Agreed on your points, but that's not the reason I love football more. I feel it is the ultimate team game where 1 single dominant player will not singlehandedly win the game.
landing spot. will be interesting to see how he does.
Agreed on your points, but that's not the reason I love football more. I feel it is the ultimate team game where 1 single dominant player will not singlehandedly win the game.
This Tom Jordan seems like he was a pretty big deal. Do tell.
Let me tell you a story of Tom Jordan. He was the best white basketball player of them all. His layups and bounce passes were a thing of beauty. They once thought to add a four point field goal to reward his all to typical half court shots. And his mustache.....wow
Sounds like Pistol Pete to me...
Seems like the last football game they played this year was pretty much defined by an iffy no-call right at the end.
That wasn't an iffy no call. It was JUSTICE for not calling that same thing in the NFC championship game.
/still bitter Falcons fan.
so yeah, I feel that particular pain.
NOM NOM NOM
It would be nice if the refs were made available for comment at some point. It would be interesting to hear how they saw that live. Clearly that was way too much contact to not call anything. And then they call the ticky tack reach in on the iSU player who has a kansas player laying on him and ku player has touched the ball while out of bounds. You're not "letting the players decide it" when you let them break the rules to do it.
I it normal now to run and dunk when the game is over? Oladipo does it against us, and Elijah Johnson last night. I always thought you were supposed to dribble the clock out not pad your stats.
No, it's not common. Self apologized to Hoiberg in the handshake line. Elijah Johnson (the player who dunked it) apologized in the postgame interview, explaining that Self had lectured him immediately after the game and admitting that "I've got to show better sportsmanship."
On the one hand, Johnson had struggled all year and then went off for 39. On the other, that kind of thing always has the potential to set off something really ugly. Good on Iowa State's players for not reacting to that after what must have been a really painful loss. Good on Self for confronting his player, and good on Johnson for owing up that he was wrong immediately after the game.
You cant officiate one way for 39 minutes and then another way for 1 minute. Im all for refs swallowing their whistles at certain times, but that was the worst officiated minute ive ever seen. Whithey clearly committed his 5th foul. The charge call was horrific. You have 3 options there: block, charge, or no call. Only call that would have been wrong was the charge, and thats what he called. Whats an even worse call was after that when both teams were fighting for the ball near the baseline and they call a ticky tack reach in foul on Iowa St. That was a very exciting game marred by horrible officiating. Let the players decide the game!
Edit: meant to say that the block call was the only call that was wrong, and thats what was called. It shouldve been a charge.
It was called a no-call. The foul wasn't for a block, it was a loose ball foul called after the KU guy missed the shot.
The NBA isn't even real basketball anymore. 3 or 4 steps, running like a RB to the hoop. Stars get all the calls and are never called for fouling because the league wants them in the game as much as possible. It's like the WWE now, fake even though its still unscripted.
I can't watch NBA games anymore. Aside from all the ridiculous flopping, obnoxious refs, terrible commentating, poor salary decisions made by GMs, I just feel like games are paid for and fixed. It stinks because I really grew up on the sport and it's falling apart because of David Stern's obsession with short term gain and superstars.
We hear this kind of thing all the time. And it's almost all wrong. The Euro step used by Ginobli, Westbrook, and Lebron is not a travel (Tom from AA can go into excruciating detail if you like). The new CBA got rid of a lot of the terrible contract structures that strangled teams in the late 90s and early 00s. The refs are calling hand checking and perimeter contact, freeing up offensive players to actually move, unlike in college ball. They've enabled postgame video review to crack down on flopping.
I don't think there's a better set of studio shows in sports right now than the NBA on TNT (though Shaq is a problem) and ESPN's show (the Simmons, Wilbon, Jalen, Magic lineup is great). About the only comparison is Gameday. Compare those to the dreck that the networks role out for the NFL, and you'll find commentators that are more insightful and more willing to call players and coaches out.
