PDA

View Full Version : GSWs are 0-6, Miami is 1-7


Pages : [1] 2

dude1394
11-15-2007, 08:07 AM
Isn't it a nice day!

Flacolaco
11-15-2007, 08:12 AM
Shaq is truly over the hill now. I know they saved it all up for the 2nd half last year, but the things that Riley has said the last couple of days have really surprised me.

dude1394
11-15-2007, 08:14 AM
Got some links or some repeats of that? I don't really read the generic nba stuff very much.

Dr.Zoidberg
11-15-2007, 08:18 AM
Riley Clarifies Comments About Heat's Loss To Bobcats
November 15, 2007 - 4:08 am

Miami Herald - Pat Riley didn't hold back on his players after the Heat's blowout loss to the Bobcats (http://bobcats.realgm.com/) on Tuesday, telling reporters: ``I should suit up. I would play better than some of them right now.''

A day later, Riley clarified.

''The point is, you can't continue to throw clichés at them about those kinds of performances,'' Riley said before Wednesday's game against the Sonics. ``What can't be tolerated is the whole concept of veteran players continuing to make the same kind of mindless mistakes. That doesn't bode well, and it's something that I have great concern with with this team.''

Link (http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/49198/20071115/riley_clarifies_comments_about_heats_loss_to_bobca ts/)

Flacolaco
11-15-2007, 08:25 AM
I saw him on sports center last night saying that they needed to shake up their roster big time, and that some veteran guys or guys you wouldn't expect to see coming off the bench would be coming off the bench.

But I loved it when he said "I should suit up. I would play better than some of them right now.''

DevinHarriswillstart
11-15-2007, 08:29 AM
If the Warriors get to about 0-10, you can pretty much mail it in at that point. I sincerely doubt the return of Steven "Jailbird" Jackson will magically turn things around since their guard production isn't the problem.

dude1394
11-15-2007, 08:35 AM
Well Nelson did get his money..soooo... Sorry chum. :)

MavsX
11-15-2007, 08:38 AM
If the Warriors get to about 0-10, you can pretty much mail it in at that point. I sincerely doubt the return of Steven "Jailbird" Jackson will magically turn things around since their guard production isn't the problem.


Steven "Jailbird" Jackson??


lol

mqywaaah
11-15-2007, 08:39 AM
Dude... It is indeed a nice day! ;)

MavsX
11-15-2007, 08:53 AM
i bet penny hardaway is pissed that he signed with the heat.

jthig32
11-15-2007, 08:55 AM
i bet penny hardaway is pissed that he signed with the heat.

I bet the Heat are too.

LonghornDub
11-15-2007, 09:30 AM
If the Warriors get to about 0-10, you can pretty much mail it in at that point. I sincerely doubt the return of Steven "Jailbird" Jackson will magically turn things around since their guard production isn't the problem.

Considering that they start a 5 game road trip now, the chances of them going 0-11 are reasonably good.

chumdawg
11-15-2007, 10:22 AM
If there's anything last year should have taught you, it's not to count the Dubs out just yet!!

MavsFanFinley
11-15-2007, 10:29 AM
Not sure what's wrong with GS but I won't count them out either. They didn't start off well last year and look how that ended.

Miami is a freaking mess and I couldn't be happier about that. Something must be up with Shaq cause he doesn't even look like half the player he was.

DirkFTW
11-15-2007, 11:01 AM
Something must be up with Shaq cause he doesn't even look like half the player he was.
Shaq lost weight??

fluid.forty.one
11-15-2007, 11:24 AM
I hope GS goes 0-82.

rabbitproof
11-15-2007, 11:42 AM
Miami's struggles are a little more anticipated.. with Wade hurt and probably the most empty of empty offseasons.. but you have to credit their management for atleast TRYING..

... where as GSW is just laughable. The team experiences its first playoff love since the first Bush administration or something ridiculous. Props to Mullin for playing hardball with every single one-year wonder Warrior but to trade your second best player after such a run is why they continue to represent consistent suckitude.

I can see Miami bouncing back into the playoff mix in that cupcake conference when Wade, who is still a top 10 cat, gets back. GSW will probably catch fire at some point but I'll be surprised if they get in.

MavsX
11-15-2007, 12:16 PM
If there's anything last year should have taught you, it's not to count the Dubs out just yet!!


BOO THIS MAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

booooooooooooooooooooooooooo

dirno2000
11-15-2007, 01:46 PM
At least they have the Baron Davis foot/back injury to look forward to...

FINtastic
11-15-2007, 02:39 PM
Not sure what's wrong with GS but I won't count them out either. They didn't start off well last year and look how that ended.

Miami is a freaking mess and I couldn't be happier about that. Something must be up with Shaq cause he doesn't even look like half the player he was.

I'm probably nitpicking here, but GS actually started out well last season. It was the middle of the season when Davis got hurt that they had a really bad stretch.

alby
11-15-2007, 02:49 PM
i bet penny hardaway is pissed that he signed with the heat.

I still don't understand why vets aren't lining up to sign with Boston.

nowhereman
11-15-2007, 02:51 PM
How about a curse of beating the Mavs in the playoffs?

Over the past 4 years:

Kings combust as a franchise, lose Peja and Webber and acquire Artest
Suns lose Amare to microfracture surgery
Heat lose Wade to injuries and owe 60 million to deadweight Shaq
and so far, the Warriors are 0-6

alby
11-15-2007, 02:53 PM
some Warriors' fans are pretty pathetic, they feel that last year was enough for them--some weren't even expecting a year in year out playoff team.. pretty sad if you ask me. They are so used to losing every season that most genuinely didn't even forecast another playoff year.

GS is 0-6

if they go 1-10, its pretty much over--the Western Conference is too good for them to make comeback. Right now, the 8th seed is playing 2:1 ball (Denver 6-3).

fluid.forty.one
11-15-2007, 04:06 PM
How about a curse of beating the Mavs in the playoffs?

Over the past 4 years:

Kings combust as a franchise, lose Peja and Webber and acquire Artest
Suns lose Amare to microfracture surgery
Heat lose Wade to injuries and owe 60 million to deadweight Shaq
and so far, the Warriors are 0-6

Yeah but San Antonio seems immune.

StackAttack
11-15-2007, 06:26 PM
As far as I'm concerned, the worse these two teams do, the worse it makes our last two playoff outings look.

mqywaaah
11-15-2007, 08:28 PM
Yup, I see your point Stack.

nowhereman
11-16-2007, 04:04 AM
Yeah but San Antonio seems immune.

The next year Derek Fisher hit a miracle shot to counter Duncan's miracle shot. It's not much of a curse, but at least they didn't repeat.

So basically, the Mavs have been the only reason the Spurs haven't won 5 straight championships.

MavsX
11-16-2007, 07:29 AM
Shaq lost weight??


doubt it.

horse900703
11-17-2007, 09:20 AM
heat almost beat the boston last night, its was a good game!!!!!

DirkFTW
11-17-2007, 10:19 AM
Yeah but San Antonio seems immune.
Plantar Facitis (sp?)

MavsFanFinley
11-17-2007, 11:12 AM
GS finally looked like the team I remembered from last season. They got their first win and the return of Stephen Jackson on Sunday should help immensely.

I couldn't believe how well Miami played Boston.

nowhereman
11-17-2007, 11:40 AM
so what do we do when miami plays GS?

hope that baron and wade injure each other?

chumdawg
11-24-2007, 01:45 AM
Don't look now, but the dubs are 2.5 games out of the eight seed.

alby
11-24-2007, 01:50 AM
and Shaq looks like he's back after tonight's game v. Yao

nowhereman
11-24-2007, 04:46 AM
yeah - that night from shaq came out of nowhere (26/14 with 3 blocks). I guess the Diesel's got a little bit left in the tank - he's just saving it for big nights (like playing on national tv against the guy that took his all star start from him 3 years ago).

u2sarajevo
11-24-2007, 08:59 AM
This thread cracks me up. I wonder if other teams in the league discounted us after the first four games last year.

chumdawg
11-24-2007, 10:45 PM
Don't look now, but the dubs are a game-and-a-half out of the playoffs!

dude1394
11-24-2007, 10:52 PM
Don't look now, but the dubs are a game-and-a-half out of the playoffs!

This makes me sad.

alby
11-24-2007, 11:48 PM
game winning 3 by azubuike tonight

rabbitproof
11-25-2007, 02:18 PM
i want some warrior blood on my maverick paws and i want some heat flesh between my maverick jaws.

we will get ours. bring the pain, suckas.

chumdawg
11-27-2007, 12:00 AM
Don't look now, but the dubs are two-and-a-half back of Dallas, and a game out of the playoff hunt.

mavsgirl4134
11-27-2007, 12:43 AM
I'm not worried.

chumdawg
11-27-2007, 01:03 AM
I'm not worried.Neither was Nero, while he fiddled as Rome burned.

fluid.forty.one
11-27-2007, 01:11 AM
boo this man

mavsgirl4134
11-27-2007, 01:30 AM
Neither was Nero, while he fiddled as Rome burned.
You must like constantly disagreeing with people don't you? I just don't see how I should be worried about GS right now. I'll be more worried about them and other teams later on down the road. I think there are things that need to be dealt with now before I start worrying about what may or may not happen in April. Ya feel me? ;)

chumdawg
11-27-2007, 01:37 AM
Sorry, but no I don't. We are one-sixth of the way into the season, and we are perilously close to missing the playoffs. I think you would do well to pay attention to everything around you.

Underdog
11-27-2007, 02:01 AM
Sorry, but no I don't. We are one-sixth of the way into the season, and we are perilously close to missing the playoffs. I think you would do well to pay attention to everything around you.


Is it possible to be "close to missing the playoffs" when you're only 1/6 into the season? We're still doing better than Houston, Golden State, LAL, and the NOK - we're tied in 4th place with Denver...

Let's not jump to conclusions - there's a lot more season left here...

(although I'll agree that we're not in Championship form yet...)

chumdawg
11-27-2007, 02:04 AM
I wouldn't have said something like "close to missing the playoffs" if we were playing well and still losing. But we have had the crap kicked out of us lately. We are NOT playing well. We look like a borderline playoff squad. And it pisses me off!

Underdog
11-27-2007, 02:10 AM
I wouldn't have said something like "close to missing the playoffs" if we were playing well and still losing. But we have had the crap kicked out of us lately. We are NOT playing well. We look like a borderline playoff squad. And it pisses me off!

To be fair - we're the only team in the league that has to play 4 games every week with at least one back-to-back per week for an entire month... This schedule is murder - no point in wearing our players out to the point of injury...

chumdawg
11-27-2007, 02:16 AM
To be fair - we're the only team in the league that has to play 4 games every week with at least one back-to-back per week for an entire month... This schedule is murder - no point in wearing our players out to the point of injury...If you're scared, put on a helmet. I just don't buy that, as I'm sure players like Dirk don't either.

AxdemxO
11-27-2007, 05:06 AM
Yeee GS is comin bak. But we shouldnt worry about tht because we should worry more abot the Mavs and getting beatin by teams tht shouldnt be beating us.GS is not one of those teams because w/e we meet its a 90% chance tht they beat us soo its almost a sure thing.

No worries...love the denial.

mavsgirl4134
11-27-2007, 07:32 AM
Ok... At this very moment I'm not worried about GS or any other team. I'm worried about the Mavs. If the mavs paid as much attention to the standings in November as you are, they'll never get anywhere. You know now much those standings will change from now until the end of the season? All the Mavs need to do is get all of these kinks worked out and get back to winning some games. They aren't as bad as they're playing.

Underdog
11-27-2007, 11:15 AM
If you're scared, put on a helmet. I just don't buy that, as I'm sure players like Dirk don't either.



Half of our team is playing injured right now - what's the value in putting someone out for the rest of the season just so we can beat the Bucks/Hawks/Blazers/Wizards in November?

I bet you'd be singing a different tune if Avery pushed one of our stars to injury just so we can beat a scrub team with 68 games left in the season... (and I'm calling you out on your BS before you even retort to good sense because we all know you'd be ranting about how Nellie would never do that if Avery did...)

antoinewalker
11-27-2007, 03:13 PM
the warriors seem to be playing better now that stephen jackson is back in the lineup.

purplefrog
11-27-2007, 05:35 PM
the warriors seem to be playing better now that stephen jackson is back in the lineup.

