Are We In For A New NFC Dominance? Or Maybe Not

I am 38 years old, so I distinctly remember the time from the 1984 season through the 1996 season when the NFC won all 13 Super Bowls.  Not only did the NFC teams win, but they usually won in dominant fashion.  The NFC had Super Bowl wins by 45, 36, 35, 32, 23, 22, 19 and 17 during that time frame and only Super Bowls XXIII and XXV were decided by less than 10 points. 

You had some dominant NFC teams in the 49ers, Cowboys, Redskins, Giants and Bears.  Yet, starting with Super Bowl XXXII, the AFC would then go on to win 8 of the next 10 Super Bowls.

When I look at the league right now, I can see that this kind of trend could be coming back.  No, I certainly don't think that the NFC is going to reel off that kind of impressive streak.  But the NFC looks strong.  Young and strong.

First, let's look at the AFC.  In the AFC, the Denver Broncos are one of the favorites to win the conference.  After that, it is ... New England?  Cincinnati?  Baltimore?  It's hard to say.  Not only is there not the quality of teams there usually is in the conference, most of the elite teams aren't built for the long run.  Denver is in a win-now mode with Peyton Manning.  As is the New England Patriots with Tom Brady.  To me, that makes a team like Cincinnati a team that could be in the mix for the long term.

Below those three teams, you have Pittsburgh and Baltimore ... teams who have had guys leave for various reasons and aren't as strong (though both have great front offices).  The Houston Texans have been in that "right there" spot for a few years and the Indianapolis Colts certainly have a bright future with Andrew Luck.

I'm not saying the AFC sucks by any means.  Remember in those 13 years the NFC won in the mid-80s to mid-90s there were some great AFC teams.  Those Buffalo Bills teams were great.  Denver went to five Super Bowls from 1986-1998 seasons.  There were solid teams in Cincinnati, Houston, Kansas City and Cleveland. 

Over in the NFC, there is a lot of youth that could rise the conference to the next level.  All the buzz is around RGIII (Redskins), Colin Kaepernick (49ers), Russell Wilson (Seahawks) and Cam Newton (Panthers).  The first three led their teams to the playoffs last year with Kaepernick nearly pulling off a Super Bowl championship.  You also have great young-ish QBs in Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Matt Stafford and Drew Brees.  And some guy named Eli Manning has already cashed in a couple of Super Bowls already.

Of course, I can point to those 13 dominant NFC seasons again for some perspective.  The AFC had guys like Dan Marino, John Elway, Jim Kelly, Boomer Esiason, Bernie Kosar and Warren Moon.  Besides Hall Of Famers Brett Favre, Joe Montana, Steve Young and Troy Aikman, these NFC quarterbacks won Super Bowls during that stretch: Jim McMahon, Phil Simms, Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler and Mark Rypien. 

Plus, who knows what happens long term anymore.  In those days, free agency and salary caps certainly aren't the same as it is today.  It would be extremely hard for those stacked teams to be able to stay stacked in today's climate.  And with the mobility of the QBs in the NFC, they are one big hit away from having their star gone (just ask the Redskins on that). 

The NFC has won 3 of the last 4 Super Bowls and 4 of the last 6.  In the last 16 Super Bowls (the games after the NFC's streak), 12 different franchises have represented the NFC (only the Redskins, Cowboys, Vikings and Lions didn't make a Super Bowl in that span).  Conversely, the AFC has had only 7 teams represent the AFC (Broncos, Titans, Ravens, Patriots, Raiders, Steelers and Colts).. 

During the 13-championship streak, only six (49ers, Redskins, Giants, Cowboys, Bears and Packers) repped the NFC.  And, again, only 7 different teams represented the AFC (Dolphins, Patriots, Broncos, Bengals, Bills, Chargers and Steelers).

Who knows what this season will hold.  Well, except in Jacksonville where the season has pretty much been written.

Sportz' Week 2 NFL Picks

LAST WEEK:  12-4
SEASON:  12-4

Not a bad week last week, but there weren't that many head scratchers so I'm not going to break my arm patting my back.  Good start, but let's keep it going.

PATRIOTS over JETS:  New England didn't look great last week, but they still looked much better than the Jets did.

FALCONS over RAMS:  Atlanta can't go 0-2 ... especially at home against the Rams.

BILLS over PANTHERS:  It isn't so much that I'm sold on Buffalo as that I'm just not sold on the Panthers offense. 

BEARS over VIKINGS:  Peterson will get his, but no one else will for the Vikes.

PACKERS over REDSKINS:  Neither team can afford to go 0-2.  One will, and it will be Washington with that suspect defense.

COLTS over DOLPHINS:  Miami looked nice against Cleveland last week.  This isn't Cleveland.

COWBOYS over CHIEFS:  Andy Reid knows the Cowboys.  But with a banged up Jamal Charles, I'm going Dallas here.

RAVENS over BROWNS:  Um, Baltimore.

TEXANS over TITANS:  New Oilers over Old Oilers. 

CHARGERS over EAGLES:  I don't know why, but I'm going upset here.  Probably a dumb pick.

CARDINALS over LIONS:  This is a game Detroit seems to lose.  It continues here.

SAINTS over BUCCANEERS:  I wouldn't say New Orleans is back, but there aren't going to lose to this Tampa team.

RAIDERS over JAGUARS:  Who cares.

BRONCOS over GIANTS:  Manning Bowl goes to Peyton.

NINERS over SEAHAWKS:  I think Seattle is a bit over-rated and that people are underestimating the Niners ability to beat them.  I'm going San Fran.

BENGALS over STEELERS:  Pittsburgh can't block anyone.  Cincinnati will bring the heat.

Sportz' Week 1 NFL Picks

It's time.  I came to get mine.  Okay, the NFL season is on us so here is my Week 1 picks:

BRONCOS over RAVENS:  Sold on Denver being the best team in the AFC.  Not sold on B-more's drastic post championship changes.

PATRIOTS over BILLS:  Buffalo is starting a rookie QB who is coming off an injury?  Yeah, I'm taking the Pats.

BEARS over BENGALS:  This is a good one, but Chicago is at home so I'm going with Da Bears.

BROWNS over DOLPHINS:  Two teams who are looking to turn around their fortunes.  I'm going to give Cleveland the edge in this one due to the Dawg Pound.

SAINTS over FALCONS:  I have the Falcons in the Super Bowl, but N'Awlins will have their Sean Payton back and that place is always live.

JETS over BUCCANEERS:  Neither team wows me at all.  I know that Jets offense could be brutal, but I think people are underestimating the defense. 

STEELERS over TITANS:  Pittsburgh is tough to beat in the Ketchup Bottle

LIONS over VIKINGS:  I'm bullish on Detroit this year ... and I could be dead wrong.  I just think that Stafford and Calvin Johnson will be big, big, big time this year.

COLTS over RAIDERS:  Oakland is bad.  Really bad.

SEAHAWKS over PANTHERS:  Cam Newton is moody and Seattle will put him in a bad mood.

CHIEFS over JAGUARS:  Kansas City wasn't your typical "worst team in the NFL" last year.  They have some players and Andy Reid can coach.  Jacksonville, however, has that look of the "worst team in the NFL" this year.

RAMS over CARDINALS:  Tough to read either team.  I just trust Jeff Fisher a bit more.

NINERS over PACKERS:  Could we see Kaepernick run all over Green Bay again?  I'm betting on it.

GIANTS over COWBOYS:  The G-men own the Cowboys in Jerrah World.  They also show up big time in big time games.  Usually.

