Bulls are Bad for NBA
math...@mislink.ipd.anl.gov
In article <4pkadb$h...@lal.interserv.net> Sco...@TRIsource.com writes:
>y this year if the Bulls win.
>
>Predicted problems for Chicago police if the Bulls win:
>
> - shootings
> - looting
I can't wait for win #4. I need a new T.V. and Microwave.
Anyone want a new Pro Logic Receiver? ;-)
> - assault
> - vandalism
> - arson
>
James F. Nelson
In article <31BDA8...@isomedia.com>, Buzz <bu...@isomedia.com> wrote:
>How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have won 3
> championships recently and only
>lost one game in the playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic. Send Michael
> Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
>and Scotty Pippen to the Philedelphia 76'ers and lets even things up a bit.
You're absolutely right. Socialism works just so darned well in the real
world that it would be a shame not to try it out in the NBA.
lo...@abyss.lerc.nasa.gov
In article <31BDA8...@isomedia.com>, Buzz <bu...@isomedia.com> writes...
>How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have won
>3 championships recently and only lost one game in the playoffs, and swept
Last time I checked, each team has the same salary cap limits, each team
get the same draft pick order (dependant on last years record) and each
team is able to dabble in the same free agent market. Winning a string or
clump of championships probably takes as much effort and skill in the front
office as on the court. Reinsdorf could have been happy just having Jordan
sell out Chicago Stadium but he went out and got some more tallented people.
Pippen via a trade, Harper via free agency, Longley via trade, Rodman via
free agency. Yes, a lot of players have been brought in that didn't work
(guys like Blount, Simpkins, Meyers, Purdue, King etc) but that just goes to
show how active your front office has to be.
>the (overrated) Magic. Send Michael Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
>and Scotty Pippen to the Philedelphia 76'ers and lets even things up a bit.
>Chicago is nothing without Jordan as the previous two seasons can attest to.
What a great idea. Better yet, at the end of each season, just pool all
the nba players and re-draft them all. I seem to remember 2 years ago
Chicago winning 55 games with no Jordan and only 2 games in back of the
conference leading Knicks. Not bad. Then without Jordan, Grant, Williams,
and Cartwright (sp) they were a .500 team (ie, mediocre). Let's see what
Seattle could do if you took away Payton, Kemp, Perkins, and Johnson.
(Pretty much the same position players). That would be a masterfull team
lead by Hawkins and Schrempf.
>
>I would be willing to bet that there are normally more Bulls fans than Sonics
>(Sonics get no media respect due to the last two seasons playoff blunders)
Probably. Chicago is a media center as is Jordan.
>BUT I bet there are more Sonics fans for this series than Bulls fans. People
>like to root for the underdog and want to see an upset. If people went to
Nope. People love to see a public execution. That's why Super Bowl ratings
are so high. People don't want to see Seattle lose by 5 points. They want
a 35 point humiliating blow-out. (Keep in mind that I am not passing
judgement on this mind-set.)
>sporting events knowing 90% for sure who was going to win, they wouldn't be
>very fun to watch. (Hence the fun in baseball which is very unpredictable.)
>So I think the Bulls have taken all the fun out of the playoffs this year, the
>expectations are too high that they will win the Championship so why even
You watch so you can see basketball history in the making. Look at all the
front line coverage of the Gulf War. We all knew a real butt kicking was
going to take place, but people turned in to watch it. (of course there
was the potential "gore" factor.)
>follow the playoffs. Having one team be that dominating is not good for any
>league in my opinion.
The NFL for a few years had a lot of league parity. The result was poor
television ratings. If you live in a non-market area, are you going to
want to watch two teams near .500 or are you going to watch a superb team
versus any other team? You are going to want to see the showcase team
since you could care less about the outcome.
>
>Granted the Sonics beat the Bulls in the regular season, and granted the
>Sonics have a better cumulative regular season record over the past 4 years
Maybe instead of a ring, they will give George Karl a life time acheivement
award. I'm sure Houston could care less about all of Seattle's wins over
the past few years.
>than any other team in the NBA, the Bulls just have too high of a
>payroll.
I remember the Cavaliers having cap problems but never really contending.
The Bulls and Seattle and the other 27 teams all have the same cap. And
watch Seattle go over the cap when they re-sign Payton (and later Kemp).
>
>There are only two teams in the NBA with a chance against the Bulls, the
>Knicks and the Sonics. The Jazz would have got destroyed. Oh well, Seattle
>is a much nicer City than Chicago (di you know Seattle only gets 2 more inches
>of rain per year than Chicago, less rain than DC, NY, and Atlanta) and my life
>doesn't revolve around basketball. I guess the positive note of having such
Neither does mine. I live in Cleveland where the Bulls are cursed by the
local myopic media. So there is virtually no coverage of any non-cleveland
sporting events.
>a dominating team might be that maybe Chicago won't vandalize and loot their
>City this year if the Bulls win.
I suggest that every Chicago resident get on I94 about noon or so this
Wednesday and jam the bars and hotels in Detroit. After the nightly
basketball lesson, they should trash that city. Nobody would notice.
(Just joking, my wife is from Detroit).
>
>May the best team win.
In a 4 game series, they usually do.
>Go Sonics!
>
Richard Sperling
Buzz <bu...@isomedia.com> wrote:
>How fun is this?
A lot if you're a Bulls fan.
I bet you wouldn't be writing any of this stuff if the Sonics had
Jordan, Pippen, et al. Your statements come off as nothing more than
sour grapes.
>Chicago is nothing without Jordan as the previous two seasons can attest to.
It's true that last year the Bulls were a mediocre team, but they were
without Jordan (for most of the season) AND Grant. The year before
('94), the Bulls, without Jordan, came within one game of going to the
Eastern Conference Finals. I wouldn't say that's nothing. It's
certainly farther than your Sonics managed to get.
Keep in mind that Jordan was around a few years before the Bulls
drafted Pippen and Grant. Jordan couldn't carry the team by himself,
so Krause got him some help. Heck, it's not the fault of the Bulls
that the former GM of the Sonics traded Scottie Pippen for Olden
Polynice.
One more thing: the Sonics would be nothing without Payton and Kemp;
the Magic would be nothing without Hardaway and Grant; the Jazz would
be nothing without Stockton and Malone; the Pacers would be nothing
without Miller and Smits; the Rockets would be nothing without
Olajuwon and Drexler, etc... The point is that most teams usually have
one or two superstars. A while back somebody posted a message to the
following effect:
The [fill in name of NBA team here] would be nothing without
[player 1] and [player 2].
So my reaction to your statement about Jordan's importance to the
Bulls is: Yeah, so?
>Oh well, Seattle is a much nicer City than Chicago
This statement is truly the reflection of a pathetic individual. Geez,
grow up! I grew up in the Chicago area and it's a wonderful place to
live. I've been to Seattle and it's nice too.
>my life doesn't revolve around basketball.
Good for you. Neither does mine.
>I guess the positive note of having such a dominating team might be that maybe Chicago won't vandalize and loot their City this year if the Bulls win.
How so? I'm sure there will be incidents. That is why the Chicago
Police have already drawn up plans to deal with the situation. It's
unfortunate that people feel the need to react to a sports
championship with violence, but it happens. I hope you don't think
that Seattle is above this sort of behavior.
>May the best team win.
They will.
Rich
Ryan Herbert
Only problem with your reasoning is that Chicago sells more
merchandise than any other team and makes more money for the NBA than
any other team. Guess that's not too bad for the NBA.
Michael John Falkner
James F. Nelson (jne...@uic.edu) wrote:
: In article <31BDA8...@isomedia.com>, Buzz <bu...@isomedia.com> wrote:
: >How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have won 3
: > championships recently and only
: >lost one game in the playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic. Send Michael
: > Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
: >and Scotty Pippen to the Philedelphia 76'ers and lets even things up a bit.
: You're absolutely right. Socialism works just so darned well in the real
Considering what we have in the NBA now, I wouldn't be surprised.
The salary cap doesn't work -- there's less parity in the game now than
there was in the 60's and 70's.
==========================================================================
Mike Falkner, mfal...@csd.uwm.edu Milwaukee, Wisconsin
"The Electric Youth Renegade" D.G.I.F. #10769
WWW: http://www.uwm.edu/~mfalkner No quotes. (No room!! =))
==========================================================================
Buzz
How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have won 3 championships recently and only
lost one game in the playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic. Send Michael Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
I would be willing to bet that there are normally more Bulls fans than Sonics (Sonics get no media respect due
to the last two seasons playoff blunders) BUT I bet there are more Sonics fans for this series than Bulls
fans. People like to root for the underdog and want to see an upset. If people went to sporting events
knowing 90% for sure who was going to win, they wouldn't be very fun to watch. (Hence the fun in baseball
which is very unpredictable.) So I think the Bulls have taken all the fun out of the playoffs this year, the
expectations are too high that they will win the Championship so why even follow the playoffs. Having one
team be that dominating is not good for any league in my opinion.
Granted the Sonics beat the Bulls in the regular season, and granted the Sonics have a better cumulative
regular season record over the past 4 years than any other team in the NBA, the Bulls just have too high of a
payroll.
There are only two teams in the NBA with a chance against the Bulls, the Knicks and the Sonics. The Jazz
would have got destroyed. Oh well, Seattle is a much nicer City than Chicago (di you know Seattle only gets 2
more inches of rain per year than Chicago, less rain than DC, NY, and Atlanta) and my life doesn't revolve
around basketball. I guess the positive note of having such a dominating team might be that maybe Chicago
won't vandalize and loot their City this year if the Bulls win.
May the best team win.
Go Sonics!
Michael John Falkner
math...@mislink.ipd.anl.gov wrote:
: In article <4pkadb$h...@lal.interserv.net> Sco...@TRIsource.com writes:
: >y this year if the Bulls win.
: >
: >Predicted problems for Chicago police if the Bulls win:
: >
: > - shootings
: > - looting
: > - assault
: > - vandalism
: > - arson
: >
I can tell you there's already been discussion about it for the last four
months [such has been the foregoneness of this conclusion]. Let's put it
this way -- don't be surprised if Chicago is basically shut down the night
of Game 4.
Scott L. Johnson
Buzz <bu...@isomedia.com> wrote:
>I guess the positive note of having such a dominating team might be that maybe Chicago
>won't vandalize and loot their City this year if the Bulls win.
Predicted problems for Chicago police if the Bulls win:
- shootings
- looting
- assault
- vandalism
- arson
Predicted problems for Seattle police if the Sonics win:
- jaywalking
D.F.
In article <31BDA8...@isomedia.com> Buzz, bu...@isomedia.com writes:
>Chicago is nothing without Jordan
>as the previous two seasons can attest to.
This always amuses me; I have just a few comments:
1) The Bulls won over 50 games without Jordan, hardly Å‚nothing.Ë›
2) Show me ANY other team in the NBA that can lose their best player (who
is nowhere near Jordan, by the way) and still win 50 games. Utah without
Malone? The Magic without Penny? Houston without Hakeem? Seattle without
Kemp? The Spurs without Robinson? AinÄ…t gonna happen.
>Oh well, Seattle is a much nicer City than Chicago
Oh, really? Have you ever _lived_ in Chicago? DonÄ…t get me wrong, I love
Seattle. But thereÄ…s something about Chicago which, in my opinion, makes
it one of the greatest cities in the world. I lived in LA for the past
seven years, and it is a joke compared to the Windy City. No night life,
no culture, no great museums, no charm. Seattle blows L.A. away as well.
But to start comparing Chicago and Seattle is an exercise in futility.
There are things about Chicago that Seattle canÄ…t touch, while at the
same time Seattle has positives that Chicago doesnÄ…t.
Dan
Quantum Mechanic
In article <4pkadb$h...@lal.interserv.net>, Sco...@TRIsource.com wrote:
> Buzz <bu...@isomedia.com> wrote:
>
> >I guess the positive note of having such a dominating team might be
that maybe Chicago
> >won't vandalize and loot their City this year if the Bulls win.
Predicted problems for Chicago police if Bulls lose:
-no loss predicted
Predicted problems for Seattle police when Sonics lose:
-lethargic stupor of fans in the Key puts authorities in fear
of serin nerve gas attack
-teens gather in front of sound sculpture and commit mass
suicide when eddie vedder reveals
he's moving to Chicago and Rodman will be made a member of Pearl Jam
-Coz murders "Squatch", dons the costume, climbs to the top of
the space needle and threatens to jump
if Bill Gates doesn't agree to give him his own, proprietary
and monological chat room on MSN titled,
"Thus Spake Coz"
-mysterious tree mutilations occur throughout the greater
seattle area, a mob grows amid reports of
strange lights and black helocopters above the Key. One woman
reports an ominous, multicolored
peacock seen on one of the craft. Rumors spread that the whole
Finals was staged in a Burbank, CA.
sound-stage, and that Rodman's hairstyle was in actuality a
clandestine form of alien communication.