Actually I think it is the addition of DJ. I knew the Mavs should have kept him. Dang.

chumdawg
11-28-2007, 11:40 PM
Don't look now, but the dubs just got to .500. That didn't take long.

alby
11-29-2007, 01:41 AM
as long as we don't finish 1st, because i don't see GS finishing higher than 7 or 8 =]

MavsFanFinley
11-29-2007, 10:07 AM
They are far from a defensive team but I was impressed with the defense against the Kings in the 4th quarter last night.

alby
11-29-2007, 03:10 PM
which team is GS going to replace in the top 8 for a playoff spot?

Spurs
Suns
Jazz
Mavs
Rockets
Hornets
Nuggets
Lakers

I guess LA...

MavsFanFinley
11-29-2007, 09:35 PM
I think injuries might knock the Hornets out.

LA looks like a playoff team one night and a lottery team the next.

chumdawg
11-30-2007, 12:00 AM
Don't look now, but the Warriors presently own the #8 seed.

From 0-6 to 8-7. Are the Warriors this year's Mavericks? Are they on pace to win 65 games? (Since they lost six to start the season, while the Mavs only lost four.)

alby
11-30-2007, 12:52 AM
haha Chum, I love your thinking...

MavsFanFinley
11-30-2007, 09:59 AM
I'm impressed with how well Harrington can guard Yao. That's mind boggling to me.

Baron is just a beast. I hope he can stay healthy cause he's so much fun to watch.

I'm happy for the Warriors. They'll give somebody trouble in the playoffs if they keep going like they are.

Darth Ape
11-30-2007, 12:03 PM
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2375/2065004976_000b6256b1_o.jpg

Mullin: "So, Don. You guys really took it to that big chinaman tonight"
Nelson: "Yeah. We sure did"
Mullin: "You beat him up and wore him down so hard, he can't even get up off the ground"
Nelson: "Yeah. He's just laying down there like a lump."
Mullin: "Wouldn't it be funny if I pissed on him?"
Nelson: "Go ahead, boss. I'm going to go grab another beer."
Mullin: "haha. See you later coach"
<pissssss>

Tokey41
11-30-2007, 02:07 PM
Nice comeback by the Warriors.... but they still have Baron's yearly injury to look forward to, then what?

alby
11-30-2007, 06:08 PM
Baron, when healthy, should always be in MVP discussions IMO.

Underdog
12-01-2007, 01:18 PM
which team is GS going to replace in the top 8 for a playoff spot?

Spurs
Suns
Jazz
Mavs
Rockets
Hornets
Nuggets
Lakers

I guess LA...


So far, it looks like GS has replaced the 9-8 Houston Rockets in the top 8... Who wouldda thunkkit?

alby
12-01-2007, 01:41 PM
So far, it looks like GS has replaced the 9-8 Houston Rockets in the top 8... Who wouldda thunkkit?

dream come true =]

alby
12-01-2007, 11:23 PM
So far, it looks like GS has replaced the 9-8 Houston Rockets in the top 8... Who wouldda thunkkit?

guess you're right! houston loses again tonight :D

LonghornDub
12-02-2007, 01:10 AM
I figure the Warriors will make the playoffs regardless, but how well they're playing doesn't bode well considering it looks like they could get as high as the 5th seed, and the Mavs will quite possibly be the 4 seed. Is another first round matchup in store?

We need to hope for that Baron injury so they can be around 7/8 and we can avoid them.

alby
12-02-2007, 01:32 AM
i can definitely see a 4/5 matchup with them. and you know what? i want to play them.

chumdawg
12-02-2007, 01:38 AM
i can definitely see a 4/5 matchup with them. and you know what? i want to play them.That's the spirit! Don't run and hide.

LonghornDub
12-02-2007, 01:50 AM
That's the spirit! Don't run and hide.

F that--I'm running and hiding. You just want to see it to possibly confirm your theory that Avery is ultimately inferior to Nellie!

Tokey41
12-02-2007, 12:45 PM
We are better equipped for them but that doesn't mean we should be hoping to face any athletic teams in the playoffs, I think it's clear we still struggle with them. Based off of last nights game I would be excited for a Mavs-Hornets series though.

StackAttack
12-02-2007, 04:25 PM
I've been watching some Dubs games online, and Christ, can Stephen Jackson D up.

chumdawg
12-02-2007, 10:39 PM
Don't look now, but the Warriors are rolling. Another win tonight.

Flacolaco
12-02-2007, 10:56 PM
Don't look now, but the Warriors are rolling. Another win tonight.

I can see the smile on your face, shining through every warrior related post. And I cannot for the life of me figure out why.

alby
12-02-2007, 10:56 PM
although it was the lowly Sonics, they manhandled them the entire 48 minutes.

fluid.forty.one
12-02-2007, 11:09 PM
I can see the smile on your face, shining through every warrior related post. And I cannot for the life of me figure out why.


I heard chum was once a Mavs fan but I'm not sure if I should believe it.

chumdawg
12-02-2007, 11:12 PM
I remain a fan of all Mavericks. Once a Maverick, always a Maverick.

I'm loyal like that, see.

fluid.forty.one
12-02-2007, 11:15 PM
But it seems skewed for you to appear to root for one ex Maverick, especially a non player, over a roster full of Mavericks.

untitled
12-02-2007, 11:17 PM
Chum, honestly, do you REALLY consider yourself to be a Mavs fan at this point? The difference between your posts re: the Mavs and the Cowboys is night and day - with the Cowboys it's eternal optimism, but with the Mavs it's eternal cynicism. Based on your posts, no one on this board would question your loyalty to the Boys or your desire to see them win. On the other hand, it seems to me that you enjoy your schadenfreude-based pleasure from a Mavs loss (especially to GS or PHX) more than you do the joy you get (if any) from a Mavs win.

chumdawg
12-02-2007, 11:20 PM
But it seems skewed for you to appear to root for one ex Maverick, especially a non player, over a roster full of Mavericks.If that's the way it seems to you, I can understand how you must feel. But I do not root for erstwhile Mavs *over* present Mavs. I simply root for them all. I don't want Nellie to fail, with Golden State. I rooted like hell for Nellie when he was a Mav. Why should I want him to fail? He pretty much made these Mavericks what they are. That should be recognized, and appreciated.

If the Warriors and the Mavs meet up again this year, it will be just as painful for me as it was last year. Or as it was in '05 and '06, when the Mavs had to face another one of their own, in Steve Nash. Or as it was when they had to face Finley. These matchups are not at all easy for a bleeds-blue Mavs fan.

But make no mistake, if the Mavs can't win the title then I want a Nellie or a Nash or a Finley to do so.

fluid.forty.one
12-02-2007, 11:20 PM
Chum, honestly, do you REALLY consider yourself to be a Mavs fan at this point? The difference between your posts re: the Mavs and the Cowboys is night and day - with the Cowboys it's eternal optimism, but with the Mavs it's eternal cynicism. Based on your posts, no one on this board would question your loyalty to the Boys or your desire to see them win. On the other hand, it seems to me that you enjoy your schadenfreude-based pleasure from a Mavs loss (especially to GS or PHX) more than you do the joy you get (if any) from a Mavs win.

I made this exact point during last years season, so props for someone else noticing it. I can't imagine TO getting traded to the Eagles, beating the Boys in the first round, and chum being happy for TO.

fluid.forty.one
12-02-2007, 11:23 PM
But make no mistake, if the Mavs can't win the title then I want a Nellie or a Nash or a Finley to do so.

I understand that.. but I would rather the CURRENT squad win over any ex-mav on a different team.



These matchups are not at all easy for a bleeds-blue Mavs fan.



I hope you're not insinuating that those of us who dislike Nash and Nellie now are less of a Mavs fan because of it.

chumdawg
12-02-2007, 11:40 PM
I hope you're not insinuating that those of us who dislike Nash and Nellie now are less of a Mavs fan because of it.If you became a Mavs fan the last year or two, that's one thing. But how could anyone who has been a fan of the Mavs for years DISLIKE Nash and Nellie?

That's the answer to your question. No true Mavs fan could.

Underdog
12-02-2007, 11:47 PM
If you became a Mavs fan the last year or two, that's one thing. But how could anyone who has been a fan of the Mavs for years DISLIKE Nash and Nellie?

That's the answer to your question. No true Mavs fan could.


Always hated Nellie - glad he's gone... Best thing Cuban ever did...

chumdawg
12-02-2007, 11:57 PM
The difference between your posts re: the Mavs and the Cowboys is night and day There is also a night-and-day difference in the way that the respective organizations treat their personnel, past and present. Emmit finished his career in another uniform, sadly, but did Jerry Jones encourage Cowboys fans to boo him? No. Jerry put him in the ring of honor. For that matter, did Jerry ever balk on paying the market price for a loyal Cowboy when the Cowboys were in their prime? Hell no, he didn't. That's why the Cowboys went to salary cap hell for a while. And that's why recently Jones has said that he hopes they get in salary cap hell again. When you have a winner, you pay your players. You worry about the future later. And you CERTAINLY don't do something so shit-all stupid as to let your personal feelings about an agent cost your team competitively.

If Jerry Jones were to not match on Romo because he thought Romo's agent railroaded him, and Romo went on to be everything that our quarterback was not, then I would be on Jerry's ass, too. (As would anyone else with a minimal capacity for reason.) But Jones is too smart for that.

So, to answer your question, Jerry Jones's Cowboys are a whole hell of a lot easier to root for than Mark Cuban's Mavericks, because Jerry doesn't kick the fans in the nuts every time he wants to put a dollar in his pocket or he thinks that he knows best how to coach the team.

alby
12-03-2007, 12:06 AM
Jerry Jones is definitely not Mark Cuban

they have their own ways of running their respective franchises.

I agree with you--if you produce for him, Jerry will take care of you through and through. Whereas Cuban would turn his back on you in an instant if he saw a potential opportunity elsewhere. Cut-throat, but that's what makes Cuban Cuban. Does it discourage other players from coming here, you bet your ass it does and I don't think people on here realize that.

However, the difference between Cuban and Jerry is that Cuban has kept the Mavericks winners ever since he took his owner's seat. The Cowboys, on the other hand, have not won a playoff game in more than a decade.

With that being said,
GO COWBOYS
GO MAVERICKS

Underdog
12-03-2007, 12:11 AM
There is also a night-and-day difference in the way that the respective organizations treat their personnel, past and present. Emmit finished his career in another uniform, sadly, but did Jerry Jones encourage Cowboys fans to boo him? No. Jerry put him in the ring of honor. For that matter, did Jerry ever balk on paying the market price for a loyal Cowboy when the Cowboys were in their prime? Hell no, he didn't. That's why the Cowboys went to salary cap hell for a while. And that's why recently Jones has said that he hopes they get in salary cap hell again. When you have a winner, you pay your players. You worry about the future later. And you CERTAINLY don't do something so shit-all stupid as to let your personal feelings about an agent cost your team competitively.

If Jerry Jones were to not match on Romo because he thought Romo's agent railroaded him, and Romo went on to be everything that our quarterback was not, then I would be on Jerry's ass, too. (As would anyone else with a minimal capacity for reason.) But Jones is too smart for that.

So, to answer your question, Jerry Jones's Cowboys are a whole hell of a lot easier to root for than Mark Cuban's Mavericks, because Jerry doesn't kick the fans in the nuts every time he wants to put a dollar in his pocket or he thinks that he knows best how to coach the team.


Emmit Smith won a Championship... Steve Nash didn't...

Also, would you say the Johnson/Jones split was any prettier than the Cuban/Nellie split?

chumdawg
12-03-2007, 12:17 AM
Emmit Smith won a Championship... Steve Nash didn't...He didn't get enough chance to. After all, we still believe that Dirk can win one here, don't we?

