Sunday, July 30, 2006
Further proof the NFL is the most corporate sports entity
So I was perusing the news stories on TSN.ca and lo and behold I find that the NFL commissioner search has been short listed to 5 names. Two of the five names have some connection to the league but the other three do not. In fact those three have such corporate backgrounds that it actually makes me worry for the league.
First, before I state why I'm worried here are the candidates and their backgrounds
Now I realize that you need lawyer types to run a huge entity like the NFL but it disturbs me that most of these guys are men with only business and legal backgrounds. They don't seem to have any real sports or PR experience. The hiring of any one of these candidates will the NFL even more cold and sterile then it is now. This is a huge problem in sports and it may be the basis of a future posting but let it be known that it was the NFL that started us down this road.
The corporatization of the NFL has been in steady ascension since the early 1990s and the hiring of the new commissioner may very well be its zenith. It seems to me that the NFL is one of those rare entities that actually respects the office of Commissioner unlike, say MLB for instance. This is a great thing but it can go horribly wrong if you're saddled with a head honcho that's bound and determined milk the cash cow of success right to the very last drop without thinking of future consequences.
As it stands right now the NFL is a multi-BILLION dollar entity with the biggest national TV deals, strong satellite distribution of its SUNDAY TICKET package, a wholly owned network which utilizes NFL Films and soon to add prime time games during the regular season, mega selling merchandising and finally the greatest spectacle in North American pro sports.
Do we really need to make this league MORE corporate and machine-like?
According to this short list the owners seem to think so. I also look at this short list with some alarm as a fan of the Buffalo Bills. The NFL is the only pro league that has a strong and equal revenue sharing plan. The last CBA saw a clash between the old guard who helped craft this magnificent (and some would say socialistic) system and the new money guys who want to outspend everyone in the hopes of winning with an "all star team". As far as I can tell the CBA was pretty much a compromise but it has left Dan Rooney (Steelers) and Ralph Wilson (Bills) a bit non-plused about the whole thing.
Looking at the short list it seems the owners in charge of the search committee may be giving the owners the option of maintaining status quo or hiring someone who may side with the New Money Owners. This in turn could see the NFL becoming more of a free market league which could only have ill tidings for the future.
In my humble opinion the NFL has maxed out all potentialities. If anything, this league needs get back to a smaller scale operation as it has become a bull in a china shop. At some point the corporate greed and the need for green will override the product on the field. In some ways we're already seeing this with the bloated excesses of the pre and halftime extravaganzas for the Season Opener, Thanksgiving, Playoffs and Super Bowl games. The NFL in its need to be "professional" has sapped all creativity by putting huge uniform restrictions to the point that players look more like models for sports equipment rather then athletes, urging coaches not to "dress up" (first it was Mike Tice and the latest example is Mike Nolan) and finally, while I'm not a fan of some of the endzone celebrations I think the league went TOO far in restricting what a player can and can not do.
Heck, just look at the telecasts on Sundays and compare it to 15 years ago. There's more ad time in a regular season NFL game today then there was back then. Everything associated with the NFL HAS to have some kind of corporate sponsor. The league has absolutely whored itself out to the almighty dollar. I don't mind this but when it's so transparent it becomes a rather glaring problem.
So now; we the fans, who have so little say in all this are forced to hope that the NFL owners vote to stay in house and maintain the status quo. In some ways this may also lead to some problems. There are some that view Tagliabue's reign as nothing more then an over-extended caretaker regime. Yes he did rake in huge TV deals, has gotten the league on the verge of returning to LA and has overseen a growth in the league that hasn't been seen since the 1950s. Nonetheless, this has been viewed as just the natural progression of what Pete Rozelle envisioned for the league. In all honesty Tagliabue has contributed very little to the actual game. In many ways he's a failure. He oversaw the Browns leaving Cleveland and the Oilers moving to Tennessee. He brought the Browns back but put such stringent restrictions on what they can and can not do that the "new" Browns were doomed to failure from the start. At the very least you can credit Tags with a smooth expansion process which has brought the Texans to Houston.
So by going with the status quo there will be little to no innovation, continued "polishing" of the NFL image while on ground level we have players misbehaving to an egregious degree. Going outside the league with these more business/legal types will make the league more sterile and greedy.