It's then reported that Steve Jaffe is none other than the
Magnus Illuminati, and that Jordan is the
result of an arcane genetic engineering experiment combining
human and alien DNA recovered from
the Roswell incident during an alien autopsy. Feeling betrayed,
George Karl speaks out over the Key's
P/A system, exhorting Seattlans to feret out the "Actors and
Floppers" in their midst. Karl invokes the
glory of the Riechstag, saying," I knew it was destiny that
I'd coach a team with the initials S.S.!" Karl
declares the Pacific Northwest to be a soveriegn, separatist
Aryan nation at war with "The NBA, NBC,
Illuminati conspiracy to create a one world government", and
that the new nation of Sonica will purify
the sport of basketball of all those not at the Sonic's level
of purity, starting with those mongrel alien
hybrids...Da Bulls. Karl enlists the help of young disgruntled
and dissaffected youths...known as "flannel
shirts", to burn and pillage the local NBC affiliates. Below
the Space Needle, a young Herr Coz rallys
the people in a public burning of anything associated with the
Mongrels...such as the Sports Illustrated
titled "Sweep Victory, Indeed", and Dennis Rodmans Book...as
the Seattle Volk shouts,"Seig Glove!"
This stereotyping places is fun, uh Scott?
The
Quantum
Mechanic
- Specializing in Custom Hyper-Dimensional Aperture Installation,
Re-polarizing clogged Singularities, and fine-tuning Metaversal
Buffers.
U.S.A, SolSys, and Native Universe: Call (800) X((y-1/X)-1/X)
Outside This Universe:Call (800)( )
"Do not fear mistakes. There are none"- Miles Davis
"New organs of perception come into being as a
result of necessity.
Therefore, O man, increase your necessity, so that
you may increase your perception"-Jallaludin Rumi
Daniel Welch
In article <31BDA8...@isomedia.com>, bu...@isomedia.com says...
>There are only two teams in the NBA with a chance against the Bulls,
>the Knicks and the Sonics. The Jazz would have got destroyed.
[ lots of other jealousy ridden posting deleted ]
If what is happening to the Sonics right now isn't "being destroyed" I
would like to know what is.
Personally, I think with a healthy Stockton the Jazz would (a) be in the
finals and (b) be doing much better than the Sonics.
Daniel Welch
--
Elvis aedificum exclessit.
David Reid
In article 6...@uwm.edu, mfal...@alpha2.csd.uwm.edu (Michael John Falkner) writes:
>
>The salary cap doesn't work -- there's less parity in the game now than
>there was in the 60's and 70's.
If I remember correctly, the salary cap was implemented
for financial, rather than competition, reasons. Remember, back
in the early 80's, many of the teams were close to being
bankrupt.
dave
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Reid re...@aps.anl.gov
Advanced Photon Source (708)252-3688
Argonne National Lab
Gregor Nikolaus Gentschev
As far as I'm concerned, this post is like school on Saturday: no class.
Of course, you're upset that your team is getting swept. I understand
that. I was pretty upset watching the Lakers lose the finals in 91.
So you think, "How can I get back at those dang Bulls fans? I know, I'll
badmouth their team and their city." Really a dumb idea.
The NBA has a long history of rather dominant teams (Cousy's Celtics, Wilt's
Lakers, Dr. J's Sixers, Magic and Kareem's Lakers, and now the Bulls).
They have helped the league because people really love seeing great
basketball. In addition, it seems a little silly to blame the Bulls for
not having any decent competition. Why don't you go to the Sonics and
ask them what happened to their mental toughness? Because it's rude.
The same can be said of this post. So cut it out and enjoy watching
the game.
In article <31BDA8...@isomedia.com>, Buzz <bu...@isomedia.com> wrote:
>How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have won 3 championships recently and only
>lost one game in the playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic. Send Michael Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
>and Scotty Pippen to the Philedelphia 76'ers and lets even things up a bit. Chicago is nothing without Jordan
>as the previous two seasons can attest to.
>
>I would be willing to bet that there are normally more Bulls fans than Sonics (Sonics get no media respect due
>to the last two seasons playoff blunders) BUT I bet there are more Sonics fans for this series than Bulls
>fans. People like to root for the underdog and want to see an upset. If people went to sporting events
>knowing 90% for sure who was going to win, they wouldn't be very fun to watch. (Hence the fun in baseball
>which is very unpredictable.) So I think the Bulls have taken all the fun out of the playoffs this year, the
>expectations are too high that they will win the Championship so why even follow the playoffs. Having one
>team be that dominating is not good for any league in my opinion.
>
>Granted the Sonics beat the Bulls in the regular season, and granted the Sonics have a better cumulative
>regular season record over the past 4 years than any other team in the NBA, the Bulls just have too high of a
>payroll.
>
>There are only two teams in the NBA with a chance against the Bulls, the Knicks and the Sonics. The Jazz
>would have got destroyed. Oh well, Seattle is a much nicer City than Chicago (di you know Seattle only gets 2
>more inches of rain per year than Chicago, less rain than DC, NY, and Atlanta) and my life doesn't revolve
>around basketball. I guess the positive note of having such a dominating team might be that maybe Chicago
>won't vandalize and loot their City this year if the Bulls win.
>
Ryan Herbert
Buzz <bu...@isomedia.com> wrote:
>(Hence the fun in baseball which is very unpredictable.)
Well, there's your problem right there. Baseball and dice sound just
about right for ya - they require just about as much atheticism.
Scott Howard
I think you left out at least one group in your huge cross-post:
alt.whining.crybaby.fans. Sheese, and I thought Knicks fans were poor sports.
Michael John Falkner
David Reid (re...@aps.anl.gov) wrote:
: In article 6...@uwm.edu, mfal...@alpha2.csd.uwm.edu (Michael John Falkner) writes:
:
: >
: >The salary cap doesn't work -- there's less parity in the game now than
: >there was in the 60's and 70's.
:
: If I remember correctly, the salary cap was implemented
: for financial, rather than competition, reasons. Remember, back
: in the early 80's, many of the teams were close to being
: bankrupt.
One of the excuses they give is that it's supposed to bring equity into the
game. Yeah and right.
Canadian
rher...@olivet.edu (Ryan Herbert) wrote:
>Buzz <bu...@isomedia.com> wrote:
And are equally as fun to watch for three-plus hours. "The ball is hit,
it's up in the air, way up there, there it goes, and MY GOSH one of the
defending players is moving! Yes folks he's actually IN MOTION! The other
players' jaws are dropping in astonishment, and the crowd is going wild as
the player is actually RUNNING. And he catches the ball, throws it, and OH
there he goes back into his statuesque, tobaccy-chewing pose. What
excitement here at Dentyne Field!"
<Flame repellent> Actually, I *like* baseball. Just not *indoors* or on
TV. Drives me spare then. Football and baseball are OUTDOOR games. =)
--
Chris Foley (chr...@iceonline.com) DNRC POPE OF CAPITAL LETTERS, HPK
Jaime Chu
> How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have
won 3 championships recently and only
> lost one game in the playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic. Send
Michael Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
> and Scotty Pippen to the Philedelphia 76'ers and lets even things up a
bit. Chicago is nothing without Jordan
> as the previous two seasons can attest to.
If it wasn't for Hue Hollins the Bulls would've gone all the way with
Scottie Pippen. Without Jordan the Bulls still held themselves up and
were contenders. A bulls team without Michael Jordan is still pretty damn
good.
--
====================================================================
Jaime Chu = http://www.students.uiuc.edu/~jd-chu =
jd-...@students.uiuc.edu = "The best way to predict the =
= future is to invent it" Alan Kay =
====================================================================
Boyd M. Reed
On Tue, 11 Jun 1996, Buzz wrote:
> How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have won 3 championships recently and only
> lost one game in the playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic. Send Michael Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
> and Scotty Pippen to the Philedelphia 76'ers and lets even things up a bit. Chicago is nothing without Jordan
> as the previous two seasons can attest to.
Sure. And we'll send Shawn Kemp to the Raptors, and Gary Payton to the
Grizzlies. Oh, what's that? You say that's not fair to Seattle?
> I would be willing to bet that there are normally more Bulls fans than Sonics (Sonics get no media respect due
> to the last two seasons playoff blunders) BUT I bet there are more Sonics fans for this series than Bulls
> fans. People like to root for the underdog and want to see an upset. If people went to sporting events
> knowing 90% for sure who was going to win, they wouldn't be very fun to watch. (Hence the fun in baseball
> which is very unpredictable.) So I think the Bulls have taken all the fun out of the playoffs this year, the
> expectations are too high that they will win the Championship so why even follow the playoffs. Having one
> team be that dominating is not good for any league in my opinion.
It's called growing pains. The Pistons spent three years in the late
1980s thumping the Bulls en route to the finals (winning it all twice).
Chicago had to learn from its mistakes. Seattle is going through the
same process (rough though it may be).
> Granted the Sonics beat the Bulls in the regular season, and granted the Sonics have a better cumulative
> regular season record over the past 4 years than any other team in the NBA, the Bulls just have too high of a
> payroll.
It's hard for someone to be so blatantly wrong about something. Chicago
has the 15th highest payroll in the NBA. Seattle has the seventh highest.
Next.
> There are only two teams in the NBA with a chance against the Bulls, the Knicks and the Sonics. The Jazz
> would have got destroyed. Oh well, Seattle is a much nicer City than Chicago (di you know Seattle only gets 2
> more inches of rain per year than Chicago, less rain than DC, NY, and Atlanta) and my life doesn't revolve
> around basketball. I guess the positive note of having such a dominating team might be that maybe Chicago
> won't vandalize and loot their City this year if the Bulls win.
Now this is simply whining.
(1) Utah couldn't do much worse than Seattle's doing now, seeing as how
Seattle has yet to win a game. Keep in mind that Seattle was
essentially only four points better than Utah in the WC finals, so
you're disrespecting a team that gave the Sonics about all they could
handle.
(2) Chicago (just the city, not the suburbs) is about 7.5 times the size
of Seattle. The celebrations (and the chances of destructive activity)
are therefore much bigger.
Besides, this has nothing to do with basketball, and I could've sworn
that this was a basketball newsgroup. Then again, at the rate this
series is progressing, I can understand why you might want to switch topics.
> May the best team win.
> Go Sonics!
They're going soon.
-bmr-
*****************************************************************
* Boyd M. Reed 217/332-5068 (H) 217/244-7513 (W) *
* bm-...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/bm-reed *
* CCSO Oregon Site Manager - Univ. Of IL at Urbana-Champaign *
*****************************************************************
* Even if I could speak for CCSO, I'd have nothing to say. *
*****************************************************************
Brian Novak
one word: JEALOUSY
'nuff said
Boyd M. Reed
On 11 Jun 1996 lo...@abyss.lerc.nasa.gov wrote:
[replying to a note from Buzz]
> >than any other team in the NBA, the Bulls just have too high of a
> >payroll.
>
> I remember the Cavaliers having cap problems but never really contending.
> The Bulls and Seattle and the other 27 teams all have the same cap. And
> watch Seattle go over the cap when they re-sign Payton (and later Kemp).
Or, if you just can't wait to see Payton's new contract, you could watch
Seattle go over the cap now. Their current payroll is $25.8M; the
current cap is $24M.
Gary Harr
Scott L. Johnson wrote:
>
> Buzz <bu...@isomedia.com> wrote:
>
> >I guess the positive note of having such a dominating team might be that maybe Chicago
> >won't vandalize and loot their City this year if the Bulls win.
>
>
> - shootings
> - looting
> - assault
> - vandalism
> - arson
>
> Predicted problems for Seattle police if the Sonics win:
>
> - jaywalking
Having been around for all three of the previous Bulls championships
I can tell you that the media coverage on a national level tends
to blow things out of proportion about the "celebrations". Indeed
we did have some major morons looting and shooting on the west
and south sides and some drunk idiots on Division street turned over
a cab or two in 1992. But on a whole, considering there are 3 million
people within the city limits, the celebrations were pretty tame.
If Seattle and it's 400,000 fans gather in one place it would look
like a riot too. In Chicago there is just so many people that tend
to gravitate toward certain neighborhoods (where the bars are). It
looks a lot worse than it is. This year, it being anticipated since
the Rodman signing, it think will be severely anti-climactic.
Boyd M. Reed
On 11 Jun 1996, Michael John Falkner wrote:
> David Reid (re...@aps.anl.gov) wrote:
> : In article 6...@uwm.edu, mfal...@alpha2.csd.uwm.edu (Michael John Falkner) writes:
> :
> : >
> : >The salary cap doesn't work -- there's less parity in the game now than
> : >there was in the 60's and 70's.
