Racism in NBA from "white America"

[hifigator]

Our local sportstalk guy made an interesting comment. I don't think I agree really, but it does make for decent discussion.

His main point was that racism is alive and well in the field of sports, but not among the owners or players, but rather among the fans. He supported this theory with 2 basic illustrations. The first had to do with the pathetic NBA finals ratings. He theorized that much of "white America" simply wasn't interested since there were no star white players on either team. Personally I think that is a stretch. I think the ratings were low for these reasons:

1. San Antonio is "old news." People like drama and excitement, but it was clear that the Spurs would win.
2. Niether San Antonio nor Cleveland are the likes of New York or L.A. And cities like that spur on (pun intended) National interest as well.
3. Three of the fouor games were on weeknights starting at 9:15pm and not ending until well after 11pm.
4. The first two games were essentially over by halftime, so any hope for excitement and drama were essentially eliminated.
5. The Spurs made the game very ugly to watch and in all honesty, not very fun to watch.

That is what I would attribute the ultra low ratings to, but I will at least listen to arguments to the contrary. In all honesty, I would have been even more into it had I had a stronger "rooting interest" as I did last year. But to me, race was not a factor a bit.



His second support for racism claim makes a little more sense. He basically noted how often the NBA is blasted for being a bunch of thugs. He pointed out how many callers note that they are not NBA fans and even that they don't appreciate the game because they really don't "like" the players.
He then contrasted that with the recent NFL troubles. With the incorporation of increased disciplinary actions for off the field incidents, the NFL is clearly trying to clean up its image. His point was that these same people who are blasting the NBA for similar "thugadry" are not blasting the NFL for the same types of actions. They may blast the individual players, but not the sport. He naturally mentions the Pac Man Jones situation and suggests that if he were a basketball player then he would be the cover story.

Personally I don't see a lot of that down here, but Gainesville is certainly not reflective of the rest of the Countries and certainly not big cities and corporate America.

Do any of you think he had a good point? Why or why not?

[theexorcist]

1. I found the NBA finals unwatchable. In game 2, when I was switching channels, the Spurs were up by 20. Cleveland was outclassed. In game 7, the final was 83-82. And it wasn't a good 83-82.

Oh - and the playoffs took something like six weeks. Suspense doesn't build over time - it deflates.

2. The NBA seems "rigged". Not in a "fixed like WWE" sense, but in a "the home team will get way too many calls" rigged. The guy responsible for this is David Stern. The consequences of a "rigged" game favors individual superstars and awful basketball, which is painful to watch.

I watched a mid-season NBA game on ESPN between New Jersey and Orlando. Painful. Just painful. No excitement, no nothing. Kentucky may blow out Auburn on Super Tuesday, but at least the UK fans will be yelling and screaming.

[RDF]

The ratings discussion is going on in the NBA Playoff Thread.

It's a stupid argument because a black player (Allen Iverson) drew the highest ratings NBA Playoffs have had (since Jordan era)when he was leading Philly to Finals---and he is a guy who attracts viewers because some don't like him--and others love him, but all want to watch him--because he's exciting.

Watching big men dominate isn't exciting for the average fan who has a "Well he should do that--he's 7'0 tall" attitude. The fact is that despite the presence of McHale, Parrish, and Kareem--viewers were attracted to Magic-Bird rivalry and fact those were outstanding teams.

I also disagree with statement it was Spurs fault for the style of play-that is strictly on the Cavs. They have one player who is worthy of being on an NBA Finals team--and rest are one dimensional or stiffs.

[hifigator]

RDF, good point with regards to Iverson. As for the Bird comparison, the host made that very point. He pretty much said that "white America" tuned in to watch because they could relate to Larry Bird. Hmm... I kind of thought people tuned in because he was really good. In any case, he pretty much implied that the numbers really reflect the average mid-level sports fan. (That much I agree with. In other words, guys like us are going to watch a lot of sports because we are sports fans but the real key will be getting casual fans to watch. That is what the NFL does, and nothing shows that better than the Super Bowl.) But his next step was what I don't agree with. He basically said that the lack of interest from those so called casual fans isn't there because there isn't a star white player on the floor. He went on to say the closest to that is Steve Nash and that was why so many people were pulling for Phoenix. It wasn't a dislike of the Spurs and it wasn't even the fact that they were tired of seeing them win. It was that Steve Nash would give average America a great white hope. I just don't see that, but I was wondering if any of you all do? I am not a Nash fan at all. I thought it was very amusing when Horry hip checked him into the scorer's table. His flailing acting job was a good one too. In any case, he is some outspoken Canadian. I will root for someone exclusively because of their Nationality, but not their race. I just don't buy that argument.

[RDF]

I don't know--most casual fans like FB because it's on Saturday-Mon--(remember I'm talking casual/non diehard fan) and they don't bother with Thursday Night games unless it's a big time college matchup--and those usually are reserved for weekend. The NFL is also singular event--one game per week, one game elimination in Postseason and 1 game means more to viewer--you can have Spurs lose to Denver in opening game and as a basketball fan--I knew that series was over by halftime of Game 3.

