Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

Training camp get here soon enough.

Code for "this is such a silly convo y'all are having and im glad I'm not participating in this foolishness".

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

The thing is, nobody ever answered with a response that was related to my point. Which is what I was getting at the whole time.



People were assuming I'm talking about him from a popularity standpoint, the responses to my posts were made as if I was saying "Jordan is more popular now, more people know him now".

Sounds like you're looking for a specific answer. And nobody assumed anything, we just went by what you typed.

[ojandpizza]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

But we/people have responded to your points. You've just chosen to not accept them as counter-points.

Your response, as well as others, have responded in the manner of telling me how popular he was. I know how popular he was, I was never arguing that he is more popular now than he was then.

I haven't not excepted anything, most haven't even responded with anything other than to say I'm wrong. That isn't a counter-point. I even "liked" your point, or whatever it's called on here. So I don't understand what you're getting at.

[Fresh Tendrils]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

You claim that he is treated more like a deity now than he was before. Others have pointed out he's been treated like this for more than 20 years.

You claim that his "name has grown" (ie: gotten more popular, carries more influence) more and more since he stopped playing. Others have pointed out that his name was actually bigger, more influential, etc while he was playing and immediately after he retired the second time.

[wwharton]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

You claim that he is treated more like a deity now than he was before. Others have pointed out he's been treated like this for more than 20 years.

You claim that his "name has grown" (ie: gotten more popular, carries more influence) more and more since he stopped playing. Others have pointed out that his name was actually bigger, more influential, etc while he was playing and immediately after he retired the second time.

Yeah OJ, this ^ is a good summary of how I've seen things but for the most part, I'm not sure why it's a big deal. You've bowed out of discussions that have gotten on you for much more significant arguments. I guess it is just because there's nothing else to talk about. Today, so far, this and the WNBA thread are the only ones getting bumped so there you go, lol.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

I "bumped" this back up to respond to the other guy talking about opinions having to be the same around here or something like that.

[King_B_Mack]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

I "bumped" this back up to respond to the other guy talking about opinions having to be the same around here or something like that.

You're a better man than me. I just left that one alone. Sure sign of an internet thread completely jumping the shark is when someone drags out the 'you can't have an opinion and have to be the same as everybody else' line when things aren't going their way.

[CaseIH]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

Nobody said he couldn't have that opinion though or that is has to be "inline" with everyone else though.

People have listed "decent reasons"(whatever the **** that is)but if he doesn't want to listen to it or put any weight in them then that's cool.

But let's not act like the reasons everyone mentioned since the question/statement was originally posted, doesn't have any weight or significance(just throwing this out there in general).

I was making a joke because of all the BS Political correctness that goes on in this country now days, not necessarily meaning you cant have a opinion here on this site,lol.

[ojandpizza]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

I think the biggest disconnect between what I meant with my posts and what most responded with is that I'm not literally talking about his "name", his popularity, how many people know him, how much he's talked about, how marketable he is, how famous he is... Obviously MJ was the most famous athlete, and maybe the most recognizable celebrity figure, on the planet during his playing days. That for sure cannot grow over time, you have a whole generation of fans now who never even watched him play. That isn't what I was getting at.

My responses were more directly in line with the OP. He was talking about MJ's name in comparison to how he's related to other players and teams. That's what I was talking about. When Jordan was playing you could talk about him the way you could other players. You could have a Kobe/Duncan "barbershop discussion" with Jordan/Hakeem, Jordan/Magic, whatever. Overtime I feel as if anything Jordan is like stepping on thin ice. Almost like he has his own standard of what you can or can't say about him. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but the whole notion of Jordan being "disrespected" or "forgotten" to me is just silly, because literally any other player who's ever played will get disrespected just so he doesn't have to.

And like I said from the start, I don't even mean that in a bad way, I'm not saying that as the GOAT you don't earn that type of legacy status or whatever you want to call it. I'm just stating how I disagree with the OP.

[wwharton]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

I think the biggest disconnect between what I meant with my posts and what most responded with is that I'm not literally talking about his "name", his popularity, how many people know him, how much he's talked about, how marketable he is, how famous he is... Obviously MJ was the most famous athlete, and maybe the most recognizable celebrity figure, on the planet during his playing days. That for sure cannot grow over time, you have a whole generation of fans now who never even watched him play. That isn't what I was getting at.