> :
> : If I remember correctly, the salary cap was implemented
> : for financial, rather than competition, reasons. Remember, back
> : in the early 80's, many of the teams were close to being
> : bankrupt.
>
> One of the excuses they give is that it's supposed to bring equity into the
> game. Yeah and right.
WRT the cap and, presumably, why it "hasn't worked b/c of the competitive
'imbalance' in the current NBA": Keep in mind that the Bulls would,
under normal market circumstances, be waaaaay over the cap with this
current team. Their payroll is still not very high at all.
In fact, the Bulls are right in the middle of the league at #15 in total
salaries for this season. But, considering the types of pay raises
they'll have to hand out, they could well see some of their most critical
players (especially Kukoc, who plays worlds better as a starter, and
Rodman) leave town. Another way of looking at this is that the Bulls,
financially, have been a kind of equivalent of the NFL's San Francisco
49ers. The Niners were able to keep star-stocked teams together by using
cap loopholes, back-loaded contracts, and the promise of contending for a
Super Bowl to get quality players to sign at cut rates. (Witness Deion
Sanders' one-year, $1M deal with the Niners in 94-95).
The Bulls have had the same approach: get the stars (Jordan and Pippen)
signed to long-term deals with small pay raises, while getting free
agents (Rodman/Harper/Salley/Edwards) at below-market prices b/c of the
chance to compete for a title. Pip's contract was front-loaded, but it
has the same long-term effect as a back-loaded one; you just take your
losses in a different year.
The only problem with this approach? When those long-term contracts come
up. Jordan could be making anywhere from 6 to 10 times what he's making
this year in 96-97. Pippen will be in the high 7 to low 8 figures.
Rodman claims he wants what amounts to a 300% pay raise -- and, even
though I think he knows he won't get that much, his pay check will
certainly be substantially heftier, wherever he may be next year.
In summary, I'd say the cap is working fine, because ever-increasing
market prices preclude keeping players long enough to build a dynasty.
Your very best player(s) will eventually become so expensive that you (a)
have to bankrupt your franchise to keep him/them, or (b) h ave to let
him/them go and rebuild.
Credit (of all people) Krause and Reinsdorf for beating the effects of
the cap for so long by using the procedures outlined above. Next year,
it'll finally catch up to the Bulls. (Hope they find some way of
keeping it together, though......)
Ward R Drennan
In article <31BDA8...@isomedia.com>, Buzz <bu...@isomedia.com> wrote:
>How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have won 3 championships recently and only
>lost one game in the playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic. Send Michael Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
>and Scotty Pippen to the Philedelphia 76'ers and lets even things up a bit. Chicago is nothing without Jordan
>as the previous two seasons can attest to.
Didn't Chicago make the 2nd round of the playoffs the previous two seasons?
I would hardly call that nothing. That puts them in or near the top
8 teams in the league with out MJ.
>
>I would be willing to bet that there are normally more Bulls fans than Sonics (Sonics get no media respect due
>to the last two seasons playoff blunders) BUT I bet there are more Sonics fans for this series than Bulls
>fans. People like to root for the underdog and want to see an upset. If people went to sporting events
>knowing 90% for sure who was going to win, they wouldn't be very fun to watch. (Hence the fun in baseball
>which is very unpredictable.)
The real problem is that basketball is becoming more like baseball:
Money buys the great teams and the players are getting overly greedy.
Not to mention baseball is slow as hell and watching it on TV is
sleep inducing.
>So I think the Bulls have taken all the fun out of the playoffs this year, the
>expectations are too high that they will win the Championship so why even follow the playoffs. Having one
>team be that dominating is not good for any league in my opinion.
>
True. But baseball was dominated by the Braves and Hockey by the Avalanche.
>Granted the Sonics beat the Bulls in the regular season, and granted the Sonics have a better cumulative
>regular season record over the past 4 years than any other team in the NBA, the Bulls just have too high of a
>payroll.
>
>There are only two teams in the NBA with a chance against the Bulls, the Knicks and the Sonics. The Jazz
>would have got destroyed.
The Pacers have as good a chance of any of those teams as well.
And Orlando...
>Oh well, Seattle is a much nicer City than Chicago (di you know Seattle only gets 2
>more inches of rain per year than Chicago, less rain than DC, NY, and Atlanta) and my life doesn't revolve
>around basketball.
Chicago's a great town. Have you ever been there?
I guess the positive note of having such a dominating team might be that maybe Chicago
>won't vandalize and loot their City this year if the Bulls win.
>
>May the best team win.
>Go Sonics!
--
Ward Drennan
Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences
Indiana University
Ward R Drennan
In article <4pkeic$1b...@piglet.cc.uic.edu>,
James F. Nelson <jne...@uic.edu> wrote:
>In article <31BDA8...@isomedia.com>, Buzz <bu...@isomedia.com> wrote:
>>How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have won 3
>> championships recently and only
>>lost one game in the playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic. Send Michael
>> Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
>>and Scotty Pippen to the Philedelphia 76'ers and lets even things up a bit.
>
>world that it would be a shame not to try it out in the NBA.
There's a difference between socialism and monopoly. In a league like the
NBA, it would behoove one to create a level playing field. Teams like
NY and Chicago have a much bigger market and thus much higher receipts.
Teams like Indiana and Denver have a tiny market. If you set up a
completely capitolisitic approach, Chicago, LA and NY are going
to buy the best teams year in and year out and win every year.
Presently, the NBA setup is not bad in this regard. A nice salary cap.
The Bulls are great for sure but not by virtue of having or spending
the most money. The Bulls are great because they made great draft picks
(MJ, Pippen) and a great trade (stupid for SA) - Rodman.
J. Hong
>How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have won 3
> championships recently and only
>lost one game in the playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic.
I dunno, I think it's kinda fun. But then, I'm a Bulls fan. Go figure.
>Send Michael Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
>and Scotty Pippen to the Philedelphia 76'ers and lets even things up a bit.
You're a real heavy hitter in the intellect department, aren't you? Bet you
aren't a big Cowboys fan either. Or a 49ers fan. And in grand Seattle
fashion, you likely despise the Indians. All these teams are just too
powerful, aren't they? How dare Cleveland and Chicago have Albert Belle and
Frank Thomas (respectively)!
> Chicago is nothing without Jordan as the previous two seasons can attest to.
"Nothing" is a strong word. The Bulls were one Hugh Hollins away from the NBA
Finals the year after Jordan left. That's more than the Sonics can say even
with their full complement of players that year.
>I would be willing to bet that there are normally more Bulls fans than Sonics
> (Sonics get no media respect due to the last two seasons playoff blunders) BUT I bet there are more Sonics fans
> for this series than Bulls fans. People like to root for the underdog and want to see an upset.
People also like to see a legend in the making, and that's what the Bulls are
this year.
>If people went to sporting events knowing 90% for sure who was going to win,
>they wouldn't be very fun to watch. (Hence the fun in baseball which is very
>unpredictable.)
How can baseball be any more unpredictable than any other sport?
>So I think the Bulls have taken all the fun out of the playoffs this year,
>the expectations are too high that they will win the Championship so why even
> follow the playoffs. Having one
>team be that dominating is not good for any league in my opinion.
You're just sore cuz your team has been unlucky enough to be the foil in the
Bulls' legendary season. The same feeling is in the air for these Bulls as
the '85 Bears and their "Super Bowl Shuffle".
>Granted the Sonics beat the Bulls in the regular season, and granted the
> Sonics have a better cumulative
>regular season record over the past 4 years than any other team in the NBA,
> the Bulls just have too high of a payroll.
Payroll doesn't have anything to do with it. The Bulls pay better players
than the Sonics do. That's the way it is.
>There are only two teams in the NBA with a chance against the Bulls, the
> Knicks and the Sonics. The Jazz would have got destroyed.
Perhaps. But that doesn't mean that the Bulls should be broken up.
>Oh well, Seattle is a much nicer City than Chicago
> (di you know Seattle only gets 2 more inches of rain per year than Chicago, less rain than DC, NY, and Atlanta)
Yeah, except that Seattle's rain is a constant dribbling while the rain in
Chicago comes less frequently, though more intensely. "Nicer" is subjective
anyway.
> and my life doesn't revolve
>around basketball. I guess the positive note of having such a dominating team
> might be that maybe Chicago
>won't vandalize and loot their City this year if the Bulls win.
We know that Seattle is safe. ;-)
>May the best team win.
They've already been doing that.
J.
zak...@accessone.com "Morality is not really the doctrine of how to make
ourselves happy, but of how we are to be worthy
of happiness."
-- Immanuel Kant
Douglas Hayden
On Stardate Tue, 11 Jun 96 18:40:01 GMT, James F. Nelson stated:
: You're absolutely right. Socialism works just so darned well in the real
: world that it would be a shame not to try it out in the NBA.
Look at what fun they're having with it in the NFL. ;)
----------
Doug "NBA have salary cap. We make own salary cap. No like Jerry
Jones, he go around salary cap. Bad Jerry Jones. Bad Bad Jerry Jones."
Hayden
Grand Duke, Czardom of Cleveland (not much else to do in the winter for
the next three years)
Standard Dennis Miller Disclaimer: Of course, I could be totally wrong.
----------
Luc Maillet
Michael John Falkner wrote:
> Considering what we have in the NBA now, I wouldn't be surprised.
>
> The salary cap doesn't work -- there's less parity in the game now than
> there was in the 60's and 70's.
From what I've gathered, the cap doesn't limit one's options much...
especially
since you can sign your own free agents and go over it (perfect example:
Chicago
in the 96-97 season, with Rodman and MJ).
Why did the league let that exception in? Why not the simple rule: "you
cannot go
over the cap. Period"? That would serve as an equalizer...
--
/ _
(__(/(
(E-mail : Luc.M...@supaero.fr)
K. Trout
In article <4pklml$6...@uwm.edu>,
mfal...@alpha2.csd.uwm.edu (Michael John Falkner) wrote:
>math...@mislink.ipd.anl.gov wrote:
>: In article <4pkadb$h...@lal.interserv.net> Sco...@TRIsource.com writes:
>: >
>: >Predicted problems for Chicago police if the Bulls win:
>: >
>: > - shootings
>: > - looting
>: > - assault
>: > - vandalism
>: > - arson
Don't forget fornication, with the homosexual Rodman leading the charge
Patrick Carey
>there was in the 60's and 70's.
What? How can you claim there was more parity in the league in the 60's when there
was only one team winning the championships?
Patrick
Rodney H Morrow
In article <31BDA8...@isomedia.com>, Buzz <bu...@isomedia.com> writes:
|> How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have won 3 championships recently and only
|> lost one game in the playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic. Send Michael Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
|> and Scotty Pippen to the Philedelphia 76'ers and lets even things up a bit.
Same shit, different sport. You don't hear people in the NFL whining about how they have break up the Cowboys and
the 49ers. If someone was screaming "Send Aikman to the Jets" or "Send Emmitt to Tampa Bay", they would be laughed
off the face of the earth. The Bulls built their team all through legitimate means, drafting, trading and signing
free agents. And you want parity Mr. Sonics fan let's all get in the act. Let's send Mr. Kemp to the Nets and Payton
to the Grizzles.
|> Chicago is nothing without Jordan as the previous two seasons can attest to.
That all depends on what you define as "nothing". They didn't totally collapse like some people predicted. If I
recall right in '94 they almost clinched home court advantage. If "nothing" is not winning the NBA Champiosnhip, then
yes, the were nothing.
|> I would be willing to bet that there are normally more Bulls fans than Sonics (Sonics get no media respect due
|> to the last two seasons playoff blunders) BUT I bet there are more Sonics fans for this series than Bulls
|> fans. People like to root for the underdog and want to see an upset. So I think the Bulls have taken all the fun out of the playoffs this year, the
|> expectations are too high that they will win the Championship so why even follow the playoffs. Having one
|> team be that dominating is not good for any league in my opinion.
I don't think EVERYBODY roots for the underdog. People root for whot they want to. And how do propose going about not
having one team dominate their league hmmmm. Put a cap on the number of times they can win a championship ? Make them
draft entirely new teams each ? And by the way dominating teams don't always win championships. For example, the
Detriot Red Wings. They won more games this year than other team in NHL history, but they didn't win the Cup.
|> Granted the Sonics beat the Bulls in the regular season, and granted the Sonics have a better cumulative
|> regular season record over the past 4 years than any other team in the NBA, the Bulls just have too high of a
|> payroll.
Yeah if Krause would ever take the lock off his wallet to use it ;)
|> May the best team win.
|> Go Sonics!
It will
Go Bulls
--
Rodney H Morrow
rmo...@iastate.edu
Eric Wang
Luc Maillet <Luc.M...@supaero.fr> writes:
>Why not the simple rule: "you cannot go over the cap. Period"? That
>would serve as an equalizer...