Another thing to bring up--Larry Bird was fun to watch because he hit shots--the man took/made big time shots. Reggie Miller took/made big time shots. I hated him as a Knicks fan during Ewing era, but respected his ability to make shots and not just go to FT line and score-and he flopped a lot. Today's games are FT contests in Eastern Conference because so few of those teams have offensive talent. It's why Iverson drew viewers--in '01 Postseason he faced off against Reggie Miller in Round One, Vince Carter (prior to Carter becoming a wimpy, coward) in Round 2--in 3 consecutive games we saw 50+ from Stars in that series and a Game 7. Then the Bucks--who had Cassell, Allen, and Robinson and could shoot/score. Went to a Game 7, and Iverson's legend grew more in the Game 6 loss then anything--he took a cheapshot from Scott Williams, got up, and his 4th quarter performance where he scored 25 in last 8 minutes and had Sixers within 1 possession after being down 30 in 4th quarter led to a dominant Game 7 and then Lakers in Finals against Shaq/Kobe and he puts 30 up in FIRST HALF-and 48 in his initial Finals Appearance. That was scoring/attacking and fun to watch.

Since then--we've seen Kobe explode now and then, and Wade--who was fun to watch until his FT parade--which turned off viewers and still does, and now you have NBA hyping LeBron's game against Pistons as an all timer. Why? Because he HIT SHOTS! What a novel concept-forcing players to make shots in Basketball--it is why we watch-not to see road team get screwed, not to see whining--which also factors into things--guys whine constantly and it turns off many people.

Basketball is meant to be attacking, free flowing, and showcase talent/skill level. Spurs play like Pistons did-and Riley's Knicks/Heat did/do--bruising, halfcourt ball, and focus on defense--people like scoring/points. Suns are fun because they score--to me the biggest disappointment for fans was the fact Suns didn't face Warriors in Round 2--that would've drawn a lot of fans--just as Dallas-Golden State did--it was uptempo and free flowing ball.

Sports are always better when you have excitement and people who not only draw fans but could do something you've never seen or couldn't do. Most people expect big men to be good basketball players and it's why big men are underappreciated. It's why casual fans embraced Jordan--he was a high flyer and did things they could never imagine--MAgic and Bird didn't play like 6'10 players--they changed the game. Iverson is a 5'10 player in a big man's game and still has a large fanbase/following--if he and Denver advanced, it would've been interesting to see the viewers response--with he and Anthony--who has following from is days at Syracuse.

Everyone thinks league is rigged--it's not because if it was--I'd like to think they would know who draws fans to their product and it certainly isn't the Pistons, Cavs, or Spurs.

[SFHoya99]

It got sucky ratings because everyone knew the Spurs were going to steamroll them.

Granted, I was on vacation, but I didn't even bother to check the scores. But I watched Cavs-Pistons, Suns-Spurs, Warriors-Mavs because I knew those series would be close. Who wants to watch a series that you think can only end one way?

[hifigator]

rdf said:

I don't know--most casual fans like FB because it's on Saturday-Mon--(remember I'm talking casual/non diehard fan) and they don't bother with Thursday Night games unless it's a big time college matchup--and those usually are reserved for weekend. The NFL is also singular event--one game per week, one game elimination in Postseason and 1 game means more to viewer--you can have Spurs lose to Denver in opening game and as a basketball fan--I knew that series was over by halftime of Game 3.

Another thing to bring up--Larry Bird was fun to watch because he hit shots--the man took/made big time shots. Reggie Miller took/made big time shots. I hated him as a Knicks fan during Ewing era, but respected his ability to make shots and not just go to FT line and score-and he flopped a lot. Today's games are FT contests in Eastern Conference because so few of those teams have offensive talent. It's why Iverson drew viewers--in '01 Postseason he faced off against Reggie Miller in Round One, Vince Carter (prior to Carter becoming a wimpy, coward) in Round 2--in 3 consecutive games we saw 50+ from Stars in that series and a Game 7. Then the Bucks--who had Cassell, Allen, and Robinson and could shoot/score. Went to a Game 7, and Iverson's legend grew more in the Game 6 loss then anything--he took a cheapshot from Scott Williams, got up, and his 4th quarter performance where he scored 25 in last 8 minutes and had Sixers within 1 possession after being down 30 in 4th quarter led to a dominant Game 7 and then Lakers in Finals against Shaq/Kobe and he puts 30 up in FIRST HALF-and 48 in his initial Finals Appearance. That was scoring/attacking and fun to watch.

Since then--we've seen Kobe explode now and then, and Wade--who was fun to watch until his FT parade--which turned off viewers and still does, and now you have NBA hyping LeBron's game against Pistons as an all timer. Why? Because he HIT SHOTS! What a novel concept-forcing players to make shots in Basketball--it is why we watch-not to see road team get screwed, not to see whining--which also factors into things--guys whine constantly and it turns off many people.

