|
Post by 405LAX on Aug 4, 2017 0:13:18 GMT -5
I think the idea of splitting forums is, well, pretty silly. Just start a thread clearly labeled "Manhattan Open - Men," or something similar. Problem solved, easy peasy. As for the dinosaurs who pine for the glory days of the 80's/90's, I get it. I mean, I was playing in some of those events. Unfortunately, Sinjin, Randy, Hov and Dodd aren't playing any more. Hell, they can barely walk these days. But I digress. At any rate, the era of a men's only tour with 20 events is dead and buried. in 2017 and beyond, separate single gender tours would kill beach volleyball as a professional sport (it's nearly on life support as it is). A combined tour gives beach VB the maximum amount of exposure to the widest range of demographics. It's pretty much the only way forward. Your point makes sense if you accept that BVB is different from literally every other major sport but you offer no reason why it would be. Neither do you offer any evidence that a women's tour is particularly marketable beyond two players, both of whom are now more or less retired. As to the old men's tour, you say dinosaurs are pining for it, but if you could take the tour from 1987 and drop it into competition with today's tours, do you know which would draw? 1987. Women's sports do not draw and men do not watch women's for the bikinis. They just don't. In terms of the kind of attractiveness society values there are maybe 5-10 women on the FIVB that may fit the profile (I am partial to Agatha and Brandi myself) and 1 or 2 on the AVP, but people aren't attending for that, and certainly not as many as used to come for the (thoroughly misogynistic bikini contests) But women aside, the old men's tour was much more marketable because it was a lifestyle and people like yourself who are invested in the new sport and the idea that it is superior won't acknowledge that. There is a famous old AVP poster with Hov/Dodd on one side and Sinjin/Randy on the other and some bimbo dressed as a ref in the middle, and that really epitomized the old tour. They were players who lived a life people wanted. Thats what BVB needs to sell and the only way it can succeed since the athletes are not particularly athletic. (or they would be playing basketball). Today that poster would be Phil/Doherty/Nick/and maybe Gibb. Just imagine them side by side and think about why one worked and the other didn't. It didnt need to be Sinjin or Hov either, it could have been Luyties, Karch, Ack, Fro, Kent, or a dozen other guys. Who on today's tour is cool? Seriously. There are more players you would describe as weird, fringe home-schooler survivalist types, than you would as cool. I think we can close this out, bravo sir, bravo.
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Aug 4, 2017 0:41:47 GMT -5
I think the idea of splitting forums is, well, pretty silly. Just start a thread clearly labeled "Manhattan Open - Men," or something similar. Problem solved, easy peasy. As for the dinosaurs who pine for the glory days of the 80's/90's, I get it. I mean, I was playing in some of those events. Unfortunately, Sinjin, Randy, Hov and Dodd aren't playing any more. Hell, they can barely walk these days. But I digress. At any rate, the era of a men's only tour with 20 events is dead and buried. in 2017 and beyond, separate single gender tours would kill beach volleyball as a professional sport (it's nearly on life support as it is). A combined tour gives beach VB the maximum amount of exposure to the widest range of demographics. It's pretty much the only way forward. Your point makes sense if you accept that BVB is different from literally every other major sport but you offer no reason why it would be. Neither do you offer any evidence that a women's tour is particularly marketable beyond two players, both of whom are now more or less retired. As to the old men's tour, you say dinosaurs are pining for it, but if you could take the tour from 1987 and drop it into competition with today's tours, do you know which would draw? 1987. Women's sports do not draw and men do not watch women's for the bikinis. They just don't. In terms of the kind of attractiveness society values there are maybe 5-10 women on the FIVB that may fit the profile (I am partial to Agatha and Brandi myself) and 1 or 2 on the AVP, but people aren't attending for that, and certainly not as many as used to come for the (thoroughly misogynistic bikini contests) But women aside, the old men's tour was much more marketable because it was a lifestyle and people like yourself who are invested in the new sport and the idea that it is superior won't acknowledge that. There is a famous old AVP poster with Hov/Dodd on one side and Sinjin/Randy on the other and some bimbo dressed as a ref in the middle, and that really epitomized the old tour. They were players who lived a life people wanted. Thats what BVB needs to sell and the only way it can succeed since the athletes are not particularly athletic. (or they would be playing basketball). Today that poster would be Phil/Doherty/Nick/and maybe Gibb. Just imagine them side by side and think about why one worked and the other didn't. It didnt need to be Sinjin or Hov either, it could have been Luyties, Karch, Ack, Fro, Kent, or a dozen other guys. Who on today's tour is cool? Seriously. There are more players you would describe as weird, fringe home-schooler survivalist types, than you would as cool. Beach volleyball is different than most any other pro sport in the U.S., in that you have men and women competing in the same tournament. The closest analogy would be tennis. And who can name the top ranked male American players? Crickets. Who can name the top ranked women's players? Well, duh. If you plopped the 1987 mens tour into 2017, it would fold after five events. Times have changed, tastes have changed. The old AVP was a product of its time, and that time is long past. I don't think anyone is clamoring for Miami Vice to make a comeback, if you get my drift. And I can definitely tell you who NBC, ESPN, etal are most interested in, and it sure as hell isn't Zaun or Lorenz (LOL). Their interest is based on market research, ratings, and ad buys. Anyway, the overall point isn't that one gender or another are more appealing, but that a sport struggling to find its footing needs to appeal to the widest audience. And that is a combined tour. Sun would tell you that as well. As would Leonard. Not to mention Angelo (who runs FIVB beach).
