Actually that’s a very Westernized perspective. Cricket is the 2nd most popular sport in the world with 2.5 billion fans. Field hockey/hockey is 3rd. Basketball is 7th.
This is terms of fans.
Could NHL surpass NBA?
- Thread starter McMoMoney29
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
This is terms of fans.
In the U.S. almost every kid plays some form of football/rugbywhether it is “kill the carrier”, flag football, 2 hand touch, eagle football, rugby, or tackle. That doesn’t even include just throwing the football or three flies up or any other warm-up. A football is needed and you can get a lot of players even 15 v 15 eagle football (rugby) to play.
I played every single of the types of football I mentioned above. I even played mud football and didn’t even mention powderpuff.
As for hockey I only got the chance to play intermural floor hockey in college. Growing up in California when I did it was quite rare for kids to play ice hockey.
There’s a lot to playing a game that can turn people into fans because they can understand the gist of the sport.
With hockey, the rules can be confusing the puck isn’t easy to see/track for novice viewers.
The NBA has some issues because the NBA doesn’t have marketable superstars to transition from LeBron and Steph
Sure Jokic and Luka are amazing players, but they also look like the two most unathletic guys in a league where athleticism sells. LeBron is a once in a generation athlete and Curry was a once in a generation shooter.
Tatum and Celtics should win again but Tatum doesn’t have the individual accolades to be a superstar. Ja is a dynamic player but needs to win. Ant Man has the dynamism, but he feels like this generation’s version of Dominique.
Giannis has been excellent but seems to be on the decline.
Of course there are other reasons why the NBA has had done issues and will continue to have issues, such as the all star game being next to useless and uninteresting.
That being said the NHL has so much ground to recover to even come remotely close to the NBA and like many others have said it’s impossible for a variety of reasons.
Appleyard
Registered User
It is impossible.
Partially just due to the nature of the sports themselves.
Hockey has such a high minimum barrier to play. And we know that around 50% of all sports fans for a specific sport will be people who grew up playing...
whereas basketball is only really behind soccer in terms of the lowest barriers to play recreationally. In turn it is played everywhere, by people off all wealth levels, cultures etc.
People can watch an NBA game for the first time and later that day go and buy a basketball for $15 (or just use a soccer ball) and shoot against a wall... that in itself can create lifelong fans.
the lowest barrier version of hockey is ball hockey, but it is someway removed from ice hockey tbh... so then you go to roller... which has high barriers too!
Growing up in the UK - in Manchester - back in the 1990s our hockey team was good, had ex-NHLers on it, and a 17,000 seat arena in the city centre. Pretty much perfect in terms of non-traditional hockey countries to get people into the game... in turn a LOT of my peers as a kid at school had been to hockey games, enjoyed them, and had an interest in the sport.
BUT almost none of us could afford to play, and many who could the logistics were awful to be able to as only 2 rinks in the Greater Metro area and both on the edge... in turn 25 years later?
Of maybe 20 kids I new who regularly went to hockey games at age ~8-13 or so?
Only 3 of us do now. And only 1/3 watches the NHL as so badly marketed outside North America (and so hard to watch legally!)
Of those 20 kids only 2 of us ever even picked up a stick and put on skates.
And both of us who did it was roller as could not afford to play ice.
Had we all been able to access actual hockey and play? Of those 20 kids my guess is that probably ~15 would still watch the sport and 10 would be NHL fans.
The only places really where growth can probably be had NHL wise is:
In places where hockey is established but not massive with okay-good facilities. (Denmark, Norway, Germany, Austria, Slovenia, Hungary, Italy, Britain, Lithuania, Romania, Japan, Korea, France etc)
Because in those places people can actually play or see hockey regularly in person. BUT NHL has done a pretty crappy job in those places over the last 25 years tbh. More people are interested in the local leagues and a lot of people dont even follow an NHL team...
The NHLs lack of savvy international marketing has always shocked me. Almost EVERY kid in the UK who plays and watches domestic basketball has a favourite NBA team and watches NBA games... with hockey and the NHL that number is maybe 50%...
Partially just due to the nature of the sports themselves.
Hockey has such a high minimum barrier to play. And we know that around 50% of all sports fans for a specific sport will be people who grew up playing...
whereas basketball is only really behind soccer in terms of the lowest barriers to play recreationally. In turn it is played everywhere, by people off all wealth levels, cultures etc.
People can watch an NBA game for the first time and later that day go and buy a basketball for $15 (or just use a soccer ball) and shoot against a wall... that in itself can create lifelong fans.
the lowest barrier version of hockey is ball hockey, but it is someway removed from ice hockey tbh... so then you go to roller... which has high barriers too!
Growing up in the UK - in Manchester - back in the 1990s our hockey team was good, had ex-NHLers on it, and a 17,000 seat arena in the city centre. Pretty much perfect in terms of non-traditional hockey countries to get people into the game... in turn a LOT of my peers as a kid at school had been to hockey games, enjoyed them, and had an interest in the sport.
BUT almost none of us could afford to play, and many who could the logistics were awful to be able to as only 2 rinks in the Greater Metro area and both on the edge... in turn 25 years later?
Of maybe 20 kids I new who regularly went to hockey games at age ~8-13 or so?
Only 3 of us do now. And only 1/3 watches the NHL as so badly marketed outside North America (and so hard to watch legally!)
Of those 20 kids only 2 of us ever even picked up a stick and put on skates.
And both of us who did it was roller as could not afford to play ice.