Basketball is meant to be attacking, free flowing, and showcase talent/skill level. Spurs play like Pistons did-and Riley's Knicks/Heat did/do--bruising, halfcourt ball, and focus on defense--people like scoring/points. Suns are fun because they score--to me the biggest disappointment for fans was the fact Suns didn't face Warriors in Round 2--that would've drawn a lot of fans--just as Dallas-Golden State did--it was uptempo and free flowing ball.

Sports are always better when you have excitement and people who not only draw fans but could do something you've never seen or couldn't do. Most people expect big men to be good basketball players and it's why big men are underappreciated. It's why casual fans embraced Jordan--he was a high flyer and did things they could never imagine--MAgic and Bird didn't play like 6'10 players--they changed the game. Iverson is a 5'10 player in a big man's game and still has a large fanbase/following--if he and Denver advanced, it would've been interesting to see the viewers response--with he and Anthony--who has following from is days at Syracuse.

Everyone thinks league is rigged--it's not because if it was--I'd like to think they would know who draws fans to their product and it certainly isn't the Pistons, Cavs, or Spurs.

RDF, I had several things to say in response, but got busy with family stuff.

I don't have time to go into details, but I pretty much agree with you as it relates to making shots. That is the key. Missing shots doesn't endear or ostracize as many people. Making shots at crucial times late in playoff games will make you many an enemy and many a fan. If you don't get to that point, then you have less of both.

More to come.

[MCIGuy]

Folks, there is a trace of racism in the way white sports radio show hosts and their mostly white listeners have treated the NBA. When I used to write for an NBA website I brought up how hypocritical fans and the media tore apart the NBA while letting the NFL and MLB off the hook (the media has been on atatck mode for over ten years with guys like Chris Berman leading the way). I won't go into too much detail because I gotta run, but perhaps in the next couple of days I will go into more detail. Its not just ratings, its in the attitude folks have of the NBA and how they judge the character of all players without even knowing a darn thing about the league itself.The NFL gets a free pass with its thuggery because America loves football so much the black players in the league eventually become houseslaves while the NBA players are treated more the field, uh, negroes. Plus the main heroes of the NFL amongst white are still quarterbacks, the majority of whom are white themselves. The NBA has no equivalent group of WHITE AMERICAN players for white audiences to tune into.

And just because a blip in time in which white audiences showerd their love for Jordan means nothing really. One time all of white America was enthralled in the African American miniseries "Roots" too which led to record ratings. Yet outside of "The Cosby Show" white audiences for the most part have ignored any TV programming in which the majority of the characters are black.

Of course this is not to say that race is the determining factor for all white viewers. And hey even black fans (like myself) were weary of these games and ignored watching most of them. Still I think its a bit disingenuous to think race doesn't have any role on how people judge the NBA.

[sleepy]

I myself and a White male, and am sick of being grouped into "white america" if there is such a thing. I loved the Jeffersons, and Fresh Prince of Belair, my favorite basketball players are Allen Iverson, Patrick Ewing, Micheal Graham, and Sleepy Floyd. I am not racist, and am sick of people saying that most white people ARE racist. I honestly can't think of anyone i know that fits into this "white america" stereotype that many have created. Maybe the reason why many people view NBA players as "thug" is because of their off the court antics. Kobe the rape case, Kidd (whose white)- beating his wife. I mean i know the NFL has the same type of stuff, but like you said they get a pass because everyone loves football, AND because theres so many players, the average fan doesnt know all their names.

[MCIGuy]

First of all Kidd isn't white. He has never claimed himself to be white that's for sure. His father was black in case you didn't know.

Second of all how does 5% of the NBA's population acting like fools lead to fans in general painting the entire league with such a broad brush?

Next explain to me why the media and fans never come down hard on NHL players for getting into numerous fights or baseball teams for clearing the benches and getting into brawls (like in Oakland when a female fan got hit by a chair) but every dustup in the NBA becomes an example of "why the league has an image problem"? David Stern dishes out severe punishment for a guy like Rodman who kicks a cameraman. The commish of baseball doesn’t do much against Kenny Rogers when he attacked a cameraman. But, yes, it’s the NBA that is run by the inmates!


If it was the NBA which had most of its superstars and much of its league itself under suspicion for using performance enhancing drugs we would never hear the end of it. The NBA would be "killed" round-the-clock on sports talk nation and fans (especially families) would be turned off by it. David Stern would have to initiate some forgiveness tour around the nation to win back the respect of America. But MLB mostly gets free pass. Sure people who write columns will rip what's going on from time-to-time but for the most part the league itself and its players aren't judged by the accusations of cheating. Fans are still turning out (including families) in huge numbers and all polling data suggests that fans in general don't care all that much about steroid use in baseball. There are exceptions of course. One player in San Francisco is hated like no other for his alleged steroid use....but I won't go there.

