The stadium is the best place for sports fans to see a big match.
The community atmosphere. The energy in the building. The fresh air. Feeling 45,000 cheering and standing as one. To prove your attendance, you can keep the ticket stub in a scrapbook forever.
Nothing beats being at the game.
Yet, the stadium is the best place to see a major sporting event if you are a sports fan.
The seats made of hard plastic with very little leg room. The drunk next to you who spills his beer all over your shoes. The idiot behind you who will not stop punching you in the neck. It's terrible weather. The long lines to get food and toilets. The inability to replay. Never being able get a signal on the phone to check out what people are talking about on Twitter. It took two hours to get out of parking lots.
There is nothing better than being at the game, good or bad.
Is the bad now more important than the good?
The Wide Left podcast's first episode featured Darren Rovell, CNBC. Rovell mentioned that sports teams are competing with to get people into buildings. Rovell said that his friends often go to the game, then they watch it on TV when they get home. They feel like they are missing too much.
You can read that again: Fans believe they must watch a game on television because it is too distracting to be there. They might be correct, as crazy as it sounds.
We may not have known, without a TV camera that could zoom in on Nick Hardwick's prostate, if the director requested it. Fans at the Chiefs-Chargers Monday night Football contest sure couldn't know that Philip Rivers had closed his top hand too soon, leading to the embarrassing fumble that cost them the victory. One for TV (and Chiefs).
Is there a change in public opinion about going to games because people can see more at home?
Are we so concerned about accessing the other games with up-to the-second fantasy stats that it makes going to the game seem worse?
Or is it just money?
Even though our cable bills are astronomical, due in large part to the rights fee cable providers pay to networks such as ESPN, one month of cable is still less expensive than attending a professional sporting event. Your cable bill of $120 per month is equivalent to $30 per week. This is cheaper than buying one ticket to any American sporting event.
Even though you can get a $30 ticket (and you go with your friends to avoid paying for your wife and children to go along), that price doesn't include parking fees and concessions. The average fan can't afford to go to a game.
This year, I was able to park at MLS stadium for $20 and have a couple of beers. One beer cost $8. The other $9. A hot dog cost nine dollars. Although I love wieners, I don't think I can spend nearly 10 dollars on one. (Wait! That was wrong.
What can we expect from more traditional American leagues if a league that is trying to reach a fanbase in a highly saturated market allows teams to charge prohibitive prices for fans?
Some colleges will charge you up to $35 to park your car if you arrive early for tailgating. Is it really worth the cost to park your car? Who can afford that?
It will be fascinating to see what the NBA does in support of fans when games resume (assuming that games resume soon).
Will the NBA make more effort to engage with fans than in the past? During an introductory press conference a few week back, the new owners of Philadelphia 76ers stated to reporters that they will do everything possible to make the experience at the arena more enjoyable for fans.
The Sixers have already reduced ticket prices for the best seats and promised other benefits once the season starts. What is the alternative to sitting at home and watching TV?
Are there giant bags of snack for just two dollars at the arena? Can we lay down on the couch, fall asleep and then rewind the game to catch up during the commercials at the arena. Is it now possible to wear pants at the arena?
It would be incredible, but it is unlikely that such things will happen at sporting events anytime soon. There are some things arenas can do that will make fans' experiences better.
Arenas may offer TV screens on the backsof seats so that fans can follow the telecast and rewind for the plays they wish to see again.For more details to visit ดูบอลออนไลน์
Arenas offer wireless service that works for all phone companies, and not just the one with the logo.
Arenas offer additional benefits that are not available to fans who don't live nearby. T-shirt cannons are awesome, but I'm not referring to them. Teams will need to be more creative.
Rovell believes that a league such as the NBA would be a great place to make players more accessible to the public. If Kevin Durant will play flag football with college students during the lockout and many NBA stars, including Durant, are playing street-ball games where fans have the opportunity to talk with the players for free, then why not the league create programs to allow them to play HORSE with children a few hours prior to the game?
Why not make it a league requirement that players sign autographs following games? If season-ticket holders are interested in watching the games, why not offer practice sessions to all?
This doesn't mean that teams aren’t doing enough. Some teams do an amazing job in fan outreach. Many of the ideas I made were implemented in buildings all across the country for years.
Yet, in an ever-dwindling entertainment market, there are more choices for our entertainment dollars. Some teams must find a way to do more, or risk losing more customers to their product.
Ironically, this situation makes it more fun to watch the game on TV. To make the TV experience better, and therefore more enjoyable than the experience at the game, we need people to go to games to fill the empty seats.
Perhaps teams could pay people to take their seats, so that the experience is more enjoyable for real fans.