The problem is that team revenues are going up, up, up as corporate
advertising execs throw money at the NBA. If the pot keeps getting
bigger but the salary caps stay the same, the owners pocket the
difference and laugh while the bank comes to them. The player's
union would never agree to this.
On the flip side, the NBA could enforce strict profit-sharing among
all teams to eliminate all market-size differences, furthermore
require that all advertising contracts be conducted through the
league office, splitting all monies equally among all teams, and
finally tie the salary cap to a fixed *percentage* (i.e. variable
dollar amount) of all league-wide revenues. In this scenario,
individual greed might be circumvented by knowing beforehand that
the pot is only so big, and compared to the next guy, you're getting
a larger portion of it roughly in proportion to your superior
capabilities. But this puts too many demands on the owners' share
of the pie, and they'll never agree to it. And even where this
arrangement has been the norm for years, as in the NFL, the best
teams are always so attractive to advertisers that they could sign
their own advertising contracts in violation of league rules, as in
Jerry Jones' "Malice in Dallas" act.
Eric Wang
wa...@sml0.ge.uiuc.edu
Daniel Welch
In article <4pkdnv$u...@uni.library.ucla.edu>, fra...@gseis.ucla.edu says...
>
>Seattle. But therešs something about Chicago which, in my opinion, makes
>it one of the greatest cities in the world.
I was born in Chicago, and it is a great city. I need to get back there
for a visit sometime. I still hate the Bulls, though, mostly for being
such whiners. (Have you ever seen Jordan when the referees finally decide
to call a foul on him?) But I hate the Sonics even more, considering that
I have to live with the Sonic fans, so the outcome of this series has me
tickled pink.
>There are things about Chicago that Seattle canšt touch, while at the
>same time Seattle has positives that Chicago doesnšt.
A friend of mine, currently living in Chicago, describes it thusly: "It's
cold, and there's no place to park." That sounds pretty accurate to me.
Chicago is a great place to visit, but for living, Seattle is much better.
Patrick Carey
K. Trout wrote:
> Don't forget fornication, with the homosexual Rodman leading the charge
and in Seattle? Choking!
Patrick
Andrew Ryan Chang
Ward R Drennan <wdre...@silver.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>There's a difference between socialism and monopoly. In a league like the
>NBA, it would behoove one to create a level playing field. Teams like
>NY and Chicago have a much bigger market and thus much higher receipts.
>Teams like Indiana and Denver have a tiny market. If you set up a
>completely capitolisitic approach, Chicago, LA and NY are going
>to buy the best teams year in and year out and win every year.
Your thinking implies that the city a team is located in supplies
the bulk of their income. What about their share of NBA merchandise
revenue? I believe that's equally shared among all the teams, no? The
playing field is about as level as it gets without handicapping
superstars to make them as mediocre as the mediocre players.
--
Mate Fork Sun Cup Zero
Fish Adjective One Tray Basket
Coke Two Chip Light Zone
Life Three Verb Snow Reflection
Buzz
Time for a rebutle.
First, I would like to thank you all for your heated responses. I must admit the primary purpose for my
original message was to needle bulls fans a little and for the people that take basketball to heart, they bit.
Regarding evening things up more and sending some of Chicago's stars elsewhere:
I agree every team has its stars. Chicago just has too many in order for there to be a competetive, fun to
watch series. I mean fun to watch for the majority of viewers, not just Bulls fans. Granted the Sonics can
beat them as they demonstrated in the regular season, the odds are just too in favor of the Bulls. But hey
that's great if you are a Bulls fan. No one is really shocked with the status of this series, (probably not
even a lot of Sonics fans.) Oh and I hope the people posting and calling themselves "Bull fans" aren't fair
weather fans than jumped on the band wagon back in the early 90's. I would just love (and so would many
others) to see what kind of difference Michael Jordan makes on a growing sub .500 team.
Regarding the statement implying Chicago has an exhorbitant payroll to have such talent:
I stand corrected, but compare those figures next year after Rodman, P J, and Jordan finish negotiating.
Regarding Seattle is a better city than Chicago:
I apologize for introducing facts into the discussion that have nothing to do with basketball. I also
recognize that what one considers 'best' is relative to what aspects of a city they value most. And I will
not debate the Seattle vs. Chicago issue because I am confident (as bulls fans are "confident") Seattle speaks
for itself and the people who have visited or lived here and visited or lived in Chicago can attest to that.
Regarding the celebration issue:
I'll just point out that (in a reply) a Chicago fan BRAGS that their celebrations entail damaging their own
city and Seattle's celebration would only entail jaywalking. Umm, I'll take the jaywalking any day fella.
Fact: Percentage of population with at least a high school diploma; Seattle 86% (highest of any major City in
the nation), Chicago 66%. I rest my case.
And last, let me point out I said "May the Best Team Win" and I meant it. If it turns out to be the Bulls,
then so be it, congratulations, doesn't effect my life. I watch one game at a time and I will still root for
MY team. If they pull out an incredible highly unlikely upset, then great, still doesn't change my life
though.
Go Sonics!
Gary Harr
Ward R Drennan wrote:
>
> In article <4pkeic$1b...@piglet.cc.uic.edu>,
> James F. Nelson <jne...@uic.edu> wrote:
> >>How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have won 3
> >> championships recently and only
> >>lost one game in the playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic. Send Michael
> >> Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
> >>and Scotty Pippen to the Philedelphia 76'ers and lets even things up a bit.
> >
> >world that it would be a shame not to try it out in the NBA.
>
> NBA, it would behoove one to create a level playing field. Teams like
> NY and Chicago have a much bigger market and thus much higher receipts.
> Teams like Indiana and Denver have a tiny market. If you set up a
> completely capitolisitic approach, Chicago, LA and NY are going
> to buy the best teams year in and year out and win every year.
>
> The Bulls are great for sure but not by virtue of having or spending
> the most money. The Bulls are great because they made great draft picks
> (MJ, Pippen) and a great trade (stupid for SA) - Rodman.
>
Actually Pippen was a draft day trade. He was picked number five by
Seattle and traded to the Bulls for Olden Polynice. Hahahaha.
D.F.
In article <31BEEE...@isomedia.com> Buzz, bu...@isomedia.com writes:
>I stand corrected, but compare those figures next year after Rodman, P J, and >Jordan finish negotiating.
Yes, but the difference will be that the Bulls will have an "exhorbitant"
payroll because the players have proven themselves handily, winning four
titles in six years. The other teams will have huge payrolls... and
nothing else.
Dan
Brian Novak
Daniel Welch wrote:
I still hate the Bulls, though, mostly for being
> such whiners. (Have you ever seen Jordan when the referees finally decide
> to call a foul on him?)
The all time classic whine, though, the one they will use in NBA training videos for
high schoolers and college freshmen, was Gary Payton's in game 3--bear hug Rodman to
stop a fast break, foul called, and run to the ref to complain about it? YOU GOTTA BE
KIDDING ME. He even was whiny enough to get a technical on top of it. Classic
tim decker
Daniel Welch wrote:
>
> A friend of mine, currently living in Chicago, describes it thusly: "It's
> cold, and there's no place to park."
How could you forget the locust and rivers of blood??
CHICAGO-Home of the hearty!!!!
td
Gary Harr
Daniel Welch wrote:
>
> In article <4pkdnv$u...@uni.library.ucla.edu>, fra...@gseis.ucla.edu says...
> >
> >In article <31BDA8...@isomedia.com> Buzz, bu...@isomedia.com writes:
> >>Oh well, Seattle is a much nicer City than Chicago
> >
> >Oh, really? Have you ever _lived_ in Chicago? Donšt get me wrong, I love
> >Seattle. But therešs something about Chicago which, in my opinion, makes
> >it one of the greatest cities in the world.
>
> I was born in Chicago, and it is a great city. I need to get back there
> such whiners. (Have you ever seen Jordan when the referees finally decide
> I have to live with the Sonic fans, so the outcome of this series has me
> tickled pink.
>
> >There are things about Chicago that Seattle canšt touch, while at the
> >same time Seattle has positives that Chicago doesnšt.
>
> Chicago is a great place to visit, but for living, Seattle is much better.
Hmm. We got
The Art Institute
Adler Planetarium
Shedd Aquarium
Field Museum
Museum of Science & Industry
Chicago Civic Opera
Chicago Symphony Orchestra
Joffrey Ballet
Dozens of Theatre Companies
Hundreds of Restaurants
Lincoln Park Zoo
Brookfield Zoo
Wrigley Field
Soldier Field
Taste of Chicago
Chicago Blues Festival
Chicago Gospel Festival
Magnificent Mile
Lake Michigan
Hundreds of golf courses
Dozens of street festivals
and much more.
If it didn't snow and there was plenty of parking there
would be 10 million people living here. Besides, having
four seasons ain't so bad.
john hlavaty
Buzz (bu...@isomedia.com) wrote:
: How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have won 3 championships recently and only
: lost one game in the playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic. Send Michael Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
Uh, wrong! First, the Bulls did damn well without Jordan that
first year! They won 55 games (the previous year with
Jordan they only won 57) during the regular season and they
came within a whisper of beating the Knicks to advance in the
finals. There's no way you could truly say that if Jordan
was still there the Bulls definitely would have advanced
in the playoffs, possibly winning their fourth championship.
It may be nice to think that, but noone could say that would
absolutely occur. The next year, now with other key players
gone, such as Horace Grant, the Bulls did struggle a bit, but
they actually were on a pretty good winning streak just as
Jordan returned. So who's to say that he *really* helped
them the Bulls at that point in time or not. Clearly he
did not help the Bulls much in the playoffs last year.
As far as sending the players to other teams, that's assinine.
There already is enough parity in the league. Heck, that's
the #1 argument this year agaisnt making this Bulls' team
the "best ever." Most people feel that the league is so
watered down and there is so much parity between the teams,
that it's "easier" for one team that can play well together,
like the Bulls or the Sonics to dominate! It's not
the Bulls' fault that they "get along" so well on the court!
If you don't like watching what a real NBA team should be,
then don't watch! Sheesh!
: I would be willing to bet that there are normally more Bulls fans than Sonics (Sonics get no media respect due
: to the last two seasons playoff blunders) BUT I bet there are more Sonics fans for this series than Bulls
: fans. People like to root for the underdog and want to see an upset. If people went to sporting events
: knowing 90% for sure who was going to win, they wouldn't be very fun to watch. (Hence the fun in baseball
: which is very unpredictable.) So I think the Bulls have taken all the fun out of the playoffs this year, the
: expectations are too high that they will win the Championship so why even follow the playoffs. Having one
: team be that dominating is not good for any league in my opinion.
Nah, I don't think so. Often, when a team wins too much,
like the Yankees of yesteryear, they do become the "hated" team.
But this Bulls' squad is SO talented that people appear to truly
enjoy watching them play! It's like watching the gods at work!
So, I honestly do NOT think there are more people rooting for
the underdog Seattle squad here. If that were true, why
have the Bulls' playoff games generated the highest viewing
audiences during this post-season run? Do you REALLY think
that everyone is tuning it just to see another team beat
the Bulls? I think people are watching because they enjoy
seeing such perfection!
Furthermore, having a team dominate does NOT make it bad
for sports!!! What type of rational is that? I mean, why
is it bad to have a team that sets a new standard for
excellence in not only basketball, but the sporting world
overall, BAD for anything? In my opinion the Bulls are showing
the world how the sport SHOULD be played! They will be the
team to which all future teams will be compared! Bad for
the NBA? I don't think so! If anything, the Bulls have
generated even MORE fans for this already booming sport!
: Granted the Sonics beat the Bulls in the regular season, and granted the Sonics have a better cumulative
: regular season record over the past 4 years than any other team in the NBA, the Bulls just have too high of a
: payroll.
Wrong again! Jordan, Rodman and Pippen, the three
premiere players that you claimed should be "traded" are
WELL below the average salary! Heck, when Patrick
Ewing can make $18 million a year, yet fail to bring
a championship to New York, how is MJ's $3 million salary
considered "too high?" While the Sonics may have
a better record during the last four years, they have
time and time again failed to win the "big games." If
anything, the Sonics are "bad" for the NBA. They
show that the regular season is virtually meaningless!
They showed the world that when the pressure is on,
they will choke! Just like the Bulls, the Sonics
also are chock full of superstars. Why don't you suggest
trading some of these players away?
: There are only two teams in the NBA with a chance against the Bulls, the Knicks and the Sonics. The Jazz
: would have got destroyed. Oh well, Seattle is a much nicer City than Chicago (di you know Seattle only gets 2
: more inches of rain per year than Chicago, less rain than DC, NY, and Atlanta) and my life doesn't revolve
: around basketball. I guess the positive note of having such a dominating team might be that maybe Chicago
: won't vandalize and loot their City this year if the Bulls win.
What has all this nonsense about weather got to do with anything?