REDSKINS over EAGLES:  A rusty RG3 can still find a way to manuver around that Eagles defense.

TEXANS over CHARGERS:  Who does Philip Rivers throw it to?

Sportz Assassin's 2013 NFL Predictions

It's that time of year where I bust out my preseason NFL predictions.  And, in about 5 months, I'll go back and celebrate the two ones I hit on perfectly and mock the many others I was way off on.  So, let's get to it.

NFC EAST
1-GIANTS
2-COWBOYS
3-REDSKINS
4-EAGLES

Overview:  Full disclosure -- I'm a diehard Redskins fan.  Despite that, I feel the Skins may take a small step back this season.  This is a division where anything could happen.  I have the Giants at the top even though they have some injury issues.  It just feels like a season they'll get it together and win the division and not much else.  I feel Dez Bryant will go off and the Cowboys will slip into that 2nd spot and maybe a playoff berth.  The Redskins?  I still see them as an 8 or 9 win team.  RG3 is great, but he may struggle early on after seeing no preseason action.  The defense isn't that much improved in the passing game.  The Eagles will be improved, but I'm not sold on that offense clicking enough this season to make a run past the rest of the division. 

NFC SOUTH
1-FALCONS
2-SAINTS
3-PANTHERS
4-BUCCANEERS

Overview:  Atlanta is in the typical Atlanta sports fashion: stuck in the same spot.  That's a good thing, though, since the Dirty Birds are one the NFL's best teams.  The addition of Steven Jackson may be what gets them to the Super Bowl.  The Saints will be right on them.  They were strong late in the season after a string of bad luck early on last year.  With Sean Payton back and a chip on their shoulder, New Orleans could surge.  Carolina and Tampa Bay are easily at the bottom of the division.  Cam Newton and the Panthers has a bit more momentum on their side, though the Bucs had the better offseason. 

NFC NORTH
1-PACKERS
2-BEARS
3-LIONS
4-VIKINGS

Overview:  Green Bay is the best team in the division, though they need those rookie running backs to perform if they want to make a serious run in the NFC.  I still believe in that Chicago defense and special teams to help that Cutler-to-Marshall connection.  Matt Forte may be the biggest key in the entire division.  I believe in the Lions and think they could get back to their 2011 ways.  This elite offense that saw a lot of bad luck in 2012, will be even more potent with Reggie Bush back there.  Two things scare me into putting the Vikings in last.  One is Adrian Peterson.  He is great, but backs who threaten the all-time single season rushing record take a step back the following year.  Two, is Christian Ponder.  Nothing against him other than the fact that he isn't the other three signal callers in the division.

NFC WEST
1-49ERS
2-SEAHAWKS
3-RAMS
4-CARDINALS

Overview:  The defending NFC Champions will be back to make a big run.  They'll have an entire offseason, preseason and early season with Kaepernick as their QB.  Still a great team overall.  Seattle has suffered some injuries that will keep them from toppling the Niners.  The Rams just aren't on par with the two elite teams in the division and lost some key offensive players in Jackson and Amendola.  The Cardinals have pieced together an offense with Palmer and Mendenhall that won't fly too high.

NFC PLAYOFF TEAMS:  1-49ers, 2-Falcons, 3-Packers, 4-Giants, 5-Saints, 6-Seahawks.

NFC CHAMPIONSHIP:  Falcons over 49ers.

AFC EAST
1-PATRIOTS
2-DOLPHINS
3-JETS
4-BILLS

Overview:  I think this is the worst division in the NFL.  New England is the easy favorite, though they won't be as potent as in past seasons.  Among the rest of the division ... I guess Miami is the next best team.  They've made a ton of moves this offseason and look much better than the rest.  The Jets have a lot of veterans, but no real quarterback.  I just think they are too broken at this point to make any real dent.  The Bills are in rebuild mode with EJ Manuel as the new QB.

AFC SOUTH
1-TEXANS
2-COLTS
3-TITANS
4-JAGUARS

Overview:  Despite everyone being down on Houston, I'm in their corner.  No, they aren't the same juggernaut they've been in recent seasons, but this is a darn good team.   I think Indianapolis takes a small step back but will be in the playoff hunt.  Tennessee and Jacksonville just aren't in the same class as the Colts or Texans, though I do think Chris Johnson turns his career back around. 

AFC NORTH
1-BENGALS
2-RAVENS
3-STEELERS
4-BROWNS

Overview:  I am high on Cincinnati this season.  I think they have everything needed to make a Super Bowl run.  All they need is a better than average season from Andy Dalton.  The Ravens took too many hits from defections to be the same strong team from a season ago.  They are still a playoff team, but losing Ed Reed and Ray Lewis brings a huge leadership hole in the locker room.  Pittsburgh will still be in the mix, but Big Ben will have to be an MVP type player to make that happen.  Cleveland will be improved as well, but not enough to challenge getting out of the basement. 

AFC WEST
1-BRONCOS
2-CHARGERS
3-CHIEFS
4-RAIDERS

Overview:  Denver is easily the top team in the west.  They have everything ... but Von Miller for six games ... to win it all.  After that?  Well, the Chargers have a lot of talent that is underperforming.  Maybe the coaching change will bring out more of that promise.  I like the Chiefs even though they had the worst record a year ago.  They did have five Pro Bowlers, Andy Reid as their coach and Alex Smith as the new QB.  Jamal Charles will become known to more non-fantasy NFL fans this season.  Oakland just isn't going anywhere to me. 

AFC PLAYOFF TEAMS:  1-Broncos, 2-Patriots, 3-Bengals, 4-Texans, 5-Colts, 6-Ravens.

AFC CHAMPIONSHIP:  Broncos over Bengals

SUPER BOWL

 

Denver Broncos

over

Atlanta Falcons

34-27

Celtics Aren't Bad Enough ... And That's Bad!

As wild as surprisingly entertaining as Thursday's NBA Draft was, the story of the night was the trade between the Celtics and Nets.  The headline was Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce and Jason Terry heading to Brooklyn ... but the real story was the Celtics blowing it up and starting from the ground up. 

That skims over what really happened.

The Celtics are starting over.  This happens to be the year that everyone decided it was time.  Ray Allen left last summer, Doc Rivers didn't want to helm a rebuilding project and KG and Pierce hobbled to a #7 seed while Rajon Rondo missed the end of the season and postseason.  This was a franchise that nearly beat the Heat in 2012 and made the NBA Finals.  Now it is headed for the lottery.  And the projected 2014 NBA Draft lottery will be stacked.

Whatever you feel about it, it was bound to happen.  The key for Boston is this: did they get bad enough?  I mean, what's the point of blowing up your team if you aren't getting nice young pieces in the deal (they didn't), future draft picks (they did) and a bad enough team that you can net yourself one of the top prizes in the draft (they didn't).

After all, Rondo is still there.  So is Jeff Green.  Avery Bradley, Brandon Bass, Courtney Lee and Jordan Crawford are there as well.  So are rising sophomores Jared Sullinger and Fab Melo.  The cupboard isn't that bare.

Now take into account what the Celtics got back in the deal.  Kris Humphries is a nice rebounder, though rumors swirl that he'll never get to wear a Celtics uniform.  Gerald Wallace is a former All-Star, a nice defender and a decent forward.  MarShon Brooks has a nice rookie season in 2012.  Kris Joseph and Keith Bogans won't make a huge difference.  They also added Kelly Olynyk in the draft. 

