Unpopular Opinions (sports edition)

[interstatefan990]

New York City is 85 miles from Philadelphia.
Philadelphia is 90 miles from Baltimore.

You would allow 3 separate teams here (no change from before).

Los Angeles is over 300 miles from the Bay Area, and they can't have two separate teams. In any other state except Texas, 300 miles would be very likely cross a state line.

Exactly. My opinion is that it should be more about the state than the city. And what does distance have to do with it? New York is 85 miles from Philadelphia, but the culture of those two cities have don't have much more in common than do LA and SF which are 300 miles apart. The reach of the culture of California is comparable to the reach of Northeast culture, even though California is one state and the Northeast is many.

The NBA is 100% population based.  It's based on the size of the media market.  Hence why NY can have two teams but ND doesn't have any.

Chris

I was referring to the actual games and the size of teams.

It doesn't make any sense, financially or otherwise, to limit states with multiple large metro areas to a single team.

Since you mentioned the Nets and Knicks, maybe your issue is with two teams being in the same metro?  That I could maybe understand. But if one team was in Buffalo instead of Brooklyn, I don't see the issue (at least not for the purposes of this discussion - whether an NBA team could be successful in Buffalo is another subject).

Well the Knicks and Nets are a particularly strong example of why there should only be one team per state. People in Brooklyn are represented by both teams, in the same city. But with the Lakers and Warriors, people not living in LA or SF could feel represented by both of those teams as well, even with the greatly larger distance. It doesn't really make sense.

Similarly, what if the Nets moved back to Jersey?  Problem solved?

Chris

You bet.

[CtrlAltDel]

2.  There should be a rule that at least 60% of the members of a team have actually lived in that area for a certain number of years.

I'm of mixed feelings about this one. It would be very complicated to implement, and would disadvantage the smaller markets.

A player could also potentially claim local status by virtue of being on the team after a certain number of years. Take Tom Brady, for example. Does it really matter anymore that he wasn't born in New England? He's still a legend there and has lived there for close to half of his life.

I'm fine with smaller markets being at a disadvantage.

If a player has lived in an area for ten years by virtue of being on a team, then he is a transplant to that area.  That's his home now.  No problem with that. But, moving forward, he shouldn't be allowed to play for some other city just because he likes that team's offer better.  He should represent where he's from—whether he's lived there all his life or for _____ years.

If it's a good enough reason to move for any other job, why isn't it here? It seems that all this would do is reduce player salaries and force them to endure work conditions that they might not like.

[CtrlAltDel]

It doesn't really make sense.

This comment is perhaps a bit more self-referential than intended. 

[kphoger]

If it's a good enough reason to move for any other job, why isn't it here? It seems that all this would do is reduce player salaries and force them to continue to endure work conditions that they might not like.

That's a good question.  I guess I view a team as actually representing its city, in a way I don't view other jobs.  When Olympians compete under their country's flag, they compete on behalf of their country, and I have the same mentality toward pro sports.  It's kind of like requiring a politician to be from the area he or she represents, although that's obviously not a perfect comparison.

[JayhawkCO]

Well the Knicks and Nets are a particularly strong example of why there should only be one team per state. People in Brooklyn are represented by both teams, in the same city. But with the Lakers and Warriors, people not living in LA or SF could feel represented by both of those teams as well, even with the greatly larger distance. It doesn't really make sense.

I wonder what your view is then of English soccer.  My team (Tottenham) is about four miles away from our main rival (Arsenal) both in London.  Does London only get one team?  The proximity creates one of the best rivalries in sport.

Chris

[webny99]

It doesn't make any sense, financially or otherwise, to limit states with multiple large metro areas to a single team.

Since you mentioned the Nets and Knicks, maybe your issue is with two teams being in the same metro?  That I could maybe understand. But if one team was in Buffalo instead of Brooklyn, I don't see the issue (at least not for the purposes of this discussion - whether an NBA team could be successful in Buffalo is another subject).

Well the Knicks and Nets are a particularly strong example of why there should only be one team per state. People in Brooklyn are represented by both teams, in the same city. But with the Lakers and Warriors, people not living in LA or SF could feel represented by both of those teams as well, even with the greatly larger distance. It doesn't really make sense.

That's fine, but it's not a reason why there should only be one team per state. Having two teams to choose from (especially if you don't live near either city) isn't a bad thing.

[Takumi]

Dale Jr. was the sequel to Kyle Petty: famous last name, started off at the family team but eventually left, showed a bit of promise before injuries and never really lived up to the hype.

Sebastian Vettel's titles were all the car.

