The official PANIC!!!!!!!!! SUPER TEAM IN THE DIVISION!!!! Thread

[Ryan the Magic Fan 253]

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

Stern is too focused on globalizing the League. He's not realizing that "more" is starting to look like "less." We need fewer teams, not more. We need a more narrow focus, not broader. The League will soon be as top-heavy as the MLB and it will be predicated on the size/location of the city. Disparity....not parity. For shame.

 

The NFL ring a bell? In that league it seems like every team is in it (well 'cept Oakland anyway). My Bucs had a 3-13 season last year and because of the parity and how a team can turn around and be a competitor with only minimal tweaks I am totally pumped up for the football season.

 

The NFL is the most successful league BECAUSE of it's parity. Because the fans all believe their team ('cept Oakland) has a shot. Not because their big market teams always do well. For christ sakes they don't even have a team in LA and there doing fine. Yet other leagues don't understand that.

[Live or Die Magic 383]

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

Stern is too focused on globalizing the League. He's not realizing that "more" is starting to look like "less." We need fewer teams, not more. We need a more narrow focus, not broader. The League will soon be as top-heavy as the MLB and it will be predicated on the size/location of the city. Disparity....not parity. For shame.

 

The NFL ring a bell? In that league it seems like every team is in it (well 'cept Oakland anyway). My Bucs had a 3-13 season last year and because of the parity and how a team can turn around and be a competitor with only minimal tweaks I am totally pumped up for the football season.

 

The NFL is the most successful league BECAUSE of it's parity. Because the fans all believe their team ('cept Oakland) has a shot. Not because their big market teams always do well. For christ sakes they don't even have a team in LA and there doing fine. Yet other leagues don't understand that.

 

You nailed it.

Preach on, Brother Ramsde.

[Ryan the Magic Fan 253]

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

Stern is too focused on globalizing the League. He's not realizing that "more" is starting to look like "less." We need fewer teams, not more. We need a more narrow focus, not broader. The League will soon be as top-heavy as the MLB and it will be predicated on the size/location of the city. Disparity....not parity. For shame.

 

The NFL ring a bell? In that league it seems like every team is in it (well 'cept Oakland anyway). My Bucs had a 3-13 season last year and because of the parity and how a team can turn around and be a competitor with only minimal tweaks I am totally pumped up for the football season.

 

The NFL is the most successful league BECAUSE of it's parity. Because the fans all believe their team ('cept Oakland) has a shot. Not because their big market teams always do well. For christ sakes they don't even have a team in LA and there doing fine. Yet other leagues don't understand that.

 

You nailed it.

Preach on, Brother Ramsde.

 

Thank you. I will even take it one step further as well (because this has burning me up about not just the NBA, but other big time leagues that dont follow the NFL model).

 

Over half the championships in the history of the NBA belong to two teams. The Lakers and the celtics at 16 and 17 respectively, with those two being two of the leagues biggest markets. The closest after that is the Bulls with 6 (another big market).

 

The NFL, which has just as long of a history, is no where even close to that kind of single team domination. The highest total belongs to the Steelers at 6, and they are a comparitively small market to the ones in Boston and New York. Not only that but again, there is real parity, teams always have a chance. I mean come on, in the last decade, the Bucs and the Saints, long the dormats of football, won superbowls!!!!

 

Now compare the two leagues in terms of financial success and fan support. Compare any league to the NFL.

 

Take notes people.

[TreyTime 3]

classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000"

height="385"

width="480"

>

value="transparent"

>

value="never"

>

name="movie"

/>

/>

/>

pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer"

wmode="transparent"

allowScriptAccess="never"

height="385"

width="480"

src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-8_Se1n67Y&hl=en_US&fs=1"

/>

[Marc Acres 3:16 418]

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

Stern is too focused on globalizing the League. He's not realizing that "more" is starting to look like "less." We need fewer teams, not more. We need a more narrow focus, not broader. The League will soon be as top-heavy as the MLB and it will be predicated on the size/location of the city. Disparity....not parity. For shame.

 

The NFL ring a bell? In that league it seems like every team is in it (well 'cept Oakland anyway). My Bucs had a 3-13 season last year and because of the parity and how a team can turn around and be a competitor with only minimal tweaks I am totally pumped up for the football season.

 

The NFL is the most successful league BECAUSE of it's parity. Because the fans all believe their team ('cept Oakland) has a shot. Not because their big market teams always do well. For christ sakes they don't even have a team in LA and there doing fine. Yet other leagues don't understand that.