My responses were more directly in line with the OP. He was talking about MJ's name in comparison to how he's related to other players and teams. That's what I was talking about. When Jordan was playing you could talk about him the way you could other players. You could have a Kobe/Duncan "barbershop discussion" with Jordan/Hakeem, Jordan/Magic, whatever. Overtime I feel as if anything Jordan is like stepping on thin ice. Almost like he has his own standard of what you can or can't say about him. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but the whole notion of Jordan being "disrespected" or "forgotten" to me is just silly, because literally any other player who's ever played will get disrespected just so he doesn't have to.

And like I said from the start, I don't even mean that in a bad way, I'm not saying that as the GOAT you don't earn that type of legacy status or whatever you want to call it. I'm just stating how I disagree with the OP.

Still can't get behind this. EARLY in his career, sure. There was the "yeah he scores a lot, but that's clearly not how you win a title"... and then he won a title. Ever since the championships started rolling in, it was a pretty consistent given that he was the best player on the planet, and that was during a time with a lot more obvious HOFers still playing than now. There was outrage the year he didn't win the MVP, and it only died down because the consensus was they just wanted to give it to someone else.

[ojandpizza]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

Well yeah, he was obviously the best player on the planet, and well before he got a title too. That's not what I meant either. I'm not talking about how great or not he was THEN.

Whatever I'm trying to say is either getting contorted when being read, or I can't put my thoughts into words well enough. Either way my point is obviously lost in translation, no biggie.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fresh Tendrils]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

Reading the thread it seems pretty clear there have been rebuttals to what you're typing out. I think you're hanging your hat on the stance that people get up in arms when there are comparisons to Jordan or GOAT discussions that allow others to be included on Jordan's level. As if those reactions have changed over the past 20 years.

That's what I've gotten anyway.

[AlexBrady]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

I have not changed on this, Bill Russell is the most impactful player ever since he controlled the most critical real estate near the basket. As for the non-bigs I have Michael Jordan as the best in a tie with Oscar Robertson.

[ojandpizza]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

without even using my own opinion, my point of view is pretty much proven by the media, ESPN, etc.

The fact that you watch a Kobe highlight reel, LeBron highlight reel, hell even Magic highlight reel, and 10 comments down "they aren't as good as Jordan though" even if the video has nothing to do with Jordan, the fact that every time Kobe strung together 5 good games ESPN "Jordan", KD scores a ton "Jordan", Curry wins a scoring title "Jordan" LeBron wins his first ring "Jordan", a team wins 10 in a row "96 Bulls", a team adds a big 3 or whatever "96 Bulls"..Lets compare to Jordan. That proves my point.

Jordan isn't being forgotten or being disrespected. He's the only former player that people still talk about to that extent. 30 years later and that's still what nearly any basketball talk will eventually turn towards. That in a nutshell proves my point. A player cannot do anything without "well Jordan did it this way". Not many care how Bill, Magic, Bird, Kareem, Big O, etc how those guys did it. But how did Jordan do it.

The OP even mentions how sin-like it would be for someone to say that the 2001 Lakers could beat the 96 Bulls. That's a disrespect to Jordan somehow. Even though Shaq is a bigger match up problem for that Chicago team than Jordan ever could be to that Laker team. Mentioning Jordan's name in seemingly anything is considered a disrespect.

Was someone picking Utah or Seattle or NY or someone to beat the Bulls in the 90's disrespectful? NO, it was just like any other great team beating another great team. But saying you think an all time great team could suddenly is? It wasn't then, but it would be now? But that's fine, that doesn't back my point any? That isn't plausible reason?

[AlexBrady]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

The OP even mentions how sin-like it would be for someone to say that the 2001 Lakers could beat the 96 Bulls. That's a disrespect to Jordan somehow. Even though Shaq is a bigger match up problem for that Chicago team than Jordan ever could be to that Laker team.

Luc Longley was 320 pounds and could hold Shaq up until help came. MJ outplays Kobe at both ends. The Lakers have no answer for Pippen. Kukoc off the bench is a game-changer. Rodman would turn the boards into a volley-ball game.

Chicago has more team speed and better defense. Chicago in six.