|
|
goudey
Banned
"I sorta get away with things like that." —Donald Trump
Posts: 1,344
|
Post by goudey on Aug 4, 2017 8:15:37 GMT -5
So the womens semi finals will be played today also. So over the weekend when 80% of the population is off work, we get to watch two womens matches.
Pack your bags for Austria lax, your all men dream Tournament is happening.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Aug 4, 2017 10:26:13 GMT -5
Your point makes sense if you accept that BVB is different from literally every other major sport but you offer no reason why it would be. Neither do you offer any evidence that a women's tour is particularly marketable beyond two players, both of whom are now more or less retired. As to the old men's tour, you say dinosaurs are pining for it, but if you could take the tour from 1987 and drop it into competition with today's tours, do you know which would draw? 1987. Women's sports do not draw and men do not watch women's for the bikinis. They just don't. In terms of the kind of attractiveness society values there are maybe 5-10 women on the FIVB that may fit the profile (I am partial to Agatha and Brandi myself) and 1 or 2 on the AVP, but people aren't attending for that, and certainly not as many as used to come for the (thoroughly misogynistic bikini contests) But women aside, the old men's tour was much more marketable because it was a lifestyle and people like yourself who are invested in the new sport and the idea that it is superior won't acknowledge that. There is a famous old AVP poster with Hov/Dodd on one side and Sinjin/Randy on the other and some bimbo dressed as a ref in the middle, and that really epitomized the old tour. They were players who lived a life people wanted. Thats what BVB needs to sell and the only way it can succeed since the athletes are not particularly athletic. (or they would be playing basketball). Today that poster would be Phil/Doherty/Nick/and maybe Gibb. Just imagine them side by side and think about why one worked and the other didn't. It didnt need to be Sinjin or Hov either, it could have been Luyties, Karch, Ack, Fro, Kent, or a dozen other guys. Who on today's tour is cool? Seriously. There are more players you would describe as weird, fringe home-schooler survivalist types, than you would as cool. Beach volleyball is different than most any other pro sport in the U.S., in that you have men and women competing in the same tournament. The closest analogy would be tennis. And who can name the top ranked male American players? Crickets. Who can name the top ranked women's players? Well, duh. If you plopped the 1987 mens tour into 2017, it would fold after five events. Times have changed, tastes have changed. The old AVP was a product of its time, and that time is long past. I don't think anyone is clamoring for Miami Vice to make a comeback, if you get my drift. And I can definitely tell you who NBC, ESPN, etal are most interested in, and it sure as hell isn't Zaun or Lorenz (LOL). Their interest is based on market research, ratings, and ad buys. Anyway, the overall point isn't that one gender or another are more appealing, but that a sport struggling to find its footing needs to appeal to the widest audience. And that is a combined tour. Sun would tell you that as well. As would Leonard. Not to mention Angelo (who runs FIVB beach). You invoke market research as if it were peer reviewed science, rather than the constantly wrong dubious social science that brought us: The XFL The WNBA Grey's Anatomy as a mid-season replacement and about a billion other examples where market research turned out to be garbage. Its borderline junk science and older people trying to figure out the zeitgeist and whats cool within that is notoriously unreliable. As to Miami Vice, www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/miami-vice-reboot-vin-diesel-works-at-nbc-1026163I think there was a movie a little while ago as well. Tastes have certainly changed but some things are universal and I think the original AVP party environment (with certain changes - less neon for example) is one of them. I just don't see how you make the case that a tour full of awkward, unathletic, boring giants is more marketable than a tour full of models. Its possible you could be right and I could be wrong, but please answer this question: What or who is cool or attractive to 15-30 year olds about the current tour?