 

You nailed it.

Preach on, Brother Ramsde.

 

Thank you. I will even take it one step further as well (because this has burning me up about not just the NBA, but other big time leagues that dont follow the NFL model).

 

Over half the championships in the history of the NBA belong to two teams. The Lakers and the celtics at 16 and 17 respectively, with those two being two of the leagues biggest markets. The closest after that is the Bulls with 6 (another big market).

 

The NFL, which has just as long of a history, is no where even close to that kind of single team domination. The highest total belongs to the Steelers at 6, and they are a comparitively small market to the ones in Boston and New York. Not only that but again, there is real parity, teams always have a chance. I mean come on, in the last decade, the Bucs and the Saints, long the dormats of football, won superbowls!!!!

 

Now compare the two leagues in terms of financial success and fan support. Compare any league to the NFL.

 

Take notes people.

 

Couldn't agree more, the NFL is the perfect model for what Stern should be doing. Unfortunatley he is an absentee landlord, he slithers out from underneath his rock when there is a press function and does nothing to improve the game.

 

A team like Tor that has never been able to hold on to a player long enough to build a contending team should have been contracted, they add nothing to the league. Same goes for Memphis and LAC, there are too many teams that are basically conduits for other teams to clear space and steal talent.

 

The part that bugs me the most about this possible super team is that in addition to eliminating competition in the league, they are going to make the game even more unwatchable. Because of Stern's BS rule changes to outlaw defense these guys are going to be unguardable. If you have someone that can get in front of them it won't matter, they are going to be going to the line. Who the hell wants to watch a free throw shooting contest?? Stern should do the league a favor and march himself into on coming traffic.

[PNuT1423 0]

quote:

Originally posted by Marc Acres 3:16:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

Stern is too focused on globalizing the League. He's not realizing that "more" is starting to look like "less." We need fewer teams, not more. We need a more narrow focus, not broader. The League will soon be as top-heavy as the MLB and it will be predicated on the size/location of the city. Disparity....not parity. For shame.

 

The NFL ring a bell? In that league it seems like every team is in it (well 'cept Oakland anyway). My Bucs had a 3-13 season last year and because of the parity and how a team can turn around and be a competitor with only minimal tweaks I am totally pumped up for the football season.

 

The NFL is the most successful league BECAUSE of it's parity. Because the fans all believe their team ('cept Oakland) has a shot. Not because their big market teams always do well. For christ sakes they don't even have a team in LA and there doing fine. Yet other leagues don't understand that.

 

You nailed it.

Preach on, Brother Ramsde.

 

Thank you. I will even take it one step further as well (because this has burning me up about not just the NBA, but other big time leagues that dont follow the NFL model).

 

Over half the championships in the history of the NBA belong to two teams. The Lakers and the celtics at 16 and 17 respectively, with those two being two of the leagues biggest markets. The closest after that is the Bulls with 6 (another big market).

 

The NFL, which has just as long of a history, is no where even close to that kind of single team domination. The highest total belongs to the Steelers at 6, and they are a comparitively small market to the ones in Boston and New York. Not only that but again, there is real parity, teams always have a chance. I mean come on, in the last decade, the Bucs and the Saints, long the dormats of football, won superbowls!!!!

 

Now compare the two leagues in terms of financial success and fan support. Compare any league to the NFL.

 

Take notes people.

 

Couldn't agree more, the NFL is the perfect model for what Stern should be doing. Unfortunatley he is an absentee landlord, he slithers out from underneath his rock when there is a press function and does nothing to improve the game.

 

A team like Tor that has never been able to hold on to a player long enough to build a contending team should have been contracted, they add nothing to the league. Same goes for Memphis and LAC, there are too many teams that are basically conduits for other teams to clear space and steal talent.

 

The part that bugs me the most about this possible super team is that in addition to eliminating competition in the league, they are going to make the game even more unwatchable. Because of Stern's BS rule changes to outlaw defense these guys are going to be unguardable. If you have someone that can get in front of them it won't matter, they are going to be going to the line. Who the hell wants to watch a free throw shooting contest?? Stern should do the league a favor and march himself into on coming traffic.

 

if i were one of the have not teams, i'd have one random no name player a month drop kick lebron at full sprint from the back... i'd watch. i think that would be one of the most viewed things for years to come, nobody knows when or where, come on guys!