That topic isn't germain at all to your prior discussion. Also,
I LOVE Chicago, but I more than realize that there are many beautiful
cities around the U.S., so comparing the city's rainfall or
beauty has nothing to do with basketball. What a sad way
for you to end your post!
: May the best team win.
: Go Sonics!
Yes, the best team WILL win and this year with the Bulls up
3-0 as I write this, it appears it will be the Bulls. If they
complete their historic run by sweeping Seattle, they will
indeed be amongst the best teams ever. Now, why is this
BAD for basketball again? I don't get your reasoning. That's
probably because you never really explained yourself and the
few "factual" information you presented was erroneous.
Thanks for "attempting" to explain why the Bulls are "bad"
but you have done nothing but furthere emphasize how GOOD
they truly are. I wish Seattle the best and I'm sure they
will regroup VERY nicely next year. But in the meantime,
enjoy history in the making!
Ciao,
John
Daniel Welch
In article <31BF26...@spss.com>, ga...@spss.com says...
>Daniel Welch wrote:
>> A friend of mine, currently living in Chicago, describes it thusly: "It's
>> cold, and there's no place to park." That sounds pretty accurate to me.
>> Chicago is a great place to visit, but for living, Seattle is much better.
>
>Hmm. We got
Hey, Seattle has museums, ballet, symphony, etc., too. Is the symphony
here as good as the one in Chicago? I'm sure I don't have a fine enough
ear to make that distinction, nor do most people. The Chicago museums
are a lot better.
>Shedd Aquarium
The Shedd is awesome. I wish I could go there more often. Seattle has
a really good aquarium on the waterfront, but it isn't as nice as the
Shedd Aquarium (although it is expanding).
>Hundreds of Restaurants
What, just hundreds? There must be a lot of hungry people there. <g>
>Taste of Chicago
Taste of Seattle
>Chicago Blues Festival
Bumbershoot
>Chicago Gospel Festival
Seattle Folk Festival
>Lake Michigan
Lake Washington (and Sammamish, and hundreds more in the mountains, and
that's not even considering Puget Sound)
>Hundreds of golf courses
Ditto
>Dozens of street festivals
Same again
>and much more.
Yup, like I said, Chicago is a great place to visit. But with its size,
and its crime, and its weather, I would rather live here in the Seattle
area. The people here are friendlier, too, in my experience.
Most, in fact ALL, of the advantages that Chicago has over Seattle are
cultural ones. Chicago is a much older and larger city, that's to be
expected. However, Seattle has things that Chicago will never have.
There are three national parks, all just a few hours away. Mt. Rainier
is one of the most beautiful (and biggest!) mountains I've ever seen.
On the Olympic Peninsula, you will find the only temperate rain forest
in the continental United States, as well as mountains, waterfalls, and
unique and fascinating ocean beaches. In the Cascade Mountains, there
is skiing in the winter, hiking in the summer -- more trails than you
can believe. If you go out to Ocean Beaches, twice a year the gray whales
are passing by, once going south and once north. Go up to the San Juan
Islands and you will see more of them, as well as orcas and dolphins.
But I'm still rooting for the Bulls, because I grew up in Dallas and
hate the Sonics more than any team (except maybe the Rockets). I still
remember Moody Madness! That was a glorious moment.
Ward R Drennan
In article <4plr26$2...@loki.tor.hookup.net>, K. Trout <tr...@hookup.net> wrote:
>In article <4pklml$6...@uwm.edu>,
> mfal...@alpha2.csd.uwm.edu (Michael John Falkner) wrote:
>>math...@mislink.ipd.anl.gov wrote:
>>: In article <4pkadb$h...@lal.interserv.net> Sco...@TRIsource.com writes:
>>: >y this year if the Bulls win.
>>: >
>>: >Predicted problems for Chicago police if the Bulls win:
>>: >
>>: > - shootings
>>: > - looting
>>: > - assault
>>: > - vandalism
>>: > - arson
>
News Flash!!! Rodman goes for females.
yuchi
> Apparently, the only teams able to beat the Bulls in the playoff.
> It would be nice if the Sonics could make history again by
> beating the Bulls, however unlikely it may seem.
Don't you think the Bulls is pretending to loss to the Sonics?
They can earn more money if they beat the Sonics in 4-1, 4-2, or 4-3
in the playoff.
Steve Miller
It all came together because of the smarts and wisdom of Jerry Krause.
Other basketball operation people don't have the knowledge and exprertise
that this guy has. AND, he's not even 5' 6". He won the exec.of the year
this year, well deserved and long in coming.
My hat's off to you my freind.
On Tuesday, June 11, 1996, Buzz wrote...
> How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have
won 3 championships recently and only
> lost one game in the playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic. Send
Michael Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
> and Scotty Pippen to the Philedelphia 76'ers and lets even things up a
bit. Chicago is nothing without Jordan
> as the previous two seasons can attest to.
>
> I would be willing to bet that there are normally more Bulls fans than
Sonics (Sonics get no media respect due
> to the last two seasons playoff blunders) BUT I bet there are more
Sonics fans for this series than Bulls
> fans. People like to root for the underdog and want to see an upset.
If people went to sporting events
> knowing 90% for sure who was going to win, they wouldn't be very fun to
watch. (Hence the fun in baseball
> which is very unpredictable.) So I think the Bulls have taken all the
fun out of the playoffs this year, the
> expectations are too high that they will win the Championship so why
even follow the playoffs. Having one
> team be that dominating is not good for any league in my opinion.
>
> Granted the Sonics beat the Bulls in the regular season, and granted the
Sonics have a better cumulative
> regular season record over the past 4 years than any other team in the
NBA, the Bulls just have too high of a
> payroll.
>
> There are only two teams in the NBA with a chance against the Bulls, the
Knicks and the Sonics. The Jazz
> would have got destroyed. Oh well, Seattle is a much nicer City than
Chicago (di you know Seattle only gets 2
> more inches of rain per year than Chicago, less rain than DC, NY, and
Atlanta) and my life doesn't revolve
> around basketball. I guess the positive note of having such a
dominating team might be that maybe Chicago
> won't vandalize and loot their City this year if the Bulls win.
Janos Szamosfalvi
Buzz (bu...@isomedia.com) wrote:
: [...]
: There are only two teams in the NBA with a chance against the Bulls, the
: Knicks and the Sonics.
Apparently, the only teams able to beat the Bulls in the playoff.
John
dan...@microsoft.com (Daniel Welch) writes:
> In article <31BF26...@spss.com>, ga...@spss.com says...
> >Daniel Welch wrote:
> >> A friend of mine, currently living in Chicago, describes it thusly: "It's
> >> cold, and there's no place to park." That sounds pretty accurate to me.
> >> Chicago is a great place to visit, but for living, Seattle is much better.
> >
[snipped comparison of the two cities]
> >and much more.
> Yup, like I said, Chicago is a great place to visit. But with its size,
> and its crime, and its weather, I would rather live here in the Seattle
> area. The people here are friendlier, too, in my experience.
Well, that depends on who you talk to in Chicago, I guess.
I've visited most of the major cities in the U.S. and Chicago
still wins me over! But this argument is silly, since
each and every person on these newsgroups will have their
own personal "favorite" city. So let's stop this debate.
Also, your mentioning of weather is ludicrous! Sure, this
YEAR it is rainy in Chicago. However, isn't it ALWAYS
raining in Seattle? Doesn't Seattle have one of the if
not THE highest suicide rate in the U.S. partially due to
it's gloomy days? The weather is something that is beyond
anyone's control. If one likes the coast, then places
like Boston or L.A. are perfect. If one likes a warm weather,
then the south is it. If one likes a nice mix of seasons,
Chicago is fine.
> Most, in fact ALL, of the advantages that Chicago has over Seattle are
> cultural ones. Chicago is a much older and larger city, that's to be
> expected. However, Seattle has things that Chicago will never have.
> There are three national parks, all just a few hours away. Mt. Rainier
> is one of the most beautiful (and biggest!) mountains I've ever seen.
More silliness.... Sure, Seattle is wonderful. However,
keep in mind WHERE Chicago is!!!! Sorry, but St. Louis is
one of my LEAST favorite cities in the world. This makes
Chicago THE premiere city in the Midwest! Heck, if it
weren't for Chicago the Midwest might be a damn boring place!
> But I'm still rooting for the Bulls, because I grew up in Dallas and
> hate the Sonics more than any team (except maybe the Rockets). I still
> remember Moody Madness! That was a glorious moment.
>
> Daniel Welch
Well, at least you show SOME sense here by rooting for the
Bulls! ;)
Ciao,
John
John
wdre...@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Ward R Drennan) writes:
> >>: >
> >>: >Predicted problems for Chicago police if the Bulls win:
> >>: >
> >>: > - shootings
> >>: > - looting
> >>: > - assault
> >>: > - vandalism
> >>: > - arson
> >
Predicted problems for Seattle if the Sonics win:
1. apathy - NBC loses money on ratings, stops showing games
2. rain
3. numerous suicides due to poor weather - diminishes crowd
4. rain
5. A "Nirvana-wannabe" group will write a song about the win
6. rain
7. Seattle, just like the very "mild" people of Denver,
discover the "wonders of looting" and humiliate themselves
before the world
8. rain
O.K., seriously, the items mentioned in the first post
appear to happen in almost ALL cities after a championship -
sometimes even at various universities as well! So, you're
niave if you think it wouldn't happen in Seattle.
Ciao,
John
David B. Greene
Brian Novak <brn...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Daniel Welch wrote:
> I still hate the Bulls, though, mostly for being
>> such whiners. (Have you ever seen Jordan when the referees finally decide
>> to call a foul on him?)
In game four! Put the broom away Chicago!
>The all time classic whine, though, the one they will use in NBA training videos for
>high schoolers and college freshmen, was Gary Payton's in game 3--bear hug Rodman to
>stop a fast break, foul called, and run to the ref to complain about it? YOU GOTTA BE
>KIDDING ME. He even was whiny enough to get a technical on top of it. Classic
Gary!? compared to Rodman's play acting!? you gotta be kidding! Well
Rodman's schtick didn't work in game four, I doubt he's out celebrating in
drag tonite!
Henry Iii McDaniel
yuchi <yu...@smartt.com> writes:
>> Apparently, the only teams able to beat the Bulls in the playoff.
>> It would be nice if the Sonics could make history again by
>> beating the Bulls, however unlikely it may seem.
>
> Don't you think the Bulls is pretending to loss to the Sonics?
> They can earn more money if they beat the Sonics in 4-1, 4-2, or 4-3
> in the playoff.
*yawn* If you think so - then ask yourself why the Bulls didn't just
let the Sonics win game 2 in Chicago, when the Sonics were within 1 shot
and a free throw of winning anyhow.
There is no conspiracy, STUPID.
-McDaniel
David B. Greene
math...@mislink.ipd.anl.gov wrote:
>In article <4pkadb$h...@lal.interserv.net> Sco...@TRIsource.com writes:
>>y this year if the Bulls win.
>>
>>Predicted problems for Chicago police if the Bulls win:
>>
>> - shootings
>> - looting
> I can't wait for win #4. I need a new T.V. and Microwave.
> Anyone want a new Pro Logic Receiver? ;-)
>> - assault
>> - vandalism
>> - arson
Not much different from any other night in Chicago, eh!
CENTURYinter.net
So do I....thats why I did not watch the game...I was happy
to know that the sonics won..
Pacor
Axelin
In article <31bfce91...@news.blarg.net>, fut...@blarg.net (Tim
Gerchmez) wrote:
Just watch the game you bastard and don't say a fucking word if you aren't
a BULL's fun!!!!
Tim Gerchmez
>Daniel Welch wrote:
> I still hate the Bulls, though, mostly for being
>> such whiners. (Have you ever seen Jordan when the referees finally decide
>> to call a foul on him?)
>
>The all time classic whine, though, the one they will use in NBA training videos for
>high schoolers and college freshmen, was Gary Payton's in game 3--bear hug Rodman to
>stop a fast break, foul called, and run to the ref to complain about it? YOU GOTTA BE
>KIDDING ME. He even was whiny enough to get a technical on top of it. Classic
Hmm I dunno.. Jordan sure was sniveling at the end of game 4 today...
--
Check out my home page at http://www.blarg.net/~future/index.html
I'm a volunteer at the Win95 Help Site. Drop by if you need help with Win95.
http://www.isisnet.com/terrymo/index.html
Gary Harr
Daniel Welch wrote:
>
> In article <31BF26...@spss.com>, ga...@spss.com says...
> >Daniel Welch wrote:
> >> A friend of mine, currently living in Chicago, describes it thusly: "It's
> >> cold, and there's no place to park." That sounds pretty accurate to me.
> >> Chicago is a great place to visit, but for living, Seattle is much better.