|
|
goudey
Banned
"I sorta get away with things like that." —Donald Trump
Posts: 1,344
|
Post by goudey on Aug 4, 2017 11:08:18 GMT -5
What or who is cool or attractive to 15-30 year olds about the current tour?
Kicking everybody's ass is what makes you cool. That would currently be Kerri Walsh and Phil Dalhausser. Give me somebody who kicks everyone's ass, brings home gold medals from the Olympics, and I will show you somebody that is 'cool'. Nothing else matters, look at Kareem Abdul-Jabbar or Kevin Durant...
|
|
|
Post by 405LAX on Aug 4, 2017 11:18:32 GMT -5
Beach volleyball is different than most any other pro sport in the U.S., in that you have men and women competing in the same tournament. The closest analogy would be tennis. And who can name the top ranked male American players? Crickets. Who can name the top ranked women's players? Well, duh. If you plopped the 1987 mens tour into 2017, it would fold after five events. Times have changed, tastes have changed. The old AVP was a product of its time, and that time is long past. I don't think anyone is clamoring for Miami Vice to make a comeback, if you get my drift. And I can definitely tell you who NBC, ESPN, etal are most interested in, and it sure as hell isn't Zaun or Lorenz (LOL). Their interest is based on market research, ratings, and ad buys. Anyway, the overall point isn't that one gender or another are more appealing, but that a sport struggling to find its footing needs to appeal to the widest audience. And that is a combined tour. Sun would tell you that as well. As would Leonard. Not to mention Angelo (who runs FIVB beach). You invoke market research as if it were peer reviewed science, rather than the constantly wrong dubious social science that brought us: The XFL The WNBA Grey's Anatomy as a mid-season replacement and about a billion other examples where market research turned out to be garbage. Its borderline junk science and older people trying to figure out the zeitgeist and whats cool within that is notoriously unreliable. As to Miami Vice, www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/miami-vice-reboot-vin-diesel-works-at-nbc-1026163I think there was a movie a little while ago as well. Tastes have certainly changed but some things are universal and I think the original AVP party environment (with certain changes - less neon for example) is one of them. I just don't see how you make the case that a tour full of awkward, unathletic, boring giants is more marketable than a tour full of models. Its possible you could be right and I could be wrong, but please answer this question: What or who is cool or attractive to 15-30 year olds about the current tour? Don't mess with guest2, no chance, another winner.
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Aug 4, 2017 11:56:13 GMT -5
Beach volleyball is different than most any other pro sport in the U.S., in that you have men and women competing in the same tournament. The closest analogy would be tennis. And who can name the top ranked male American players? Crickets. Who can name the top ranked women's players? Well, duh. If you plopped the 1987 mens tour into 2017, it would fold after five events. Times have changed, tastes have changed. The old AVP was a product of its time, and that time is long past. I don't think anyone is clamoring for Miami Vice to make a comeback, if you get my drift. And I can definitely tell you who NBC, ESPN, etal are most interested in, and it sure as hell isn't Zaun or Lorenz (LOL). Their interest is based on market research, ratings, and ad buys. Anyway, the overall point isn't that one gender or another are more appealing, but that a sport struggling to find its footing needs to appeal to the widest audience. And that is a combined tour. Sun would tell you that as well. As would Leonard. Not to mention Angelo (who runs FIVB beach). You invoke market research as if it were peer reviewed science, rather than the constantly wrong dubious social science that brought us: The XFL The WNBA Grey's Anatomy as a mid-season replacement and about a billion other examples where market research turned out to be garbage. Its borderline junk science and older people trying to figure out the zeitgeist and whats cool within that is notoriously unreliable. As to Miami Vice, www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/miami-vice-reboot-vin-diesel-works-at-nbc-1026163I think there was a movie a little while ago as well. Tastes have certainly changed but some things are universal and I think the original AVP party environment (with certain changes - less neon for example) is one of them. I just don't see how you make the case that a tour full of awkward, unathletic, boring giants is more marketable than a tour full of models. Its possible you could be right and I could be wrong, but please answer this question: What or who is cool or attractive to 15-30 year olds about the current tour? This has been the issue over the last couple of decades. Every shirt is about the AVP. Back in the day, lets do a bit of brand recognition research: Who can you tie to these brands? Sideout Fila Quicksilver Speedo Primative Prints Nike RedSand There is no free market right now for this stuff. the AVP has to let the brands battle. Let the brands market the players on THEIR tour. This also helped keep Vball Mag around, as more sponsors bought ads.
