Deer "put the college kids in" types,
"©N¥ikuli, Williåm©"
2. "more motivated" or not, in todays basketball world, with college
kids the team will be smashed even worse.
Tom Enright
"©N¥ikuli, Williåm©"
$nx2....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> 1. Its about the BEST players in the world i.e. Pro players.
>
> 2. "more motivated" or not, in todays basketball world, with college
> kids the team will be smashed even worse.
IAWTP
The college kids do not belong there.
-Tom Enright
det282
news:ZVOTc.22963$nx2....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> 1. Its about the BEST players in the world i.e. Pro players.
BEST players? Apparently, no one told the US.
Greg Reeves
"There's nothing wrong with shooting,
just as long as the right people get shot."
-- Inspector Harry Callahan San Francisco PD
Czar Christopher I
:
: "?N?ikuli, Willi?m?"
:
: $nx2....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
: > 1. Its about the BEST players in the world i.e. Pro players.
: >
: > 2. "more motivated" or not, in todays basketball world, with college
: > kids the team will be smashed even worse.
:
: IAWTP
:
: The college kids do not belong there.
Especially now that the best players skip college altogether.
--
Czar Christopher I rec.sport.football.college
"I'm not aware of anyone in the White House who is aware of
anyone who's aware that the President ever was aware of
having made such a comment." --Scott McClellan, 7/21/2004
TB-Taylor
"©N¥ikuli, Williåm©" <hm...@thisisbetterthan.MSOexpress> wrote in message
news:ZVOTc.22963$nx2....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Then why didnt we send any?
>
> 2. "more motivated" or not, in todays basketball world, with college
> kids the team will be smashed even worse.
err.. no.
TB-Taylor
"Tom Enright" <then...@komBOINKcast.nYet> wrote in message
news:BJidnfE4B7Z...@comcast.com...
and you are?
TB-Taylor
"det282" <det...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:ScPTc.158723$eM2.84969@attbi_s51...
> "©N¥ikuli, Williåm©" <hm...@thisisbetterthan.MSOexpress> wrote in message
> news:ZVOTc.22963$nx2....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > 1. Its about the BEST players in the world i.e. Pro players.
>
> BEST players? Apparently, no one told the US.
>
thats right!
"©N¥ikuli, Williåm©"
.
>>2. "more motivated" or not, in todays basketball world, with college
>>kids the team will be smashed even worse.
>
>
> err.. no.
Yes, because they're just not godo enough. You think Connecticut last
year would've beaten the Hawks or Clippers? Yes or no?
Tom Enright
"TB-Taylor, Tom Clany's fiction pales in comparison:
> > -Tom Enright
> and you are?
...ccccccooorect.
-Tom Enright
TB-Taylor
"©N¥ikuli, Williåm©" <hm...@thisisbetterthan.MSOexpress> wrote in message
they would have beaten several teams in the nba.
Daniel Seriff
(in message <mVPTc.23003$nx2....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>):
Last year's UConn wouldn't even have beaten Georgia Tech in the NCAA final
without that unprecedented shitload of help from the refs.
--
Daniel Seriff
Everyone loves a fungible conspiracy theory.
Daniel Seriff
(in message <EaSdnW9kLf3...@comcast.com>):
In what wacko fantasy universe?
--
Daniel Seriff
You can't expect the world to beat a path to your door just by putting a
sweater on a penis.
Setzer
The Olympics have always been about finding the next great athlete. Not the
current great one. It is about AMATEUR players. There's all kinds of
chances for elite players to prove their prowess in team sports. Be it the
NBA Finals, the World Series, the World Cup whatever, these events are for
the people who are meant to be the best in the wrold at what they do. But
that means they've already been found.
The Olympics are for the underdog. They're for the sports that people
forget about. They're for the people who just need one chance to prove how
great they are. They're for the people who will never get paid $10 million
a year, who after the Olympics will only have memories of their one shot at
greatness as they go about the mundane realities of life. NBA players
playing basketball at the Olympics is like a kiddie team that has Shaq on
it. Its meaningless, the games are meaningless and there's no sense of
victory whatsoever in it.
