The Smiley Smile Message Board

Non Smiley Smile Stuff => The Sandbox => Topic started by: Charles LePage @ ComicList on June 02, 2006, 08:52:14 PM



Title: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Charles LePage @ ComicList on June 02, 2006, 08:52:14 PM
(http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/sp/getty/oly_full.getty-57561984mw038_detroit_pisto.jpg)
(http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/sp/getty/oly_full.getty-57561984mw032_detroit_pisto.jpg)
"I only celebrate it," O'Neal said, "when it's really over. ... The job is not done."


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jonas on June 03, 2006, 01:49:21 PM
The Heat is on! :woot


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jeff Mason on June 03, 2006, 09:13:45 PM
You mean that there are still folks supporting a sport where the players have to go on strike because the average salary is only areound $2 million and the athletes were struggling to make mortgage payments like everyone else?  As if they would have health issues a la football players in life?  I NEVER went back to the NBA after that strike and I never will again.

College football -- now that's where it's at.


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Susan on June 03, 2006, 09:22:23 PM
Jeff, next fall make sure you head over to the Other Topics board at Shut Down.  We've got a bunch of college football freaks over there...the thread is a million-and-two seller every year!


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Susan on June 03, 2006, 09:23:10 PM
Jeff, next fall make sure you head over to the Other Topics board at Shut Down.  We've got a bunch of college football freaks over there...the thread is a million-and-two seller every year!

Oh - and on the strength of i like Dirk Nowitski, Go, Mavs!


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Charles LePage @ ComicList on June 04, 2006, 05:05:10 AM
"As if they would have health issues a la football players in life?"

I'm not at all certain what that means.


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jeff Mason on June 04, 2006, 06:09:59 AM
"As if they would have health issues a la football players in life?"

I'm not at all certain what that means.

In the case of pro football players, they often have health issues due to playing injuries or wear and tear that in the worst extreme can chew up all of the money that they made playing football.  Plus, the time available for a career is most often much shorter (less than 8 years on average) and the first contract is never too good if you aren't a top 10 draft pick.  So if a pro football player complains about salary, I have some sympathy.  Besides, the average salary is below that of a basketball player.

But an NBA player....  Playing basketball won't cause permanent damage in most cases.  Players can often play for years and years if ability allows.  And the minimum salary and average salary are relatively HUGE since you have fewer players to divide up the pie with.  Now when people in THAT circumstance say that they have to strike because they need the money?  They can barely make mortgage payments? (someone, please give me $2 million dollars and I can assure you I will no longer HAVE a mortgage payment EVER).  That was a huge turnoff, and that WAS said in the strike.  Plus, NBA culture has taken a downturn and I don't like it.  There are too many people that I would think of as almost thugs, and the NBA itself seems powerless to police itself if an independent counsel can throw out penalties enforced by league offices for flagrant violations of league rules (IMO EVERY player in the Indiana/Detroit game who went into the crowd needed a suspension and fine of some sort). 

So let them do what they want.  Once I cared a bit, but now I am just not interested.


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jonas on June 04, 2006, 06:20:33 AM
Agreed Jeff, but its happened in almost every sport already. Basketball, Hockey, Baseball (every few years now)...

Still, I'll root for the Heat and Dolphins up to my grave...


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jeff Mason on June 04, 2006, 06:52:37 AM
See, that's why I am a fan of college football.  There is no purity in any sport left but IMO cf comes closest....


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jonas on June 04, 2006, 08:52:11 AM
Ive always enjoyed college sports because theres more spirit and heart in it. But college has its dark demons as well, theres been as much controversy as there is in pro-ball. :/


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Charles LePage @ ComicList on June 04, 2006, 12:19:26 PM
Anecdotal, but, I hear of plenty of college sport violations, college football included.

The NBA is enforcing a dress code (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_dress_code) to help remedy part of the "thugness" you spoke of.

Which players who went into the stands did not receive a penalty of any sort?