In essence the NFL may be doomed to topple over it's huge monolithic structure and all the good will that fans have built up for years may very well dissipate. In fact, I can almost certainly say that during the next CBA talks that there WILL be a lockout/strike. It'll be very interesting to see how it plays out both in the media and to the fans especially with a new commissioner in place.
First, before I state why I'm worried here are the candidates and their backgrounds
- Roger Goodell: NFL COO and one of Paul Tagliabue's closest aides.
- Gregg Levy: NFL outside counsel (the same job Tags had before being named commish)
- Frederick Nance: A Cleveland Lawyer
- Robert L. Reynolds: Concord Mass. Resident who's the VP and CEO of Fidelity Investments
- Mayo A. Shattuck III: Lives in Baltimore and is the chairman, President and CEO of Constellation Energy
Now I realize that you need lawyer types to run a huge entity like the NFL but it disturbs me that most of these guys are men with only business and legal backgrounds. They don't seem to have any real sports or PR experience. The hiring of any one of these candidates will the NFL even more cold and sterile then it is now. This is a huge problem in sports and it may be the basis of a future posting but let it be known that it was the NFL that started us down this road.
The corporatization of the NFL has been in steady ascension since the early 1990s and the hiring of the new commissioner may very well be its zenith. It seems to me that the NFL is one of those rare entities that actually respects the office of Commissioner unlike, say MLB for instance. This is a great thing but it can go horribly wrong if you're saddled with a head honcho that's bound and determined milk the cash cow of success right to the very last drop without thinking of future consequences.
As it stands right now the NFL is a multi-BILLION dollar entity with the biggest national TV deals, strong satellite distribution of its SUNDAY TICKET package, a wholly owned network which utilizes NFL Films and soon to add prime time games during the regular season, mega selling merchandising and finally the greatest spectacle in North American pro sports.
Do we really need to make this league MORE corporate and machine-like?
According to this short list the owners seem to think so. I also look at this short list with some alarm as a fan of the Buffalo Bills. The NFL is the only pro league that has a strong and equal revenue sharing plan. The last CBA saw a clash between the old guard who helped craft this magnificent (and some would say socialistic) system and the new money guys who want to outspend everyone in the hopes of winning with an "all star team". As far as I can tell the CBA was pretty much a compromise but it has left Dan Rooney (Steelers) and Ralph Wilson (Bills) a bit non-plused about the whole thing.
Looking at the short list it seems the owners in charge of the search committee may be giving the owners the option of maintaining status quo or hiring someone who may side with the New Money Owners. This in turn could see the NFL becoming more of a free market league which could only have ill tidings for the future.
In my humble opinion the NFL has maxed out all potentialities. If anything, this league needs get back to a smaller scale operation as it has become a bull in a china shop. At some point the corporate greed and the need for green will override the product on the field. In some ways we're already seeing this with the bloated excesses of the pre and halftime extravaganzas for the Season Opener, Thanksgiving, Playoffs and Super Bowl games. The NFL in its need to be "professional" has sapped all creativity by putting huge uniform restrictions to the point that players look more like models for sports equipment rather then athletes, urging coaches not to "dress up" (first it was Mike Tice and the latest example is Mike Nolan) and finally, while I'm not a fan of some of the endzone celebrations I think the league went TOO far in restricting what a player can and can not do.
Heck, just look at the telecasts on Sundays and compare it to 15 years ago. There's more ad time in a regular season NFL game today then there was back then. Everything associated with the NFL HAS to have some kind of corporate sponsor. The league has absolutely whored itself out to the almighty dollar. I don't mind this but when it's so transparent it becomes a rather glaring problem.
So now; we the fans, who have so little say in all this are forced to hope that the NFL owners vote to stay in house and maintain the status quo. In some ways this may also lead to some problems. There are some that view Tagliabue's reign as nothing more then an over-extended caretaker regime. Yes he did rake in huge TV deals, has gotten the league on the verge of returning to LA and has overseen a growth in the league that hasn't been seen since the 1950s. Nonetheless, this has been viewed as just the natural progression of what Pete Rozelle envisioned for the league. In all honesty Tagliabue has contributed very little to the actual game. In many ways he's a failure. He oversaw the Browns leaving Cleveland and the Oilers moving to Tennessee. He brought the Browns back but put such stringent restrictions on what they can and can not do that the "new" Browns were doomed to failure from the start. At the very least you can credit Tags with a smooth expansion process which has brought the Texans to Houston.