Also, would you say the Johnson/Jones split was any prettier than the Cuban/Nellie split?Since Jimmy didn't come back and embarrass our ass in the playoffs, and Jerry did go on to another championship post-Jimmy, then I'd say that Nellie certainly took Cuban's pants down in a way that Jimmy never did Jerry.

Flacolaco
12-03-2007, 12:17 AM
So when wade 'country bubkin' philips leads the cows to a super bowl loss, is The Tuna going to be recognized by 'these sorts of "fans" ' as the guy (Nellie) who put it all together?

alby
12-03-2007, 12:19 AM
the media has given credit to Parcells a lot so far this year...

have you guys heard Roy Williams and Romo speak of the Big Tuna? admiration

Underdog
12-03-2007, 12:20 AM
Since Jimmy didn't come back and embarrass our ass in the playoffs, and Jerry did go on to another championship post-Jimmy, then I'd say that Nellie certainly took Cuban's pants down in a way that Jimmy never did Jerry.

I was getting at Jerry Jones' business tactics vs. Cuban's...

You can't tell me that letting Nash & Nellie go is worse than letting a coach that led you to 2 (let's call it 3) Super Bowls just because of personal differences...

jthig32
12-03-2007, 12:21 AM
If you became a Mavs fan the last year or two, that's one thing. But how could anyone who has been a fan of the Mavs for years DISLIKE Nash and Nellie?

That's the answer to your question. No true Mavs fan could.

Ridiculous.

Some Mavs fans (like me) will respect what Nellie did for this franchise, but will always have a bitter taste in their mouths over the way Nellie quit on this team.

As far as Nash, I still love him, but nothing hurts worse than seeing him beat us. Both he and Fin moved to hated rivals (well, the Suns became one by beating us in the playoffs) and because of that I can never root for them.

alby
12-03-2007, 12:25 AM
I agree jthig

there are only four teams that I truly want us to beat everytime we play them.

GS. Houston. SA. Phoenix.

GS just because of last year.. but just like Sac, that will die out in a couple years
Pho because of Nash
SA is self explanatory
Houston is self explanatory

But with phoenix, it's not like they have always been our rivals. It's all because of Mr. Steve Cash--he made the team so fun to watch and got so much attention, that I just couldn't take anymore.

untitled
12-03-2007, 12:29 AM
There is also a night-and-day difference in the way that the respective organizations treat their personnel, past and present. Emmit finished his career in another uniform, sadly, but did Jerry Jones encourage Cowboys fans to boo him? No. Jerry put him in the ring of honor. For that matter, did Jerry ever balk on paying the market price for a loyal Cowboy when the Cowboys were in their prime? Hell no, he didn't. That's why the Cowboys went to salary cap hell for a while. And that's why recently Jones has said that he hopes they get in salary cap hell again. When you have a winner, you pay your players. You worry about the future later. And you CERTAINLY don't do something so shit-all stupid as to let your personal feelings about an agent cost your team competitively.

If Jerry Jones were to not match on Romo because he thought Romo's agent railroaded him, and Romo went on to be everything that our quarterback was not, then I would be on Jerry's ass, too. (As would anyone else with a minimal capacity for reason.) But Jones is too smart for that.

So, to answer your question, Jerry Jones's Cowboys are a whole hell of a lot easier to root for than Mark Cuban's Mavericks, because Jerry doesn't kick the fans in the nuts every time he wants to put a dollar in his pocket or he thinks that he knows best how to coach the team.
You sure have a selective memory, and the blanket, categorical statements you make re: how Mavs fans MUST behave is akin to something Doc or Murph would say. It's unfortunate since you obviously have more to offer than either of those two.

First off, you're basing your opinion on Cuban's contract negotiations on his dealings with ONE player - Steve Nash. Go ask the other cornerstones of the franchise how they've been paid since 2000, when Cuban bought the Mavs. Mike Finley will tell you that Cuban made him one of the highest paid players in the league and the highest paid player in Mavs history (at the time). And something tells me that Dirk isn't having trouble paying the bills these days. Then check out JET's, and Harris', and JHo's current salaries, and I think you'll see that, for the most part, Cubes takes care of his players - hell, I'd opine that he's so willing to take care of these core guys BECAUSE of the lesson he learned by not paying Nash. Just look at the significant increases in the Mavs' payroll since 2000: http://www.eskimo.com/~pbender/mavs/mavs-news/mavs-sal.txt

Does this dramatic increase in payroll really reflect an owner who is solely concerned with lining his pockets?

While I concede that not matching the Suns' offer was, in retrospect, a mistake, I don't feel that parting ways with Nellie was the wrong decision. Besides, wasn't Nellie one of the highest paid coaches in the NBA during his last few years with the Mavs? Don't get me wrong, I liked Nellie, I really did - but it is, and was, difficult to ignore the man's extensive track record of success....in the regular season. The man is the second-winningest coach in NBA history, right? Yet he's never sniffed the finals once (as a coach). He's the Alex Rodriguez of NBA coaches - he's at his best with the stakes are lowest. By the time the Mavs moved on, I felt that it was time for the organization to set its sights a little higher and bring somebody in that could take us all the way. I'm not saying that Avery is the guy for the job, all I'm saying is that I don't think that Nellie is/was.

Of course, only time will tell - but expecting an new owner or new coach to be absolutely flawless in their respective jobs is a bit much. They're still human and will continue to make mistakes in the future. And re: Jerry Jones, what about Jimmy Johnson? Did a two-time NFL championship coach (with far less experience) deserve to be fired, whereas a zero-time NBA championship coach (with far more experience) didn't?

chumdawg
12-03-2007, 12:30 AM
Ridiculous.

Some Mavs fans (like me) will respect what Nellie did for this franchise, but will always have a bitter taste in their mouths over the way Nellie quit on this team.

As far as Nash, I still love him, but nothing hurts worse than seeing him beat us. Both he and Fin moved to hated rivals (well, the Suns became one by beating us in the playoffs) and because of that I can never root for them.Bitter? Bitter taste in your mouth? Nellie never quit on his team. Cuban quit on Nellie. Cuban even went further than that. He undercut Nellie. Nellie is a saint for staying even that long.

Both Nash and Finley moved on because they were no longer wanted enough here. Once again, look to ownership for your bitter taste.

Do you have season tickets? You line Mark Cuban's pockets every year, and what does he do with it? He profits while Steve Nash walks and beats us in the playoffs, while Mike Finley wins a ring and we don't. Cuban takes your money while he pisses on the players you go to the arena to support.

FINtastic
12-03-2007, 12:33 AM
Since Jimmy didn't come back and embarrass our ass in the playoffs, and Jerry did go on to another championship post-Jimmy, then I'd say that Nellie certainly took Cuban's pants down in a way that Jimmy never did Jerry.

Only because Jimmy left Barry one of the greatest rosters ever assembled in NFL history. And Barry still screwed that up by not winning a Super Bowl in his first year here. Jerry had to sign Deion in order to keep Barry from screwing it up a second year in a row. Nellie left behind a good roster that his son had assembled, but there's really no comparison. Jerry cheated the Cowboys out of one Super Bowl and had Jimmy stuck around maybe we wouldn't have fizzled so quickly the next few seasons after Super Bowl XXX. Instead you had Jerry and Barry bungling draft pick after draft pick for the next few years and killing the future of the Cowboys.

jthig32
12-03-2007, 12:33 AM
Bitter? Bitter taste in your mouth? Nellie never quit on his team. Cuban quit on Nellie. Cuban even went further than that. He undercut Nellie. Nellie is a saint for staying even that long.

Both Nash and Finley moved on because they were no longer wanted enough here. Once again, look to ownership for your bitter taste.

Do you have season tickets? You line Mark Cuban's pockets every year, and what does he do with it? He profits while Steve Nash walks and beats us in the playoffs, while Mike Finley wins a ring and we don't. Cuban takes your money while he pisses on the players you go to the arena to support.

The Nellie thing has been rehashed over and over. Agree to disagree. Whatever. Nellie quit on this basketball team because whittle Stevie wasn't around anymore.

I never said that I root against Nash and Finley because they left. I fully respect Steve's decision and would make the same one every time. And Fin had no decision in the matter, obviously.

I also agreed with both decisions at the time. I still agree that waiving Finley was the right move, as does pretty much everyone else. Nash..well, that's been rehashed ad nauseum as well.

And no, I do not have season tickets, but I wish I did. I will gladly support the Mavs and Cuban, and all he's done/is doing for the basketball in the city of Dallas.

Underdog
12-03-2007, 12:34 AM
He profits while Steve Nash walks and beats us in the playoffs.

Wow, I seem to remember beating the Suns in 6 last time we played them in the playoffs...

chumdawg
12-03-2007, 12:38 AM
You sure have a selective memory, and the blanket, categorical statements you make re: how Mavs fans MUST behave is akin to something Doc or Murph would say. It's unfortunate since you obviously have more to offer than either of those two.

First off, you're basing your opinion on Cuban's contract negotiations on his dealings with ONE player - Steve Nash. Go ask the other cornerstones of the franchise how they've been paid since 2000, when Cuban bought the Mavs. Mike Finley will tell you that Cuban made him one of the highest paid players in the league and the highest paid player in Mavs history (at the time). And something tells me that Dirk isn't having trouble paying the bills these days. Then check out JET's, and Harris', and JHo's current salaries, and I think you'll see that, for the most part, Cubes takes care of his players - hell, I'd opine that he's so willing to take care of these core guys BECAUSE of the lesson he learned by not paying Nash. Just look at the significant increases in the Mavs' payroll since 2000: http://www.eskimo.com/~pbender/mavs/mavs-news/mavs-sal.txt

Does this dramatic increase in payroll really reflect an owner who is solely concerned with lining his pockets?

While I concede that not matching the Suns' offer was, in retrospect, a mistake, I don't feel that parting ways with Nellie was the wrong decision. Besides, wasn't Nellie one of the highest paid coaches in the NBA during his last few years with the Mavs? Don't get me wrong, I liked Nellie, I really did - but it is, and was, difficult to ignore the man's extensive track record of success....in the regular season. The man is the second-winningest coach in NBA history, right? Yet he's never sniffed the finals once (as a coach). He's the Alex Rodriguez of NBA coaches - he's at his best with the stakes are lowest. By the time the Mavs moved on, I felt that it was time for the organization to set its sights a little higher and bring somebody in that could take us all the way. I'm not saying that Avery is the guy for the job, all I'm saying is that I don't think that Nellie is/was.

Of course, only time will tell - but expecting an new owner or new coach to be absolutely flawless in their respective jobs is a bit much. They're still human and will continue to make mistakes in the future. And re: Jerry Jones, what about Jimmy Johnson? Did a two-time NFL championship coach (with far less experience) deserve to be fired, whereas a zero-time NBA championship coach (with far more experience) didn't?You thought that Nellie wasn't the coach...despite the fact that he took us from the dregs of the NBA to the freakin' WCF in five years' time? And you also thought that it would be a good idea to turn the reins over to someone else--anyone else--even if it was a rookie coach who would waste several years of Dirk's prime while he tried to figure out what it is that NBA coaches actually do?

Nice. Good luck in your own strategic endeavours. I'm sure you are also among the group of people who feel that Nellie didn't beat Avery last year, but rather that the Mavericks ran into a "hot team."

On payroll...don't get me started. We are in a very, very lucrative market--much more so than, say, a New Orleans or a Portland--and our owner is profiting plenty, as he himself has said. Other teams are losing money because they want to win, and we are busy shedding salary.

FINtastic
12-03-2007, 12:41 AM
Bitter? Bitter taste in your mouth? Nellie never quit on his team. Cuban quit on Nellie. Cuban even went further than that. He undercut Nellie. Nellie is a saint for staying even that long.

Both Nash and Finley moved on because they were no longer wanted enough here. Once again, look to ownership for your bitter taste.

Do you have season tickets? You line Mark Cuban's pockets every year, and what does he do with it? He profits while Steve Nash walks and beats us in the playoffs, while Mike Finley wins a ring and we don't. Cuban takes your money while he pisses on the players you go to the arena to support.

