1 Corinthians 11 - Printable Version

1 Corinthians 11 - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: 1 Corinthians 11 (/thread-23316.html)

Pages: 1 2

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - Mick - 07-24-2022

Couple of thoughts:

1) I played football and basketball and ran track in high school. My worst injuries always came from basketball (dislocations, sprained ankles), but I had two concussions in football. Really didn't want to play it, but father-of-the-year pressured me to do so.

2) I can't speak to age group appeal like BC just did, but here's the collective, league-wide season live attendance for the major sports leagues. I did not include any non-American leagues in any sport other than EPL. Second figure is annual TV viewership:

- MLB, 68.5 mms. (30 teams) - Does not include AAA (13.5 mms.), AA (8.8 mms.), 24 mms.
- NCAA D1 FBS football, 36.7 mms. (131 teams), 249 mms.
- NCAA D1 basketball, 28.0 mms. (358 teams), 351 mms. men, 349 mms. women
- NHL, 22.2 mms. (30 teams), 27.6 mms.
- NBA, 22.0 mms. (32 teams, never would have guessed that hockey outdrew the NBA collectively), 50.4 mms.
- NFL, 17.0 mms. (32 teams), 114.4 mms.
- EPL, 11.1 mms. (20 teams, premier division only)
- MLS, 8.7 mms. (28 teams) , 29.3 mms.

The not too surprising conclusions is that it's immaterial which sports are more popular across the age ranges, unless you're selling advertising or tickets. They serve different purposes. Baseball is the ultimate social game with the most possible in-person interactions. it's the slowest, with the least action, so it's a fun social activity. Basketball and hoickey are frenetic, focus is on the action. Soccer, less so, and if you didn't grow up with the game, you don't understand the subtleties or the differences between MLS and EPL (which are vast, let me assure you). Our pro soccer league is to EPL what Korean baseball is to MLB.

I found the changes in sports viewership over time to be noteworthy. Soccer is on an upswing...still small, but went up 250% in a decade. Football hit a nadir at 28% and in a decade peaked at 43%. I don't understand the basketball chart. It's been between 8% and 15% for its entire existence. It was at 8% in 1937, it's at 9% now, though it's wholly different. Remember the late 1970s NBA championships were on tape delay? And then after rounds of improvement, from Chamberlain/Russell to Dr. J/Kareem to Bird/Magic to Jordan to Kobe to Lebron to Durant/Curry/Harden, interest in the NBA - I thought - took off.

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - BobK - 07-24-2022

Football baseball and basketball in HS for me. Broken ankle but on the playground as a Sr broken hand in football catching a pass. YD though. More non varsity than varsity
Grandson age 10 has played flag football a new very popular organized sport. One league nationally Formed by former Stanford player Nick Sanchez. Grandson also basketball, baseball and soccer
Granddaughter age 8 softball and soccer now travel soccer.

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - 81alum - 07-24-2022

What hasn't been mentioned is that young people just don't watch television--at all. Both my children (in their 20s) watch e-sports online and neither watches professional or college sports--or any television. In fact, they don't own TVs and have no desire to have one. Nor do any of their friends.

E-sports is a foreign world to me. While e-sports are not YET ready to supplant TV revenues for "real" sports, Dota2 has already given out $225 million in prize money, and it is merely the first among a couple of dozen online games that have professional players--many of them college age or younger. In fact, I would not be surprised to learn that there are at least a couple of Stanford students making big bucks on e-sports.

So 1) there is the issue of a generation of people devoted to online gaming and disinterested in athletics, and 2) even if they were not--they don't watch TV, which will eventually undermine the main revenue stream that college sports currently relies upon.

To connect this to the original post, I think my children's generation has not put away childish things--it just prefers very different childish things to our generation.

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - Maple Leaf - 07-24-2022

(07-24-2022, 10:29 AM)81alum Wrote: What hasn't been mentioned is that young people just don't watch television--at all. Both my children (in their 20s) watch e-sports online and neither watches professional or college sports--or any television. In fact, they don't own TVs and have no desire to have one. Nor do any of their friends.