So by going with the status quo there will be little to no innovation, continued "polishing" of the NFL image while on ground level we have players misbehaving to an egregious degree. Going outside the league with these more business/legal types will make the league more sterile and greedy.
In essence the NFL may be doomed to topple over it's huge monolithic structure and all the good will that fans have built up for years may very well dissipate. In fact, I can almost certainly say that during the next CBA talks that there WILL be a lockout/strike. It'll be very interesting to see how it plays out both in the media and to the fans especially with a new commissioner in place.
Thursday, July 27, 2006
When the NBA was king (Conclusion)
Sorry for the delay on this last part. I think I got all NBA'ed out. LOL!
Tonight i'm going to focus on the Bulls dynasty and the ill affects it has had on the league. I will also touch on the tragic over reliance of Michael Jordan. I have a feeling that this installment might see a lot of criticism but oh well.
The problem with dynasties in sports except the NFL (maybe i'll talk about that sometime) is that a dynasty creates a vacuum once said dynasty is over. You see, the pro leagues and the media tend to market the stars on the dynastic team or cover said team to the exclusion of others. It didn't help the NBA's cause that the Bulls dynasty had arguably the greatest player of all time running the show.
So here lies the problem, the league and the media hypes up the dynasty team to such an extent that they become bigger then the league itself. What do you expect to happen when that dynasty is over?
The casual fans who only watched the sport to see that team, whether it be to win or lose will no longer have any real interest and stop watching. Of course some will become geniune fans of the game and stick with it but not enough to make the whole hoopla worth it.
The other thing that happens is that everyone will be looking for that new "super team". This is why everyone sings the praises of parity which in effect really means mediocrity. Since there are no clear dominant teams the league has to sell the individuals even more then necessary.
Which leads us right to Michael Jordan. Ah, Michael Jordan; the man should be pictured next to the term "double edged sword" because that what he was to the NBA.
On the positive side he was and is the most media savvy and business savvy athlete to ever lace up a pair of basketball shoes. The man's wealth was 95% based on endorsement deals and comercials rather then his actual playing contract for the majority of his career. He was arguably the greatest player to ever play game. He took a league that was still somewhat reeling from the coke head perception that it got from fans and the media alike. (remember Michael Ray Richardson was given a lifetime suspension in the '86 season!)
The good has led to many problems which still plague the league to this day.
* I know the numbering on my list is screwed. Blame me not blogger.
Tonight i'm going to focus on the Bulls dynasty and the ill affects it has had on the league. I will also touch on the tragic over reliance of Michael Jordan. I have a feeling that this installment might see a lot of criticism but oh well.
The problem with dynasties in sports except the NFL (maybe i'll talk about that sometime) is that a dynasty creates a vacuum once said dynasty is over. You see, the pro leagues and the media tend to market the stars on the dynastic team or cover said team to the exclusion of others. It didn't help the NBA's cause that the Bulls dynasty had arguably the greatest player of all time running the show.
So here lies the problem, the league and the media hypes up the dynasty team to such an extent that they become bigger then the league itself. What do you expect to happen when that dynasty is over?
The casual fans who only watched the sport to see that team, whether it be to win or lose will no longer have any real interest and stop watching. Of course some will become geniune fans of the game and stick with it but not enough to make the whole hoopla worth it.
The other thing that happens is that everyone will be looking for that new "super team". This is why everyone sings the praises of parity which in effect really means mediocrity. Since there are no clear dominant teams the league has to sell the individuals even more then necessary.
Which leads us right to Michael Jordan. Ah, Michael Jordan; the man should be pictured next to the term "double edged sword" because that what he was to the NBA.
On the positive side he was and is the most media savvy and business savvy athlete to ever lace up a pair of basketball shoes. The man's wealth was 95% based on endorsement deals and comercials rather then his actual playing contract for the majority of his career. He was arguably the greatest player to ever play game. He took a league that was still somewhat reeling from the coke head perception that it got from fans and the media alike. (remember Michael Ray Richardson was given a lifetime suspension in the '86 season!)
The good has led to many problems which still plague the league to this day.
