U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 04-01-2012, 03:09 PM
 
Location: The "Rock"
2,490 posts, read 1,198,577 times
Reputation: 1235
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life View Post
The NBA was majority black but you still had enough great white stars with visibility to the public so the league was still acceptable to mainstream america. You know the names; Bird, McHale, Ainge, Mullins, Chambers, Stockton, Price, Laimbeer, and so on. Back then, these were either All Stars or at least major contributors, so young kids from the suburbs had idols who looked like them, and that they could relate to.
There's just as many now...

White All Star Players from 1985 - 1994 (NBA's hey day)
1985 - 3
1986 - 2
1987 - 4
1988 - 3
1989 - 6
1990 - 5
1991 - 4
1992 - 5
1993 - 4
1994 - 2

Avg 3.8

White All Star Players from 2003-2012 (Present Day)
2003 - 4
2004 - 4
2005 - 4
2006 - 3
2007 - 2
2008 - 2
2009 - 2
2010 - 5
2011 - 4
2012 - 4

Avg 3.4

I don't think a drop off .4 percent is enough to say its drastically different. I also dont want to hear that because they are foreign is the problem. That is extremely short sited.

All that matters is if they are caucasian. If having Dominican's are good enough for baseball to count as black then Europeans are certainly good enough to count as white for basketball. In addition, black players are not separated out if they foreign... no one refers to Parker, Duncan, Motumbo, Deng, etc as foreign players.

Look... I do not doubt that "some" white americans are not comfortable with the NBA because it doesnt have enough white players. But this just does not represent the majority. Black people only make up 12% of the population. So white people MUST be ok with the sport as they are vast majority of the people going to the games and watching them on TV. As a well buying the merchandise.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-01-2012, 04:40 PM
 
Location: Cook County
5,285 posts, read 3,939,081 times
Reputation: 2989
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life View Post
paranoid??? I'm being realistic. And I think the NBA agrees with me. Why do you think they have been steadily cracking down on "thug behavior" (eg the dress codes of a few years ago)? Because they realize that having too many "thugs" which we can all agree is code for urban blacks, turns off mainstream america. This is also why the NBA is pretty much focused on marketing and expansion overseas. They know that the US is pretty much tapped out for them. It's ironic that you bring up the NBA peaking in the 80s, because that's probably the last time the NBA had the kind of balance you need to succeed in America. The NBA was majority black but you still had enough great white stars with visibility to the public so the league was still acceptable to mainstream america. You know the names; Bird, McHale, Ainge, Mullins, Chambers, Stockton, Price, Laimbeer, and so on. Back then, these were either All Stars or at least major contributors, so young kids from the suburbs had idols who looked like them, and that they could relate to.

If white suburban parents had to choose between Peyton Manning and Allen Iverson, or even Kobe Bryant, who do you think they will encourage their kids to follow? My money is on Peyton. And while we can all ignore the facts, the point that Peyton is someone they can relate to better than Iverson will play a role in their decision.
First, the thug aspect wasn't bad for basketball because it was black players involved, it was bad because thuggery takes away from the product of the game. I watch the NBA to see the game executed on the highest level, and players cheap shot-ing, getting ejected, etc takes away from the product. The NBA obviously realizes this hurts their bottom line and they react. They don't like thugs, it's not that they don't like black players. Same with the consumer.

Just like the NFL recognized there was a problem with concussions. Do you blame the concussions on racism as well? You are taking the result, but misidentifying the motivations behind it.

I love your example of comparing Mr Clean Cut Manning to AI who has had a checkered past, and Kobe who has been accused of rape. Stacking the deck much?

Come to chicago, ask people if they would rather have their kid be like Derrick Rose or just about ANY white athlete, and the vast majority will say Rose. Because he has qualities that are redeeming in any race.

Racism exists, but the venue to which you attribute racism to, is a flimsy argument that doesn't hold up.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2012, 04:49 PM
 
3,525 posts, read 1,451,260 times
Reputation: 2170
I really don't know many people who care too much about baseball...basketball, at least, people have something to say about it.

Maybe it's a regional thing..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2012, 04:52 PM
 
9,284 posts, read 11,151,451 times
Reputation: 9113
I don't like the current NBA product nor the Decision I NCAA product.

The NBA product suffers substantially from having so many very young players who do not have a great knowledge of the fundamentals. Certainly the superstars are as great as in prior periods but once you get down on the roster, the talent drops off. Compare the NBA of the 60s and 70s with the current product and it suffers by comparison.

The college game likewise suffers as the coach who can recruit the "one and outs" do better than those who try to develop their talent.