E-sports is a foreign world to me. While e-sports are not YET ready to supplant TV revenues for "real" sports, Dota2 has already given out $225 million in prize money, and it is merely the first among a couple of dozen online games that have professional players--many of them college age or younger. In fact, I would not be surprised to learn that there are at least a couple of Stanford students making big bucks on e-sports.

So 1) there is the issue of a generation of people devoted to online gaming and disinterested in athletics, and 2) even if they were not--they don't watch TV, which will eventually undermine the main revenue stream that college sports currently relies upon.

Which means the only tv adds you will see in the future are for prostate treatment, incontinent issues, hearing aids, back and joint pain, chair lifts and a little blue pill. No sure if that will generate enough dollars. Maybe someday the head football coach at Power 5 U will have the same salary as the campus window washer.

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - msqueri - 07-24-2022

TV viewership has indeed declined among young people and appears like it will continue to, but 81alum's point is vastly exaggerated. A majority of young people still watch TV (I think the percent was low 60s and the average per day was an hour and forty five minutes last I saw). Moreover, much of the shift away from traditional TV has been toward digital devices and streaming. If somebody is going to watch sports on their phone rather than on a TV set, that's still relevant to advertisers and business models. I don't dispute major generational changes afoot but it's more complicated than "no young people watch TV." Many still do, and many who don't watch stuff on their phones.

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - BostonCard - 07-24-2022

Live attendance has to factor in the number of teams and the number of games, and the typical size of an arena. Baseball has 162 regular season games on offer, and stadia are pretty large (average stadium holds 42,675 spectators). The NBA has half as many regular season games, and the arenas hold on average just under 19,000 spectators.

Interesting that both the NHL and NBA seasons are 82 games, and frequently held in the same or similar arenas. I too am surprised that the NHL outdraws the NBA.

BC

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - msqueri - 07-24-2022

And live attendance is only one part of the picture. Overall revenue would seem to be a better gauge of the popularity of the leagues as that would combine live attendance, television revenue, merchandise, etc.

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - Phogge - 07-24-2022

After years of football working for Gary Cavalli and Bob Rose was season ticket holder until 2020 (plus season tix 1953-1977). Turned off Big Game at halftime and didn't watch Domers/Stanford.

I won't watch any college football other than Stanford and if they stink it up won't watch. Don't watch any other college sports. Love the prostate ads! Not much regular TV but did watch Dark Winds and The Old Man.

Other than the prostate ads I pick up a book during commercials. Worked on too many. I have DISH mostly for the Golf Channel.

Played three years of Small College varsity baseball (no D1, D2 etc back then and we played Large Colleges about 20 a year). Would watch Giants but no cable available in the forest and DISH/NBC Bay Area severed last year. have been watching MLB Net (Giants blacked out). Couldn't tell you what they advertise.

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - 81alum - 07-24-2022

(07-24-2022, 11:10 AM)msqueri Wrote: TV viewership has indeed declined among young people and appears like it will continue to, but 81alum's point is vastly exaggerated. A majority of young people still watch TV (I think the percent was low 60s and the average per day was an hour and forty five minutes last I saw). Moreover, much of the shift away from traditional TV has been toward digital devices and streaming. If somebody is going to watch sports on their phone rather than on a TV set, that's still relevant to advertisers and business models. I don't dispute major generational changes afoot but it's more complicated than "no young people watch TV." Many still do, and many who don't watch stuff on their phones.

Of course you are right that some young people still watch TV. Or at least they have it on in the background. I just don't know any, including my students, my children, or my neighbor's kids. It is probably a demographic issue--similar to the decline in driving among affluent youth. I'm observing college kids, college educated young adults, young techies etc. And I am observing young people in the Bay Area. These are of course demographics that most advertisers would love.

