Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

    I agree with a lot of things being said in the thread:

    1). Regular season is way too long. I know people point out baseball's season is 162 games. I think that's different. First, only four teams make the playoffs. This makes the regular season much more entertaining. Also, the regular season builds up divisional rivals (Cubs-Cards, Yanks-Sox, Braves-Mets, LA-SF, etc). Plus, the emphasis on playing in your division makes every game much more meaningful. The inter-league play is always enjoyable to watch. Back to my point about divisional rivals, these games in MLB mean something because the playoff spots are limited. That brings me to my next point:
    2). Too many teams in the playoffs. I can't justify a team finishing in the bottom half of their conference and making the playoffs. The only time in recent memory when a playoff race actually mattered (that I can recall) was the GS/LAC battle for eighth, and that's only because Dallas lost to the Warriors.
    3). Playoffs is too long, just like the regular season.
    4). Horrible TV contracts. ABC's coverage of the NBA is downright awful. I think they might broadcast more WNBA games than NBA games. Could we get the NBA back on NBC and keep it on TNT? Marv Albert should be required to do all the NBA finals games. I guess I can go ahead and throw in the TV time outs here. I know the NBA has to make money, but these things (especially going to commercial with five seconds left in a game) absolutely kill the momentum of the game and make it less enjoyable to watch.
    5). Too many teams. I know contraction seems out of the question, but I can't help but wonder if talent is spread too thin in the league. I think the NBA would run a lot better if you take out four teams. Baseball can get away with having so many teams since they have such a developed farm system.
    6). Inexperienced players. I honestly think that if the NBA is going to have an age limit on the draft, it should be like the NFL's. I think the age limit that Stern has put in has harmed both college basketball and the NBA.
    7). Salary cap.

    The fact is I don't see Stern making any changes to the playoff system and I certainly don't see him contracting any teams from the league.
    Last edited by Wu-Gambino; 06-17-2007, 04:01 PM.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

      BTW, here's a good blog entry on problems with the NBA.
      http://jonesonthenba.blogspot.com/se...NBA%20on%20ABC

      About the NBA on ABC"
      The Television Contract:
      As documented here and here, the NBA’s current TV contract with ABC/ESPN is completely deficient to that of their previous deal with NBC. The NBA was NBC’s main sporting event for twelve full seasons, and because of it NBC worked with the NBA to package the sport in a way that it would be palatable to its fans and thus attract the most viewers for NBC. Fans appreciated everything NBC telecasts provided from the theme music, to the announcers, on down to the way that they set up a game. NBC marketed the NBA with a level of class that fans today can only reminisce about.

      With ABC/ESPN, the NBA is just one of many sports that the network has in its broadcast stable. It’s obvious that ESPN does not hold the NBA in the same regard as NFL football, college football, college basketball, or major league baseball, because they don’t market or package the games with the same care they do with those sports. They sell the theme music rights to NBA games off every year to some bubble gum pop band (this year it’s the Pussy Cat Dolls) and have exploding talking heads such as Stephen A. Smith covering their games and the NBA draft. As well, ESPN/ABC isn’t consistent with when and where they broadcast NBA games. I guarantee half of the NBA fans don’t know when and on what station games are being broadcasted. When the games were on NBC you always knew that there was going to be a double header on Saturday’s and a triple header on Sunday. At least with TNT around you know that you can always catch a game there on Thursday, but beyond that, finding a game at a consistent day and time gets kind of murky.

      The NBA obviously has an image problem these days. But what network is the catalyst for blowing up the off the court issues that plague the NBA more than anything today? That’s right, ESPN. Although the NBA probably thought there was some sort of synergy there between ESPN and their product, there really isn't. Think about it, ESPN is the first to jump on suspension and off the court issues and blow them out of proportion. They're in bed with the network that's the catalyst for blowing up a lot of their bad PR. ESPN makes things so much worse by covering every single off the court issue. NBC never had one drop of fluff or any sort of tabloid aspect in their coverage, yet ESPN is full of it. In fact the ABC/ESPN conglomerate probably puts more effort into covering the off the court tabloid non-sense than they do marketing the games they're broadcasting. If they were to change that strategy and stick to marketing the games and the players, maybe people will again focus on those things again instead of the tabloid stuff the main stream media loves to shove down our throats. It's not just ESPN but a lot of other sources of sports media that are creating and recycling these negative images. But in the case of ESPN, as a broadcast partner of the NBA, they have a responsibility to aid the NBA with the marketing of the league. NBC surely understood this, why doesn’t ESPN?