Do you find it the least bit ironic that you rail on Cuban for being a greedy pig because he doens't want to pay a luxury tax through the roof for a 31 year old point guard that was good but not great and whose own coach doubted his durability? Meanwhile you blindly support Nash after leaving for roughly $10 million extra when he already has all the money he would ever want and don't seem to think of him as being all that greedy.

Cuban is greedy but so is everyone else. What makes him so different?

Underdog
12-03-2007, 12:41 AM
You thought that Nellie wasn't the coach...despite the fact that he took us from the dregs of the NBA to the freakin' WCF in five years' time? And you also thought that it would be a good idea to turn the reins over to someone else--anyone else--even if it was a rookie coach who would waste several years of Dirk's prime while he tried to figure out what it is that NBA coaches actually do?

Nice. Good luck in your own strategic endeavours. I'm sure you are also among the group of people who feel that Nellie didn't beat Avery last year, but rather that the Mavericks ran into a "hot team."


Nellie didn't beat us because he's better - he beat us because he knew this team inside & out from having coached us for several years... If he never coached the Mavs, he would have never beat the Mavs in the playoffs (just like he couldn't beat anyone else...)

jthig32
12-03-2007, 12:41 AM
On payroll...don't get me started. We are in a very, very lucrative market--much more so than, say, a New Orleans or a Portland--and our owner is profiting plenty, as he himself has said. Other teams are losing money because they want to win, and we are busy shedding salary.

You have now stepped completely outside of reality and are dealing in utter fantasy. This team is most certainly not "shedding salary".

Have they made some salary minded moves over the past few seasons? Sure.

But this team is not shedding salary. The point is not whether the Mavs are turning a profit. All NBA teams are turning a profit, if by no other means than the value of the franchise rising.

However, many, many owners, even the owners of great teams, allow luxury tax and other salary issues to stand in the way of success. Cuban is much more willing to cross those lines than just about anyone else.

This is the one area where you lose much credibility and show your true colors, because you continue to harp on Cuban for salary when Phoenix is selling away draft picks and giving away their only low post defender because of the salary tax.

chumdawg
12-03-2007, 12:44 AM
"Whittle Stevie." I like how you say that, thig. You do know that the guy has two MVP's, right? How about "whittle Tom Brady" or "whittle Tony Romo" or...god forbid..."whittle Dirky"?

Would you keep a stiff upper lip if your precious "whittle Dirky" went to another team because we didn't want him anymore?

FINtastic
12-03-2007, 12:44 AM
On payroll...don't get me started. We are in a very, very lucrative market--much more so than, say, a New Orleans or a Portland--and our owner is profiting plenty, as he himself has said. Other teams are losing money because they want to win, and we are busy shedding salary.

Who are those teams? The Spurs don't want any part of paying the luxury tax and the Phoenix Suns badly bungled the Joe Johnson deal trying to save a few bucks and trade their draft picks yearly for cash. I guess you can throw out the Knicks, but that's only because the owner is an idiot and I'm not really sure he's in it for winning really. I don't see all these teams who are way over the cap because they want to win.

untitled
12-03-2007, 12:44 AM
You thought that Nellie wasn't the coach...despite the fact that he took us from the dregs of the NBA to the freakin' WCF in five years' time? And you also thought that it would be a good idea to turn the reins over to someone else--anyone else--even if it was a rookie coach who would waste several years of Dirk's prime while he tried to figure out what it is that NBA coaches actually do?
Read my post over again, I think you skimmed through it too quickly - I explicitly stated that I was NOT saying Avery was the guy to get us there. And I also explicitly stated why I felt Nellie wouldn't get us to the promised land - because, after all of his years of success, the man has never even been to the finals. Not once.

Nice. Good luck in your own strategic endeavours. I'm sure you are also among the group of people who feel that Nellie didn't beat Avery last year, but rather that the Mavericks ran into a "hot team."
You know what they say happens when you assume...

I never said anything about last year's debacle, and I fully admit that Nellie AND the Warriors made Avery AND the Mavs look like their bitches. The Warriors weren't the "hot team", they were the better team.

On payroll...don't get me started. We are in a very, very lucrative market--much more so than, say, a New Orleans or a Portland--and our owner is profiting plenty, as he himself has said. Other teams are losing money because they want to win, and we are busy shedding salary.
Sources, please?

jthig32
12-03-2007, 12:47 AM
"Whittle Stevie." I like how you say that, thig. You do know that the guy has two MVP's, right? How about "whittle Tom Brady" or "whittle Tony Romo" or...god forbid..."whittle Dirky"?

Would you keep a stiff upper lip if your precious "whittle Dirky" went to another team because we didn't want him anymore?

The points is that Nellie decided not to coach this team anymore because Steve Nash was gone. He pouted and went through the motions until Cuban had had enough and agreed to pay him to go away.

FINtastic
12-03-2007, 12:55 AM
There is also a night-and-day difference in the way that the respective organizations treat their personnel, past and present. Emmit finished his career in another uniform, sadly, but did Jerry Jones encourage Cowboys fans to boo him? No. Jerry put him in the ring of honor. For that matter, did Jerry ever balk on paying the market price for a loyal Cowboy when the Cowboys were in their prime? Hell no, he didn't. That's why the Cowboys went to salary cap hell for a while. And that's why recently Jones has said that he hopes they get in salary cap hell again. When you have a winner, you pay your players. You worry about the future later.

The Patriots don't do that and it seems to work out quite nicely for them.

alby
12-03-2007, 12:56 AM
The Patriots cheat.

chumdawg
12-03-2007, 12:59 AM
Just imagine in your mind... Just imagine if when the Allan Houston clause had come about, Cuban had said, "We're not cutting Michael Finley, no matter how much money it would save us. Michael Finley is a cornerstone of our franchise, and he isn't going anywhere."

Note also that Allan Houston didn't even get cut with the Allan Houston rule.

Just imagine, also, if Mark Cuban had said, "We're not letting Steve Nash get away. We will pay him more than anyone else will pay him. He is a cornerstone of our franchise."

Cuban could have done that. He has made a crapload on money on the Mavericks, and he certainly could have spent a little of it to satisfy the lifelong fans. But as it is, he's a little richer (as if he needed it), and we are without two franchise cornerstones. Cuban 2, fans 0.

FINtastic
12-03-2007, 12:59 AM
The Patriots cheat.

People make way too big of a deal about that. When you are winning by 20-30 points every game, I don't think a little video camera is the cause of it. By gosh, I hate the Patriots as much as the next guy but they are darn good franchise run by a darn good football man.

FINtastic
12-03-2007, 01:04 AM
Just imagine in your mind... Just imagine if when the Allan Houston clause had come about, Cuban had said, "We're not cutting Michael Finley, no matter how much money it would save us. Michael Finley is a cornerstone of our franchise, and he isn't going anywhere."

But Michael Finley wasn't the cornerstone of our franchise at that time. He was a former great in serious decline.

Note also that Allan Houston didn't even cut with the Allan Houston rule.

Because the Knicks are a bunch of idiots. This type of idiocy is part of the reason they need a game-ending-buzzer-beating-37-footer just to avoid a franchise low in points (and only lose by 45 points instead of 48).

Underdog
12-03-2007, 01:04 AM
He has made a crapload on money on the Mavericks, and he certainly could have spent a little of it to satisfy the lifelong fans. But as it is, he's a little richer (as if he needed it), and we are without two franchise cornerstones. Cuban 2, fans 0.


And lifelong fans don't want to see their team go to the Finals??? That happened under Cuban's watch & I don't feel the least bit ripped off! (and we didn't need Nash, Finely or Nellie to do it...)

mary
12-03-2007, 01:05 AM
From what I've heard about the new Cowboy stadium, Jerry Jones has the crotches of season ticket holders directly in his crosshairs.

Just sayin'

FINtastic
12-03-2007, 01:07 AM
Hell he has the crotches of the citizens of Arlington in a vice just so he can build that monument to himself that is the new Cowboys stadium.

chumdawg
12-03-2007, 01:08 AM
And lifelong fans don't want to see their team go to the Finals??? That happened under Cuban's watch & I don't feel the least bit ripped off! (and we didn't need Nash, Finely or Nellie to do it...)Do you really believe that the Mavs didn't need Nash, Finley, or Nellie in order to get to that failed Finals appearance that you so cherish? Do you really believe that?

mary
12-03-2007, 01:09 AM
Jerry Jones would never just up and fire a cornerstone coach of the franchise. He's definitely too classy for that.

Oh wait....


Tom Landry...was he a great big fat person?

Underdog
12-03-2007, 01:11 AM
Do you really believe that the Mavs didn't need Nash, Finley, or Nellie in order to get to that failed Finals appearance that you so cherish? Do you really believe that?



Nash & Nellie (as a coach) have never been to the Finals, so it's stupid to say they could get us there... Finely got his ring on the bench...

Maybe Nash could have out-star-powered Wade in the eyes of Stern's refs, but we didn't need him to get there...

FINtastic
12-03-2007, 01:11 AM
I don't recall either Mark Cuban saying that 500 other coaches could coach the Dallas Mavericks (although he may very well have been thinking it).

chumdawg
12-03-2007, 01:13 AM
Nash & Nellie (as a coach) have never been to the Finals, so it's stupid to say they could get us there... Finely got his ring on the bench...

Maybe Nash could have out-star-powered Wade in the eyes of Stern's refs, but we didn't need him to get there...I don't think you at all understood what I was getting at.

Imagine Cuban on this day took over the Timberwolves. How long do you think it would take him to get his team to the Finals?

rabbitproof
12-03-2007, 01:18 AM
Don't look now but Chum is going to say "don't look now".

Underdog
12-03-2007, 01:19 AM
I don't think you at all understood what I was getting at.

Imagine Cuban on this day took over the Timberwolves. How long do you think it would take him to get his team to the Finals?


Imagine if Phil Jackson coached the Mavs instead of the Bulls in the 90s - how many rings would he have? Imagine if we kept Tractor Traylor instead of trading for Dirk - how brilliant would Nellie's run have been? Imagine, imagine, imagine - that seems to be all you do around here...

From what I've seen, the Mavs have taken this franchise farther since Cuban & Avery stepped in than they ever did with Nellie, Nash or Finely... If any of them were better, then where are the results??? The proof is in the pudding...

rabbitproof
12-03-2007, 02:21 AM
If that's the way it seems to you, I can understand how you must feel. But I do not root for erstwhile Mavs *over* present Mavs. I simply root for them all. I don't want Nellie to fail, with Golden State. I rooted like hell for Nellie when he was a Mav. Why should I want him to fail? He pretty much made these Mavericks what they are. That should be recognized, and appreciated.

If the Warriors and the Mavs meet up again this year, it will be just as painful for me as it was last year. Or as it was in '05 and '06, when the Mavs had to face another one of their own, in Steve Nash. Or as it was when they had to face Finley. These matchups are not at all easy for a bleeds-blue Mavs fan.

But make no mistake, if the Mavs can't win the title then I want a Nellie or a Nash or a Finley to do so.

Do you apply these same rules to the Cowboys?

ty
12-03-2007, 01:45 PM
People make way too big of a deal about that. When you are winning by 20-30 points every game, I don't think a little video camera is the cause of it. By gosh, I hate the Patriots as much as the next guy but they are darn good franchise run by a darn good football man.

Big deal out of cheating? Umm, well duh? Because it is cheating.

Does winning by 20-30 points a game justify cheating? I don't think so.

What if they were a losing team, and they were caught cheating. Is that what it takes to make cheating something bad?

I hate how many Pats players defend it by saying the likes of "We work hard every day..." Who cares. You work hard every day, and you cheat. People make a big deal out of it because it is (or in the NFL's case--should be) a big deal.

It's being dishonest in an honest situation. I don't see how you can justify it by "winning big."

Pats were cheaters no matter how you look at it.

jthig32
12-03-2007, 01:47 PM
Big deal out of cheating? Umm, well duh? Because it is cheating.

Does winning by 20-30 points a game justify cheating? I don't think so.

What if they were a losing team, and they were caught cheating. Is that what it takes to make cheating something bad?

I hate how many Pats players defend it by saying the likes of "We work hard every day..." Who cares. You work hard every day, and you cheat. People make a big deal out of it because it is (or in the NFL's case--should be) a big deal.

