Utah Jazz have lost 44% of its viewership since a year ago.
- Thread starter Shad
- Start date
Bawse Dawg
Well-Known Member
Don’t blame me
I didn’t watch last year either
I didn’t watch last year either
Don't know if you're trying to be sarcastic, but there may be something to this (though I would put it differently).
The Utah Hockey Club came around at the time of increasing Trumpification of Utah, and it seems some number (really not sure how many) of Jazz fans made loud announcements that the style of the NHL fit with their social views better than the NBA did. So, for the time being at least, their migration to the NHL is as much of a social-political statement as anything to do with the team (in NBA terms, at very nearly .500, the UHC is in the no-man's-land mediocre middle).
I don't know if this sorting of conservatives in Utah away from the NBA is a long-term real trend, or just a short term phenomena that's loud on social media. But, I suspect that support for the Jazz overall will pick up when they start winning again and it's easy to see their promise.
Tremendous Upside
Well-Known Member
Don't worry, the Edgecombe era will be glorious.
jom2003
Well-Known Member
One successful tank job can change all of that. There's no reason for a lineup of Collier/Cooper/Collins/Lauri/Kessler with Sexton/Hendrix/Filip off the bench can't be at least somewhat competitive in the West...With the potential of becoming a real force for the next 3 to 10 years.
Schrödinger's Gerbil
Member
I imagine there's some threshold of viewership decline that crosses the line from expected to worrisome. If 44% doesn't cross the threshold, then it's probably close to it. Significantly declining viewership also decreases a team's leverage when it comes to negotiating TV rights deals.
I don't worry too much about the irate, offended fans who make a big showy deal of announcing their departure from fandom and vowing never to return, i.e., "they lost me." I suspect these are a very small slice of the fanbase that are more interested in getting attention than stating a principled commitment to leaving. I suspect the large majority of them will either 1) never actually leave and 2) eventually come back. It's those fans at the margins that are most at risk; those who enjoy the game and rooting for the team but whose identify isn't necessarily wrapped up in it and who have good options for spending/investing in other leisure activities. But this post embeds a lot of assumptions, many of which I'd be hesitant to bet my retirement on.
Last edited:
Schrödinger's Gerbil
Member
You may be right. I hope you're right. I'd only add that "at least somewhat competitive" would likely be considered an unsuccessful tank by most tanking adherents and not worth the 5 or so seasons of shiity losing basketball. We were "at least somewhat competitive" before we blew up the team and began down this dark, uncertain path
Schrödinger's Gerbil
Member
Defense Entirely Ignored.
Schrödinger's Gerbil
Member
In the NBA context, DEI is signing more white guys, a form of DEI that I suspect many of the most rabid DEI critics would find acceptable.
But, I suppose in the current political climate where DEI is the bogeyman responsible for all social ills and government/corporate f-ups, sure, why not?
framer
Well-Known Member
Meh, there is always a danger to losing, especially losing on purpose. If the NBA is a hobby and people take a few years off because the product sucks, chances are they pick a new hobby or find a new team or sport. I used to love the NFL, took a few years off and now I don't care about any of it. Kids grow up liking better, more popular teams. The Jazz are in a unique position because all of us grew up watching the team play their asses off and they won a lot more than they lost. That bought them a lot of goodwill in the lean years. To be a top 3 tanking team next year the Jazz would have to be really dirty and fire sale their good players. I don't think the fans would support that. That would likely lock you into several bad years because even if they hit paydirt, it would still take a long time to build a team around they guy you drafted. That guy you drafted will likely bolt at the first opportunity because you wasted so much of their early career. There might be 8-10 tanking teams next year, the upside play would be to profit off the stupidity and add proven pieces on the cheap.
The best position to be in is to be a "treadmill team" with lots of assets and flexibility. Fans like that better as well.
The best position to be in is to be a "treadmill team" with lots of assets and flexibility. Fans like that better as well.