      The NBA made the mistake of ending a relationship with a broadcast partner that they had great success with (NBC) in order to gain a few extra dollars from a new partner (ESPN/ABC). But it’s obvious that the few extra bucks they made with the ESPN/ABC deal is worthless in comparison to the marketing and branding value they received from their broadcasting partnership with the peacock. When the NBA is negotiating their next television contract with ESPN/ABC they should be sure to let them know that they are NOT happy with the way their television package has been put together and figure out a way to make to make it better. As proven by Dallas and Phoenix this past week and the playoffs last year, the actual on the court product is fine. It’s more the way the game has been packaged that hurts the league. The league needs to make sure ESPN is committed to providing better overall production of NBA games (from theme song, to segments, to announcers), a consistent schedule with good games where NBA fans are aware of when and where the games are going to be broadcasted, and a policy of not knocking the NBA as much as they do on Sportscenter and on ESPN.com.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

        And within a few days there will be an announcement that the NBA has extended their current agreement with TNT, and ESPN/ABC

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

          I think the whole racism thing can be explained this way. The NBA is really more or less no blacker than it was in the glory days of the 80's which extended into the still very popular Jordan finals. In my opinion the last great year of the NBA was the year that the Lakers and the Pacers played in the finals. Anyway, the quality of the NBA has been decreasing rapidly in the past few years or so for a variety of reasons, mostly having to do with the emergence of raw guys out of eithe high school or had one year of college who watched Jordan play and want to be like Mike, but the fact is that most of these guys are just extremely athletic and not fundamentally sound basketball players. This has led to an incredible decrease in the talent of American basketball players. Don't believe me? Look at the number of Europeans in the league compared to how many there were 20 years ago.

          Many times around certain elements of the population racism is only extolled when the situation itself is already bad. One time at a Pacer fan I saw a guy with a Reggie jersey on who was cheering hard for a mostly-black Pacers team in 1996 or so call a black referee the N word multiple times for making calls against the Pacers. Keep in mind, this guy had a REGGIE MILLER jersey on, who obviously is black. He wasn't necessarily mad at the guy for being black, he was mad at him for other reasons and brought race into it. Does that make it excusable and appropriate for him to call the ref the N word? Hell no. But it explains what I am trying to say. White America isn't turned off by the NBA because most of the players are black, they are mad because the quality of play has been awful for most of this decade. The racism that accompanies that is a sickening, unforunate byproduct of the worsening of play, it's not because America in itself has become more racist in the last 7 years or whatever.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

            Racism is just a red herring in this case. I dislike the NBA now and my reasons have nothing to do with race. I'd like to think the same could be said for other people.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
              Actually, yes.

              -There is no dominant "white" team for mainstream america to relate to and root for.
              Who was the dominant white team during MJ's reign?

              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
              -Players back then acted much more like your average businessman. They wore suits, they spoke out less, and they dressed more conservatively. If you debate any of those things I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
              So are you saying there where less rape accusations, weapons charges, and domestic battery issues? We can agree that personal conduct plays a view in how the league is viewed, but I'd say the NFL is having a huge problem with that right now. It's not limited to the NBA. The two main differences is that the NFL is addressing it aggressively and the NFL has a liked product.


              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
              -Um, because it's harder to relate to a person 7 feet tall and 250 lbs than it is to relate to your average pitcher or goalie, who stands at eye level with you?
              If you say so. There are many reasons I can't relate to professional athletes. For me, size would be very low on the list.


              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
              -Yeah, tell me that the next time you hear someone complain about an athlete being selfish and spoiled. That person almost ALWAYS knows exactly how much each athlete is being paid, right down to the dime.
              TO, Moss, and Vick. Your right people seem to know how much they are paid, but do you think it would matter if they made half what they do? The numbers are unreal regardless if it's 3 mil or 13 mil. The main time I here it brought up is when comparing players in relation to one another within a sport. I've never heard someone suggest TO has the right to be more of an *** than Iverson becaus he isn't paid quite as much.


