Tuesday, August 22, 2006

 

Purity?

Why is there this notion that amateur sports are more "pure" than the professional sports? Like they are sullied somehow for making a living and accepting money for specializing in labor.

I don't get it...

Is it the money? Is it a return to a better, more innocent time?

Comments:
I think you probably hit the nail on the head. A lot of people I know don't like pro sports because of all the money involved.

My granddad liked college football better than pro because it hadn't been "shitted up" by money. And my dad still curses how money killed NASCAR.

Maybe they are concerned with the purity of the sport, but maybe money also influences how the game is played and how fun it is to watch.

Personally, I prefer college football (when I watch) because it's more exciting. The game moves at a faster pace. I think most people that saw last year's Super Bowl would agree.

My guess would be a difference in incentives. The payoff for college players to take risks on the field might be a lot greater than payoffs for pros? That is, college players are more concerned with getting in the pros while pros are more concerned with staying in the pros.

Of course, money is still indirectly involved. So maybe people are really only complaining about how money ruins the fun of watching a game when it makes players more cautious?

But that's just a guess. There could be a lot of things I'm over looking that a bigger sports fan might realize.

I'd also point out that my explaination doesn't work everywhere. For example, I can tell you right now that college, minor, and major league baseball are all equally dull. :)
 
No idea.

Personally, I feel more connected to college teams (State, for example) and therefore actually care who wins or loses. In pro sports, I couldn't care less about any of the teams, which makes it hard to watch.
 
And I enjoy watching professional baseball, hockey, and football.

I enjoy watching college football and basketball.

I dislike professional basketball.

I think its the money, personally. I think that is what gives people issues with the particular sports
 
I didn't want to be the only one not to comment on this. I think you guys covered almost everything, but youth is also a key ingredient in college sports. The teams are groups of guys (or girls) who are usually 18-22 years old, which makes for a powerful experience. Young, unpolished, passionate athletes make for good sports. This makes sense given that young athletes are also favorites in professional sports.
 
Is there a way we can put that into an economic context.

Deferred wages for college and high school athletes; associated risks of playing all four years of college (coupled with greater marketing ability of one's own skills to pro teams); "playing harder" now in hopes of earning more later...

I know others, like Becker, have done a fair amount on the economics of sports and probably have explained why some choose Amateur over professional, but I think it would be interesting to discuss this further
 
Pure girliness: younger athletes are more attractive. As are soccer players. (This is how I always manage to talk female friends into watching soccer with me.)

There are probably better reasons that are more consistent with economics, but I thought I'd throw that out there.
 
Jenna,

That's the only reason my wife watches soccer!! GOD DAMN DAVID BECKHAM!!!
 
But at least she watches!
 
Post a Comment



<< Home
CrispAds Blog Ads

Does someone you know deserve flowers?
Web Site Hit Counter
Dell Canada

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?