Why I no longer follow men's basketball.

[UcMiami]

Husky25 got me thinking about this from the we are doomed thread. I used to play basketball every chance I got, and lived and died with what the Celtics were doing, but starting maybe ten years ago, I lost my passion for the game. And today I started thinking about reasons.
1. In the Pros - free agency and the players running the asylum changed the nature of supporting a team from a 15 year love affair to a 1 year hired gunslinger mentality. I know there are still superstars that play their entire career with one team, but they are getting rarer, and if you have two players remain with the same team for 5 straight years you count yourself lucky. The rotating of rosters year after year, especially on such small rosters makes it hard to 'identify' as a fan.
2. College - the revolving door here is with the good players leaving for the pros after one or at most two years. Recruiting has become the biggest determining factor to success and it is not a fan friendly aspect of the game! And a victory in recruiting is a one year wonder. And the product on the floor in terms of real team play suffers - coaches don't have a team long enough to teach anything of real substance. And all the parity in MCBB is actually a result of the best players leaving early and not some great 'balancing' of talent - the mid majors have better success in the men's game because almost all of their players stick around 4 years so the coach can actually build a team and their team play can sometimes beat the raw talent on the elite teams.
3. The men's talent level has actually outgrown the game - it is too easy to score and impossible to really defend 1 on 1. This is where Husky25 comes in and the real reason for this post. I cannot think of another team game where the 'team' has become so irrelevant to the actual game. The amount of one on one play in men's basketball is incredible and really unlike any other team game I can think of in college or pros. Yes superstars shine in other team games, but for them to shine, they need the rest of the team to be working in tandem with them. Obviously a single player cannot win in basketball 1 on 5, but offensively they basically can. I think this may actually hark back to Michael Jordan's arrival in the pros and the 'I am going to score the winning basket now and all 5 of you guys aren't going to be able to stop me'.
4. Geno started a small fire storm in WCBB by saying they should lower the basket - I think he got it wrong. I think the men should raise the basket 12-18" and maybe make it smaller. I would like to see a dunk actually be special and limited to tall guys and not guards (throw back to 1960's/70s.) I would like a guy falling out of bounds as he shoots a jump shot to have a less than 50% chance of making it. Those changes would bring team back into offense and reintroduce difficulty into scoring. Not going to happen, but ... (Think of all the changes to golf course design that have happened over the last 15 years driven by Tiger and other players getting 'too good' and technological advances in equipment. Masters didn't have rough when Tiger first won and they have lengthened the course by something like 1000 yards. There was a Ryder cup where the Europeans added a band of rough across the fairway to prevent long drives, etc.)

I would actually really like to hear comments about #3 above specifically. And the idea of team play vs. individual play in other team sports.

 

[OneTrickPony]

Your number 4 would be a good start...making the court bigger would help. as well...

 

[Wally East]

I looked at last year and then jumped back a decade a few times.


Year FG% 3pt% 2pt%
2012 44.8% 34.9% 47.7%
2002 44.5% 35.4% 46.5%
1992 47.2% 33.1% 48.6%
1982 49.1% 26.2% 49.7%
1972 45.5% 45.5%

The last column is just 2-point basket FG%. So, there was a jump from 1972 to 1982 but it's been pretty steady since. I can look at more years but I don't think the stats support your hypothesis about the increasing ease with which someone can score.

 

[RS9999X]

Nationally people watch the Playoffs. Regular Season viewership just keeps declining except for marquee matches. The only salvation there is regional where there are pockets of strength and overall a 2.0 is just enough to give it some traction on cable.

It's not as bad as the late 70s when the ABA merged. It's become like pro-wrestling: a manufactured event where the large markets create a tag team of villains and heroes. Ron Artest to the Lakers?

The game has always had its critics "Watch the last 3 minutes. It's worse than golf"

 

[RS9999X]

There are those in the NBA who want contraction because the small markets and dilution are 'ruining' the game

Restrict the Rosters to 10 plus 2 reserves, restrict each division to 12 teams, and shorten the regular season by 20 games creating more parity and better matchups.

 

[Icebear]

People watch the NBA?

 

[VAUConnFan]

1. More people are playing the game
2. Better athletes are playing the game
3. Stronger athletes are playing the game
4. Defenses are much, much better and much more intense which is why more players take to break down defenses individually to creat offense.
5. Offenses are much more sophisticated than they ever were in the game the OP grew up to love
6. Because of the better defenses, it is much harder for teams to run plays; especially plays that have been well scouted.
7. Men's basketball is as good as it ever was, although your assessments are valid.