It's being dishonest in an honest situation. I don't see how you can justify it by "winning big."

Pats were cheaters no matter how you look at it.

As long as you agree that most other teams are trying in some form or fashion to get a similar edge.

There's a reason coordinators hold the cards in front of their mouths when they readio in the plays.

Doesn't make it right, but don't act like the Patriots are the evil empire stooping to depths never before considered.

MavsFanFinley
12-03-2007, 02:16 PM
I'm sure glad we don't hear Peter Holt or Pop talk about how AJ cheats to beat the Spurs.

ty
12-03-2007, 02:20 PM
As long as you agree that most other teams are trying in some form or fashion to get a similar edge.

There's a reason coordinators hold the cards in front of their mouths when they readio in the plays.

Doesn't make it right, but don't act like the Patriots are the evil empire stooping to depths never before considered.

But facts are facts. And the Patriots got caught.

Of course there is a possibility other teams have done the same. But, it doesn't mean that a majority of teams do cheat. And IMO I don't think you can just assume that other teams do at all. It's like assuming a majority of people in a classroom cheat on a test just because one person was caught cheating.

Sure, coordinators might hold cards in front of their mouths--but can't a human being be cautious? Doesn't necessarily mean that most other teams are trying to get an edge.

You are innocent until proven guilty. That's how this country works. And the fact is, the Patriots were proven guilty.

So until other teams are found to cheat like the Pats did, they are the evil empire to me.

dalmations202
12-03-2007, 02:50 PM
Do baseball teams steal signs?

fluid.forty.one
12-03-2007, 03:12 PM
You guys are giving chum too much credit and attention. He's just one guy with one opinion.

jthig32
12-03-2007, 03:19 PM
But facts are facts. And the Patriots got caught.

Of course there is a possibility other teams have done the same. But, it doesn't mean that a majority of teams do cheat. And IMO I don't think you can just assume that other teams do at all. It's like assuming a majority of people in a classroom cheat on a test just because one person was caught cheating.

Sure, coordinators might hold cards in front of their mouths--but can't a human being be cautious? Doesn't necessarily mean that most other teams are trying to get an edge.

You are innocent until proven guilty. That's how this country works. And the fact is, the Patriots were proven guilty.

So until other teams are found to cheat like the Pats did, they are the evil empire to me.

Well then, in my opinion, you are naive.

Pat Summerall was asked about it a few days after the story got out, and he said that the first time the Giants ever played the Cowboys after Landry took oever, he was given a set of binoculars and told to spend his time on the sidelines watching the signals coming in.

It happens. Everywhere. Probably not always to the extent that New England went to, but every team is always looking for an edge, legal or not.

And Dalm raises an interesting point. At what point does cheating become almost expected and beloved? Like stealing signs and scuffing the ball in baseball.

I just think it's an awful lot of venom for something like that. Yes they got caught, and they deserved to be punished. But acting like they're the epitome in the NFL because of it is riduclous, imo.

AxdemxO
12-03-2007, 03:38 PM
Are the Pats cheating this year...and it was more being smart thn cheating...couldnt you get some of the stuff they got just by watching the tape of the game tht lets say ESPN taped??

ty
12-03-2007, 03:56 PM
Well then, in my opinion, you are naive.

Pat Summerall was asked about it a few days after the story got out, and he said that the first time the Giants ever played the Cowboys after Landry took oever, he was given a set of binoculars and told to spend his time on the sidelines watching the signals coming in.

It happens. Everywhere. Probably not always to the extent that New England went to, but every team is always looking for an edge, legal or not.

And Dalm raises an interesting point. At what point does cheating become almost expected and beloved? Like stealing signs and scuffing the ball in baseball.

I just think it's an awful lot of venom for something like that. Yes they got caught, and they deserved to be punished. But acting like they're the epitome in the NFL because of it is riduclous, imo.

You're really going to compare Summerall's binoculars example? Tom Landry took over in 1960. That is almost 50 years ago. Surely technology has increased from a pair of binoculars and a walkie talkie to have given the Patriots an extremely unfair advantage.

I'm not arguing that other teams do not try to gain any type of advantage. But I'm arguing exactly what you pointed out:

but every team is always looking for an edge, legal or not.

You seem to have breezed by that "legal or not" part quite well. But, it seems pretty important to me. There are apparent ways to gain an advantage that are legal and that aren't. An obvious example shows that steriods are an illegal way to gain an unfair advantage. Another example would be the Patriots recording of sidelines. If the Patriots' video recording of other teams' sidelines wasn't illegal, then it wouldn't have been punished in the way that it was.

Cheating is not always a grey area. Sometimes there is a clear black and white. I don't know what the rules were 50 years ago when Pat Summerall used binoculars, but in today's NFL they are clear cut. The Pats did something against the NFL rulebook and I don't see any reason to rationalize that.

I'm not denying the possibility that other teams do (or have) videorecorded the opposing team's sidelines, but no other teams have been proven to. Therefore, I'm not going to assume that they do. Assumptions never get you anywhere anyways.

Also, I've never followed anything baseball related (in fact I hate the sport) so I don't even know what to say to that.

alby
12-03-2007, 08:40 PM
Wow, I don't how people can downplay what the Patriots were caught doing earlier this year against the Jets (and undoubtedly, what they have been doing in previous years).

The NFL game is so heavily based on play-calling the right offensive/defensive schemes and how well a team disguises those schemes; thus, if a team were to know beforehand what their opponent was going to do, it's almost as if you are in the other huddle.

After knowing what the Patriots were charged of doing; what was going on during Sundays is similar to what goes on in practices during the week when the offense plays against the defense. Both sides are sometimes informed of each other's plays, and each side tries to execute the play even when the other side has the perfect scheme.

Essentially, this was exactly what was going on since New England knew before each play what the other team was going to do. There is absolutely no justification for what they did, and their punishment was nowhere near what the NFL should have given them. You can say that other sports have cheaters all the time, but if you use that excuse; it's like saying because other students cheat on their test in class, it's okay if your son or daughter does it as well.

I don't think so.

jthig32
12-03-2007, 10:12 PM
Wow, I don't how people can downplay what the Patriots were caught doing earlier this year against the Jets (and undoubtedly, what they have been doing in previous years).

The NFL game is so heavily based on play-calling the right offensive/defensive schemes and how well a team disguises those schemes; thus, if a team were to know beforehand what their opponent was going to do, it's almost as if you are in the other huddle.

After knowing what the Patriots were charged of doing; what was going on during Sundays is similar to what goes on in practices during the week when the offense plays against the defense. Both sides are sometimes informed of each other's plays, and each side tries to execute the play even when the other side has the perfect scheme.

Essentially, this was exactly what was going on since New England knew before each play what the other team was going to do. There is absolutely no justification for what they did, and their punishment was nowhere near what the NFL should have given them. You can say that other sports have cheaters all the time, but if you use that excuse; it's like saying because other students cheat on their test in class, it's okay if your son or daughter does it as well.

I don't think so.

Wait a minute. I'm not here to justify anything they did, but don't seriously think that video would do all THAT, do you?

It's not like they could see the video and have time to relay the signal down to the defense, so they'd know what was coming. It wasn't a real-time advantage. It would simply give them an even better film to watch later on, and hopefully them some things to look for when they next played the Jets.

Those video tapes did nothing to help the Patriots during the actual game it was happening in.

And the part bolded is not what I'm saying at all. They got caught they deserved to be punished. All I'm saying is people shouldn't act like it was some unspeakable travesty, something no other football team has ever thought about doing before, and it was the thing that set them apart from other football teams. Because none of those things are true, at all.

That's all I'm saying.

alby
12-03-2007, 10:17 PM
Whoa whoa whoa. You don't think the cameraman has any modes of communication with the coaches upstairs, the coaches on the sidelines, or scouts on the field...especially in our day and age? If you know ONE single scheme going into the 2nd/3rd/4th quarter, you have an unfair advantage against the competition.. and that is called cheating.

All you need is for an assistant coach to tell Brady who is rushing, who is dropping back into coverage, who is spying when they are lined up in a certain way--and the game is over.

jthig32
12-03-2007, 10:19 PM
Whoa whoa whoa. You don't think the cameraman has any modes of communication with the coaches upstairs, the coaches on the sidelines, or scouts on the field...especially in our day and age? If you know ONE single scheme going into the 2nd/3rd/4th quarter, you have an unfair advantage against the competition.. and that is called cheating.

I'm sure they did, but those camermen are not elite military code breakers. They are not sitting there on the fly breaking down that video.

I haven't heard a single person of the opinion that this was something that would benefit a team real time in a game, and I've heard a lot of people discuss this. The consensus is that it would be a tool to use to study up for the next time you play that opponent.

alby
12-03-2007, 10:25 PM
The cameraman wouldn't have to do anything except to record. I'm sure something like an iphone has the ability to send videos. It's not very difficult to send the video to someone who does know football, someone who does know how to break down the film.

It's not even complex.

Scenario A.

Jet's defense.
5 on the line
2 linebackers
2 cbs
2 safeties playing 2 deep

if the right linebacker rushes while the right DE drops back, the next time Brady see's that (maybe 5mins later or maybe 3 quarters later, he knows he has a DE on a Watson). Bam, a touchdown.

jthig32
12-03-2007, 10:42 PM
The cameraman wouldn't have to do anything except to record. I'm sure something like an iphone has the ability to send videos. It's not very difficult to send the video to someone who does know football, someone who does know how to break down the film.

It's not even complex.

Scenario A.

Jet's defense.
5 on the line
2 linebackers
2 cbs
2 safeties playing 2 deep

if the right linebacker rushes while the right DE drops back, the next time Brady see's that (maybe 5mins later or maybe 3 quarters later, he knows he has a DE on a Watson). Bam, a touchdown.

I think you're confused. The video was not of the defensive formations, it was of the defensive coaches signaling in the defensive play. And they are very complex signals made by a variety of people.

The only use it would be to you is if you already had video of those signals, and knew that to look for. Obviously, that's what the camera is for. You get the video, study it, and then maybe you can identify two or three specific signals a spotter can look for the next time you play that team. Even then, you're talking about seeing that information, translating it, and relaying it to your offensive decision makers in a matter of 10 seconds or so. So it's nothing like being told exactly what the play is.

Everyone in America agrees on this point, I think. See this video. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn9jXpxMivY)

alby
12-03-2007, 10:45 PM
It's not very hard to correlate a certain signal with the defensive scheme on the field, is it?

jthig32
12-03-2007, 10:48 PM
It's not very hard to correlate a certain signal with the defensive scheme on the field, is it?

Dude, you think they do one signal and that's it? They do a series of singals, by like five different coaches, only one of which is probably giving the actual signal. It's like a 3rd base coach times five. Watch the video.

It would take hours of watching those signals repeatedly, and comparing subsequent plays to figure out what the common identifier is, how to determine what the actual meaningful signal is.

Gimme a break.

alby
12-03-2007, 10:51 PM
Just like in baseball, the majority of the entire signal is pure BS. There are a few main signals that mean the same things--it's not very hard for someone to pick it up. I think you are thinking it was just the cameraman and the person he sent it to. If the Jet's had 5 people sending in actual signals, I'm sure the Patriots had more than 5 guys trying to read them. Just my belief. Why just cheat half way when you can cheat all the way?

jthig32
12-03-2007, 10:54 PM
Just like in baseball, the majority of the entire signal is pure BS. There are a few main signals that mean the same things--it's not very hard for someone to pick it up. I think you are thinking it was just the cameraman and the person he sent it to. If the Jet's had 5 people sending in actual signals, I'm sure the Patriots had more than 5 guys trying to read them. Just my belief. Why just cheat half way when you can cheat all the way?

Of course the majority is pure BS. But the only people that know what is BS and what isn't is the team using the signals. That's why they're called SIGNALS. Do you really think all the baseball teams know everyone else's signals and know what they're telling their hitters and baserunners to do?

Of course they don't.

Just watch the video, and watch one person. Then tell me how many times you would have to watch it before you could pick up the significant identifier. Then assume they change that identifier at the half, and you have to start all over again.