[Fultz4thewin 2,464]

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

Stern is too focused on globalizing the League. He's not realizing that "more" is starting to look like "less." We need fewer teams, not more. We need a more narrow focus, not broader. The League will soon be as top-heavy as the MLB and it will be predicated on the size/location of the city. Disparity....not parity. For shame.

 

The NFL ring a bell? In that league it seems like every team is in it (well 'cept Oakland anyway). My Bucs had a 3-13 season last year and because of the parity and how a team can turn around and be a competitor with only minimal tweaks I am totally pumped up for the football season.

 

The NFL is the most successful league BECAUSE of it's parity. Because the fans all believe their team ('cept Oakland) has a shot. Not because their big market teams always do well. For christ sakes they don't even have a team in LA and there doing fine. Yet other leagues don't understand that.

 

You nailed it.

Preach on, Brother Ramsde.

 

Thank you. I will even take it one step further as well (because this has burning me up about not just the NBA, but other big time leagues that dont follow the NFL model).

 

Over half the championships in the history of the NBA belong to two teams. The Lakers and the celtics at 16 and 17 respectively, with those two being two of the leagues biggest markets. The closest after that is the Bulls with 6 (another big market).

 

The NFL, which has just as long of a history, is no where even close to that kind of single team domination. The highest total belongs to the Steelers at 6, and they are a comparitively small market to the ones in Boston and New York. Not only that but again, there is real parity, teams always have a chance. I mean come on, in the last decade, the Bucs and the Saints, long the dormats of football, won superbowls!!!!

 

Now compare the two leagues in terms of financial success and fan support. Compare any league to the NFL.

 

Take notes people.

 

I like the sentiment but i think the NBA can never be like the NFL because a smaller amount of players can impact a game more. In football there are 22 starters on offense/defense. In basketball there are 5. So one superstar on an NBA team is like having 4-5 superstars on an NFL team. Building a roster around Lebron James is like building a roster around Peyton Manning, Andre Johnson, Joe Thomas, and mario williams. Just having dwight on our roster is like the Vikings Defensive line.

 

That's why there's more parity in the NFL. There's more moving parts. more things can go wrong. injuries happen at a higher rate so it's rare that even 50% of a team stays healthy during a season.

 

It takes a whole lotta luck to win a super bowl.

[AcuWill 45]

quote:

Originally posted by Lewis4thewin:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

Stern is too focused on globalizing the League. He's not realizing that "more" is starting to look like "less." We need fewer teams, not more. We need a more narrow focus, not broader. The League will soon be as top-heavy as the MLB and it will be predicated on the size/location of the city. Disparity....not parity. For shame.

 

The NFL ring a bell? In that league it seems like every team is in it (well 'cept Oakland anyway). My Bucs had a 3-13 season last year and because of the parity and how a team can turn around and be a competitor with only minimal tweaks I am totally pumped up for the football season.

 

The NFL is the most successful league BECAUSE of it's parity. Because the fans all believe their team ('cept Oakland) has a shot. Not because their big market teams always do well. For christ sakes they don't even have a team in LA and there doing fine. Yet other leagues don't understand that.

 

You nailed it.

Preach on, Brother Ramsde.

 

Thank you. I will even take it one step further as well (because this has burning me up about not just the NBA, but other big time leagues that dont follow the NFL model).

 

Over half the championships in the history of the NBA belong to two teams. The Lakers and the celtics at 16 and 17 respectively, with those two being two of the leagues biggest markets. The closest after that is the Bulls with 6 (another big market).

 

The NFL, which has just as long of a history, is no where even close to that kind of single team domination. The highest total belongs to the Steelers at 6, and they are a comparitively small market to the ones in Boston and New York. Not only that but again, there is real parity, teams always have a chance. I mean come on, in the last decade, the Bucs and the Saints, long the dormats of football, won superbowls!!!!

 

Now compare the two leagues in terms of financial success and fan support. Compare any league to the NFL.

 

Take notes people.

 

I like the sentiment but i think the NBA can never be like the NFL because a smaller amount of players can impact a game more. In football there are 22 starters on offense/defense. In basketball there are 5. So one superstar on an NBA team is like having 4-5 superstars on an NFL team. Building a roster around Lebron James is like building a roster around Peyton Manning, Andre Johnson, Joe Thomas, and mario williams. Just having dwight on our roster is like the Vikings Defensive line.

 

That's why there's more parity in the NFL. There's more moving parts. more things can go wrong. injuries happen at a higher rate so it's rare that even 50% of a team stays healthy during a season.

 

It takes a whole lotta luck to win a super bowl.