However, this article says Gen Z streams 77% to TV at 15%. (I'd love to see a comparison of young people who stream live athletic events vs. young people who stream e-sports. I bet it would shock many oldsters.)
https://www.insiderintelligence.com/content/us-adults-across-age-groups-prefer-streaming-services-cable-tv

And this one predicts TV will die and be replaced by the metaverse, which is more or less what I was suggesting:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-10696571/Television-die-audience-young-people-turn-away-experts-warn.html

And this one says young people watch 1/2 as much live TV as older people:
https://www.prweek.com/article/1324176/young-people-spend-half-time-adults-watching-live-tv

So, while I admit to the statistical fallacy of assuming my experiences with young people were typical of ALL young people, I don't think I was far off the mark. And if I was, my guess is that it will just mean that the collapse of TV will come a bit later rather than a bit sooner.

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - Goose - 07-24-2022

From what I see in my "older" generation, nobody watches TV either. There is simply nothing on worth watching and watching sports is so saturated with commercials it is unendurable. The problem is that there are so many advertisers that are drinking their own bathwater that nobody notices.

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - BostonCard - 07-24-2022

I'm just not seeing the metaverse. It seems to be a solution in search of a problem. There will be some use cases (mostly games), but I just don't believe that the demand is there.

I may be getting old. I am sure there were lots of takes like that about the internet in the late 90's, so I am prepared to be wrong about the above statement.

BC

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - Leftcoast - 07-25-2022

On Friday my workplace, a typical Silicon Valley start-up, hosted a group event at the Oakland As vs Texas Rangers game attended by ~40 folks, mostly in the 25-35 age range. (Yes, that made me the oldest person there!)

Everyone had fun but it was shocking how little people understood the game. Most could follow balls/strikes but any nuances went over their heads. Sample questions - Why is he out when he wasn't tagged? (Force out at 2nd base on attempted DP); Why does the scoreboard show ERA for that player and batting average for everyone else? And what's ERA? (Pitcher vs Position Player); He hit the ball and but it doesn't count as a hit? Why? (Pop fly to centerfield). What's the significance of the "Holy Toledo" sign in centerfield and why does it light up after home runs?

This being the A's someone reached first on dropped 3rd swinging strike. The catcher threw the ball to the first baseman who whiffed on the catch. Of course, this blew everyone's minds and left the five of us who knew the rule explaining this for the rest of the inning. Later a ball got momentarily caught against the right field padding on a long hit which the refs later ruled a ground rule double after a video review. A run was waved off and the runner returned to 3rd. More minds blown and we were explaining that well into the next inning.

I walked away believing that baseball needs to change the fan experience to better explain to folks what is going on. A large percentage of the rising age groups is very confused by the sport.

(Despite all of the above it was a great night out - The As aren't a very good team but the seats were great, the game was in question until the final pitch, and bad teams tend to let you see plays you've rarely seen before.)

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - fullmetal - 07-25-2022

If all the time and money spent on football were spent on constructive ventures...sigh. It's bread and circuses right now.

I don't like the status and protection that playing football affords athletes who behave badly (borderline criminal and beyond). That goes for Stanford players as well. I don't like the inflated salaries of football staff compared to professors, grad students, and researchers -- I don't like what that says about our society's values and where we incentivize aspirations. I don't like the fact that this sport rewards and celebrates people inflicting trauma on other people with as much brutality as possible within the rules, far and away the worst among all sports besides boxing (debatable?). I don't like that the uncertain fate of Stanford's football conference affiliation is the linchpin of the athletic department's financial health; athletics has intrinsic value to society, but not like this.

I'll follow Stanford football as long as it exists, but with far less enthusiasm and support than I once did. I'm not sure I want to perpetuate the cult of tackle football.

Flag football -- that's catching on at the high school level, and it seems far safer, and I'll take that athlete health win even if flag football merely replaces tackle football with its money and cult status.

