Which major sports do you consider relevant in the US?

[Dave Gray]

I don't really mean your personal preference.

Football, baseball, and basketball are definites.

Hockey is a tough one.  It doesn't have coverage on ESPN and I don't see it on major networks.  They talk about it once in a while on shows like PTI, but only during a close-out game or when there's some kind of controversy...rarely related to the sport itself.  I know a few people who like hockey, but not nearly to the extent that they like football or basketball or what have you.

UFC is another one.  They don't get coverage on ESPN, either, but it has a large fanbase.  Every time there's a fight, you can go to one of several local places showing the fight and it will be packed to the gills.

I think that soccer only matters to the masses for 1-2 games every few years.  In other words, not enough to matter.

Golf is one that I think still matters to older people.

I don't know anyone who watches or cares about tennis.

[Brian Fein]

We've had this discussion before.  I hope people can keep an open mind in this topic.

I agree with your "definites."

I think hockey, in some parts of the country, is another "definite" - ask Boston, Detroit, Philly, and Pittsburgh.  I happen to love hockey - I watched the NHL draft last Friday night.  I bet no one else even knew there was a draft.  I recognize its lack of popularity, but I think you're in a bad market and your perception might be skewed.

I think UFC is a niche market.  While it appears that it gets a lot of interest, places are only packed to the gills because its on Pay per view and people don't wanna buy it when they can go to the local bar to see it for free.  I think the majority of its popularity is in the 18-35 year old male demographic.  I don't think its even close to the level of the three "definites."

I know a lot of people that like soccer.  Its difficult to follow in the US, since most of the teams are in Europe and games are played in the morning (our time).  I think it has a lot to offer and is far more popular than your estimates.

I know a few people who sit at their computer and watch Wimbledon or follow every shot Tiger Woods takes.  Its out there but to a much lesser extent.

I think all sports are "relevant" to different people.

[jtex316]

"The Olympics" - Summer or Winter, every 2 years, everyone comes out of the woodwork (e.g. jumps on the bandwagon) and "cares" (e.g. they fake care) about the 100m dash and 400m relay. We really don't give a shit, but it's a good reason to get behind the patriotic hymn of the USA national anthem, so it's OK.

Cycling - No one gives a shit, knows a shit, or watches a shit of cycling. They never have and they never will, and as soon as Lance Armstrong cracks (e.g. finally admits to what I've been saying for over 10 years that he's a doper), then he will be more hated than LeBron James in Cleveland.

Boxing - Irrelevant, but who does a better job than HBO in their "Behind the Scenes" segments when they following fighters training for a fight? It's extremely well done.

Horse Racing - See cycling. Everyone "fake" cares the week before the Kentucky Derby, and as soon as another horse wins the next leg of the Triple Crown, we don't hear about this until the following year.

Cricket - No US following but large in certain international countries, like India and Indonesia

Rugby - Same

NASCAR - This has to rank right up there with NFL, NBA, and MLB. Huge national following, weekly events, major network coverage and major ESPN / Sports news coverage, multi-billion dollar a year industry and advertising campaigns and sponsorships.

F1 Racing - Not so much.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Figure skating.

I bet if you asked everyone in the country their favorite sport that one would come out number one. Men would be split among baseball, basketball and football etc., but among the population that urinates sitting down it would be such an overwhelming favorite it would top the list.   

[Dave Gray]

I forgot about Nascar.  That is popular, it gets coverage on ESPN, and it's on a major network.  That's gotta be a definite, too, I guess.

I don't hate hockey.  I kinda like it and stop to watch for a sec when I see it on.  I just think that it's really hard to follow it.  I'm in a bad market, yes.  I think it's bigger than that, though.  It's not on TV and it doesn't have recognizable stars.  Even though I don't watch a lick of tennis, I know who the major players are.  I can probably name 2 hockey guys, and their names escape me at the moment.

In my opinion, boxing is dead.

UFC is popular with the below 35 demographic, but I think it's growing.  They have a few things to work out, in terms of judging and stuff like that, but I think that the league itself is full of integrity.  I don't think they promote too much thuggery, like boxing did.  There are idiots, but for the most part, the athletes are respective of each other.  I think that UFC's reality show is also a pretty big deal.  It's a way to get to see the sport without having to wait for a big event.  I have some friends that hate it.