Here's some interesting info on the strike:

Quote
League: NBA
Year Of Strike: 1998-1999
Days Strike Lasted: 191
Games Lost: 928

The NBA was experiencing its highest ratings and revenue prior to the strike, thanks in large part to the impact of Michael Jordan. Facing a season shortened to 50 games -- and without Jordan -- it hoped its good fortune would continue. It didn't.

Even though the strike lasted just three months and didn't impact the playoffs, NBA players lost a fortune -- $50 million a week and roughly $500 million in total salary. Not to mention the millions in potential earnings they lost after a salary cap was instituted to contain spending. Commissioner David Stern announced that even though 2004 attendance is up, current NBA revenue for many teams is dropping. He didn't, however, release the exact numbers.

Players also suffered a hit in terms of endorsement deals, as a number of companies suspended payments to NBA players under contract during the strike. Nike was employing 230 NBA players at the time and suspended payments to all of them.

In terms of ratings, the NBA has gone from an 18.7 in the final NBA game before the strike -- Game 6 of Chicago versus Utah -- to a finals average of 8.2 in 2003. And a playoff game for 2004 was even clobbered in the ratings by the NFL draft, posting a rating of 1. With a $4.6 billion TV contract signed with ABC in 2002, the NBA won't see that kind of money again unless the ratings pick up.

http://www.askmen.com/sports/business_100/107b_sports_business.html


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Charles LePage @ ComicList on June 04, 2006, 12:28:17 PM
The average football career is 3.5 to 4 years and when it ends, the money is gone.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/ESPNSports/story?id=1528986

There are many factors that influence a players' success at levels above public school athletics. The probability of reaching the highest levels of competition is small. In basketball in the USA, only three-percent of high school players will ever play in college. Of that group, only three-percent play professional basketball. Even when succeeding against these odds, the average professional basketball player's career is only four to six years (Leonard, 1996).

http://www.coachesinfo.com/article/7/


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Charles LePage @ ComicList on June 04, 2006, 12:37:23 PM
Shaq getting the cold shoulder from Jeff:

(http://www.nba.com/media/shaq_400_051214.jpg)


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Charles LePage @ ComicList on June 04, 2006, 12:39:03 PM
(http://alt.cimedia.com/palmbeachpost/wallpaper/shaq_pack_1024.jpg)


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jonas on June 04, 2006, 12:58:50 PM
4-6 years? bs. I wanna see the numbers they used to come up with that average...


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jeff Mason on June 04, 2006, 01:58:50 PM
I researched it and found that my memory was faulty; only one player's suspension was reduced.  But even that makes me angry -- there was no excuse for that behavior, and for the players' union to even try to defend it in anyway was offensive.  This is also a league that suffers players choking coaches and other acts of extreme arrogance. 

I don't feel sorry for them losing money during the strike.  Their choice to do it.  Had they been saving their money and investing it as they should, they should have been OK.  The problem is that these players learn early on to be arrogant and believe that there are no consequences to bad behavior that can't be overcome.

And yes, as I indicated before, college sports aren't pure either.  Nothing is.  But they are in their imperfect form far more enjoyable than the Look-at-me fest that the NBA has become.  I feel no sympathy for their reduced ratings at all, nor did I feel sympathy for baseball (which is its own idiot problem -- how could you possibly resist steriod testing for so long and think no consequence would happen?) or hockey (do you think that this is established enough that you could endure losing an entire season and stay at the same level?).


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Kirk Lowdermilk on June 04, 2006, 02:49:20 PM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=IVUAc7Hr3Fs&search=elvis%20dumervil

Some uplifting college football action from last season.


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Susan on June 04, 2006, 02:56:53 PM
THere is plenty of culpability to spread around the baseball world for steroids.  Owners/the commissioner saw revenues increasing hugely when players started taking steroids.  They did nothing to stop the drug use because it equated with more money in everybody's pockets.  And sports journalists and fans enjoyed a more exciting game...so they - we - didn't say anything.  Now the chickens are coming home to roost re: rampant steroid use in the late '90s and ealry '00s, and we're all pointing fingers at the players?  I think we need to use more fingers here.