But, if you like a game played below the rim, then, yes, women's basketball is the game for you. However, I dare say that those here who claim to love women's basketball really only love UConn women's basketball. The overwhelming majority of women's teams do not play the game the way UConn plays it. UConn can play that splendid game because they have the absolute best players.

I like both games. Enjoy them both immensely. Last week's men's national championship was an affirmation of just how good a game can be when the best of the best go at it. The game of the 50's gave way to the game of the 60's, the game fo the 60's gave way...

Why would anyone have a problem with a player changing teams? Especially when there is more money involved. In the working world, do we not change jobs, seek promotions, network, seek training and education to increase our prospects? Sports is a business. Players change teams, owners and general managers trade players, release productive players due to financial considerations. College sports is a huge business in which there are going to be drastic changes in the next few years that may address concerns about players leaving early.

 

[DaddyChoc]

1. More people are playing the game
2. Better athletes are playing the game
3. Stronger athletes are playing the game
4. Defenses are much, much better and much more intense which is why more players take to break down defenses individually to creat offense.
5. Offenses are much more sophisticated than they ever were in the game the OP grew up to love
6. Because of the better defenses, it is much harder for teams to run plays; especially plays that have been well scouted.
7. Men's basketball is as good as it ever was, although your assessments are valid.

But, if you like a game played below the rim, then, yes, women's basketball is the game for you. However, I dare say that those here who claim to love women's basketball really only love UConn women's basketball. The overwhelming majority of women's teams do not play the game the way UConn plays it. UConn can play that splendid game because they have the absolute best players.

I like both games. Enjoy them both immensely. Last week's men's national championship was an affirmation of just how good a game can be when the best of the best go at it. The game of the 50's gave way to the game of the 60's, the game fo the 60's gave way...

Why would anyone have a problem with a player changing teams? Especially when there is more money involved. In the working world, do we not change jobs, seek promotions, network, seek training and education to increase our prospects? Sports is a business. Players change teams, owners and general managers trade players, release productive players due to financial considerations. College sports is a huge business in which there are going to be drastic changes in the next few years that may address concerns about players leaving early.

well said

 

[RockyMTblue2]

I have thought for a decade and more that the rim should be raised and the court made bigger. Today it is still a sport, but I would not call it basketball. It fluctuates between barely controlled chaos and a total lack of defense because who wants to get in the way of that! As a demonstration of OMG athleticism it is impressive, but as a spectator sport not so much.

 

[DaddyChoc]

let's not change the rules now... can't help it cause the guys are bigger, stronger and more skilled (or athletic).

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

But, if you like a game played below the rim, then, yes, women's basketball is the game for you. However, I dare say that those here who claim to love women's basketball really only love UConn women's basketball. The overwhelming majority of women's teams do not play the game the way UConn plays it. UConn can play that splendid game because they have the absolute best players.


Why would anyone have a problem with a player changing teams? Especially when there is more money involved. College sports is a huge business in which there are going to be drastic changes in the next few years that may address concerns about players leaving early.

I wanted to quote a few of your remarks so I sound coherent.

For the most part, I agree with the OP, although I actually have never much cared for men's basketball. But I don't object that how it is played is quite entertaining if you like it, the same applies to women's basketball and tiddly winks. But the constant players changing teams is an issue - and the one and gone in college - for the enjoyment of following a "team". Teams are not about retaining talent, and if they were they would find the money, I think.

As to your claim about WBB fans, there is probably some truth that a lot of UConn fans are attracted to UConn's style. But in general, I hope there are some (like myself) that just enjoy the sport more. It is always more team oriented, it is played at a pace I enjoy, there are true stars that you can follow for 4 seasons, etc.

And for me, the fan base. Most women's fan bases are not like men's fans - I have said before how I attended the NIT semi's in MSG when RU was in them maybe 10 years ago, and I was appalled at the fans, Rutgers and otherwise. Vulger, taunting, rude, caring only about their team and demeaning the opponent. For the most part, women's fans are completely different.

 

[UcMiami]

WallyEast - thanks for the stats. But I would counter that the percentage may be because the players of yesteryear actually worked as a team to get good open shots, and today's stars don't bother.
And other responses:
I am not saying that players should not be allowed to chase the money in free agency, I am just saying that it makes it harder to be a fan of a team when the roster turnover is so high and the team you supported two years ago is now made up of players you rooted against and are playing against your heroes from that same team.
And I admit to loving watching Uconn WCBB and not so much for a lot of other teams who do not play a very 'pretty' game. But I do like other teams that do play good ball, and the number of those teams continue to expand.
Not sure the defense is the reason for the 1 on 1 play - I actually think it is the reverse. The ball moves faster than any player can, and a good offensive team should be able to manipulate a team defense into leaving an opening.

