First, regarding Nash's bloody nose...using it as an excuse for why Phoenix lost has gotten old and its become downright ignorant and biased, not to mention disrespectful to a hard working, championship caliber club like San Antonio who has been in these crunch time situations more than any other team in professional sports the past decade. I'm talking about uninformed media guessers who don't truly understand the subjects upon whom they report, therefore reverting to guesswork and popular opinion.
Take Tony Kornheiser on his daily radio show in D.C. Yesterday he ranted and whined about how Phoenix lost that game definitively because Nash missed the last 45 seconds. A true professional would say that Phoenix MIGHT have won had Nash been on the floor. Not once in a twenty minute series analysis did he even MENTION Tim Duncan's NAME! NOT ONCE! No, not even the fact that Hall of Fame Tim Duncan is on top of his game the most in a few years because he's finally totally healthy in a playoffs. I guess Kornheiser assumes that Duncan would have just laid down and quit playing had Nash been on the floor that last minute. I guess Kornheiser forgets that San Antonio's Big Three have two championships together, routinely lead the league in defense and Parker had peppered Phoenix with jumpers and diced them with layups all game.
Kornheiser does NOT want to acknowledge that Tony Parker has his way against Nash, and has at least matched him in every matchup all season long, including this playoff game.
Guys like Kornheiser are bred from a culture of whiny excuses who live on bandwagons.
His other b**** was that its shaping up to be a San Antonio v. Detroit Finals and that America does NOT want to see that, so its a looming ratings disaster for the League. I'll get to this point in a minute...
Let ME state something more intelligently than Kornheiser can, which is that San Antonio would likely have won with Nash because of their far superior defense and Tim Duncan's legendary winning ways, not to mention all stars Parker and Ginobili looming large in the wings. San Antonio is flat out BETTER than Phoenix, and the better team won. NO EXCUSES. Nash never should have committed that stupid foul against Parker in the first place. But what choice did he have? Nash is such a defensive non-presence that he knew Parker was about to twist his ankles in cement again.
And regarding Kornheiser's Finals take, let's revert back to my point about his whiny, bandwagon nature. A TRUE professional would have acknowledged the ratings drop in a potential San Antonio v. Detroit matchup, but would also have stated that a true basketball aficionado would appreciate it. He could have at least stated some positive attributes about those teams, because any team that reaches the NBA Finals does so because they have earned it. And ANY team that reaches it FOUR TIMES in less than a decade does so because of EXCELLENCE.
So Korny doesn't like physical, intelligent, hard working basketball teams? What a wuss!
I won't be listening to Tony Kornheiser's radio show in my podcast anymore, although I have only done so twice. The guy has lost all credibility with me. He wastes my time with awful commentary, poor insight and background knowledge of his subjects and blows his nasty, stinky east coast hot air into every topic he attempts to dissect. His absolutely pathetic lack of respect for San Antonio, alone, reveals what an obnoxious little credent this jerk has become.
I didn't read your entire post, but I agree with the first part. I was watching PTI yesterday, and both Kornheiser and Wilbon agreed that the Suns would have won the game had Nash not been injured. I was like WTF? How can they make that statement. Like you said, the Suns may have beaten the Spurs, but to say they definitely would have is dumb. Like many others, they probably want to see Phoenix move on.
I actually downloaded his 1.5 hour podcast from his Washington radio show. He actually had Wilbon as a guest. Wilbon said that no matter the outcome of Game 1, San Antonio is far, far superior to any remaining team, Phoenix included. He also heavily propped the Big Three and said Pop is the best coach in the NBA. Wilbon was telling it like it is! ha ha
I was just insulted by his ignorance in not even mentioning Tim Duncan's name. Forget that Duncan is stoic with the national press, but his game is legendary. Do your job and be a professional as a journalist. You don't have to kiss ass but try to tell the other side of the story as well. I know he's more or an editorial type, but still. He went on and on about Phoenix and Nash and the only few words he had for the Spurs were how the rest of the world was about to get tortured have their fun ruined by San Antonio eventually reaching the Finals.