If you feel like team sports need these people to somehow be worth watching,
then you're not the audience the Olympics is made for. The 1980 US Hockey
Team was composed entirely of college hockey players, and they shocked the
world. Yes, the ending of the Cold War has made much of the Olympics
"boring" for the modern day US fan, but that's because the modern day fan
has become obsessed with pizzazz and flash instead of substance. To the
rest of the world, the Olympics is a chance for them to make it big on a
worldwide stage, and THAT is what the Olympics are about, not a bunch of
spoiled pro athletes flexing their muscles.
--
Setzer
marty mcmahone
"Setzer" <set...@setzertopia.net> wrote in message
news:qnQTc.7491$ii....@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
Two things:
1) The rest of the world were the ones who voted to send pros to Olympic
basketball. USOC voted against.
2) The idea of amateurism in the Olympics was the creation of rich Brits who
knew they could compete in a competition where they could afford to do
nothing but train and those who were poorer would be forced to go pro or
give up training. It was never the noble pursuit that it was pitched as.
The Olympics should be a competition for the best in the world. Any other
possibility leaves the situations where you have essentially pro teams
playing true amatuers, etc. The vision of the "noble amateur" was always a
distortion, and was never even close to done the same way across the world.
Marty
Tom Enright
"Setzer, Tom Clancy's fiction pales in comparison:
> IDNAWTP.
>
> The Olympics have always been about finding the next great athlete. Not
the
> current great one. It is about AMATEUR players. There's all kinds of
> chances for elite players to prove their prowess in team sports. Be it
the
> NBA Finals, the World Series, the World Cup whatever, these events are for
> the people who are meant to be the best in the wrold at what they do. But
> that means they've already been found.
"Amateur" cannot be defined. An "amateur" in the Soviet
Union was paid by the Soviet government under the guise
of being part of the armed forces.
The Olympics should be for the best athletes in the
world, not a series of "up-close-and-personal" heart-
warming, personal struggle stories.
> The Olympics are for the underdog. They're for the sports that people
> forget about. They're for the people who just need one chance to prove
how
> great they are. They're for the people who will never get paid $10
million
> a year, who after the Olympics will only have memories of their one shot
at
> greatness as they go about the mundane realities of life. NBA players
> playing basketball at the Olympics is like a kiddie team that has Shaq on
> it. Its meaningless, the games are meaningless and there's no sense of
> victory whatsoever in it.
The "sports that people forget about" are the sports
people don't want to remember. If an athlete is that
good, they will win a spot on the Olympic team sooner
or later. What's the difference if he does it when he is
18 or 24?
> If you feel like team sports need these people to somehow be worth
watching,
> then you're not the audience the Olympics is made for. The 1980 US Hockey
> Team was composed entirely of college hockey players, and they shocked the
> world. Yes, the ending of the Cold War has made much of the Olympics
> "boring" for the modern day US fan, but that's because the modern day fan
> has become obsessed with pizzazz and flash instead of substance. To the
> rest of the world, the Olympics is a chance for them to make it big on a
> worldwide stage, and THAT is what the Olympics are about, not a bunch of
> spoiled pro athletes flexing their muscles.
What is your hard-on about the US Olympic team? If
you want to complain about the ruination of the mythical
"Olympic spirit" you should direct your gaze towards the
(former) Soviet Union, Cuba and China.
-Tom Enright
> --
> Setzer
>
>
Kurgan the Crosseyed Assclown
> 1. Its about the BEST players in the world i.e. Pro players.
>
> 2. "more motivated" or not, in todays basketball world, with college
> kids the team will be smashed even worse.
>
The reason "Team USA" sucks is the best players couldn't be bothered to be
on the olimpic team. Typical of the trash that is the NBA
Setzer
> 1) The rest of the world were the ones who voted to send pros to Olympic
> basketball. USOC voted against.
I never said they did, nor did I imply that only the US should cease using
pros. All teams should.
> 2) The idea of amateurism in the Olympics was the creation of rich Brits
who
> knew they could compete in a competition where they could afford to do
> nothing but train and those who were poorer would be forced to go pro or
> give up training. It was never the noble pursuit that it was pitched as.
>
> The Olympics should be a competition for the best in the world. Any other
> possibility leaves the situations where you have essentially pro teams
> playing true amatuers, etc. The vision of the "noble amateur" was always
a
> distortion, and was never even close to done the same way across the
world.