Yeah, but the league setup is the key here. I think the key difference is the NBA has fans of players (see VC freaks when we got him) instead of NFL where fans are TEAM fans. To my knowledge, I have never seen/heard ofa roaming fan base with a player in the NFL.

 

This is simply a league-wide marketing. They market their players, not their teams.

[Fultz4thewin 2,464]

quote:

Originally posted by AcuWill:

quote:

Originally posted by Lewis4thewin:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

Stern is too focused on globalizing the League. He's not realizing that "more" is starting to look like "less." We need fewer teams, not more. We need a more narrow focus, not broader. The League will soon be as top-heavy as the MLB and it will be predicated on the size/location of the city. Disparity....not parity. For shame.

 

The NFL ring a bell? In that league it seems like every team is in it (well 'cept Oakland anyway). My Bucs had a 3-13 season last year and because of the parity and how a team can turn around and be a competitor with only minimal tweaks I am totally pumped up for the football season.

 

The NFL is the most successful league BECAUSE of it's parity. Because the fans all believe their team ('cept Oakland) has a shot. Not because their big market teams always do well. For christ sakes they don't even have a team in LA and there doing fine. Yet other leagues don't understand that.

 

You nailed it.

Preach on, Brother Ramsde.

 

Thank you. I will even take it one step further as well (because this has burning me up about not just the NBA, but other big time leagues that dont follow the NFL model).

 

Over half the championships in the history of the NBA belong to two teams. The Lakers and the celtics at 16 and 17 respectively, with those two being two of the leagues biggest markets. The closest after that is the Bulls with 6 (another big market).

 

The NFL, which has just as long of a history, is no where even close to that kind of single team domination. The highest total belongs to the Steelers at 6, and they are a comparitively small market to the ones in Boston and New York. Not only that but again, there is real parity, teams always have a chance. I mean come on, in the last decade, the Bucs and the Saints, long the dormats of football, won superbowls!!!!

 

Now compare the two leagues in terms of financial success and fan support. Compare any league to the NFL.

 

Take notes people.

 

I like the sentiment but i think the NBA can never be like the NFL because a smaller amount of players can impact a game more. In football there are 22 starters on offense/defense. In basketball there are 5. So one superstar on an NBA team is like having 4-5 superstars on an NFL team. Building a roster around Lebron James is like building a roster around Peyton Manning, Andre Johnson, Joe Thomas, and mario williams. Just having dwight on our roster is like the Vikings Defensive line.

 

That's why there's more parity in the NFL. There's more moving parts. more things can go wrong. injuries happen at a higher rate so it's rare that even 50% of a team stays healthy during a season.

 

It takes a whole lotta luck to win a super bowl.

Yeah, but the league setup is the key here. I think the key difference is the NBA has fans of players (see VC freaks when we got him) instead of NFL where fans are TEAM fans. To my knowledge, I have never seen/heard ofa roaming fan base with a player in the NFL.

 

This is simply a league-wide marketing. They market their players, not their teams.

 

i think it has to do with shelf life/players staying with teams.

[Marc Acres 3:16 418]

quote:

Originally posted by Lewis4thewin:

quote:

Originally posted by AcuWill:

quote:

Originally posted by Lewis4thewin:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

Stern is too focused on globalizing the League. He's not realizing that "more" is starting to look like "less." We need fewer teams, not more. We need a more narrow focus, not broader. The League will soon be as top-heavy as the MLB and it will be predicated on the size/location of the city. Disparity....not parity. For shame.

 

The NFL ring a bell? In that league it seems like every team is in it (well 'cept Oakland anyway). My Bucs had a 3-13 season last year and because of the parity and how a team can turn around and be a competitor with only minimal tweaks I am totally pumped up for the football season.

 

The NFL is the most successful league BECAUSE of it's parity. Because the fans all believe their team ('cept Oakland) has a shot. Not because their big market teams always do well. For christ sakes they don't even have a team in LA and there doing fine. Yet other leagues don't understand that.

 

You nailed it.

Preach on, Brother Ramsde.

 

Thank you. I will even take it one step further as well (because this has burning me up about not just the NBA, but other big time leagues that dont follow the NFL model).

 

Over half the championships in the history of the NBA belong to two teams. The Lakers and the celtics at 16 and 17 respectively, with those two being two of the leagues biggest markets. The closest after that is the Bulls with 6 (another big market).