Is this a roster that is really that bad?  To become one of the worst teams in the NBA, they really have some work to do.  Are they worse than the Charlotte Bobcats/Hornets?  Nope.  Are they worse than the Orlando Magic?  Probably not.  Not to mention that the hapless Sixers just sent their lone All-Star (Jrue Holiday) to New Orleans via trade to get two rookies, one of which is coming off a blown knee (Nerlens Noel) and the Toronto Raptors are rumored to be sending Andres Bargnani to the Knicks.  The Milwaukee Bucks, who finished as an 8th seed last season, could lose their top two players in Monta Ellis and Brandon Jennings.  The Celtics look like at worse the 12th seed in the East.  That's not even looking out West where the Suns and Kings are bottom feeders.

With everyone knowing the draft class of 2014 is stacked, who knows if there are any other teams that will tank their seasons.

It is certain that Boston will make more moves, but which ones?  Unless something major happens, I don't see them dealing Rondo.  Green could be dealt, but what would he net you? 

If Boston really wants to be bad -- ugly bad -- they may need to put in a little more work.

2013 NBA Draft Could Look Like 2002 or 2000 Draft

Charlotte made Melvin Ely a lottery pick in 2002

I'm an NBA Draft nut, but even I am not excited about this Thursday's draft.  It lacks the sizzle that most drafts have (including last year's) and is a bad prequel to what should be an amazing draft in 2014.  That draft will most likely feature the star power of Andrew Wiggins, Jabari Parker and Julius Randle among others.

Thursday's draft has none of that.  The most likely top pick is Nerlens Noel, a guy who blew out his knee and may not be ready for the beginning of the season.  I only wish the Portland Trail Blazers had the top pick so it would get me excited.  If Noel doesn't go No. 1, it could be Maryland's Alex Len ... a guy who couldn't even crack the All-ACC team this past year.  It could be Kansas' Ben McLemore, a guy who just isn't impressing scouts.  Honestly, it could be anyone and no one will be in awe of that individual.

This will be a draft of role players ... and that isn't a bad thing.  I've always been big on seeing the NBA Draft as that: you have a few future superstars, a couple of All-Star guys and several guys who could either have a long career or one that they shine for a bit and then fade out.  We just watched a Finals where guys like Udonis Haslem, Shane Battier, Danny Green and Kawhi Leonard played key roles for their teams.  They can't all be LeBrons.

However, who really knows who those guys will be.  It could be a Reggie Bullock who finds a long career as a sharpshooter (maybe a Danny Green?), or Otto Porter as a two-way player (Kawhi Leonard?), or a Trey Burke in a Gary Neal type role. 

It reminds me of the 2002 Draft.  In that draft, there was one true super star in Yao Ming.  There's nothing like that here for a variety of reasons.  Only three players other than Yao made an All-Star team: Amare Stoudemire, Caron Butler and Carlos Boozer.  Boozer was a 2nd round pick.

That draft was filled with guys who have made decent careers.  Guys like Nene, Tayshaun Prince, Drew Gooden, Mike Dunleavy, Matt Barnes and Luis Scola.  Udonis Haslem went undrafted that year.  It was also filled with guys like Nikoloz Tskitishvili, Dajuan Wagner, Melvin Ely, Marcus Haislip and Fred Jones.  P.S., those guys were all lottery picks.

The 2000 Draft was nearly as bad.  Only Kenyon Martin, Jamaal Magloire and Michael Redd made an All-Star appearance during their careers from that draft.  There were guys like Mike Miller, Jamal Crawford, Hedo Turkoglu, DeShawn Stevenson, Eddie House and even Eduardo Najera that forged a career. 

Or this could be as bad a draft as the one waaaaaaaay back in 2011.  That was the draft that scared away the top prospects due to an impending NBA labor battle.  Because of that, these guys were picked in the top 10:  Enes Kanter, Jonas Valanciunas, Jan Vesely, Bismack Biyombo and Jimmer Fredette.  There have been diamonds in the rough like Kawhi Leonard, Nikola Vucevic, Iman Shumpert, Kenneth Faried, MarShon Brooks, Jimmy Butler, Norris Cole and Chandler Parsons.  Kyrie Irving, the top overall pick, is a stud.  Klay Thompson is turning into one.  Kemba Walker is progressing nicely.  Outside of that, there's no one to be ecstatic about.

So as your favorite team drafts on Thursday, don't get caught up in any hype.  Just hope this guy can at least help your team down the road when the guys you drafted last year and next year are able to be the stars.

Ranking the NBA Finals Game 7s

I was born in 1975, so there have been seven Game 7s in my NBA lifetime.  Although the Sonics-Bullets series was a bit before my understanding, I will rate how well these Game 7s were played.

One of the themes in Game 7s is sloppy play and bad shooting.  It is a combination of good defense and tight offensive play. 

#7      1984-CELTICS vs LAKERS:  While the Lakers-Celtics rivalry of the 1980s was great as a whole, this lone Game 7 they were in was a bit dud-ish.  Cedric Maxwell was the man for the C's and not Hall Of Famers Bird, Parish, McHale or Dennis Johnson (those four combined for 68 points, but did so on 19-for-53 shooting).  For the Lakers, Kareem was huge with 29 points, but Magic Johnson had a bad shooting night and 7 turnovers.  While not a blowout, this one didn't have that close feeling. 

#6      2010-LAKERS vs CELTICS:  This game was close with two of the NBA's glamor franchises going at it.  But it wasn't a very well played game.  Boston held a 13-pt lead at one point, but poor shooting allowed the Lakers to come back.  Kobe Bryant, the Finals MVP, shot just 6-for-24 for the night, but was huge in the 4th quarter.  Still, not the greatest capper to a really good series. 

#5      1978-BULLETS vs SONICS: I obviously don't remember this series. But, reading the recap, it seems as this one was a pretty good one. This was the only time in my life that a road team won a Game 7 in the Finals. Neither team was great during the season (Seattle was a 4-seed; Washington was a 3-seed). This series followed the same format as the one you just watched: Seattle won games 1, 3 and 5 like the Spurs did with Washington winning game 2, 4, 6 and 7 like the Heat. Okay, on to the actual Game 7.

Game 7 took play 18 days after Game 1 as the NBA stretched the series out (it is the longest postseason series in actual time of the major sports). Dennis Johnson, like he did for the Celtics in 1984, had a bad game. He was 0-for-14 from the field.  The Bullets came into the 4th with a 13-point lead, but nearly coughed it up.  Big plays down the stretch by Mitch Kupchak and Wes Unseld clinched the win.

#4      2005-SPURS vs PISTONS:  This is what you want: a tie game going into the 4th quarter.  The Spurs would win by 7, but it was the run they went on that did it.  The Pistons held a 9-pt lead in the 3rd before Tim Duncan led San Antonio out of the fire.  He was big with 25 points and 12 boards.  As the theme goes, the Pistons were bad in this one.  Rip Hamilton led them in scoring with just 15 points on 6-of-18 shooting (Tayshawn Prince went 4-of-13).  Detroit shot just 41.9% for the game.  The Spurs weren't much better, shooting 42.6% (Duncan's big night came on 10-of-27 shooting).

#3      1994-ROCKETS vs KNICKS:  When we talk about bad shooting Game 7s, John Starks tops the list.  His horrid 2-of-18 shooting night against the Rockets is largely blamed by fans as the reason New York lost this series.  But everyone seemed to shoot poorly (NY went 39% in this one).  However, this game was close all the way through and featured the last great big man Finals battle in Olajawon and Ewing so that ranks it pretty high. 

