-
-
Re: What ever happened to it being a mans game?
Co-sign completely. The fact that Phil Jackson said since Beasely didn't miss any games the league over-reacted in a sense. That logic is flawed imo. Just because Mike was fortunate enough to not get hurt doesn't make the act less deplorable. It is odd that Bynum gave Crash a collapsed lung on another hard foul a few years back and suffered no penalties.EA and 2k have the unfortunate task of trying to balance on a tightrope of fun and sim while trying not to fall 10,000 feet to their death. Instead of a safety net waiting down below there will just be angry customers quick to move out of the way and talk of their failure.Comment
-
Re: What ever happened to it being a mans game?
It isn't revisionist to see the New York Knicks for what they were; a slap fighting, chippy team that couldn't clutch up when it mattered most. One time Eastern Conference Champions. Nothing else. I'm sorry this revelation completely devalues your construction of NBA history and the teams that actually left an imprint upon it.Last edited by redcedarrevenge; 03-22-2011, 01:44 AM.Comment
-
Re: What ever happened to it being a mans game?
Scoring is still not up as far as it was then. When the Lakers and Celtics played each other for the NBA title in the mid 80s, both teams gave up over 100 points a game on defense (you will not see that now). Was it "a mans game" then?Last edited by ZB9; 03-22-2011, 12:44 PM.Comment
-
Re: What ever happened to it being a mans game?
or
hmmmm??Last edited by BATMON; 03-22-2011, 12:59 PM.Comment
-
Re: What ever happened to it being a mans game?
The final score of that game was 129-125
So playing defense isnt what you mean by "man's game"? Clothes-lining someone makes it a "man's game'? If being physical or taking cheap shots is what determines what is a "man's game", then NBA is far behind the NFL and NHL when it comes to being a "man's game"...
(btw, personally, I think it was a "man's game" back then, probably for different reasons than you do though, and I also think it's a "man's game" now)Last edited by ZB9; 03-22-2011, 01:26 PM.Comment
-
Re: What ever happened to it being a mans game?
both versions are a man's game. both versions have elements of them that are not particularly "manly", as well. just because they are different does not mean they are not equally man-full.xbox gt - bmorerep87
Comment
-
Re: What ever happened to it being a mans game?
So are we arguing "manlyness" or are we arguing the supposed drop of quality defense? Because one is a social construct while the other actually has to do with sports....just saying.Comment
-
Re: What ever happened to it being a mans game?
Sorry, Pat Riley's Knicks only won the East once.
And, BATMON's hilarious. I never knew back to back eastern conference crowns by the New Jersey Nets mattered as much as it did until now!
This thread is lame. Bunch of 90s honks trying to live on childhood construction rather than measurables or proof about how the game changed because they can't do it. Every single good team in that era deserves the credit reserved only for NBA Champions. 83 Sixers? Pfft. Couldn't even touch the likes of the Pat Riley New York Knicks because they bumped into guys. Can't even touch the Van Gundy Knicks because there's this GIF file of Chris Childs slap fighting with Kobe Bryant and it's so cool even though Childs throws glancing shots with a curved back as if he were a junk-in-the-trunk-loaded woman. They took the Bulls to six games guys! Nobody else can say that.
Comment
-
Re: What ever happened to it being a mans game?
They are arguing manliness because measurables for defense have nothing to do with the construction of eight-year-olds that the game they watched then is significantly better in all facets and forms than it is now.
In the early 2000's, when games were more defense oriented, it was because the stars of the 90's weren't around and offenses suffered as a result. The league was second tier. The later you get, the more offensive numbers and the crispness of the game improves, the argument shifts from 90's star offensive output to "they don't play physical defense like they did in the 90's, so that negates everything because so and so would've scored fifty-five a game in this NBA". Suddenly, it isn't about Michael Jordan and Charles Barkley and Patrick Ewing as to why the game is suffering; it's because the NBA doesn't have enough Charles Oakley's or Anthony Mason's or Horace Grant's...you know, guys who are, at best, glue pieces to a contender and, when put up as individuals, were unable to be focal points of teams. It's just some dimwitted way of saying "THE GAME WAS BETTER, MAN" without actually having to justify it in any way.Comment
-
Re: What ever happened to it being a mans game?
Hey hey HEY!Sorry, Pat Riley's Knicks only won the East once.
And, BATMON's hilarious. I never knew back to back eastern conference crowns by the New Jersey Nets mattered as much as it did until now!
This thread is lame. Bunch of 90s honks trying to live on childhood construction rather than measurables or proof about how the game changed because they can't do it. Every single good team in that era deserves the credit reserved only for NBA Champions. 83 Sixers? Pfft. Couldn't even touch the likes of the Pat Riley New York Knicks because they bumped into guys. Can't even touch the Van Gundy Knicks because there's this GIF file of Chris Childs slap fighting with Kobe Bryant and it's so cool even though Childs throws glancing shots with a curved back as if he were a junk-in-the-trunk-loaded woman. They took the Bulls to six games guys! Nobody else can say that.
You watch it now....it matters to me dammit
#RespectTheCultureComment
Comment