              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
              -Um, baseball players are wearing either a cap or helmet at all times.

              Furthermore, if a hitter so much as smiles immediately after hitting a home run, he's getting a 95MPH fastball in the ribs the next time he sees the plate.

              Aside from end-of-game celebrations, baseball abhors individualism.
              Now we are on to something. IMO Stern has over sanitized the NBA for corporate america. Players are no longer allowed to police their own. Everything is handleded through a bumbbling front office that some how seems to get every attempt at disipline wrong. The animoisity of the Lakers / Celtics series and Bulls / Pistons series were a huge draw that we will never see again. The little bit of chipiness in the GS / Dallas series was constantly talked about as was the supposed dirty play of Horry and Bowen for SA.


              To me it’s simple - If the NBA product was as compelling weekly as the NFL (as it was in the 80's and 90's) the media would be talking about the storylines instead of the TV ratings. When the most compelling period in you league is the off season, your league has a problem - and it an't racism.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                Originally posted by Kstat View Post

                Um, because it's harder to relate to a person 7 feet tall and 250 lbs than it is to relate to your average pitcher or goalie, who stands at eye level with you?



                Yeah, tell me that the next time you hear someone complain about an athlete being selfish and spoiled. That person almost ALWAYS knows exactly how much each athlete is being paid, right down to the dime.



                Um, baseball players are wearing either a cap or helmet at all times.

                Furthermore, if a hitter so much as smiles immediately after hitting a home run, he's getting a 95MPH fastball in the ribs the next time he sees the plate.

                Aside from end-of-game celebrations, baseball abhors individualism.



                No, It's simply easier now because the culture gap between the average NBA superstar and the average middle-class white guy is at an all-time high.



                I just listed them off for you.

                Look at the NHL. It's suffering FAR worse than the NBA, and I don't see any writers doing an indian war dance around its decaying corpse like you hear about the NBA.

                I don't think the NBA is nearly as dissimilar to the 90's or the 80's as people think. The biggest change has been in the people playing the game. They don't appeal to the average middle-class fan nearly as much as Magic, Bird or Jordan did.

                Um, because it's harder to relate to a person 7 feet tall and 250 lbs than it is to relate to your average pitcher or goalie, who stands at eye level with you?
                +++++++++++++++++

                This is funny. They are not aliens.....on the other hand maybe they are.
                You're right we have nothing in common with them


                Um, baseball players are wearing either a cap or helmet at all times.
                ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
                In baseball people are enamored with their favorite player. A hat does not
                make them incognito. Please.


                Yeah, tell me that the next time you hear someone complain about an athlete being selfish and spoiled. That person almost ALWAYS knows exactly how much each athlete is being paid, right down to the dime.
                ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++

                Maybe you do, the average joe see's a millionare and can't relate, whether
                football, baseball or basketball. Is it wrong they are rich, heck no, its free
                enterprise.



                Look at the NHL. It's suffering FAR worse than the NBA, and I don't see any writers doing an indian war dance around its decaying corpse like you hear about the NBA.
                +++++++++++++++++++++++++
                You should be happy people are griping about the NBA, NOBODY cares about
                hockey. Plus they killed themselves with their strike. Talk about foolishness.
                People still care about basketball.


                I don't think the NBA is nearly as dissimilar to the 90's or the 80's as people think. The biggest change has been in the people playing the game. They don't appeal to the average middle-class fan nearly as much as Magic, Bird or Jordan did.[/QUOTE]
                ++++++++++++++++++++++++

                If you are talking about the gang like lifestyle that some players were emulating then I will agree and people should be turned off by that.
                There is nothing noble about that. On the news tonight they were talking about a 14 year old boy burned to death in a van from gang violence.
                And he was like the 30th death of the year in Chicago of High School age
                from gang violence. So we want NBA players to represent that?????

                But with all that said that is still not what is really wrong with the NBA
                and others have really done a good job analyzing it in this thread.
                Using only the race card is cop out.