The Olympics are a competition for the best in the world, in sports like
track and field, swimming, etc. But these are people who have no other real
avenues to become larger than life than through the Olympics. On the other
hand, sports like Hockey and Basketball use players than make millions of
dollars a year, have already made an impact on the world at large, and do
not need the exposure a shot at true greatness at the Olympics brings. On
the other hand amateur players (be they college kids, or like you're
speaking about in other nations of the world, the equivalent of farm-grown
products) receive a chance to make their impact by going to the Olympics
every four years. Why should they be denied a shot so that pro atheltes who
gain nothing but an ego-boost from their appearance can dominate the
Olympics? I'm sure there are some pro players, especially in non-US
countries, who honestly want to bring home the gold for their countries, but
let's not be naive here, in the sports world today most of these people are
playing solely to make themselves the center of attention. Complete lack of
cooperation is what killed the US team today against Puerto Rico.
Will any of this change? Of course not, and we're all certainly entitled to
our opinions. But the end of the Cold War has caused most Americans to not
really care about the Olympics, and while the original Dream Team was a
phenomenon, the sports world has changed, and in my opinion the time has
come to end this little experiment and go back to the way the Olympics was
when I was a kid. Call me a fuddy-duddy, or whatever, but whether the
motivations for making the Olympics an amateur competition were pure or not,
that is where I feel they should be today. As I said earlier, there are
many opportunities for pros in essentially every team sport to prove their
prowess. Give the kids a shot.
--
Setzer
David Loewe, Jr.
<micro...@nospam.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 15:53:27 -0500, TB-Taylor wrote
>(in message <EaSdnW9kLf3...@comcast.com>):
>
>> "©N¥ikuli, Williåm©" <hm...@thisisbetterthan.MSOexpress> wrote in message
>> news:mVPTc.23003$nx2....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>> TB-Taylor wrote:
>>>
>>>>> 2. "more motivated" or not, in todays basketball world, with college
>>>>> kids the team will be smashed even worse.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> err.. no.
>>>
>>> Yes, because they're just not godo enough. You think Connecticut last
>>> year would've beaten the Hawks or Clippers? Yes or no?
>>
>> they would have beaten several teams in the nba.
>
>In what wacko fantasy universe?
Using what rules? College? NBA? International?
--
"And so it was that later
As the Miller told his tale
That her face, at first just ghostly
Turned a whiter shade of pale"
Keith Reid & Gary Brooker
Rockboy
> IDNAWTP.
>
> The Olympics have always been about finding the next great athlete. Not the
> current great one. It is about AMATEUR players.
I'm with Tom Enright here. What did the Soviet Union ever have to do
with producing amateur athletes?
> There's all kinds of
> chances for elite players to prove their prowess in team sports. Be it the
> NBA Finals, the World Series, the World Cup whatever, these events are for
> the people who are meant to be the best in the wrold at what they do. But
> that means they've already been found.
That's bullshit, and you know it. When the World Series involves
inviting the rest of the world, and basing the teams by country, let me
know. When the NBA Finals involve teams not identifying themselves by
an American city, let me know.
Some sports in the Olympics are just about the athletes. Some, however,
are about the teams, and at that point it's country vs. country. It's
only fair that each nation use the absolute best players that they can.
--
Rockboy
I forget which came first
the bad idea or me befallen by it?
Setzer
>
> > IDNAWTP.
> >
> > The Olympics have always been about finding the next great athlete. Not
> the
> > current great one. It is about AMATEUR players. There's all kinds of
> > chances for elite players to prove their prowess in team sports. Be it
> the
> > NBA Finals, the World Series, the World Cup whatever, these events are
for
> > the people who are meant to be the best in the wrold at what they do.
But
> > that means they've already been found.
>
> "Amateur" cannot be defined. An "amateur" in the Soviet
> Union was paid by the Soviet government under the guise
> of being part of the armed forces.
>
> The Olympics should be for the best athletes in the
> world, not a series of "up-close-and-personal" heart-
> warming, personal struggle stories.
Certainly no system is perfect, and I'm sure many of the superpower
countries are guilty of violating various Olympic rules, especially during
the Cold War. Nor do I personally give a shit about the
"up-close-and-personal" stories you seem to believe I'm advocating. What I
do believe is that the Olympics is a forum for those who do not get
worldwide attention at any time except during the Olympics to prove their
mettle against similar athletes from as many countries as will participate.
The Olympics is not about the "best in the world" it is about taking pride
in your country's athletes as they compete. You may believe that this is
best achieved by allowing professional players to participate. My personal
opinion is that this violates the spirit of the Olympics by preventing
amateur athletes from ever getting a chance to prove themselves. .