[bsfins]

Massive thread drift....
They were talking on Major league baseball network,about MLS in Seattle Sounders and how popular they've become drawing just over 36,000 fans at their home games.Out drawing the Mariners...

end the drifting....

This thread is a about a whole bunch of sports I don't care squat about....

[Brian Fein]

I feel like its always Dave vs me in the battle over NHL when these topics come up.

Hockey is not hard to follow, if you want to.  There is an NHL network on my cable box.  There is a Versus channel that I can watch a game almost every night.  Just because its not on ESPN doesn't mean its not on.  You have to know where to look for it.  It IS on TV.  All the time.  There ARE stars, but you don't know them because you don't follow it.  That doesn't make it irrelevant, it makes it irrelevant to YOU.

On the other hand, there's a UFC reality show?  I didn't know that (nor do I care).  Don't see how its a "pretty big deal" considering I didn't know it existed.  The only UFC star I know is Brock Lesnar, and that's only because I know him from WWE.  Couldn't name one other guy.

From my perspective, you appear to be applying your preferences and interests as the general rule for the massive population of 300 million plus people, and I think there's a flaw in that reasoning.

FWIW, I think adding NASCAR as a "definite" is almost laughable.  The same way people in the north view hockey as a definite, people in the south say that of NASCAR. 

Just try to consider more than just your point of view.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Hockey is not hard to follow, if you want to.  There is an NHL network on my cable box.  There is a Versus channel that I can watch a game almost every night.  Just because its not on ESPN doesn't mean its not on.  You have to know where to look for it.  It IS on TV.  All the time.  There ARE stars, but you don't know them because you don't follow it.  That doesn't make it irrelevant, it makes it irrelevant to YOU.

If it was relevant than Fox, ABC, NBC, CBS and ESPN would be fight over who gets to show it and it wouldn't be relegated to some minor network.  You can find chainsaw competitions on ESPN2 if you look hard enough, still doesn't make it a relevant sport.   

[Brian Fein]

^^ I don't see any of those channels covering UFC events either.  But I do see NHL highlights on SportsCenter.

The Stanley Cup Finals were broadcast on NBC.  All 7 games.

If I got to ESPN.com, there's a menu bar across the top:

NFL
MLB
NBA
NHL
NCAA FB
NCAA BB
NASCAR
Soccer
"More sports" - includes boxing, tennis, rugby, MMA, Poker, golf, and horse racing.

I think that says alot about what's relevant and what's not.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

^^ I don't see any of those channels covering UFC events either. 

I have never claimed UFC is relevant.  And Dave puts the two on about equal footing or maybe hockey a bit higher.

[Phishfan]

I have never claimed UFC is relevant.  And Dave puts the two on about equal footing or maybe hockey a bit higher.

But you did claim figure skating was and it is probably the least televised and cared about in this thread.

This argument has come and gone more than I can imagine and it is always the same thread basically. Someone defending the sport they like against another sport that someone else likes. What is relevant is relative to each person.

[Dave Gray]

Yeah, I definitely think that hockey is a bigger deal nationwide than UFC.  However, I think that one is on the way up, the other is on the way down.

[Brian Fein]

Yeah, I definitely think that hockey is a bigger deal nationwide than UFC.  However, I think that one is on the way up, the other is on the way down.

I would agree with this assessment.  However, I don't know that UFC will ever enter the "mainstream" market, but I agree that it has replaced boxing in the fighting space.

Until we see Mayweather/Pacquiao, boxing will be an afterthought.

[Sunstroke]

As long as ESPN9 carries the World Championships of Midget Tossing, my relevant sports are taken care of...

I do consider hockey to be one of the major (and relevant) sports though.

[Dave Gray]

Re: Mayweather / Pacquiao

I think that this is part of the problem with boxing.  It is built around the one big fight.  Tyson/Holyfield, Mayweather/Pacquiao, whatever.  While UFC does have the prospect of dream fights, it's the undercards that are just as entertaining and interesting.  You can have a good card, without any big names.

Boxing is a sport of who is the best puncher.  MMA is punching and grappling.  Within that, there are many styles, so you have a paper/scissors/rock thing going on by the very nature of it.  I think that because of that, the ebb and flow of fights are more entertaining in MMA than in boxing.  It's not uncommon for a guy to win a fight that was losing.  I rarely see that in boxing.  (I also don't want to crap on boxing.  I do like watching it.)