http://www.nba.com/video/channels/nba_tv/2010/07/08/20100708_lebron_barkley.nba/

Yeah, he was spot on too.

The thing (other than the fact that he ripped our hearts out on national TV) that bothers me is that Miami is going to benefit from this. A TERRIBLE sports town. FUCKING TERRIBLE.

hoops23;418988 wrote:Yeah, he was spot on too.

The thing (other than the fact that he ripped our hearts out on national TV) that bothers me is that Miami is going to benefit from this. A TERRIBLE town. FUCKING TERRIBLE.

Fixed

hoops23;418988 wrote:Yeah, he was spot on too.

The thing (other than the fact that he ripped our hearts out on national TV) that bothers me is that Miami is going to benefit from this. A TERRIBLE sports town. FUCKING TERRIBLE.

I would agree that it's frustrating that he went to a bad sports town. But so did Kobe... LA is just as bad as Miami.

However, a good sports town generally = a bad town in general. Where are the most "hardcore" sports fans? The Rust Belt and the deep South. Big Ten, SEC, Cleveland, Pittsburgh.

It really is give a little, take a little. Assuming the contracts are equal (and they are), do you go to a town that sucks ass outside of the rabid fanbase, or do you go somewhere that is actually a nice place to live and pursue opportunities outside of basketball even though the fanbase blows?

Kobe has always been there.

Yeah, Kobe was traded to LA on his draft day.

Also, while LA isn't a good sports town, the Lakers are a glorified sports franchise..

I mean seriously, it's the Miami fucking Heat...

I know the Cavs don't have any kind of history either, but at least Cleveland is a great sports town.

Oh well though, it's spilled milk now.

I Wear Pants;419018 wrote:Kobe has always been there.

Still blows ass as a sports town, and he seems fine. He could have left, and chose not to.

hoops23;419020 wrote:but at least Cleveland is a great sports town.

No it isn't. Definitely better than Miami, but it isn't great by any stretch.

Mulva;419022 wrote:No it isn't. I love it, but it isn't.

How isn't it?

Please do explain, because the popular opinion around the country is that it IS a great sports town. I spend most of my time in and around Cleveland and I will say it IS a great sports town.

People have been through everything with these Cleveland teams. EVERYTHING except championships. Yet we still love them...

I really don't think an explanation is necessary. You can look at attendance figures and draw your own conclusion. It's a great football town. That's about it.

2 of the 3 major sports teams have been DEAD LAST in attendance this decade. The Indians are this year, and the Cavs were the year before LeBron was drafted. A great sports town would never be 30th out of 30 teams in attendance in a major sport (let alone 2 of them), regardless of how bad the team was.

It's a football city that will jump on the bandwagon if the other teams are successful.

Ok so fans don't attend games when the team is the worst team in the league=bad sports town

gotcha.

SportsAndLady;419029 wrote:Ok so fans don't attend games when the team is the worst team in the league=bad sports town

gotcha.

Yep. Not "great" = bad.

Gotcha.

K.

Ok so fans don't attend games when the team is the worst team in the league=not a great sports town

gotcha

SportsAndLady;419033 wrote:K.

Ok so fans don't attend games when the team is the worst team in the league=not a great sports town

gotcha

Duh?

The Browns have been the worst team in the league multiple times since coming back. Fans still show up. It's a great football town. Like I said.

The Indians were a bottom 10 team in attendance (24th and 21st) in baseball in 2005 and 2007, while winning 93+ games both of those seasons. So there goes that lame ass "worst team in the league" argument. OK, let's play devil's advocate and make the equally lame "they sucked the year before so people thought they would suck and took a while to warm up to the team" argument. Well, by that idiotic logic the following seasons (2006 and 2008) attendance should have been up near the top of the league, right? 25th in 2006 and 22nd in 2008.

It looked like the Indians had great fans in the mid-late 90s because the Browns didn't exist. Cleveland is NOT a good baseball town.

The Cavs don't even need to be justified, because they wouldn't be in Cleveland if it weren't for LeBron. They couldn't sell out even with no Browns and an above average team for most of the mid-late 90s. Never even cracked 18k in attendance from 1995-2000 (with capacity of 20.5k, 18k is only 88% capacity) even though 2 of those seasons were playoff years and 2 more were the seasons following playoff years.

It's a completely average sports town that is very passionate about football. Anyone who wants to argue it's a great sports city is delusional.

No one gives a fuck about baseball...omg the Indians had bad attendance numbers..well no shit, getting 50,000 people to come out and watch a fucking baseball game in 90 degree heat is ridiculous. Just becuase fans don't show up doesn't mean they're not great fans.

So the Lakers fans are all great fans, because they sell out every game, right? LOL

Of course the Indians don't have great attendance #'s... Because they have, for the most part sucked..

2005 was a season that really came out of no where, especially because of the poor 2004 season.

2007 was a follow up to the disappointing 2006 season. The Indians haven't been able to be consistent enough, period.

You can look around at ANY city, if the sports team isn't performing, people don't pay.

That doesn't make you a bad sports town.. Obviously the Cavs won;t sell out every game, but I'm willing to bet they will still draw a good number of people.

SportsAndLady;419044 wrote:Just becuase fans don't show up doesn't mean they're not great fans.

This might be the dumbest argument I've ever read, so I am going to bed.

hoops23;419048 wrote:Of course the Indians don't have great attendance #'s... Because they have, for the most part sucked..

2005 was a season that really came out of no where, especially because of the poor 2004 season.

2007 was a follow up to the disappointing 2006 season. The Indians haven't been able to be consistent enough, period.

You can look around at ANY city, if the sports team isn't performing, people don't pay.

That doesn't make you a bad sports town.. Obviously the Cavs won;t sell out every game, but I'm willing to bet they will still draw a good number of people.

Sigh.

Please read my post. I 100% addressed the B.S. 'season after bad season' argument. The attendance the following years (after a good season) was just as bad.

And again, I didn't say it was a bad sports town. I said it was an average sports town.

OK... now I'm going to bed.

Mulva;419050 wrote:This might be the dumbest argument I've ever read, so I am going to bed.

Lakers fans, best in the world!!

I guess Boston fans are the best in the world too..

Even though during the Celtics bad stretch the arena was empty... Until they played the Lakers, in which Kobe received "MVP" chants.

Wow, Chris Webber is an idiot

hoops23;419048 wrote: Obviously the Cavs won;t sell out every game, but I'm willing to bet they will still draw a good number of people.

I wouldn't wanna make that bet. You won't see too much of a drop off in ticket sales next year because everyone already has their tickets but we'll see how the attendance is. The following year will be the drop off year for ticket sales. If they win which we all know they probably won't might be different. I am not holding out much hope.