> > The Olympics are for the underdog. They're for the sports that people
> > forget about. They're for the people who just need one chance to prove
> how
> > great they are. They're for the people who will never get paid $10
> million
> > a year, who after the Olympics will only have memories of their one shot
> at
> > greatness as they go about the mundane realities of life. NBA players
> > playing basketball at the Olympics is like a kiddie team that has Shaq
on
> > it. Its meaningless, the games are meaningless and there's no sense of
> > victory whatsoever in it.
>
> The "sports that people forget about" are the sports
> people don't want to remember. If an athlete is that
> good, they will win a spot on the Olympic team sooner
> or later. What's the difference if he does it when he is
> 18 or 24?
What you define as "sports people don't want to remember" is a personal
thing. Many countries still love track and field, even if you or I don't
(and I don't know if you do or not). Badminton is huge in Asia, though it
bores me to tears. And age isn't an issue, I've never specified that "only
college kids" should be allowed in the Olympics. Just that they not make a
living off the sport in which they choose to participate.
> > If you feel like team sports need these people to somehow be worth
> watching,
> > then you're not the audience the Olympics is made for. The 1980 US
Hockey
> > Team was composed entirely of college hockey players, and they shocked
the
> > world. Yes, the ending of the Cold War has made much of the Olympics
> > "boring" for the modern day US fan, but that's because the modern day
fan
> > has become obsessed with pizzazz and flash instead of substance. To the
> > rest of the world, the Olympics is a chance for them to make it big on a
> > worldwide stage, and THAT is what the Olympics are about, not a bunch of
> > spoiled pro athletes flexing their muscles.
>
> What is your hard-on about the US Olympic team? If
> you want to complain about the ruination of the mythical
> "Olympic spirit" you should direct your gaze towards the
> (former) Soviet Union, Cuba and China.
You're now digressing from the point entirely. I have a hard-on for the US
Olympic team because I am American, and I love my country, warts and all.
And I do not care what has happened in the past in regards to transgressions
committed by other countries. All I am concerned with is defending my point
that pro athletes are detrimental to the Olympics at large. Whether you
agree with me or not isn't really my concern, I am only presenting and
defending my case. What you take or disdain from that is your concern.
--
Setzer
Setzer
> with producing amateur athletes?
See my reply to him.
> > There's all kinds of
> > chances for elite players to prove their prowess in team sports. Be it
the
> > NBA Finals, the World Series, the World Cup whatever, these events are
for
> > the people who are meant to be the best in the wrold at what they do.
But
> > that means they've already been found.
>
> That's bullshit, and you know it. When the World Series involves
> inviting the rest of the world, and basing the teams by country, let me
> know. When the NBA Finals involve teams not identifying themselves by
> an American city, let me know.
>
> Some sports in the Olympics are just about the athletes. Some, however,
> are about the teams, and at that point it's country vs. country. It's
> only fair that each nation use the absolute best players that they can.
Are you attempting to imply that only Americans participate in these sports?
I agree usage of the term "World" is a misnomer, but in recent years many
non-American athletes have made their presence felt in both MLB and the NBA.
I've presented my points, I've defended them as best I can. At this point
there is no further reason to argue. If you disagree with me that's fine,
there's no harm in that. But my opinion will not change, nor will yours,
nor Tom Enright's, nor probably anyone else's, so I'll leave it at this.
--
Setzer
"©N¥ikuli, Williåm©"
> IDNAWTP.
>
> The Olympics have always been about finding the next great athlete.
Eh. You've been suckered in by the sob stories.
In its purest form, the olympics should be the *elitest* athletes
sweating and bleeding for their country.
The best of the best.
> Not the current great one. It is about AMATEUR players. There's all kinds of
> chances for elite players to prove their prowess in team sports. Be it the
> NBA Finals, the World Series, the World Cup whatever, these events are for
> the people who are meant to be the best in the wrold at what they do. But
> that means they've already been found.
>
> The Olympics are for the underdog. They're for the sports that people
> forget about.
But they push it with their definition of "sport".
They're for the people who just need one chance to prove how
> great they are. They're for the people who will never get paid $10 million
> a year, who after the Olympics will only have memories of their one shot at
> greatness as they go about the mundane realities of life. NBA players
> playing basketball at the Olympics is like a kiddie team that has Shaq on
> it. Its meaningless, the games are meaningless and there's no sense of
> victory whatsoever in it.
