Spurs Win
I now live in the 37th ranked television market in the United States. So, San Antonio is not exactly the first place that you go if you want to make money selling advertising to people via TV. In fact, the Spurs-Nets NBA championship series in 2003 was the lowest rated TV-wise since like the early 1980s. I guess that's what happens when you have two tiny markets (suburban NJ and San Antonio) with relatively boring grind-it-out teams while all the big-market teams (LA, Dallas, Boston, etc) have been eliminated. Commentators are saying how bad it is for the league and ragging on NJ and SA for being such "boring" teams that noone wants to watch.
But is that really so? I don't think so (and of course I am biased). But, championship series like this year are a necessary part of every league -- even pro wrestling. If people don't believe that the small-market, underdog teams can atleast occasionally beat one of the better-funded big-market teams, then what hope is there of getting viewership in places like Sacramento, San Antonio, Memphis, Detroit and so on? You must have it or else your sport turns into the Harlem Globetrotters (LA) versus the Washington Generals. Sure, it's entertaining, but it sure ain't the athleticism that is drawing the crowds.
Another point is that it's interesting how teams like the Spurs and Lakers really represent the character of their city. LA is flashy, big $$, rap contract, movie-starring, overbearing. SA is nice guys, hard-working but you wouldn't look at these guys and be intimidated -- they are kinda funky; a strange hodge-podge of young people and old codgers on the court. So much we are the same as a culture across the United States, the differences are still there. It's neat, I think.
