Golden age? | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Golden age?

What we don’t have is all the juicey narratives, the regional rivalries, the old school detest for you rival. All the stuff that makes it more entertaining.
This is an interesting point for college sports that I hadn’t thought about. The whole realignment debacle has clearly made the regional and historical rivalries worse pretty much across the board. I’m solidly in the camp that going back to the 90’s and watching even elite teams play is kind of painful because of the style of play, but the storylines were clearly better.
 
Sure, but the discussion you jumped into the middle of was comparing the early 2000s to the current day. The 80s and 90s is a different discussion, but the complete lack of talent disparity makes that a non starter for me
You said the Golden Age of college basketball is right now (current.) I said it was late 70's early 80's.

You responded to Cardiac who said only argument addition he would have is he would say Mid- 2000's CBB may have been up there. He would honestly just say like 2004-5 Modern day has been golden age.

I strongly disagree with this, I think the late 70's early 80's was the Golden Age. I also think the mid 90's was better than 2004-5 through Modern day (current.)
 
Yes, today is the golden age of the NBA. The last 10-15 years or so is the most talented and best basketball it's ever been. If you like watching 80-75 rock fights I'm sure you can find a fun high school league to follow

Are the rivalries are better today than in the 90s? Is there even a real rivalry in the NBA right now? Competition in the 90s was fierce.

I fully understand that the players on a whole are more talented, but the proliferation of endless 3s isn't appealing to me as a fan.
 
You said the Golden Age of college basketball is right now (current.) I said it was late 70's early 80's.

You responded to Cardiac who said only argument addition he would have is he would say Mid- 2000's CBB may have been up there. He would honestly just say like 2004-5 Modern day has been golden age.

I strongly disagree with this, I think the late 70's early 80's was the Golden Age. I also think the mid 90's was better than 2004-5 through Modern day (current.)
Agree to disagree
 
Not better than the early 80's and mid 90's where all the top players stayed in college. The top players who are first round talents and many who are second round talents leave right away now.
Equivalent of Flagg, Dysbantsa, Boozer, DP, M Brown staying till their junior year. College was cultivating NBA stars for 3 years back then, so we got to see them blossom in a college uniform. Hard to beat that.
 
Advances in strategy, training, sports science, etc.
The players aren't bigger, stronger, faster, jump higher than the players in the 90's and 2000's. The style of play has changed, there's more guys who can handle the ball and shoot threes really well now and they're given far more room/leeway with crab dribbles, step backs, Euro steps, foul baiting etc. The game is a lot more spaced now and much more dependent on three point shooting and more analytically advanced but these guys don't have the post moves/bang in the paint that those guys did/finishing through contact and Jalen Duren and Zion Williamson are about the only guys who looks like they could hang physically with Karl Malone, Shaq, David Robinson, Barkley, Anthony Mason, Ben Wallace, Kevin Willis etc.
 
Last edited:
.-.
The players aren't bigger, stronger, faster, jump higher than the players in the 90's and 2000's. The style of play has changed, there's more guys who can handle the ball and shoot threes really well now and they're given far room/leeway with crab dribbles, step backs, Euro steps, foul baiting etc. The game is a lot more spaced now and much more dependent on three point shooting and more analytically advanced but these guys don't have the post moves/bang in the paint that those guys did/finishing through contact and Jalen Duren and Zion Williamson are about the only guys who looks like they could hang physically with Karl Malone, Shaq, David Robinson, Barkley, Anthony Mason, Ben Wallace, Kevin Willis etc.
I always like to say the swing men today of Edward’s, Tatum, Booker, etc. aren’t holding a candle to Kobe, T Mac, Vince, Ray and many more. Athletically, skill wise, all of that.

This isn’t including the young Bron, Melo, Wade that was during that time too. 90s were for the bigs. 2000s were for the swingmen and true PGs.

2010s had some of the most athletic freak PGs we ever saw.
 
Are the rivalries are better today than in the 90s? Is there even a real rivalry in the NBA right now? Competition in the 90s was fierce.

I fully understand that the players on a whole are more talented, but the proliferation of endless 3s isn't appealing to me as a fan.
Probably not better rivalries, but is that really important? I'd much rather watch the 2 best teams play great games every year than it be 2 "rivals"
 
Probably not better rivalries, but is that really important? I'd much rather watch the 2 best teams play great games every year than it be 2 "rivals"
Nothing beats rivalry’s when both teams are great and the games are meaningful, ie Sox Yanks 2004. It sure as hell beats a Rangers/Dbacks WS. Duke and UNC when it was K and Roy. Doesn’t have to be the best two teams, just good ones in meaningful games. Sports are always best when the game means that much more. Read page 211 of Hurley’s book.