Had we all been able to access actual hockey and play? Of those 20 kids my guess is that probably ~15 would still watch the sport and 10 would be NHL fans.
The only places really where growth can probably be had NHL wise is:
In places where hockey is established but not massive with okay-good facilities. (Denmark, Norway, Germany, Austria, Slovenia, Hungary, Italy, Britain, Lithuania, Romania, Japan, Korea, France etc)
Because in those places people can actually play or see hockey regularly in person. BUT NHL has done a pretty crappy job in those places over the last 25 years tbh. More people are interested in the local leagues and a lot of people dont even follow an NHL team...
The NHLs lack of savvy international marketing has always shocked me. Almost EVERY kid in the UK who plays and watches domestic basketball has a favourite NBA team and watches NBA games... with hockey and the NHL that number is maybe 50%...
Last edited:
I mean - the answer, in perpetuity, is no. But that doesn’t mean that the NHL can’t make inroads in the US. Getting back on ESPN/TNT is a big deal. Scoring is up, and the league is brimming with amazing talent that deserves more exposure.
Also, as a lifelong basketball nut, let me say: the NBA F***ING SUCKS right now. Load management, and entitled, lazy players are killing the league. Analytics has turned games into 3 pt chuck and run contests. There’s no physicality, and the players are soft babies - always whining for foul replays. The league hasn’t been in worse shape since the first post-Jordan years.
However, the superstars are larger than life figures who gossip about team-ups, and get into spats on social media. It keeps it culturally relevant, but it’s just a garbage soap opera that has little to do with the actual game - like Real Housewives, but for men.
I think there is a real opportunity to get fans that are bored/disillusioned with the NBA/MLB into the NHL. Maybe 4N was a glimpse at that potential in the US. I also thoroughly reject this notion that you have to have played hockey to get into the NHL. Gary needs to go, and give someone fresh the opportunity to grow the game.
Also, as a lifelong basketball nut, let me say: the NBA F***ING SUCKS right now. Load management, and entitled, lazy players are killing the league. Analytics has turned games into 3 pt chuck and run contests. There’s no physicality, and the players are soft babies - always whining for foul replays. The league hasn’t been in worse shape since the first post-Jordan years.
However, the superstars are larger than life figures who gossip about team-ups, and get into spats on social media. It keeps it culturally relevant, but it’s just a garbage soap opera that has little to do with the actual game - like Real Housewives, but for men.
I think there is a real opportunity to get fans that are bored/disillusioned with the NBA/MLB into the NHL. Maybe 4N was a glimpse at that potential in the US. I also thoroughly reject this notion that you have to have played hockey to get into the NHL. Gary needs to go, and give someone fresh the opportunity to grow the game.
Last edited:
If you count the entire population of the countries where it’s the number one sport as fans, sure. However, I appear to have been corrected about what the second most popular sport is in the world by another poster.
In terms of cricket being a niche sport, well, there are only twelve teams with test status. Ten teams represent sovereign nations. One represents several combined into one team (West Indies) and one represents a sub national division (England, although the “English” team represents players from both England and Wales). Come to think of it I believe team Ireland actually represents players from both the Republic of Ireland as well as Northern Ireland. There are also several associate members with ODI status, including the United States. It’s a subjective thing to say, but I’d call that a sport with only regional or “niche” appeal, worldwide, about on par with the worldwide reach of hockey. I believe there are only two countries in the world where hockey is the most popular sport (Canada and Finland) but don’t quote me on that.
Breakfast of Champs
Registered User
- Apr 15, 2007
- 3,166
- 3,371
Appleyard
Registered User
I think the difference is that hockey basically only has pro leagues of any worth in North American and Europe.
Cricket has pro leagues with high-end players in Europe, Asia, North America, Australasia and Africa... and it is played in multiple countries in each of those continents to a high level. South America (Guyana) also produces some very good players.
plus, the nations where cricket is played have a far greater combined population than hockey.
Hard to be "niche" when the 2nd most watched and 2nd most played team sport on the planet... with high end professional players coming from EVERY continent!
Also 99 nations have national teams that actually play games.
Whereas in ice hockey only 58 teams play at international level. (albeit 2-3 more will be added in the next couple of years in Europe I guess with Ireland and Portugal)
Beerz
Registered User
- Jun 28, 2011
- 38,135
- 15,240
Half the population doesn't watch because there are no black players that look like them when only 13% of the US population is black? .. Trying to figure the math here.
And yet 70% of the NBA is black which means a huge majority portion of NBA fans are not black yet still watch.
It's almost as if the color of the players skin doesn't really matter and there is probably a little more complex reason behind it than just boiling it down to skin color.
Go poll 100 people in the US.
"Who is the most famous athlete of the past 100 years". I bet you get a ton of Michael Jordan respones. And some will say Lebron. And other NBA stars. You won't get a single hockey player.
Expand it to "top 10 most famous athlete of past 100 years" - and you get that many more NBA stars, and still not a single hockey player.
NBA by far does the best job of creating stars out of the 4 leagues. I can't imagine the NHL ever passing them, nor coming close, because of that.
"Who is the most famous athlete of the past 100 years". I bet you get a ton of Michael Jordan respones. And some will say Lebron. And other NBA stars. You won't get a single hockey player.
Expand it to "top 10 most famous athlete of past 100 years" - and you get that many more NBA stars, and still not a single hockey player.
NBA by far does the best job of creating stars out of the 4 leagues. I can't imagine the NHL ever passing them, nor coming close, because of that.
