Celtics Distant 4th in town

[GuyClinch]

See. I don't care if basketball doesn't get a lot of coverage. I don't really watch all the football pre-game stuff - I just wanna watch the game. Even if its for your team its still really annoying. So much talk and analysis and so little game in football. And whatever the players do in the first half - or one play its entirely exaggerated. Guy makes one good throw and its 'so and so really coming along - he is going to be a star' and one bad play and its basically the reverse.

In basketball, the color commentary you get during the 82 games is enough for me.. I guess its an ego thing - to know that everyone likes the same stuff you do - but I can't say I really get it. You just want your sport to be popular enough so that they show the games and can afford to pay the players..IMHO.

[cl2117]

In basketball, the color commentary you get during the 82 games is enough for me.. I guess its an ego thing - to know that everyone likes the same stuff you do - but I can't say I really get it. You just want your sport to be popular enough so that they show the games and can afford to pay the players..IMHO.

It's not an ego thing for me as much as it's just tiresome to hear about the Red Sox as much as we do and not about the Celtics, especially when interesting things are going on in basketball as compared to baseball or football etc.

While I'm working I enjoy listening to sports radio, ESPN coverage etc. and it'd be nice to get more basketball stuff mixed in than what they currently have both during the season and outside of the season. For me in particular it's because most of the guys I hang out with aren't as big basketball fans so it's hard to get my basketball fix. I honestly don't care if it's popular or not with the general public, but I do enjoy hearing the analysis of the games and hearing different perspectives on what's going on and if there was a larger demand I feel like you'd get a bit more.

I think you're right in that really at the end of the day as long as they show the games and we aren't getting blacked out because people don't care and the team can afford to put a quality product on the floor then, the rest is just gravy.

[ConnorHenry]

agree that the Celtcs and Bruins fluctuate based on how well one is doing compared to the other. Two years ago they were tied, the survey said.

The hard cores will always be there, but how many fans will have an appetite for another bad season? ownership has to think about stuff like this; their relevance beyond the hard cores and their bottom line. And I may be mistaken, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Danny's plan was to completely tank for a few seasons and have a long drought/rebuild. He wanted continuity, thus the Jeff Green trade, he wanted to "keep it going" and produce a team that was competitive post big 3. I'm hopeful for a good season this year and some big moves next season.

I know Felger hates hoops, which is why i dont listen during the NBA season, but this was not a Felger production.

Nice going, Ainge. Rondo wants out and fan interest is plummeting.

Stupid move to rebuild the franchise to a contender only to completely destroy it again. Of course Rondo and the fans would bail. It's fine to be terrible when you're the Nuggets or Wolves, but if you're a storied franchise like the Steelers, Yankees, Red Sox, Lakers, Celtics, etc., it's simply not acceptable. If you build up a tradition of excellence and championships, you can't expect the fan base to tolerate irrelevance.

And I don't buy that the Celtics had to entirely collapse in order to rebuild. The Spurs have shown how to do it without going so drastic.

[GuyClinch]

Stupid move to rebuild the franchise to a contender only to completely destroy it again. Of course Rondo and the fans would bail. It's fine to be terrible when you're the Nuggets or Wolves, but if you're a storied franchise like the Steelers, Yankees, Red Sox, Lakers, Celtics, etc., it's simply not acceptable. If you build up a tradition of excellence and championships, you can't expect the fan base to tolerate irrelevance.

If Ainge could rebuild without ever letting the team slide - I am sure he would choose that path. The NBA hasn't been around that long and the days when Red could bamboozle the then small time GMS out of good players seems to be over..

Ironically is growth of the sport that makes all the difference. Back in the 50s guys didn't always rely on basketball as their major source of income. NBA is relatively 'new' compared to baseball - and didn't really see big growth till the 80s..

it's a different league now with franchises being worth billions and tons of competition for the best players..

[Bleedsgreen]

Ok couple things, I think the Felger bit dose have something to do with it, the Poll has two parts the sports and media section which I assume is the same pool for both. Felger and Mazz were ranked the number one radio show, Mazz the number one radio personality, and Felger the number two tv personality. A clear example is how the hell dose "Behind the B" the 2nd favorite sport show essentially a Bruins Propaganda show, that takes a little different take than the Celtics , Red Sox Magazine shows, only person I hear talk about it is Felger. So Felger has become a major opinion maker of local fans or least the pans polled . OUt of all the media the only guys who i consider basketball guys were Heinshon for color/play by play a distant 4th , where the atrocity of Mike Gorman was not even in the list, and then Dale and Holley as 4th for radio shows, No Bob Ryan, no Jackie Mack.