In general, the quality of the NBA right now is at it's highest level since the 1980s (and if you want to talk about star calls, watch a rebroadcast of a game from then). Ratings for finals games were at their highest levels last year since Jordan's Bulls. There are a bunch of teams running a variety of offensive and defensive sets and philosophies, and playing them well, from the slow down interior style of the Pacers to the up-tempo games being played by the Rockets, Nuggets and Warriors. And the Spurs may be playing the most attractive offensive basketball in NBA history and LeBron might be having one of the top 10 individual seasons in league history.
It's fine if you're not into the NBA anymore. Or if you're primarily a Piston's fan and can stomach watching a young team that needs two more years to develop. But very little in your post corresponds to the NBA as it actually exists.
Hockey Night in Canada is the best sports show
Agree with everything posted here.
"Euro step" my ass. I've seen the explanation of the rule you're talking about and occasionally that's the reason for the travel. But it's possible to find video of Lebron going from the area between the three point line and halfcourt, to the basket on the other end, somehow taking two dribbles. We're talking about going about 60 feet in two dribbles. That's just one of the more extreme examples. Be a fan all you like but anyone claiming that all these extra steps are totally legit is an apologist, not a fan.
I'm not saying that traveling is never missed and that the NBA ignores pivot foot sliding. You see a lot of it in that situation you describe. But I've heard a lot of people complain about the Euro step in particular, and it's just not traveling.
I don't deny it. I would also just say, though, that usually when people complain about traveling in the NBA, they're not talking about the Euro step. Personally the move that I hate the most is when a guy like Kobe cradles the ball like a football and takes three or four steps after picking up his dribble on the way to the rim. That's the sort of traveling that really gets people.
I remember being at a basketball camp in high school in the mid-90s with some coach from UCLA showing us how to do one dribble and take it to the hole (teaching us not to dribble the ball too much). He kept moving back and still only using one dribble. He was able to do it all the way from half court. So a 6'11 ridiculous athlete going 60 feet in 2 dribbles? Sure, no problem, doesnt need to be travelling.
There's a difference between a euro step and the four steps you see in the NBA. This goes as far back as Iverson who time and time again took a step and then a very generous hop step. The same move is still used by the Wades and Lebrons today. In regards to flopping, since Judge Stern implemented his flopping penalty this year (which is probably 10-15 years late) only 4 players have been penalized. Only 4 flops this year? You can pick out more in a single game.
Contracts are much improved, I'll agree on that. TNT commentators are very solid. The ESPN commentating is pretty terrible, and that goes for the guys I liked as players including Rose and Jon Barry. Wilbon is a fool and Simmons is probably the only guy on that show with any insightful commentating.
The quality is definitely not improved over past years. Parity will not be at the same level as it used to be. Teams avoid building talent these days because they know they can save up and splurge on one or two superstars. The Heat, Knicks, and Lakers are setting up a stupid precedent of destroying parity. The obvious exceptions, which are probably the only teams I enjoy watching, include the Pacers, Thunder, Rockets and Spurs.
The pistons complete ineptitude plays a significant role. At the same time, I look back at the glory days when Hakeem, D Robinson, Stockton, Jordan, etc. played with talented teams that didn't require espn orgasm inducing offseason signings or obvious favoritism by refs in order to win games. I think my love for the NBA took the biggest hit in that Mavs-Heat championship when wade had 25 free throws in one game. They called flagrants if Mav players made eye contact with him. I had never seen such a biased game in my life.
That was a terribly officiated series, no doubt.
But I don't get your point about no parity. LA's about to miss the playoffs. The Knicks are slumping and hardly have a collection of superstars (now, I think Tyson Chandler's one of the best 10 players in the league, but that was a heady signing after the Mavs let him walk, and Denver seems to be doing just fine in the wake of the 'melo deal). The Heat have three high priced players, but I think any team that has Lebron at this point in his career is going to be one of the league's best (if he could bring the collection of spare parts in Cleveland to the best record in the east that's certainly true now that he's figured out how to dominate from the post).
At the same time, you have a hugely competitive race in the West, with the Spurs, OKC, Clips, Denver, and Memphis all likely capable of beating each other (OK, maybe not Denver). If you look at the years you term the glory days, there was far less parody then. You knew Chicago was coming out of the east and Utah or Seattle was coming out of the West.
