Let's discuss NBA fan culture

[ninersdd]

To improve NBA culture:

Get rid of the Maloofs!

Also, as discussed in the NBA thread, the reffing has just been highly questionable these playoffs. (College isn't great either with the extended 6 on 5 this year and the Jim Burr fiasco last year). Like the bs high five technical called on the Clippers, and also on Ray Allen in Game 1 against the Heat. I mean it's like if your a player, how are you supposed to react if you don't like the call? It's not like he attacked the ref or anything like that. David Stern redefines the term smug a$$hole. He was not happy with the Pacers coach calling the Heat floppers, only to admit that there is a problem with flopping in the league. Obviously it's also an automatic 25K fine if you say one word about his precious refs. I don't want the refs insulted and abused on a daily basis, but if it's just a player or coach saying how they feel and as long as it's civil, it should be allowed.

[OnWis97]

I don't even understand what they're logo is. It certainly isn't representative of the word "Thunder"

(clip)

Agreed on their road jerseys. Just my opinion, but I think their color scheme is great. One of my NBA favorites in fact.

With regard to the Thunder logo, I put it in the same category as the Lakers and Clippers; neither of them have much...hell, anything to do with the names of the teams. I know that's a real issue around here but it doesn't really bother me all that much. Still, if OKC is going to go that route, they could have done a better job with it. Their logo is not the apocalyptic disaster some make it out to be around here, but it's still a long way from good.

FAKE EDIT: The Nets fall into the "logo has nothing to do with the name" category too. Nothing wrong with simplicity. I suppose as long as the logo immediately brings to mind what it's supposed to represent, not much else matters.

It was once suggested on here, and I kinda buy in, that because the team moved late in the offseason, the "OKC" part was there just waiting for the team name, whatever it was, to be placed on top of it. It would have been interesting to see what they'd have come up with had they had more time.

[tBBP]

Reading this thread has been interesting. All I really have to say is that I think the OKC crowds are great. They remind me of the professional sports crowds from back in the 70's and 80's when "regular" (read blue collar folks who made less than 200K a year) could still afford to fill a stadium or arena for a game. There's a good chance I'm way off the mark with this, but I think the less raucous crowds we see today are a direct result of the kind of people who attend the events. In other words, we're far more likely to see a bunch of blue collar folks "acting a fool" at a game than we are to see a bunch of white collar "executive" types doing it.

"Back in the day", places like the old Boston Garden or the Silverdome were packed to the rafters with "regular" fans. These days, there aren't as many "regular" fans and the ones that are there are up in the nosebleed seats.

None of that explains why the OKC crowds are the way they are, I just hope they keep it up.

Bruh, lemme share something with you. As one who's been all through Oklahoma City, overnighted and got laid over several times there (I said "laid OVER, not "laid" for those who might've misread that), I'll say this: the passion is genuine. I saw it firsthand. I don't think they've yet wrapped their lives around the Thunder the way Pittsburgh people wrap their lives around the fortunes/misfortunes of the Steelers, but they LOVE them some Thunder out there. And as far as the blue-collar thing, ad far as I deduced, OKC ain't too different from Indy in that it's a capital city whose economy is largely based around industry and manufacturing. Now I have no clue what the Thunder price their tickets at, but either they're doggone affordable or those folks pony up the hard-earned Benjamins regardless to watch their team...then get inti that arena and go ham for 48 solid (game) minutes.

I kinda wish more fanbases were like that.

[The_Admiral]

David Stern redefines the term smug a$hole.

See, I like Stern's demeanor, for the most part. I think he projects years of wisdom and a genuine love of the game. Compare him to Gary Bettman, who seems edgy, insecure, and dissembling. I think David Stern wants people to think that he has the best interests of basketball at heart. Bettman wants people to know that he didn't say he was worried about a lockout, he said he wasn't not worried about the possibility of the eventuality of a labor stoppage. Which is different.

[OnWis97]

Reading this thread has been interesting. All I really have to say is that I think the OKC crowds are great. They remind me of the professional sports crowds from back in the 70's and 80's when "regular" (read blue collar folks who made less than 200K a year) could still afford to fill a stadium or arena for a game. There's a good chance I'm way off the mark with this, but I think the less raucous crowds we see today are a direct result of the kind of people who attend the events. In other words, we're far more likely to see a bunch of blue collar folks "acting a fool" at a game than we are to see a bunch of white collar "executive" types doing it.

