Difference in football and basketball on TV

[Catfanlou]

I think the football decision makers have created a monster and done an incredible job of making the TV experience second to none . I realized this year I now prefer it
To attending games . That’s different for baseball and basketball . I want to see them in person .

I didn’t really think about it until recently but I think here is why . Football is outside . You are farther from the action. You swelter in September and freeze in November .
Football has 22 players to watch at a time . Basketball ten. Harder to watch all 22 players live from a greater distance from the action.

Football players only play offense or defense and only play about six minutes a game . Consequently, due to the time between plays on TV there are replays with analyst showing what happened and even marking for you what player to watch . Don’t get that at the stadium. A replay at the stadium but no commentary and if it is a controversial call they don’t show it . TV shows it and the commentators give their opinion on weather the call was correct . Very exciting .

In basketball they play forty minutes and only stop during timeouts, free throws and for occasional replays .

Basketball and baseball schedule games well ahead of time so you can plan better. Football in order to have better matchups only 12 or 7 days out . Really was a problem for us due to conflicts with traveling baseball, but obviously free tv poses no problem time wise .

A basketball game takes two hours and football almost twice that even though the players only play about 11 or twelve minutes . Football halftime is longer . The owner of the New York giants Sonny Werblen a TV mogul once said the TV experience would someday b so good you would have to give tickets away or pipe in noise to create the excitement. I wonder if we are approaching that time .

Football TV contracts are now such that rather than watching one game by attending you can watch three or four of the best games around the nation for free rather than watching just one game and paying five hundred bucks for tickets , parking and food . Can’t do that at the stadium unless you want to set up expensive TV layouts and b there all day .

I guess attending is still good for students and granddads with grandkids. Don’t get me wrong . I love football but the Bug Screen is by far not just the best value but the best way to see and comprehend the action. I really now understand the trend toward less capacity stadiums .

 

[dvillecatfan]

You high?

 

[TucsonCat]

I don't think that's TV production improvement fault. That was all available 30, 40 years ago.
There's two issues.
One you're to had to go to games because most weren't on. Now if the blue white scrimmage isn't on TV, everyone is up in arms about the inequality of capitalism.

Two, we as a society have changed. We used to have nothing to do, so standing in a line is fun. Being outside in a crowd was a thing you wanted to do. People had season tickets and talked to the people next to them. Now, everyone has anxiety. Everyone has to be alone. Getting in a conversation is an attack A minute in the car driving to the game is a minute not on your phone.

 

[UKBrassowTipIN]

I dunno, there's something about being outside at a night game and the build up to it if the team is competitive.

That Trevin Wallace blocked kick return against Florida, for instance, was an energy that you could only experience in person

Now, if UK is playing Poop University at noon...I'll watch on TV

 

[bthaunert]

Football is an event, basketball is a game. That’s the biggest difference.

Give me the all day event of tailgating and a game vs going to a restaurant and the game. Not even close for me.

 

[sieken]

I think it's more about the lack of winning. Most if not all of the schools having good years this year didn't have attendance problems.