- The prolific nature of Michael Jordan's play: Yes he was fun to look at. He did things no one had done before and yes he had contemporaries but everyone points to "His Airness" as the inspiration to their careers in the NBA. Jordan's high flying antics has led to the ESPN-ization of the game where the players today only really want to make it on the highlight clips and concentrate more on the fabulous rather then the more mundane fundamentals (something I mentioned in my last installment)
- Crass Comercialism: Yeah you had Magic Johnson and the Lakers as well as the Celtics to a lesser extent ruling the roost with jersey sales but with Jordan came the explosion of the sports merchandizing market. You had TONS of people walking around with Bulls paraphanelia and MJ related items. This eventually spread to other teams and now the NBA has become the standard for the hip hop culture with the fashion jerseys and the way players dress before and after games etc etc.
- "The Jordan Rules": Originally this was the defensive strategy used by Pistons coach Chuck Daly against Michael Jordan and his Bulls. However, it has morphed to mean something completely different. In effect, The Jordan Rules has come to be known as the Superstar Treatment. Ever since the Bulls beat the Pistons in the '89 playoffs Jordan was treated differently then almost every superstar out there. He was given the benefit on defensive calls, he was given favourable calls against the defense. At times he couldn't even be touched without a foul being called against him. This treatment of Michael Jordan has migrated to be the standard for almost every elite superstar in the NBA today. Role players will get the shaft because of "the code" and how stars have to be coddled and taken care of. It has become one of the things that have turned off a lot of long time basketball fans and it's something that doesn't seem to be changing anytime soon. (witness the Dwayne Wade foul in the Finals this past season)
- The Next Michael Jordan: The over-reliance on Michael Jordan was something unique in North American sports. Yes, Wayne Gretzsky had that kind of prominence in hockey but since the game isn't as huge in the US as it is in Canada it just doesn't have the same impact. Michael Jordan became BIGGER then the game itself. I can think of only one other time in sports where a player had that kind of dominance on every level and it goes so far back when the connection between sports, media and culture wasn't as strong as it is now. That person was Babe Ruth who, if he was playing today would have a connection with the fans like no other player in pro sports today. The thing with Jordan is, the NBA hyped him up as the greatest thing since sliced bread. By the time Jordan's career was in full steam the PR people HAD to look for an "Air Apparent". Do you people remember the hype that Grant Hill, Penny Hardaway, Kobe Bryant, (oh he does still get hype just ask some of the nutbars on the OS baskeball forum j/k y'all!) Vince Carter and Harold Minor?!?! got. None of those guys lived up to the pressure that the media placed on their platter. I think the NBA has finally cooled down on the MJ comparisons stuff now. Yes early in Lebron James short career he was given that moniker but now it looks like they're going for a Bird/Magic dynamic between he and Wade which I think is a great way to grow the sport by having REAL rivalries.
* I know the numbering on my list is screwed. Blame me not blogger.
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
When the NBA was king (part two)
When the NBA was king Part Two
Tonight I will be looking at the players, lack of talent today and the ill effects of the Bulls and to a lesser extent the Laker Dynasties.
I think we can all agree that the level of play in the NBA today is pretty enemic. Yeah, I hear the younger folks saying Kobe and Lebron are legends and all that but what these people fail to realize is that these guys are excelling in what is basically a watered down league where marginal players are over-valued because there is a dearth of talent overall.
Let's take the wayback machine to the 1980s and while the players were not as athletic as these guys are today they had fundamentals. Most of the stars of the NBA in that time had full college careers behind them and learning from some of the best coaches in the college ranks. Today you have kids that literally can't wait to bust out of collegiate "prison". They will only marginally buy into their coach's system when they know full well that they'll be making the big bucks of the NBA and shoe endorsements etc etc.
So now we have college coaches recruiting kids that they feel are more "polished" so they can win now rather then building a program from the ground up because they don't have the luxury of teaching their kids the fundamentals of the game. There are certainly exceptions to this but by and large this is what college basketball recruiting has turned into. So when these kids get drafted into the NBA their basketball IQ is stunted to a large degree.