College FB at this point has the best rivalries, driven by the massive fan bases and culture. Not sure they really exist anymore at the pro level.
 
Nothing beats rivalry’s when both teams are great and the games are meaningful, ie Sox Yanks 2004. It sure as hell beats a Rangers/Dbacks WS. Duke and UNC when it was K and Roy. Doesn’t have to be the best two teams, just good ones in meaningful games. Sports are always best when the game means that much more. Read page 211 of Hurley’s book.

College FB at this point has the best rivalries, driven by the massive fan bases and culture. Not sure they really exist anymore at the pro level.
Ohio State Michigan always feels like the most important game of the year no matter the record.

Those rivalries definitely just have a different feel to them.
 
NBA: late 80s to late 90s
MLB: mid 90s to late 2010s
NFL: 2000s
CBB: early 80s to early 2010s

The more I type this I think most people born anytime around 1975 to 1995 prefer the 90s.
 
NBA: late 80s to late 90s
MLB: mid 90s to late 2010s
NFL: 2000s
CBB: early 80s to early 2010s

The more I type this I think most people born anytime around 1975 to 1995 prefer the 90s.
So:

MLB - Yanks fan
NFL - Pats fan
NBA - Bulls fan

That’s a wide era for CBB
 
.-.
Probably not better rivalries, but is that really important? I'd much rather watch the 2 best teams play great games every year than it be 2 "rivals"
Rivalries and "hating" your opponent makes sports so much better. It's why Yankees Red Sox, Ohio State Michigan, Duke UNC, Bama Auburn are still awesome and such major events whenever they play. It's probably not what it once was but those rivalries are so ingrained that they still hold up.

Celtics/Lakers, Bulls/Knicks, Knicks/Pacers, Knicks/Heat etc. That's the last of it I can remember in the NBA. We don't have anything that approaches anything like that in the sport and College has lost so much of it. It seriously detracts from the sport. It's a different time, all these guys hang out with each other now, have dinner together, train and play ball with each other in the offseason.
 
Nothing beats rivalry’s when both teams are great and the games are meaningful, ie Sox Yanks 2004. It sure as hell beats a Rangers/Dbacks WS. Duke and UNC when it was K and Roy. Doesn’t have to be the best two teams, just good ones in meaningful games. Sports are always best when the game means that much more. Read page 211 of Hurley’s book.

College FB at this point has the best rivalries, driven by the massive fan bases and culture. Not sure they really exist anymore at the pro level.
Rivalries and "hating" your opponent makes sports so much better. It's why Yankees Red Sox, Ohio State Michigan, Duke UNC, Bama Auburn are still awesome and such major events whenever they play. It's probably not what it once was but those rivalries are so ingrained that they still hold up.

Celtics/Lakers, Bulls/Knicks, Knicks/Pacers, Knicks/Heat etc. That's the last of it I can remember in the NBA. We don't have anything that approaches anything like that in the sport and College has lost so much of it. It seriously detracts from the sport. It's a different time, all these guys hang out with each other now, have dinner together, train and play ball with each other in the offseason.
You guys are missing the point I'm making. As a UConn fan it might be more satisfying to watch UConn beat Syracuse in 2024 to win a national championship. What I'm saying is as a neutral observer I'd much rather watch UConn and Purdue match up as the clear 2 best teams all season. Outside of fans of those 2 specific teams I really don't think rivalries hold much power
 
You guys are missing the point I'm making. As a UConn fan it might be more satisfying to watch UConn beat Syracuse in 2024 to win a national championship. What I'm saying is as a neutral observer I'd much rather watch UConn and Purdue match up as the clear 2 best teams all season. Outside of fans of those 2 specific teams I really don't think rivalries hold much power
Yeah, we disagree.

I don't care who UConn beats as long as we win it all. UConn never had a truly great rival but I would still much rather see them play Syracuse than Oklahoma State or a similarly rated team even though the juice that was once there in the "rivalry" is mostly gone.

As a neutral observer I would much rather see Ohio State play Michigan than Washington.
 
Yeah, we disagree.

I don't care who UConn beats as long as we win it all. UConn never had a truly great rival but I would still much rather see them play Syracuse than Oklahoma State or a similarly rated team even though the juice that was once there in the "rivalry" is mostly gone.

As a neutral observer I would much rather see Ohio State play Michigan than Washington.
Yeah UConn is probably a bad example because it's a team we all root for. But I think you're in a pretty massive minority in rooting for rivalry matchups over the best teams. That's a very outdated mindset
 
Yeah, we disagree.

