What's new
By:

Three Days

LogGrad98

LogGrad98

Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
Is WAY too freaking long between games. I'm jonesing hard! Let's go Jazz! I need a game damnit!! Seriously WTF? We should be 3-0 by now! GGAAAAHHHH!!
 
Nah, last year was too wild with there basically being a game every other day. I enjoy the long breaks between games.
 
Ideally you would have your more condensed schedule at the start of the season and less condensed season at the end. Although, it's not a bad thing to have more practice time at the front end.
 
I am all for reducing the scheduled number of games...but then these long breaks kill me and wish we played every other day. 3 days feels way too long.
 
KqWIN said:
I am all for reducing the scheduled number of games...but then these long breaks kill me and wish we played every other day. 3 days feels way too long.
Click to expand...
This. I'm happy they get the rest. I'm just being a petulant child and I want a game every other day! I want it! I want it! I want it!


Seriously though, I would support a reduction of games. 72 seems about right to me, across the current season time frame. Greatly reduce or eliminate back-to-backs. I think you'd get a better quality of play and better health for the players.

It'll never happen though because it's 10 games less revenue.
 
LogGrad98 said:
This. I'm happy they get the rest. I'm just being a petulant child and I want a game every other day! I want it! I want it! I want it!


Seriously though, I would support a reduction of games. 72 seems about right to me, across the current season time frame. Greatly reduce or eliminate back-to-backs. I think you'd get a better quality of play and better health for the players.

It'll never happen though because it's 10 games less revenue.
Click to expand...

I think a greater scarcity of games could also drive up more revenue. You won't lose any national TV games and less games would produce higher quality games with more meaning. There's a balance here and there's nothing magical about 82. What we do know about 82 is that it's too many for teams/players to really take each game seriously and that has an effect on the product.

I think 58 games would be the right amount for me, but I do like the idea of another ongoing competition or tournament during the season to fill in the gaps. Most people hate the tournament idea because teams/players won't care, but even if that's the case I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. I think it's perfectly fine to have different competitions going on during the season with different importance. If the star players want to use tournament games as a designated rest day, I'm fine with it. They already rest during random regular season games so might as well let them rest during a tournament game. You can build an understanding with the fans so no one gets disappointed when they show up to the arena and someone is resting.

At worst it would give younger players a chance to get some playing time at a good competition level in between the league and the G-League. I would enjoy the hell out of watching a game that stared Butler and Paschall against other young promising players. The main bonus, of course, would be that the actual regular season games are elevated. Very few people are actually going to watch 82 games anyways, so I think this is a good measure to improve the product for more casual fans while still delivering a lot of basketball to die hards. You have your 58 prime time games that are most important and people know that they should tune in for a great game. Then you have these other games where there's no guarantees who plays.
 
KqWIN said:
I think a greater scarcity of games could also drive up more revenue. You won't lose any national TV games and less games would produce higher quality games with more meaning. There's a balance here and there's nothing magical about 82. What we do know about 82 is that it's too many for teams/players to really take each game seriously and that has an effect on the product.

I think 58 games would be the right amount for me, but I do like the idea of another ongoing competition or tournament during the season to fill in the gaps. Most people hate the tournament idea because teams/players won't care, but even if that's the case I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. I think it's perfectly fine to have different competitions going on during the season with different importance. If the star players want to use tournament games as a designated rest day, I'm fine with it. They already rest during random regular season games so might as well let them rest during a tournament game. You can build an understanding with the fans so no one gets disappointed when they show up to the arena and someone is resting.

At worst it would give younger players a chance to get some playing time at a good competition level in between the league and the G-League. I would enjoy the hell out of watching a game that stared Butler and Paschall against other young promising players. The main bonus, of course, would be that the actual regular season games are elevated. Very few people are actually going to watch 82 games anyways, so I think this is a good measure to improve the product for more casual fans while still delivering a lot of basketball to die hards. You have your 58 prime time games that are most important and people know that they should tune in for a great game. Then you have these other games where there's no guarantees who plays.
Click to expand...
What’s your opinion on baseball?
 
KqWIN said:
I never watched MLB, not because of 162 games but because baseball is boring af.
Click to expand...
You just character assassinated everyone who likes baseball. And all because we’re just hanging out and chatting about basketball? Cmon bro
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top