And the actual play is better. Teams are moving the ball more, relying less exclusively on two man games and isos, and playing less grabby defense than they did.
This comment debunks a lot of "myths" about the NBA and basketball in general that come from people that are predisposed to dislike it.
And I know, because I am sort of that kind of person now and was quite biased against basketball in the late 90s and early 00s. It was not a coincidence that the Pistons and Wolverines were both bad at the sport at the time, and that the Pistons wore horrible uniforms. But I was (and still am) a hockey fan and I actively resented basketball's attention. So I held many of these arguments, or similar ones of a more appropriate time.
The fact is, the NBA has done an excellent job of branding itself, developing good stars, exciting plotlines, and entertaining basketball. Now, nobody will argue that regular-season basketball can sometimes be a bit of a drag, but that is true of all sports that are not football.
Complaints about things like officiating are real issues, but when someone uses those complaints to say that the sport is inherently worse or inferior, that is just an excuse. Every sport has its serious warts, and people who like other sports better will delight in pointing those out. Every sport has officiating problems. Every sport has structures built into its fabric that cause spectating headaches, like late-game fouling situations in basketball, or ties that are resolved in random shootouts in hockey, or punitive rules against regular hitting in football. It's everywhere.
Here's the thing: It's okay to like one sport over another. Just to like it. This is not something earth-shaking where you have to have a good reason--you just like it. Often it is just because your teams are successful in the sport you like most. Admit that it's random, and admit that each sport has its problems that outsiders can't stand but insiders just accept, and move on.
The NBA is pretty good right now, and it will be even better in the playoffs, even if we know who is going to win the East already. But if you're not a huge NBA fan, no problem!
The flopping... Ugh. Glad they are trying to put an end to that. Pathetic.
What would a basketball topic be without token "the NBA is terrible" posts. The NBA is rolling right now and if you don't like it that is fine. I don't like hockey but you won't see my ass in hockey threads killing it for how boring or random it is. A lot of people are watching the NBA(bulls,Thunder ect sell out every night. Finals Ratings have been better then the World Series as of late).
He didn't call a block, first off.
Watch the baseline official. He doesn't raise his hand to signal a foul on the contact.
He raises it on the grab of the kansas player who has the ball.
I'm fine with the no-call or the charge there. (the defensive player flopped big time but did take the contact) and it was the right call on the hold of the kansas player. The ball fell into the lap of the kansas player who tried to pass the ball out but was grabbed by the player who originally attempted to take the charge. If you don't call that and Kansas is unable to kick the ball out, aren't you deciding it there.
All that said, make your FT at the end and it's a moot point.
And come on. Pass inferference in Nat'l Title game OSU vs. UMiami? There are many, many examples of call/no-calls in football at the end of the game and the argument could be made that they are more impactful than a basketball call.
It was an obvious charge to me and come on, they were both fighting for the ball, that was not a foul. He didnt grab him. Sure there was contact, but not enough to warrant a foul. I would have been fine with two no calls, but the refs botched both calls, in my opinion.
Can't disagree with any of that. I would have probably called the charge - but I'm looking at it in a vaccuum since I didn't see the rest of the game, so I don't have all the info (i.e. how did they call block/charge throughout the game). The flop makes it harder, though, to call the charge. The view we get is tough to see how he took the contact and if/when he started leaning backwards.
From that bad, wide angle, I saw the ISU player reach around the Kansas player to grab at the ball. It's kind of an unwritten rule that you cannot tie-up the ball from behind a player. In this case they were both on the floor and the ISU player reached around. I thought it was enough for the call. It would have been very tough to call nothing there. If you have nothing and that ball doesn't get kicked out to the perimeter, it's a huge miss - just as bad as the "charge," if you think it was a missed call.
Two tough calls. It happens. I think the first was probably wrong and the second was probably right. But I think there's room for arguments for each possibility.
Sitting in the end zone when a certain pass interference penalty was not called against msu vs Desmond Howard. That seemed to be similarly determinative, no?
to a certain extent, but to me it is no different than the pass interference call in football. That particular penalty call / no call seems to decide a number of games during the course of the season. Ultimately it is almost a complete judgment call from the official, since there are varying degrees of PI on almost every pass. Same thing with holding.