As for college football being closest to pure amongst the popular sports, i have to disagree.  Those programs are SO not pure...between alums forking over money and goodies, drug use to increase performance, and non-participation in classes, i don't see how you can find a whole lot of purity, Jeff.  College hoops isn't much better, but it is SOME better.

NCAA baseball might be the most pure among the college sports, if only because MLB doesn't use the NCAA as its minor leagues.  The NFL and the NBA both do - hence the pressure on the student-atheletes that leads to the aforementioned drug use, money schemes, etc.  At least MLB has its one farm system, under its rules and regulations.


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jeff Mason on June 04, 2006, 03:20:48 PM
College hoops is only better because NBA-caliber players have not had to go to college in years.  We get them now for one year (watch out for them Buckeyes as a result next year!), but those who will be making money in many if not most cases never even go to school anymore.  So everyone in school knows that most likely that is their one shot.  So that is why it is "better" -- even if the caliber of play is not what it was 15 years ago.

College football is corrupt in many ways, but it is not in your face every few minutes the way most pro sports are.  Of the pro sports, football is the least offensive because they use some common sense in running the league.  NCAA baseball would be fine, I guess, if you were a huge baseball fan.  But I only enjoy baseball in person; I can't hack watching it on TV or radio.  But NCAA football?  You have to pry me from that in the fall.

And besides, in what other sport can I say that, thanks to a prize my wife won for us, I have been to see my alma mater play for and win the BCS Championship IN PERSON?  One of the greatest vacations/nights of my life.  Go Sooners!


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Susan on June 04, 2006, 04:22:49 PM
Oh-ho!  I see how you are!
;-)

I love my Mets on the radio - don't really need tv for baseball at all, personally.  And you're right about college hoops - the quality of play has declined as guys leave after a year or two.  I think starting next year the NBA will have an age requirement [19years?] that will mean all of them either go to college or sit for a year...but they're still not going to hang around for four.

Which is too bad.  When you do get to see the rare team that's been together for a few years, they're really sight to behold!

Never been a college gridiron fan except for the first two Fairbanks years at Colorado...and the few years since then when they haven't been piteous.  I'm not much more of a pro football fan, but at least it's confined to the weekends.  Mets and college hoops for me...


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jeff Mason on June 12, 2006, 05:25:02 AM
Still not watching this.  But as I check up on the news, I can't help but see this.  My reaction....?

Oops. 

Sorry, Chuck....


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Charles LePage @ ComicList on June 12, 2006, 10:53:09 AM
Thanks Jeff.  I don't think Detroit wilted so badly as Miami is now.  Hurts to watch. 


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jonas on June 12, 2006, 10:55:06 AM
Its ok, its A-ok. Let the Mavs feel the glory for a while. Watch us sweep the next 3, lose game 6 and take the championship home in game 7.

THE HEAT IS ON! :woot


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jeff Mason on June 19, 2006, 12:04:04 PM
Its ok, its A-ok. Let the Mavs feel the glory for a while. Watch us sweep the next 3, lose game 6 and take the championship home in game 7.

THE HEAT IS ON! :woot

So far so good, Joe...


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jonas on June 19, 2006, 12:42:50 PM
:3d


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: andy on June 19, 2006, 02:37:41 PM
Which players who went into the stands did not receive a penalty of any sort?


Fred Jones and Eddie Gill, both of whom went into the stands to separate the players from fans. But that's beside the point. Not everyone who went into the stands that night got what they deserved, and some were victims. Just a bad, misinformed opinion from someone that didn't see everything unfold.


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: andy on June 19, 2006, 02:58:24 PM
I researched it and found that my memory was faulty; only one player's suspension was reduced.  But even that makes me angry -- there was no excuse for that behavior, and for the players' union to even try to defend it in anyway was offensive.  This is also a league that suffers players choking coaches and other acts of extreme arrogance.

Again, another misinformed opinion from someone who didn't see the event unfold and doesn't understand the circumstances. First of all, Jermaine O'Neal never went into the stands. Second of all, he was defending one of his teammates who was being attacked by an unruly fan. This player had just undergone arthroscopic knee surgery and was still wearing a large brace to protect his knee, and Jermaine stopped that person from continuing to attack said player. And just so you know, that player had to retire because of his knee problems at the age of 24.