As to the post that the NBA has abandoned Missouri, the reality is that NBA teams did not draw well. And the Kings franchise has been on the move for years - Syracuse, Cincinnati, Kansas City, and Sacramento for the time being.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2012, 07:47 AM
 
Location: Wylie, Texas
1,123 posts, read 1,028,320 times
Reputation: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. GE View Post
There's just as many now...

White All Star Players from 1985 - 1994 (NBA's hey day)
1985 - 3
1986 - 2
1987 - 4
1988 - 3
1989 - 6
1990 - 5
1991 - 4
1992 - 5
1993 - 4
1994 - 2

Avg 3.8

White All Star Players from 2003-2012 (Present Day)
2003 - 4
2004 - 4
2005 - 4
2006 - 3
2007 - 2
2008 - 2
2009 - 2
2010 - 5
2011 - 4
2012 - 4

Avg 3.4

I don't think a drop off .4 percent is enough to say its drastically different. I also dont want to hear that because they are foreign is the problem. That is extremely short sited.

All that matters is if they are caucasian. If having Dominican's are good enough for baseball to count as black then Europeans are certainly good enough to count as white for basketball. In addition, black players are not separated out if they foreign... no one refers to Parker, Duncan, Motumbo, Deng, etc as foreign players.

Look... I do not doubt that "some" white americans are not comfortable with the NBA because it doesnt have enough white players. But this just does not represent the majority. Black people only make up 12% of the population. So white people MUST be ok with the sport as they are vast majority of the people going to the games and watching them on TV. As a well buying the merchandise.
Let me assure you, in the african american community, the black latino players are not considered "black". right or wrong, that's just what it is. Hailing from the Dominican republic, Panama, and all the other latin spots is not the same as being American. Heck many of the black latin players struggle speaking english! How exactly can they relate to the african americans here? They cannot, and they don't.

I agree that white people are the main buyers of NBA products, and they certainly buy a lot. The problem is that they are a declining portion for the NBA, and have been declining for quite a while. This is in contrast to the NFL, college football and basketball which have only been going up up up over the last decade. This is why the NBA has had to go overseas to find new customers. For better or worse, the white sports fan has increasingly gone away from the NBA. I won't say it's strictly racism, but to deny it has a part would be unrealistic.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2012, 07:53 AM
 
Location: Wylie, Texas
1,123 posts, read 1,028,320 times
Reputation: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orangeish View Post
First, the thug aspect wasn't bad for basketball because it was black players involved, it was bad because thuggery takes away from the product of the game. I watch the NBA to see the game executed on the highest level, and players cheap shot-ing, getting ejected, etc takes away from the product. The NBA obviously realizes this hurts their bottom line and they react. They don't like thugs, it's not that they don't like black players. Same with the consumer.

Just like the NFL recognized there was a problem with concussions. Do you blame the concussions on racism as well? You are taking the result, but misidentifying the motivations behind it.

I love your example of comparing Mr Clean Cut Manning to AI who has had a checkered past, and Kobe who has been accused of rape. Stacking the deck much?

Come to chicago, ask people if they would rather have their kid be like Derrick Rose or just about ANY white athlete, and the vast majority will say Rose. Because he has qualities that are redeeming in any race.

Racism exists, but the venue to which you attribute racism to, is a flimsy argument that doesn't hold up.
I picked Iverson and Kobe because they have been two of the biggest NBA stars in the post Jordan era. For better and for worse, they have been the face of the NBA. Peyton Manning has been one of the great NFL stars for much of the same time frame. The problem for the NBA is that their biggest stars have as you called it "checkered pasts". That helps for street cred with the hip hop crowd, but is a negative for suburban families. And this is where the NFL kicks butt. If you dont want Peyton, well how about Brady? or Brees? or dare I say it Tebow? Wholesome guys that you can make the face of your sport. This is why even though the NFL has its share of knuckleheads (probably more than the NBA), it doesnt suffer as much in comparison because the franchise guys are for the most part what they need to reach the suburban consumer.