#2      2013-HEAT vs SPURS:  A very, very good game.  It was close throughout with with Tim Duncan missing a hook shot and tip in late to tie the game.  LeBron James was dominant with 37 points and 12 boards.  Neither team really got out to a huge lead and there were huge plays down the stretch by James and Shane Battier. 

#1      1988-LAKERS vs PISTONS:  What a game and what a series.  Unlike most of the games on this list, bad shooting wasn't a factor.  The Pistons shot 46% while the Lakers shot an amazing 55.8%.  This was a game of runs.  Detroit got off early with Isiah Thomas and led at the half by five.  The Lakers then went off with Michael Cooper raining threes and led 90-75 late.  Then, the Pistons caught fire and made a huge comeback (25-12 run) to get within a bucket.  The Lakers gave them opportunites but Detroit just couldn't get over.  Big Game James Worthy had 36 pts, 16 rbs and 10 ast. 

Stop Calling The 2013 NBA Finals "Classic"!

The 2013 NBA Finals were really good ... just not classic.  Game 6 was a classic and Games 1 and 7 were very competitive, but there were four big-time blowouts in this series and that makes me hesitant to call this one of the great Finals.

Two main reasons why I cannot call this a classic series:

BLOWOUTS:  The middle four games were blowouts with two of the games just embarrassingly bad.  The Miami Heat had a 27-point lead at one point in Game 2 before winning by 19.  In Game 3, the San Antonio Spurs beat Miami by 36 points ... one of the worst Finals beatdowns in history.  In Game 4, Miami took control of the game in the second half and won by 16.  Game 5 saw a reversal, with the Spurs taking the game over with a huge lead before winning by 'only' ten.

Sure, Game 6 was a classic and Game 7 was close.  Those two games ... plus the fact that the series didn't see one team win consecutive games until those final two games ... make people believe the series was great.  The series was close, but the games weren't. 

REALLY, REALLY BAD PLAY:  Look, guys have bad series and games within series.  It has happened in every Finals.  But this one was very odd in how bad these superstars had looked. 

Just look at Game 7 for example.  Chris Bosh finished with ZERO points. Miami starters Bosh and Mike Miller, along with super sub Ray Allen combined for 0 points on 0-14 shooting in Game 7.  Tony Parker, who was the leading candidate for Finals MVP if the Spurs won, shot 3-for-12 in this one.  Danny Green went 1-for-12.

Manu Ginobili was horrible in nearly every game (Game 5 was the obvious exception).  Dwyane Wade had some very subpar games.  Aside from Parker early, Duncan late and LeBron James' performance, the star power had a lot of blackouts. 

Ranking The Last 25 NBA Finals

#25 - LAKERS VS NETS (2002):  To me, this was the worst Finals.  It wasn't just that this was a sweep (though it factors), it is just that this series felt like a formality while you were watching it.  Sure, three of the games were close, but it just didn't feel like the Lakers even took this series seriously. 

#24 - PISTONS VS LAKERS (1989):  This should have been epic.  The Lakers surged into the Finals after sweeping their first three series.  The Pistons had the best record in the league and we were staring at a rematch of one of the greatest Finals in history.  Well, that crashed when Byron Scott missed the entire series with a hamstring injury, then Magic Johnson getting hurt early in Game 2 and missed the rest of the series.  The Lakers were game, but with just Michael Cooper as their backcourt veteran, they were no match for that Isiah Thomas-Joe Dumars-Vinny Johnson backcourt.

#23 - SPURS VS CAVALIERS (2007):   Neither team was great (Spurs finished 3rd in the West; Cavs won just 50 games) but this was a three-time champion Spurs against soon-to-be-legend LeBron James and his Cavaliers.  The Spurs handled the Cavs in the first two games, then eeked out the final two games in Cleveland. This was a ratings nightmare.  Despite having King James in it, nobody watched. 

#22 - PISTONS VS LAKERS (2004):  This felt like a "5-game sweep" as the Pistons dominated the heavily favored Lakers and let Game 2 get away on a Kobe Bryant three-pointer with two seconds left.  The Pistons were a bland, hardworking bunch with no superstars.  The Lakers, however, were a complete spectacle all season long (the addition of Karl Malone and Gary Payton, Kobe's rape trial, Shaq's threats to leave) and it all crumbled during and following this series.  That's what people remember. 

#21 - SPURS VS KNICKS (1999):  The Asterisk Championship for the Spurs.  The NBA's lockout meant the season was only 50 games long.  It was the year after Michael Jordan retired.  And the Spurs played the Knicks in the Finals ... the only #8 seed to make it to the Finals.  The Knicks were bad, not scoring more than 89 points during the series and scoring 77 points or fewer in three of the games.  San Antonio wasn't much better, scoring over 89 just once.  Other than the closeout game, none of these games were particularly close. 

#20 - LAKERS VS MAGIC:  This was a close series of sorts, though the Lakers won it in five.  Game 4 was the classic.  The Lakers made a huge comeback which included a huge Derek Fisher three-pointer to send the game into OT.  There, the Lakers dominated and took a commanding 3-1 series lead.  The Lakers cruised to a title three days later. 

#19 - SPURS VS NETS (2003):  This was kind of like the Spurs-Knicks series four years earlier, except that the Nets gave a good fight.  Hard to believe, but Game 4 in New Jersey wasn't even a sellout.  Unreal.  Just like fans in the Garden State, fans at home didn't feel like watching this either.  It was the lowest rated Finals until the Spurs/Cavaliers series in 2007. 

#18 - LAKERS VS SIXERS (2001):  The Lakers went 15-1 in this postseason, though their only loss was in Game 1 to Philadelphia.  That Game 1 was epic, as Allen Iverson scored 48 pts and Shaq scoring 44.  Both Shaq and Iverson had big series, but the Lakers pretty much skated to their second straight championship. 

#17 - BULLS VS SUPERSONICS (1996):  This was the 72-win Bulls with the new Jordan dynasty.  I thought this would've been a great series, but the Bulls blew out to a 3-0 series lead.  Seattle did salvage the next two at home before the Bulls finally put the Sonics out of their misery. 

#16 - ROCKETS VS MAGIC (1995):  Shaq vs Hakeem in the Finals.  Wow.  Nick Anderson's missed free throws kept open a window for Hakeem to tip in the game winner of Game 1.  Anderson was mud after that.  This series was a sweep, but three of the games were very close.  Hakeem's tip in, Horry's three to win Game 3 and a huge fourth quarter run to close out the series. 

#15 - HEAT VS THUNDER (2012):  What was billed as the future of the Finals, LeBron James and Kevin Durant met on the biggest stage with a title on the line.  After an impressive Game 1 win, the Thunder would go on to lose every game the rest of the way.  The Big Three got their championship together ... so haters would have to hate harder and LeBron fans felt validated.

#14 - SPURS VS PISTONS (2005):  This, along with the Lakers-Celtics series in 2010, is the only matchup of teams on this list that had won a championship recently.  This did go 7 games, though this was filled with bad games.  There was a 31-pt win, a 21-pt win, a 17-pt win, a 15-pt win and a 9-pt win.  There was that great Game 5 -- a swing game with the series tied 2-2 -- when Robert Horry willed an overtime win and the series lead.  Game 7 was close, with the game tied heading into the 4th quarter. 

