The Bobcat Nation

Looks as if the preseason is DONE and the season is in jeopardy.....That is the headline from the Sacramento Bee.....

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz,

this has been kind of funny to me. i actually like the nba. i'm not a die hard fan but i'll enjoy a game if it happens to be on. it's not near entertaining to me as the college game but i can appreciate them differently.

that said, it is so funny to me how different this is than when the nfl was going through the exact same thing this summer. the only difference is that everyone seemed to REALLY care about there being no nfl....and no one seems to care if there is no nba! even the players seem content just going over seas to play hoops for as long as they have to.

in the end, i'm sure something will get done, even if it's a shortened season. just too much money to be lost....

Havent thought about it like that, but yeah (as usual) youre right on point.

I "follow" the nba, meaning if nothing else is on, I may watch the Sacramento Kings or the Golden State Warriors as they on our ComCast "locals". But if they had no season it would sure not be a big blow. I have not been a fan of the nba for probably ten to fifteen years.
But as was stated before, probably too much money.....
I would much rather watch the NCAA. Now that I am happily retired March Madness is lots of fun.....And I can actually enjoy it.

Good riddance. Ever since Howard Schultz (in all his infinite wisdom) decided to move the Sonics to Oklahoma City, I have stopped following the NBA.

Just a bunch of over paid prima donnas anyways

TIrwin24 wrote:Good riddance. Ever since Howard Schultz (in all his infinite wisdom) decided to move the Sonics to Oklahoma City, I have stopped following the NBA.

Just a bunch of over paid prima donnas anyways

well, i KINDA agree. moving the sonics was absurd. but i don't know how that would change your perspective of the entire league. what of they were still in seattle, and what if durant and crew won a title last year. would that change your view of the whole league? would they not be overpaid? would they not be prima donnas? like i said, i actually kind of agree with you, but don't know how one situation could change you whole view.

as an aside, i don't think anyone making millions is overpaid when they are making BILLIONS for their bosses. that money is being made, and it's going to go somewhere. if not to the actual players playing the game, it'd just go to the owners and their private jets and weekend getaways to paris anyway....

Howard schultz didnt move the team. He sold the team to clay bennett who made a half hearted effort to keep the team in seattle before moving OKC.

wbtfg wrote:Howard schultz didnt move the team. He sold the team to clay bennett who made a half hearted effort to keep the team in seattle before moving OKC.

My mistake. Thanks for correcting that.

As I've said more than once on this board... Who cares? It's the NBA.

It's hard to know what the real story is, but I've heard a couple guys say that the owners really aren't making money right now under the legacy CBA (which gives the players something like 58% of all league revenues), so canceling games actually doesn't cost them much or perhaps anything (except for the ones that own their own arenas -- their fixed costs are much higher). So the owners seem fairly content to just do nothing until they get their way. On the other hand, the players have everything to lose, and most don't exactly save what they make, so they will start hurting right away in most cases.

It kinda sounds like the owners are going to have a huge amount of leverage, and the players are going to take a pretty big pay cut (I think I heard the owners want to reduce their share of revenues to at or below 50%).

I certainly don't miss the NBA, but the economic and legal aspects of all of this is somewhat interesting to me.

Now if we could just get rid of the NHL also!

gtapp wrote:Now if we could just get rid of the NHL also!

Why?

gtapp wrote:Now if we could just get rid of the NHL also!

Wouldn't be a bad league if they'd actually play hockey and not also sanction fighting as part of it.

Makes a joke of a great sport IMHO.

MashTun wrote:

gtapp wrote:Now if we could just get rid of the NHL also!

Wouldn't be a bad league if they'd actually play hockey and not also sanction fighting as part of it.

Makes a joke of a great sport IMHO.

You're kidding right? I think I've seen more fights in Football (college and pro) this year than I have in hockey recently. Hockey probably handles fights (which are going to happen in any agressive competition) better than any sport there is. Got a problem, the two with an issue go for it until one has a major advantage...then break it up and sit both down for a penalty. Way better than pretending you are going to stop fights by instituting stupid judgement penalties for a guy pointing his finger at an opponent as he scores a touchdown.

kmax wrote:

MashTun wrote:

gtapp wrote:Now if we could just get rid of the NHL also!

Wouldn't be a bad league if they'd actually play hockey and not also sanction fighting as part of it.

Makes a joke of a great sport IMHO.

You're kidding right? I think I've seen more fights in Football (college and pro) this year than I have in hockey recently. Hockey probably handles fights (which are going to happen in any agressive competition) better than any sport there is. Got a problem, the two with an issue go for it until one has a major advantage...then break it up and sit both down for a penalty. Way better than pretending you are going to stop fights by instituting stupid judgement penalties for a guy pointing his finger at an opponent as he scores a touchdown.