....to remember Spartan Bob.... or Desmond getting tripped in the endzone.... or, to be fair, Michigan's win over Illinois in 2000, for example.
Didn't the Big Ten officially apologize to Illinois?
Illinois got an apology. Michigan got a victory.
You mention 3 games over 30 years. There is humanity on refereeing and errors happen. That is fine. But in basketball, especially college basketball, there is a real problem when you sit down expecting those errant calls almost every single night, be they your standard home cooking at any Duke or Indiana game, or terrible calls meant to keep a game interesting ala ISU/Kansas.
I've been watching college basketball and football for over 40 years. Football has been far more popular than basketball for longer than that. A lot more penalties get called in basketball than football, many of which are judgment calls, but that has always been the case. The biggest change is that there are far more games televised today with more camera angles, better lighting, more replays shown, and the worst that some television commentators feel like they are the stars, to the point that they won't shut up and just let viewers just watch and enjoy the game.
When you've rooted for Josh Aselin...and you've watched what they've become...It's one of the great underdog stories in sports as far as I'm concerned. If we get a Disney ending this year someone may mess around and try to write a book.
be better than basketball because the reffing in the latter is bad? Not super-logical, but you're entitled to your opinion. I think that refs have long determined outcomes or distorted them in the major sports; the media and fans are much better positioned to scrutinize nowadays.
I probably love both sports equally, but tire of hearing football fans rake on basketball. Different ethos, both fascinating. Hoop has arguably gotten better with big men less dominant. All the gossip and bickering that today surround both sports are tiresome. Not pointing to the OP, but there's a racist tinge to some basketball criticism. I saw some people on message boards talking about starting a white league--hilarious and embarrassing.
My biggest complaint with college basketball these days is that I have no idea what is a charge vs. a block. Commentators don't seem to know either. If someone drives the lane, makes contact with a defender, we all just look at the ref to see what the call will be this time. Seems random a lot of the time.
I notice this more when I'm watching a non-UM game where I don't have as clear of a rooting interest, and it's frustrating. And I know the B10 is all about "toughness", but the degree that offensive players can get mugged without a call is annoying.
I agree with this. A study of last year's tournament found that refs only got 65% of block/charge calls correct, while they got 90+% of other calls correct. Given those numbers, it's time for a new rules interpretation because right now it's really a crap shoot as to whether good plays are going rewarded or punished.
I'd be fine if that particular play by the Iowa State guy was an automatic block call. If you're not making a play on the ball, but are rather sliding in front of the man, I think it's questionable if that's a basketball play. Charges would still be called for plays on the floor, particularly as primary defenders slid to maintain defensive position, but also as help defenders get over early, but I'd be fine for it to be an automatic block if the the help guy is sliding over without challenging the shot. The addendum is that refs would have to get better at respecting the "rule of verticality," that the defensive player has the right to go straight up and challenge without it being a foul.
The other thing I'd like to see is the number of TOs reduced to 2 per half. End of game situations are excruciatingly long right now (and are going to get worse in the tournament when CBS starts pumping the same two BWW commercials into the six stoppages that occur in the last minute). Fewer TOs will reward teams whose players understand the game, rather than deferring every strategic decision to the coach.
The confusion seems to come from the change to allowing the defensive player to establish position without having his feet set. Before, if the player had good position in front of the offensive player, but his feet were still moving, it was a block. If his feet were set with good position, it was a charge. Feet set, but out of position is a blocking foul. Makes it harder for me to judge what is a blocking foul and what is a charge.
That said, there is a ton of crappy officiating that goes on in football, even with instant replay. Before replay, though, phantom TDs (USC, notre dame), Spartan Bob, and Desmond tackled in the endzone come to mind.