"Back in the day", places like the old Boston Garden or the Silverdome were packed to the rafters with "regular" fans. These days, there aren't as many "regular" fans and the ones that are there are up in the nosebleed seats.

None of that explains why the OKC crowds are the way they are, I just hope they keep it up.

Bruh, lemme share something with you. As one who's been all through Oklahoma City, overnighted and got laid over several times there (I said "laid OVER, not "laid" for those who might've misread that), I'll say this: the passion is genuine. I saw it firsthand. I don't think they've yet wrapped their lives around the Thunder the way Pittsburgh people wrap their lives around the fortunes/misfortunes of the Steelers, but they LOVE them some Thunder out there. And as far as the blue-collar thing, ad far as I deduced, OKC ain't too different from Indy in that it's a capital city whose economy is largely based around industry and manufacturing. Now I have no clue what the Thunder price their tickets at, but either they're doggone affordable or those folks pony up the hard-earned Benjamins regardless to watch their team...then get inti that arena and go ham for 48 solid (game) minutes.

I kinda wish more fanbases were like that.

Perhaps it is advantageous to be the only pro sport in town.

[Sport]

Reading this thread has been interesting. All I really have to say is that I think the OKC crowds are great. They remind me of the professional sports crowds from back in the 70's and 80's when "regular" (read blue collar folks who made less than 200K a year) could still afford to fill a stadium or arena for a game. There's a good chance I'm way off the mark with this, but I think the less raucous crowds we see today are a direct result of the kind of people who attend the events. In other words, we're far more likely to see a bunch of blue collar folks "acting a fool" at a game than we are to see a bunch of white collar "executive" types doing it.

"Back in the day", places like the old Boston Garden or the Silverdome were packed to the rafters with "regular" fans. These days, there aren't as many "regular" fans and the ones that are there are up in the nosebleed seats.

None of that explains why the OKC crowds are the way they are, I just hope they keep it up.

Bruh, lemme share something with you. As one who's been all through Oklahoma City, overnighted and got laid over several times there (I said "laid OVER, not "laid" for those who might've misread that), I'll say this: the passion is genuine. I saw it firsthand. I don't think they've yet wrapped their lives around the Thunder the way Pittsburgh people wrap their lives around the fortunes/misfortunes of the Steelers, but they LOVE them some Thunder out there. And as far as the blue-collar thing, ad far as I deduced, OKC ain't too different from Indy in that it's a capital city whose economy is largely based around industry and manufacturing. Now I have no clue what the Thunder price their tickets at, but either they're doggone affordable or those folks pony up the hard-earned Benjamins regardless to watch their team...then get inti that arena and go ham for 48 solid (game) minutes.

I kinda wish more fanbases were like that.

Perhaps it is advantageous to be the only pro sport in town.

and that the team is really good. They'd be a little less enthusiastic if they hadn't been gifted a really young exciting team and instead were watching the Kings or Hornets or something instead.

[illwauk]

The Mavericks were a weird case as far as NBA champions go. it just felt like they were finally getting theirs after eight years of contending: 2003, 2005, 2006, and 2007 (they kinda coughed up that last Nash year) were all more memorable teams to me than the one that actually won. Lifetime Achievement Championship. And now they're all kind of old and not as good. The Thunder, on the other hand, feel like a team we're not done with just yet.

Agreed... this was the same problem with the '95 Braves. They'd been so good for so long without a championship that it almost seemed anti-climactic when they finally won one.

Although I think there's something to be said for the Spurs not being more popular and still not being as much of a marquee team as the Lakers, Celtics, Heat or even the Bulls when they've been as successful as anyone else for the past decade and some change. It certainly doesn't help the whole "biased towards big markets" stigma that turns so many off from the NBA. College doesn't have this problem largely because every few years we can count on a Butler, VCU, George Mason, Gonzaga to punch through to the Final Four which makes more people feel as though their team has a chance.

[gosioux76]

Reading this thread has been interesting. All I really have to say is that I think the OKC crowds are great. They remind me of the professional sports crowds from back in the 70's and 80's when "regular" (read blue collar folks who made less than 200K a year) could still afford to fill a stadium or arena for a game. There's a good chance I'm way off the mark with this, but I think the less raucous crowds we see today are a direct result of the kind of people who attend the events. In other words, we're far more likely to see a bunch of blue collar folks "acting a fool" at a game than we are to see a bunch of white collar "executive" types doing it.

"Back in the day", places like the old Boston Garden or the Silverdome were packed to the rafters with "regular" fans. These days, there aren't as many "regular" fans and the ones that are there are up in the nosebleed seats.