Hmm. Michael Johnson shouldn't have run in 2000 then?
The only area in which "lower quality" players competing better is in
football, where the NCAAA & High School Football >>>> NFL, but that is
not true anywhere else.
Eggman
I know what you're up to just the same.
If they had a shooter or two they would have beaten Puerto Rico.
Eggman
Daniel Seriff
(in message <Xns9546BCB99E27...@216.196.97.131>):
Not likely. Even if they had been given a point for every time they just hit
the rim, they still would have lost.
I've seen pee-wee teams shoot fewer airballs.
--
Daniel Seriff
I'm surrounded by p-branes.
GregoryD
"©N¥ikuli, Williåm©" <hm...@thisisbetterthan.MSOexpress> wrote in message
> 1. Its about the BEST players in the world i.e. Pro players.
It's about the best team. These guys got together and decided to
play together after the season. The teams they're playing against have
been practicing for years together.
Besides, there are quite a bit of BEST players who aren't in the
Olympics this season. Kobe and Shaq come to mind.
> 2. "more motivated" or not, in todays basketball world, with college
> kids the team will be smashed even worse.
The college kids would have already played together quite a bit.
There isn't a player on this squad fit to carry the jock of Isaiah Thomas,
and he wasn't even on the 94 squad.
GregoryD
Charles Beauchamp
Not at basketball they wouldn't.
--
v/r Beau
On today's episode Beau meets his inner child....and picks on it.
Charles Beauchamp
> On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 16:03:15 -0500, Daniel Seriff
> <micro...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 15:53:27 -0500, TB-Taylor wrote
>> (in message <EaSdnW9kLf3...@comcast.com>):
>>
>>> "©N¥ikuli, Williåm©" <hm...@thisisbetterthan.MSOexpress> wrote in
>>> message
>>> news:mVPTc.23003$nx2....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>>> TB-Taylor wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> 2. "more motivated" or not, in todays basketball world, with
>>>>>> college kids the team will be smashed even worse.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> err.. no.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, because they're just not godo enough. You think Connecticut
>>>> last year would've beaten the Hawks or Clippers? Yes or no?
>>>
>>> they would have beaten several teams in the nba.
>>
>> In what wacko fantasy universe?
>
> Using what rules? College? NBA? International?
You could make a rule that the NBA team can only dribble left handed and it
wouldn't matter.
Charles Beauchamp
Talk about spitting into the wind. The NBA players are in the Olympics to
stay. The World wanted them. I didn't. They aren't leaving. Also...back
in the day...the Eurpeans were already sending professional players to the
Olympics. They just weren't neccessarily NBA players.
Further the mythology that the Olympics was about amatureism belies the fact
that in 1896 the only people with the time to engage in sports were people
of leisure...the privileged. Amature then did not mean what amature means
now.
The Tennis competition is filled out with WTA players. The Track and Field
competition is a series of races and field events loaded with millionair
athletes. The Olympic games is a professional competition today in all ways
including national prizes given to medal winners.
Charles Beauchamp
When you were a kid the Olympics was a battle between the East and West.
Our "kids" took on their professionals in all sports. Those days? Time
machines do not exist. That is a good thing.
sAnToLiNa
©N¥ikuli, Williåm© <hm...@thisisbetterthan.MSOexpress> wrote in message
> 1. Its about the BEST players in the world i.e. Pro players.
>
> kids the team will be smashed even worse.
>
Fuck the college kids, put in the McDonald's kids.
D-Chance.
"sAnToLiNa" <mys...@babylon.com> wrote in message
news:2oak1pF...@uni-berlin.de...
Why? Pimple-faced bastards can't even make a decent
double cheeseburger...
Bryan S. Slick
[Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:35:21 GMT]
:1. Its about the BEST players in the world i.e. Pro players.
Wrong, and the above attitude is why Team USA is losing.
It's about the best TEAM on the floor.
Whoever made the comment about sending the NCAA Champion from the
previous season just might be onto something.
--
Bryan S. Slick, usenet at slick-family dot net
"To those who have fought for it,
freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
Bryan S. Slick
[Sun, 15 Aug 2004 15:58:47 -0500]
:On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 15:42:58 -0500, ©N¥ikuli,_Williåm© wrote
:(in message <mVPTc.23003$nx2....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>):
:
:> TB-Taylor wrote:
:>
:>>> 2. "more motivated" or not, in todays basketball world, with college
:>>> kids the team will be smashed even worse.
