kingsboi
Hall of Famer
I'm surprised his huge quads didn't rip those pants as he sat down
The Finals
- Thread starter Mr. S£im Citrus
- Start date
- Status
I'm surprised his huge quads didn't rip those pants as he sat down
And that's all I'm saying. Fans equivocate/rationalize/make excuses, as long as they can sell that "name on the front" bulldaggle. Protagonist-centered morality, is what I call it: the Team is the Good Guy, the Player is the Bad Guy. As long as the Team does it, and can get credit for it, it's good, and The Right Way™. When the Player does it, it's bad, it's selfish, it's "ring chasing," etc.
Insomniacal Fan
Starter
I am skeptical that the concept of “team loyalty” was designed to be marketed towards the players. Athletes don’t buy professional sports; they market their abilities through the institutions that sell sports to fans, brands, and ads (not necessarily in that order).
With selling sports being a collaboration between the jerseys and the suits; I don’t see this as a moral argument (everybody’s a consenting adult.) And as long as there’s money being made, everybody is happy. I think it’s questionable whether this model of player empowerment is going to last without a player that is as marketted or as marketable as Lebron. There will always be new superstars; but careers are usually short and unpredictable; and athletes are usually bores at best.
The spectacle of individual play is part of the package of being a sports fan, but the other, larger, part is the narrative. Without incentives for a redistribution of talent, only a handful of teams will ever be competitive. Without a chance of teams being eventually competitive, there’s no point to “team loyalty.” And without the longterm narrative engagement in the local organization, its a smaller league, with less growth and fewer players. (probably doesn’t matter to the Lebron James of the world.)
I engage with the NBA primarily as someone with an interest in the long term team narrative. I’d like superstar players to buy into this vision too. Maybe max contracts should mostly come in the form of equity in the team?
Why else would the notion even exist? Nobody cared about how "loyal" mister Bill Russell was to the Celtics, in large part because he was not capable of leaving the Celtics. Back when he played, he wouldn't even have had enough leverage to demand a trade: even that didn't really come until the early/mid-seventies. In mister Russell's era, the team traded you, when they decided that you were expendable, and basically no other time. Nobody talked about Jordan's career, in terms of "loyalty," until well after his third retirement, and even that required whitewashing the Wizards era. Because, although he technically had free agency available to him, it still didn't allow for player movement, in the ways that it does, today. Free agency didn't exist in any form until the late-seventies/early-eighties, and basically didn't exist as we understand it today, until about 20 years ago. Which, coincidentally, is around the time people suddenly started to care about whether superstars were "loyal."
You are very probably correct about this. Which is why, to me, LeBron and players like him are so important, and the idea of looking up to an "anti-LeBron" is nuts.
But, that's always been true. And, barring aberrations like this season, where nearly every star player in the league got injured, that's not likely to change.
Now that's a concept that I can sink my teeth into! You want my loyalty? Pay me in equity!
whozit
Starter
Devil is in the details. Like the concept but I could see buyers remorse after signing said Max player and then cash calling them to death ..........
whozit
Starter
If the team did that, the owner is giving up ALL control of said player. That ain't gonna fly even if it was right.......
And if the player was an iron man like LeBron, there is probably something in the bylaws that prevents an individual from ownership in multiple teams.
Well, there you have it. Congratulations to the 2021 NBA Champion Milwaukee Bucks.
miltonap
Starter
Do they usually call it for the home team or what
Not as such, but there's some inane bit of trivia about how Chris Paul is something like 1-13, for his career, in playoff games officiated by Scott Foster.
miltonap
Starter
Do him and Scott Foster have beef or could it just be coincidence ?
I don't know if "they" have beef, but Chris Paul certainly seems to believe that his career playoff record in games officiated by Scott Foster is not a coincidence. He's mentioned it in press conferences, multiple times.
miltonap
Starter
haha, ah I see. Seems like there may something to it then
Yeah its only basketball, common, what is he thinking.
They didn't do themselves any favors this quarter, besides rebounding well (still).
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
Feels like this is how the Bucks look 70% of the time.
Bucks currently 3/16 on 3s- they need to either up that percentage or lay off the 3s.
- Status
Similar threads
- ClutchPoints | San Antonio Spurs News
- Kings News Links