Also, the players union had EVERY right to appeal the suspension, for many reasons. The penalties handed down were completely inconsistent with past penalties for more severe actions. Do your research. No previous penalty (for fighting) had even half of the length that these suspensions did. Also, there is a less strict punishment level for first time offenders, and as of that point, several players who were suspended had NEVER been suspended. And to top that off, one player got charged with something that he did not do (entering the stands), and received an unruly suspension.



But that's okay. I mean, you have college football, the 'purest' sport that does not suffer from arrogance or disorderly conduct.



Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jeff Mason on June 19, 2006, 03:45:56 PM
Define an action more severe than running into the stands.  There are security guards.  There is NO excuse for running into the stands.  The fans should be banned for life from the stands as well for inciting the event.  NO ONE came off well in that, and the NBA is so spiralling out of control in some ways that someone has to seize the reins.  The penalty IMO is not for fighting but for crossing the invisible line between the game and the fans.  To my knowledge that had not happened in years if ever. 


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Kirk Lowdermilk on June 19, 2006, 04:58:31 PM
What about that gem of a human being Ty Cobb?

"Cobb vaulted the guardrail protecting the grandstand, stalked up 12 rows and began punching and kicking a heckler, tearing holes with his spikes and opening gashes around the man's ears and face.

Other spectators pleaded with Cobb, yelling that the man - who'd lost eight fingers in an industrial accident - had no hands.

"I don't care if he has no feet," Cobb replied."



Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Charles LePage @ ComicList on June 19, 2006, 05:47:39 PM
Kudos to Dwayne Wade for excellent service to the Heat.  Win or lose, the Heat are benefitting from one of the truly great ones.


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Charles LePage @ ComicList on June 19, 2006, 05:58:42 PM
The penalty IMO is not for fighting but for crossing the invisible line between the game and the fans.  To my knowledge that had not happened in years if ever. 

The most recent example of an NBA player going into the stands and punching a fan came in February 1995, when Vernon Maxwell of the Houston Rockets pummeled a spectator in Portland. The league suspended him for 10 games and fined him $20,000.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1928540


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jeff Mason on June 19, 2006, 06:16:55 PM
Maybe it was inconsistent with past penalties, but past penalties are a joke. Only 10 games for attacking a fan?  That is ludicrous.  I guess that the union coudl argue that point, but the earlier guy got off easy IMO.


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jonas on June 20, 2006, 03:57:37 PM
GO HEAT!

as for that NBA incident regarding all those players...any player that set foot off the floor deserved a suspension for the whole season and then some. no excuses what-so-ever.


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: andy on June 20, 2006, 05:04:57 PM
Define an action more severe than running into the stands.  There are security guards.  There is NO excuse for running into the stands.  The fans should be banned for life from the stands as well for inciting the event.  NO ONE came off well in that, and the NBA is so spiralling out of control in some ways that someone has to seize the reins.  The penalty IMO is not for fighting but for crossing the invisible line between the game and the fans.  To my knowledge that had not happened in years if ever.

Let's see:

Having a fan hurl a beer bottle from 10 rows up and striking a fan/official/employee/player.
Having a fan stab someone in the middle of competition.
Having a fan attack the wife or a family member of a player.

I can go on, but it doesn't matter. You're right. There are security guards. They didn't do their job, and neither did the officiating crew at calming the situation down or ejecting Wallace. But either way, that line has been crossed so many freaking times I can't count. Charles points out one example, but there have been things in between then and many things before then. The severity of the penalty definitely sent the right message, but it was unwarranted in several players' cases and very inconsistent in the rest. Anyone can compare past and previous penalties for far worse infractions that got 5 times less suspension time and understand that the only ludicrous matter were the inflated suspensions. Anyone with a sense of mathematics should be able to comprehend that regardless of their personal beliefs. The league got their message across, and I'm as glad as any other basketball fan, but it was at the expense of several players, and more importantly, one team. All from an incident that should've been avoided by several league policies that were ignored.