#13 -  LAKERS VS PACERS (2000):  This was the Lakers first championship in the post-Magic Johnson era.  Of their three-peat, this was the best series, though uneven.  Games 1, 3 and 5 were blowouts (the Lakers lost Game 5, where they could've won the title, by 33 points).  The memorable game was pivotal Game 4.  The game went into overtime with 21-year old Kobe Bryant hitting clutch shots (Shaq had fouled out) to give the Lakers a big 3-1 series lead.  The Pacers nearly sent it to a 7th game, but the Lakers made a late run to clinch the title. 

#12 - BULLS VS LAKERS (1991):  The changing of the guard.  After Sam Perkins stunned the Bulls in Game 1 at Chicago Stadium, Michael Jordan (and that "impossible move") took over from there.  In Game 3 at the Forum, Jordan and the Bulls dominated in overtime to win Game 3 and would coast to their first NBA title.

#11 - MAVERICKS VS HEAT (2011):  This series will be best remembered as the one where LeBron James just didn't show up for the Heat late in games.  It was a 2-2 series before Dirk Nowitzki and Jason Terry carried the Mavs the rest of the way. 

#10 - PISTONS VS BLAZERS (1990):  While only a five-game series, four of them were nail biters.  After a Pistons win in Game 1, Portland stole an overtime game to even the series.  After blowing out Portland in Game 3, the Pistons eeked out a 3 and 2 point win the capture their second title.  This was also sad as this was the last game with the NBA of CBS, which I personally grew up on. 

#9 - CELTICS VS LAKERS (2008):  This was a both a surprise and pleasant matchup of the two NBA glamor franchises.  The Celtics were back from the dead after getting their Big 3 together.  The Lakers made a steal of a trade for Pau Gasol to get back.  But the Celtics were ready.  A hard fought series that saw Paul Pierce wheelchaired off the court only to come back two minutes later and hit a couple of threes.  And then the Celtics clincher happened: a 39 point beatdown of the Lakers. 

#8 - HEAT VS MAVERICKS (2006):  This was the first non-Lakers/Spurs Finals since 1998 and the first to see new blood in the Finals since 1971.  A weird series.  The Maverics owned the first two games in Dallas.  Miami ... namely Dwyane Wade ... owned the rest of the series.  Games 3, 5 and 6 were nail biters that featured phantom fouls, an illegal timeout and a parade of Wade free throws.  Oh, and Dirk Nowitzki kicking the ball into the stands.  It was great theater and Miami's first NBA Championship. 
#7 - BULLS VS JAZZ (1998):  This series is always remembered for Jordan's final shot.  It was also a series filled with close games.  Game 1 went into overtime, Game 2 was won by the Bulls by 5 and Games 4 through 6 were won by 4, 2 and 1, respectively.  But this also had the dud of Chicago's 96-54 blowout of Game 3.  That was one of the ugliest Finals game I had ever witnessed.  The Jazz set a record for lowest point total for any NBA game since the shot clock (the record has since been broken).  The Bulls also held a 3-1 series lead before Utah saved face in Chicago.  Then Jordan's shot in Game 6. 

#6 - BULLS VS BLAZERS (1992):  People remember Jordan shrugging off those six first half three-pointers.  But this was a good series.  It was tied 2-2 when Jordan erupted for 46 points in Game 5 to take control of the series. 

#5 - BULLS VS JAZZ (1997):  I am actually ranking this series higher than the 1998 edition.  The teams had better regular season records, both teams cruised into the Finals and the series was closer.  In this one, the Bulls won the first two games in Chicago while the Jazz won the next two in Utah.  With the series tied 2-2, Chicago won Game 5 ... aka the Jordan Flu Game ... to take the series lead back to Chicago.  The Jazz had a big lead late in Game 6 before Steve Kerr hit the go ahead shot late and Scottie Pippen made a key defensive play to seal the deal.

#4 - ROCKETS VS KNICKS (1994):  This was a very defensive Finals that may be best remembered for a weird Game 5 that saw NBC cut to coverage of O.J. Simpson in his white Ford Bronco.  This was billed as the Hakeem vs Ewing series (these two met in the 1984 NCAA Tournament Final), but Olajawon totally outplayed his counterpart.  It all ended with a wild Game 7 that saw John Starks go 2-of-18 from the field.  As an aside, this series had a weird feel.  It was the first NBA Finals that didn't have the Lakers, Celtics, Pistons or Bulls in it since 1979.

#3 - LAKERS VS CELTICS (2010):   This, along with the 2005 Spurs/Pistons series, is the only on this list to feature the last two champions facing off.  This one was wild.  Though no game outside of Game 7 to be a nail-biter, this was a physical, chippy series.  We saw Ray Allen hit an NBA Finals record 8 three-pointers in Game 2 ... and then couldn't drop it in the ocean over the next few games.  Boston actually held a 3-2 lead before losing the series in 7. 

#2 - BULLS VS SUNS (1993):  Jordan vs Barkley.  That epic triple-OT Game 3.  Jordan going for 55 in one game.  John Paxson's game winner.  Epic series.  By the way, Michael Jordan averaged 41 points per game for this series.  Unreal.

#1 - LAKERS VS PISTONS (1988):  The oldest series on this list was also the best.  It went the full 7 games.  The Lakers would get the NBA's first repeat since the Celtics of the 1960s.  Game 5 at the Pontiac Silverdome had over 40,000 fans there.  And the classic Game 6 where Thomas scored 25 points in the 3rd quarter, Magic had 19 assists and about 100 scuffles.  A classic series ended with a tough as nails closeout Game 7 with the Lakers holding on for the title.

P.J. Hairston Arrest in North Carolina Makes Me Sick

For the entire start to the back story, read up on it here.  The quick version is that P.J. Hairston ... UNC's top player for the upcoming 2013-14 college basketball season ... was pulled over at a checkpoint.  He and his riding buddies were in a rental car (they are all under 25) found with weed, cigars, no drivers licence and apparently someone threw a gun out the window. 

There are tons of layers to this.  In the beginning, we only knew about the weed and the lack of a license.  While it is disappointing and somewhat serious, it wasn't enough to banish the kid and ruin his life.  While a serious mistake, it isn't the kind that needs to be severely punished.  But the part of the report about the gun is quite a different story.  Now there are a ton of questions that must be answered if Hairston is going to be able to make this go away and continue his Tar Heels career.

Fanboys are hitting message boards with two main arguments: "Kick him off the team" or "who cares, I just want to see him draining threes".  Anti-Heels fans are having a field day with this, especially on the "heels" of all the academic issues the school has had over the past five years. 

As a lifelong North Carolina fan who grew up in Charlotte ... I'm sick of this!

I hate this.  I hate what has happened to the program Dean Smith built.  Sure, UNC was great before Smith, but he inherited a mess like this and turned it around.  I'm not saying this is Roy Williams fault or anything and I'm not saying Tar Heels in the past haven't made mistakes, but whatever has happened of late is troubling.  I don't like it.

Let me be clear.  I know that what Hairston did has absolutely nothing to do with the university (as of now) aside from the punishment to be handed out.  Right now, this was solely Hairston's bad decision that UNC and its fans have to deal with.  However, the rental car agreement could be huge for the school if it was paid for by someone like a booster or anyone associated with the school.  If so, the NCAA could come down hard on the school and the basketball program.

Even if it never gets to that point, as a whole I hate the stain these kinds of things are having on Carolina.

I'm not one of those people who shrugs this stuff off.  I don't think that everyone is doing it so it's not a huge deal if we have problems.  But it bothers me.  It makes me sick.  I don't like it.  And as the one Tar Heel fan that people who I live around and work with know, I want them to understand I don't condone this nor make an excuse for Hairston.

