Why Don't I Trust The NBA?

As I've watched the NBA playoffs move through their rounds this spring I've hopped on the bandwagon of those who are a little cynical about the league's process of conveniently getting teams with its top two stars (Kobe and LeBron) to square off in the finals and I believe that somehow this will play out (wink).

While Orlando in the East and Denver in the West have put up game fights it just seems that a league that's seen its popularity slip will do whatever it takes to ensure that they have the marquis match-up for the finals.

One would suppose that a nightmare scenario for the NBA suits would be the less than appealing Magic/Nuggets get-together for the title. Although there are a couple of stars in Dwight Howard and Carmelo Anthony they don't hold the status that the Big Two do.

I ask myself 'why is it that I think this about the NBA and not the NFL or Major League Baseball (I don't think this about hockey either but I don't consider it to have the national appeal of the other three)?'

I do think it's interesting that in the NFL LaDanian Tomlinson has yet to make a Super Bowl and the league thrives. One would think the Dallas Cowboys would be given every advantage but it's been years since they were a true factor to go deep in the playoffs. The NFL obviously has a business model that transcends needing certain teams or stars to always be in the spotlight as well as a championship game that's now a holiday in and of itself.

In baseball, although we get Red Sox/Yankees crammed down our throats ad naseum (particularly by a certain all-sports network) we've seen the former go against a non-descript Colorado team in its second Fall Classic of the decade in 2007 and last year's Phillies/Rays World Series as well as the less than stellar Astros/White Sox of '05, while neither was a smash in terms of TV ratings, they came during a period in which baseball has continued to thrive financially, especially in the recent bad economy. Such match-ups in the NBA (see: the potential of Nuggets/Magic) would likely draw half of the lousy ratings of last year's World Series.

The NBA is a different animal than the others because it has gotten to the point where it relies so heavily on one or two individuals per team to make it work. In the '60s and early '70s, when the league experienced a rise in popularity (before its pre-Magic/Bird/Jordan collapse of the late-'70s) with teams like the Celtics, Knicks, and Lakers which not only came from big markets but whose stars played within the framework of a game plan. This was also the "pre-hype" era of sport, a time that's probably changed the NBA more than any other league.

The PGA Tour clearly gets better ratings whenever Tiger plays in a tournament, yet I never get the feeling that the event is rigged for him to contend for a title each time out. He puts himself into contention, which leads to coverage of every shot he takes but it doesn't feel like the tail wagging the dog.

I wish I could feel the same way about the NBA.

On another note, I did get a chuckle over the fact that Clemson and Alabama again should square off in baseball this week thus completing the tri-fecta of competing against each other in the three major sports in the same school year. The Tigers and Tide play on separate sides of the bracket but there's a decent likelihood they'll encounter each other at some point during the weekend. It would be a pretty unique achievment that Clemson wouuld play an SEC other than South Carolina in the big three sports in the same year. The last time it happened was with Georgia in '03-'04.

As for this year with the Tide, there was the football humiliation followed by revenge for the Tigers in basketball in early January.

In case you're wondering, Alabama alumn Dabo Swinney obviously pained for the football loss and cheered the basketball win from behind the Tigers' bench. I wouldn't be suprised if he's a fixture at Doug Kingsmore Stadium this weekend, too.