Let me ask this, if Mike Vick had been an NBA superstar point guard I am willing to bet the NBA would have suffered as a sport FAR more than the NFL did. Perception becomes reality. If people perceive the NBA to be full of thugs then that becomes the reality, right or wrong.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2012, 08:50 AM
 
Location: Earth
3,526 posts, read 1,836,254 times
Reputation: 1528
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life View Post
I picked Iverson and Kobe because they have been two of the biggest NBA stars in the post Jordan era.
What about:

Shaquille O'neal ( retired now of course)
Lebron James
Dwyane Wade
Kevin Durant
Dwight Howard
Derrick Rose
Tim Duncan
Kevin Garnett
Chris Paul
Steve Nash
Dirk Nowitzki

All of these guys have/had mostly clean images, so why wouldn't they appeal to suburban families less than their NFL counterparts? Iverson was really only a 'face' of the league for a few years, mostly in the early 2000's it was Shaq, Kobe pre-rape trial, Vince Carter in his high flying Raptor days, Tmac in his Magic days, Garnett in Minnesota, etc. Once Kobe had the rape trial, the focus kind of turned onto Lebron as the 'face' of the league, and it's been that way ever since. Guys like Durant and Rose are quiet, humble types who are easy to root for, and poised to carry the league through 2020. Rose plays in a big market, and Durant( with Westbrook) is making basketball relevant in OKC. There's no reason I can see why they'd be any less marketable to suburban families that the Brees and Bradys of the NFL.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2012, 10:23 AM
 
29,786 posts, read 18,116,285 times
Reputation: 14583
Sorry, but thug is not code for black in the NBA.

The NBA definitely got an image problem there for a little while and Stern addressed it.
Remember, we had Bison Dele murdered by his brother? The shooting death of the limo driver by whats-his-face? Iverson (repeatedly) and so on and so forth.

Stern also addressed this year all the constant whining and berating of refs over foul calls which irritated fans.

Michael Jordan was VASTLY popular and to this day makes more endorsement money then the current stars even in retirement. He's pretty black, he's just not a thug.

I don't see how the NBA has risen to great heights with huge numbers of black stars and now suddenly people 20 years later are realizing "hey, I didn't know Michael Jordan and Pippen and Reggie Miller and Olajuwon and David Robinson and Shaq and Kobe and 100's more guys I could name....are black."

It's like saying people don't like Barry Bonds because he's black. Doesn't hold water.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2012, 10:26 AM
 
29,786 posts, read 18,116,285 times
Reputation: 14583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg1977 View Post
What about:

Shaquille O'neal ( retired now of course)
Lebron James
Dwyane Wade
Kevin Durant
Dwight Howard
Derrick Rose
Tim Duncan
Kevin Garnett
Chris Paul
Steve Nash
Dirk Nowitzki

All of these guys have/had mostly clean images, so why wouldn't they appeal to suburban families less than their NFL counterparts? Iverson was really only a 'face' of the league for a few years, mostly in the early 2000's it was Shaq, Kobe pre-rape trial, Vince Carter in his high flying Raptor days, Tmac in his Magic days, Garnett in Minnesota, etc. Once Kobe had the rape trial, the focus kind of turned onto Lebron as the 'face' of the league, and it's been that way ever since. Guys like Durant and Rose are quiet, humble types who are easy to root for, and poised to carry the league through 2020. Rose plays in a big market, and Durant( with Westbrook) is making basketball relevant in OKC. There's no reason I can see why they'd be any less marketable to suburban families that the Brees and Bradys of the NFL.
All the white suburban kids that cram my driveway to play basketball about every night (I have a big flat driveway and a hoop that instant adjusts from 6 to 10feet and anywhere in-between...they love it) LOVE Kobe, Rose, Wade and so forth. You don't see them wearing Nash or Love jerseys.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2012, 10:29 AM
 
29,786 posts, read 18,116,285 times
Reputation: 14583
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life View Post
I picked Iverson and Kobe because they have been two of the biggest NBA stars in the post Jordan era. For better and for worse, they have been the face of the NBA. Peyton Manning has been one of the great NFL stars for much of the same time frame. The problem for the NBA is that their biggest stars have as you called it "checkered pasts". That helps for street cred with the hip hop crowd, but is a negative for suburban families. And this is where the NFL kicks butt. If you dont want Peyton, well how about Brady? or Brees? or dare I say it Tebow? Wholesome guys that you can make the face of your sport. This is why even though the NFL has its share of knuckleheads (probably more than the NBA), it doesnt suffer as much in comparison because the franchise guys are for the most part what they need to reach the suburban consumer.

Let me ask this, if Mike Vick had been an NBA superstar point guard I am willing to bet the NBA would have suffered as a sport FAR more than the NFL did. Perception becomes reality. If people perceive the NBA to be full of thugs then that becomes the reality, right or wrong.
The NBA is more star power \ player oriented in their past marketing and the NFL is more team oriented. The NBA has changed this because it backfired on them because that model works great when you have guys like Jordan but when you have Kobe and Lebron....acting like idiots hurts the league.

You used to see a lot more of the match-ups touted as "Kobe vs. Lebron" or "Iverson and the Nuggest coming to play against Wade and the Heat".

Now it's a lot more "Lakers vs. Heat" or "Bulls vs. OKC".
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top