[Alps]

NBA:
* fouls are called based on helping the most popular players and teams win
* the Knicks should be disbanded and replaced by an entirely new team/ownership and history post-Ewing should be erased
* entirely overpromoted by ESPN
NHL:
* entirely underpromoted by ESPN
* the OT is a farce and should be played 5 on 5 for a full 20 minute session, even in regular season
* games should end in a tie after 20 minutes, no shootouts
* either abandon the loser point in OT or go to a 3-2-1-0 scenario. 2-2-1-0 favors teams going to OT.
MLB:
* too much money in salaries now, it's hyperinflating
* the minor leagues didn't need what was done to them, this is sad and wrong
* Aaron Judge will never have a full season again
NFL:
* fouls are called based on helping the most popular players and teams win
* entirely overpromoted by everyone
* too much money in salaries now, it's hyperinflating
* is a monopoly that causes all other leagues to fail, even development leagues, and should be broken up

[interstatefan990]

It doesn't really make sense.

This comment is perhaps a bit more self-referential than intended. 

I stated the way things are right now, and then slapped "it doesn't make sense" on the end. Call it what you will.

That's fine, but it's not a reason why there should only be one team per state. Having two teams to choose from (especially if you don't live near either city) isn't a bad thing.

Why should people have to choose between supporting two different parts of their home state?

I wonder what your view is then of English soccer.  My team (Tottenham) is about four miles away from our main rival (Arsenal) both in London.  Does London only get one team?  The proximity creates one of the best rivalries in sport.
Chris

I can't really answer that, to avoid being incorrect since I don't know anything about English sports teams. 

[hbelkins]

The NCAA's football targeting rules are unnecessary and are overkill. They weaken the sport and penalize what for years were legitimate plays.

The "flagrant 1" and "flagrant 2" rules in college basketball are also overkill.

All levels of football put too much emphasis on protecting the quarterback.

[Scott5114]

It should be possible in every sport for both teams to lose. Not a tie (which I'd also like to see happen more often), just a situation in which neither side can claim victory or that they fought a hard-fought battle against a superior foe. Just straight, undiluted disappointment for everyone. Would give you something to root for when two teams you hate play each other.

When you win a certain number of championships in a rolling period (either as a team or an individual player), you get retired like a 90's Wheel of Fortune contestant. If one team or player is so much better than the rest of the league that they keep winning, that's boring. (They can come back after a season or two. Maybe it's permanent, in the case of an individual player. "You beat basketball! Congratulations!")

It seems that all this would do is reduce player salaries and force them to endure work conditions that they might not like.

They could resign and become an air conditioner salesman like anyone else would have to do.

[Bruce]

It should be possible in every sport for both teams to lose. Not a tie (which I'd also like to see happen more often), just a situation in which neither side can claim victory or that they fought a hard-fought battle against a superior foe. Just straight, undiluted disappointment for everyone. Would give you something to root for when two teams you hate play each other.

There are definitely situations in soccer where a tie costs both teams their place in the league/group standings (since it's worth 1 point compared to 3 for a win) benefiting a third team that overtakes them.

[Max Rockatansky]

Shootout victory's in the NHL are a farce.  Ties or just continuing until someone gets a real goal would be a more legitimate result.  The shootout loss is even more of a joke given that a point is still awarded.

[JayhawkCO]

Shootout victory's in the NHL are a farce.  Ties or just continuing until someone gets a real goal would be a more legitimate result.  The shootout loss is even more of a joke given that a point is still awarded.

I think they should just go back to ties myself.  Shootouts should be eliminated.  I love the no shootouts in the playoffs so you get epic games like the old Penguins/Rangers game that Petr Nedved scored in the 7th OT.

Chris

[Max Rockatansky]

Shootout victory's in the NHL are a farce.  Ties or just continuing until someone gets a real goal would be a more legitimate result.  The shootout loss is even more of a joke given that a point is still awarded.

I think they should just go back to ties myself.  Shootouts should be eliminated.  I love the no shootouts in the playoffs so you get epic games like the old Penguins/Rangers game that Petr Nedved scored in the 7th OT.

Chris

Agreed, I know that was a fear that a monster long game would result in regular season play.  The tie had a consequence given both teams got a point and I see no issue with a playoff game going multiple overtime's. 

[Roadgeekteen]

The NBA needs to do something about every player only wanting to go to LA and NY.

The Clippers should move to San Diego or Seattle

[Max Rockatansky]

The NBA needs to do something about every player only wanting to go to LA and NY.

The Clippers should move to San Diego or Seattle

The NBA has a problem with really good players wanting to build mega teams.  The Nets and Lakers just happen to be where those players are accumulating at the moment.  Not too long ago it was the Warriors and Heat that were building mega teams.  I doubt the NBA is really inclined to do much about it given they star filled teams have been their traditional big draw. 