I also understand both ends of this.  That may have not been Hairston's marijuana or gun and, though he didn't have a license, he may have had his parents (who reside in Greensboro) sign for his rental car.  He may not be as guilty as it looks.  However, he could be and this may not be the first time he's been in these kinds of situations but just the first time he's been caught. 

As far as Hairston, I'd hate for his life to be ruined by being kicked off the basketball team or the school if it was a marijuana possession or even driving without a license.  A punishment should come, but nothing that will ruin him.  If the gun possession comes back as his or even stolen and/or the rental car comes up as paid for by a booster or something, then I cannot argue with him being dismissed from the team.  Yes, it would be a blow to the team as far as his talent and role on it, but being a Tar Heel hoops player is a privilege.  He earned it.  But like anything earned, it can be taken away by bad decisions and actions.

I'm sure Roy Williams has told P.J. this, but I want to reiterate.  Hairston nearly went into the NBA Draft this year and may have had designs on entering next year -- or at the very worst an NBA career when he graduates.  While he's a very good player, he isn't the superstud that NBA teams can overlook character issues.  If driving around with guns and drugs is worth losing all of that for, then I guess he wouldn't care if the school kicked him off the team. 

Sportz' NBA Finals Pick

We're at the NBA Finals and I couldn't be more bummed.  We get the Miami Heat and the San Antonio Spurs.

As a Lakers fan, the Spurs have been our biggest rival over the past 15 years.  Since the Jordan Era ended in 1998, the Lakers and Spurs have combined to win 9 of 14 championships and have represented the Western Conference in 11 of 14 Finals.  I respect them, but I don't want to see them match the Lakers five rings since 1998.

On the other side is the Heat.  I guess you could call me a hater.  I didn't like the way The Decision went down, though I cannot fault him for leaving Cleveland. I'm a fan of most of LeBron's game, just not a fan of LeBron. 

So this is a tough Finals to root for a team.  Usually there's a nice story, an underdog or a UNC players (well, the Spurs have Danny Green) that I will find myself pulling for.  Other than Green, I don't have that.  What I do have is what I like: two teams who are already champions that are fighting for another championship.  Usually ... especially in the NBA ... that means a very special series.

It is kind of rare nowadays.  The last time we had this was 2010 when the Lakers, who were defending champions, beat the Celtics, who won the title in 2008, in an epic 7-game series.  We got it 2005 when the defending champion Detroit Pistons lost to the San Antonio Spurs (who won it in 2003 and 1999) in ... yes ... a 7-game series. 

That has been it.  Before those series, you'd have to go back to those epic Magic-Bird matchups in the mid-1980s for battles between two former champions and we all know how special those series were.  So I figure this will be the same.  Neither will be scared.  Neither will get caught up in the moment.  Home court is honestly just a nice way to say where the game is being played and not some spooky deterent for the road team.

I'm not going to use this space to break down every matchup, every player, every minute detail or spout a bunch of factoids.  It is a series of ideals and wills.  That's it.

MIAMI:  One thing that works against them is that they've just come off a 7-game series with the physical Indiana Pacers.  They just had two days off while the Spurs have had 9-days of rest.  The Heat are younger, but Wade has been banged up and could've used an extra day or two to heal up.  One good thing is that they are done with the Pacers and Bulls.  Those two are matchup problems for Miami and the Heat struggled to dismiss both teams.  The Spurs aren't that kind of team.  Miami can get back to their "spread offense" of LeBron at the power forward, Chris Bosh at center, Wade at wing and a couple of shooters hanging out at the arc.  They couldn't against Indiana due to the Pacers size and that messed with their rhythm. 

This isn't to say that the Spurs are an easier matchup.  No.  But they do allow for the Heat to play Heat basketball and not have to play odd-ball lineups just to stay alive.  Ray Allen and Shane Battier will see more minutes in this series while Chris Andersen and Joel Anthony will not.

SAN ANTONIO:  Rest vs Rust.  That is the question when anyone gets an extended layoff between playoff rounds.  In the Spurs case, I'm not as concerned with it.  This is a veteran bunch who have been through this before and, let's face it, could use the rest anyway.  Tim Duncan and Tony Parker are playing at elite levels and Manu Ginobili can kill you at any moment.  They also have bodies to throw at LeBron, though none of them will stop him.  Still, it isn't like the Pacers who had to use Paul George, their best player, to guard him nearly the entire game. 

Also, this is a mentally strong team while Miami has shown, at times, to lack that.  Yeah, they are the defending champions, but we've seen LeBron cower in the 2011 Finals, Wade and coach Eric Spoelstra get into it in the 2012 playoffs and a bit of a power struggle between LeBron and Wade in the Pacers series last week.  And who knows where Chris Bosh's head is at after a horrible series with Indiana. 

WHO WINS:  Again, this should be a close series.  Home court means nothing as both these teams can win on the road.  Miami hasn't faced a big man as skilled as Duncan this postseason.  They haven't played a point guard like Parker.  These two will give Miami problems.  The Ginobili-Wade matchup will be something to see, too.

But on the other side, the Spurs dominated the Lakers and Grizzlies who aren't outside shooting teams.  The Warriors were, and the Spurs had a ton of problems with them.  Miami can be the same thing.  If the Spurs struggle to contain LeBron, he will find guys like Battier, Allen, Mike Miller, Wade and Bosh open for shots.  And those guys can knock them down. 

The Miami Heat will win this series in 6 games.

If Spurs Win Title ... Was This The Kobe Era or Duncan Era???

*Full disclosure: I've been a Laker fan since the early 1980s when Showtime took the league by storm. 

On Monday night, the San Antonio Spurs swept the Memphis Grizzlies and will head to their fifth NBA Finals.  There they will meet the winner of the Miami-Indiana series.  If the Spurs win that, it will be their fifth title since 1999.  Only the Los Angeles Lakers have won that many during that span.

If the San Antonio Spurs win their fifth NBA Championship ... does Tim Duncan have a better grasp of the "Player Of His Time" as Kobe Bryant does?  I mean, during Kobe's career, he has five rings.  As far as superstars go, Tim Duncan has four as did Shaquille O'Neal.  Kobe's status and amount of rings gives him the belief that the 1996-2013 timeline is his era.  A fifth ring for Duncan, however, could mean that he has a right to claim that thrown.

But can he claim it?

Well, let's look at this era.  From 1999-2013 (this would be under the assumption that the Spurs win the 2013 championship which would be a bit of an upset.  But let's assume it for this argument), the Lakers and Spurs combined to win 10 of the 15 championships.  Only the Pistons (2004), Heat (2006, 2012), Celtics (2008) and Mavericks (2011) have won titles in this Spurs/Lakers era. 

Heck, if you realize the fact that these two are in the same conference, these two have represented the West in 12 of the last 15 NBA Finals.  Kobe's Lakers have gotten to seven Finals and Duncan's Spurs have reached five.  Only the Mavericks (2006, 2011) and Thunder (2012) have broken through these two juggernauts. 

That's something.

So how do you determine if this was the Kobe Era or the Timmy Era?  Well, Duncan was the Finals MVP three times.  Kobe just twice.  Tony Parker won the Finals MVP award for the Spurs last title and would be the favorite to do so if they win it this year.  Shaquille O'Neal dominated the Finals MVP award during the Lakers three-peat in the early 2000s with Kobe winning it in their titles in 2009 and 2010. 