Let's also look at what the NBA is touting as it's future in the Euro players. I saw a guy at Operation Sports complain about Euro players and how they're no good but au contraire my friend they ARE good. These kids are for a lack of a better term indoctrinated into basketball. They're taught the game from the ground up and the European coaches have taken the drills that American coaches USED to teach and have made it into an art form. The problem is that these kids have the basics drilled into their heads so much that they've lost something that players back in the day and yes, even players of today posess and that something is creativity and the playground mentality.
You see, the Euro players succeed through repitition, so much so that they become almost machine-like in the way they play. They don't have the creativity to improvise or the loose playground feel to try something different. I believe this is mostly due to their coaching rather then anything to do with their skill. A good example of this was Jose Calderron with the Raptors last year. He was finding some success early on with his jumper and he was mixing in a slashing, to the hoop style of play to go along with it. When he got cold, he became very tentative, passed up the open shots, didn't drive to the hoop and when he did shoot they were always long range jumpers that require feel and timing to get in. He didn't have the creativity to just try something different or be aggressive with the basketball at all.
On the flip side the major problem with today's players is that they're TOO in tuned with the highlight reel plays. They're TOO flashy and want to make the SportsCenter highlights. Mainly what this does is mask the lack of fundamental skills most players have. They're too insecure to just play the game the way it's supposed to be played. In some ways you have to put a little bit of the blame on the prolific high flying antics of Michael Jordan and Dominique Wilkins as they took what Dr. J popularized and put it into the stratosphere.
Last but not least, I truly believe in my heart of hearts that most of the players back in the day would be highly successful today. Some of them may not be superstars like they were then but they'd be damn good. You have to remember they played in a league that was either lightning fast up and down the court action or rough and tumble with big guys banging all over the place. Hell, you had two teams in that time period that made a living out of abusing their opponents in the "Bad Boy" Pistons and the Pat Riley coached Knicks. Do you honestly think that Lebron or Wade could succeed in an enviroment where they're constantly being pushed around? Hell, a guy like Rasheed Wallace would be kicked out at the end of the 1st quarter every game because he's being "fouled" all the time.
Seeing that this post went a little long i'll save the Dynasties part for Part Three.
I think we can all agree that the level of play in the NBA today is pretty enemic. Yeah, I hear the younger folks saying Kobe and Lebron are legends and all that but what these people fail to realize is that these guys are excelling in what is basically a watered down league where marginal players are over-valued because there is a dearth of talent overall.
Let's take the wayback machine to the 1980s and while the players were not as athletic as these guys are today they had fundamentals. Most of the stars of the NBA in that time had full college careers behind them and learning from some of the best coaches in the college ranks. Today you have kids that literally can't wait to bust out of collegiate "prison". They will only marginally buy into their coach's system when they know full well that they'll be making the big bucks of the NBA and shoe endorsements etc etc.
So now we have college coaches recruiting kids that they feel are more "polished" so they can win now rather then building a program from the ground up because they don't have the luxury of teaching their kids the fundamentals of the game. There are certainly exceptions to this but by and large this is what college basketball recruiting has turned into. So when these kids get drafted into the NBA their basketball IQ is stunted to a large degree.
Let's also look at what the NBA is touting as it's future in the Euro players. I saw a guy at Operation Sports complain about Euro players and how they're no good but au contraire my friend they ARE good. These kids are for a lack of a better term indoctrinated into basketball. They're taught the game from the ground up and the European coaches have taken the drills that American coaches USED to teach and have made it into an art form. The problem is that these kids have the basics drilled into their heads so much that they've lost something that players back in the day and yes, even players of today posess and that something is creativity and the playground mentality.
You see, the Euro players succeed through repitition, so much so that they become almost machine-like in the way they play. They don't have the creativity to improvise or the loose playground feel to try something different. I believe this is mostly due to their coaching rather then anything to do with their skill. A good example of this was Jose Calderron with the Raptors last year. He was finding some success early on with his jumper and he was mixing in a slashing, to the hoop style of play to go along with it. When he got cold, he became very tentative, passed up the open shots, didn't drive to the hoop and when he did shoot they were always long range jumpers that require feel and timing to get in. He didn't have the creativity to just try something different or be aggressive with the basketball at all.
On the flip side the major problem with today's players is that they're TOO in tuned with the highlight reel plays. They're TOO flashy and want to make the SportsCenter highlights. Mainly what this does is mask the lack of fundamental skills most players have. They're too insecure to just play the game the way it's supposed to be played. In some ways you have to put a little bit of the blame on the prolific high flying antics of Michael Jordan and Dominique Wilkins as they took what Dr. J popularized and put it into the stratosphere.
