poohkiller said:
I think that the best example to prove that the thinking you and many others have is wrong is golf. Golf is DEAD ON BORING on TV and imo watching it there as well.
Yet there are many who are watching it and it has a tremendous value for all the sponsor as far as I can tell.
As for the second paragraph you wrote, yet again, golf is a good example. Golf has a huge audience but in a few years old InsidePool Magazine I have read that there were already more 40 million pool players in the USA alone. Isn't that a big enough audience alone? And I have no clue how many golf players could there be but I doubt that there are 40 million - correct me if I am mistaken here.
The sponsors I remember from golf would be Nike, Adidas, car brands that were sponsoring tours, etc. A nike, adidas or lacoste t-shirt has absolutely nothing to do with how good you're playing golf, it won't help you any. Yet they are still paying big money for the good players to wear them. The point I am trying to make is that the same would go for pool and it would be nice seeing these mega brands sponsoring pool.
In my opinion the reason why so many people are watching golf while not playing is the money involved. Everything - and I mean everything - gets incredibly interesting when big money is involved. Take a look at tennis, golf, poker, etc.etc.
This is my opinion, I am not trying to offend you, but trying to make some points with all respect towards you and your opinion.
Well how is golf doing for a boring sport to watch? Pretty damn good I would say!
See these people that play golf want to watch golf.
Casual league pool players do not want to watch pool.
Was Golf forced on it's current audiance? No one can tell me I have to watch anything. So no.
See it's a very simple formula for the TV station, things that you put on TV where viewership is increasing you increase. Things where it's decreasing or stagnating you show less of, or in poor time slots.
Now until viewership increases at events and on TV and it has a large enough audiance sponsors know they won't get exposure. What you have to realize is these large sponsors know exaclty what the viewership numbers are for their player or event.
Tiger is a prime example, he is Nike's highest paid athlete. Do you think the fact that 35,000 more people attend events when he is there has anything to do with that? Of course.
No one has thrown money at something and made it popular. Your viewers decide that. So until we find a way to market pool and start to increase viewership we wont have any rich companys jumping to get into it.
I hate to admit this because I love the game and promote it so much, but as boring as you may think golf is I watch it more than pool.
The only pool I've watched lately is on TAR becuase the back stories and setups for the matches interest me. So maybe those guys are on to something.
There is a thread on here with Harriman and Schmidt plus their supporters going back and forth about another match. Doesn't look like it will happen but I am so intrigued the whole time I'm reading that I was checking it everyday to see if it would go, lol. I even threw my two cents in to try to mix it up.
Anyway let's hope 2009 brings some hope!