Overall MVP awards?  Duncan has two awards (2002, 2004) to Kobe's one (2008).  Interesting to note that neither won a title in their MVP seasons.  All-Star games?  Kobe has 15 to Duncan's 14.  All-NBA First team?  Kobe has done so 11 times to Duncan's 10.  Defensive first team?  Kobe has done so 9 times to Duncan's 8.  Not as relevant, but Kobe has two Gold Medals (Beijing, London) to Duncan's bronze medal in Athens. 

Both are among the greatest players to ever lace them up.  Kobe is near the top of the all-time scoring list while Duncan is regarded as possibly the best power forward in history.  Sheer greatness.

How about who these two beat in the Finals?  The Lakers beat the Pacers, Sixers, Nets, Magic and Celtics for Kobe's titles.  Not the greatest of teams, but that does include Reggie Miller, Allen Iverson, Jason Kidd, Dwight Howard and a Boston team that had won a title two years prior.  The Spurs beat the Knicks, Nets, Pistons and Cavaliers for their titles ... and would've beaten the Heat for this argument to take place.  New York was an 8th seed in the Finals, the Pistons were defending champs and though the 2007 Cavaliers weren't that great, this would mean the Spurs have knocked LeBron out in the Finals twice.  Beating this Heat team would beat the best win of all of them.  Still, that doesn't mean a ton since it is opportunity more than a take on how good they really are.

Both won an NBA Finals Game 7 as well.  Kobe's Lakers beat the Celtics in Game 7 of the 2010 Finals, while Duncan and the Spurs beat the Pistons in a Game 7 of the 2005 Finals.  Duncan was huge in that Game 7, scoring 25 pts and grabbing 11 rebounds while being clutch in the 4th quarter.  Kobe didn't have as good a game in his showing.  He hit just 6-of-24 shots, but did score 10 of his 23 points in the final frame and did nab 15 boards.

One thing that helps settle this is the fact that these two have faced off SEVEN times in the Western Conference playoffs in the last 15 years ... including five times in the period of 1999 to 2004.  The results?

1999:  Spurs 4-0 in semis
2001:  Lakers 4-0 in WCF
2002:  Lakers 4-1 in semis
2003:  Spurs 4-2 in semis
2004:  Lakers 4-2 in semis
2008:  Lakers 4-1 in WCF
2013:  Spurs 4-0 in first round

Head to head, the Lakers have won 4 of the 7 series.  As far as games, Lakers hold an 18-16 lead.  It is that close. 

You can also bring up the timeframes they won their titles.  The Spurs have never won consecutive championships.  Again, they won in 1999, 2003, 2005, 2007 and (for this argument) 2013.  That means Duncan's Spurs won in three different decades, 15 years apart.  The Lakers won in spurts.  During that "drought" between the Spurs' first and second titles, the Lakers won all three (2000, 2001, 2002) and went to the Finals between the Spurs' second and third rings.  Since the Spurs last title in 2007, the Lakers have won the Western Conference three times (the following three seasons of 2008, 2009 and 2010) while winning two championships in the latter two seasons.

The Spurs can say they have five rings in 15 years, showing their longevity.  The Lakers can say they won 5 titles in 11 years, showing their might.  So is it Kobe's or Tim's era?

I guess you have to craft your answer around which of these stats you put the most stock in.

Charlotte Gets The "Hornets" Back ... Now What???

"We Beelieve That The Bugs Are Back!" was a slogan used
in the 1990s for the Charlotte Hornets.  The name is back, but
what else does the franchise need to do?

Michael Jordan made official what everyone knew:  the Charlotte Bobcats want to change their name to the Hornets.

A little history for those who somehow don't know.  The Charlotte Hornets entered the NBA in 1988 and the city led the league in attendance in 8 of their first 10 seasons (the expansion Minnesota Timberwolves led the other two seasons when they played in the Metrodome).  Original franchise owner George Shinn ... who was beloved by the city ... got into some hot water for some extra-marital affairs and a sexual harrassment suit.  The city soured on him and he ended up bolting for New Orleans.  The NBA let it happen, though they immediately gave Charlotte another expansion franchise, which would become the Bobcats.  Shinn sold the New Orleans Hornets to the NBA, who sold it to Tom Benson, who changed the name to the Pelicans.  With the Hornets name available, Jordan (who now owns the Bobcats), claimed the name.

Got it?

Now that it has happened, let's look at some other aspects of what should take place.

TEAM COLORS:  Jordan said that they hadn't decided on the team colors.  I'd bet nearly everything that the teal, purple and white will be back with the Hornets.  After all, the "Bring Back The Buzz" campaign that the Bobcats/Hornets have been pimping out there has those original Hornets color schemes.  Remember that it was the Hornets that turned the sports world onto teal in 1988.  No one had it.  After the Hornets, the San Jose Sharks, Florida Marlins and Jacksonville Jaguars had a bit of teal in their logos. 

It belongs back in Charlotte.  But let's just think for a second if they went another direction.  What could it be? 

They could continue to use the dark blue, Carolina blue and orange that the Bobcats currently use.  That way it could meld the franchises together.  I'm not a big fan of that, but I can't blame the Bobcats/Hornets if they did it.  It keeps the Bobcats fanbase a bit happy that the orange they've been used to would be there if the name wasn't.

Original logo

Outside of that, nothing makes sense.  If you were going to go away from the Bobcats current colors, then you may as well stick with the teal and purple.  No one else in the NBA has those colors.

LOGO:  No one in the city would object to the new Charlotte Hornets using their old logo.  Not only is the logo a favorite, but it has been popular in retro gear.  I mean, you could buy Charlotte Hornets merchandise over the last decade even though there was no Charlotte Hornets. 

I do understand a tweaking of it.  After all, the Hornets logo underwent some changes when they moved to New Orleans.  I don't see anything too wholesale being changed.  I think we'll see a fluttering hornet dribbling a basketball just like we always have.  I doubt we'll see it look exactly the same as the old logo, but I don't think they will go off the wall.  Maybe something like this.

UNIFORMS:  Now, I can see anything happen here.  There's is no way the unis will look the same as what Larry Johnson, Alonzo Mourning and Muggsy Bogues are wearing at the top of this page.  Those uniforms will make appearances as a retro jersey of some sort.  Believe that.  But Jordan and the Bobcats spent a lot of time changing the Bobcats look over the last two years that some of those ideas could be incorporated.  I don't see the pinstripes returning, for some reason. 

Still ... and this goes back to the logo and colors as well ... why even bother changing the name "back" to the Hornets if you don't stick to the main focus of the original Hornets?

BOBCATS FANS:  I know it doesn't seem like it, but there are some pissed off Bobcats fans that don't like this change.  Some may not remember the old Hornets.  Some may have bought completely into the Bobcats clothing and merchandise.  I mean, what are you going to do with all that Bobcats stuff?

That's where Jordan and the team should really tread lightly.  Give into those fans.  Sure, some like this change, but treat all your ticket holders respectfully.  Throw them some bones.  Maybe invite fans to exchange certain Bobcats gear for Hornets stuff.  Give away a lot of Hornets stuff, especially at the games.  Possibly even during the upcoming season (they will be the Bobcats for the 2013-2014 season before most likely becoming the Hornets in 2014-2015).  Give stickers, hats, towels, whatever to these fans so they can stock up on things.