None of that explains why the OKC crowds are the way they are, I just hope they keep it up.

You've hit on something here. The thing I like about OKC is that there's something very grassroots about it, and that's been missing from the NBA for a long time.

I think the part of the problem is that the NBA seems to view itself as a premium brand -- the Nike to the NHL's Reebok. In most cases that isn't a bad thing, since "premium" implies higher value. But it's also a status that tends to limit the participation from a large portion of a team's potential fan base. I don't get the sense that the league cares, at least not compared to other pro leagues. Baseball's naturally less expensive per-ticket due to the volume of games. The NFL is the opposite, yet magically it seems the most blue-collar of them all; the one sport that draws interest from all cultures and classes.

I don't know a good solution for this. The NBA's just become too much glitz and glam for my taste.

(Good discussion, other than the whole if-you-don't-watch-it-you-can't-have-an-opinion thing.)

[infrared41]

I kinda wish more fanbases were like that.

You and me both. When Perkins slammed that "dagger dunk" home last night and the place went crazy...well, that's what's supposed to happen when your team all but locks up a trip to the finals. I thought the crowd was just awesome. As I said earlier, it reminded me of "back in the day."

[McCall]

What I like about OKC is that they don't really have an "ego" guy while other teams have multiple. The closest is Westbrook, and it's partly due to being the only real one and the size of the market, that it just seems]/I] a little inflated. But for the most part, aside from his postgame wardrobe, he's vastly matured. Durant's the leading scorer in the league, but he's not flashy. And Harden is a pure retro player, from his playing style to his beard.

Mostly, I see them as the new Spurs. A bunch of great players who play the game right and don't let their heads get too big.

[tBBP]

^ I think that's a pretty good assessment right there.

[The_Admiral]

If that's the case, it's by design: Crewcut Clay was a minority owner of the Spurs, and brought Sam Presti in from the Spurs' basketball-ops.

EDIT:

miss u sonics

[rams80]

Fouls aren't the problem, as late game fouling's part of the sport and its strategy.

It's not part of the sport; it's part of the NBA. By no means is it a necessary part of the game.

It's part of the sport. You see it in college all the time.

No I don't, because I don't watch college sports.

The point is that it's not an integral part of the game like, say, dribbling is. Take away dribbling and it ceases to be basketball. Take away the intentional foulfest at the end of games and what do you get, tighter defense played? Plays on the ball by defenders trying to steal instead of rushing to foul the center who can't make foul shots? A final two minutes that doesn't take twenty? I'll take that.

Foulfest is more exciting and trumps 20-30 seconds of gametime doing nothing, then throwing up a perfunctory 3. Which is what would happen otherwise since foulfest only really happens in a 4-10 point game in which it's really not in the leading team's interest to force stuff.

[DarkJourney]

Boston vs. Seattle has a nice ring to it but Boston vs. OKC will do.

[The Six]

Your overall ignorance of the sport is showing (Though loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooogodud still doesn't have a case). It IS part of the strategy of the end of basketball games, at all levels.

It's part of the rules, but is not an irremovable part. And it makes for plodding, dull finishes to close games that should be frantic and exciting.

[RyanMcD29]

Your overall ignorance of the sport is showing (Though loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooogodud still doesn't have a case). It IS part of the strategy of the end of basketball games, at all levels.

It's part of the rules, but is not an irremovable part. And it makes for plodding, dull finishes to close games that should be frantic and exciting.

But it's the same thing as kneeling in football or intentionally walking in baseball. It's a fabric of the strategy of the game and it's seen at all levels no matter which gender. And at least in the levels below the NBA, and even in the NBA if it's a poor FT shooter, free throws can be some of the most tense moments in the entire game

[loogodude90]

Your overall ignorance of the sport is showing (Though loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooogodud still doesn't have a case). It IS part of the strategy of the end of basketball games, at all levels.

It's part of the rules, but is not an irremovable part. And it makes for plodding, dull finishes to close games that should be frantic and exciting.

But it's the same thing as kneeling in football or intentionally walking in baseball. It's a fabric of the strategy of the game and it's seen at all levels no matter which gender. And at least in the levels below the NBA, and even in the NBA if it's a poor FT shooter, free throws can be some of the most tense moments in the entire game

Exactly.

If the game feels "dull and plodding" at the most tense point of the game to someone, then they're not really a fan, and I'm not sure why they're posting here (like mccccccccccccccccccccccccccfarthy and mcccccccccccccccccccccccccccballs (I wonder if they are related, it wouldn't surprise me!)).