|
|
|
Post by 405LAX on Aug 4, 2017 12:31:32 GMT -5
Not so sure brands are lining up to sign these guys (or gals). Most guys look like they bought two pairs of the same boardshorts and ironed on their names. Gone are the giant volleyball-only apparel companies sans Rox but they are tiny potatoes compared to Hurley, Billabong, Rip Curl, etc. Last I checked ZERO athletes are sponsored by king Hurley, Reid has some kinda small deal with Nike but that's from from his indoor fame. It's just not there.
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Aug 4, 2017 13:31:20 GMT -5
Not so sure brands are lining up to sign these guys (or gals). Most guys look like they bought two pairs of the same boardshorts and ironed on their names. Gone are the giant volleyball-only apparel companies sans Rox but they are tiny potatoes compared to Hurley, Billabong, Rip Curl, etc. Last I checked ZERO athletes are sponsored by king Hurley, Reid has some kinda small deal with Nike but that's from from his indoor fame. It's just not there. They don't line up, because they are limited to exposure with the AVPs deal with Rox.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Aug 4, 2017 14:14:33 GMT -5
What or who is cool or attractive to 15-30 year olds about the current tour? Kicking everybody's ass is what makes you cool. That would currently be Kerri Walsh and Phil Dalhausser. Give me somebody who kicks everyone's ass, brings home gold medals from the Olympics, and I will show you somebody that is 'cool'. Nothing else matters, look at Kareem Abdul-Jabbar or Kevin Durant... But how do you make people care about dominance in a sport they don't care about? Who dominates handball for example? Does anyone know? or Fencing? Also that works for one player or team per gender. There needs to be more. Look at a guy like Brent Frohoff. Never better than 7th in terms of top players, but had a huge following, sold clothes and attracted attention etc. for sponsors and the tour as did a lot of guys in that one win per year range, and more recently some female players who excelled aesthetically. (More/Stonebarger for example) With the current tour, both domestically and internationally (although much more domestically) its hard to tell at times what exactly is being sold. Is it lifestyle? Is it elite athletes? Vicious competition?
|
|
|
Post by swim4life107 on Aug 4, 2017 14:39:48 GMT -5
Good lord. I almost wondered if I was at the RNC with how pig-headed some of the talk was in here. Why do dude-bros always love to %*$# on women's sports?
As for the combined tour model. Any idiot could tell you that model is what keeps this sport afloat. Separate tours would cut out the legs from the sport. The AVP's problem is not that they have the women. It's that they aren't the premier tour anymore. Back in the Beijing Quad, Kerri and Misty opted to play AVP because they could get just as good of (if not better) competition on any given weekend than they could in the AVP. That's not the case anymore which is why it isn't super compelling. The AVP results just aren't relevant because we see what happens when they go out on the FIVB tour. Our teams get killed and even our elite teams win scraps.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Aug 4, 2017 14:50:24 GMT -5
Good lord. I almost wondered if I was at the RNC with how pig-headed some of the talk was in here. Why do dude-bros always love to %*$# on women's sports? As for the combined tour model. Any idiot could tell you that model is what keeps this sport afloat. Separate tours would cut out the legs from the sport. The AVP's problem is not that they have the women. It's that they aren't the premier tour anymore. Back in the Beijing Quad, Kerri and Misty opted to play AVP because they could get just as good of (if not better) competition on any given weekend than they could in the AVP. That's not the case anymore which is why it isn't super compelling. The AVP results just aren't relevant because we see what happens when they go out on the FIVB tour. Our teams get killed and even our elite teams win scraps. Saying people don't watch them is not "hating on women's sports" its stating a fact. Also fake outrage clouds the discussion, in particular because it implicitly argues against the fact that when there is interest in women's sports it is very often because a particular athlete is considered sexy by the media (Rousey/Carano/Kournikova/Sharapova/Evert/Leslie/Reece, etc.) Second what we are really talking about is getting casual fans involved and the idea that casual fans won't watch because the quality of play on the FIVB is higher is just nonsense. Do you think a casual fan understands the nuances of why Loziak is better than Stafford Slick? Also MLS is probably not even a top 10 league in the world and people love it, as do people in many other countries about their second rate basketball and soccer leagues.
