Search

[Joy]

Yeah. Unfortunately, the farther back you go, the harder it is to find accurate attendance counts for movies, which is why they use ticket inflation for adjustment, which doesn't always work because of how varying ticket prices can be from one week to the next and from one coast to the other.

[sdcforever]

Box office take should always be measured in tickets sold, not revenue. To measure revenue ignores inflation. A movie today could surpass a movie from 1980 while only selling one third as many tickets.

You can't ignore the feat, though.  Especially since there are so many distractions now even compared to fifteen years ago.  Cable and satellite TV, the internet, etc.  That's why inflation and attendance figures aren't a good, objective measure either.  Like you said, Joy, attendance figures aren't tracked very well even today.  All they can really give are estimates.  However, for a movie today, with all the other distractions and ways to occupy our time, to have over 61 million in estimated attendance and gross over $600 million in six weeks is astounding!

If you just go by inflation, then "Gone With the Wind" would be the top grosser with over $1.4 billion domestic.  But it came out in 1939, and TV was brand new back then.  There were far fewer distractions in the way of media seventy years ago.  In truth, there really is no good, objective measure for box office performance.  That's why everything should be taken into account to give perspective and context.  And when you take into account all of the distractions of our modern world, what "Avatar" has done is one of the greatest box office runs in history. 

[Swoosh]

I still cannot ignore the fact that I felt like I was watching Dances with Wolves fused with Ferngully the entire time I was watching AVATAR.  It was such a blantent ripoff of storyline that it was almost unbareable to continue watching.

[History Buff]

The line "They killed their mother" was the one that finally did me in.  The earth people were not there to populate Pandora because the earth was dead - they were there to mine the "unobtainium" (which, BTW, is a horrible name for a mineral).  Without the green message stuck in for the sake of appeasing the in-crowd.

[sdcforever]

They're already talking about Super Bowl XLV.  The Colts are early favorites to win it at 13:2.  The Saints are 10:1.  And our local teams, the Chiefs and Rams, are tied for the longest odds with a couple of other teams at 100:1.  It is not a good time to be a Rams or Chiefs fan.

Odds mean nothing, though.  When the Rams won it all in 1999 they were 400:1!   That Super Bowl win actually caused a few betting firms to go under due to the large amounts being paid out, and is the main reason we don't see odds that steep anymore.

In case you haven't heard, there will probably be a lockout in 2011 and no NFL season.  The labor agreement between the owners and players expires after next season, and the owners want to increase their share of the profits.  Currently the players receive 52% of the profits; the owners want to cut that to 34% with the next agreement.  Obviously, the players don't think that's fair, but the owners don't want to budge or compromise.  We'll see, but it's not looking good for the 2011 season.

[Coaster]

Those odds don't mean much to me for a couple reasons.
a)You must be an optimist to be a Chiefs fan.
b)The NFL from year to year is as unpredictable as anything.

As for reports of no football two years from now, I wouldn't read much into it. I think that a deal will get done at the last possible minute. They are talking doom and gloom right now but there is  just too much money at stake for them not to get a deal done. But there is still that little part of me in the back of my head that is worried there won't be football in 2011. I can't live without my Chiefs! 

In saying that, 2010 will be an uncapped year which will make things very interesting in free agency for every team.

[sdcforever]

^Actually, now that I've read more about what's going on with the labor dispute, the likelihood of football in 2011 is not good.  Here's an exchange between a player and the new head of the NFLPA, DeMaurice Smith, from a forum held during this past weekend:

"When Cincinnati receiver Chad Ochocinco asked the first question of the day — how serious a threat was it that the owners would lock out the players in 2011 — Smith gave him a blunt answer. 

"On a scale of 1 to 10," he said with a perfectly timed dramatic pause, "It's a 14.""

The broadcast deal the owners have in place for 2011 guarantees them $5 billion even if no games are played that year.

"His strongest point of the day was that the NFL has no incentive to negotiate with the NFLPA because the league is scheduled to receive $5 billion from its network television deals even if no games are played in 2011.

