...fools!...the correct answer is blutto...and then its a sprint finish for second between Cobblestoned, Polish and flicker...and the peloton is minutes behind...MacRoadie said:
best point. Stars selling and raising money world wide..I am not sure where Lance falls but Pojols, Brees and Manning are not getting close to world wide appeal and revenue...maybe Manning should tweet a punt,pass and kick in Melbourne just to be sureSanitiser said:
...well not really, but I can see why one could make that mistake...after-all we do look alike...tall, dark, devilishly handsome and wicked fast on a bike...and we all have dedicated our lives to fighting for truth and goodness and against evil and badness and so on and so forth...Race Radio said:Aren't those all the same people?
So just how much power and influence OUTSIDE cycling does Armstrong really have?OFF-FIELD ATTRIBUTES
The off-field attributes comprise an athlete's expected endorsement potential (80 percent) and endorsement earnings (20 percent). The endorsement potential comes from E-Poll's N-Score, which measures an athlete's name awareness, appeal, influence, trustworthiness, overall popularity, and a number of other attributes. Endorsement data is estimated by industry experts based on comparable athletes
....whoa!!!!....you just applied the term methodology to sports journalism, a field that stands as one of the great oxymorans of all time...the mind reels...MacRoadie said:I think there needs to be a distinction made here.
The pro-Armstrong crowd is fond of touting Lance not only as the most "popular" (famous/infamous/well known) cyclist in the world, but also as a very powerful individual here in the States. The rankings provide more of a measure of Lance Armstrong the star thlete here in the US, where he faces a court of public opinion, and possibly a court of a more serious nature as well.
According to the article, the methodology was as follows: "An athlete's ranking is comprised of on-field attributes (50 percent) and off-field attributes (50 percent) to develop an overall ranking."
Further, the off-field attributes were comprised of:
So just how much power and influence OUTSIDE cycling does Armstrong really have?
So, now every article written on the subject of sports, including one appearing in Bloomberg Businessweek and written by this guy is flippantly dismissed as "sports journalism".blutto said:....whoa!!!!....you just applied the term methodology to sports journalism, a field that stands as one of the great oxymorans of all time...the mind reels...
...that contravenes at least several Geneva Conventions...and probably much more...like go recalibrate your moral compass or something...
Ask anyone outside the US who those American football and baseball players are and you will be met with a confused stare...MacRoadie said:
If I'm selling t-shirts I'll take Ronaldo (even the old fat one), Messi, and Eto'o over any of these guys. I'll do well in América, Africa, Europe, and just about every place else; you can sell shirts in Jersey.MacRoadie said:
Too right; I looked the dude up but I have no idea of what a quarterback does. I like it that our football players don't wear all that body armour.. well they used not to ;-(andy1234 said:Ask anyone outside the US who those American football and baseball players are and you will be met with a confused stare...
Federer, Woods, Armstrong, Bolt etc are truly global.
...very funny that you would bring up a business paper as an example of a credible news provider...MacRoadie said:
IMlessthanHO Lance's "power" is as fleeting as Caesar's. Any argument that suggests he is being targeted because of the magnitude of his appeal or what he contributes to "cycling" would come from his paid or non-paid defenders, not a realistic observer.MacRoadie said:Ok, obviously the forest is getting in the way of one very large tree.
Look at it this way:
Lance Armstrong is an AMERICAN. Over and over on here, posters refer to his "popularity" and connections HERE IN THE US as an indication that he will avoid any grand jury indictments.
The link I provided is an article, published by a respected AMERICAN business journal, that seeks to apply a metric to AMERICAN sports personalities.
In that analysis, regardless of whatever "effort" others may make to the contrary, Lance comes out ranked significantly lower than a number of other AMERICAN sports stars IN AMERICA.
The point is not that Armstrong is not more pupular globally than an NBA of NFL star, or even a golfer. The point is that in America, where he's under investigation (and where it matters), he's not exactly at the top of the popularity list.
And sorry blutto, but if your crowd is going to post moronic links to every blogger you can drag out of a corner booth at Starbucks as proof of your boy's popularity, then I can drag our Businessweek...