> >
> Yup, like I said, Chicago is a great place to visit. But with its size,
> and its crime, and its weather, I would rather live here in the Seattle
> area. The people here are friendlier, too, in my experience.
>
> cultural ones. Chicago is a much older and larger city, that's to be
> expected. However, Seattle has things that Chicago will never have.
> There are three national parks, all just a few hours away. Mt. Rainier
> is one of the most beautiful (and biggest!) mountains I've ever seen.
> in the continental United States, as well as mountains, waterfalls, and
> unique and fascinating ocean beaches. In the Cascade Mountains, there
> is skiing in the winter, hiking in the summer -- more trails than you
> can believe. If you go out to Ocean Beaches, twice a year the gray whales
> are passing by, once going south and once north. Go up to the San Juan
> Islands and you will see more of them, as well as orcas and dolphins.
>
> hate the Sonics more than any team (except maybe the Rockets). I still
> remember Moody Madness! That was a glorious moment.
Hey Dan, don't get me wrong. I never meant to say that Seattle isn't
a great city. I have never been there so I would never dis it. I
just wanted to point out that Chicago is not a bad place to live and
there are a lot of people out there that think it is a bad place.
It is 80 and sunny today, which makes up for the fact that we are
all hung over and we lost anyway. Oh well, I suppose we will get to
celebrate correctly with it ending on a Friday night now.
Gary "Getting ready to Rumble (or is that Scumble)" Harr
Jerry Houston
James F. Nelson wrote:
>
> In article <31BFB3...@smartt.com>, yuchi <yu...@smartt.com> wrote:
> >> Apparently, the only teams able to beat the Bulls in the playoff.
> >> It would be nice if the Sonics could make history again by
> >> beating the Bulls, however unlikely it may seem.
> >
> >
> > Don't you think the Bulls is pretending to loss to the Sonics?
> > They can earn more money if they beat the Sonics in 4-1, 4-2, or 4-3
> > in the playoff.
>
> series. It doesn't matter how many games it takes.
Are you kidding? Where do you think the millions from broadcast rights
go, local charities? I'm pretty sure that NBA contracts involve
percentages of concession revenues, too. Not to mention money from
(expensive!) ticket sales.
If there is no Game 6 and no Game 7, it will cost them both (and
probably the NBA as well) some SERIOUS money. If there had been no Game
5, it would have cost them even more!
James F. Nelson
-R.C.Jender
In article <31C04E...@spss.com>, Gary Harr <ga...@spss.com> wrote:
>Daniel Welch wrote:
>>
>> In article <31BF26...@spss.com>, ga...@spss.com says...
>> >Daniel Welch wrote:
>> >> A friend of mine, currently living in Chicago, describes it thusly: "It's
>> >> cold, and there's no place to park." That sounds pretty accurate to me.
>> >> Chicago is a great place to visit, but for living, Seattle is much better.
>> >
>> >Hmm. We got
>> [ a long list of things ]
I've lived in Chicago and surrounding burbs for (checking my
drivers license)....46 years. I've finally come to realize that
this state really does suck!! Especially the weather!
--
-----------------
Raymond C. Jender
Lucent Technologies
Bell Labs Innovations
Robert Wiegand
da...@halcyon.com (David B. Greene) writes:
>> I still hate the Bulls, though, mostly for being
>>> such whiners. (Have you ever seen Jordan when the referees finally decide
>>> to call a foul on him?)
>In game four! Put the broom away Chicago!
The replay showed that Jorden was right - I think he had reason to complain
about that one. You need to find a better example.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Wiegand | Education makes a people easy to lead, but
Motorola Inc. | difficult to drive; easy to govern, but
bwie...@sesd.cig.mot.com | impossible to enslave - Henery Peter Brougham
Wayne Dyer
The rumor I heard was that the Bulls were throwing games so they could win
in Chicago, where the victory parade is already planned.
--
Wayne Dyer :: dwd...@eskimo.com :: http://www.eskimo.com/~dwdyer/
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that
faith does not prove anything." -- F.W.N.
yuchi
James F. Nelson wrote:
> >
> > Don't you think the Bulls is pretending to loss to the Sonics?
> > They can earn more money if they beat the Sonics in 4-1, 4-2, or 4-3
> > in the playoff.
>
> The only thing that determines how much money each team gets is who wins the
> series. It doesn't matter how many games it takes.
Ya, right! Why NBA want to play 7 games in the playoff?
The more games they play, the more money they can earn. They did
a survey to see how many games they can play in a playoff so that
fans will feel boring and they can earn more money.
Bob
Buzz (bu...@isomedia.com) wrote:
: How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games,
: have won 3 championships recently and only lost one game in the
: playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic. Send Michael Jordan to
: the Dallas Maveriks and Scotty Pippen to the Philedelphia 76'ers
: and lets even things up a bit. Chicago is nothing without Jordan
: as the previous two seasons can attest to.
Before Jordan came along, Chicago had one of the weakest teams around.
Ten years from now, Chicago will probably have the worst team in the
league. Much as I'm rooting for Seattle, I think Chicago deserves their
turn at the top as much as any other team. It's too bad some of the
other perenial losers haven't had a taste of playoff glory.
--
Bob [iceb...@eskimo.com]
Shaun Patrick Darragh
yuchi <yu...@smartt.com> wrote:
>> Apparently, the only teams able to beat the Bulls in the playoff.
>> It would be nice if the Sonics could make history again by
>> beating the Bulls, however unlikely it may seem.
>
> Don't you think the Bulls is pretending to loss to the Sonics?
> They can earn more money if they beat the Sonics in 4-1, 4-2, or 4-3
> in the playoff.
Hehh heh ehh heh heh....not after seeing Jordan's face last night I
don't. The Sonics came together and played at their best. The Bulls
lost fairly....deal with it.
Shaun
John Sullivan
In article <DsyF3...@eskimo.com> dwd...@eskimo.com (Wayne Dyer) writes:
>The rumor I heard was that the Bulls were throwing games so they could win
>in Chicago, where the victory parade is already planned.
And the drunken riot.
That theory crossed my mind, too, but it seems unlikely. I'm sure they would
rather have done the sweep.
John Sullivan
jsul...@fhcrc.org
David B. Greene
Gary Harr <ga...@spss.com> says:
>>
>> A friend of mine, currently living in Chicago, describes it thusly: "It's
>> cold, and there's no place to park." That sounds pretty accurate to me.
>> Chicago is a great place to visit, but for living, Seattle is much better.
>
>Hmm. We got
>The Art Institute
We got the Seattle Art Museum and downtown gallery walks
>Adler Planetarium
We got the Pacific Science Center with its planetarium which
is a good thing because you can rarely see anything from the
University of Washington observatory with all the clouds.
>Shedd Aquarium
We got the Seattle Aquarium and all of Puget Sound
>Field Museum
We got the Burke Museum
>Museum of Science & Industry
We got the Museum of History and Industry
and we got the Museum of Flight
>Chicago Civic Opera
We got the Seattle Opera
>Chicago Symphony Orchestra
We got the Seattle Symphony
and we got the Northwest Chamber Orchestra
>Joffrey Ballet
We got the Pacific Northwest Ballet
>Dozens of Theatre Companies
Big deal, every city has those now
and we got the Seattle Reperatory Theater
and we got A Contemporary Theater
>Hundreds of Restaurants
If ya like eating at McDonalds
>Lincoln Park Zoo
We got the Woodland Park Zoo
>Brookfield Zoo
We got the Point Defiance Zoo and Northwest Trek
(if you count Tacoma which is where the Sonics played last year)
>Wrigley Field
True, the Kingdome sucks, but at least we got the Mariners and
both Ken Griffey Jr and Randy Johnson
>Soldier Field
We got Husky Stadium and more than a few Rose Bowl trophies
>Taste of Chicago
We got the Bite of Seattle
>Chicago Blues Festival
We got the Folklife Festival
>Chicago Gospel Festival
I don't think we got one of those
>Magnificent Mile
We got Microsoft
>Lake Michigan
We got puget sound which is where all of Lake Michigan's
salmon stocks originated.
>Hundreds of golf courses
hundreds!? we only got dozens
>Dozens of street festivals
They are a dime a dozen during Seafair
>and much more.
>
>If it didn't snow and there was plenty of parking there
>would be 10 million people living here. Besides, having
>four seasons ain't so bad.
We got only two bridges accross all of Lake Washington and
traffic makes it seem like 10 million people live here ;-)
David B. Greene
In article <31BFB3...@smartt.com>, yuchi <yu...@smartt.com> says:
>
>> Apparently, the only teams able to beat the Bulls in the playoff.
>> It would be nice if the Sonics could make history again by
>> beating the Bulls, however unlikely it may seem.
>
>
> Don't you think the Bulls is pretending to loss to the Sonics?
> They can earn more money if they beat the Sonics in 4-1, 4-2, or 4-3
> in the playoff.
Sounds like *Bull* to me. I s this how they think in Chicago, no wonder
their politics is so wierd.
David B. Greene
In article <4pmqqm$s...@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, wdre...@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Ward R Drennan) says:
>
>In article <4plr26$2...@loki.tor.hookup.net>, K. Trout <tr...@hookup.net> wrote:
>>In article <4pklml$6...@uwm.edu>,
>> mfal...@alpha2.csd.uwm.edu (Michael John Falkner) wrote:
>>>: In article <4pkadb$h...@lal.interserv.net> Sco...@TRIsource.com writes:
>>>: >y this year if the Bulls win.
>>>: >
>>>: >Predicted problems for Chicago police if the Bulls win:
>>>: >
>>>: > - shootings
>>>: > - looting
>>>: > - vandalism
>>>: > - arson
>>
>>Don't forget fornication, with the homosexual Rodman leading the charge
>
>News Flash!!! Rodman goes for females.
Anybody who dates Madonna can't be all bad.
Janos Szamosfalvi
yuchi (yu...@smartt.com) wrote:
: > Apparently, the only teams able to beat the Bulls in the playoff.
: > It would be nice if the Sonics could make history again by
: > beating the Bulls, however unlikely it may seem.
:
: Don't you think the Bulls is pretending to loss to the Sonics?
: They can earn more money if they beat the Sonics in 4-1, 4-2, or 4-3
: in the playoff.
With the sweep they could've set an NBA record.
About money: I'm not sure about the NBA's rules, but in baseball
the _clubs_ don't earn more money if the play more games in the
playoff, so there's very little incentive to prolong a series.
And I think the same true for basketball, too. No team in their
right mind would want to prolong the win and leave everything for
the very last game if they can secure the championsip earlier.
SCN User
HISTORY IN THE MAKING.
The Sonics now have a chance to MAKE HISTORY.
Can be the first team ever to come back and win a 7-game playoff
series after getting behind 3-0. he hee...
Coz
On Thu, 13 Jun 1996 16:57:00, JSUL...@fhcrc.org (John Sullivan)
writes:
>And the drunken riot.
>That theory crossed my mind, too, but it seems unlikely. I'm sure they would
>rather have done the sweep.
Considering the way the Bulls shunned their fans outside the hotel
today it was pretty obvious that they are no longer having fun.
---______ _____ _
/ ____/___ / ___/____ ____ (_)_________
/ / __/ __ \ \__ \/ __ \/ __ \/ / ___/ ___/ Sweepless
/ /_/ / /_/ / ___/ / /_/ / / / / / /__(__ ) in
\____/\____/ /____/\____/_/ /_/_/\___/____/ Seattle!
Seattle Sonics '96 Western Conference Champs!
EMAIL: c...@aa.net WEB: www.aa.net/~coz
ha...@gil.com.au
> In article 6...@uwm.edu, mfal...@alpha2.csd.uwm.edu (Michael John Falkner)
> writes:
> >The salary cap doesn't work -- there's less parity in the game now than
> >there was in the 60's and 70's.
>
> What? How can you claim there was more parity in the league in the 60's when
> there
> was only one team winning the championships?
>
>
> Patrick
OK, so maybe parity shouldn't have been mentioned. But it's true - the salary
cap DOES NOT WORK. It merely puts a price that incoming players know is
available, and they go for it, driving UP salaries in the process. Plus, the
cost of policig the rule is enormous. Why have it at all. Save millions by not
having it, and players would get what they were worth, including the great ones
who actually bring people through the turnstiles and not merely ride the pine.
There must be some controls, such as a minimum pay, but a maximum? Let the
players get what they are worth, instead of inflating their pays merely because
it may be available unde the salary cap.
Haz (Australia)
Joseph Lee
Oh! Come on..... one game and you Seattle fans think you have won the world war
or something.... don't get your hopes too high 'cause your team don't have any.
In article <4po448$n...@nadine.teleport.com>, sza...@teleport.com says...
>
>Buzz (bu...@isomedia.com) wrote:
>: [...]
>: There are only two teams in the NBA with a chance against the Bulls, the
>: Knicks and the Sonics.
