Trey Time 186 Report post Posted October 22, 2012 http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/8536640/jeff-van-gundy-implies-nba-blocked-hiring-stan-van-gundy A man who has been vocal (and truthful) of NBA officiating can't be an analyst because the NBA says so. And Stern wonders why people think the league is fixed... 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TrustInHenny 14 Report post Posted October 23, 2012 "As a broadcaster of the NBA, it gives you pause. How forthcoming can you be? You don't want your honesty to cost you a chance at employment." David Stern does what he wants. Shame. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NittanyBuc 757 Report post Posted October 23, 2012 David Stern does what he wants. Shame. Goodell vs. Stern. Who's the bigger douche? I say Stern by a small margin. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the notorious S.A.C. 89 Report post Posted October 23, 2012 Goodell vs. Stern. Who's the bigger douche? I say Stern by a small margin. Goodell at least has a successful product where underdog teams occasionally emerge and smaller market teams can keep their stars and be competitive. The NFL also has a franchise tag for whatever its worth. Meanwhile Stern is undermining the legitimacy of every team except for the "essential" 4 or 5 big market clubs that have dominated since the 1970's. Im sorry its Stern and its not even close. He is the hoover dam of douches and Goodell is but a trickling stream. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ibn Battuta 127 Report post Posted October 23, 2012 I don't see the big deal. If you speak out like that you have to know it could cost you. Just like real life. It sucks and unfair but so is life. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NittanyBuc 757 Report post Posted October 23, 2012 I don't see the big deal. If you speak out like that you have to know it could cost you. Just like real life. It sucks and unfair but so is life. I just find the fact that Stern can manipulate ESPN to be a little shady. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Captain Hi-Top 791 Report post Posted October 23, 2012 Interesting read, and I really like Stan. I was looking forward to hearing him on games. Moving this to the general NBA section soon. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
30Assists 342 Report post Posted October 23, 2012 Goodell at least has a successful product where underdog teams occasionally emerge and smaller market teams can keep their stars and be competitive. The NFL also has a franchise tag for whatever its worth. Meanwhile Stern is undermining the legitimacy of every team except for the "essential" 4 or 5 big market clubs that have dominated since the 1970's. Im sorry its Stern and its not even close. He is the hoover dam of douches and Goodell is but a trickling stream. The NFL also has a one-and-done playoff system. In a best-of-seven series, you're not going to get too many upsets. A good team might have one off night, but they're not going to have four. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NittanyBuc 757 Report post Posted October 23, 2012 The NFL also has a one-and-done playoff system. In a best-of-seven series, you're not going to get too many upsets. A good team might have one off night, but they're not going to have four. The physical toll in the average NFL game is far too great to make it a "best of series". I mean, I guess you could, but playoffs would take months. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Optimist Prime 197 Report post Posted October 23, 2012 The physical toll in the average NFL game is far too great to make it a "best of series". I mean, I guess you could, but playoffs would take months. I think that was his point. Because the NFL requires a one-game format, it is more likely for there to be upsets in that system. Also, playing a 16-game season lessens the disparity between top and bottom seeds, especially for a team learning a new system, they may hit their stride later and edge into the playoffs, then ride the momentum all the way to the Super Bowl. 82-game seasons also assure that the best teams are at the top and worst teams at the bottom (and having 8 seeds with no bye makes a difference as well), so it's less likely for an upset to occur. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NittanyBuc 757 Report post Posted October 23, 2012 I think that was his point. Because the NFL requires a one-game format, it is more likely for there to be upsets in that system. Also, playing a 16-game season lessens the disparity between top and bottom seeds, especially for a team learning a new system, they may hit their stride later and edge into the playoffs, then ride the momentum all the way to the Super Bowl. 82-game seasons also assure that the best teams are at the top and worst teams at the bottom (and having 8 seeds with no bye makes a difference as well), so it's less likely for an upset to occur. I believe it was as well, just elaborating and building off what he was saying. I prefer the NFL playoff system because, like you both said, upsets are much more prominent and everyone loves a good Cinderella story. On the topic of Goodell vs. Stern, I just think the whole Saints bounty fiasco is making Goodell looking increasingly more controlling and dictatorial. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ibn Battuta 127 Report post Posted October 23, 2012 I just find the fact that Stern can manipulate ESPN to be a little shady. He knows where the bodies are buried Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