I think the "having to wait a little bit" makes the game even more exciting and tense. It creates cliffhangers.

[knnhrvy16]

The NBA's just become too much glitz and glam for my taste.

That's part of why it's hard for me to really get into it anymore. I still get into the Jazz, but I just don't really have an interest in the entire league like I used to.

Another reason is that it seems the league really isn't a league - or at least have a "league feel" anymore. It's more like "Four or five teams with stars! And...uh...those other guys!" At least growing up in the 90's, it seemed there was a star in every city. The star-power, if you will, was much more spread out. Heck, even Sacramento had Mitch Richmond. Charlotte had Glen Rice. Toronto later had Vince Carter. Utah had Stockton and Malone, and so on, so forth. Lots of interest to be had when it was spread out like that. Plus, even with Chicago just about curb-stomping the league throughout the decade, there was at least a sense of new blood challenging them every year. They played five differnt teams in the Finals, and even Conference foes seemed to vary. Chicago was really the only repetition of sorts. Now? The big markets seemed to be stacked with all the stars, and the media crams the same freakin' teams down the throat year after year after year. A casual fan can't name at least a guy on every roster anymore like they could 15 years ago. Think they could name anyone in Sacramento? Charlotte? Toronto? If it weren't for Utah-icon Jimmer in Sacramento, I'd likely blank out on all three.

All I can say at this point is, thank goodness for a team like the Thunder. Small-market success, GREAT fans, humble stars in it for the game and not press coverage. I hope they stick around, maybe it will set an example. That said, the Spurs have been doing the same for nearly 13 years and the league is still the reality-TV crap it is today, so maybe it'll be all for naught anyways. But still, one can hope. I used to be a rabid NBA fan and would like to be again - hopefully that's sooner than later. I just can't root for the league as a whole at this point.

[tBBP]

Yourselves overall ignorance of the sport is showing (Though loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooogodud still doesn't have a case). It IS part of the strategy of the end of basketball games, at all levels.

It's part of the rules, but is not an irremovable part. And it makes for plodding, dull finishes to close games that should be frantic and exciting.

But it's the same thing as kneeling in football or intentionally walking in baseball. It's a fabric of the strategy of the game and it's seen at all levels no matter which gender. And at least in the levels below the NBA, and even in the NBA if it's a poor FT shooter, free throws can be some of the most tense moments in the entire game

Exactly.

If the game feels "dull and plodding" at the most tense point of the game to someone, then they're not really a fan, and I'm not sure why they're posting here (like mccccccccccccccccccccccccccfarthy and mcccccccccccccccccccccccccccballs (I wonder if they are related, it wouldn't surprise me!)).

I think the "having to wait a little bit" makes the game even more exciting and tense. It creates cliffhangers.

Okay...at this point I got to question whether or not you really are a high school teacher or whether you were just blowing smoke up our asses. How the hell do you expect us to believe you really educate teenagers when the maturity level of your posts reads as a teenager?

Most expect a certain level of decorum from those entrusted to be educators...just saying.

[McCall]

Yourselves overall ignorance of the sport is showing (Though loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooogodud still doesn't have a case). It IS part of the strategy of the end of basketball games, at all levels.

It's part of the rules, but is not an irremovable part. And it makes for plodding, dull finishes to close games that should be frantic and exciting.

But it's the same thing as kneeling in football or intentionally walking in baseball. It's a fabric of the strategy of the game and it's seen at all levels no matter which gender. And at least in the levels below the NBA, and even in the NBA if it's a poor FT shooter, free throws can be some of the most tense moments in the entire game

Exactly.

If the game feels "dull and plodding" at the most tense point of the game to someone, then they're not really a fan, and I'm not sure why they're posting here (like mccccccccccccccccccccccccccfarthy and mcccccccccccccccccccccccccccballs (I wonder if they are related, it wouldn't surprise me!)).

I think the "having to wait a little bit" makes the game even more exciting and tense. It creates cliffhangers.

Okay...at this point I got to question whether or not you really are a high school teacher or whether you were just blowing smoke up our asses. How the hell do you expect us to believe you really educate teenagers when the maturity level of your posts reads as a teenager?

Most expect a certain level of decorum from those entrusted to be educators...just saying.

And why would two people with two different McNames be related? That's like saying two guys with the first name Bill, but two different last names, must be related. (Btw, McCall is not my name.)