The NBA has almost as many problems as the number of times Patrick Ewing walks over the course of a game. One of these problems is how they're killing off their own talent pool, snatching off players in high school before they reach the end of their maturation period. The number of teams have expanded to the point where teams are lucky to have one top caliber player. Unproven rookies are making millions in signing bonuses and endorsements.
These problems, however, are tiny compared to the problem of the nature of the lottery system. It only seems fair that the worst teams should get the benefit of getting first picks. Yet the impact of a single player can be so immense that we are now beginning to see not only the teams and ownership commit themselves to losing, but also the fans.
I find it really sad and depressing when I see Bostonians root for the Celtics to lose. How the mighty have fallen. Celtics greats must be rolling in their graves. I know it's all done in love and in hopes of capturing Tim Duncan, yet it's rooting for failure nonetheless. How can these sports fans condemn Pete Rose for betting against his own team, and then turn and hope the Celtics lose?
It's a problem that David Stern and the NBA have to deal with. Boston is not the only city in this situation. Around the country, people are watching their TVs and cheering when the final score comes up and their home team has lost. For some reason, I don't think that's very good for the sport.
The U. S. tennis team has advanced into the next round of the Davis Cup.
Hooray!
I'd hate to criticize tennis yet again, but this hardly newsworthy story caught my attention. Jim Courier, the 22nd ranked player in the world, defeats the 85th. To add to the disgrace of the event, the aforementioned 85th player was content to lose, happy that he "lacked little to win." I thought sports were supposed to be competitive.
Now, don't take me wrong here. I like tennis a whole lot, and the sport lends itself well to international play. Around the world there are top caliber players. Every tournament is international in scope. I watch Olympic tennis, and I usually find myself quite entertained.
Yet the Davis Cup hardly holds my interest. Maybe it's the fact that it's played every year. Each World Cup, Olympics, and America's Cup is special because of their infrequency. When such an apparently important event like the Davis Cup occurs every year, it loses a lot of the magic.
The other problem is that the tournament is dragged out over the whole year. At any time, it appears that there are Davis Cup matches happening somewhere on ESPN at some odd time of the night. It's impossible to figure out how the tournament is progressing since it takes so long for anything of note to happen. There is no build-up, and in turn, the finals seem to come and go in a blink of an eye.
The potential is there for a wonderful and monumental sporting event. When the U.S. loses, I don't want us to simply say, "We'll win it next year." It's just far too easy. I'll take a couple years after a loss in turn for exciting competition.