 

[hthusky74]

Husky25 got me thinking about this from the we are doomed thread. I used to play basketball every chance I got, and lived and died with what the Celtics were doing, but starting maybe ten years ago, I lost my passion for the game. And today I started thinking about reasons.
1. In the Pros - free agency and the players running the asylum changed the nature of supporting a team from a 15 year love affair to a 1 year hired gunslinger mentality. I know there are still superstars that play their entire career with one team, but they are getting rarer, and if you have two players remain with the same team for 5 straight years you count yourself lucky. The rotating of rosters year after year, especially on such small rosters makes it hard to 'identify' as a fan.
2. College - the revolving door here is with the good players leaving for the pros after one or at most two years. Recruiting has become the biggest determining factor to success and it is not a fan friendly aspect of the game! And a victory in recruiting is a one year wonder. And the product on the floor in terms of real team play suffers - coaches don't have a team long enough to teach anything of real substance. And all the parity in MCBB is actually a result of the best players leaving early and not some great 'balancing' of talent - the mid majors have better success in the men's game because almost all of their players stick around 4 years so the coach can actually build a team and their team play can sometimes beat the raw talent on the elite teams.
3. The men's talent level has actually outgrown the game - it is too easy to score and impossible to really defend 1 on 1. This is where Husky25 comes in and the real reason for this post. I cannot think of another team game where the 'team' has become so irrelevant to the actual game. The amount of one on one play in men's basketball is incredible and really unlike any other team game I can think of in college or pros. Yes superstars shine in other team games, but for them to shine, they need the rest of the team to be working in tandem with them. Obviously a single player cannot win in basketball 1 on 5, but offensively they basically can. I think this may actually hark back to Michael Jordan's arrival in the pros and the 'I am going to score the winning basket now and all 5 of you guys aren't going to be able to stop me'.
4. Geno started a small fire storm in WCBB by saying they should lower the basket - I think he got it wrong. I think the men should raise the basket 12-18" and maybe make it smaller. I would like to see a dunk actually be special and limited to tall guys and not guards (throw back to 1960's/70s.) I would like a guy falling out of bounds as he shoots a jump shot to have a less than 50% chance of making it. Those changes would bring team back into offense and reintroduce difficulty into scoring. Not going to happen, but ... (Think of all the changes to golf course design that have happened over the last 15 years driven by Tiger and other players getting 'too good' and technological advances in equipment. Masters didn't have rough when Tiger first won and they have lengthened the course by something like 1000 yards. There was a Ryder cup where the Europeans added a band of rough across the fairway to prevent long drives, etc.)

I would actually really like to hear comments about #3 above specifically. And the idea of team play vs. individual play in other team sports.

I think you sort of answered your own question in #3. The NBA should make zone defense legal. That would cut down on the one-on-one. They won't do it, sadly, because there are too many rubes who like to see the flamboyant on-on one plays, especially when they culminate in dunks.

 

[msgordon]

I think you sort of answered your own question in #3. The NBA should make zone defense legal. That would cut down on the one-on-one. They won't do it, sadly, because there are too many rubes who like to see the flamboyant on-on one plays, especially when they culminate in dunks.

zone defense has been legal in the NBA for over 10 years. nothing more annoying than the people who dont watch the NBA complaining about it

 

[bmayuc]

WallyEast - thanks for the stats. But I would counter that the percentage may be because the players of yesteryear actually worked as a team to get good open shots, and today's stars don't bother.
And other responses:
I am not saying that players should not be allowed to chase the money in free agency, I am just saying that it makes it harder to be a fan of a team when the roster turnover is so high and the team you supported two years ago is now made up of players you rooted against and are playing against your heroes from that same team.
And I admit to loving watching Uconn WCBB and not so much for a lot of other teams who do not play a very 'pretty' game. But I do like other teams that do play good ball, and the number of those teams continue to expand.
Not sure the defense is the reason for the 1 on 1 play - I actually think it is the reverse. The ball moves faster than any player can, and a good offensive team should be able to manipulate a team defense into leaving an opening.

I hate when people knock current NBA level play by comparing it to inferior play of yersteryear.

No offense to the past, but basketball is an evolutionary game.defenses and offenses are far superior now to a generation before.bigger, stronger, faster, and superior skilled athletes Patti the game.

The strategy is far superior, as its the overall coaching and tactics.

Players didn't "work harder to get good shots." Just as college players look like they are playing harder because they are not as efficient as pros, the same applies to older generations.

