London 2012 Summer Olympics
#81
Posted August 02, 2012 - 12:54 PM
#82
Posted August 02, 2012 - 12:56 PM
#83
Posted August 02, 2012 - 01:07 PM
#84
Posted August 02, 2012 - 06:47 PM
I wouldn't be so quick to judge if she had stepped up and came up clutch by shaving a little bit off her best time, but she improved by a whole FIVE seconds. That's just ridiculous in swimming. One or two seconds is possible, but to turn into a rocket for the final 100m like that? Something's fishy.
#85
Posted August 03, 2012 - 05:23 AM
http://www.thefirstr...ntre-court.html
Kobe's there too!
#86
Posted August 03, 2012 - 05:53 AM
#87
Posted August 03, 2012 - 05:57 AM
I would watch that match...if it was televised. I hate watching sports on the computer
I can understand that... When I watch streaming games I usually link the PC to the TV so it is like televised.
Anyway, you should really check it out. Third set right now and 5-4 for Delpo.
#88
Posted August 03, 2012 - 07:59 AM
Great match all around.
#89
Posted August 03, 2012 - 11:20 AM
#90
Posted August 03, 2012 - 01:09 PM
Just rewatched Ye Shiwen's 400m IM. She's got to be on something. That final 100m is just flat out ridiculous with how she just completely pulled away by almost 2 body lengths.
I wouldn't be so quick to judge if she had stepped up and came up clutch by shaving a little bit off her best time, but she improved by a whole FIVE seconds. That's just ridiculous in swimming. One or two seconds is possible, but to turn into a rocket for the final 100m like that? Something's fishy.
There are a few claims of genetic engineering/undetectable drugs. Some have also suggested the same about their weightlifting results, but really since 92' they have placed well in weightlifting, so I don't know if there is a rational case there. Still doesn't take away from the ridiculous 400M because that's an event that requires incredible endurance. Though, who knows? She could be legitimate and simply a product of those intense youth academies in China. However, the level/magnitude at which the WR was broken would suggest otherwise.
#91
Posted August 03, 2012 - 02:42 PM
There are a few claims of genetic engineering/undetectable drugs. Some have also suggested the same about their weightlifting results, but really since 92' they have placed well in weightlifting, so I don't know if there is a rational case there. Still doesn't take away from the ridiculous 400M because that's an event that requires incredible endurance. Though, who knows? She could be legitimate and simply a product of those intense youth academies in China. However, the level/magnitude at which the WR was broken would suggest otherwise.
Yeah, I'm not so shocked by the weightlifting, but I am shocked by that single 100m split at the end of the 400 IM. Just rewatching the video makes it look all the more ridiculous when you consider that she was about half a body length behind and then won by nearly two body lengths. And it's not the like the previously leading swimmer suddenly slowed down to a snail's pace, Ye just went off like a rocket. She could be swimming genius, but it looks incredibly suspect that she'd shave a full five seconds off her previous best time right in the medal round. Bringing out one's best is not unheard of in the Olympics, but by a whole FIVE seconds? I don't know about that.
And I agree that it's not so much the fact that she broke the WR that's a shock, but how it compares to every other swimmer and her previous times.
#92
Posted August 03, 2012 - 03:24 PM
It is about viewership and dollars. They try to identify who watches what channel more and place their events accordingly. Makes perfect sense, however I don't understand how the decision is made because I don't think they release the data.Makes zero sense that NBC wouldn't show Team USA basketball on their main local channel. Instead they showed cycling for 4 [expletive]ing hours.
Mike D'Antoni
#93
Posted August 03, 2012 - 03:35 PM
Just brutal.
I felt the goalie was going to have that type of collision at some point in the game. She was very aggressive and had many close calls (even got clipped by Wambach's cleat early in the game).
![]()
RIP to the Greatest Owner in Sports, Dr. Jerry Buss
#94
Posted August 03, 2012 - 03:51 PM
They've shown one USA Basketball game on local coverage thus far, that being the Women's game vs. Croatia last Saturday. The numbers?