If you're a penn state fan, any football game against Michigan ;)
My first love was basketball because I started playing it at a young age, but I've recently been watching more college basketball, not just Michigan, and it becomes almost unwatchable at times. The sequence at the end of that game last night was appalling and the referee that had probably the worst view on the court made a call that he couldn't even see when another had a perfect view and didn't call anything. The charge I was ok with being a no call at first, but after they called the foul not 2 seconds later, there was no way to not call that charge. Just a terrible job all around.
to me about bad basketball officiating when the memory of Desmond getting tackled in the end zone on the 2 point conversion against Michigan State in 1990 still burns.
That was my first thought too after reading those. Between MSU 1990 and MSU 2001 it is pretty clear that officials (and timekeepers) do affect the outcome of games. The 5th down game between Missouri and Colorado when Colorado later won the national championship as well as the kicked ball by Nebraska against Missouri in 1997 also came to mind. There are tons of example of the officials significantly impacting who won football games.
So, my question is, what woud you do about it?
Basketball is such a fast-paced game that these "judgment calls" are going to have to be made (and yes, sometimes they are really bad). But should we stop the game for review after every contact, etc.? If so, we'd probably go from a typical 2 hour game to a chopped up, closer to 3 hour game.
Maybe there's another answer other than instant replay everytime contact is made. I do think the conferences should review games regularly and provide refs with feedback like "Hey, this was good, or hey you really botched this," etc. This way the refs can learn. Last I knew the Big Ten did it for football (but that's the extend of my knowledge).
Football has it's own poetic interjections by refs from time-to-time. They are less frequent, because calls are significantly less frequent in football, but any time you introduce humans you're going to also introduce human error. That's not to say it's okay or nothing should happen, but if we can make a change, what should it be?
the NFL "red flag" and let them challenge 1 call per game.
I can think of a few occassions just in the last few years where bad calls by the ref helped or hurt Michigan or the Lions.
Iowa 2011, the Sugar Bowl, the pylon touchdown against MSU, the Calvin Johnson noncatch against the Bears, etc.
I respect that basketball players are some of the most athletic freaks of nature out there, but the rules of the sport just don't make sense to me. I understand that a player shouldn't be able to hit a guy's arm while he shoots, but why is it a penalty to just be in the way of someone going toward the basket? Why should a player be able to jump into a defensive player and throw the ball up to "draw" a foul?
Deliberately taking penalties at the end of a game can also be beneficial and strategic for a team, which should have no place in sports, though I don't see a way around that with basketball's rules.
In those instances the rule for refs should be to just let them play and put the whistle away. I hate when players go into the lane totally out of control, but then throw themselves into another player and get bailed out. The rules allow for play to be more fluid, but refs too often think they need to call everything.
I love both. I give football a small edge because it's a rarer event - 12-13 games vs. 30-35. Also, being outside on a nice fall day and watching the team is awesome. But they're both great.
I like baskteball but it's tough to watch college with how long the shotclock is. They move the ball around the perimeter so much before actually trying to approach the basket, a luxury the pro guys don't have but it's not very exciting to watch.
Then the longer shot clock also means at the end of games the whole foul, timeout, foul situation is even worse because teams have to start fouling earlier and the 11 seconds difference or whatever it is is an eternity when you consider the end of a basketball game. That's at least 2 extra fouls. Ugh.
I agree with you that basketball will always be second to football and I agree with you that the refs in basketball are an absolute joke. However, the coaches and players don't always define the outcome and the refs DO find ways to screw football teams over.
With college football, not even the addition of review has taken away the incompetence of the refs at crucial moments. The refs handed Notre Dame victories in their games against Stanford and Pitt this past season. That was a big factor in them going to the national title game. True, ND has been getting away with that kind of shit in South Bend since the beginning of time. But we also saw clear fuck ups at the end of Oregon/Oklahoma a couple years back and Texas/Nebraska in the Big 12 title game 3 years ago.
In 2005, Sparty was able to tie us in the 4th quarter and send the game to overtime when Domata Peko returned a non-fumble 74 yards for a score. They reviewed the play from all angles for several minutes. Every shot showed Henne's arm clearly going forward before the ball hit the ground. Play is dead. After review, the refs STILL gave MSU the touchdown.
It may not be as common as basketball, but the refs can still decide football outcomes.