Whether you like the NBA or not you can't deny it produces some of the best highlights. And yet a guy like Chris Berman can get away with showing every sport in the world in his Top Ten Countdown (even women's high school field hockey) but won't touch the NBA. Of course this is the same "journalist" ten years or so ago who was gleeful in predicting the demise of the NBA and pointed to the NBA 'strike" as being a good example of why fans had enough of he selfish players. The funny thing about that is Berman's main sports passions are the NFL and MLB, both of which had far more labor strife than the NBA. But he didn't look down at those two leagues for those problems. The NBA had one labor snafu and he jumped all over it. Also he kept referring to it as a "strike" even though as a sports journalist he knew it was actually a lockout, which, yes, is a big difference. He surely understands the difference and makes a point of it if the sport is the NHL, NFL and MLB. But with the NBA he did what I recall numerous white fans and white sports talk show hosts did during the NBA lockout which was repeatedly refer to it as a strike (which indicates that the league's mostly black players were the ones to initiate the disagreement and therefore were the ones responsible for the season being interrupted) even when others tried to correct them by pointing out it was a strike. Why such blind venom? Certainly these folks don't hate those players (and overlook their transgressions) when they are in college. But as soon as they get paid to play the sport it seems the resentment sets in.

Years ago Michael Wilbon wrote that even during its height in popularity, southern newspapers tended to go out of their way in limiting coverage of the NBA, including during the post season. Now why is this? Is it because that region of the country doesn't care for pro hoops? Okay. Why not? Was it too black? If you think that suggestion is ridiculous then you don't know the south where for the most part the only type of black athlete they have any use for is one that suits up for a college football team. There are exceptions (NFL players for certain southern teams, college basketball players in areas where college basketball is appreciated, Jordan...who is from a southern state like North Carolina). But the south more than any area of the USA has always been known to be filled with people (and I should not have to explain why) who are more "comfortable" with paying attention to things which are dominated by white icons: country music, baseball (still more white players than any other race), NASCAR, NFL (okay white players don't dominate but the biggest stars --based upon who gets the national commercials and who mostly get the jobs in the studios and the booth after their playing days -- are white quarterbacks). Of course southerners like to explain it that they lean towards sports figures, entertainers, etc that share their "moral values" etc. Fine. Whatever.

If an NBA player doesn't sign up to play for the USA in the Olympics he is selfish and doesn't appreciate all he's been given by the nation in the eyes of many fans. But if he plays he and his teammates are still dismissed as being selfish, one-on-one players who really don't care and are just playing for the endorsements (as if there are any these days). And you will bet that fellow Americans will root against them in international competition, especially if a game is close. This is a phenomenon that I have never encountered before (Americans rooting against Americans in an international –particularly Olympic- sporting event) until I ran across person after person who rooted against the USA men’s basketball team. And al of those folks were white. A few were friends of mine whom I don’t obviously consider racist. I mean they weren’t as bad as the white callers I heard on radio stations who were throwing every allowable vile name at the basketball players even after victories. Some of them didn’t even know much about basketball or even cared about it. But nonetheless they had a fixed image in their heads of the American players and cheered the international teams on. And of course they had all sorts of excuses (NBA players don’t care; they’re all thugs, the college players should be playing, they don’t play as a team; they care more about their millions and the NBA championship than winning gold for their country) to justify their stance.

By the way if we are to be fair the word thug tend to be used these days almost exclusively towards black hooligans. That’s in part because of the rap industry embrace of the word “thug”. A white player who is a hooligan tends to be labeled a punk instead (which black and Latino players also can be referred to). So there is almost a racial connotation associated with the word thug in my opinion and I see it applied to the NBA’s black players.

I recall when Doug Gottlieb once had an NBA player in the studio as a guest on his ESPN radio show. He mentioned how well dressed the player was and intelligent he was (I guess he could put more than three sentences together) and went on to state that the guest wasn’t like most NBA players,; that he was in fact a good guy and pretty smart. Well, first of al Gottlieb doesn’t really know too many NBA players and doesn’t really deal with the league in terms of covering it and interviewing its players so how would he know? But most of all it was an insult plain and simple. It was the equivalent of saying to the player “you are a credit to your race” which is an old school backhanded compliment that white folks used to give to any black person they found to be more, for lack of a better word, “civilized” than the rest of the black population. And would even a jerk like Gottlieb make such an indictment against NFL, MLB or NHL players? I tend to doubt it.

By the way, Sleepy, I pointed out that not every white person hates the NBA and I did not suggest every white person is a flaming racist . However to be honest the fact that you liked the old Georgetown teams, liked Iverson and watched the (crappy) old Will Smith show actually makes you a minority amongst white Americans. Because most white Americans do not share your taste in players and TV shows.

I could go on with more examples but I’m already crazy enough for writing all of this at this time in the morning. But let me say this that I too hate when the racism charge is thrown around. So when I do that myself I tend to not take my decision to do so lightly. With that being said the only thing I can’t stand more than people who always want to use the race card, are those who insist in every argument that racism is not an issue. If I had a dime for every time I saw some comment or heard some comment by a white person that went something like “yes, racism does exist but in this situation I don’t see any racism at all”, well, lets just say I would have enough money to not even have to worry about getting up for my job. Race has always been the poison in the well of America. Some of it is so subtle you don’t know it exist. But in the back of most people minds (and I’m talking about people of all colors) it lurks and will often play a role in the opinions people form.

