Everyone has an opinion on LeBron James’s move to Miami, and that includes me. After all, as a fan of Cleveland sports for four decades, I think I may have some insight, and I sure don’t mind sharing it with you.
I’m still not sure people outside of Northeast Ohio truly realize the heartbreak Cleveland fans have suffered over the years. I get so worn out on Cubs fans, and until a few years ago Red Sox fans and the like. Sure those teams are suffering or have suffered long droughts between championships, but other teams in those towns have won---a lot.
1964. If you’re familiar with Cleveland’s plight, you know that’s the last time Cleveland won a championship. The Browns beat the Baltimore Colts 27-0, to win the NFL title, which in hindsight is tainted somewhat. The American Football League had gained legitimacy by that time, and was two years from merging with the NFL, but the champions of the two circuits would not meet in a post-season contest until two years later. Would the Browns have beaten the AFL champ Buffalo Bills? Probably. But we’ll never really know. The Super Bowl era somehow diminished previous NFL title games making the 1964 game look insignificant.
Of all the teams that were in existence at the time of the NFL/AFL merger, only two have never reached the Super Bowl---Cleveland and the Detroit Lions. However, in that time Detroit has won a World Series (2), NBA championships (3) and Stanley Cups (4). Certainly there are cities that have suffered longer considering the fact that they joined the major league ranks after Cleveland’s ’64 triumph---Sacramento, Jacksonville, Phoenix and the like. Then again, there are Johnny-come-latelys like San Antonio, Indianapolis and Denver that have one quite recently.
You can understand the frustration then. Like it or not, LeBron James was our last hope for a long time. The Indians are awful. The Browns are awful. The Cavs are now a .500 team at best, and have little chance of even sneaking in as the eighth play-off team next year.
Sure, it was huge just winning the draft lottery in 2003, and securing the number one slot and the right to draft James. That’s the set-up though. It’s just the start of “The Drive,” it’s the play before “The Fumble.” It’s “Red Right 88,” and Jose Mesa about to pitch to Edgar Renteria in Game 7 of The World Series. We should have known then it would only end in disaster seven years later.
I was going to watch the ESPN spectacle, but at that last minute thought “why?” Why watch “The Drive” when you know it’s coming? No thanks. The Miami fans cheered, the Cleveland fans wailed, forever to be shown on TV and YouTube. America is used to that. It’s laughable that people criticized the burning of LeBron’s jersey. “Hey, there. You can’t burn anything until you win a championship. Then you can torch cars, garbage dumpsters, and bust up all kinds of crap---go nuts!”
One guy that will benefit from this is Bernie Kosar, who returns to his rightful place as Cleveland’s most beloved hometown sports hero. No, he never won the big game, but he didn’t abandon the faithful. When he was dismissed from the Browns by then coach Bill Belichick, and immediately snapped up by Dallas, my life-long disdain for the Cowboys vanished in an instant. Bernie, in a bit of cosmic justice, got his Super Bowl ring that year.
For the most part, people from outside the area seem to like Greater Cleveland. Most have empathy for the drought. Some find it comical, and I get that. It’s sad, but I get it. Sadder still, is I don’t think I can root for LeBron to win that championship in Miami. He has done a lot for the city, but in the end, it just doesn’t feel right.
Showing posts with label NBA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NBA. Show all posts
Friday, July 9, 2010
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
A Soccer Theory
I’ve been “watching the football,” as they say in Britain, and like most Americans my interest has waned. America falls to Ghana, England gets thumped by Germany. While we of course are disappointed, the English are positively beside themselves. How does a country that invented the sport, and has perhaps the top league in the world, end up doing so crappy? And does anyone outside of England care?
Certainly very few people in North America do. Obviously we’re more about (real) football, baseball and basketball. Our Canadian cousins like the hockey, as do some of us in the States. Now comes the obligatory “we North Americans don’t like soccer.” We don’t, at least not in large numbers. For the record, I do. I actually sometimes prefer it to basketball.
Every year about this time the discussion is had as to why we don’t get into soccer. The soccer bashers revel in the opportunity to point out the games foibles, and extol the virtues of “our sports.” Then there’s the paradox. Lots of kids grow up playing soccer, but after more than a generation of youth programs, we have a disproportionate number of people who have little interest in watching the game. It is one of the most perplexing mysteries in sports.