And dunno I think Dark is onto something with the racial issues specifically African/American and there culture issues don't match Boston sensibilities. Being progressive doesn't mean that Boston isn't in some form not racist/biased. I would hope we have evolved beyond the busing incidents, Bill Russell and other black athletes treatment of the past but we have just recently the Carl Crawford incident (one of the few African Americans on the Red Sox). I would love to see a ranking of Boston best athletes of this pool that took this survey bet dollar to doughnuts it be Williams, Brady, Bird and Orr, with no mention of Russell , other than David Ortiz as a distant 5th. For the boston Locals with out looking them up dose anyone know who Reggie Smith, Or George Scott is? Now how bout Rico Petrocelli or Tony Conigliaro?

The only time in there history the Celtics weren't #3 or 4 was during the 80's (don't need to spell out much more) and maintained it until the mid 90s when the Tuna showed up. Patriots weren't #1 until mid 2000s. Red Sox have been a number one team in this city for past 40 years and they have a ugly history to it with African/Americans which might have progress there culture of losing.

The whole thuginess thing has to come down to this too, let look one of the most popular bruins moments until some of these championship moments and Orr Flying were the entire Bruins team in the 70's climbing into the stands in the Madison Square Garden beating a fan with his own SHOE. Celtics would have never been to let that down or least memorialize it, closet was Maxwell but for the most part that has been forgotten other than to rag on Cedric at times. Then the incident that drew the whole thugginess debate on NBA was Kermit Washinton (at one point a Celtic after the fact) punching and causing massive damage to Rudy Tomjanovich and essentially ending his career then there is the Indiana and Detroit incident.

I'll end with one question if the Patriots had the same record over the last ten years but quarter back was Micheal Vick (ok that a bit much lets say Cam Newton), and Coach Mike Tomlin would they be the #1 team in town? The patriots have very much clamped down on the individual personality of the players and focus on the personalities of Brady and Belicheck. Some of the more controversial have been shipped out of town and often taken Lumps from the fan base out the door, Randy Moss, Brandon Merrieweather we will leave out Hansworth, and the Ocho while Vinteri and Welker haven't been exposed to similar treatment.

Yeah I know I am a scatter shot mess but unfortunately kinda coming to conclusion that there is something to it. The ranking of African/American participation in the major 4 from most to least is Basketball, Football, Baseball and Hockey but football is the sport that the Coach has the most power in the professional ranks, and then 2nd most important in football is quarterback , who have the most minimal face guard that person can see the face and happens to be two of the most predominately white positions (well besides the offensive lineman and kickers/punters).

[The Infamous1]

It is strange that the most action packed, fast paced, athletically impressive and highest scoring and easily most entertaining game to watch is ranked so low. Definitely has to do with bias rather than objectivity. It seems like the NBA gets an unfair share of hate towards high paid athletes and bad behavior compared to baseball and football. I remember a baseball player throwing a chair from bullpen into the stands during a fight with a fan and breaking an innocent woman's nose months before the Artest brawl. Artest punched a fan who absolutely deserved to be punched. I can't remember the baseball players name but the Artest incident is so ingrained due to differing media coverage.

But most of my coworkers and friends hate the NBA.

Because it's a black dominated league with no white american superstars

[GuyClinch]

Yeah I know I am a scatter shot mess but unfortunately kinda coming to conclusion that there is something to it. The ranking of African/American participation in the major 4 from most to least is Basketball, Football, Baseball and Hockey but football is the sport that the Coach has the most power in the professional ranks, and then 2nd most important in football is quarterback , who have the most minimal face guard that person can see the face and happens to be two of the most predominately white positions (well besides the offensive lineman and kickers/punters).

Don't beat yourself up over it. Of COURSE ITS RACIAL. People like to root for people they can identify with - and people associate themselves with people of the same skin color. Don't think that if the roles were reversed a largely African American city might want a black QB or Black coach or favour a black sport.

We should be careful to distinguish between racial and racist. Everyone knows that people love Brady - but they also love Edelman and they loved Welker. Hell they loved Welker even after he cost the Pats a superbowl. There is nothing the hardworking fans of Boston love more then a scrappy white guy..

BFD - racial/tribal divisions are at the heart of all sport fandom anyway. People like to root for Boston because they think that when Boston wins some of that rubs off on them. The athletic contest is a few steps removed (for the better from actual war) but its often called "war." anyway.

With hoops becoming mostly a 'black thing' its not going to draw as large of a white audience. Its the same reason why Fox dumped their African American older sideline reporter for Erin Andrews. Its why lots of movies cast impossibly handsome white guys/women in the major roles.

Women WANT to be like J-Law. It's the same in other countries though - Japan will cast Japanese people in the lead roles etc etc. It's just because we have a more racially diverse country that this stuff gives New Englander's white guilt.

Now personally I always liked Moss better then Welker - and I always liked Pierce better then Jiri Welsch but it is what it is. Back a few years ago Welsch was the most talked about player on this board..

[floyd]

Who cares? Means cheap seats to games and fewer yahoos (like at Fenway).