You really think the big NBA sponsors are counting on Havlicek stealing the ball to drive viewership of millennials? Because of the romance and history? Things have changed a lot.
No I think NBA sponsors who buy time on ESPN/TBS are counting on the marketing people at those meda comanies to market the games in the best possible light to attract the max # of eyeballs.
And I think that if they do it, they have numbers showing that it will do exactly that. They aren't going to do it for shits and giggles.
If it takes a grainy film of Babe, Bucky or Havlicek to frame the game in a historic manner to best attract ratings, they'll do it. If it means using history and romance, that my friend is a lay-up.
And they've done it for years.
Correlation =/= causation. If the Celtics won 70 games and the Sixers won 35 but sneak in as the 8 seed, are viewers or fans in places outside of Boston and Philly tuning in because of the rivalry or the history? You would, because you're big on it. A 27 year old that lives in Detroit, I assure you, gives less than two shits. And that's their demo.
Nice to know you that at 38 you are immune to the marketing draws of Babe, Bucky and Havlicek, that ESPN/Fox/TBS etal have exposed you and younger viwers to for decades. There is a method to their madness.
I've quite literally never watched a game because of grainy footage of some old game or player. I - and many neutral fans - were fixated on Sox-Yanks for a long time because of the hammer vs. nail aspect, the arms race that developed, the drama and 1918. Since they broke that barrier, I don't find it has anywhere near the draw based on the rivalry. It's cool to see the old clips, but they aren't a draw, they fill in gaps of dead air. The Celtics Sixers don't have any heat anymore outside of your demographic - they've never been relevant at the same time since the early 80s.
And i strongly suspect before any change is done the NBA and the media companies will have sliced/diced and fully analyzed the data to see how changing prospective play-off match-ups impact ratings. Again I'm not sure why a 1-16 is more compelling than a 1-8, or a first round E-W match-up is more attractive than a regional rivalry like the Celts-76ers, which already has a built-in audience and head start on ratings than a less familiar match-up.
This is a huge part of my stance and point - do you think he'd even mention it if they hadn't already gone through those numbers, done market research, focus groups, etc?
If the goal is the get rid of crappy games, lose 8 post-season teams.
But that's not happening.
I suggested a modest modification which keeps the early round regional rivalries that appeal to the regional fan, and can be played within the relevant time zone to maximize those viewers.
The goal is to make more money. They wouldn't do it if they didn't think it would. Regional doesn't mean as much as it used to, with cord cutting, DVRs, cable packages, etc. It's not like when we grew up and you got the local game all season then went to national for playoffs to watch teams you had never seen anything more than box scores for.