|
|
|
Post by swim4life107 on Aug 4, 2017 15:20:28 GMT -5
Do you realize people don't watch women's sports because people are conditioned to believe that women aren't worthy to watch because they aren't as athletic, can't jump as high, can't run as fast, etc. Very few sports viewers actually watch sports for their actual abilities. People like two things in sports: Winning and stories. You market an athlete with a good story AND they win. You have magic. Regardless of gender. The Olympics have proven time and time again that is the formula for success.
I won't argue with you that the NBA or WNBA are somehow equivalent. However, Beach Volleyball? There is relative parity. It isn't even debatable.
I agree that casuals don't know this. However, TV broadcasters know this. Sponsors know this. They are the people that determine if the product actually gets seen. Right now, it isn't being seen. Eventually what happens is fans who are inclined to watch peter out because they don't want to have to work too hard to watch.
|
|
|
Post by ardatak on Aug 4, 2017 16:09:53 GMT -5
As much as I like discussing the sport here, has anyone ever pitched having two boards for beach, one men's & one women's? I honestly have zero interest in the women's side of things and find myself having to sift through women's posts on events like Vienna. Could we start a men's/women's Manhattan thread when time is right? Just seems natural as I don't believe I'm alone on this whichever sex you prefer to discuss.
100% Agreed. ZERO interest in Women's side.
|
|
mati
Sophomore
Posts: 125
|
Post by mati on Aug 4, 2017 16:44:17 GMT -5
While I grew up with the Miller Light Lifestyle of the original AVP Tour and loved it, I think that the current model is a breath of fresh air in a very crowded and noisy sports marketing landscape.
I've watched as groups of girls from our beach/indoor volleyball program have experienced both the Seattle and Hermosa Beach events. They love Taylor Crabb, but they also love Sheila Shaw. Sarah and Kelly have their attention, as does Rosie. They don't like Ricardo because he wouldn't autograph their shirts. It's been incredibly fun and rewarding to watch these kids become both players and fans. Not all of them are super into the fan side, but the ones who are have a huge appreciation for the fact that the women and men are placed on pretty even footing. It sends a message to them that they belong and that this can be theirs too.
I worked for the Seattle Sounders before they became an MLS franchise. They had an extensive youth camp program that ran through the Summer and provided extra income for the players when they had time to work as coaches or make appearances at the camps. It has taken 20 years, but that camp program has turned into an incredible fan base fills the stadium with 36k+ fans per match every time, despite the fact that the talent on display is overall not as good as what they could see watching the European leagues on TV.
The Miller Light, Corona, Jose Cuervo lifestyle just didn't end up being sustainable for the AVP. Growing a fan base from the grass roots with accessible athletes of both genders has a pretty strong chance at succeeding in the long run. Having a points system and a pipeline that runs from the Junior AVPFirst program through the AVPNext and Pro Tour sends a message to the thousands of young girls who are picking up the sport of beach volleyball. The message is that they belong and that there is a future for them with the AVP. That could be the best bet to make sure that the AVP has a future.
Beach volleyball will likely always be a niche sport. It is foolish to think that the AVP or anyone else will compete with the NBA, NFL, MLB or NHL in terms of revenue or their ability to offer big impact to sponsors. Sponsors who want to market to a specific niche will find the AVP and will reach a core audience of healthy, active young people who spend their time outside. It may not create billions of dollars in revenue, but there is no reason to think that a properly grown niche market cannot grow in a similar manner to Tennis, MMA or Lacrosse and be very successful if managed properly. It's more of the Seth Godin approach as opposed to the Madison Avenue approach to business development.
|
|