This is not elementary school. This is NOT something that could be done on the fly. Period.

chumdawg
12-03-2007, 10:58 PM
Dude, you think they do one signal and that's it? They do a series of singals, by like five different coaches, only one of which is probably giving the actual signal. It's like a 3rd base coach times five. Watch the video.

It would take hours of watching those signals repeatedly, and comparing subsequent plays to figure out what the common identifier is, how to determine what the actual meaningful signal is.

Gimme a break.Are you suggesting that Patriots didn't get any benefit from their films?

If that's the case, why were they filming?

Seems rather foolish to break the rules when you don't even stand to benefit from it.

alby
12-03-2007, 11:19 PM
any ounce of benefit is cheating, that is an unfair advantage no matter how you look at it

ty
12-03-2007, 11:33 PM
Of course the majority is pure BS. But the only people that know what is BS and what isn't is the team using the signals. That's why they're called SIGNALS. Do you really think all the baseball teams know everyone else's signals and know what they're telling their hitters and baserunners to do?

Of course they don't.

Just watch the video, and watch one person. Then tell me how many times you would have to watch it before you could pick up the significant identifier. Then assume they change that identifier at the half, and you have to start all over again.

This is not elementary school. This is NOT something that could be done on the fly. Period.

Okay, so going by your book, maybe it does take a while to identify--maybe it doesn't do them any benefit until the last few minutes or so of the game. But an unfair advantage on even one of the last few plays of a game can mean a hell of a lot.

alby
12-03-2007, 11:36 PM
That's what I'm saying. Just one play means cheating.

alby
12-03-2007, 11:41 PM
You're really going to compare Summerall's binoculars example? Tom Landry took over in 1960. That is almost 50 years ago. Surely technology has increased from a pair of binoculars and a walkie talkie to have given the Patriots an extremely unfair advantage.

I'm not arguing that other teams do not try to gain any type of advantage. But I'm arguing exactly what you pointed out:



You seem to have breezed by that "legal or not" part quite well. But, it seems pretty important to me. There are apparent ways to gain an advantage that are legal and that aren't. An obvious example shows that steriods are an illegal way to gain an unfair advantage. Another example would be the Patriots recording of sidelines. If the Patriots' video recording of other teams' sidelines wasn't illegal, then it wouldn't have been punished in the way that it was.

Cheating is not always a grey area. Sometimes there is a clear black and white. I don't know what the rules were 50 years ago when Pat Summerall used binoculars, but in today's NFL they are clear cut. The Pats did something against the NFL rulebook and I don't see any reason to rationalize that.

I'm not denying the possibility that other teams do (or have) videorecorded the opposing team's sidelines, but no other teams have been proven to. Therefore, I'm not going to assume that they do. Assumptions never get you anywhere anyways.

Also, I've never followed anything baseball related (in fact I hate the sport) so I don't even know what to say to that.

great post.

jthig32
12-04-2007, 08:01 AM
Are you suggesting that Patriots didn't get any benefit from their films?

If that's the case, why were they filming?

Seems rather foolish to break the rules when you don't even stand to benefit from it.

Please read the entire conversation before jumping in. Of course I'm not saying tha they didn't benefit. But Alby made it sound like this video gave them an open book of the plays the defense was calling for the entire game in which the video tape is being used. He compared it to when a football team practices and each side knows what the other is running.

I was simply pointing out it wasn't nearly THAT beneficial, nor was it helping them during the actual game they were video taping. The point was to hopefully find something they could look for the next time they played the Jets.

And they deserved to be punished for that. But Alby was making it sound like a much bigger overall advantage than it was, that's all.

jthig32
12-04-2007, 08:01 AM
That's what I'm saying. Just one play means cheating..

No, that's now what you were saying. Otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion. I never said what they did wasn't cheating.

jthig32
12-04-2007, 08:02 AM
Okay, so going by your book, maybe it does take a while to identify--maybe it doesn't do them any benefit until the last few minutes or so of the game. But an unfair advantage on even one of the last few plays of a game can mean a hell of a lot.

I don't disagree, although again, it wouldn't benefit them until the NEXT game.

But either way, yes of course it is still cheating, and could end up being the difference between a win and a loss. They deserved the punishment they got.


BTW, you completely misunderstood my whole "legeal or not" point. My point is that NFL teams will not care whether it is legal or not. They will care about ths risks of getting caught, for sure. But in my opinion, legalities are not going to stop a team from getting an advantage in a league as competitive as the NFL.

alby
12-04-2007, 10:21 AM
There is about 3 to 3 1/2 hours between kickoff and the last play of the game. I am quite certain there are signals that can be deciphered during that timespan.

ty
12-04-2007, 10:31 AM
BTW, you completely misunderstood my whole "legeal or not" point. My point is that NFL teams will not care whether it is legal or not. They will care about ths risks of getting caught, for sure. But in my opinion, legalities are not going to stop a team from getting an advantage in a league as competitive as the NFL.

Well I didn't know that there weren't good people in the world today--teams that will play the game for what it is, within the rules. Call me naive again for that because I don't believe your pure assumptions/opinion regarding the majority of the NFL.

alby
12-04-2007, 10:37 AM
Not only have they been winning, but they've won THREE superbowls under Bellicek and his cameras... I mean, come on.

Flacolaco
12-04-2007, 10:45 AM
In baseball, they all say "if you're not cheating, you're not trying"

And everyone gets their panties a wad because the pats were trying to steal signals.

There are bigger and badder things in this world to complain about.

You think the Pats had the opportunity to steal the signals of the NFC teams they beat in those super bowls? You think stealing signals helped them play in the snow, or make those field goals?

Please.

I hate the bastards, but there are worse things than this in sports that don't get half the attention.

alby
12-04-2007, 11:08 AM
Is that reason to brush off what they were charged with?

A lot of athletes in the African American community fight dogs, but Michael Vick is the only known "star" that has been accused of it. Should we just brush that off?

ty
12-04-2007, 11:32 AM
What are some worse things in sports that don't get half the attention?

Cheating is a pretty damn big deal.

The thing is, it seemed to me like Spygate really didn't get the attention it should have. And any time an analyst brought up the fact that Spygate should take away from the Pats' perfect season, they would strangely revoke the statement soon after.

No, cheating doesn't make field goals in the snow. It sure can help in anything prior. You have to get to the point of the field goal before you have a chance to kick it.

jthig32
12-04-2007, 11:43 AM
What are some worse things in sports that don't get half the attention?

Cheating is a pretty damn big deal.

The thing is, it seemed to me like Spygate really didn't get the attention it should have. And any time an analyst brought up the fact that Spygate should take away from the Pats' perfect season, they would strangely revoke the statement soon after.

No, cheating doesn't make field goals in the snow. It sure can help in anything prior. You have to get to the point of the field goal before you have a chance to kick it.

I need a smiley for a giant eye roll. Just imagine it here.

Care to explain how they're doign what they're doing this season if the vid cameras were such a big part of their arsenal in the past?

I thought the media made a freaking huge deal out of spygate. A much bigger deal than say, Shawn Merriman testing positive for steroids. Now which offense do you find worse?

Flacolaco
12-04-2007, 11:46 AM
Care to explain how they're doign what they're doing this season if the vid cameras were such a big part of their arsenal in the past?

I thought the media made a freaking huge deal out of spygate. A much bigger deal than say, Shawn Merriman testing positive for steroids. Now which offense do you find worse?

co-sign

(as alby says)

ty
12-04-2007, 12:59 PM
I need a smiley for a giant eye roll. Just imagine it here.

Care to explain how they're doign what they're doing this season if the vid cameras were such a big part of their arsenal in the past?

I thought the media made a freaking huge deal out of spygate. A much bigger deal than say, Shawn Merriman testing positive for steroids. Now which offense do you find worse?

1) You can't deny that Randy Moss and a legitimate QB can make a difference on any team. They weren't always blowing out teams in the past. I never said the Patriots were not a good team. But, if you're a good team and you are proven to cheat, then you lose credibility in my book.

The truth is, none of us (not even you) will ever know the extent to which the Patriots cheated. But, logically, it makes more sense for them to have benefitted greatly compared to little. The world today is all about maximizing efficiency: Cost-Benefit. It is more logically sound for them to have received greater benefit from cheating than little. If you receive little from cheating, than why go through the costs to cheat in the first place? The costs could excede the benefits in that case...

If cheating wasn't that bad and did such little impact on their team, I would like to think they would have appealed the fine and draft pick losses.

2) Have we forgotten steroids with Barry Bonds? That seemed like a pretty big deal to me. It definitely didn't receive only "half the attention" of Spygate. Flac said "sports"--I'm referring to what I quoted.

FINtastic
12-04-2007, 01:22 PM
1) You can't deny that Randy Moss and a legitimate QB can make a difference on any team. They weren't always blowing out teams in the past. I never said the Patriots were not a good team. But, if you're a good team and you are proven to cheat, then you lose credibility in my book.

The truth is, none of us (not even you) will ever know the extent to which the Patriots cheated. But, logically, it makes more sense for them to have benefitted greatly compared to little. The world today is all about maximizing efficiency: Cost-Benefit. It is more logically sound for them to have received greater benefit from cheating than little. If you receive little from cheating, than why go through the costs to cheat in the first place? The costs could excede the benefits in that case...

If cheating wasn't that bad and did such little impact on their team, I would like to think they would have appealed the fine and draft pick losses.

Why is it logically sound that they had have received a gigantic benefit. If you want to talk about the Economics of cheating all that had to happen was that the perceived benefit of cheating exceeded the perceived cost of cheating. For a guy as crazy and egotistical as Belichek, I wouldn't be surprised if he just felt he simply wouldn't get caught. In that case he didn't need to gain much perceived benefit in order for it to be worthwhile. The only way you could do an effective cost-benefit analysis is if you had a good idea of what exactly goes through Belichek's head. And the Patriots wouldn't have 3 Super Bowls and a potential undefeated season if people knew what was going on in Belichek's head.

jthig32
12-04-2007, 01:31 PM
1) You can't deny that Randy Moss and a legitimate QB can make a difference on any team. They weren't always blowing out teams in the past. I never said the Patriots were not a good team. But, if you're a good team and you are proven to cheat, then you lose credibility in my book.

The truth is, none of us (not even you) will ever know the extent to which the Patriots cheated. But, logically, it makes more sense for them to have benefitted greatly compared to little. The world today is all about maximizing efficiency: Cost-Benefit. It is more logically sound for them to have received greater benefit from cheating than little. If you receive little from cheating, than why go through the costs to cheat in the first place? The costs could excede the benefits in that case...

If cheating wasn't that bad and did such little impact on their team, I would like to think they would have appealed the fine and draft pick losses.

2) Have we forgotten steroids with Barry Bonds? That seemed like a pretty big deal to me. It definitely didn't receive only "half the attention" of Spygate. Flac said "sports"--I'm referring to what I quoted.

I didn't say anything about Barry Bonds. I want to talk about Shawn Merriman being suspended for steroid use last season, and how you felt like it was covered compared to Spygate. Spygate got HUGE coverage.

And Fin already beat me to it, but everything we know about Belicheck would seem to point to him feeling like he's smarter than everyone else. I doubt he ever felt he would get caught. And I'd say Belicheck is the kind of coach that would go to any means to find any advantage, no matter how small.

And that's what I think it was, a small advantage. An illegal advantage, obviously, and punishable. But let's not act like it was the crutch they leaned on for three titles. That would be moronic.

As far as worse things in sports that don't get half the mention, let's start with the fact than an NFL team still employs Leonard Little. There's one.

Underdog
12-04-2007, 01:39 PM
And that's what I think it was, a small advantage. An illegal advantage, obviously, and punishable. But let's not act like it was the crutch they leaned on for three titles. That would be moronic.


When you win 3 Super Bowls by 3 points each, then a little cheating goes a long way...

jthig32
12-04-2007, 01:42 PM
When you win 3 Super Bowls by 3 points each, then a little cheating goes a long way...

Ok, so explain to me how that cheating helped them in those three close games.