 

The NFL, which has just as long of a history, is no where even close to that kind of single team domination. The highest total belongs to the Steelers at 6, and they are a comparitively small market to the ones in Boston and New York. Not only that but again, there is real parity, teams always have a chance. I mean come on, in the last decade, the Bucs and the Saints, long the dormats of football, won superbowls!!!!

 

Now compare the two leagues in terms of financial success and fan support. Compare any league to the NFL.

 

Take notes people.

 

I like the sentiment but i think the NBA can never be like the NFL because a smaller amount of players can impact a game more. In football there are 22 starters on offense/defense. In basketball there are 5. So one superstar on an NBA team is like having 4-5 superstars on an NFL team. Building a roster around Lebron James is like building a roster around Peyton Manning, Andre Johnson, Joe Thomas, and mario williams. Just having dwight on our roster is like the Vikings Defensive line.

 

That's why there's more parity in the NFL. There's more moving parts. more things can go wrong. injuries happen at a higher rate so it's rare that even 50% of a team stays healthy during a season.

 

It takes a whole lotta luck to win a super bowl.

Yeah, but the league setup is the key here. I think the key difference is the NBA has fans of players (see VC freaks when we got him) instead of NFL where fans are TEAM fans. To my knowledge, I have never seen/heard ofa roaming fan base with a player in the NFL.

 

This is simply a league-wide marketing. They market their players, not their teams.

 

i think it has to do with shelf life/players staying with teams.

 

Maybe but it certainly doesn't help that the league marketing shoves players down everyones throat. It makes for stupid fans in the process, how many times do we see a guy that has a sub-par year get voted on to the all-star team? Grant f'in Hill was voted on by the fans and HE WASN'T EVEN PLAYING. If you go by the marketing of this screwed up league you would think Cleveland has won the last 10 titles.

 

Oh and Cunning I think that is a great idea, in fact I would rather watch a 30 hr loop of Lebron and David Stern getting into a car accident than this abortion of a game that these guys and ESPN have created.

[Fultz4thewin 2,464]

quote:

Originally posted by Marc Acres 3:16:

quote:

Originally posted by Lewis4thewin:

quote:

Originally posted by AcuWill:

quote:

Originally posted by Lewis4thewin:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

Stern is too focused on globalizing the League. He's not realizing that "more" is starting to look like "less." We need fewer teams, not more. We need a more narrow focus, not broader. The League will soon be as top-heavy as the MLB and it will be predicated on the size/location of the city. Disparity....not parity. For shame.

 

The NFL ring a bell? In that league it seems like every team is in it (well 'cept Oakland anyway). My Bucs had a 3-13 season last year and because of the parity and how a team can turn around and be a competitor with only minimal tweaks I am totally pumped up for the football season.

 

The NFL is the most successful league BECAUSE of it's parity. Because the fans all believe their team ('cept Oakland) has a shot. Not because their big market teams always do well. For christ sakes they don't even have a team in LA and there doing fine. Yet other leagues don't understand that.

 

You nailed it.

Preach on, Brother Ramsde.

 

Thank you. I will even take it one step further as well (because this has burning me up about not just the NBA, but other big time leagues that dont follow the NFL model).

 

Over half the championships in the history of the NBA belong to two teams. The Lakers and the celtics at 16 and 17 respectively, with those two being two of the leagues biggest markets. The closest after that is the Bulls with 6 (another big market).

 

The NFL, which has just as long of a history, is no where even close to that kind of single team domination. The highest total belongs to the Steelers at 6, and they are a comparitively small market to the ones in Boston and New York. Not only that but again, there is real parity, teams always have a chance. I mean come on, in the last decade, the Bucs and the Saints, long the dormats of football, won superbowls!!!!

 

Now compare the two leagues in terms of financial success and fan support. Compare any league to the NFL.

 

Take notes people.

 

I like the sentiment but i think the NBA can never be like the NFL because a smaller amount of players can impact a game more. In football there are 22 starters on offense/defense. In basketball there are 5. So one superstar on an NBA team is like having 4-5 superstars on an NFL team. Building a roster around Lebron James is like building a roster around Peyton Manning, Andre Johnson, Joe Thomas, and mario williams. Just having dwight on our roster is like the Vikings Defensive line.

 

That's why there's more parity in the NFL. There's more moving parts. more things can go wrong. injuries happen at a higher rate so it's rare that even 50% of a team stays healthy during a season.

 

It takes a whole lotta luck to win a super bowl.

Yeah, but the league setup is the key here. I think the key difference is the NBA has fans of players (see VC freaks when we got him) instead of NFL where fans are TEAM fans. To my knowledge, I have never seen/heard ofa roaming fan base with a player in the NFL.