Shooting and roles have become more specialized, but offense is so much cleaner and crisp now.

If you like basketball, please enjoy the LEBRON/DURANT era for the next few years because you are seeing unmatched levels of play. Its reallt phenomenal.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[superjohn]

This thread is beyond ridiculous, a bunch of people that don't follow the NBA commenting on why the NBA isn't any good.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

This thread is beyond ridiculous, a bunch of people that don't follow the NBA commenting on why the NBA isn't any good.

Don't include me in thinking the NBA isn't any good. The skill level is amazing.

My issue is I just don't enjoy the men's game, but do enjoy the women's. But it certainly isn't because I don't think the men's game is any good. I don't know what exactly it is about the game, although I mentioned some things above. FWIW, hockey is the reverse of basketball for me, although I don't follow it any more, I genuinely enjoy watching men's ice hockey; I have watched a few women's games and didn't enjoy them at all.

 

[UcMiami]

Hey - I think the men are incredible athletes and players - but I don't care to watch it anymore. And I do not think I am alone in that. Not sure how the league finances are doing - probably just fine without my 'dollars'. And I do think the skill of the players has outdistanced the difficulty of the game. I like team games where scoring is a little difficult. As I said, I think men's basketball is the least team oriented game around and I happen to enjoy the interaction of teammates in games.
And as for not following mens basketball - true, I no longer do until the finals. But I did follow it for the first 40 years of my life. (And I did know that limited zone defenses are allowed now - by the way, a change made in the rules specifically to make scoring and 1 on 1 play a little harder. Personally I don't think they went far enough! )

 

[UcMiami]

Oh yeah and just to confirm my fuddy duddy nature -
I think slam dunk contests are some of the stupidest events around.
I think touchdown celebrations and sack dances are silly and am reminded every time I see one of I think Chris Carter's comment to a rookie teammate - 'Son, please act as if you've been there before!'
Most of the x-games leave me bored - any sport that requires judges voting to determine a winner is not a real sport. (Includes figure skating, and gymnastics too - 'and the russian judge gives a __' - Please!)
Sure there are other things to list but it is late and I am forgetful!

 

[Fishy]

Zone defense in the NBA is well-established and the limitations (defensive three-seconds) are only there to avoid teams packing the lane. Ironically, I suspect if they were instituting zones for the first time these days, they might not have bothered with that restriction - the players it was designed to protect have almost gone the way of the dodo. (The franchise center.)

It's all right to prefer women's college hoop to the NBA, but your reasoning is odd.

Personally, I prefer men's college basketball to the NBA - mostly because I have a stronger connection to UConn than I do to the New York Knicks. But I can't argue that men's college hoop is superior to the NBA in any facet of the game - women's basketball is even farther down the totem pole.

Offense, defense, team play, individual play, shooting, rebounding - doesn't matter. The NBA does it better than whatever else you want to put up against it. They're playing a fundamentally sounder, purer and more precise game than the stumbling, bumbling college players that we prefer.

But I agree - slam dunk contests are inane. We can stop now - all the dunks have been done.

 

[Icebear]

Don't include me in thinking the NBA isn't any good. The skill level is amazing.

My issue is I just don't enjoy the men's game, but do enjoy the women's. But it certainly isn't because I don't think the men's game is any good. I don't know what exactly it is about the game, although I mentioned some things above. FWIW, hockey is the reverse of basketball for me, although I don't follow it any more, I genuinely enjoy watching men's ice hockey; I have watched a few women's games and didn't enjoy them at all.

Bingo and well said. I watch the NBA enough to know I don't enjoy it. Most of what I watch is based on the playoffs. It's the style of the game I don't enjoy. The athleticism is through the roof. But it just isn't interesting to me.

 

[bmayuc]

Zone defense in the NBA is well-established and the limitations (defensive three-seconds) are only there to avoid teams packing the lane. Ironically, I suspect if they were instituting zones for the first time these days, they might not have bothered with that restriction - the players it was designed to protect have almost gone the way of the dodo. (The franchise center.)

It's all right to prefer women's college hoop to the NBA, but your reasoning is odd.

Personally, I prefer men's college basketball to the NBA - mostly because I have a stronger connection to UConn than I do to the New York Knicks. But I can't argue that men's college hoop is superior to the NBA in any facet of the game - women's basketball is even farther down the totem pole.

Offense, defense, team play, individual play, shooting, rebounding - doesn't matter. The NBA does it better than whatever else you want to put up against it. They're playing a fundamentally sounder, purer and more precise game than the stumbling, bumbling college players that we prefer.

But I agree - slam dunk contests are inane. We can stop now - all the dunks have been done.