EMBRACE THE OLD:  Dell Curry is the TV analyst for the team.  But Jordan needs to reach out to the other ol' skool Hornets.  Bogues still does a lot in Charlotte and is possibly the most popular Hornets player.  Maybe Kelly Tripuka can make an appearance.  Or Rex Chapman.  Or J.R. Reid.  Or LJ.  Incorporate some of the things Hornets fans loved about the original franchise that made them yearn for those memories to come back. 

Oh ... AND HUGO BETTER BE BACK!!!!  He is loved in this city. 

UM, THE TEAM:  None of this will mean anything if the club doesn't get better.  There will be a very short honeymoon for these Hornets.  The original Hornets got a standing ovation after losing to the Cavaliers by 40 points in their first game.  They had a parade after the end of the first season.  They were rabid as the franchise rose to the playoffs with Johnson, Mourning, Bogues, Dell Curry, Kenny Gattison and many others.  Remember that the Hornets didn't have a losing season their last 10 years in Charlotte.  The Bobcats, by comparison, have had just one winning season in their 9 years of existence.

There isn't much on this roster.  The upcoming draft offers little help.  Somehow they have got to at least show they can turn it around and get on a winning track. 

If not, then what's the point.

Kings Stay In SacTown; Seattle Should Be Angry

The NBA has made it clear: the Kings are staying in Sacramento.  To make a long story short, the Kings owners are losing money and want a new arena to replace ARCO (or whatever it is called this week).  They had a deal to sell it to an ownership group that would move the team to Seattle and rebirth the SuperSonics.  The NBA was on board until Sacramento mayor and former NBA All-Star Kevin Johnson got together an ownership group that would keep the team in town as well as the funding to finally build a new arena.  Kings owners didn't care and still wanted to sell to Seattle.  NBA owners and Commish David Stern shot it down.

Let me state my top opinion on this.  I agree that the Kings should stay in Sacramento provided they replace ARCO Arena (I just looked it up -- it is Sleep Train Arena.  Yeah).  I agree with Stern that this was a win for the small market cities and that the NBA has been good to those markets.  That's all good to me. 

I grew up in Charlotte, NC and saw how the Hornets turned the town into a city.  I also saw how greedy, down-on-their-luck ownership can shop their team to the highest bidder and screw over the people who support them.  Charlotte saw all sides of it.  They were the small market like Sacramento who saw their owner (George Shinn) become a pariah and do everything to make a windfall of money with a move (the Hornets would ultimately move to New Orleans).  Charlotte was also in Seattle's shoes, a city who lost their team but was promised a replacement would be coming (the Bobcats started play two years later; Seattle holds the rights and history for a new Sonics team). 

Seattle deserves to feel upset.  Back in 2008, Seattle watched their team move to Oklahoma City without the same kind of care that the NBA gave Sacramento.  Sure, in both cases, arena financing was the major issue for relocation.  However, the Sonics move to OKC smelled extremely dirty.  There seemed to be a hidden agenda by Clay Bennett, who bought the team, to move the team no matter what. 

So if you are Seattle, you are wondering why their team ... which was in that city for 41 years ... was easily swept away but the Kings (who have been in California's capital for 28 years) had the NBA's support to find ways to keep the team.  Again, I'm not slighting Sacramento, Seattle or Oklahoma City.  All three deserve NBA teams.  The way both situations were handled seem bogus to me.

I also agree with Stern.  Small markets are a big thing for the NBA and a reason for their success.  The NBA is the only major pro franchise in Sacramento, Oklahoma City, Salt Lake City, Orlando, Portland, Memphis and San Antonio.  They were the first pro franchise in Charlotte, Indianapolis and Phoenix (and Seattle).  Still, the feeling that the people of Seattle have for the commissioner is valid.

The Andrew Wiggins Decision Says More (Bad) About Fandom Than Anything

Recruiting is different now.  There's always been elite players (think how Lew Alcinder's recruitment would be handled today) and great coaches selling great programs (imagine UCLA's John Wooden, UNC's Dean Smith and Kentucky's Adolph Rupp going after you).  But today there is access to it unlike any seen before. 

Sure, there is the media that's greater.  That's a given, but there has been massive media for quite some time.  No, there is the availability of fans to (a) the media and (b) the information or misinformation that has gotten this out of hand. 

In Andrew Wiggins' case, it was bad.  Here was a kid that did the exact correct thing in each and every way.  He never promised any fan base -- he was considering Kentucky, Florida State and North Carolina before ultimately picking Kansas -- that he was leaning their way.  He never lied to anyone.  Never showed his hand.  When asked about it, he either deflected the question or gave a blunt "I have no idea" response.  He took his time so he could make the correct decision for himself.  He actually signed the letter in virtual privacy and not on an ESPN set or in front of a packed gymnasium filled with cameras where he put on a hat (like they did in the old days) or via Skype (as Harrison Barnes did) or even with a school's mascot.  He did this thing perfect ... which may actually did more damage in the social media-sphere. 

Kentucky fans were convinced he was coming to Lexington.  I mean, they are "Kentucky".  They have this awesome class coming in.  Their fans will elevate you into a star even though you really aren't one (right, Josh Harrelson?).  Despite all the signs, Kentucky fan knew he was coming.

So did Florida State fans.  I mean, his mom and dad went there.  It is in the state of Florida ... which is a lot more fun than Kansas, Kentucky or North Carolina.  And why else would the Seminoles be on a recruiting list along with those three heavyweights?

Kansas and North Carolina fans also had their own factions who were convinced that Wiggins belonged there.  Great coaches, great arenas, great traditions and great rosters were waiting for them in Lawrence and Chapel Hill, respectively. 

But if you were a Kentucky, North Carolina or Florida State fan ... Tuesday was a tough day.  Wiggins used that day to select Kansas as his stop gap to the NBA and those other fanbases didn't take very kindly to it.  Sure, there were many fans who moved on without vitriol, but there were also tons of them who took it too hard.  Hard enough that some even went to Wiggins' Twitter account with some very harsh things to say to the 18-year old.

Given what we've seen about Wiggins' maturity in a very wild world of both recruiting and college athletics, I hope that he understands that this is just a bunch of scum who have no self worth in their lives aside from the success of their teams.  He should also know that those people reside in every school's fan base ... though some schools have more than others.  He should also tell himself that those same people would fawn over him if he attended their favorite university ... meaning that those people don't have HIS well-being at heart but that of their school.  To know that you won't represent those folks at all should make him feel even better about his decision.

The fact of the matter is that fans can get where the feel soooooo close to the recruiting scene than they really are.  And people who are in that scene are way more media savvy than you realize.  Every other day, somebody was going on Kentucky sports radio stations and giving hope to Big Blue Nation that Wiggins was a lock to go there.  That same guy could go to a station in the Triangle and sell the same plot to North Carolina fans.  Then head down to North Florida and say he's following his parents' footsteps to FSU.  From there, fans hearing that get on Facebook or Twitter or their blogs and buzz it around.  If you hear it from enough "sources", then you start to actually believe it.  I mean, why else would four fanbases enter Tuesday feeling as if Wiggins was set to sign with their school?

Wiggins just did what millions of kids do each year: choose the college that best fits them. 

Which is also what fans usually do as well.  I mean, why are you the fan of the school you are a fan of?  Maybe you attended that school?  Maybe someone close to you went there?  Maybe you happen to be born in the city or state that the school hails from (or in Wiggins' choices, were the Big State School)?  Maybe you are just a bandwagon fan that just picks the best or most popular team?  Maybe daddy passed on the love for that school ... just as Wiggins' daddy had done for Florida State. 

And if Wiggins' mother and father can support his decision to attend Kansas, then why in the hell can't you?