No, not joking. Completely stupid for a referee to just stand there as guys punch each other. I'm not watching UFC( which I'm a fan of). Going to be bit of a smarta$$ here, but I'm under the impression that refs. are there to enforce the rules of the sport

I'd like to see hockey played. A good physical game of hockey is great, check'em into the boards all night long. How hard physical play has degenerated into fistfights is beyond be. I further say, that it's one of the reason hockey isn't a bigger sport than it is.

Some excessive celebration penalties can be a little much, such as your finger pointing example. At little too PC for me.

MashTun wrote:

kmax wrote:

MashTun wrote:

gtapp wrote:Now if we could just get rid of the NHL also!

Wouldn't be a bad league if they'd actually play hockey and not also sanction fighting as part of it.

Makes a joke of a great sport IMHO.

You're kidding right? I think I've seen more fights in Football (college and pro) this year than I have in hockey recently. Hockey probably handles fights (which are going to happen in any agressive competition) better than any sport there is. Got a problem, the two with an issue go for it until one has a major advantage...then break it up and sit both down for a penalty. Way better than pretending you are going to stop fights by instituting stupid judgement penalties for a guy pointing his finger at an opponent as he scores a touchdown.

No, not joking. Completely stupid for a referee to just stand there as guys punch each other. I'm not watching UFC( which I'm a fan of). Going to be bit of a smarta$$ here, but I'm under the impression that refs. are there to enforce the rules of the sport

I'd like to see hockey played. A good physical game of hockey is great, check'em into the boards all night long. How hard physical play has degenerated into fistfights is beyond be. I further say, that it's one of the reason hockey isn't a bigger sport than it is.

Some excessive celebration penalties can be a little much, such as your finger pointing example. At little too PC for me.

There are fights in a little over a third of games in the NHL, so I wouldn't say it's a major issue. Also, I wouldn't jump in there if I was a ref. If someone is throwing some wild haymakers, I'm not going to step in front of one. I think the system works pretty well as is. Two guys take care of business then they're sent away for a little while. It makes more sense than beanball wars in baseball where they're throwing at each other because of all of these unwritten rules. (The reason these rules are unwritten? Because they are stupid.)

Egg Salad wrote:

MashTun wrote:

kmax wrote:

MashTun wrote:

gtapp wrote:Now if we could just get rid of the NHL also!

Wouldn't be a bad league if they'd actually play hockey and not also sanction fighting as part of it.

Makes a joke of a great sport IMHO.

You're kidding right? I think I've seen more fights in Football (college and pro) this year than I have in hockey recently. Hockey probably handles fights (which are going to happen in any agressive competition) better than any sport there is. Got a problem, the two with an issue go for it until one has a major advantage...then break it up and sit both down for a penalty. Way better than pretending you are going to stop fights by instituting stupid judgement penalties for a guy pointing his finger at an opponent as he scores a touchdown.

No, not joking. Completely stupid for a referee to just stand there as guys punch each other. I'm not watching UFC( which I'm a fan of). Going to be bit of a smarta$$ here, but I'm under the impression that refs. are there to enforce the rules of the sport

I'd like to see hockey played. A good physical game of hockey is great, check'em into the boards all night long. How hard physical play has degenerated into fistfights is beyond be. I further say, that it's one of the reason hockey isn't a bigger sport than it is.

Some excessive celebration penalties can be a little much, such as your finger pointing example. At little too PC for me.

There are fights in a little over a third of games in the NHL, so I wouldn't say it's a major issue. Also, I wouldn't jump in there if I was a ref. If someone is throwing some wild haymakers, I'm not going to step in front of one. I think the system works pretty well as is. Two guys take care of business then they're sent away for a little while. It makes more sense than beanball wars in baseball where they're throwing at each other because of all of these unwritten rules. (The reason these rules are unwritten? Because they are stupid.)

Why let them fight at all? That it's sanctioned at all is my point. Hockey is the only "big" sport that sanctions fighting as part of the contest. In the other "big sports" players get thrown out for fighting. Yet it's legitimized in hockey. Stupid.

Just throw them out of the game and that will solve the problem. If a "message" needs to be sent, there's plenty of opportunity to check someone on the boards. I love watching Olympic hockey for that reason(fighting not allowed), I get to watch a hockey game, with hockey skills on display. Sanctioned fighting is amateurish and diminishes the game.

MashTun wrote:

Egg Salad wrote:

MashTun wrote:

kmax wrote:

MashTun wrote:

gtapp wrote:Now if we could just get rid of the NHL also!

Wouldn't be a bad league if they'd actually play hockey and not also sanction fighting as part of it.

Makes a joke of a great sport IMHO.