That, he says, is all the proof he needs to show that NFL owners are preparing for a long lockout. "Has any one of the prior deals included $5 billion to not play football?" Smith asked, referring to previous contracts that were extended or redone. "The answer's no.""

So, be prepared for a lockout in 2011.  It's clear that the owners and the league are putting everything into place.  It's the NFLPA versus the NFL.

Read more here:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/columnists.nsf/bryanburwell/story/5ED7750DCC73C795862576C5000E9221?OpenDocument

[Coaster]

^There is still awhile to get a deal done, and I think it will happen.

But, we're guaranteed this year of football and the my favorite part of the offseason, the draft. I've created my own mock draft on an awesome website I found on a snow day this week. It was really fun and it is interesting to read other fan's ideas and opinions and not "the expert's."

http://draftdebacled.com/publisheddraft.aspx?mdid=8718

I'd appreciate it if you could either give me comments there or here. I'm interested to hear how I did. Currently it has a three star rating, but who knows if that holds any merit.

[sdcforever]

^I like the look of your draft.  I think you're right in predicting that Bradford will be the only QB taken early, with Clausen being taken before McCoy (due to his injury) outside of the top ten.  I think McCoy will be taken in the second round (perhaps by the Rams?).

The only big question is will the Rams take Suh or Gerald McCoy at #1?  Suh is more instinctive and stronger, but McCoy is quicker and more disruptive.  The Rams may decide to take McCoy since they really, really, really need a DT that can penetrate the line.  It's a tough choice for the Rams.  If they do take McCoy then I think the Bucs will take Suh.

[Coaster]

^Thanks. I think the Rams would get a ton of flack if they passed up on Suh for McCoy. Everyone thinks Suh is the number one guy but i definitely agree with you. McCoy could be just as good.

As for the Chiefs, I'm really hoping Berry drops to us. We need o-linemen but we also need playmakers and Berry is a great playmaker. Similar to Troy Polamalu, Ed Reed, and the late Sean Taylor. He could be that good. But if Berry is gone by the fifth pick, I have no problem with us drafting Okung or even trading down.

[sdcforever]

^I agree with you about the Chiefs.  Berry would be a great pick if he drops to #5.  We really need o-linemen and playmakers on defense.

As for the Rams, I'm curious if they'll trade down for more picks.  The Rams need pretty much everything and, if they can draft well (they have not been the past three or four years, and it shows), the more picks the better.  I'm really hoping they draft a QB in the second round.  Bulger's backups, Null and Boller (both got extended playing time due to his injury), showed that neither have the qualities of a starter.  We really want to sign Vick, but it'd be nice to have someone new who has promise to step in in case Vick gets injured.  That's probably the only good thing about being as bad as the Rams--you really get to test the depth of your team.  Everyone gets a chance to play.

[Coaster]

^Yeah, I'm hoping the Rams can get Vick too. They need a big name guy to be the face of their team. Even if he is a two or three year option, he would give them more leeway in the draft to pick up other players at needed positions.

[sdcforever]

This post continues one that was taking place in the "Big XII Football 2009" thread, but I thought I'd move it here since it really doesn't apply to that subject.

This is a great article from the Post-Dispatch regarding the impending shuffling of schools and conferences.  Key quote:  "College sports aren't all about student-athletes. College sports are all about big TV contracts. The power schools and power conferences want more, more, more."

It really is a great article.  Read more here:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/columnists.nsf/jeffgordon/story/DD340A5DAC495420862576D5005B5538?OpenDocument

[sdcforever]

Regarding the Big Ten expansion, apparently they have just finished analyzing potential teams and five have passed financial muster:  Missouri, Rutgers, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse.

Read more here:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/ct-spt-0302-big-ten-foot--20100301,0,2940944.column

[Coaster]

Who else besides me is rooting for Northern Iowa to win the whole tournament now that Mizzou is out?