11.4 million viewers on local NBC coverage, 1.5 million average on their specialty cable channel. Almost 10 million more viewers for a women's game. Can you imagine how many the men's team could have generated? Especially yesterday's game which set a handful of Olympic basketball records? If they show the games on local coverage, there is no doubt in my mind that they would get the viewership that they are craving. People will tune in to see Team USA dominate their opposition, no matter what the sport is.Saturday’s United States/Croatia Olympic women’s basketball game drew 11.4 million viewers on NBC, according to Sports Business Daily. The telecast aired live in the Eastern and Central time zones and on tape delay in the Mountain and Pacific. For some perspective, the game drew more viewers than all but one game of the Heat/Celtics NBA Eastern Conference Finals on ESPN earlier this year.
Compared to domestic women’s basketball games, United States/Croatia easily topped the Baylor/Notre Dame Women’s NCAA Tournament title game on ESPN in April (4.244M) and the top game of last year’s Lynx/Dream WNBA Finals (600K).
Not surprisingly, the NBC telecast easily outdrew USA basketball coverage on the NBC Sports Network cable channel. The first two USA men’s basketball games have averaged 2.5 million viewers on NBCSN and two women’s games on the network have averaged 1.5 million.
http://www.sportsmed...ketball-on-nbc/
Whoever is in charge of TV scheduling is an idiot. Point blank.
#95
Posted August 03, 2012 - 04:02 PM
My guess is that it has alot to do with daytime watching versus night time .... also weekend viewing versus during the week.
One thing I know is they have experts along data and have invested billions of dollars in the Olympics. I bet they know something we don't.
Mike D'Antoni
#96
Posted August 03, 2012 - 04:12 PM
I mean, just in Britain alone:
The most successful British athlete winning a gold medal in a sport that is huge in Britain drew in a peak viewership of 6.9M. USA Women's pool play against Croatia drew 11.4M on tape delay. It doesn't take a genius to realize that cycling isn't going to attract as much viewership as basketball in the US.Almost 7 million viewers tuned in to watch Bradley Wiggins take gold in the men's cycling time trial on Wednesday afternoon, becoming the most successful British Olympic athlete ever in terms of medals won. The 32-year-old's record seventh Olympic medal – and fourth gold – drew a five-minute peak of 6.2 million viewers on BBC1 from 4pm, with another 648,000 tuning in on the BBC Olympics 2 red button service.
http://www.guardian....s?newsfeed=true
#97
Posted August 03, 2012 - 04:21 PM
Mike D'Antoni
#98
Posted August 03, 2012 - 04:28 PM
USA Men's Basketball won't get any local coverage until the Gold Medal game. That's just terrible broadcasting by NBC no matter how you look at it.
#99
Posted August 03, 2012 - 04:43 PM
Saturday morning most viewers have not gotten the results and will watch it tape even if it is taped delayed. Many ppl know the results of today and will watch tonite's events me included.Summertime, school is out, there are a TON of people tuning in to view these games on a daily basis. Weekends will attract more viewership than weekdays, but NBC already tape delays all the main events for evening coverage. That women's game was tape-delayed on a Saturday morning. USA vs. FRA men's basketball was on the next day in the same early morning timeslot and easily would have outdrawn that 11.4M from the day before. Instead, we were treated to 5 full hours of cycling. Women's cycling.
USA Men's Basketball won't get any local coverage until the Gold Medal game. That's just terrible broadcasting by NBC no matter how you look at it.
I think there is valid statistical data that both you and I are not privy to however if you are right I expect you to be the head of the sports division of NBC or some other network.
Edited by pointguard11, August 03, 2012 - 04:43 PM.
Mike D'Antoni
#100
Posted August 04, 2012 - 04:06 AM

Props to fkMikeBrown
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users