[sleepy]

I see you point and admit that it is a very good one, but I wasn't trying to say that the media doesn't negativly potray black athletes in the NBA. I was trying to say that not all of "white america" agrees with the racism. Maybe in the south its very different, but I live in the North, and haven't found any of the stereotypes of racist white people to be true. Yes i know racism still goes on in the North, but to say that the majority of white people are racist against blacks or have racist tendencies, just isn't true at all from my expeirence

Maybe the reason the NHL is percieved as thugs, is because no one actually care about the NHL in America.

[theexorcist]

MCI, can you fix your post to remove the dead space? Thanks.

Many southern newspapers probably didn't cover pro basketball because the one team in the South for eons, the Hawks, was awful. The Heat wasn't any good for a while, either. College basketball got squat coverage because it really didn't matter if you lost to Kentucky (except for North Carolina, which is crazy about college basketball because they have good teams). Many newspapers stopped sending people to the Stanley Cup playoffs because their local team was eliminated. With the exception of major events (i.e., the final game of a season), the local story will often be the lead.

And can we thus drop the tired "Southerners are racist" insinuation? Why don't Southerners like hockey, which is lily-white? Maybe they like NASCAR because it has its roots in Tennessee and North Carolina and thei daddy took them to a race. Country music, to a large degree, mines rural themes and is thus more popular in rural areas of northern states rather than the South in general. There is racism everywhere, and it's not more virulent in the South.

Yes, I rooted against USA Basketball. But I did root for the Dream Team, which played together and won. It's an embarassment for the US men's basketball team not to win every single tournament it plays. I root against them as an indictment of the organization that brought them together and the hustle that some of the players showed when they lost (I rooted very hard for the scrubs that nearly won the world championships during the strike year). Lots of people root against and boo their team when they don't do well (England's famous for hating the way their team plays).

Yes, Berman hates the NBA. He really likes football. He's paid to be a personality. He does not have to be a representative of every sport equally.

Finally. I like country music, and I don't like being considered racist. I also don't like the "you don't like the NBA, so you must be racist" attitude. Unless you're going to bring a more bulletproof argument, it's thoughtless in the extreme to paint with such a broad brush.

[hifigator]

Now we are getting some real discussion. Well done folks.

For the record, I like much of what sleepy does. I too like the Fresh Prince and I think Will Smith is an excellent actor and very talented. I would add Good Times to the list of shows that I enjoy as well as Sanford and Son, but I also totally enjoyed Family Ties and Cheers. Two of those shows feature almost exclusively black actors, the other two almost exclusively white actors. For years I was seemingly the only person on the planet who didn't like M*A*S*H or The Waltons. Of course those shows are both mostly white. Does that make me a racist?

The point is that I do fit much of your description of "racist white America." I enjoy NASCAR and actually look forward to watching a race every now and then. I enjoy Budweiser, and most other beers for that matter. I am from the south and as such, love my college football, and I also enjoy country music, although I also listen to classic rock and heavy metal as well. As mentioned, I pretty much don't like the NBA. I watch the playoffs for the most part, but don't really get into the regular season much. Finally I do think that most of the players in the NBA are primadonas, and have a negative opinion of most of them. And lastly I do like the NFL but unlike most of my southern kin, I also enjoy hockey, which like Nascar, is predominantly white. I guess I am a racist then, right? The problem with that suggestion however, is that I don't give a rat's ass what color someone's skin is. I will like or dislike the individual for reasons aside from that. I like Tim Duncan and LeBron James who are both black. I can't stand Rasheed Wallace who is also black, but I also don't like Steve Nash. I don't like Karl Malone and think it is very funny that he never got a ring. But I do like Charles Barkley and feel somewhat bad for his lack of a title.

You brought up Barry Bonds earlier. I heard him in an interview last year blasting reporters and then pleying the race card. He pretty much flat out said that most reporters don't like him because he is black. I have news for you pal: these same reporters "like" Sammy Sosa who is also black and took steroids. The fact that you are disliked so much has little if anything to do with the darkness of your skin and almost everything to do with the fact that you are an egotistical jerk. Much like Karl Malone, I am rooting for you to never win a title.

MCIguy, that is the problem with your reasoning. I fit the bill so to speak for the most part. But I am not a racist. In any case, you are basically saying the same thing that our local radio host said yesterday and I didn't agree with him either.

[RDF]

Sammy Sosa is Latin--and did his moe/joe show with McGwire during the sickening lovefest of their cheating. I'm a pessimist by nature and as a fan I always thought they were cheating. I also never believed they took Steriods--so they technically were not lying when they would reply "I'm not using Steriods"--now if you ask "have you ever done them?" or "are you using performance enhancers?" the answer would've been different.