:>>
:>> err.. no.
:>
:> Yes, because they're just not godo enough. You think Connecticut last
:> year would've beaten the Hawks or Clippers? Yes or no?
:
:Last year's UConn wouldn't even have beaten Georgia Tech in the NCAA final
:without that unprecedented shitload of help from the refs.
What game were you watching?
David Loewe, Jr.
The comment goes more to the fact that playing by unfamiliar rules can
be disturbing.
--
"There is no cause so right that one cannot find a fool
following it."
- Laurence VanCott Niven
Mphsrick43
>From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22=A9N=A5ikuli=2C_Willi=E5m=A9=22?=
> hm...@thisisbetterthan.MSOexpress
>Date: 8/15/2004 2:35 PM EST
>Message-id: <ZVOTc.22963$nx2....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>
>
>1. Its about the BEST players in the world i.e. Pro players.
>
>kids the team will be smashed even worse.
at the present time the college player are more experienced due to the fact
that so many high schoolers are going straight to the league. the pro players
of today with todays style of ball are so fundamentaslly weak that most would
be sitting the bench if they were playing 20 years ago.
Jon Enslin
"Mphsrick43" <mphsr...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040816103211...@mb-m21.aol.com...
Now that is just not true.
The problem is with the mix of players. Iverson, Wade, James, Odom,
Jefferson etc. are all the same person...to the basket guys that need a
bunch of shots to be effective. These guys are not bad players...in fact
they very good players who would have been stars at any time in the NBA.
The problem is that at any level of basketball you need more than one style
of player...you need the defensive stopper....outside shooters...primary
ball handlers...
This team could use Ray Allen, Chauncey Billups, Jason Kidd, Mike Bibby etc.
to make it more well-rounded.
And I think too much has been made about the "pampered star" angle. These
are the people that *wanted* to be there...they *wanted* to represent our
country. There is no financial or basketball reason for them to be there.
If you want to be mad at anyone, be mad at the Shaqs, Allens, Kidds, Bibbys
and McGradys that backed out. These are the ones that took up the
cause...and now they are going to be roasted for it and that's a shame.
Jon
det282
news:10i075q...@corp.supernews.com...
Oh, they can make it. They just can't put it in the right bag.
Greg Reeves
"There's nothing wrong with shooting,
just as long as the right people get shot."
-- Inspector Harry Callahan San Francisco PD
Daniel Seriff
(in message <MPG.1b89f93ea...@news-40.giganews.com>):
> [Daniel Seriff (micro...@nospam.com)]
> [Sun, 15 Aug 2004 15:58:47 -0500]
>
>> On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 15:42:58 -0500, ©N¥ikuli,_Williåm© wrote
>> (in message <mVPTc.23003$nx2....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>):
>>
>>> TB-Taylor wrote:
>>>
>>>>> 2. "more motivated" or not, in todays basketball world, with college
>>>>> kids the team will be smashed even worse.
>>>>
>>>> err.. no.
>>>
>>> Yes, because they're just not godo enough. You think Connecticut last
>>> year would've beaten the Hawks or Clippers? Yes or no?
>>
>> Last year's UConn wouldn't even have beaten Georgia Tech in the NCAA final
>> without that unprecedented shitload of help from the refs.
>
> What game were you watching?
The one where I was sitting close enough to the court to see the refs' mouths
wrapped around Okafor's dick.
--
Daniel Seriff
Love is a joke with no punchline.
K.Wylde
The Cosby kids (animated or otherwise) could have done a better job
then our "Dream Team".
KW!
Pauli G
> On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 15:42:58 -0500, ©N¥ikuli,_Williåm© wrote
> (in message <mVPTc.23003$nx2....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>):
>
> > TB-Taylor wrote:
> >
> >>> kids the team will be smashed even worse.
> >>
> >
> > Yes, because they're just not godo enough. You think Connecticut last
> > year would've beaten the Hawks or Clippers? Yes or no?
>
> Last year's UConn wouldn't even have beaten Georgia Tech in the NCAA final
> without that unprecedented shitload of help from the refs.
Step slowly away from the crackpipe son, and keep your hands where we can see them.