Last but not least, I truly believe in my heart of hearts that most of the players back in the day would be highly successful today. Some of them may not be superstars like they were then but they'd be damn good. You have to remember they played in a league that was either lightning fast up and down the court action or rough and tumble with big guys banging all over the place. Hell, you had two teams in that time period that made a living out of abusing their opponents in the "Bad Boy" Pistons and the Pat Riley coached Knicks. Do you honestly think that Lebron or Wade could succeed in an enviroment where they're constantly being pushed around? Hell, a guy like Rasheed Wallace would be kicked out at the end of the 1st quarter every game because he's being "fouled" all the time.
Seeing that this post went a little long i'll save the Dynasties part for Part Three.
When the NBA was king (part one)
Oye I know I haven't posted in eons and the 1 or 2 people that read this has probably gone away "sniffles". Anyways i'm gonna make a comeback as I have a lot of thoughts stored up in my mind lately.
When the NBA was king (part one)
There are many people of my age bracket that remember those weekends watching some of the greatest basketball in a generation. We had the pleasure of watching Magic, Bird, Jordan, Ewing, Stockton and Malone just to name a few. It was a time when the NBA was the hottest pro sports league in existence. It seemed that David Stern could do no wrong. Stern had the same kind of profile that Paul Tagliabue so rightfully deserved but in the end the end of a dynasty, the retirements of legendary players all within a few years and last but not least the over-reliance on the Greatest Player of All Time has put the NBA in a bad situation.
It's hard to believe that in the late 1970s the league was on the verge of collapse and the NHL had a higher profile in the U.S. The use and proliferation of cocaine and other drugs made the stars of the NBA into unmarketable, volatile nutcases for the most part. Of course there are exceptions like Dr. J but for the most part the NBA was a barren wasteland.
Just when the league was on the edge of oblivion two new stars joined the L and totally changed the league forever. The two men couldn't be more different. One was outgoing, gregarious, photogenic and could play the uptempo game that defined his generation. The other star was a country boy hick from the basketball mad state of Indiana. He was shy, awkward looking but had an amazing ability to shoot the lights out. They were Earvin "Magic" Johnson and Larry Bird.
They saved the league from oblivion and opened the door to what would be the most interesting and competitive 15 or so years in NBA history. One could argue it was the period from 1979-1998 that made the NBA THE talk of the sports world. The talent was far more spread out and the players were actually "gasp" REALLY talented. You had Ewing and Starks in NYC, Jordan, Pippen and later Rodman in Chi., Stockton, Malone, Hornacek in Utah, Bird, McHale, Parrish in Bos., Hakeem in Houston, Alex English in Denver, Magic, Kareem, Worthy, Scott etc etc in LAL.
Hell, even the lesser teams had some good talent during that time frame like Golden State having Chris Mullin, Tim Hardaway and a young Latrell Sprewell. The Clippers had Danny Manning for crying out loud!
The other thing that made the NBA so great was NBC and this is where I think a lot of the problems with the NBA come in today. Oh i'm sure we'd still complain about the lack of talent which i'll get into but David Stern has put his hand in the cookie jar one time too many. NBC was a very loyal broadcaster to the league and basically helped to make it as widespread as it is today. Remember when NBC lost the NFL rights? That was a huge blow right? Well yes but it wasn't so bad because NBC had the NBA which NBC had made into the crown jewel of their sports division.
My generation fondly remembers growing up hearing the John Tesh music and getting geeked up for NBA basketball. We'd marvel at the tough and at times chippy basketball you'd get from time to time. We all laughed at the silly arguments between Bill Walton and Snapper Jones and rolled our eyes at Peter Vecsey's attempts to throw out breaking news.....
and who can forget "YESSSSSS" from Marv Albert :)
In short, NBC made fans out of even casual sports fans. I can tell you this from experience. I distinctly remember in 1991 my whole family sitting around the TV watching the series clinching game between the Bulls and Lakers. It was a rite of passage every spring/summer to watch the playoffs on NBC. You didn't have to fret about whether the game was on this network or that. Even if NBC split the broadcast rights during the playoffs at least you knew it would be TNT and that's it. Sone nights these days you have to switch from TNT to ESPN then back to TNT. It's just far too confusing.
