Reply With Quote
Favor's more rested and deeper Spurs who have won b to b to b x 2 and last on road and by a large margin each game - end of discussion, if Spurs do not lay and egg at home it ends in 4 or at most 5.
I will wager that Spurs win game 3.
Favor's more rested and deeper Spurs who have won b to b to b x 2 and last on road and by a large margin each game - end of discussion, if Spurs do not lay and egg at home it ends in 4 or at most 5.
the networks and the NBA. And money as the supreme value in American life.
The NBA's priority is money, not the quality of games, not the health of the players. Too many teams, too many games (B2B), and too little talent.
No, we're just the customers. It's our place to pay for everything, and shut the up, right? After all, that's what customers are for, isn't it? To provide income for someone else? Your customers must just love you, with an at ude like that.
Yeah - if you're going to have a b2b, getting them more than 24 hours apart is better than having a quick turnaround. But that doesn't change the fact that both lower-seeded teams are getting the b2b at home, because they are from LA. And don't tell me about business decisions. No normal business could get by with pissing on customers all over the country, in favor of the customers in a single city.
And BTW - you don't know about who this favors. Nobody ever plays a b2b against the same team, in the same arena. Not ever. You can't tell me that playing in front of the same hostile crowd, with playoff intensity, two nights in a row is an advantage. I don't know what you sell, but you aren't selling that.
Power to the proletariat, NBA style? You ing loon.
Back to backs against same team is not a new thing. The numbers reflect that sweeps in that scenario are rare and more times than not, the teams split.
Look at the numbers.
BTW, you are not a customer. You are not going to these games. You are sitting on your ass watching on tv, you have not paid one dime to watch these games on the road.No, we're just the customers. It's our place to pay for everything, and shut the up, right? After all, that's what customers are for, isn't it? To provide income for someone else? Your customers must just love you, with an at ude like that
You ers are spoiled. Before these big tv contracts, we fans had to listen to games on the radio, not every playoff game was even on tv. We had to do pay per view to watch Spurs in playoffs....so stop your whining.
[QUOTE=boutons_deux;5875515] the networks and the NBA. And money as the supreme value in American life.
The NBA's priority is money, not the quality of games, not the health of the players. Too many teams, too many games (B2B), and too little talent.[/QUOTE]
You think there was more quality in yesterday's game( not a back to back) than you will see in game 4(back to back) of Spurs series?
I am willing to wager that the shooting percentages will be much better in the Spurs game than you had yesterday.
yeah the massive injuries to NBA players is nothing new and not related at all to the schedule... oh wait
Yeah, they never have injuries in any other year.
You remember the year 1996? They year 2000?
shortened schedule, more games per week, no training camps.
yeah that has nothing to do with the number of injuries this year
I guess they should have scrubbed the season.shortened schedule, more games per week, no training camps.
yeah that has nothing to do with the number of injuries this year
Really? It's common to have a b2b against the same team, in the same arena? (Which is what I said, and the only real question here.) How about you look at the numbers, and show me one example. Because if you can't give even one example, you're just another ing blowhard.
Not same arena, but I'm talking about back to back against same opponent. It is harder to win both games when you are back to back.
Btw, we Spurs fans should never complain about b2b2b.
In the two shortened seasons when the b2b2b games were on schedule, the Spurs were the NBA leaders in total wins in that format.
They have 10 wins and 2 losses in the two times that they hade to play on 3 consecutive nights...so STFU and stop whining, because we Spurs fans have benefited more than anyone in lockout seasons
NBA is a business, first and foremost.
Business-wise, you want your big market teams to compete.
You have the Lakers and Clippers, out of tough 7 games battles, playing Monday-Tuesday back-to-backs on the road (B2B2B for Clippers) and the respective series are very very very likely 2-0.
Small and mid-size market teams (OKC and SAS) have the easy way.
Oh but they deserve it!
Let's be fair and sportsman-like!
It's wonderful to notice that there is always someone rediscovering hot water.
So in other words, you just made up some that I didn't say, and then told me I was wrong?