[I-55]

The NBA needs to do something about every player only wanting to go to LA and NY.

The Clippers should move to San Diego or Seattle

The NBA has a problem with really good players wanting to build mega teams.  The Nets and Lakers just happen to be where those players are accumulating at the moment.  Not too long ago it was the Warriors and Heat that were building mega teams.  I doubt the NBA is really inclined to do much about it given they star filled teams have been their traditional big draw.

The core for Golden State (Curry, Thompson, Green) were all drafted by the Warriors. They won before adding more start to their superteam (those stars being KD and post injury Demarcus Cousins). Their success came form drafting and developing more so than winning trades (though KD did significantly help).

The Lakers basically got LeBron after a couple down years and he brought a bunch of friends.

The Clippers couldn't do anything with their original core (CP3, Blake, DeAndre Jordan)  and all of them left in free agency or trade. Then Kawhi/PG decided to move in when the team looked like it would struggle, and now the team is full of league veterans.

Brooklyn existed in mediocrity until very recently, now they're the heart of the east.

The Knicks are out of the basement (but still the laughing stock of the league) and would have a playoff spot if the season ended today.

Summary: 3/4 LA and NY teams are now superteams by basically trading the entire roster, getting a star or two, and attracting more stars. Golden State, Milwaukee, Boston got a lot of their success from the draft and player development.

[JayhawkCO]

Shootout victory's in the NHL are a farce.  Ties or just continuing until someone gets a real goal would be a more legitimate result.  The shootout loss is even more of a joke given that a point is still awarded.

I think they should just go back to ties myself.  Shootouts should be eliminated.  I love the no shootouts in the playoffs so you get epic games like the old Penguins/Rangers game that Petr Nedved scored in the 7th OT.

Chris

Agreed, I know that was a fear that a monster long game would result in regular season play.  The tie had a consequence given both teams got a point and I see no issue with a playoff game going multiple overtime's.

Yeah, overtime just for playoffs.  You'd have too many injuries if they did it in the regular season.

Chris

[gr8daynegb]

- The Jets will always suck.

-The Jets will make the playoffs this season

- Franchises should be given a new name if they move states. Like wtf is the Utah Jazz?? New Orleans should be the only one with that name.

Agreed for the most part. Although Jazz is much more egregious than other examples. Most names could transcend state boundaries with a little more grace than Jazz.

The Jazz MUST keep their name!!!!  How can I watch Baseketball again if they aren't the Jazz anymore? 

[CoreySamson]

I have no problem with NCAA schools being in different conferences in different sports.

[Max Rockatansky]

- The Jets will always suck.

-The Jets will make the playoffs this season

- Franchises should be given a new name if they move states. Like wtf is the Utah Jazz?? New Orleans should be the only one with that name.

Agreed for the most part. Although Jazz is much more egregious than other examples. Most names could transcend state boundaries with a little more grace than Jazz.

The Jazz MUST keep their name!!!!  How can I watch Baseketball again if they aren't the Jazz anymore? 

I don't even think that I can come up with a better name for the Jazz that fits Salt Lake City.  Maybe for Utah on the whole but not really Salt Lake City. 

[JayhawkCO]

I have no problem with NCAA schools being in different conferences in different sports.

I don't mind it for "minor sports", but having basketball and football different just seems to make it so rivalries are diluted.

Chris

[hbelkins]

Conference names should relate to some factual basis. (The Big Ten should have 10 teams; the Atlantic Coast Conference teams should all be in coastal states, etc.)

[kurumi]

NHL:
* entirely underpromoted by ESPN
* the OT is a farce and should be played 5 on 5 for a full 20 minute session, even in regular season
* games should end in a tie after 20 minutes, no shootouts
* either abandon the loser point in OT or go to a 3-2-1-0 scenario. 2-2-1-0 favors teams going to OT.

Maybe it's just because I was just a kid and the Whalers had potential, but it seems the NHL peaked in the mid-80s. 80 games, balanced schedule, a tie was a tie dammit, no shootouts, no points for losing. The median record was .500. If you were above that, you were at least average bordering on good. Today, the standings suffer from grade inflation.

Back on topic, some unpopular opinions:
* I guess Tom's not just a system quarterback
* mad respect for LeBron, he's a good person and GOAT contender; but I'll root against him forever, to hell with him
* big-time sports colleges are pro teams, pay your players
* if my home team isn't in it (which is NCAAM most of the time, and CFB all the time) then I'm interested only in upsets, sorry
* "FBS" and "FCS" are annoying, go back to Div 1 and Div 1-A
* UConn's early Div 1 success was a fluke (NFL-caliber QB and RB), and they'll never reach that level again