                You can have the last word as I am done with the subject.
                {o,o}
                |)__)
                -"-"-

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                  Who was the dominate white team during MJ's reign?
                  MJ was the ultimate corporate superstar. He appealed to white America moreso than any black athlete in the history of American sports.

                  So are you saying there where less rape accusations, weapons charges, and domestic battery issues? We can agree that personal conduct plays a view in how the league is viewed, but I'd say the NFL is having a huge problem with that right now. It's not limited to the NBA. The two main differences is that the NFL is addressing it aggressively and the NFL has a liked product.
                  No, the difference is when you turn on the TV, you don't see felons, you see barely-distinguishable football players covered in pads and jerseys. Most of America doesn't even know what Pac-man Jones looks like.

                  But pretty much every sports fan in america could tell you what Ron Artest, Stephen Jackson, or Rasheed Wallace looks like.

                  The NFL catches its fair share of heat off the field, but nobody can put a face next to any of these guys.

                  If you say so. There are many reasons I can't relate to professional athletes. For me, size would be very low on the list.
                  Most NBA players are defined by their size.

                  I've never heard someone suggest TO has the right to be more of an *** than Iverson becaus he isn't paid quite as much.
                  The point I was trying to make was, the NBA players have the best salary structure. They make the most money, and they are playing for GUARANTEED money.

                  If you don't think a certain segment of society is ****ed off that NBA players play a game for millions of dollars under guaranteed contracts, you're fooling yourself.

                  TO me it’s simple - If the NBA product was as compelling weekly as the NFL (as it was in the 80's and 90's) the media would be talking about the storylines instead of the TV ratings. When the most compelling period in you league is the off season, your league has a problem - and it an't racism.
                  I'm not saying that the NBA is perfect.

                  I'm simply saying that the media loves to pick on the NBA more than any other sport, mainly because of its makeup. The media would never treat the NBA like this if it was a %50 white league, like baseball.

                  It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                  Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                  Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                  NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                    If you are talking about the gang like lifestyle that some players were emulating then I will agree and people should be turned off by that.
                    There is nothing noble about that. On the news tonight they were talking about a 14 year old boy burned to death in a van from gang violence.
                    And he was like the 30th death of the year in Chicago of High School age
                    from gang violence. So we want NBA players to represent that?????
                    The fact you're comparing NBA players to gangland shooters is exactly the point I'm trying to convey.

                    Aside from a select few, this attitude is not prevalent in the NBA. The public simply gets that impression from the hair, the tats, and the clothing.

                    NFL offenders outnumber NBA offenders 10 to 1, but nobody know what half the population of the NFL really looks like, so it gets the kid gloves.

                    Magic Johnson and Julius Erving were far from role models off the court, but they looked and acted the part, so white america gave them the free pass.
                    Last edited by Kstat; 06-17-2007, 07:30 PM.

                    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                      Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
                      I want less games - more rest and practice time for teams, less injuries.

                      I want a more set NBA schedule - 2-3 games per week on standard days, everyone plays. My wife knows I'm watching football on Sundays. As far as she's concerned the NBA plays every day and I can watch it another day. Make Wednesday night (or whatever night) NBA night - televise a a double header with the two most appealing games.

                      I want a shorter faster, playoff system. They drag out the schedule way too long and kill any momentum that develops. Games need to be every other day.

                      Change the first round to best of 3 and the rest to best of 5. The shorter the series the better chance an underdog has.

                      Experiment with widening the court to increase spacing - see the other thread. They changed the ball for marketing reasons - to me that is a bigger change than compensating for the size and speed of the current NBA player.

                      Concentrate on marketing teams instead of players and work to get rid of the "star system". SA should be a compelling team similar to NE in the NFL - they just win. But because the NBA is completely individual based and there star is "boring" they are unappealing. Of course they play great basketball and that is what it should be about.

                      Obviously none of these will happen - they are all "impossible".
                      I totally agree with less regular season games. I think that standard nights is also a good idea. However a 3 game series is a horrible idea. The WNBA does it and it sucks. While I think 5 game series is a good idea until the finals 7 game series would be a lot better if they played every other day with maybe an additional day off for travel.