What I said was that playing two nights in a row, against the same hostile crowd is a decided disadvantage. Especially games with playoff intensity. It's a totally different situation. And the NBA chose to saddle both teams with the better record, and give that advantage to the two teams from LA. And the only excuse they gave was scheduling. But there is no way that it is easier to schedule 4 games in a single arena, in a single weekend. So there must be some other reason... but what could it be?
Just a little hint - you should probably stop telling people that they have to shut the up, unless you just enjoy being an unlikable asshole. People come here to share thoughts. If you're the only one who can have an opinion, it's going to get pretty dull.
Actually, it's going to get really, really ing dull.
STFU is not meant to be an insult...to me it is just like saying get the out of here....
My apologies.
I did not make something up, we just had two different interpretations of my original statement about playing back to back against same team. IMO, it is hard to win both, so imo, it favors the team that benefits from a split, and that is the road team. Now do you understand the words coming out of my mouth?
Besides, I am so starved for Spurs bball, I don't care if they play 4 straight nights.
STFU is not meant to be an insult...to me it is just like saying get the out of here....
My apologies.
I did not make something up, we just had two different interpretations of my original statement about playing back to back against same team. IMO, it is hard to win both, so imo, it favors the team that benefits from a split, and that is the road team. Now do you understand the words coming out of my mouth?
Strangely enough, that sounds like a reasonable explanation to me.
I think playing a b2b in the same arena, against the same team and hometown crowd, is a disadvantage. You don't. Just a difference of opinion. I understand the need for a b2b, due to the compressed schedule, and I wouldn't about that.
But, like I said, scheduling 4 NBA games in the same arena, in the same weekend, has to be a lot harder logistically. Throw in a hockey game (yes, they have a hockey game in the Staples Center this weekend too), and the scheduling really doesn't make any sense at all to me.
One thing I still disagree with you about. You talk about how much money the networks spend on television rights, and then turn around and say that the only customers are the ones who actually go to the games. I don't think you would have said that if you'd thought about it for a minute. The TV audiences (customers) are where the real money is at. You damn betcha we're customers. Do you have any customers who feel like they have to keep quiet and accept whatever you give them? The only reason the NBA can feel that way is the anti-trust agreement. In return, they are supposed to balance the needs of the smaller markets, even though it doesn't fully optimize profits - in the short run, at least. If for no other reason than the large market teams need the small market teams to have someone to play against. Without SA, Utah, OKC, etc. the league couldn't exist - and it damned sure couldn't sell all that advertising.
Well, I guess I am just jaded. I'm used to The Man dictating what we watch when we watch it, and so on and so forth, and I just stopped worrying about it years ago. I just know that it is so much better than when I was watching my Spurs in the late 70s and early 80s when they were hardly on free tv. Had to fin a bar to go watch them.....so today I am just happy to be able to watch every playoff game.Strangely enough, that sounds like a reasonable explanation to me.
I think playing a b2b in the same arena, against the same team and hometown crowd, is a disadvantage. You don't. Just a difference of opinion. I understand the need for a b2b, due to the compressed schedule, and I wouldn't about that.
But, like I said, scheduling 4 NBA games in the same arena, in the same weekend, has to be a lot harder logistically. Throw in a hockey game (yes, they have a hockey game in the Staples Center this weekend too), and the scheduling really doesn't make any sense at all to me.
One thing I still disagree with you about. You talk about how much money the networks spend on television rights, and then turn around and say that the only customers are the ones who actually go to the games. I don't think you would have said that if you'd thought about it for a minute. The TV audiences (customers) are where the real money is at. You damn betcha we're customers. Do you have any customers who feel like they have to keep quiet and accept whatever you give them? The only reason the NBA can feel that way is the anti-trust agreement. In return, they are supposed to balance the needs of the smaller markets, even though it doesn't fully optimize profits - in the short run, at least. If for no other reason than the large market teams need the small market teams to have someone to play against. Without SA, Utah, OKC, etc. the league couldn't exist - and it damned sure couldn't sell all that advertising.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