Bonds cheated just like they did--but he's catching crap because he's Black, he's not a warm person, and he's about to break a record held by Bud Selig's hero/friend in Henry Aaron. Selig and others use Aaron's race as a reason to say "See, it's NOT a racial issue--it's a personality issue". Well Ty Cobb was a scumball. Babe Ruth, not a great man. Micky Mantle? Not a role model or best of human beings. What does this have to do with their accomplishments in baseball? If you are going to put an asterisk or wipe out Bonds records--you better eliminate McGwire and Sosa from record books as well. Bonds was a Hall of Famer without this HR/HGH era--and with it--he showed what happens when a tremendous player uses a performance enhancer--and lots of other stiffs have used it to make money/careers--see Jason Giambi.

As a fan I don't care if Barry Bonds saves kittens out of trees or if he laughs if they fall out of the tree--I just judge him based upon how he plays the game. Unless you know someone personally, you can't really judge them. It's why I often dislike the more polished, media friendly guys--because in today's era, a lot of them are trained what to say and how to behave. Give me reality because like it or not--someone who is real is going to tell the truth. If you remember how people laughed at Jose Canseco when he first came out with his comments on performance enhancers and steriods--well I'm going to admit I believe someone like him far more then someone like McGwire--who had the nerve to act like he gave a rat's ass about the Maris family. If he did--he would've said--you know what--I am juicing and cheating and apologize to Roger for cheating his record and the game. Instead he paraded around like he was Mr. Wonderful and Sosa was his sidekick as if this was a Lethal Weapon Flick. Give me a break. Canseco is a self centered, egotistical clown, but he's also proven to be more insightful and honest in regards to this topic and his comments are far closer to the truth then anyone in MLB wants to admit.

Bonds, Sheffield, Jeff Kent, Schilling, are some of the guys I think have big mouths, but at least you know where they stand and they speak from the heart and not from teachings of some PR Coach an Agency hires to "polish" them up. Someone can come along and be both polished and honest--but it's few and far between. I don't have to like people to admire their work or respect their talent and there are certainly some nice men who can't play a lick--but my relationship as is case with majority of fans is watching them as a spectator and judging them for their actions on the field--why this off the field stuff matters gets mentioned is beyond me? Are you planning on having a dinner party and want to know who is nicest guy or do you want to watch who can play ball?

[ExcitableBoy]

In terms of finals ratings: If the racism explains why the predominantly black NBA got bad ratings, what explains why the predominantly white NHL got historically bad ratings for its finals?

In terms of the NBA's "Image Problem:" One specific impediment to the NBA improving its image is that the fans are extremely close to the action and the players are huge (and therefore pretty intimidating). What's more, rather than being dressed in pinstripe uniforms, goofy breezers and helmets, or tight pants and huge shoulder pads, NBA players wear clothing that allows the fans to see just how massive (and therefore pretty intimidating) these guys are. NBA players are arguably the most intimidating in terms of size because it's very easy to compare them to their surroundings. In contrast, NFL players don't look as big because they're not standing directly next to the fans. Hate to break it to you folks, but size does matter in this case.

What I'm trying to say is that the NBA's image problem should not necessarily be attributed to a group of racist white men. Rather, there are sport-specific traits that create a more intimidating look to NBA players--white or black--that ensures that anything negative (off court, but especially on court) gets blown way out of proportion. Think about sitting rink side at an NHL game watching two hockey players get in a fight. Not only are they heavily padded, they are also separated from you by a pane of plexiglass. Contrast this with sitting court side at an NBA game watching two NBA players fight. While the fight would also certainly not be as extreme, the fact that the players aren't wearing any pads and also that they are not separated from the fans by boards or glass makes the fight much more intimidating to the fans (and therefore the media who can parlay this intimidation into a story for the next three days).

[hifigator]

Interesting take RDF. It's interesting that you should use the term "polished and honest." If I think of one guy who was forever in the spotlight and yet fit that description it would probably be Michael Jordan. And like MCI said, he was tremendously popular and among both white and black fans as well. It's not just that he was one of the best 2 or 3 guys to ever play the game (if not THE best), but also that he was very likable. I read several quotes from him and I thought that he had the best understanding of the fact that the very same popularity which made him hundreds of millions of dollars, would forever prevent him from having a "normal" life in the sense of privacy and the sort. Tiger Woods is close, but you still get a sense that he has a hint of resentment. Jordan was the professional in this regard. In any case, I think you are definitely onto something with regard to likability and "polished and honest."

