clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

TV or Live?

SBNation and Samsung have collaborated on an advertising scheme where, if bloggers write three posts on "technology," we get kicked a little cash. Full disclosure: I like cash.

Last week, I wanted to know how you, intrepid Hornet fans, liked to watch the Hornets. Local TV seemed to be the majority answer with League Pass, expectedly, the second most common option.

Today, a different poll: which sport is most conducive to technology? 

The televised vs. live debate swings either way on different sports. Pro football is considered a TV sport; even though certain venues enhance the game through their fans, atmosphere, etc, the statistics indicate that the NFL has become an absolutely dominant TV sport. I feel like baseball is on the other end of the spectrum. The slow pace of the game- brought on by breaks in between pitches, not much "action" on the field- can cause boredom via the television set. However, I think I enjoy live baseball more than any other live sport. The laid back rhythm and the ability to casually converse with surrounding fans are things I enjoy, in person.

Then there's the NHL. I've never been to a hockey game, but as people often say, hockey loses more in the live to TV translation than perhaps any other sport. The intensity of the players, the viciousness of the hits, and most importantly, the motion of the puck, are better enjoyed in person. 

So, the question. Assuming they both cost you the same, would you rather watch an NBA game or TV (let's say good resolution, etc) or in person (let's say the middle rows, lower level)?