Still waiting for the obvious double windmill!

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[cohenzone]

I don't watch the NBA at all anymore, mainly because there is a sameness to me from one game to the next that doesn't exist at the college level. I like the men 's college game, but the focus on who will leave early is a total turn off. That whole thing needs to be fixed.

I think raising the rims would make the game more big man dominant than ever. Dunks are what they are and don't bother me. Unlike golf, where the athleticism of the modern player is ridiculously aided by equipment that only amateurs should be allowed to use, there is nothing in hoops that has changed other than the size and skill set of the players and the physicality of the game. But supposedly the reason hoops players are sometimes called "cagers" is because in early years of the game, play was so rough that netting was used to surround the court to minimize the results of the rough play.

 

[Ozzie Nelson]

I love BB at all levels...watch when I can. What I hate is that I can no longer play the game with any grace.

 

[Husky25]

Husky25 got me thinking about this from the we are doomed thread. I used to play basketball every chance I got, and lived and died with what the Celtics were doing, but starting maybe ten years ago, I lost my passion for the game. And today I started thinking about reasons.
1. In the Pros - free agency and the players running the asylum changed the nature of supporting a team from a 15 year love affair to a 1 year hired gunslinger mentality. I know there are still superstars that play their entire career with one team, but they are getting rarer, and if you have two players remain with the same team for 5 straight years you count yourself lucky. The rotating of rosters year after year, especially on such small rosters makes it hard to 'identify' as a fan.
2. College - the revolving door here is with the good players leaving for the pros after one or at most two years. Recruiting has become the biggest determining factor to success and it is not a fan friendly aspect of the game! And a victory in recruiting is a one year wonder. And the product on the floor in terms of real team play suffers - coaches don't have a team long enough to teach anything of real substance. And all the parity in MCBB is actually a result of the best players leaving early and not some great 'balancing' of talent - the mid majors have better success in the men's game because almost all of their players stick around 4 years so the coach can actually build a team and their team play can sometimes beat the raw talent on the elite teams.
3. The men's talent level has actually outgrown the game - it is too easy to score and impossible to really defend 1 on 1. This is where Husky25 comes in and the real reason for this post. I cannot think of another team game where the 'team' has become so irrelevant to the actual game. The amount of one on one play in men's basketball is incredible and really unlike any other team game I can think of in college or pros. Yes superstars shine in other team games, but for them to shine, they need the rest of the team to be working in tandem with them. Obviously a single player cannot win in basketball 1 on 5, but offensively they basically can. I think this may actually hark back to Michael Jordan's arrival in the pros and the 'I am going to score the winning basket now and all 5 of you guys aren't going to be able to stop me'.
4. Geno started a small fire storm in WCBB by saying they should lower the basket - I think he got it wrong. I think the men should raise the basket 12-18" and maybe make it smaller. I would like to see a dunk actually be special and limited to tall guys and not guards (throw back to 1960's/70s.) I would like a guy falling out of bounds as he shoots a jump shot to have a less than 50% chance of making it. Those changes would bring team back into offense and reintroduce difficulty into scoring. Not going to happen, but ... (Think of all the changes to golf course design that have happened over the last 15 years driven by Tiger and other players getting 'too good' and technological advances in equipment. Masters didn't have rough when Tiger first won and they have lengthened the course by something like 1000 yards. There was a Ryder cup where the Europeans added a band of rough across the fairway to prevent long drives, etc.)

I would actually really like to hear comments about #3 above specifically. And the idea of team play vs. individual play in other team sports.

This thread has nothing to do with me. At no point did I explicitly say, implicitly indicate, or otherwise intimate that I hate women basketball.

Other than the two sports calling themselves, basketball, I don't think they have much else to do with one another. I think the womens game is generally based in a more fundemental style and that the mens game can disguise its relative lack of fundementals with athletic superiority. If I were coaching a team of 6th graders, other than the designed plays, I would definitely show them a tape of UConn women. However, when you get a mens team that can combine superior athleticism AND fundementals (Duke, Georgetown (especially), UConn on occassion, Marquette, Michigan, Butler, Gonzaga, etc.) the mens game is far more athestically pleasing. It's an opinion. nothing else...

I am a fan of UConn mainly because I am an Alum (The winning isn't bad either). Calhoun's later teams drove me nuts because it always seemed they had no half court offense - including the 2011 NC team - and could only score off a miss or steal. It was great fun watching Princeton beat defending champions UCLA because (1) the underdog factor, and (2) the fundemental style of play. Because of that, I love watching the Georgetown (JTIII was on Carril and Carmody's staff.).