 

This is simply a league-wide marketing. They market their players, not their teams.

 

i think it has to do with shelf life/players staying with teams.

 

Maybe but it certainly doesn't help that the league marketing shoves players down everyones throat. It makes for stupid fans in the process, how many times do we see a guy that has a sub-par year get voted on to the all-star team? Grant f'in Hill was voted on by the fans and HE WASN'T EVEN PLAYING. If you go by the marketing of this screwed up league you would think Cleveland has won the last 10 titles.

 

Oh and Cunning I think that is a great idea, in fact I would rather watch a 30 hr loop of Lebron and David Stern getting into a car accident than this abortion of a game that these guys and ESPN have created.

 

that happens in the NFL too. See: Roy Williams.

[AcuWill 45]

quote:

Originally posted by Lewis4thewin:

quote:

Originally posted by Marc Acres 3:16:

quote:

Originally posted by Lewis4thewin:

quote:

Originally posted by AcuWill:

quote:

Originally posted by Lewis4thewin:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

quote:

Originally posted by Ramsde68:

quote:

Originally posted by Live or Die Magic:

Stern is too focused on globalizing the League. He's not realizing that "more" is starting to look like "less." We need fewer teams, not more. We need a more narrow focus, not broader. The League will soon be as top-heavy as the MLB and it will be predicated on the size/location of the city. Disparity....not parity. For shame.

 

The NFL ring a bell? In that league it seems like every team is in it (well 'cept Oakland anyway). My Bucs had a 3-13 season last year and because of the parity and how a team can turn around and be a competitor with only minimal tweaks I am totally pumped up for the football season.

 

The NFL is the most successful league BECAUSE of it's parity. Because the fans all believe their team ('cept Oakland) has a shot. Not because their big market teams always do well. For christ sakes they don't even have a team in LA and there doing fine. Yet other leagues don't understand that.

 

You nailed it.

Preach on, Brother Ramsde.

 

Thank you. I will even take it one step further as well (because this has burning me up about not just the NBA, but other big time leagues that dont follow the NFL model).

 

Over half the championships in the history of the NBA belong to two teams. The Lakers and the celtics at 16 and 17 respectively, with those two being two of the leagues biggest markets. The closest after that is the Bulls with 6 (another big market).

 

The NFL, which has just as long of a history, is no where even close to that kind of single team domination. The highest total belongs to the Steelers at 6, and they are a comparitively small market to the ones in Boston and New York. Not only that but again, there is real parity, teams always have a chance. I mean come on, in the last decade, the Bucs and the Saints, long the dormats of football, won superbowls!!!!

 

Now compare the two leagues in terms of financial success and fan support. Compare any league to the NFL.

 

Take notes people.

 

I like the sentiment but i think the NBA can never be like the NFL because a smaller amount of players can impact a game more. In football there are 22 starters on offense/defense. In basketball there are 5. So one superstar on an NBA team is like having 4-5 superstars on an NFL team. Building a roster around Lebron James is like building a roster around Peyton Manning, Andre Johnson, Joe Thomas, and mario williams. Just having dwight on our roster is like the Vikings Defensive line.

 

That's why there's more parity in the NFL. There's more moving parts. more things can go wrong. injuries happen at a higher rate so it's rare that even 50% of a team stays healthy during a season.

 

It takes a whole lotta luck to win a super bowl.

Yeah, but the league setup is the key here. I think the key difference is the NBA has fans of players (see VC freaks when we got him) instead of NFL where fans are TEAM fans. To my knowledge, I have never seen/heard ofa roaming fan base with a player in the NFL.

 

This is simply a league-wide marketing. They market their players, not their teams.

 

i think it has to do with shelf life/players staying with teams.

 

Maybe but it certainly doesn't help that the league marketing shoves players down everyones throat. It makes for stupid fans in the process, how many times do we see a guy that has a sub-par year get voted on to the all-star team? Grant f'in Hill was voted on by the fans and HE WASN'T EVEN PLAYING. If you go by the marketing of this screwed up league you would think Cleveland has won the last 10 titles.

 

Oh and Cunning I think that is a great idea, in fact I would rather watch a 30 hr loop of Lebron and David Stern getting into a car accident than this abortion of a game that these guys and ESPN have created.

 

that happens in the NFL too. See: Roy Williams.

Don't think it's the same at all, but lets say that the Roy Williams situation is: it is still the exception, no the rule.