                      Changing the schedule is only "impossible" until it comes time to negotiate the TV contract when the networks realize viewership is down and they don't want to show as many games.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                        Originally posted by Kstat View Post

                        If you don't think a certain segment of society is ****ed off that NBA players play a game for millions of dollars under guaranteed contracts, you're fooling yourself.
                        I suppose I can be counted in that group. Of course it has nothing to do with a player getting paid, but it does have everything to do with it's overall effect on the league. It is harder in the NBA to go from bad to good - harder than in MLB or the NFL. I hear salarys discussed in that repect constantly. I don't care at all if Troy Murphy gets all of his money or not. I do care that my favorite franchise is screwed for 3-4 years because Murphy had a good season a couple years ago. This all plays into another big area where the NFL is vastly superior to the NBA - damn near (I'd exclude raider and lions fans) every teams fans believe they have a shot to at least be difference makers - and for the most part they are right. In the NBA if you hit bottom you stay there - for years. Fans for half the leagues teams could skip the next 3 years and not miss anything significant for their team - on the court anyway.
                        Last edited by rm1369; 06-17-2007, 07:40 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                          Originally posted by grace View Post
                          I totally agree with less regular season games. I think that standard nights is also a good idea. However a 3 game series is a horrible idea. The WNBA does it and it sucks. While I think 5 game series is a good idea until the finals 7 game series would be a lot better if they played every other day with maybe an additional day off for travel.

                          Changing the schedule is only "impossible" until it comes time to negotiate the TV contract when the networks realize viewership is down and they don't want to show as many games.
                          I could easily be persuaded that 5 games is the right number. The theory is that the longer the series is, the less chance an underdog has -and everyone loves an underdog.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                            Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
                            I suppose I can be counted in that group. Of course it has nothing to do with a player getting paid, but it does have everything to do with it's overall effect on the league. It is harder in the NBA to go from bad to good - harder than in MLB or the NFL. I hear salarys discussed in that repect constantly. I don't care at all if Troy Murphy gets all of his money or not. I do care that my favorite franchise is screwed for 3-4 years because Murphy had a good season a couple years ago. This all plays into another big area where the NFL is vastly superior to the NBA - damn near (I'd exclude raider and lions fans) every teams fans believe they have a shot to at least be difference makers - and for the most part they are right. In the NBA if you hit bottom you stay there - for years. Fans for half the leagues teams could skip the next 3 years and not miss anything significant for their team - on the court anyway.
                            This brings up another item I should have mentioned with my list of improvements. What would be wrong with at least allowing players and teams to negotiated buyouts and then not count the original contract against the salary cap or especially the luxury tax? I believe the Pacers should be allowed to tell Murphy the will pay him 50 cent on the dollar for his contract and he will be a FA allowed to negotiate as such. If he agrees, it simply is a cost of business for the team, but isn't counted as part of any league salary structure. i don't see why the players union would be against it - the players get paid unless they agree to a settlement. Even then they get a chance at FA. Teams get some added flexibility to erase past mistakes and turn over the roster. I suppose it would give a slight advantage to big market teams, but only slight. They still would have to follow the normal salary cap guidelines for FA signings and trades.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                              The way players do their hair, what they wear, and their tatoos say things about them. If they remind people of gang members, what do you honestly expect people's reaction to be? I'm coming at it from the, if it walks and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck angle. That doesn't mean it's true, or even "mostly right" (though for all I know it could be too; I don't know), but it's an understandable reason for why a lot of people have trouble relating to the players.

                              So I guess as someone who doesn't know, but wants to know, I have this to ask: What DOES a gang member look like? What does he usually wear? What does he usually have to say? How does he usually act (aside from being violent)? What kind of tatoos does he have?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                                The difference is, the media doesn't seem to be reveling in the NHL's decrease in ratings.

                                Ummm... about the only mention of the Stanley Cup Finals by the ESPN Radio talking heads (Mike & Mike, Cowherd, Dan Patrick) was how totally irrelevant hockey has become. It was pointed out several times how the ratings for one of the games trailed a show on the Food Network about "Building a Better Burger".

                                They made fun of the demise of hockey A LOT.
                                The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X