Chris Pirih, proverbs at wolfenet dot com
| >> Chicago is a great place to visit, but for living, Seattle is much better.
| >
| ...
| >Hundreds of Restaurants
| If ya like eating at McDonalds
We (Seattle) have hundreds of _Thai_ restaurants.
And an espresso cart on every streetcorner. Now
_that's_ culture!
---
chris
James F. Nelson
>> > Don't you think the Bulls is pretending to loss to the Sonics?
>> > They can earn more money if they beat the Sonics in 4-1, 4-2, or 4-3
>> > in the playoff.
>>
>> The only thing that determines how much money each team gets is who wins the
>> series. It doesn't matter how many games it takes.
>
>Are you kidding? Where do you think the millions from broadcast rights
>go, local charities? I'm pretty sure that NBA contracts involve
>percentages of concession revenues, too. Not to mention money from
>(expensive!) ticket sales.
>
>If there is no Game 6 and no Game 7, it will cost them both (and
>probably the NBA as well) some SERIOUS money. If there had been no Game
>5, it would have cost them even more!
Each team in the finals receives a certain dollar amount to be distributed
among its players. The winner gets a little more than the loser, and the
players on each team vote to determine how their team's share is divided.
I forget the actual amounts (they were reported in yesterday's Sun-Times), but
they have already been decided, and are not contingent upon the length of the
series. If the Bulls had won game four (thus sweeping), they would receive no
more or less than if they win the series in seven games.
BONVICINI,GIOV./EP
In article <4pkeic$1b...@piglet.cc.uic.edu>, jne...@uic.edu (James F. Nelson) writes...
>In article <31BDA8...@isomedia.com>, Buzz <bu...@isomedia.com> wrote:
>>How fun is this? A team filled with superstars, who won 72 games, have won 3
>> championships recently and only
>>lost one game in the playoffs, and swept the (overrated) Magic. Send Michael
>> Jordan to the Dallas Maveriks
>>and Scotty Pippen to the Philedelphia 76'ers and lets even things up a bit.
>
>world that it would be a shame not to try it out in the NBA.
Sorry, but the NBA is socialism for millionaires already. How do you
explain Katz and Sterling making a profit year after year? It clearly
works.
D.F.
In article <4pqjp8$4...@Holly.aa.net> Coz, c...@aa.net writes:
>---______ _____ _
> / ____/___ / ___/____ ____ (_)_________
> / / __/ __ \ \__ \/ __ \/ __ \/ / ___/ ___/ Sweepless
>/ /_/ / /_/ / ___/ / /_/ / / / / / /__(__ ) in
>\____/\____/ /____/\____/_/ /_/_/\___/____/ Seattle!
>Seattle Sonics '96 Western Conference Champs!
>EMAIL: c...@aa.net WEB: www.aa.net/~coz
I like your new sig, Coz. Pretty sad when not getting swept is grounds
for celebration...
D.F.
In article <1996Jun13.0...@atl.com> David B. Greene,
da...@halcyon.com writes:
>>The Art Institute
>We got the Seattle Art Museum and downtown gallery walks
>>Adler Planetarium
>We got the Pacific Science Center with its planetarium
>>Shedd Aquarium
>We got the Seattle Aquarium and all of Puget Sound
>>Field Museum
>We got the Burke Museum
>>Museum of Science & Industry
>We got the Museum of History and Industry
>and we got the Museum of Flight
>>Chicago Civic Opera
>We got the Seattle Opera
>>Chicago Symphony Orchestra
>We got the Seattle Symphony
>and we got the Northwest Chamber Orchestra
>>Joffrey Ballet
>We got the Pacific Northwest Ballet
>>Brookfield Zoo
>We got the Point Defiance Zoo and Northwest Trek
Yeah, but every city has museums, etc. The point the guy was trying to
make was that the Art Institute, Adler, Shedd, Field, S&I, Civic Opera,
Symphony Orchestra, Joffrey, and Brookfield are all world-renowned, and
stand apart from most of the like around the world. New York is one of
the few cities, if not the only in the U.S., which can compare. Which is
not really fair to Seattle, since Chicago is a much older and larger
city, and the west coast as a whole seems to place less emphasis on
"cultural" things like this.
>>Hundreds of Restaurants
>If ya like eating at McDonalds
There are more McDonalds on the west coast than in the midwest. I think
you were joking, but Chicago is known as the best "food" city in the
world. It stems from the demographics of the city and its population.
>>Wrigley Field
>True, the Kingdome sucks, but at least we got the Mariners and
>both Ken Griffey Jr and Randy Johnson
But do you throw the ball back onto the field when the other team hits a
home run? ;-)
>>Soldier Field
>We got Husky Stadium and more than a few Rose Bowl trophies
But it ain't nothing like Soldier Field! The place reeks of "tradition."
Too bad the Bears future there is in such doubt.
>>Taste of Chicago
>We got the Bite of Seattle
Not even close (see "food" above).
>>Chicago Blues Festival
>We got the Folklife Festival
Chicago's the biggest blues city in the country (hmm... is that something
to bragg about? ;-) )
>>Chicago Gospel Festival
>I don't think we got one of those
;-)
>>Magnificent Mile
>We got Microsoft
Whooo-oooo-y! Reminds me of that line about Seattle in "Singles" where
everybody is talking about what they do for a living... the one guy tries
the brag "I build airplanes!" and the clown goes "Whooo-oooo-y!"
>>Hundreds of golf courses
>hundreds!? we only got dozens
I don't know why either side is bragging about this... In Chicago, half
the year the course is frozen solid or covered in snow; in Seattle, half
the year it's wet...
Dan
Jerry Houston
James F. Nelson wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Each team in the finals receives a certain dollar amount to be distributed
> among its players. The winner gets a little more than the loser, and the
> players on each team vote to determine how their team's share is divided.
>
> I forget the actual amounts (they were reported in yesterday's Sun-Times), but
> they have already been decided, and are not contingent upon the length of the
> series. If the Bulls had won game four (thus sweeping), they would receive no
> more or less than if they win the series in seven games.
If that's true, surely it can't be the whole story. Did the Sun-Times
article mention who gets the millions of dollars from the ticket sales,
concession percentages, and broadcast rights?
All that money can't simply evaporate. Does it go to the league
instead? If so, what happens to them from that point on?
This smells just a little like the reports of corporation CEOs who are
paid a salary of $10,000 per year, but don't mention the multi-million
dollar bonuses, company-paid limousines and corporate vacation homes.
James F. Nelson
>> : Don't you think the Bulls is pretending to loss to the Sonics?
>> : They can earn more money if they beat the Sonics in 4-1, 4-2, or 4-3
>> : in the playoff.
>>
>> About money: I'm not sure about the NBA's rules, but in baseball
>> the _clubs_ don't earn more money if the play more games in the
>> playoff, so there's very little incentive to prolong a series.
>> And I think the same true for basketball, too. No team in their
>> right mind would want to prolong the win and leave everything for
>> the very last game if they can secure the championsip earlier.
>
>No, but I think the NBA makes more money and I'm *sure* NBC makes more
>money. I'd bet viewership increases with the game count, and that Game 7
>broadcasts pull in more advertising revenue than Game 4 revenue, even if
>the tally is 3-0 at the time.
Agreed. But getting back to the original question, I doubt that either the
Bulls or the Sonics would deliberately lose a game just to help NBC make a
few extra bucks. Even with a 3-0 lead going in, there's still the chance that
such a decision could come back to haunt a team later.
Let's face facts Bulls fans. Our guys lost because the Sonics played a
much better game. The Sonics won 64 games during the regular season, and they
beat two pretty good teams (including the defending champs) just to *get* to
the finals. They were playing at home, and they had their backs up against
the wall. Meanwhile, the Bulls were so busy worrying about their contracts
and victory celebrations, they overlooked the little fact that they still had
to win one more game.
It wasn't the refs, it wasn't Michael paying off a gambling debt, and it
wasn't a deliberate effort to extend the series. I think some of the people
who frequent this group have seen one Oliver Stone film too many.
Jeff Meeks
wie...@woodcock.cig.mot.com (Robert Wiegand) wrote:
>da...@halcyon.com (David B. Greene) writes:
>>> I still hate the Bulls, though, mostly for being
>>>> such whiners. (Have you ever seen Jordan when the referees finally decide
>>>> to call a foul on him?)
>>In game four! Put the broom away Chicago!
>The replay showed that Jorden was right - I think he had reason to complain
>about that one. You need to find a better example.
Wow! the first time a ref made a bad call! no wonder his head spun
around backwards and he chewed the ref's nose off!
Any other player woulda been booted. Michael shoulda too.
Wayne Dyer
Janos Szamosfalvi wrote:
> yuchi (yu...@smartt.com) wrote:
> : > Apparently, the only teams able to beat the Bulls in the playoff.
> : > It would be nice if the Sonics could make history again by
> : > beating the Bulls, however unlikely it may seem.
>
> : They can earn more money if they beat the Sonics in 4-1, 4-2, or 4-3
> : in the playoff.
>
>
> the _clubs_ don't earn more money if the play more games in the
> playoff, so there's very little incentive to prolong a series.
> And I think the same true for basketball, too. No team in their
> right mind would want to prolong the win and leave everything for
> the very last game if they can secure the championsip earlier.
No, but I think the NBA makes more money and I'm *sure* NBC makes more
money. I'd bet viewership increases with the game count, and that Game 7
broadcasts pull in more advertising revenue than Game 4 revenue, even if
the tally is 3-0 at the time.
--
Janos Szamosfalvi
Joseph Lee (joe...@interlog.com) wrote:
: Oh! Come on..... one game and you Seattle fans think you have won the world war
We'll see....
Janos Szamosfalvi
Wayne Dyer (dwd...@eskimo.com) wrote:
: No, but I think the NBA makes more money and I'm *sure* NBC makes more
: money. I'd bet viewership increases with the game count, and that Game 7
: broadcasts pull in more advertising revenue than Game 4 revenue, even if
: the tally is 3-0 at the time.
That's irrelevant. The people who actually decide about the outcome
(the players) get no more money directly.
R. Urban
I'd love to visit Seattle one of these days. I used to live in Los
Angeles and they have horrendous traffic problems. Is it true that a lot
of Californians have moved up to Seattle?
Having fun in Chicago,
Roger
David B. Greene wrote:
>
> Gary Harr <ga...@spss.com> says:
> >>
> >> A friend of mine, currently living in Chicago, describes it thusly: "It's
> >> cold, and there's no place to park." That sounds pretty accurate to me.
> >> Chicago is a great place to visit, but for living, Seattle is much better.
> >
> >Hmm. We got
>
> >The Art Institute
> We got the Seattle Art Museum and downtown gallery walks
>
> >Adler Planetarium
> We got the Pacific Science Center with its planetarium which
> is a good thing because you can rarely see anything from the
> University of Washington observatory with all the clouds.
>
> >Shedd Aquarium
> We got the Seattle Aquarium and all of Puget Sound
>
> >Field Museum
> We got the Burke Museum
>
> >Museum of Science & Industry
> We got the Museum of History and Industry
> and we got the Museum of Flight
>
> >Chicago Civic Opera
> We got the Seattle Opera
>
> >Chicago Symphony Orchestra
> We got the Seattle Symphony
> and we got the Northwest Chamber Orchestra
>
> >Joffrey Ballet
> We got the Pacific Northwest Ballet
>
> >Dozens of Theatre Companies
> Big deal, every city has those now
> and we got the Seattle Reperatory Theater
> and we got A Contemporary Theater
>
> >Hundreds of Restaurants
> If ya like eating at McDonalds
>
> >Lincoln Park Zoo
> We got the Woodland Park Zoo
>
> >Brookfield Zoo
> We got the Point Defiance Zoo and Northwest Trek
> (if you count Tacoma which is where the Sonics played last year)
>
> >Wrigley Field
> True, the Kingdome sucks, but at least we got the Mariners and
> both Ken Griffey Jr and Randy Johnson
>
> >Soldier Field
> We got Husky Stadium and more than a few Rose Bowl trophies
>
> >Taste of Chicago
> We got the Bite of Seattle
>
> >Chicago Blues Festival
> We got the Folklife Festival
>
> >Chicago Gospel Festival
> I don't think we got one of those
>
> >Magnificent Mile
> We got Microsoft
>
> >Lake Michigan
> We got puget sound which is where all of Lake Michigan's
> salmon stocks originated.
>
> >Hundreds of golf courses
> hundreds!? we only got dozens
>
R. Urban
Wayne Dyer wrote:
>
> James F. Nelson wrote:
> > In article <31BFB3...@smartt.com>, yuchi <yu...@smartt.com> wrote:
> > >> Apparently, the only teams able to beat the Bulls in the playoff.