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - jonnyss - 07-25-2022

(07-24-2022, 09:24 AM)Mick Wrote: Couple of thoughts:

1) I played football and basketball and ran track in high school. My worst injuries always came from basketball (dislocations, sprained ankles), but I had two concussions in football. Really didn't want to play it, but father-of-the-year pressured me to do so.

2) I can't speak to age group appeal like BC just did, but here's the collective, league-wide season live attendance for the major sports leagues. I did not include any non-American leagues in any sport other than EPL. Second figure is annual TV viewership:

- MLB, 68.5 mms. (30 teams) - Does not include AAA (13.5 mms.), AA (8.8 mms.), 24 mms.
- NCAA D1 FBS football, 36.7 mms. (131 teams), 249 mms.
- NCAA D1 basketball, 28.0 mms. (358 teams), 351 mms. men, 349 mms. women
- NHL, 22.2 mms. (30 teams), 27.6 mms.
- NBA, 22.0 mms. (32 teams, never would have guessed that hockey outdrew the NBA collectively), 50.4 mms.
- NFL, 17.0 mms. (32 teams), 114.4 mms.
- EPL, 11.1 mms. (20 teams, premier division only)
- MLS, 8.7 mms. (28 teams) , 29.3 mms.

The not too surprising conclusions is that it's immaterial which sports are more popular across the age ranges, unless you're selling advertising or tickets. They serve different purposes. Baseball is the ultimate social game with the most possible in-person interactions. it's the slowest, with the least action, so it's a fun social activity. Basketball and hoickey are frenetic, focus is on the action. Soccer, less so, and if you didn't grow up with the game, you don't understand the subtleties or the differences between MLS and EPL (which are vast, let me assure you). Our pro soccer league is to EPL what Korean baseball is to MLB.

I found the changes in sports viewership over time to be noteworthy. Soccer is on an upswing...still small, but went up 250% in a decade. Football hit a nadir at 28% and in a decade peaked at 43%. I don't understand the basketball chart. It's been between 8% and 15% for its entire existence. It was at 8% in 1937, it's at 9% now, though it's wholly different. Remember the late 1970s NBA championships were on tape delay? And then after rounds of improvement, from Chamberlain/Russell to Dr. J/Kareem to Bird/Magic to Jordan to Kobe to Lebron to Durant/Curry/Harden, interest in the NBA - I thought - took off.

the women's ncaa bb tv viewership seems surprisingly high. am i reading it correctly as 349 million vs 351 million men? if true, that's great! sure bodes well for women's bb as a revenue sport.

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - CTcard - 07-26-2022

(07-24-2022, 09:24 AM)Mick Wrote: 2) I can't speak to age group appeal like BC just did, but here's the collective, league-wide season live attendance for the major sports leagues. I did not include any non-American leagues in any sport other than EPL. Second figure is annual TV viewership:

- MLB, 68.5 mms. (30 teams) - Does not include AAA (13.5 mms.), AA (8.8 mms.), 24 mms.
- NCAA D1 FBS football, 36.7 mms. (131 teams), 249 mms.
- NCAA D1 basketball, 28.0 mms. (358 teams), 351 mms. men, 349 mms. women
- NHL, 22.2 mms. (30 teams), 27.6 mms.
- NBA, 22.0 mms. (32 teams, never would have guessed that hockey outdrew the NBA collectively), 50.4 mms.
- NFL, 17.0 mms. (32 teams), 114.4 mms.
- EPL, 11.1 mms. (20 teams, premier division only)
- MLS, 8.7 mms. (28 teams) , 29.3 mms.

When one posts numbers like this it is very helpful to have some kind of reference as to where they come from. A link is great, but any reference is good. It helps people interested in the topic in track down more information.
[Even if the info is from wikipedia, which is my default guess.]

(07-24-2022, 12:36 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Live attendance has to factor in the number of teams and the number of games, and the typical size of an arena.