However, I don't think that Bonds really fits in that category. You can try to follow up on that race card issue, but I just don't think it flies. Again, I don't give a rat's ass what color his skin is. I dislike him because of the things he says and does. I dislike him because of his idea that he is bigger than the team. I dislike him for his insistance that virtually half of the entire locker room for 30 plus people be devoted to his private comfort. Do I care that he has the money for a plasma tv and recliner in his private study? Not one bit. But I do care, if you will, that he finds it necessary to have such a luxurious area which he keeps off limits for other teammates. I find his comments when other teams pitch around him childish. It is a part of the game, and if one guy is swinging an especially hot bat, and if that guy has the kind of power to really make you pay then the intentional walk is an integral part of the game. Just a month ago, Alabama decided that Matt LaPorta was not going to beat them. They intentionally walked him 8 straight times. They walked him with nobody out. They walked him to load the bases a couple of times. They walked him when he was the potential tying run, which is historically a baseball no-no. And they did all of this during the last homestand of his tremendous 4 year career. Did he say anything? No. He said it was just part of the game. In short, I have heard and read enough specific quotes by Bonds himself to formulate an opinion of the guy. Sorry, that is what we do. Earlier I said that I do like some athletes and dislike others. Obviously the college will go a long way in that determination. Equally obvious is the fact that I will have a predisposition to like a Gator and a predisposition to hate a seminole. But these can be overcome. I like Warrick Dunn and Derrick Brooks, who both played under stinking Bowden. I also have no allegiance towards Jason Williams or Vernon Maxwell, who both embarrassed the Gator Nation. Along similar lines, I like when I read things like Dikembe Mutumbo donating all of that money for a hospital in his homeland. Some of these token gifts by celebreties mean very little. If Michael Jackson or Paris Hilton donate $10,000 to a charity, then sure, it's a "good" thing, but that is such a drop in the bucket to those stars that it doesn't change my opinion of them, and in some cases it could actually harm their image in my eyes. If I think they are looking at such an act as an "investment" by boosting their image, then I will be inclined to move the other way so to speak.

In any case, the main point is that I think I have ample reason to dislike Bonds. And for someone to suggest that it is because he is black is an insult to me. When he makes such a claim about a group of people then I find it especially offensive.

[hifigator]

One more thing: people keep comparing hockey to basketball. That is just an unfair comparison, regardless of the intent. Hockey is not a native American sport. I am not going to get into a history lesson, but you know what I mean. America, by and large, grows up with football, baseball and basketball. Sure there are some areas which feature hockey, but virtually all areas have the other three. NHL ratings were horrible this season for sure, but much of that blame should fall on the fact that "versus" carried all of the games, rather than ESPN and the occassional game on one of the "big 4" networks. Even cable networks with versus, which used to be the Outdoor Life Channel, didn't exactly draw tons of viewers. The channel also isn't in the 2 most basic and most popular packages for Dish Network or DirecTV. My point is that NHL drawing bad ratings in America doesn't equate to NBA drawing similarly bad ratings.

Lastly, people also keep mentioning the fighting issue of the hockey and comparing it to the NBA. Again that isn't a fair comparison. Fighting is a part of hockey. Similary, managers arguing with an umpire and sometimes getting tossed is a part of baseball. Is it the main focus? No, of course not, but it is a part of baseball, that really has no comparable element in basketball or football. Sure, coaches argue a call here or there, but it isn't the same as in baseball. Accordingly, guys fight in hockey they might get 2 minutes in the penalty box. Guys fight in basketball, they might get a 5 game suspension and $20,000 fine. I apologize for such long posts.

[MCIGuy]

theexorcist said:

MCI, can you fix your post to remove the dead space? Thanks.


And can we thus drop the tired "Southerners are racist" insinuation?

Can we also stop the tired "Southerners get a bad rep when it comes to race" argumenT? Because outside of Indiana no other part of America has ever had the same amount of recorded racial strife nor produced the same amount of white-supremacy groups as the South.

Actually in my post I never wrote that Southerners had some sort of monopoly on racism. I'm not that dumb. I realize that race problems have happened everywhere. But I'm also not dumb enough or gullible enough to go along with the notion that the race of the people involved is not a huge influence over white Southerners choice of sports, idols, music, etc. More acts of domestic terrorism happened against blacks in the South than it did anywhere else in America. Lets get real. My family originates from the South and I have a love-hate relationship with the region. There's much to love about it and its people. I'm not trying to suggest otherwise. However it has a history and a rep which is well earned in my book.

Why don't Southerners like hockey, which is lily-white?

1)Hockey unlike basketball, baseball and football was not made in America.

2)Before ice-skating rinks became popular across the entire nation the only way to participate in hockey was to live in the far north. As a result the sport never took root in the South.

Maybe they like NASCAR because it has its roots in Tennessee and North Carolina and thei daddy took them to a race.

Good point. But you are forgetting to point out that the fathers make a conscious choice what to take their sons to and steer them towards (which in of itself is perfectly fine). If the majority of NASCAR drivers had been black in the early days do you really think it would have become as popular amongst white Southerners? Lets be honest. It would not have become nearly as popular. For example the Kentucky Derby used to be dominated by black jockeys. But as it begin to grow it could only attract a larger white fan base by pushing out the black jockeys and bringing in white ones. That's a historical fact.

Yes, I rooted against USA Basketball. But I did root for the Dream Team, which played together and won. It's an embarassment for the US men's basketball team not to win every single tournament it plays.