I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with him saying that had he AT LEEEEEEEEEEAST acknowledged that San Antonio is a great team and until somebody beats them....you know what I mean.
kornheiser doesn't watch basketball very much. i tend to ignore his takes on the subject. other than that, i find him to be highly entertaining, although i don't know if i could take his radio show daily. from what i understand he doesn't talk a terrible amount about sports.
That's fine....let Kornholer have his fun. I love it when the "experts" discount the Spurs. Good things usually happen.
wow how pathetic. a better statement woulda been --phoenix coulda won with NASH if the SPURS would just take their seats at the bench.
Meh, if it makes you feel any better, society didn't prevent him from losing his Radio job at ESPN...
The NBA has been a marketing nightmare since Jordan left.
His flash, personality and GAME; following on the heals of the storybook Magic/Bird Years were a league's dream come true. Since he has retired, Stern et al. has been trying to conjure up the same formula; marketing personalities and flash.
The NFL, on the other hand, does a great job of marketing (what a concept, here) FOOTBALL! With the relative mediocrity of the league, and no dominant, dynasty level teams to speak of, they manage to make the Superbowl "Super" every year; and they make it about the "best" teams, regardless of who is actually playing. They give all contenders screen time, and keep their commentators relatively unbiased (you wouldn't want to pimp anybody too hard, they might get eliminated!)
The Spurs/Detroit series was the best Finals series in pretty much forever; and it SHOULD be a dream matchup for the league for a rematch; from a marketing standpoint. Problem is, the league never once talked about how good that series was once the LOB was presented. The league went on its pimping of LeBron, Wade and other "future MJ's" - not to mention the heavy dose of the Phoenix Suns propaganda. Didn't the NFL have their version of the Suns in the Warren Moon Oilers of the early '90's? Same results on the field (disappointing playoff collapses), much different outcome from a marketers point of view (nobody talked about how it was SO disappointing that the BILLS were advancing to the Super Bowl, after all - they talked about how great a matchup THAT game would be. Then, when the Cowboys spanked that, the league was SMART enough to jump on a PROVEN CHAMPION, and ride those coattails. They certainly didn't forget the Cowboys and jump right back on the Oiler's banwagon the next year!
If the league were smart, and if it wants good ratings deep in the playoffs, it ought to look at the teams most likely to be playing into June (and July) and pimp those teams throughout the year (Dallas notwithstanding)! I live in Western Pennsylvania, and I see almost NO local NBA coverage; the national broadcasts having the LeBron, Wade, Phoenix and LA bias that it does means that any team the people around here might grow to enjoy watching, or even bond with (no natural loyalty exists), WON'T be playing late in the playoffs. The TV's go off.
If, on the other hand, the Spurs were on TV ALOT - and the virtues of their style of play were espoused, and the virtues of the players (coach and management group included) themselves were championed - then a loyalty would begin to be formed. Considering that it has now been 8 SEASONS that the Spurs have been at or very near the top - it is no fault but that of the NBA that they still get "low" ratings.
These Spurs play the game of basketball like the Niners of the late '80's played the game of football. IF you follow the NBA, you know this. If you don't actively follow the NBA, they are simply "boring".
Sounds like a well-thought out football take to me.
I agree. I think the 05 finals were the most exciting of the past decade.
Even the first two finals that the Spurs won (99 and 03) weren't very good.
In 99, the Spurs beat the Nicks in 5.
In 03, the Spurs beat NJ in 6.
From 2000-2002, the Lakers won in (6 games, 5 games, 4 games). NONE of those series (other than 2000 Pacers) was even remotely compe ive.
In 04, the Pistons pretty much destroyed the Lakers in 5 games.
And last year, the Mavs choked away a 2 game lead.
SO, I'd love to see a rematch between the Spurs and Pistons. Maybe not great ratings, but great basketball.
The NBA chooses to have a marketing nightmare. The league is all about individuals, teams don't matter. It's always, always, "Kobe and the Lakers take on Nash and the Suns, or McGrady and the Rockets meet Vince Carter and the Nets, etc...
The NFL doesn't operate that way...its about the team and always has been that way. Cowboys and the Redskins, Steelers take on the Chargers, and on and on.
I don't know if I completely agree. I mean, how many damn Peyton Manning commercials are on TV?