I've already given ample evidence as to how those videos are worthless during the actual game they are recorded in. Every football expert to comment on this situation agrees with me.

So explain to me how they helped in those close games.

I'm shocked there are actually people out there that feel like this spygate thing was a big factor in the success of the Patriots. I find it hard to believe people actually believe that, but alas, the evidence is right in front of me.

Underdog
12-04-2007, 01:48 PM
Ok, so explain to me how that cheating helped them in those three close games.

I've already given ample evidence as to how those videos are worthless during the actual game they are recorded in. Every football expert to comment on this situation agrees with me.

So explain to me how they helped in those close games.

I'm shocked there are actually people out there that feel like this spygate thing was a big factor in the success of the Patriots. I find it hard to believe people actually believe that, but alas, the evidence is right in front of me.


The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence...

Proving that cheating DIDN'T help the Pats win Super Bowls is as impossible as proving that it DID...

We deserve every right to remain skeptical about their legitimacy as long as we know they cheated AT ALL...

jthig32
12-04-2007, 01:50 PM
The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence...

Proving that cheating DIDN'T help the Pats win Super Bowls is as impossible as proving that it DID...

As long as we know they cheated AT ALL, then we deserve every right to remain skeptical about their legitimacy...

One would assume this season is pretty good evidence that they were pretty good, cheating or not.

If they were playing at about their same level, then I could see the argument. Take away their huge cheating advantage, add a receiver core, and they don't lose a step.

However, remove huge cheating advantage from a previously average team, add a receiver core, and now their the greatest team we've seen in a decade, if not a whole lot longer?

Whatever floats your boat.

Underdog
12-04-2007, 01:51 PM
One would assume this season is pretty good evidence that they were pretty good, cheating or not.


You can be good & a cheater at the same time... The question isn't whether cheating made them good, it's whether cheating made them better than their opponent...

jthig32
12-04-2007, 01:54 PM
You can be good & a cheater at the same time... The question isn't whether cheating made them good, it's whether cheating made them better than their opponent...

Now you're just arguing in circles. Did cheating make them better or not? Were they a superbowl level team without the cheating or not? Take a position.

If your position is they would not have won three Superbowls without the cheating, fine. Then you must think they figured out a way to continue cheating, otherwise the current season they're turning in would be pretty impossible.

alby
12-04-2007, 01:56 PM
Because they are blowing teams out by 100 points this year does not mean they would have had the same success without cheating in prior seasons. You know it and I know it, you can't have one good deed justify a many previous bad deeds. We don't even know how far back this Spygate thing goes or to what extent. I highly doubt the NFL released all the information that they found in correspondence to this issue 1) because you don't want to ruin the face of the league (Tom Brady and the New England Patriots) and 2) because you want to save face in the midst of all the scandals going on in the MLB and NBA.

jthig32
12-04-2007, 02:01 PM
Because they are blowing teams out by 100 points this year does not mean they would have had the same success without cheating in prior seasons. You know it and I know it, you can't have one good deed justify a many previous bad deeds. We don't even know how far back this Spygate thing goes or to what extent. I highly doubt the NFL released all the information that they found in correspondence to this issue 1) because you don't want to ruin the face of the league (Tom Brady and the New England Patriots) and 2) because you want to save face in the midst of all the scandals going on in the MLB and NBA.

It doesn't present factual evidence, obviously.

However, the level the Patriots are currently at, assumingly without their previous video advantage, would seem to indicate that they were a pretty good team before this season, cheating or not. That's a logical conclusion to come to.

alby
12-04-2007, 02:02 PM
That's not the point. Let's say they are a superbowl team without cheating, so what? An advantage is an advantage no matter how you look at it.

I go to the University of California at Irvine.
We have a GPA system where an 80 (2.7) is worth less than 89 (3.3) instead of the popular 3.0 for all scores in the range of 80-89.

Let's say I am going to be a B student no matter what, however, I cheat to get a few extra points earning a B+ which in turn raises my GPA. Although I'm still a B student, I have a better GPA because I cheated earning those couple of points.

Underdog
12-04-2007, 02:06 PM
It doesn't present factual evidence, obviously.

However, the level the Patriots are currently at, assumingly without their previous video advantage, would seem to indicate that they were a pretty good team before this season, cheating or not. That's a logical conclusion to come to.


Nobody has argued whether they were a good team or not - we all know they were... The argument is whether they cheated to gain an unfair advantage over their opponent in their three different Super Bowl appearances that were decided by a field goal each...

Could they have won without cheating? Maybe...

Did they cheat in those games? Maybe...

Do we have a reason to be suspicious that they cheated in light of them getting caught doing it this season? Definitely...

Will we ever prove that they cheated? The NFL would be the only ones who could prove such a thing, so the answer is NEVER...

fluid.forty.one
12-04-2007, 02:24 PM
I thought this thread was suppose to be about how much the Warriors suck :(

Underdog
12-04-2007, 02:30 PM
I thought this thread was suppose to be about how much the Warriors suck :(


Yeah, I haven't seen a hijacking this bad since Sept... Um, nevermind (afterall, I DID participate in this one...)

jthig32
12-04-2007, 02:31 PM
That's not the point. Let's say they are a superbowl team without cheating, so what? An advantage is an advantage no matter how you look at it.

I go to the University of California at Irvine.
We have a GPA system where an 80 (2.7) is worth less than 89 (3.3) instead of the popular 3.0 for all scores in the range of 80-89.

Let's say I am going to be a B student no matter what, however, I cheat to get a few extra points earning a B+ which in turn raises my GPA. Although I'm still a B student, I have a better GPA because I cheated earning those couple of points.

You (and a few others) need to go back and read your own first post on this subject. My entire point on this thing (or this branch of this thing, I guess) was yes they cheated, yes they gained an advantage, but you made it sound like this thing made it an open book for the Patriots to know what play was coming at them. That was my point.

That was where this part of the dicussion started, when you compared it to knowing what the other side of the ball was going to do during practice, and being in the other team's huddle.

So which is it? Is it a HUGE advantage, as you characterized earlier in this thread? Or is it the kind of advantage that would take a really good team and maybe make them just that much better.

If you feel like the latter is true, then we agree. But then I've confused by your earlier post.

alby
12-04-2007, 02:36 PM
a miniscule advantage due to cheating v. a huge advantage due to cheating

same difference.
advantage = advantage
cheating = cheating

ty
12-04-2007, 02:37 PM
Why is it logically sound that they had have received a gigantic benefit. If you want to talk about the Economics of cheating all that had to happen was that the perceived benefit of cheating exceeded the perceived cost of cheating. For a guy as crazy and egotistical as Belichek, I wouldn't be surprised if he just felt he simply wouldn't get caught. In that case he didn't need to gain much perceived benefit in order for it to be worthwhile. The only way you could do an effective cost-benefit analysis is if you had a good idea of what exactly goes through Belichek's head. And the Patriots wouldn't have 3 Super Bowls and a potential undefeated season if people knew what was going on in Belichek's head.

I didn't say it was logically sound. I said it was more logically sound.

alby
12-04-2007, 02:40 PM
Back on topic...

Looks like the Warriors have found their groove while the Heat are truly a shadow of themselves.

Warriors
8-2 since Stephen Jackson's return
9-8 overall

Heat
3-7 since Dwayne Wade's return
4-13 overall

Underdog
12-04-2007, 02:46 PM
So which is it? Is it a HUGE advantage, as you characterized earlier in this thread? Or is it the kind of advantage that would take a really good team and maybe make them just that much better.

If you feel like the latter is true, then we agree. But then I've confused by your earlier post.


I believe in the latter, myself... So I guess you & I agree...

But to re-phrase my earlier post: when you win 3 Super Bowls by 3 points each, "just that much better" can be the difference between winning & losing... If the smallest boost from cheating helped them overcome their opponent, then the better team did not win & the sense of justice that attracts many people to pro sports is lost... The integrity of the game is in jeopardy when a team can become a "dynasty" by cheating...

(and back on topic - eff the Warriors!)

ty
12-04-2007, 03:08 PM
...and that's why SJax is a captain.

alby
12-05-2007, 11:01 PM
If the Warriors play decent defense, they are a very very good team.

With 6 mins left in the third quarter, they have held the Bucks to 44 points.

MavsFanFinley
12-05-2007, 11:43 PM
The Warriors look much better defensively this year than last. Not lock down but they play great team defense in spurts that is really stifling.

chumdawg
12-05-2007, 11:45 PM
Don't look now, kiddos, but Golden State just went into Milwaukee and blew their asses out.

EDIT: Looks like the game was at Oracle. Still a nice win, though.

chumdawg
12-05-2007, 11:56 PM
DJ Benga led the team in rebounding. Giggle.

Flacolaco
12-06-2007, 12:19 AM
DJ Benga led the team in rebounding. Giggle.

That proves it! He can play on a gimmicky team that can't win anything as well as this mess of a mavs team that can't win anything.

chumdawg
12-06-2007, 12:45 AM
What makes you think GSW is a gimmicky team?

alby
12-06-2007, 12:46 AM
they are now 9-2 with their captain the lineup.

When was the last time Dallas had a stretch of 9-2 (honest question, I'm not trying to hate on the Mavs)

chumdawg
12-06-2007, 12:53 AM
When you consider the run they had at the end of last year, they are flat winning games at a horrific pace with their captain at the helm. Dismiss them at your peril. They are for freaking real.

Darth Ape
12-06-2007, 01:02 AM
Nelson is only a game and a half behind the Mavs and gaining fast.

Dirkadirkastan
12-06-2007, 01:20 AM
they are now 9-2 with their captain the lineup.

When was the last time Dallas had a stretch of 9-2 (honest question, I'm not trying to hate on the Mavs)

Um... when we started the year 9-2?

chumdawg
12-06-2007, 01:25 AM
Dirkakazakstan...are you suggesting that the Warriors are as accomplished a team as we are?

You may not be half wrong.

alby
12-06-2007, 01:41 AM
we did start 9-2, didnt we.. dang, seems so long ago. was the 3 game losing streak right after that?

fluid.forty.one
12-06-2007, 11:45 PM
Go Portland!

LonghornDub
12-07-2007, 01:03 AM
Dirkakazakstan...are you suggesting that the Warriors are as accomplished a team as we are?

You may not be half wrong.

Obviously the Mavs aren't infinitely more accomplished than the W's, but there's no way you can say that the Mavs aren't at least somewhat more accomplished.

fluid.forty.one
12-07-2007, 01:20 AM
I'm proud of the Blazers! F the heat.

Darth Ape
12-07-2007, 10:28 AM
Obviously the Mavs aren't infinitely more accomplished than the W's, but there's no way you can say that the Mavs aren't at least somewhat more accomplished.

Golden State went further in the playoffs last year. So in recent times, you can say they have had more success and are therefore more accomplished. If you look back a few years, you should remember that the Warriors have won a championship. The Mavericks never have. So historically, the franchise is more accomplished. And they've had more success recently. So in my book, the Mavs aren't more "accomplished" at all.

alby
12-07-2007, 11:38 AM
agreed. Dallas fans have always acted as if we've won something... Wrong.

rcs15
12-08-2007, 01:56 AM
Warriors outscore Heat 38-22 in the 4th. Heat blew an 18 pt lead.

4-15 on the year now

ty
12-08-2007, 02:02 AM
Warriors outscore Heat 38-22 in the 4th. Heat blew an 18 pt lead.

4-15 on the year now

Because they took out Shaq.

alby
12-08-2007, 02:39 AM
The Nellie-effect

MavsFanFinley
12-08-2007, 11:19 AM
The Warriors remind me of Dallas some years back. It doesn't matter how many points they're down they continue to chip away and they still looked like they were having fun.

It would be so much fun to watch a Spurs-Warriors matchup in the 1st round.

Jack.Kerr
12-08-2007, 11:26 AM
The Warriors remind me of Dallas some years back. It doesn't matter how many points they're down they continue to chip away and they still looked like they were having fun.

It would be so much fun to watch a Spurs-Warriors matchup in the 1st round.

Spurs in 4.

