Reasoning: Some people can not afford to attend games and or afford the high costs of having cable service.
214113
Absolutely. They should offer it free online. Kinda like when CBS offered free ondemand NCAA Tournament online.
205420
Sure they are. But the fans keep going to the games and watching them on TV, generating huge advertising revenues.  The owners, don't forget, are are also bringing in bigger bucks; they keep paying the players more to build better teams to attract more fans to attract more dollars.  Vicious circle isn't it.
115759
Indeed, before when it was impossible to watch games on television, fans were had to go to the game if they wanted to watch their team play. Also it is argued you can see more of the play from lots of different angles on the televsion. So yes is my answer, and I think that games not played on a Saturday are effected by this even more.
617494
Because no one except a few people really care about basketball anymore.  The reason salaries are so high is tv contracts, which will probably be lower next time since they are based on ratings.  Until basketball cleans up its act, and game, ratings will continue to fall.
91605
Some people migt not be able to afford it, or have to work to support their family.  Others might even have kids of their own.  You never know.
648065
It is Networks and it is the Delay. It has nothing to do with Cable. If you are using a Sunday Ticket type broadcast maybe BUT the games are still carried on NETWORK TV. It doesn't matter if they are on Cable or no Cable it is NETWORK on Fox and CBS. They do add the delay for live broadcast and it DOES have to do with the FCC. The NETWORK stations have to follow FCC Decency rules and use the delay to bleep anything they need to bleep.
528078
No they prob wont because there is not enough interest in it...\n\nWhen Arena Football is able to be seen on TV ... that is when they will prob list it on Yahoo...\n\nIt is fun to go to a game ... especially in the off season of the NFL\n\nGood luck...
241930
I think they need to get one first.  I don't think they could have too teams because either they would need two stadiums or the schedulers would have to make someone else at home every week.  I think one football team is enough for one city.
31308
Well at least it makes you uncapitalistic. Follow this line of logic. Wherever you have a need (in this case entertainment) you have people willing to spend money. So you hire people to support this need (athletes) and pay them a percentage. The NFL is a multi-billion dollar business. It's only fair that these athletes take their percentage.\nI think you are way over generalizing athletes. While there are certainly selfish immature players. There are also classy, generous, respectable athletes as well, It's just that the more immature players tend to stay in the public eye do to their hijinks.\nNow the olympics are a complete abomination. They secure television contracts, charge unGodly prices for seats, yet they don't even pay the participants that make the olympics a reality. How is that fair? \nIt's not wrong to be rich. To make the money you earned. It's wrong to be an child and a thug. But these two things aren't really even related.
387507
Yes, it's obscene the amount that they earn.   Ultimately it's the fan in the street who pays their wages, and some of those are the least able to afford it.
550112
Well, first off, an SF rookie gets paid BANK anyways...55 grand a year: no education above high school required. And no - it's not due to the cost of living. I worked there for a lowly 35 grand a year and did just fine.\n\nSecond of all, these are not team requirements...the team doesn't bear the cost of it's fans...it plays football. Fans come. If it's a traffic problem...which it is, the city can either cover it - as they benefit from having a pro stadium...or they can let it go.\n\nThe team will go where the money is, and if it's SC...I guess thats where they go. It won't be fair to us fans that have held seasons tickets for...\nuhhhh...I've has seasons tickets for 34 years now....\nBUT it could happen.\n\nI think the city loves the team, it just isn't equipped to adapt very well.
602264
Umm,it just does............kids too poor to go to college get a free ride to college by being good at sports,hence Education............tourism is a great thing also,go to Wrigley Field or Yankees Stadium,see what I mean.............As far as human society it gives us all a break form the real world for a while,something to beleive in and feel a part of..............and Employment,each major sports venue gives hundred of jobs to people,sometimes thousands
217621
If you want a good answer to this, it is sad but truthful one. It is what is called supply and demand. If American's (the biggest consumer nation in the world) would put as much money as they do one buying movies, concert tickets, or anything of that stature and used it to help te poor it would be a different situation. So next time you buy a movie ticket, cd or go to a sporting event think about that.
225971
Usually tax payers pay for the stadium but in some cases, the stadium is paid for by private individuals, like the owners who get investors.\n\nThe good part if the investors pay for it, is the city is not obligated to tax the residents who may not even like sports.
129824
It's not the players, it's the owners who should be paying.  The problem is that there are more cities who want MLB teams than there are teams, so when an owner wants to build a stadium, they can extort money from the local government by threatening to move the team out of the area.  \n\nIt is true that MLB teams contribute to the local economy by providing jobs and increasing revenue in surrounding businesses, but the local governments need to make sure that they're getting a decent return on the investment.\n\nThe whole stadium-building race is being driven by luxury boxes leased to corporations.  In baseball, where revenue sharing among teams is minimal, a team that doesn't maximize its revenue is at a competitive disadvantage.
280489
Due to lack of facilities and adquate exposure and sometimes lack of enough funds
62886
Like everyone else said, they don't want any team to have a home-field advantage. Also, you are talking about tens of thousands of people coming to the site of the Super Bowl. These people all need hotels, airfare and othere accomodations. Trying to plan something this big with only one or two weeks notice would be a complete disaster. There are some NFL cities (like Green Bay) that simply could never handle that many people at once on short notice. Jacksonville had trouble with it a few years ago, and they had plenty of warning. This needs to be planned out years in advance. Plus the NFL likes to reward cities (like Detroit, or Houston last year) that build shiny new stadiums for their teams. They don't want the Super Bowl to be played in a dump.