Finally, there's the thing we all remember most, the double and triple headers during the weekend, for that one brief moment in time the NBA almost had an NFL-like following because of those double/tripleheader games.
It's all gone now because Stern wanted the upfront money and he thought the exposure of ESPN would trump any kind of revenue loss. What he didn't bargain for was the casualness of the fanbase that the NBA had built up over the last decade and a half. Sure ESPN goes to a lot of homes but for the most part not everyone is a sports nut. You need to market the game to the outsiders because you're ALWAYS going to get the core audience. Stern went back-to-front with the cable only broadcast deal.
My next post will talk about the players, lack of talent today and the ill effects of the Bulls and to a lesser extent Laker dynasties.
It's hard to believe that in the late 1970s the league was on the verge of collapse and the NHL had a higher profile in the U.S. The use and proliferation of cocaine and other drugs made the stars of the NBA into unmarketable, volatile nutcases for the most part. Of course there are exceptions like Dr. J but for the most part the NBA was a barren wasteland.
Just when the league was on the edge of oblivion two new stars joined the L and totally changed the league forever. The two men couldn't be more different. One was outgoing, gregarious, photogenic and could play the uptempo game that defined his generation. The other star was a country boy hick from the basketball mad state of Indiana. He was shy, awkward looking but had an amazing ability to shoot the lights out. They were Earvin "Magic" Johnson and Larry Bird.
They saved the league from oblivion and opened the door to what would be the most interesting and competitive 15 or so years in NBA history. One could argue it was the period from 1979-1998 that made the NBA THE talk of the sports world. The talent was far more spread out and the players were actually "gasp" REALLY talented. You had Ewing and Starks in NYC, Jordan, Pippen and later Rodman in Chi., Stockton, Malone, Hornacek in Utah, Bird, McHale, Parrish in Bos., Hakeem in Houston, Alex English in Denver, Magic, Kareem, Worthy, Scott etc etc in LAL.
Hell, even the lesser teams had some good talent during that time frame like Golden State having Chris Mullin, Tim Hardaway and a young Latrell Sprewell. The Clippers had Danny Manning for crying out loud!
The other thing that made the NBA so great was NBC and this is where I think a lot of the problems with the NBA come in today. Oh i'm sure we'd still complain about the lack of talent which i'll get into but David Stern has put his hand in the cookie jar one time too many. NBC was a very loyal broadcaster to the league and basically helped to make it as widespread as it is today. Remember when NBC lost the NFL rights? That was a huge blow right? Well yes but it wasn't so bad because NBC had the NBA which NBC had made into the crown jewel of their sports division.
My generation fondly remembers growing up hearing the John Tesh music and getting geeked up for NBA basketball. We'd marvel at the tough and at times chippy basketball you'd get from time to time. We all laughed at the silly arguments between Bill Walton and Snapper Jones and rolled our eyes at Peter Vecsey's attempts to throw out breaking news.....
and who can forget "YESSSSSS" from Marv Albert :)
In short, NBC made fans out of even casual sports fans. I can tell you this from experience. I distinctly remember in 1991 my whole family sitting around the TV watching the series clinching game between the Bulls and Lakers. It was a rite of passage every spring/summer to watch the playoffs on NBC. You didn't have to fret about whether the game was on this network or that. Even if NBC split the broadcast rights during the playoffs at least you knew it would be TNT and that's it. Sone nights these days you have to switch from TNT to ESPN then back to TNT. It's just far too confusing.
Finally, there's the thing we all remember most, the double and triple headers during the weekend, for that one brief moment in time the NBA almost had an NFL-like following because of those double/tripleheader games.
It's all gone now because Stern wanted the upfront money and he thought the exposure of ESPN would trump any kind of revenue loss. What he didn't bargain for was the casualness of the fanbase that the NBA had built up over the last decade and a half. Sure ESPN goes to a lot of homes but for the most part not everyone is a sports nut. You need to market the game to the outsiders because you're ALWAYS going to get the core audience. Stern went back-to-front with the cable only broadcast deal.
My next post will talk about the players, lack of talent today and the ill effects of the Bulls and to a lesser extent Laker dynasties.