Schrödinger's Gerbil
Member
I keep hearing over and over from podcasters, talking heads, NBA insiders, etc. that "the worst" thing is to be "stuck on the treadmill of mediocracy." No, the worst thing is to be stuck on the treadmill of sucking. I'm guessing Detroit Pistons fans would have loved to be stuck on the mediocracy treadmill rather than the losing shiiteshow they've endured since the 2008-09 season.
Last edited:
jom2003
Well-Known Member
I mean... "Being somewhat competitive" has been the motto for us as a franchise since 1998. We've never been a real contender in the last 25 years. The closest we've gotten was when we got lucky with GSW upsetting the mavs in 2007 which led us to the WCF where we were gentlemen swept by the Spurs. We've never made out of the second round after that.
gomretat
Well-Known Member
I was going to say the same thing - I am surprised it is only 44%. Last year is the first year in 30 years that no one in my family has had season tickets and no one cares. I do disagree on the strategy part. Tanking is fine but what we have done has been directionless until maybe this year.
Yeah, I've watched pretty much every game from the 97 season (first year my family got cable) till now, but haven't been able to bring myself to watch any games this year at all.
I understand and don't necessarily disagree with the tanking efforts. When I watch I want to cheer them to win. In my head I understand its best if they lose. Can't reconcile that enough to enjoy watching. Plus, really, at some point the Jazz are going to be involved in a major trade. I have a hard time trying to watch for player development when I don't really believe there's a great chance the young guys currently on the team will still be on the team when we are good again.
I'm still following the team, lurking here, paying attention to trade rumors and draft prospects. They don't have to necessarily be good for me to watch. But they need to be trying and winning needs to not be detrimental before I'll do that again.
I understand and don't necessarily disagree with the tanking efforts. When I watch I want to cheer them to win. In my head I understand its best if they lose. Can't reconcile that enough to enjoy watching. Plus, really, at some point the Jazz are going to be involved in a major trade. I have a hard time trying to watch for player development when I don't really believe there's a great chance the young guys currently on the team will still be on the team when we are good again.
I'm still following the team, lurking here, paying attention to trade rumors and draft prospects. They don't have to necessarily be good for me to watch. But they need to be trying and winning needs to not be detrimental before I'll do that again.
Losing Interest
New Member
I started following the Jazz during the 1988 playoffs when they took the Lakers to 7 games in the conference semi finals. I was 21 years old. IMO, LHM was a great franchise owner. After his death, it seemed to me the team just kind of went through the motions.
I spent about 30 years watching almost every game (live or recorded). Finally, in the past few years, I gave up on the Jazz and stopped buying what management was selling. I still watch the business side of the Jazz & NBA. I still look at stats, listen to a few podcasts and read articles but Danny Ainge and Ryan Smith are going to have to put a real contender on the floor before I spend any time watching games on a regular basis. I hate to say it, but the Utah Jazz and several other teams in the league are irrelevant.
When the league gives players, agents and a few major teams (Lakers & Celtics and a few others) the ability to control who plays where, it is a bad look. When contracts are guaranteed and players only play when they want, it is a bad look.
I spent about 30 years watching almost every game (live or recorded). Finally, in the past few years, I gave up on the Jazz and stopped buying what management was selling. I still watch the business side of the Jazz & NBA. I still look at stats, listen to a few podcasts and read articles but Danny Ainge and Ryan Smith are going to have to put a real contender on the floor before I spend any time watching games on a regular basis. I hate to say it, but the Utah Jazz and several other teams in the league are irrelevant.
When the league gives players, agents and a few major teams (Lakers & Celtics and a few others) the ability to control who plays where, it is a bad look. When contracts are guaranteed and players only play when they want, it is a bad look.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
Paying for? Why would you ever pay even if they were in first place in the nba?
Peter Effin' Parker
Well-Known Member
Maybe not trying to be sarcastic as much as pointing out what a huge dumb**** Donald Trump is.