I think I may have figured it out, though I’m probably not the first to put forth the following theory. So here goes. Growing up in the ‘70s and ‘80s, if you played baseball, football, basketball, or hockey, you had Major League Baseball, the NFL, the NBA and the NHL to follow. At times you even had competing leagues (the ABA, WHA and briefly the WFL and USFL). In other words, after playing you had a lot of opportunities to watch the game played professionally, and would perhaps be further inspired. If you played soccer, you had The North American Soccer League (NASL). The NASL claimed it brought world-class soccer to the upper part of the continent, but it really didn’t. Some talented players from here were mixed with good players from other countries, but many of the latter were past their prime and overpaid. Cable TV, desperate for programming did carry games, but the wire was just starting to make inroads at that time. Seeing the NASL product, even if your city had a team, was difficult. Odds are if you did have a team, you wouldn’t have it for long.
If you want to use the chicken and the egg analogy, then today the egg is still youth soccer; however the MLS hasn’t quite evolved into a chicken. Actually it seems as though MLS is marketed more toward those of us who grew up enjoying the sport, as opposed to trying to indoctrinate new converts as the NASL attempted. That strategy seems to be working for MLS. The crowds (around 16,000) aren’t much bigger than they were with the NASL (14,000 at its peak), but it seems to be a more soccer savvy and consistent crowd today. The fiscal policies of the newer league also allow it to work with a smaller draw. Of course the NHL and NBA do fine with attendance numbers that aren’t a whole lot higher.
I liken it to golf, tennis and bowling, all sports that a lot of people participate in, but few comparatively watch on TV. Oh sure, there are those who will watch golf it’s The Masters and they want to see a Tiger, or a Phil, or…some other famous golfer. Odd thing about golf though, is no one will sat they hate it, at least not with the same fervor as the soccer bashers. I’m indifferent, and someone once said “the opposite of love isn’t hate, it’s indifference.”
Certainly very few people in North America do. Obviously we’re more about (real) football, baseball and basketball. Our Canadian cousins like the hockey, as do some of us in the States. Now comes the obligatory “we North Americans don’t like soccer.” We don’t, at least not in large numbers. For the record, I do. I actually sometimes prefer it to basketball.
Every year about this time the discussion is had as to why we don’t get into soccer. The soccer bashers revel in the opportunity to point out the games foibles, and extol the virtues of “our sports.” Then there’s the paradox. Lots of kids grow up playing soccer, but after more than a generation of youth programs, we have a disproportionate number of people who have little interest in watching the game. It is one of the most perplexing mysteries in sports.
I think I may have figured it out, though I’m probably not the first to put forth the following theory. So here goes. Growing up in the ‘70s and ‘80s, if you played baseball, football, basketball, or hockey, you had Major League Baseball, the NFL, the NBA and the NHL to follow. At times you even had competing leagues (the ABA, WHA and briefly the WFL and USFL). In other words, after playing you had a lot of opportunities to watch the game played professionally, and would perhaps be further inspired. If you played soccer, you had The North American Soccer League (NASL). The NASL claimed it brought world-class soccer to the upper part of the continent, but it really didn’t. Some talented players from here were mixed with good players from other countries, but many of the latter were past their prime and overpaid. Cable TV, desperate for programming did carry games, but the wire was just starting to make inroads at that time. Seeing the NASL product, even if your city had a team, was difficult. Odds are if you did have a team, you wouldn’t have it for long.
If you want to use the chicken and the egg analogy, then today the egg is still youth soccer; however the MLS hasn’t quite evolved into a chicken. Actually it seems as though MLS is marketed more toward those of us who grew up enjoying the sport, as opposed to trying to indoctrinate new converts as the NASL attempted. That strategy seems to be working for MLS. The crowds (around 16,000) aren’t much bigger than they were with the NASL (14,000 at its peak), but it seems to be a more soccer savvy and consistent crowd today. The fiscal policies of the newer league also allow it to work with a smaller draw. Of course the NHL and NBA do fine with attendance numbers that aren’t a whole lot higher.
I liken it to golf, tennis and bowling, all sports that a lot of people participate in, but few comparatively watch on TV. Oh sure, there are those who will watch golf it’s The Masters and they want to see a Tiger, or a Phil, or…some other famous golfer. Odd thing about golf though, is no one will sat they hate it, at least not with the same fervor as the soccer bashers. I’m indifferent, and someone once said “the opposite of love isn’t hate, it’s indifference.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
