The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(06-21-2013 08:03 AM)the_blazerman Wrote:  No, back to back games were played in the 80's & even played in the afternoon because I watched them at school.

8 teams in the playoffs would be sufficient for me.

The finals used to end in late May or at least the first week in June.

It should not be extended past that in my opinion.

Why should they end in early June? What are they bumping? That all important pre season football talk.

No other league has an 8 team playoff, except maybe baseball, which has suffered for it.

You don't like it. That's fine. But your reasons are flawed.

More teams in the playoffs with less games in the first few rounds would be ok.

No reason to have a best of 7 in the first round in my opinion.

The best of 7 should only happen in the division finals & championship.

The reason you have a best of 7 series is for the top seeds. The shorter the series, the more likely it is that a top team will be upset.

(06-20-2013 09:04 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  Not too many players stay with the same team anymore, making it hard to follow or care about the game.

I could name 3 players on Miami's team & 1 on the Spurs.

The playoffs are way too long and too many teams are allowed to make the playoffs.

I remember in high school watching the Celtics & Lakers play in the playoffs during 7th period.

The next day they played the next game, not 3 days later.

Had Magic, Bird, & Jordan decided to play on the same team like the Miami players did, you would have all hell break loose with the other teams raising a big stink over it.

1. Watching basketball during school hours is very educational.
2. Are you a hunter gatherer? Still get your water from a well? Do you go to the theater for entertainment (all characters played by men)? Do you use a horse and buggy for transportation?
3. Plenty of players in the NBA stay with the same teams, google it.

Magic played with: Kareem Abdul Jabbar, James Worth, Byron Scott, AC Green

Bird played with: Kevin McHale, Robert Parish, Dennis Scott, Danny Agnes

Jordan played with: Scotty Pippen, Dennis Rodmen, Horace Grant

The old days aren't always as good as people try to make them out to be. I would say, because of the salary cap, it is harder to build a dynasty than before, making what Pat Riley did in Miami that much more amazing.

It's "Ainge" not "Agnes".

He was a two-sport guy, having briefly played for the Toronto Bluejays.



This diversion was brought to you by the letter U, and the number 4.

Carry on.

It was during 7th period athletics class & it wasn't high school basketball season anymore.

If you are afraid of the top seeds getting upset by only having a 5 game series, then why play?

If they are the better team then they should be able to win a 5 game series with 3 of those games being at home.

The reason it is a 7 game series is because of money, just like in all of sports. The NBA is the second most successful sports league, so they are doing something right.

Really? It is bad for the NBA to have the Heat upset in the 2nd round by a team that has a hot game or 2 and steals home court. It's simple math. If a team has a 25% chance of beating another team, the more games you play, the less likely it is that team will win the series. The odds of winning a one game series are significantly better for this team than winning a 3 game series. And the odds keep going down if you extend the series.

Baseball plays 300,000 games and then decides it's early playoff games with 1 game and 5 game series. I've never understood that. That is why you'll see the top team in the league get upset quite often in baseball, short series.

(06-21-2013 09:12 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  Really? It is bad for the NBA to have the Heat upset in the 2nd round by a team that has a hot game or 2 and steals home court. It's simple math. If a team has a 25% chance of beating another team, the more games you play, the less likely it is that team will win the series. The odds of winning a one game series are significantly better for this team than winning a 3 game series. And the odds keep going down if you extend the series.

Baseball plays 300,000 games and then decides it's early playoff games with 1 game and 5 game series. I've never understood that. That is why you'll see the top team in the league get upset quite often in baseball, short series.

Last time I recall, the San Francisco Giants were defending World Series Champions, and they've won 2 of the last 3, right? Then why is it damn near every time I turn on my set to watch a baseball game, there's either a Yankees game on or a constant stream of reference to them? Auuuggghhh!!!!

And they've finished where in the regular season? I wasn't saying the teams that win aren't good, I was merely saying that the top teams tend to get knocked out frequently in baseball in the 5 game series.

& I see no problems with that.

Baseball has a lot more areas where you can win when unexpected. All it takes is one bad pitch.

It is a lot harder for the underdog to win in basketball because you have several possessions each game to score.

Underdogs are exciting, but the goal of a championship is to find the best team. The NCAA tournament is an exciting event, but it does not award the best team in a season. It awards the hottest team in March.

A series is the best way to find the best team.