Regarding Tony K., he remarks frequently what a tragedy it is that Kobe is sitting at home, that the Knicks, the Yankees, etc. are not champions of something. He also never watches the Spurs play unless they are playing either the Knicks or the Lakers. He goes to bed at 8 or 9 and then wants to comment on the west coast games.
I hope the Spurs sweep. I want to see a grown man cry.
Is Tony Kornheiser that little leprechaun they brought in to do Monday Night Football?
He's an ass of the Peter Vescey variety. Dude thinks he is smarter than everyone else on the planet.
Well I see your point but I disagree. The commercials that involve individual players are usually those of the individual sponsers and not commercials put out by the leauge. They are also usually used correctly, for example the DirecTV commercial that shows Peyton and emphasises the point, hey when my team is beating the out of someone you can switch to any other game and watch other teams. To me that is marketing a service and not the leauge.
Yes, yes he is. Or as I like to call him: the Talking Non-Sequitur.
It's also notable that the NFL doesn't allow players to pimp themselves out to the media DURING A GAME. This keeps the focus on the game instead of the next ridiculous dunk/flex that Amare or James will throw down.
Really, I'm getting sick of it. The bravado of the NBA and how they promote showboating over actual compe ion is just ridiculous and it's wearing thin. They're trying to reincarnate Magic's "Showtime" Lakers, and it will probably never happen with the salary cap so rigidly in place, not to mention that the Lakers weren't just flash, they could actually play the game extremely well on both ends of the court.
The Spurs could be the saviors of the NBA -- emphasis on close, tight games full of strategy, defense, and amazing ball movement (and if you haven't been paying attention, Manu and Parker can make some plays that are every bit as ridiculous as Kobe or Wade, note the absolutely silly floater that Manu threw over Camby in the Denver series). Yet the NBA ignores them and gives coverage to the .500 Lakers instead. Then when the Lakers fall on their face EVERY season, Stern & Co. are left wondering why no one is watching? Idiots.
What didnt make sense was Wilbon said Phoenix would've won the game with Nash but then said we were the best remaining team in the playoffs and the le is ours to lose.
If so, why would we have lost the game? Korn/Wilbon basically sweated the Suns nuts in their 90 second segment. I love the show and all but them
do you listen to kornheiser regularly? is so you would've known that posting this is a waste of your time. he's not an expert on anything, hates professional basketball and rarely, if ever, discusses it in a meaningful manner. that's why on occasion he invites wilbon and aldridge on his show to enlighten him. i'm pretty sure he, like everyone else, enjoys watching the suns for their style, but try not to take anything he says regarding the nba seriously. and he's right about the ratings. a detroit/san antonio series would be horrible for the nba. not that any of us care, but it's the truth. maybe listen to more than two broadcasts before you judge a show on how much it kisses your team's ass.
It's not worth your time and effort to get all riled up over those two blowhards.
All we can say is "scoreboard".
ESPN sometimes says "Sunday Night Football, Peyton Manning and the Colts go into cold snowy Foxboro to face Brady and the Pats".
Baseball is the one where I havent seen much of that "talk"
ESPN is not the NFL. The NFL does not market stars, they market teams.
I'm glad this thread is stirring some debate. Every radio host is en led to their opinion as is every fan, but I call into question one's journalistic professionalism when one does not even give the other team a slight prop here and there. Ridiculous. Korncheese sucks. So does Stephen A. Smith. He's amusing in that he rips the Knicks to shreds and picks at every flaw in the Mets and Yanks. He has NO business cracking San Antonio becoming from the tired Least Coast, at least when it comes to professional sports.
but you're assuming that kornheiser is a professional journalist. he's far from it. by the guys own admission he knows little to nothing of the nba or the nfl, a sport he covers on espn in the form of mnf. in the past when he wrote articles and covered the redskins for the post you could've considered him a journalist but now he's a talking head who espn hired for humor and pop-culture insight. if you want to get angry with someone, make it wilbon who should've known better. kornheiser is just playing to his audience by showing his ignorance and pimping a team who's in the national spotlight repeatedly.
wilbon has always given the spurs credit. tony has too, he just doesn't think they are terribly interesting as a team. if he thinks like that, that's fine. his main days covering the NBA were the 70s and 80s, when it was played a different way. i don't see why people are getting so worked up about this.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