LonghornDub
12-08-2007, 12:11 PM
Spurs would own the GSW's in the playoffs. The Spurs are fortunate to be one of the 2 or 3 teams in the NBA with a low post player who can singlehandedly dictate the pace of a game.

alby
12-08-2007, 01:12 PM
The Warriors are a very fun team to watch. They do have a lot of comparisons to the Dallas team with Nash/Fin/Dirk but I think the Warriors of today are faster, more athletic, and actually can defend if they wanted to. Baron is good if he wants to defend, we all know Stephen Jackson's defensive capabilities, Biedrins patrols the paint pretty well, and of course--DJ Mbenga aka the Kobe shot blocker

alby
12-08-2007, 01:36 PM
It starts with rule No. 1 from coach Don Nelson: Shoot the ball.

"He actually said, 'Don't worry about making it,'" Austin Croshere (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3182) said. "You have to take that shot in order to get the defense to extend to open things up. It's within certain parts of our offense. To get the ball into the corner, you have to get that guy out there."

alby
12-09-2007, 11:09 PM
Miami wins today =[

GS loses today =]

edit*
DJ
7 points
4 rebounds
2 blocks
14 minutes

LonghornDub
12-09-2007, 11:37 PM
Miami wins today =[

GS loses today =]

edit*
DJ
7 points
4 rebounds
2 blocks
14 minutes

I really think it's kind of sad that the Lakers can beat the GSW's by 10 and the Mavs have to exert a ridiculous amount of energy just to beat them at all.

fluid.forty.one
12-09-2007, 11:44 PM
Any night that Golden State loses is a good night.

alby
12-09-2007, 11:56 PM
Any night that Golden State loses is a good night.

Cheers!

fluid.forty.one
12-10-2007, 12:22 AM
Cheers!

cheers indeed.

I need to figure out something special to do for myself every time Miami and Golden State lose on the same night.

Dirkadirkastan
12-10-2007, 01:45 AM
cheers indeed.

I need to figure out something special to do for myself every time Miami and Golden State lose on the same night.

Whatever it is, you have a lot of backlogging to do.

MavsFanFinley
12-10-2007, 10:50 AM
GS doesn't match up with the Lakers at all. They better hope they don't face them in the playoffs.

DJ had a nice game. I know the stats don't look that impressive but he had some nice blocks and taps for rebounds. The offense (whatever it may be) is only a bonus.

alby
12-11-2007, 09:43 PM
Nellie has elected to go small tonight, Al Harrington starting at C

alby
12-11-2007, 09:45 PM
...and Matt Bonner has 3 offensive rebounds in the first 2 mintues

alby
12-11-2007, 09:55 PM
Warriors [link] (mms://a1737.l3072828838.c30728.g.lm.akamaistream.net/D/1737/30728/v0001/reflector:28838?auth=caEd6dSbGbjbMbicFdjaVcfc9d4bS aecrbL-bhx1SC-eS-EqCDFxw&aifp=0001&upos=2)

last chance

alby
12-11-2007, 09:58 PM
Baron is a strong man.

chumdawg
12-11-2007, 09:59 PM
MAD props to Alby for hooking a brutha up with a stream of the game. You rock, man!!!

alby
12-11-2007, 10:03 PM
after the 1st quarter

Spurs - 25
Warriors - 23

at this rate, GS will win by 17+ points (just watch)

alby
12-11-2007, 10:23 PM
update

Spurs - 27
Warriors - 38

Manu is 1-3, has 2 points, 1 rebound, 1 steal, and 5 turnovers

I'm telling you guys, Stephen Jackson is a beast on the defensive end.
The Warriors are an underrated defensive team. Sure, their numbers look horrid--but they play at such a face pace, their defensive statistics will never look good. The confidence they gained against us last year has created a monster that nobody wants to play anymore.

chumdawg
12-11-2007, 10:31 PM
The Warriors are kicking the crap out of the Spurs. It's dirty.

alby
12-11-2007, 10:34 PM
halftime

Spurs - 37
Warriors - 53

After the first quarter, I predicted a 17+ point win for GS, is that too low?

chumdawg
12-11-2007, 10:40 PM
Nah, I don't think you are selling GS short. Even if they get up 25, which doubtless they will do, it is likely that the scrubs bring it much closer by the end of the game.

I don't ever want to hear anyone say that the Warriors don't play defense. They are HARD to play offense against.

alby
12-11-2007, 10:55 PM
watching the GS game tonight makes me really want Artest.

Stephen Jackson was considered an NBA outcast, a locker room killer, a bad teammate, etc etc...

chumdawg
12-11-2007, 11:01 PM
watching the GS game tonight makes me really want Artest.

Stephen Jackson was considered an NBA outcast, a locker room killer, a bad teammate, etc etc...And yet the truth be known is that it was Stephen Jackson, and not Steve Kerr, who buried us with threes in that Game Six in '03 against San Antonio. Kerr finished the job, but it was Jackson who started the job and made it happen. The guy is a FLAT OUT baller, no other way to describe him.

I would take Artest quicker than you can say "blueberry pancakes."

alby
12-11-2007, 11:03 PM
Did you just see Jackson's no look assist to Biedrins? then forcing Manu to his right where he missed a layup?

fluid.forty.one
12-11-2007, 11:03 PM
I hope GS shoots it's wad tonight so Portland can destroy them tomorrow.

alby
12-11-2007, 11:05 PM
Does anyone know why Horry is back to his #25 this year?

chumdawg
12-11-2007, 11:10 PM
I hope GS shoots it's wad tonight so Portland can destroy them tomorrow.In case you didn't know already, GS can shoot that wad every night. They are young, you know.

alby
12-11-2007, 11:15 PM
at the end of the 3rd

Spurs - 64
Warriors - 79

Flacolaco
12-11-2007, 11:19 PM
Spurs actually shooting a better percentage. Warriors have attempted 24 3 pointers in 3 quarters.

Oh wow, Duncan still isn't playing...that explains it.

fluid.forty.one
12-11-2007, 11:21 PM
Oh wow, Duncan still isn't playing...that explains it.

It also reinforces almost everyone's belief that teams that play their bigs against GS do better than teams who go small.

alby
12-11-2007, 11:51 PM
Final score

Spurs - 84
Warriors - 96

Jackson held Manu to 10 points, 4-10 shooting, 3 rebounds, 1 assist, 5 turnovers

I hate the damn Warriors, but they are unquestionably a scary team.

chumdawg
12-12-2007, 12:00 AM
Manu was as good as Marquis Daniels tonight. The Dubs shut him down, no kidding.

MavsFanFinley
12-12-2007, 12:16 AM
Does anyone know why Horry is back to his #25 this year?

He came into the league wearing that number and said he'd wear that number again when he was retiring.

Stephen Jackson is an excellent defender and really bothered Ginobli tonight. The Warriors as a team really forced the Spurs into numerous turnovers. The team averages 12 a game and they had 21 tonight. I really don't think the Warriors get enough credit for their defense either. They might not play it for 48 minutes but I've seen them do it for a quarter or in spurts that is really locked down.

Underdog
12-12-2007, 07:58 AM
The Warriors have beaten the Spurs, Suns & Rockets so far this season...

Suddenly, I don't feel so embarrassed about our first round exit...

dude1394
12-12-2007, 09:44 AM
Manu was as good as Marquis Daniels tonight. The Dubs shut him down, no kidding.

Who (and how) did they cover him chum? Nobody on the mavs could.

Did they do the dirkster defense on him?

dude1394
12-12-2007, 09:54 AM
The Warriors have beaten the Spurs, Suns & Rockets so far this season...

Suddenly, I don't feel so embarrassed about our first round exit...

Are you saying the mavs ran into a hot team? :)

alby
12-12-2007, 10:28 AM
Who (and how) did they cover him chum? Nobody on the mavs could.

Did they do the dirkster defense on him?

Stephen Jackson played him straight up.

Stephen should make the all defensive team this year.

MavsX
12-12-2007, 01:09 PM
sigh

Tokey41
12-12-2007, 01:36 PM
Stephen Jackson played him straight up.

Stephen should make the all defensive team this year.

If he doesn't get shot or suspended first. They are a good team (right now) no question, but I can't do anything but hate their two best players (even before our first round upset, even before they were on GSW). Jackson is just a thug, a cocky thug no less. And every time Baron opens his mouth he coldly and persistently rapes the English language, I have never heard him say anything remotely intelligent. Being injured every single year for long stretches doesn't help my dislike for him either... but that said I think they are fun to watch and will thoroughly enjoy seeing them crash and burn against some team in the playoffs. Not that i'm hoping for it but that team could very well be us.

alby
12-12-2007, 02:46 PM
I hate the Warriors as much as the next person, I just can't believe how great of a player those two are. If you think about it, that organization is very similiar to ours--they hadn't made the playoffs in 12 (or was it 13) years, then they make it on the last day of the regular season, and went on to actually win a playoff series. Kinda similar to our drought in the 90s, then coming back and beating Utah in the first round. Don't hate the player, hate the game--is what I'm trying to say, I guess.

alby
12-16-2007, 03:05 PM
update

Warriors: 13-11 (8th in the West)
Heat: 6-17 (Last in the East) ...yes, they are behind the Knicks lol

Dirkadirkastan
12-16-2007, 05:54 PM
I hate the Warriors as much as the next person, I just can't believe how great of a player those two are. If you think about it, that organization is very similiar to ours--they hadn't made the playoffs in 12 (or was it 13) years, then they make it on the last day of the regular season, and went on to actually win a playoff series. Kinda similar to our drought in the 90s, then coming back and beating Utah in the first round. Don't hate the player, hate the game--is what I'm trying to say, I guess.

I think you're one of the last people to board that train of thought.

The rest of us are just waiting for the other shoe to drop: when Nelson gets bored, quits on the team, and sues the owner for not paying him money after quitting.

chumdawg
12-16-2007, 06:34 PM
The rest of us are just waiting for the other shoe to drop: when Nelson gets bored, quits on the team, and sues the owner for not paying him money after quitting.I think you are imagining a situation where Baron Davis comes up for renewal, and the owner decides to lowball him, and then not match another legitimate offer.

You may be able to imagine that, but I can't. Because I don't think anyone is as stupid as Mark Cuban when it comes to these things.

What is Nash, now four years into a five-year contract, when Cuban said he was supposed to break down two years ago?

alby
12-16-2007, 06:40 PM
Maybe we could pick up Baron =p

dude1394
12-16-2007, 07:53 PM
What is Nash, now four years into a five-year contract, when Cuban said he was supposed to break down two years ago?

Yea, cubes and the mavs screwed that pooch badly. I still refuse to put that totally on cubes, if your basketball guys can't tell you that you are royally screwing up, what good are they. But he's the top dog, he gets the blame.

Tokey41
12-16-2007, 08:32 PM
Comparing Nash to Davis is wrong on so many levels.

Dirkadirkastan
12-17-2007, 02:50 AM
I think you are imagining a situation where Baron Davis comes up for renewal, and the owner decides to lowball him, and then not match another legitimate offer.

You may be able to imagine that, but I can't. Because I don't think anyone is as stupid as Mark Cuban when it comes to these things.

What is Nash, now four years into a five-year contract, when Cuban said he was supposed to break down two years ago?

Whenever you bring this up, I'll just remember when you said 2005 was our best opportunity to win the title. You know, the year Nelson got bored and quit the team...

jthig32
12-17-2007, 08:58 AM
I think you are imagining a situation where Baron Davis comes up for renewal, and the owner decides to lowball him, and then not match another legitimate offer.

You may be able to imagine that, but I can't. Because I don't think anyone is as stupid as Mark Cuban when it comes to these things.

What is Nash, now four years into a five-year contract, when Cuban said he was supposed to break down two years ago?

Judging by the poor phyiscal condition Nash is in right now, and knowing that he admittedly rededicated himself to basetball and got in the best shape of his life after signing with the Suns (his words), is it really that out of the question to wonder what kind of shape he'd be in right now if he'd re-signed with the Mavs, and not had the chip on his shoulder to get him to change his habits?

Obviously it's purely hypethetical and conjecture, but it's based in more fact that most Chum's Nash and Nellie centric conjecture usually is.

Just a question to ponder.