Exactly MB. This is also why the underdogs are always stopped in the NCAA Tournament as well. A team can pull off an upset or 2, but eventually being a constant underdog will catch up to those teams. This is really the only format college basketball can use.

The NBA, however, plays an 82 game season. Playing a 3 or 5 game series puts the league in jeopardy of losing its best teams(over the course of the 82 games) early. While that is exciting when it happens, the end result of a Memphis/Indiana Final would not generate much buzz at all, which is bad for the league.

(06-21-2013 08:58 AM)UAB?IAB Wrote:  Magic played with: Kareem Abdul Jabbar, James Worth, Byron Scott, AC Green

Bird played with: Kevin McHale, Robert Parish, Dennis Scott, Danny Agnes

Jordan played with: Scotty Pippen, Dennis Rodmen, Horace Grant

The old days aren't always as good as people try to make them out to be. I would say, because of the salary cap, it is harder to build a dynasty than before, making what Pat Riley did in Miami that much more amazing.

You are entitled to your opinion with the bold comment but I am pretty sure most people would disagree with you. The late 70's, 80's, and early 90's was probably the best time period of the NBA. Teams and players were marketed and competition was much, much better than now.

What Miami has done isn't amazing by any standard. And if a salary cap is suppose to level the playing field why is it only 8 out of 32 teams have won the NBA championship since 1990:

Pistons (2), Bulls (6), Spurs (5), Heat (3), Lakers (5), Rockets (2), Celtics (1), Mavericks (1).

But prior to 1990, the teams winning championships were even fewer. Generally, celtics and Lakers dominated.

And it's not a hard salary cap. The teams with the income are willing to pay the luxury tax.

That said, small market NBA teams are more successful than in any other sport.

And I would love a Grizz Pacers finals. Two small market teams that play team ball, hard nosed defense and built great teams without superstars.

You would love a Mem-Ind finals, sure. I would too. But the majority of the country? No chance.

And a lot of small market teams do well in other sports... The A's and Rays in baseball. Green Bay and New Orleans in football. I really think soft caps are the dumbest thing ever created in sports. Either have a cap, or don't, but don't try to act like one is in place and allow teams to go way over it.

I think the majority of the country would love it. They love underdogs and given an opportunity to watch how those teams play, it would be fun. ESPN and The NBA would not enjoy it. ESPN knows nothing about those teams because they dont cover them. The media's coverage of the NBA is star driven, not team driven. Even today, listening to the radio, you would have to listen a while to even know who Lebron played last night.

The way the sport is covered is what has turned people like Blazerman off of the sport. It is also creating a whole generation of fans who only care about the stars and not about teams.

Yep. And when those stars aren't around, people don't watch. It's been proven time and again. The World Series rates high when the Yankees are in it. The NBA Finals, the Lakers/Heat/team of the moment. NCAA Basketball, the Butler-UConn game was one of the lowest rated finals in a long time if I recall correctly. Imagine what the BCS Title Game would get if there wasn't an SEC team in it.

The NFL is probably the only league that is pretty much immune to this.

(06-21-2013 12:15 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  But prior to 1990, the teams winning championships were even fewer. Generally, celtics and Lakers dominated.

And it's not a hard salary cap. The teams with the income are willing to pay the luxury tax.

That said, small market NBA teams are more successful than in any other sport.

And I would love a Grizz Pacers finals. Two small market teams that play team ball, hard nosed defense and built great teams without superstars.

Actually, several teams won NBA Championships prior to 1990. From 1970-79 eight different teams won a NBA Championship. From 1980-89 The Lakers and Celtics completed dominated the decade with only the 76ers and Pistons winning. So actually more teams have won NBA Championships between 1970-89 (10) than between 1980-2013 (8).

1988-89 Detroit Pistons
1987-88 Los Angeles Lakers
1986-87 Los Angeles Lakers
1985-86 Boston Celtics
1984-85 Los Angeles Lakers
1983-84 Boston Celtics
1982-83 Philadelphia 76ers
1981-82 Los Angeles Lakers
1980-81 Boston Celtics
1979-80 Los Angeles Lakers
1978-79 Seattle SuperSonics
1977-78 Washington Bullets
1976-77 Portland Trail Blazers
1975-76 Boston Celtics
1974-75 Golden State Warriors
1973-74 Boston Celtics
1972-73 New York Knicks
1971-72 Los Angeles Lakers
1970-71 Milwaukee Bucks

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/blog/eye-on...-one-image