I totally agree with your point about instant replays, and I remember that MSU td on the Henne fumble vividly. Even with replay the refs still screw it up royally.
If we are such jokes you can always join up and do high school. We could always use more officials
Bingo. It's a really fucking hard job (both sports).
Mugging Desmond on the 2 point conversion plus the Spartan Savings Time game (combined with no holding call on Larry Stevens) are obvious. But I was going for games in the post replay era. Its just a shame that the addition of replay hasn't changed much.
The one thing that really irks me about college and pro hoops is the charging call. Back in the early 80's to late 90's the charge was very rarely called. You had to be completely set for a charge to be called. Now, charges are called way too frequently for my liking, I wish refs would just let them play and put the whistle away. The pro game has many more flaws than college, travel is rarely called, too much one on one, etc...
I do like football better as a spectator sport but basketball is the ultimate sport to play.
I agree with several of the points people have made above about basketball officiating, but that is just basketball to me. I don't know how you fix it. Am I the only one here, though, who has basketball as third fiddle to football and hockey? I've just always been a hockey fan. In fact, I like watching the NHL more than any other pro sports league. It probably helped a little bit that during my teens and early 20s Michigan was a juggernaut in hockey and...slightly worse than that in basketball.
As much as I enjoy the year that our basketball team is putting together, watching the hockey team play has just about cancelled it out. And hockey referees aren't perfect, but they very rarely decide a game (although I am aware of some horrible no goal calls in Michigan games in the past that screwed us).
I actually don't have a problem with that initial no call. However, the ref then calls a foul on ISU for a play with far less contact. That is inexcusable. If you decide to not call the charge, swallow the whistle until the horn or something flagrant.
Particularly since the KU guy got the ball out to a guy for an open 3, about the best possible outcome. That's a soccer officiating move, and obviously getting 2 foul shots down 2 is a bigger "advantage" than a buzzer 3, but it didn't seem like the call needed to be made.
I LOVE Michigan football. To illustrate this love, a young Drunk Uncle cried when Michigan lost to Minnesota in 1986 -- "why can't they just win them all".
However, the NCAA tournament is about the best thing going in sports which is why I love basketball, equally.
It's because football is just a better sport than basketball. I can't stand watching the last few minutes of a basketball game. It's just brutal.
I can't disagree with you there. If a team is up by 4 or more with less than 2 minutes left, the game can be extended and it seems like the game goes on for an extra half hour, that is def brutal. Lets not act like football is much better with all of the replays and commercials, and half the time the refs get the replays wrong. But the replays in basketball are getting ridiculous in length also. Besides Michigan football and basketball, I realy don't have time to sit and watch games that are not Michigan games. I do love europan soccer, and absolutely love the fact that there are no commercials and game last 2 hours, every single game.
is an issue, agreed. But, the taking a knee during the last 2 minutes of a football game isn't very exciting either.
It's like difference between getting a quick shot vs. getting your teeth pulled.
Huh? I would argue that it's much more egregious (and maybe even more common) for football games to be decided by blown calls than basketball games. Since there are far fewer football games than there are basketball games, the stakes are much higher in football. Has there ever been a basketball equivalent to the infamous fifth down game that allowed Colorado to win the most fraudulent national championship in history in 1990? What about Nebraska's infamous "flea kicker" against Missouri that screwed us out of an undisputed national championship in 1997? And who can forget Mike Lantry's phantom miss in 1974 that cost us a possible undefeated season and a trip to the Rose Bowl? On a related note, a college basketball fan would say that the NCAA basketball tournament is far superior to any system that college football has ever used to decide its national champion. And he would have a point.
There are plenty of good reasons to like football more than basketball, but officiating is not one of them.
Anyone who saw the end of the IU/MSU game had to be disgusted with how long it took. Basketball would be a better game simply by eliminating some timeouts. With the possibility of 14 total timeouts in a half of college basketball, plus reviews, plus the MSU timekeeper never knows when to start the clock, it kinds of screws up the game.
Webber used to openly say how the refs in the Big Ten totally favored the home team. Its true the proximity makes a huge effect