You're kidding right? I think I've seen more fights in Football (college and pro) this year than I have in hockey recently. Hockey probably handles fights (which are going to happen in any agressive competition) better than any sport there is. Got a problem, the two with an issue go for it until one has a major advantage...then break it up and sit both down for a penalty. Way better than pretending you are going to stop fights by instituting stupid judgement penalties for a guy pointing his finger at an opponent as he scores a touchdown.

No, not joking. Completely stupid for a referee to just stand there as guys punch each other. I'm not watching UFC( which I'm a fan of). Going to be bit of a smarta$$ here, but I'm under the impression that refs. are there to enforce the rules of the sport

I'd like to see hockey played. A good physical game of hockey is great, check'em into the boards all night long. How hard physical play has degenerated into fistfights is beyond be. I further say, that it's one of the reason hockey isn't a bigger sport than it is.

Some excessive celebration penalties can be a little much, such as your finger pointing example. At little too PC for me.

There are fights in a little over a third of games in the NHL, so I wouldn't say it's a major issue. Also, I wouldn't jump in there if I was a ref. If someone is throwing some wild haymakers, I'm not going to step in front of one. I think the system works pretty well as is. Two guys take care of business then they're sent away for a little while. It makes more sense than beanball wars in baseball where they're throwing at each other because of all of these unwritten rules. (The reason these rules are unwritten? Because they are stupid.)

Why let them fight at all? That it's sanctioned at all is my point. Hockey is the only "big" sport that sanctions fighting as part of the contest. In the other "big sports" players get thrown out for fighting. Yet it's legitimized in hockey. Stupid.

Just throw them out of the game and that will solve the problem. If a "message" needs to be sent, there's plenty of opportunity to check someone on the boards. I love watching Olympic hockey for that reason(fighting not allowed), I get to watch a hockey game, with hockey skills on display. Sanctioned fighting is amateurish and diminishes the game.

How does it diminish the game? And you get to see the same amount of hockey, with or without fights. I like watching NCAA and international hockey as much as the NHL, and I've never thought that fighting in the NHL makes it any less watchable than anything I've seen internationally.

Egg Salad wrote:

MashTun wrote:

Egg Salad wrote:

MashTun wrote:

kmax wrote:

MashTun wrote:

gtapp wrote:Now if we could just get rid of the NHL also!

Wouldn't be a bad league if they'd actually play hockey and not also sanction fighting as part of it.

Makes a joke of a great sport IMHO.

You're kidding right? I think I've seen more fights in Football (college and pro) this year than I have in hockey recently. Hockey probably handles fights (which are going to happen in any agressive competition) better than any sport there is. Got a problem, the two with an issue go for it until one has a major advantage...then break it up and sit both down for a penalty. Way better than pretending you are going to stop fights by instituting stupid judgement penalties for a guy pointing his finger at an opponent as he scores a touchdown.

No, not joking. Completely stupid for a referee to just stand there as guys punch each other. I'm not watching UFC( which I'm a fan of). Going to be bit of a smarta$$ here, but I'm under the impression that refs. are there to enforce the rules of the sport

I'd like to see hockey played. A good physical game of hockey is great, check'em into the boards all night long. How hard physical play has degenerated into fistfights is beyond be. I further say, that it's one of the reason hockey isn't a bigger sport than it is.

Some excessive celebration penalties can be a little much, such as your finger pointing example. At little too PC for me.

There are fights in a little over a third of games in the NHL, so I wouldn't say it's a major issue. Also, I wouldn't jump in there if I was a ref. If someone is throwing some wild haymakers, I'm not going to step in front of one. I think the system works pretty well as is. Two guys take care of business then they're sent away for a little while. It makes more sense than beanball wars in baseball where they're throwing at each other because of all of these unwritten rules. (The reason these rules are unwritten? Because they are stupid.)

Why let them fight at all? That it's sanctioned at all is my point. Hockey is the only "big" sport that sanctions fighting as part of the contest. In the other "big sports" players get thrown out for fighting. Yet it's legitimized in hockey. Stupid.

Just throw them out of the game and that will solve the problem. If a "message" needs to be sent, there's plenty of opportunity to check someone on the boards. I love watching Olympic hockey for that reason(fighting not allowed), I get to watch a hockey game, with hockey skills on display. Sanctioned fighting is amateurish and diminishes the game.

How does it diminish the game? And you get to see the same amount of hockey, with or without fights. I like watching NCAA and international hockey as much as the NHL, and I've never thought that fighting in the NHL makes it any less watchable than anything I've seen internationally.

How does it not diminish the game, when you're not playing by the rules? You can get "payback" or "settle a score" within the rules. Why not do that? Throw hard checks all night long I say.

Would you like to see fights in football, baseball, and basketball and not see players thrown out? If so, I'd say we see sports quite differently.