Results 181 to 190 of 193
Thread: NBA 2011-2012
-
-
- Join Date
- 11-26-06
- Location
- Anywhere you want to be.
- Posts
- 3,946
- Post Thanks / Like
- Blog Entries
- 1
06-20-12, 11:22 AM #182Re: NBA 2011-2012
Ya it would appear the heat have it, but I will root for the Thunder till the end.
It aint over til its over
-
06-20-12, 04:11 PM #183
Re: NBA 2011-2012
The Thunder fucked up the last game...they had it..they had the momentum and they just really fucked up. James Harden fucked up big time after the steal and a couple other plays and westbrook, aside from having an amazing game, fucked up when it really mattered by fouling with a 5 sec. shot clock in the last play. They had this game and they just let it slip from their hands.
-
06-25-12, 08:34 AM #184
Re: NBA 2011-2012
Someone sent me a few links which make a nice footnote to the 2012 finals:
Mark Cuban Appears On First Take, Spends Entire Appearance Trashing Its Hosts
The video here is an unedited clip from that segment:
Æ
-
- Join Date
- 02-13-07
- Location
- Fort Worth, TX
- Posts
- 42,785
- Post Thanks / Like
- Blog Entries
- 5
-
06-25-12, 09:35 AM #186
Re: NBA 2011-2012
Skip Bayless certainly comes off as a blowhard (as do his frequent TV counterparts), but there is one difference: he's getting paid for it.
I think those shows are terrible, but I guess enough people watch them to make it worthwhile. I think part of it is that these sorts of shows are necessary to grow the NBA fan-base. There are only ever going to be so many people who really care for the game of basketball. After them, how can you get newcustomersfans? You have to appeal to the people who like drama, or conflict, or controversy. You have to attract people who are into personality, or people who simply want to be part of something popular.
So these shows build an entirely fictional story that takes place inside NBAWorld. It doesn't even matter if the storytellers know it's false. It's pure mythology, and the effect works whether or not you think it's real.
You see the same effect in other areas as well. For example, I don't understand at all why Jim Cramer and "Mad Money" continue to be a thing. The guy is obviously a very talented clown. I just don't understand why a clown show can be so successful on CNBC.
I don't want to admit this about myself, but I love it when one of these media clowns gets taken down. One of my favourite media moments of the past decade was Jon Stewart on Crossfire.
Cheers,
AetheLove
-
- Join Date
- 02-13-07
- Location
- Fort Worth, TX
- Posts
- 42,785
- Post Thanks / Like
- Blog Entries
- 5
06-25-12, 10:13 AM #187Re: NBA 2011-2012
I don't disagree. Within these NBA playoffs we have gone from Spoelstra being fired, the big three in Miami being split up, and LeBron James being the biggest choke artist in the history of the game to Spoelstra being coach of the year if not the decade, the big three in Miami predicted to win the next 5-7 championsips, and LeBron being the most clutch player since Michael. The same happens in all sports. In the first few months of the baseball season I have heard that the Rangers will go undefeated, then they weren't going to make the playoffs, and now we are back to them being the best team in baseball.
There are too many Howard Stern wanna-bes in this world.
-
- Join Date
- 01-28-07
- Location
- Arizona
- Posts
- 13,490
- Post Thanks / Like
- Blog Entries
- 5
06-25-12, 08:30 PM #188Re: NBA 2011-2012
I'd argue the problem is ESPN dominates the sports world, I mean is there really anyone on there of that great of value? Really the only ones I kind of like is Kiper Jr. and Gruden (though Gruden seems to spend too much time loving every player and prospect he sees). Though I do like their commentary team for the English Premier League games (and Michael Ballack has been pretty good, from what I've seen, on the pre-game/halftime/postgame sets).
-
- Join Date
- 02-13-07
- Location
- Fort Worth, TX
- Posts
- 42,785
- Post Thanks / Like
- Blog Entries
- 5
-
06-26-12, 02:38 PM #190
Re: NBA 2011-2012
I'd argue that's why I pay almost no attention to ESPN.
When I want to watch a game, I figure out how to get that game on whichever video device is local. I like to watch from approximately when the game starts. The longest I'm likely to watch is the end of the game.
If that happens to be ESPN, well, ok then. I won't say I don't notice which network is on, because sometimes I do notice, but I will say that I almost never care. There are announcers who I like, who do a good job, but they are never the reason I want to see something. I like a good play-by-play person. Their call is a supplemental stream of information about the game (the video stream is the primary). The colour/analysis guy is where all the fun and learning are. I don't mind learning the finer points of a game in between the action, in fact I like listening to someone who knows what they're talking about, but I'm never going to watch a show for that.
So that's it. The game.
I see these other sports shows in passing; it's on in the background at a sports bar, or at a friend's house, or I'm flipping channels. If you care about The Sports World, then I can see how something like PTI might be entertaining. But I don't care about any of that.
A long time ago, I would sometimes watch Sportscenter. If you were interested in sports generally, they did a great job. But then I stopped. Maybe that show got worse, or maybe I stopped being interested. I think the last thing ESPN hosted that I cared about was "Hey, Rube". But then the good doctor decided to act his age, and the world got a little more boring.
Cheers,
AetheLove
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks