3 hour game = 13 minutes of actual play
And this, ladies and gents, is why I can’t stand to watch (American) football.
Comments
but you like baseball? Your logic is flawed.
You beat me to it, Matt. Baseball and football are both probably 80% planning what to do next, and 20% actually doing what’s next.
Funny that these two are the most popular sports.
Fagun said:Hutch isn’t using logic, he’s just being a jerk.but you like baseball? Your logic is flawed.
Here’s my logic: if the pitcher is on the mound with the ball, it’s in play. there’s a game happening. Anything could happen at any time and it’s exciting to watch. It’s one man controlling the entire pacing of the game. This is completely different from the regimented stop/start of football.
Paris said:Funny that these two are the most popular sports.
wait. hockey isn’t our most popular sport?
also, john. seriously stop it. i love baseball and the fact that there is no clock makes it that much better. but christ, it is a god damn boring game to watch most of the time. there are 15 games on a day and they play 162 times a year. and i love all that. but who the fuck cares about kansas city and texas playing in the middle of the summer.
also, the pitcher being on the mound with the ball is not a game. it’s boring. stop it. it’s boring.
As much as it pains me to say, Nascar is America’s #1 sport. That measures attendance and revenue made. Sure, the stadiums are larger and can thusly fit more people, but I don’t make the rules, that’s how these things are measured.
You want to talk about a boring sport: watching cars turn left for 5 hours. Now that’s boring.
Here’s my logic: if the pitcher is on the mound with the ball, it’s in play. there’s a game happening. Anything could happen at any time and it’s exciting to watch. It’s one man controlling the entire pacing of the game. This is completely different from the regimented stop/start of football.
How the hell is this any different than the quarterback holding onto the ball before a play starts, reciting his cadence/snap-count? Other than the fact that there is a play clock to ensure he doesn’t stand there with the ball for 5 minutes (like a pitcher sometimes does) there is basically no difference.
Logic = false
Big Bill said:Here’s my logic: if the pitcher is on the mound with the ball, it’s in play. there’s a game happening. Anything could happen at any time and it’s exciting to watch. It’s one man controlling the entire pacing of the game. This is completely different from the regimented stop/start of football.How the hell is this any different than the quarterback holding onto the ball before a play starts, reciting his cadence/snap-count? Other than the fact that there is a play clock to ensure he doesn’t stand there with the ball for 5 minutes (like a pitcher sometimes does) there is basically no difference.
Logic = false
Seriously. Exactly correct. Watch a team running a hurry up offense and tell me that the time between snaps isn’t part of the play. Nonsense.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/inside_game/magazine/life_of_reilly/news/2000/10/10/life_of_reilly/
A playoff baseball game had the ball in play for 12 minutes, 22 seconds. (Scroll all the way to the bottom.) Then I guess your logic is that baseball is better because it’s actually shorter than football.
While I do appreciate the nuances of a pitcher controlling the tempo of a game, the quarterback does the same exact thing. A QB has to read defensive coverages, call audibles on the fly to account for them, send receivers and backs into motion, and trying to throw off the defense’s timing.
I don’t know any of those things therefore football is a terrible sport.
you could learn.
They’re both boring, and neither has very much action. Football is even worse, because it is almost completely a TV show, whereas baseball’s natural slow pace means the game doesn’t have to be altered as much to fit commercial breaks and such. Which isn’t exactly a good thing.
Both football and baseball fit in commercials at regularly scheduled intervals (between innings, during time-outs,after points are scored, etc.) — I’ve never once seen a game cut short or altered in any way to fit in a commercial break.
John is a schmuck. There, I said it.
Hockey’s actually the worst, where they actually have designated television timeouts throughout the game.
Watch basketball! Tons of fast paced action there. The last two minutes are slow as fuck with all the time-outs, but still the action almost makes up for it.
Yeah Ev, but the all out action doesn’t make up for a terrible game.
I’m timing the actual movements of your next online chess match.
Jeff said:As much as it pains me to say, Nascar is America’s #1 sport. That measures attendance and revenue made. Sure, the stadiums are larger and can thusly fit more people, but I don’t make the rules, that’s how these things are measured.
You want to talk about a boring sport: watching cars turn left for 5 hours. Now that’s boring.
Does that take television rating into account? i don’t think so. Football is far and away the highest rated sport in America. And if you take college football into account, it’s not even close.
Also, Jeff is right. the NBA is a terrible product
Tim said:I’m timing the actual movements of your next online chess match.
hahahahahha fuck. Best possible argument.
Several things. 1) Nascar cheats so I don’t count is as the most popular sport. Of course it is, every driver is there! It’s hard to literally compare, but if there is a race in a city, every driver is going to be there, so every fan of every driver would want to attend.
2) Hockey having television timeouts stopping play prevent from having a longer intermission. Also hockey recently has shortened the amount time between faceoffs to keep the pace of the game and shorten the overall length.
3) #2 is also some of the reason that hockey is considered not a television sport. I can do so many other things while watching baseball and football. Also there is time for people to explain what just happened over and over again between plays. While I think people could enjoy hockey on the simplest of levels, people don’t give it a chance, so only the intelligent end up enjoying it on TV.
i went to a hockey game once and saw maayyyybe four minutes of play because we were too busy trying to find beer that wasn’t grolsch.
the reason nobody watches hockey is because, well, nobody cares about hockey. at least not in this country.
Before the lockout, I was all into hockey. Now, I barely even watch the Flyers (but when I do, it is sorta entertaining).
luke said:the reason nobody watches hockey is because, well, nobody cares about hockey. at least not in this country.
I know one South-Jerseyan that would disagree.
GO FLYERS!!!!
I think football games pause for commercials.
Sammy said:luke said:the reason nobody watches hockey is because, well, nobody cares about hockey. at least not in this country.
I know one South-Jerseyan that would disagree.
i’d imagine you would be able to find many more than one. doesn’t matter though… they’re just wrong. GO FLYERS!
Rod said:John is a schmuck. There, I said it.
Hahahahaha… argument over.
There are good hockey markets is the United States. Actually, Philadelphia is one of them, even dealing with the fact that there are 3 other major sports in the market.
But this isn’t about hockey. This is about how NFL football isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.
Evan said:I think football games pause for commercials.
All sports on tv do, it’s the nature of the business, cause after all, it is a business. Basketball and hockey have tv timeouts. Football takes extra time between a change of possession. And baseball has between innings and pitching changes, etc. If you attend a playoff baseball game that’s the infuriating thing, the amount of time between innings is extended to what feels like 10 minutes.