And Joe, that's quite a blanket statement.


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jeff Mason on June 20, 2006, 07:05:03 PM
No one is excusing the fans.  Again, use video tape, find out who did what, and ban them from life from the arena and see if you can press charges.  Punish the wrongdoers.  But that still doesn't excuse going into the crowd -- two wrongs don't add up to one right.  At least we agree it needed to be punished severely, even if we don't agree as to how it got meted out.  Again, past suspensions have to be considered wimpy and insufficient, and there has to be SOME way of increasing the penalties.  10 games for going into the crowd and beating up a fan?  You think that was an adequate penalty?  At what point can a league admit it was too cushy and turn up the heat?  As long as it is consistently turned up for all teams and players.


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jonas on June 20, 2006, 09:02:29 PM
:3d


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jeff Mason on June 21, 2006, 04:50:05 AM
Yeah, but your prediction was STILL wrong.  They were supposed to lose last night!


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jonas on June 21, 2006, 07:25:37 AM
i KNOW! I was off by one game, however I Did call Heat in 6 on another messageboard...:shrug


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: andy on June 21, 2006, 10:32:51 AM
No one is excusing the fans.  Again, use video tape, find out who did what, and ban them from life from the arena and see if you can press charges.  Punish the wrongdoers.  But that still doesn't excuse going into the crowd -- two wrongs don't add up to one right.  At least we agree it needed to be punished severely, even if we don't agree as to how it got meted out.  Again, past suspensions have to be considered wimpy and insufficient, and there has to be SOME way of increasing the penalties.  10 games for going into the crowd and beating up a fan?  You think that was an adequate penalty?  At what point can a league admit it was too cushy and turn up the heat?  As long as it is consistently turned up for all teams and players.

Not saying two wrongs make a right. The penalty was easily too severe, and there are so many factors that go into that. It isn't justifiable to randomly quintuple the length of a suspension for an action in the middle of a season. League sanctions occur every off-season, so if they wanted to make stricter penalties they could've done it then. On top of that the league is 4/7ths responsible for the brawl occurring by not following their own sanctions, yet only one team (that also happens to be 1/7th of the equation) was given 90% of the penalties. It's unfair just from that standpoint, nevermind the severity of the penalty. Even if you look at the players who were penalized you can see unfairness. Artest and Jackson do the same thing, yet one player gets a suspension over twice as long as the others? Give me a break. I can go on and on, but what's most damning is how it affected one team.


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: Jeff Mason on June 21, 2006, 11:00:35 AM
Now unequal suspensions I can agree are wrong -- both teams needed to share the load of the penalties, and both players needed the same length suspension.  As for changing in the middle of the season, who could have imagined such an outrageous event before it happened? 


Title: Re: Zo You Think You Can Dance
Post by: andy on June 21, 2006, 02:07:15 PM
I think there were warnings. It was only a matter of time before the next incident; it'd been a couple of years in basketball, and baseball and football were both coming off of fan/player altercations. Rules in other sports were already changing in regards to alcohol consumption cutoff times and penalties for game interference. In basketball they weren't, and the security, especially in the Palace at Auburn Hills, was notoriously lax and unresponsive (you can read complaints by players throughout the league for the brawl happened) with fan incidents. Several other arenas were the same way.

The big difference is that the 'hype' surrounding the next possible fan/player sports incident had grown so much, especially after that baseball player broke that fan's nose by throwing a chair into the stands. After that it was just hyped to the point where the next event was going to draw huge suspensions, and it did.

A little digression..I'm all for changing rules that need to be changed, especially in terms of security. Unfortunately, security hasn't changed with several player/fan interactions just from this past year and is still not responsive enough. Even for penalties, but not to the degree that happened with a couple of players from that brawl, not to mention the complete wrongdoing by the league. If security isn't going to separate fans from players and vice-versa, who else physically capable of doing it but other players? And for that, suspensions shouldn't have been handed down.