You have little respect for the competition if you think that. The 2004 team, for example, outside of AI and Duncan, was put together at the last minute (once 10 other players had dropped out) and most of them were guys who had been in the NBA for a season or two. Considering the different rules and the way the games were being called you expected them to win against teams that were not only talented but had been playing together for almost a decade?!? I keep hearing all this stuff about Team USA should have been playing like a team but you yourself shoot down the notion of the importance of teamwork by suggesting a last-minute stitched team should have dominated just by showing up against teams that had years of chemistry and familiarity with each other. Please be consistent. But that's the problem. The critcism towards Team USA is never consistent. And soon as the beloved and mainstream-accepted MJ and Magic and Bird were no longer part of the squad, the claws were out from the American public.

Lots of people root against and boo their team when they don't do well (England's famous for hating the way their team plays).

The British NEVER roots against its own during the World Cup. Give me a break. They get frustrated and angry with their team (and I can understand if Americans felt that way about Team uSA). But you won't find British citizens rooting for Argentina.

Yes, Berman hates the NBA. He really likes football. He's paid to be a personality. He does not have to be a representative of every sport equally.

He's an Ivy educated journalist who found his way to ESPN. He can hate the NBA all he wants. But he shouldn't pass out flase information. When he said the NBA was on "strike" he knew what he was doing. A trained journalist like himself doesn't make such a slip. Plus if you are going to give your views in an interview and don't take your favorite sports to task for the same things you take the NBA to task for that is having an agenda or at the very least a grudge that borders on unprofessionalism.

Finally. I like country music, and I don't like being considered racist.

I don't like people wasting my time with that garbage. No where except in your overeactionary mind did I suggest that liking country music or NASCAR or being white and from the South made anyone a racist. Nor did I write that hating the NBA makes you a racist. But at the same time its aburd to think that in this society race plays no part in the formation of many people's opinins of certain sports, music, movies, etc. To suggest otherwise is pure fantasy.

And if I had to go over a number of things to give you your bulletproof evidence it will get quite long and this thread could get quite heated and quite nasty as a result. That's not my intention. Hifigator brought up the issue and asked for everyone's two cents. I'm not trying to tick anyone off or start a flame war.

[MCIGuy]

hifigator said:

Lastly, people also keep mentioning the fighting issue of the hockey and comparing it to the NBA. Again that isn't a fair comparison. Fighting is a part of hockey.

I always thought that was a copout. There is nothing in the rule books about fighting being part of the sport the people who tend to truly promote the sport dislike the fighting element. But fans give the players a pass for acting like hooligans? In an NBA game if a fight breaks out it is seen as an an example of what's wrong with the game. Players who exchange blows are seen as the worst guys in sports. But if an exchange get heated and two players "share some words" and throw a couple of punches that don;t connect before backing off that's ridicue too by the American sports media. Either way they lose.

[RDF]

Hifi, you would be shocked to know what jerk Jordan is--he makes Bonds look like a choirboy in certain situations. I also will add that Jordan's ego and gambling debts to the wrong people still played a part in loss of his father. I know it sounds cold-but to this day I believe those two incidents were hand in hand. It's not that Jordan couldn't pay it--it's that he is so arrogant he didn't think he needed to pay it and he was hanging with some BAD people around time Stern told him to take a break--ugh I mean he decided he was burned out and wanted to play baseball.

Baseball is an individual sport within team game. Bonds can be a jerk but also help his team. He's been on many good teams in Pittsburgh and San Francisco--it's not as if his personality has prevented them from winning. I think Bonds cheated and should catch crap over it, but I also think it's pathetic how he's eating all of the same crap/anger/rage from fans that McGwire/Sosa should've back in '98. Are people really so naive that they can't figure out how difficult it is for a man in his 30's to have their head size/shoe size grow 2 sizes in less then 4 months? Are they so ignorant they figure it's just an amazing "work ethic" that MLB players gain 30/40 lbs of muscle in offseason--which consists of October-February-when they get back to Spring Training? FB players put on about 10-15 in a longer offseason and it's considered a great gain--but these guys were doing this and owners, media, and others turned a cheek. Why? Now Bonds is about to break the record and everyone is up in arms--I find race does play some part and some don't like him-fine--but he's a lot more similar to Michael Jordan in attitude--only that Jordan was smart enough to let David Falk mold him and keep the true personality away from public--plus he had promoters like the idiotic/worthless Ahmad Rashad hyping everything he did--and it was no coincidence they were friends. People say they want honesty but they don't. The minute you see someone act like they usually do, most cringe. It's funny. Bonds is a jerk--but I find it refreshing that he shows us who he is. Jordan is similar but did what most people do--and why not? It made him millions. I don't begrudge Jordan for doing this--I just hate how people say they want honest people and call someone who wasn't a "good person" just because he says what they want to hear or smiles. You and most like that, I prefer reality--be it someone is mean, someone is nice, someone is goofy, someone is smart, someone is dumb. I just don't trust someone who is "perfect" and never will.