctional press]

167. or watching other people act out scenes, in movies or plays...

or looking at paintings or sculptures created by others.

[Toasterlad]

153. Go Rent VisionQuest

There's an excellent monologue about why people watch sports and why they are important near the end.

[Raskolnik]

158. I was thinking of the same thing, and here it is:

Louden Swain: You never took a night off to see me wrestle before. They'll dock you for that.

Elmo: Hey, kid - money ain't everything.

Louden Swain: It's not that big a deal, Elmo. I mean, it's six lousy minutes on the mat, if that.
Elmo: You ever hear of Pele?

Louden Swain: Yeah, he's a, a soccer player.

Elmo: A very famous soccer player.



Elmo: I was in the room here one day... watchin' the Mexican channel on TV. I don't know nothin' about Pele. I'm watchin' what this guy can do with a ball and his feet. Next thing I know, he jumps in the air and flips into a somersault and kicks the ball in - upside down and backwards... the goddamn goalie never knew what the fuck hit him. Pele gets excited and he rips off his jersey and starts running around the stadium waving it around his head. Everybody's screaming in Spanish. I'm here, sitting alone in my room, and I start crying.



Elmo: That's right, I start crying. Because another human being, a species that I happen to belong to, could kick a ball, and lift himself, and the rest of us sad-assed human beings, up to a better place to be, if only for a minute... let me tell ya, kid - it was pretty goddamned glorious. It ain't the six minutes... it's what happens in that six minutes.

[conscious evolution]

164. Modern day equivalent of bread and circuses for stupid people

who have no imagination.

[mamaleah]

165. Like every other form of entertainment then? nt

[Raskolnik]

168. I bet you're a hoot at Superbowl parties, aren't you? n/t

[onenote]

170. that dummy Obama

http://www.flickr.com/photos/94393434@N00/3330471905/

Just another "stupid person" with "no imagination"

[anonymous171]

173. Literature is no different.

Just more bs for those stupid enough to believe in anything but the material.

[mainer]

183. Literature can survive, and inspire, for generations

Even for thousands of years.

We still know much of what Herodotus and Aeschylus and Aristophanes wrote.

But 2,000 years later, who cares who jumped higher or threw faster than the other guy on the playing field?

[saltpoint]

192. I hold with Pound who felt that Literature is news that stays news.

[Rebubula]

174. Sooo....

...I assume that you do not read, watch or look at anything that anyone else creates?

What an arrogant attitude. Why do some people feel a need to belittle what other people get pleasure from (assuming that no harm comes to anyone due to those pleasures)?

[HughMoran]

184. Why would you say something so awful?

Do you really think that of sports fans?

[mamaleah]

203. It's that holier than thou thing

He or She is not one of the plebs. One of those so above it all that they can barely breathe around us lower ick.

[insanity]

175. Lots of reasons

It is nice to have diversions in a world that is so ugly and full of hate. I find entertainment in watching good teamwork and/or individual ability to accomplish objectives that are seemingly quite hard. It is fun to go to the arena or the ballpark and root for your team because if nothing else it is a few hours where people from all walks of life can come together without it turning into a vicious fight.

[bobburgster]

177. It is entertainment, and more....

for me, having played sports, it is truly exciting to watch the best execute (pick skill) flawlessly. I have also coached numerous sports and appreciate good coaching. I do not watch all sports, or every game, but I thoroughly enjoy watching and discussing them

[Codeine]

182. For the same reason I enjoy a good band,

or a great book, or a well-cooked meal -- I enjoy activities performed at their highest level.

I enjoy playing soccer, but in all honesty I'm terrible at it, as are the other guys in our over-35 league. I like seeing that sport played at its world-class best by the greatest players alive.

Why is that bad?

[saltpoint]

185. Because in athletics of all kinds, more art than sport, mind and body are

one thing.

[saltpoint]

186. I cannot remember names but nevertheless see the lithe bodies of

divers in the Olympics falling by design off the high board into the water below, and any number of millions of people of all ages and backgrounds frozen to the screen, watching in awe that so much strength, discipline, and beauty can be so spontaneously present.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

188. Do you ever watch anything?

[Redneck Socialist]

189. Because a well turned double play is a thing of beauty.

Because of the sense of community it engenders.

Because being part of something larger than yourself is life affirming.

Because of the memories.



Because it's the stuff of dreams.

And sometimes dreams come true.

[AngryAmish]

190. No I will not help you understand

You see, it makes you feel so good about yourself being a non-sports fan. It is such a part of your identity that to take it away would be taking the way in which you judge other people who are different. And judge them you must, since you feel superior to them.

I'm not going to be the one who takes away your phony sense of superiority. It is all you have.

[glitch]

193. Relic from our hunter past - we appreciate the visual stimulation.

Well, that's what I heard.

[McCamy Taylor]

194. Sports NEWS is gambling news--all about predictions, spreads etc.

I believe that the gambling industry keeps professional sports alive.

[LAGC]

196. Sports is the new opiate of the masses...

As I posted in the other thread, better sports than religion.

[tavalon]

198. It's a holdover of tribalism

And it's a safe way to vent aggression. I don't personally watch sports but it serves a need and causes great joy for others and I don't begrudge it. Happily, my spouses also aren't sports people so I don't have to feel like a sports widow.

[Nye Bevan]

201. Tribal instinct. The cavemen who banded into packs to hunt the brontosauruses

were the ones who survived and passed down their genes. As were the folks with the instinct to team up, wage war, defeat their enemies, and physically dominate their competitors. Given that these powerful urges are still deeply ingrained in people today, it is a good thing that they can be expressed through the relatively harmless safety valve of organized sports.

Having said that, last Friday I would have *loved* to see a T Rex eat Luis Castillo.

[Baikonour]

209. Because the media has hammered it into our brains that...

If you're a male and aren't enamored with sports, you're a sissy.

[onenote]

243. what "media" was hammering it into people's brains to be enamored with sports

back when sporting contests were first held as spectator events?

BTW, the finale of Roots drew a larger audience than any sports event. Is that because the media hammered it into our brains that there's something wrong with you if you aren't interested in the saga of a slave's family?

People have liked sports long before the "media" had much to do with it. And there are sports and sporting events that don't get much media attention but still have s loyal and not insignificant body of fan support.

[and-justice-for-all]

210. As much as I find sports to be lame

and an exercise in unnecessary competitiveness, we all need some escape from the real world. If we did not do other things like watch or play sports, people would explode.

I have to go do other things, I have get take a break from the insanity of the world. So I play World Of Warcraft, search out new music, go to concerts, watch movies and spend time with my partner and several other things.

[supernova]

213. It's a safe outlet for our bloodlust and violence

If you want someone to blame for the popularity of sports, blame the Oracle at Delphi.

She was the first to suggest games (nee the Olympic Games) as a substitute for warfare between battling city-states. :-)

We go to "war" every week, and no one gets really hurt, but we can still scream and yell and otherwise get our primal primate on.

[bvar22]

215. I fell the same way.......

....but only about Golf and Bowling.

Everything Else....GAME ON!

[Dulcinea]

221. To each their own.

I watch sports (hockey, football) because I enjoy them. As a Pittsburgh native, Steelers fan & Pens fan, I'm having a great year! Now if only Penn State could get it together!

I lost my job of nearly 20 years in February & have had no luck finding anything else. I have had ONE interview in 4 months. Sports has helped keep my spirits up.

Why bash other people's fun? Life is difficult enough without that kind of thing.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

236. why do people go to the theatre? ballet? watch cooking shows?

i mean...really...you don't get it?

sP

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

237. There's a lot to be said for escapism. Watching sports is just one of many.

Personally, I find most of them boring and/or irritating.

[ourbluenation]

240. Los Gigantes...Numero Uno!

Gooooo Giants!

[NeedleCast]

242. Expalining why people are entertained by various things is impossible

Why do I like watching sports, playing video games, gardening, enjoying drinks with my friends, watching movies or any other of a variety of hobbies and interests? I'm sure there's a long and terribly deep psychological answer behind it, but the real answer is...because I do.

For the most part, it's a commradarie thing I guess. I can cheer with my fellow sports fan. I can jeer in good nature with opposing team fans. I can talk about it the next day with friends and co-workers.

Diversions and hobbies are usually a good thing.

[Owl]

244. I'm with you Joe; watching sports is generally a boring waste of time.

[drmeow]

246. I don't watch sports on TV

I pretty much don't watch anything on TV except The Daily Show and the Colbert Report. However, my spouse watches a decent amount of sports on TV. Every now and then I will get called in to watch an incredible play (and I know enough about the sports to recognize said incredible plays) - in those moments I can understand the appeal. But those moments seem so few and far between. And you have to deal with the announcers - I cannot stand sports announcers who turn every single good play into the most incredible moment ever!

Watching an amazing demonstration of physical training and ability is very enjoyable - I can watch Gene Kelly dance all night long! If the sound was off and if there were less breaks I would be more willing to watch sports (although even then there are other things I'd rather do). Even with sports I think are unbelievably stupid or boring, I can watch and really appreciate a very well executed play. There also are the high tension moments (even if you are not a fan you can react to them) ... not the injuries or the fights but the amazing recoveries from errors or when a play goes just exactly as planned. I think some of that tension explains a lot of the appeal (the same why horror movies appeal ... which I also don't get).

The part I personally can't relate to is the over-the-top fans (and as crazy as US sports fans can be, we are nothing compared to some other countries so its not an American phenomenon ... I don't think there has ever been a case of an American player being gunned down for letting in the other teams winning goal!). Its a f**king game for cryin' out loud. Unless you've bet a substantial amount of money on it, if your team wins it doesn't change a thing (unlike elections which is why the comparison with the election process doesn't quite fit) and it starts all over again next year. So Pittsburgh gets the Stanley Cup for a year. They have to fight for it all over again next year. If teams were actually owned by the city (or state) they are in and if the players actually came from that city/state then I could better understand the team pride (helps me understand the Olympics and things like the World Cup a little better). But the way it is now a team winning doesn't say a single thing about the city or the people who live there. I think part of my lack of understanding comes from having moved around a lot ... I don't have much of a connection to a single place.

On the other hand, even though I'm not a sports fan and there are no teams I really root for, there are definitely teams I hate :). Since there are almost definitely fans of some of those teams here, I won't list them.

[ThoughtCriminal]

247. Sport is drama in which the conclusion is not pre-determined

(hopefully). Which leads to another reason...

They bet on it.

So, why do people read or watch fiction?

[Synicus Maximus]

248. Except when thye Braves are playing

[deaniac21]

249. They just aren't as smart or metrosexual as you. It's simple.