Reply With Quote
They'll have to notice. The only knock remaining on the Spurs/Duncan is the lack of a repeat. If that doesn't work, maybe Duncan needs to find a hotel clerk to impose his will on.
So Mike Monroe will call us a dynasty and the rest will qualify it, saying the Spurs are the most boring dynasty in NBA history. The most respect in the media we'll get is Sampras level. He could well be one of the best ever, but did anyone really even notice?
They'll have to notice. The only knock remaining on the Spurs/Duncan is the lack of a repeat. If that doesn't work, maybe Duncan needs to find a hotel clerk to impose his will on.
Any complimenet will be applied with the back of the hand. The "Boring" label is a sticky one. Permanent.They'll have to notice.
Dynasties aren't boring. Even the Pats were made to be thrilling.
Wow, an east coast team was favorably portrayed in the media?
Tell me more.
Well, they weren't the Bosox so they don't have that kind of 'perennial loser finally gets the nut' story. No national following either. Brady's the biggest star and he's got a Duncan-esque personna. They had the hardass no-nonsense coach and a solid D.
The Spurs can capitalize on the similar...a throwback style that's winning while the rest of the league is focused on scoring and what not. The anti-now. Sportswriters love to deep-six the present for not stacking up to the past. If the past creates a dynasty today, that makes for great copy.
San Antonio Spurs
Deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you know the truth. You know that for as much as you are supposed to appreciate the selfless, successful play of the San Antonio Spurs, as much as you are supposed to laud Tim Duncan as the best player in the league, this team is absolutely killing the popularity of the game. Can you ever remember a time when you had to get home to catch the Spurs game? Sorry, but Duncan banking in jumpers from 15 feet or Bruce Bowen draping himself over Vince Carter like an octopus doesn't get our blood flowing. But that's the Spurs' plan -- to play fundamentally sound ball on offense and make the game ugly on defense. And no one does fundamental better, more consistently, than the Spurs. And why not? That plan has won three les in five seasons. But it's also a lot like eating dry, white toast. It gets the job done, but, man, is it dull.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ts3/index.html
I'm sure another trophy will change this guy's tune, right?
We'll see this summer. Then SI will be publishing sketches of TD's HOF plaque and calling him the greatest player today.
They already call him the greatest player today.
And boring.
It won't change.
Nah, Shaq, Kobe and LBJ are still mentioned in those discussions. Right now the league is seen as being in a state of parity by the average sports fan. Yeah, the Spurs have won 2 of the last 3, but those Pistons could win it all this year and last year's Finals was close, etc...
Winning this year changes that. It rewrites the history of the last 4 seasons. The Spur Dynasty ascendenth.
Even if they win it all again, I guarantee you this board will still include rants against articles that diss this Spurs as boring. "Dynasty" will just be another word to fill in the phrase "Most boring _____ ever."
And we'll take the bait again like so much flounder.
I'm not sure it changes people's perception, but I know it'd change the way history looks at this team. However, it could also change perception if they start to market the NBA differently. It could go from "Will Kobe or Shaq have what it take to win a championship?" to "Will Kobe or Shaq be able to stop the Spurs' dynasty?"
This is the first season that the Spurs are crossing over into the mainstream. TP's thing with Eva is up there with Angelina and Brad's at present.
So we have the undying respect of the readership of the Weekly Star?
Americans love a winner. In the NBA that usually means 'dynasty'...
Normally not important in these parts, but part and parcel of becoming a dynasty is moving to pages such as those.
This as a bit of apples and oranges element to it in that the Super Bowl is infinitely more popular than the NBA finals .... for which the blame lies squarely on Tim Duncan's (boring-ass) shoulders. [/sarcasm]
I will also guarantee that another SA/Detroit series will produce articles saying everyone is just waiting for, say, Phoenix and Cleveland to save the NBA.
Then the league will adopt the trapezoid to help that along -- or something like that.
bringing in FIBA refs along with the tapezoid.
I think the response to SA/Det Part II will be that the 'back to basics' is winning and that the flashy hip hop part of the NBA (and US basketball) is in error. Sportswriters like to trash the present and in general, a certain segment of the US loves to hear how the traditional trumps that which spurns it. It's the same thing as with the Pats. Belicheck was the old school no-nonsense coach who mastered a league in love with something else. It's pretty hard to argue with 3 out of 4 les in any sport.
I'd also say that TP has given the Spurs a star who is willing to embrace the spotlight. To the extent that still matters, the Spurs have that covered.
The Pats also had that fat white dude that looked like Rodney Dangerfield
I wish people would let 0.4 go already. It should've been 0.8 left anyway. They shouldn't have let it come to that point anyway. Never allow the refs a chance to beat you. It was best of 7 anyway, so why was Devin the only player that showed up for Game 6?
Writers say a lot of things.
, I remember talk of the Bulls' dominance hurting the NBA, and the NBA needing a fresh Champion...
When it comes to the NBA, the general unwritten rule among the sports media is to tear it down no matter what the facts are.
The exact opposite of Major League Baseball. The last two World Series have been the most god-awful, boring, unmemorable championship events it has ever been my displeasure to witness. If the NBA ever had a Finals like those, the sports media would storm Congress to pass a cons utional amendment banning it forever.
Yet how much bad stuff got said about them as compared to the Spurs-NJ or Spurs-Pistons? I can't recall anybody ripping them.
The Spurs could win seven les and it doesn't mean they're going to get media love. The Detroit Pistons are forty-seven-and- ing-nine and all the media talks about is LeBron! Kobe! AI! 47-9! They're going to finish like 68-14 and nobody cares!
We could have three teams each win 65 games this season. None of them get media attention. Nobody cares. They care about three players each scoring 30 ppg. Individuals get attention. Teams don't.
30 years from now the Spurs are going to get respect regardless of what happens from here on out, because the only people who care about what happened 30 years ago are students of the game, and they already love the Spurs. Popular fans are never, ever, ever, ever, ever going to care. The league markets itself around individuals because it has to. There aren't that many people outside the inner city hip-hop culture who give a flip about pro basketball as a game in this country. Unless there is some big name scoring a lot of points for a high-profile team, nobody cares, nor have they ever cared. When the Boston Celtics were winning eight championships, fans cared about Wilt Chamberlain because he put up great stats. That's how it has always been.
They're not going to watch just to see Eva Longoria's boyfriend either, unless and until he gets caught cheating on her with Eva Mendes or something, and then they'll care for about a week.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