I don't care who UConn beats as long as we win it all. UConn never had a truly great rival but I would still much rather see them play Syracuse than Oklahoma State or a similarly rated team even though the juice that was once there in the "rivalry" is mostly gone.

As a neutral observer I would much rather see Ohio State play Michigan than Washington.
Even for that 2023(?) playoffs, the Michigan Alabama Rose Bowl was a much better game than Washington and it’s not like Washington wasn’t great. They had the better QB, offense, just beat Texas etc.

The tradition of both programs playing a game in that historic venue just meant more though. These things matter when it comes to the storytelling and emotions sports can have. Honestly would rather us setup a non-conference with Syracuse every year than play BYU or Arizona.

Even though both teams weren’t necessarily great, that first time Dan Hurley played Syracuse just felt like it meant a lot.
 
The players aren't bigger, stronger, faster, jump higher than the players in the 90's and 2000's. The style of play has changed, there's more guys who can handle the ball and shoot threes really well now and they're given far more room/leeway with crab dribbles, step backs, Euro steps, foul baiting etc. The game is a lot more spaced now and much more dependent on three point shooting and more analytically advanced but these guys don't have the post moves/bang in the paint that those guys did/finishing through contact and Jalen Duren and Zion Williamson are about the only guys who looks like they could hang physically with Karl Malone, Shaq, David Robinson, Barkley, Anthony Mason, Ben Wallace, Kevin Willis etc.
You have nostalgic bias and thats okay. I’m sure I will with the next generation. Players don’t need to “bang” and hang physically with those guys you mentioned. Many of those guys now will be put in the pNr or isolated on the perimeter and taken advantage of. That’s how eras work.

Bigger and stronger, maybe not. But faster, more quick twitch, more versatile and ambidextrous, more processing power, etc yeah, this era clears.
 
.-.
Not reading what the old heads need to say in this thread and causing myself undo stress.

The answer is simple to me. The talent level, skill and athleticism are all better than every before. Better training, S&C, analytics, and a bigger pool of players to draw from internationally have all made that possible.

Golden age? Depends how you define it. The league is certainly not more watchable despite the high level of play. Outside of UConn alum and the Celts I get pretty bored watchi g tje game. It's too expensive for your average fan to watch. Young people only watch highlights.
 
Yeah UConn is probably a bad example because it's a team we all root for. But I think you're in a pretty massive minority in rooting for rivalry matchups over the best teams. That's a very outdated mindset
I'm not. You said as a neutral supporter, you're not a neutral supporter of any UConn game. I tried to give examples of teams being in somewhat even standing playing each other and I would much rather watch "rivals" play each other in those instances.
 
Yeah UConn is probably a bad example because it's a team we all root for. But I think you're in a pretty massive minority in rooting for rivalry matchups over the best teams. That's a very outdated mindset
Agreed. If it was #1 Michigan vs #2 Washington, I would rather watch that than #1 Michigan vs #10 Ohio State.

If they were same ranked I guess i’d rather watch the rivalry more, but it wouldn’t really impact me too much.
 
Not reading what the old heads need to say in this thread and causing myself undo stress.

The answer is simple to me. The talent level, skill and athleticism are all better than every before. Better training, S&C, analytics, and a bigger pool of players to draw from internationally have all made that possible.

Golden age? Depends how you define it. The league is certainly not more watchable despite the high level of play. Outside of UConn alum and the Celts I get pretty bored watchi g tje game. It's too expensive for your average fan to watch. Young people only watch highlights.
NBA players now aren't bigger, stronger, faster, don't jump higher than the players in the 90's and 2000's.
 
I'm not. You said as a neutral supporter, you're not a neutral supporter of any UConn game. I tried to give examples of teams being in somewhat even standing playing each other and I would much rather watch "rivals" play each other in those instances.
I used UConn as an example because it's a team and rivalry we're a familiar with. If you'd rather I use Michigan/Ohio State or Duke/UNC as an example I can.

I understand you would rather watch 2 rivals than 2 good teams play, I am telling you that's a minority opinion. That is why these rivalries are fading into the abyss, fans care less and less about rivalries and more about watching the best teams play
 
Agreed. If it was #1 Michigan vs #2 Washington, I would rather watch that than #1 Michigan vs #10 Ohio State.

If they were same ranked I guess i’d rather watch the rivalry more, but it wouldn’t really impact me too much.
This is exactly my point, all things equal then sure a rivalry game might be a little better. But I just want to watch the best teams play each other
 
.-.
I used UConn as an example because it's a team and rivalry we're a familiar with. If you'd rather I use Michigan/Ohio State or Duke/UNC as an example I can.