> > >> It would be nice if the Sonics could make history again by
> > >> beating the Bulls, however unlikely it may seem.
> > >
> > >
> > > Don't you think the Bulls is pretending to loss to the Sonics?
> > > They can earn more money if they beat the Sonics in 4-1, 4-2, or 4-3
> > > in the playoff.
> >
> > series. It doesn't matter how many games it takes.
>
> in Chicago, where the victory parade is already planned.
car next to mine and lite it. I was on the phone and saw smoke and looked
out the window and then ran downstairs to move my car. Had to get in on
the passenger side, but got it out of there in time. 90 seconds later,
the other cars gas tank blew, resulting in 3 torched cars.
There are enough cops, state troopers and national guards to put a damper
on things this time around.
I think Chicago will be safer if the Bulls win game 5 instead of game 6,
simply because they'll be out of town.
Do you really think that the game was thrown? The refs were
excessively jumping all over the Bulls. That put a damper on things. A
couple of shots ended up in the stands - that did look like they were
just thrown away, as no one was near to catch them. I have to
question the "mis-communication" explanation, but it could have
been. Then, the camera pans on Jackson laughing, then later on Scotti
laughing. Hardly anyone could hit the basket. Luc was in a foul mood. So,
I dunno. It just didn't look like their hearts were in it.
Hopefully, tonights game will be like the 4th.
David B. Greene
wie...@woodcock.cig.mot.com (Robert Wiegand) says:
>da...@halcyon.com (David B. Greene) writes:
>
>>> I still hate the Bulls, though, mostly for being
>>>> such whiners. (Have you ever seen Jordan when the referees finally decide
>>>> to call a foul on him?)
>
>>In game four! Put the broom away Chicago!
>
>The replay showed that Jorden was right - I think he had reason to complain
>about that one. You need to find a better example.
Jordan shouldn't complain too much, the ref didn't call him on a second technical
that would have sent any other player packing out of the game. Mikey always gets
the kidd glove treatment but then he whines that "the calls didn't go our way."
David Wahlquist
In article <31C081...@smartt.com>, yuchi <yu...@smartt.com> wrote:
>James F. Nelson wrote:
>> >
>> > Don't you think the Bulls is pretending to loss to the Sonics?
>> > They can earn more money if they beat the Sonics in 4-1, 4-2, or 4-3
>> > in the playoff.
>>
>> The only thing that determines how much money each team gets is who wins the
>> series. It doesn't matter how many games it takes.
>
>
>The more games they play, the more money they can earn. They did
>a survey to see how many games they can play in a playoff so that
>fans will feel boring and they can earn more money.
The network would DEFINITELY love a full 7 game series, and I can even see
the NBA, as an organization, hoping for a full series. But it seems a
little off to think that competitors like MJ, or Pippen, or Phil Jackson,
or any of the others would have any interest in throwing games just for
effect or money.
David
Ward R Drennan
In article <1996Jun13.0...@atl.com>,
David B. Greene <da...@halcyon.com> wrote:
>Gary Harr <ga...@spss.com> says:
>>>
>>> A friend of mine, currently living in Chicago, describes it thusly: "It's
>>> cold, and there's no place to park." That sounds pretty accurate to me.
>>> Chicago is a great place to visit, but for living, Seattle is much better.
>>
>>Hmm. We got
>
>>The Art Institute
>We got the Seattle Art Museum and downtown gallery walks
Chicago's is better. Money exhibit, etc. etc.
>
>>Adler Planetarium
>We got the Pacific Science Center with its planetarium which
>is a good thing because you can rarely see anything from the
>University of Washington observatory with all the clouds.
>
>>Shedd Aquarium
>We got the Seattle Aquarium and all of Puget Sound
>
>>Field Museum
>We got the Burke Museum
>
>>Museum of Science & Industry
>We got the Museum of History and Industry
>and we got the Museum of Flight
The Science & Industry museum is a classic. It's huge!
>
>>Chicago Civic Opera
>We got the Seattle Opera
Chicago's is better.
>
>>Chicago Symphony Orchestra
>We got the Seattle Symphony
>and we got the Northwest Chamber Orchestra
>
No contest. Chicago has a incredible orchestra.
>>Joffrey Ballet
>We got the Pacific Northwest Ballet
>
Hmmm.... Chicago's might be better!
>>Dozens of Theatre Companies
>Big deal, every city has those now
>and we got the Seattle Reperatory Theater
>and we got A Contemporary Theater
>
So, Indianapolis has the Indiana Rep.
The question is not whether they have theatre, but how good it is.
With the larger city and the bigger budgets, Chicago has higher
quality arts all around.
>>Hundreds of Restaurants
>If ya like eating at McDonalds
>
NAIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You havn't been to Chicago, have you? Chicago is loaded with privately
owned restaurants with some of the finest chefs in the world. There's
great ethnic diversity with chefs from around the globe. As far as
foods go, Chicago is in a class with New York and Paris.
>>Lincoln Park Zoo
>We got the Woodland Park Zoo
>
Brookfield is a fine Zoo.
Linclon Park is completely free (as is Brookfield, I think).
>>Brookfield Zoo
>We got the Point Defiance Zoo and Northwest Trek
>(if you count Tacoma which is where the Sonics played last year)
>
>>Wrigley Field
>True, the Kingdome sucks, but at least we got the Mariners and
>both Ken Griffey Jr and Randy Johnson
>
Caminskey Park: Hey, TWO baseball teams :)
>>Soldier Field
>We got Husky Stadium and more than a few Rose Bowl trophies
Chicago has one more SuperBowl trophy.
>
>>Taste of Chicago
>We got the Bite of Seattle
Take off on taste of Chicago.
>
>>Chicago Blues Festival
>We got the Folklife Festival
>
>>Chicago Gospel Festival
>I don't think we got one of those
Chicago Jazz Festival, Ravinia, etc.
>
>>Magnificent Mile
>We got Microsoft
>
Hmmm. .... Magnificent Mile is a big shopping district downtown.
>>Lake Michigan
>We got puget sound which is where all of Lake Michigan's
>salmon stocks originated.
>
Did you sent the Zebra Mussles, too? Glad to steal some fine Salmon.
>>Hundreds of golf courses
>hundreds!? we only got dozens
>
Has to do with population.
>>Dozens of street festivals
>They are a dime a dozen during Seafair
>
>>and much more.
>>
>>If it didn't snow and there was plenty of parking there
>>would be 10 million people living here. Besides, having
>>four seasons ain't so bad.
>
>We got only two bridges accross all of Lake Washington and
>traffic makes it seem like 10 million people live here ;-)
Traffic is a big problem. The snow is tough, especially for traffic.
The city government is a problem- corrupt. The city public schools
are a BIG problem. There's a drug problem - doesn't every city have that?
The drugs are probably more profuse in Chicago. There's crime, but some
city neighborhoods are fairly safe. We had an auto stolen once.
If you can handle crowds, traffic jams, heavy thunderstorms,
heavy property taxes, snow, jungle-like summer time weather, and a
mugging or two, you can enjoy all the cultural ammenities of Chicago.
And most importantly - NO VALCANOES!
--
Ward Drennan
Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences
Indiana University
Ward R Drennan
In article <4psao4$4...@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>,
Ward R Drennan <wdre...@silver.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>In article <1996Jun13.0...@atl.com>,
>David B. Greene <da...@halcyon.com> wrote:
>>Gary Harr <ga...@spss.com> says:
>>>>
>>>The Art Institute
>>We got the Seattle Art Museum and downtown gallery walks
>
>Chicago's is better. Money exhibit, etc. etc.
That should be Monet... same difference.
Ward R Drennan
In article <4prhr9$4...@ratty.wolfe.net>,
Chris Pirih, proverbs at wolfenet dot com <_@_._> wrote:
>| >> Chicago is a great place to visit, but for living, Seattle is much better.
>| >
>| ...
>| >Hundreds of Restaurants
>| If ya like eating at McDonalds
>
>And an espresso cart on every streetcorner. Now
>_that's_ culture!
>
Thai people, but the espresso thing sounds yuppie.
Janos Szamosfalvi
Joseph Lee (joe...@interlog.com) wrote:
: Oh! Come on..... one game and you Seattle fans think you have won the world war
: or something.... don't get your hopes too high 'cause your team don't have any.
I hope you don't play with stocks..... ;-)
Coz
On 14 Jun 1996 06:16:28 GMT, joe...@interlog.com (Joseph Lee) writes:
>Oh! Come on..... one game and you Seattle fans think you have won the world war
>or something.... don't get your hopes too high 'cause your team don't have any.
Thankfully the Woof gods are proving once again that the O.W.T. is
very real.
I wish the Sonics would wake up and quit winning. Didn't someone tell
them they have no hope?
---______ _____ _
/ ____/___ / ___/____ ____ (_)_________
/ / __/ __ \ \__ \/ __ \/ __ \/ / ___/ ___/ In it
/ /_/ / /_/ / ___/ / /_/ / / / / / /__(__ ) to
\____/\____/ /____/\____/_/ /_/_/\___/____/ Win it!
Allan L Bergano
hey sonic fans...
this will be next thursday morning's headline in chicago after our team
celebrates on their floor...in their house...in their city!!!
"comebacks" are for real!!! let's keep this thread going...:-]
allan
Ritchie
In article <4pu5o9$l...@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com>, da2...@ix.netcom.com(Allan
L Bergano ) wrote:
Your cheers will be short lived!!!
Gareth Howell
> hey sonic fans...
>
> this will be next thursday morning's headline in chicago after our team
> celebrates on their floor...in their house...in their city!!!
>
> "comebacks" are for real!!! let's keep this thread going...:-]
I think the Bulls just wanted to win their FOURTH title on their home court.
----
Utah Jazz 1997-'98 Defending Champions
Game 7, Finals
Utah Jazz 100 Chicago Bulls 82
email: Ca...@iafrica.com
voice: +27-11-616-6336
MikeS
Allan L Bergano wrote:
>
> hey sonic fans...
>
> this will be next thursday morning's headline in chicago after our team
> celebrates on their floor...in their house...in their city!!!
>
> "comebacks" are for real!!! let's keep this thread going...:-]
The Sonics have not proven they can win in Chicago this season and during
the playoffs. Game 5 could have been won by the Bulls, neither team
played very well. At two different times during the 4th quarter the point
difference was a mere 6. The Bulls lost that game do to poor decision
making on the bench and court. Namely shooting all those 3's when they
had the Sonics in foul trouble. Seattle should count their blessings that
they did not get eliminated in Game 5. I doubt the Bulls will play as
foolishly at home
Mike Beers
> The Sonics have not proven they can win in Chicago this season and during
> the playoffs. Game 5 could have been won by the Bulls, neither team
> played very well. At two different times during the 4th quarter the point
> difference was a mere 6. The Bulls lost that game do to poor decision
> making on the bench and court. Namely shooting all those 3's when they
> had the Sonics in foul trouble. Seattle should count their blessings that
> they did not get eliminated in Game 5. I doubt the Bulls will play as
> foolishly at home
Could have, should have. Seattle could be up 3-2 by winning game 2 when
they held Chicago to zero field goals in the final 5 or 6 minutes.
Overview:
Game 3, Chicago by 22; Game 4, Seattle by 21. Analysis: Even.
Game 1, Chicago by 17 (7 point lead with around 5 minutes to go); Game 5,
Seattle by 11 (6 point lead with around 3 minutes to go). Analysis: Even.
Game 2, Chicago by 4. Analysis: Chicago experience.
Chicago is, by some, considered the greatest team of all time,
where do the Sonics rank?
Riffster
Luc Maillet wrote:
>
> Michael John Falkner wrote:
>
> > Considering what we have in the NBA now, I wouldn't be surprised.
> >
> > The salary cap doesn't work -- there's less parity in the game now than
> > there was in the 60's and 70's.
>
> From what I've gathered, the cap doesn't limit one's options much...
> especially
> since you can sign your own free agents and go over it (perfect example:
> Chicago
> in the 96-97 season, with Rodman and MJ).
>
> Why did the league let that exception in? Why not the simple rule: "you
> cannot go
> over the cap. Period"? That would serve as an equalizer...
>
Two simple reasons -- general managers and players. First, a rule putting a strict cap would cause teams to lose
players who have reached the end of their contract with good numbers. Second, it would cause a strike. It was hard
enough to get players to agree to any cap at all, but to get them to agree to a "hard" (strict) cap would be
pretty much impossible. With the teams opposing the hard cap on one side and the players opposing it on the other,
the only proponents would be fans. You know what that means, Luc....
------------------------
I was in a diner in Allentown, PA 'bout four AM (got up way too early, made a terrible mistake),
staring at a bowl of horribly forshortened cornflakes and a glass of orange juice 'bout a big as a finger
And I said to myself -- this is the life!
-- FRANK ZAPPA "200 Years Old"