Has to factor that in for what purpose?
Obviously those things tend to drive the number in live attendance.
However, if one is interested in the income from live attendance, however one gets there is mostly immaterial. Baseball salaries remain high largely from those high live attendance numbers, which indeed depend upon things like playing lots of games.

---------------
The attendance and TV numbers do emphasize that baseball is following a different income model than the other sports. Baseball still makes it generally difficult to watch games on TV. Few are available on my live streaming service, and I believe few on cable. Most games I do see listed are blacked out in my area (Connecticut), even if the game is in the midwest - maybe even on the west coast.
Obviously, baseball seems to have determined that actual live attendance is its income driver.
For most, its TV viewership.

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - Mick - 07-26-2022

(07-26-2022, 11:22 AM)CTcard Wrote:
(07-24-2022, 09:24 AM)Mick Wrote: 2) I can't speak to age group appeal like BC just did, but here's the collective, league-wide season live attendance for the major sports leagues. I did not include any non-American leagues in any sport other than EPL. Second figure is annual TV viewership:

- MLB, 68.5 mms. (30 teams) - Does not include AAA (13.5 mms.), AA (8.8 mms.), 24 mms.
- NCAA D1 FBS football, 36.7 mms. (131 teams), 249 mms.
- NCAA D1 basketball, 28.0 mms. (358 teams), 351 mms. men, 349 mms. women
- NHL, 22.2 mms. (30 teams), 27.6 mms.
- NBA, 22.0 mms. (32 teams, never would have guessed that hockey outdrew the NBA collectively), 50.4 mms.
- NFL, 17.0 mms. (32 teams), 114.4 mms.
- EPL, 11.1 mms. (20 teams, premier division only)
- MLS, 8.7 mms. (28 teams) , 29.3 mms.

When one posts numbers like this it is very helpful to have some kind of reference as to where they come from. A link is great, but any reference is good. It helps people interested in the topic in track down more information.
[Even if the info is from wikipedia, which is my default guess.]

Your slightest whim is my abject command. (or you could have looked it up yourself, lazy bones. Just sayin'). Here's the television figures:

Sports in the United States - Wikipedia

And the in-person attendance link, mon ami:

List of attendance figures at domestic professional sports leagues - Wikipedia

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - CTcard - 07-26-2022

(07-26-2022, 11:35 AM)Mick Wrote: Your slightest whim is my abject command. (or you could have looked it up yourself, lazy bones. Just sayin'). Here's the television figures:

[/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_in_the_United_States]Sports in the United States - Wikipedia

And the in-person attendance link, mon ami:

List of attendance figures at domestic professional sports leagues - Wikipedia

Thanks oh so much.
But ... Grand Funk Railway? (funkalishous, but seems off topic)

RE: 1 Corinthians 11 - BostonCard - 07-26-2022

(07-26-2022, 11:22 AM)CTcard Wrote:
(07-24-2022, 12:36 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Live attendance has to factor in the number of teams and the number of games, and the typical size of an arena.

Has to factor that in for what purpose?
Obviously those things tend to drive the number in live attendance.
However, if one is interested in the income from live attendance, however one gets there is mostly immaterial. Baseball salaries remain high largely from those high live attendance numbers, which indeed depend upon things like playing lots of games.

---------------
The attendance and TV numbers do emphasize that baseball is following a different income model than the other sports. Baseball still makes it generally difficult to watch games on TV. Few are available on my live streaming service, and I believe few on cable. Most games I do see listed are blacked out in my area (Connecticut), even if the game is in the midwest - maybe even on the west coast.
Obviously, baseball seems to have determined that actual live attendance is its income driver.
For most, its TV viewership.

You are right, one doesn’t “have to” do anything, and of course it depends on the context in which you are looking at the data. But this thread started with a discussion of the relative popularity of the sport, and my point was that to look at cumulative in person attendance regardless of number of teams, number of games in a season, or stadium sizes, you could be misled and think MLB is 4 times as popular as the NFL, because over the course of a season, 68 million people go to a baseball game, while only 17 million go to an NFL game.

BC