I understand you would rather watch 2 rivals than 2 good teams play, I am telling you that's a minority opinion. That is why these rivalries are fading into the abyss, fans care less and less about rivalries and more about watching the best teams play
Again, you aren't understanding what I'm saying. That's not at all what I said.

Using UConn is fine but you're obviously not a neutral observer when it comes to UConn games.
 
This is exactly my point, all things equal then sure a rivalry game might be a little better.
That's what I was trying to convey to you but I would much rather watch the rivalry game between teams on equal footing/similarly ranked than watch a game between two teams who have no real connection who are on equal footing/similarly ranked.
 
I used UConn as an example because it's a team and rivalry we're a familiar with. If you'd rather I use Michigan/Ohio State or Duke/UNC as an example I can.

I understand you would rather watch 2 rivals than 2 good teams play, I am telling you that's a minority opinion. That is why these rivalries are fading into the abyss, fans care less and less about rivalries and more about watching the best teams play
As a Michigan fan, I miss our rivalry with Notre Dame in the OOC. Texas and Oklahoma games were very meh.
 
Again, you aren't understanding what I'm saying. That's not at all what I said.

Using UConn is fine but you're obviously not a neutral observer when it comes to UConn games.
Obviously, I only used UConn because it was the most recent title game that matched up #1 vs #2 that I could remember. And I'm saying OTHER actual neutral observers would rather see UConn/Purdue than UConn/Syracuse
 
College basketball All-American teams recently...

2024-2025
1st team- Johni Broome, Walter Clayton, Cooper Flagg, Mark Sears, Braden Smith

2nd team- PJ Haggerty, Kam Jones, RJ Luis, John Tonje, JT Toppin

3rd team- LJ Cryer, Hunter Dickinson, Eric Dixon, Ryan Kalkbrenner, Zakai Zeigler

2023-2024
1st team- RJ Davis, Zach Edey, Dalton Knecht, Tristen Newton, Jamal Shead

2nd team- Hunter Dickinson, Kyle Filipowski, DaRon Holmes, Tyler Kolek, Mark Sears

3rd team- Johni Broome, Jaedon LeDee, Caleb Love, Baylor Scheierman, Terrence Shannon

Back in the day...

1984-1985
1st team- Patrick Ewing, Keith Lee, Xavier McDaniel, Chris Mullin, Wayman Tisdale

2nd team- Len Bias, Johnny Dawkins, Jon Koncak, Mark Price, Kenny Walker

3rd team- AC Green, Alfrederick Hughes, Roy Tarpley, Sam Vincent, Pearl Washington

1983-1984
1st team- Patrick Ewing, Michael Jordan, Hakeem Olajuwon, Sam Perkins, Wayman Tisdale

2nd team- Sam Bowie, Michael Cage, Devin Durrant, Chris Mullin, Leon Wood

3rd team- Lorenzo Charles, Keith Lee, Alvin Robertson, Melvin Turpin, Michael Young

1982-1983
1st team- Dale Ellis, Patrick Ewing, Michael Jordan, Ralph Sampson, Wayman Tisdale

2nd team- Clyde Drexler, Derek Harper, Keith Lee, Steve Stepanovich, Darrell Walker

3rd team- Antoine Carr, Kenny Fields, Sam Perkins, John Pinone, Ennis Whatley

1981- 1982
1st team- Terry Cummings, Quintin Dailey, Sleepy Floyd, Kevin Magee, Ralph Sampson

2nd team- Lester Conner, Dale Ellis, Keith Lee, Terry Teagle, James Worthy

3rd team- Dan Callandrillo, Ricky Frazier, Ricky Pierce, Paul Pressey, Dominique Wilkins

I'm not even getting into the late 70s teams with Bird, Magic, and Moncrief
To be fair, it is fundamentally impossible for the names of college players from the past two seasons to carry the weight of those you’re contrasting them with because their lasting legacies or lack thereof has yet to be determined.
 
Obviously, I only used UConn because it was the most recent title game that matched up #1 vs #2 that I could remember. And I'm saying OTHER actual neutral observers would rather see UConn/Purdue than UConn/Syracuse
Oklahoma State isn't a very good power conference team, same goes for Syracuse. It's why I used them as an example. I would rather see UConn play the old "rival" Syracuse.

I used Washington as an example because I think they are on pretty equal footing with Michigan. I'll make it a point to tune into Ohio State playing Michigan. I don't know if Ohio State has Washington on the schedule but if they do I don't care about that game.
 
.-.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,182
Messages
4,555,991
Members
10,441
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom