# Why do the Spurs get no respect?



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

I had to go on a rant about this ladies and gentlemen. After reading in a post related to the 80's era of the NBA vs. today's era of the NBA, I just had to bring this situation up.


The post that put me over the edge stated that last year's Spurs were the worst champions in the NBA since the 1970's. Give me a freakin break. When we won our first title, Phil Jackson, along with everyone and their mother, labled our championship with an asterik. Because it was a strike-shortened season, I guess no team was worthy of winning the championship that year. Oh wait, if one of the other big-market teams won the title that year, nobody would mention a damn thing about an asterik season, and nobody would try to discredit their championship. But since it was the little 'ol Spurs, a team that doesn't have millions of supporters in the media, everyone basically agreed with the fact that their title was tainted because it was only a half-season. Like it or not, that title is in the books my friends, and you can take the asterik and shove it up your *** Phil Jackson.


That was Rant A, now on to Rant B: "The Spurs are boring."
Watching the best team in the league last year was boring to some people.....that just doesn't click with me. I'm not a NBA fan to watch "fun" basketball; I'm a fan of the NBA to watch good basketball, and it doesn't get any better than winning a championship. That's all I heard about too; "The Spurs are boring. They are unbearable to watch." If you want to watch a basketball game full of ally-oops, crossovers, dunks etc., AND 1 seems to have a good collection of videos that will "quench your thirst" for highlight-basketball. The Spurs went out and won the championship by battling it out with every team they played down to game 6 in every series even though it probably couldn't be considered pretty, but I guess the competitiveness means nothing to some people. I can understand why people say the Spurs aren't fun to watch, but I didn't hear crap about that until after they won the 2nd championship. 



I could seriously go on for about another 700 words on the "Spurs are the worst champions since the 1970's", but I know there is probably one or two people who actually will read through this thing. Yes it's long, but to keep it short and sweet: The Spurs get crapped on because of the marketability of this team. If it's not the "Asterik Title", or the "Worst champs since the 1970's", it's "The Spurs are boring." I feel upset with these things because I know for a fact that if some bigger market team other than LA won the title last year, there wouldn't be a damn person saying that they were the worse champs since the 1970's. If we weren't a small-market team, Phil Jackson wouldn't go out and run his mouth about an "Asterik" being next to our first title, because there would be somebody in the media to step-up and say "Phil Jackson, you are a panzee." 


Low marketability, little respect. That's the way I see it.


----------



## Luiz_Rodrigo (Dec 2, 2003)

I don´t think that we don´t get respect. Since Duncan came to San Antonio, we´re beggining to be hated, which is good because the great public just hates the teams that wins the titles, because it´s very easy to envy the winners, and nobody wastes time with losers.

About the people that say that watch the Spurs are boring, well I suggest you to ignore those people, because if their teams had a Duncan they all would change their speech.

Back to the "no respect" question... of course we´re respected, just watch the ESPN broadcast in the games, they -for several years- always says that we are contenders in the league.


----------



## DaBobZ (Sep 22, 2003)

Yeah u guys r right, the Spurs aren't respected as they should be.
One major reason IMO is the defensive oriented style of play of the Spurs, I guess 50% or more basketball fans dont't consider that a ball game below 90/100pts can be a great ball game, this is amputating bball from a major part of its.
No need to say this stat must rise up to 70% for the journalist sportswriter population.
That beeing said the Spurs aren't 'shiny' or Hollywood or whatsoever, San Antonio is a small city and big cities would like only big cities to win titles.

Now about the asterisk, I think it showed how stupid and ridiculous people can be :upset: once the playoffs and season started all teams were on the same line.

Anyways who did kill the Lakers in the WC semis in 2003?


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

You are exactly right. The spurs are discredited with being good champs because they play slow, defensive minded basketball and there are no alley oops or awesome highlight reels. 
As for the Phil Jackson comment. I think he was tryen to defendd or make an excuse as to why his team didnt win the championship. Sure he wasnt the coach but he still jus was tryen to make a lame *** excuse to why the lakers didnt win. Phil Jackson is a ***** and needs to learn to suck it up.


----------



## Starks (Feb 22, 2004)

I find the Spurs highly entertaining to watch. Duncan is a great player and Parker and Ginobilit are two young exciting guards. Plus Bruce Bowen can lock down anyone in the league.

I think many find them boring or they don't have the same personality like other teams do.


----------



## quick (Feb 13, 2004)

People probably hate the spurs because they get away with alot of calls and have favors from the refs.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>quick</b>!
> People probably hate the spurs because they get away with alot of calls and have favors from the refs.



Don't be bitter because your team couldn't win tonight.


----------



## quick (Feb 13, 2004)

Don't be defensive because the spurs come closest to the lakers in getting it their way with the refs.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

Good God, I've had enough of this, "The Spurs don't get respect. Wah Wah Wah" crap.

It's total BS. There are millions of people saying this same thing right now...so clearly, they do. They are the champs, so obviously the media knows how good they are.

Who cares if they don't get talked about as much? Clearly, people on TV are going to talk about more flashy teams like the Kings, Mavs, Lakers and Wolves before they talk about the Spurs, who have a fundamental approach to the game.

So again, stop with the complaining. At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is if they're winning.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>quick</b>!
> Don't be defensive because the spurs come closest to the lakers in getting it their way with the refs.


ever heard of the kings? or hte mavs? yeah dont even think about it bud


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>quick</b>!
> Don't be defensive because the spurs come closest to the lakers in getting it their way with the refs.




Good luck on making the playoffs. Just don't expect the Spurs to help you out.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> Good God, I've had enough of this, "The Spurs don't get respect. Wah Wah Wah" crap.
> 
> It's total BS. There are millions of people saying this same thing right now...so clearly, they do. They are the champs, so obviously the media knows how good they are.
> ...



Coincedence? Or is a Laker fan crying about us Spurs fans?



The last line is about the only thing I like about your statement. And what "millions" of people are saying the Spurs aren't getting respect? The same "millions" of people who complain about the Spurs being fluke champions and boring? It's at least a two-way street, but it isn't IMO. People consider the Spurs contenders by default; They've won two championships recently, so people feel like they have to include the Spurs in contender talk. How can I tell? Because it takes an 8 game winning streak for people to notice the Spurs. Again, that's by default. You can't help but to mention a team after winning 7 or 8 consecutive games, or when they win 50 games every year. 


As for your command, stop complaining, I say this: NO. Until I stop seeing people find a way of degrading the Spurs' two championships, there is a good reason to complain. The Spurs are boring, they have an asterik championship, and they are the worst NBA champs since the 1970's. Yep, that's respect.



Damian, this thread is mostly due to the 70% negative stuff I read about the Spurs on this very board. I was in just one of those "rant" moods, so I might have overblown it, but I'm not going to switch my opinion because others feel different. And another thing, you don't know if the Spurs get respect unless you are a Spurs fan. Since I am a Spurs fan, I listen, in greater detail, about the Spurs, and I've seen that nobody seems to care about the Spurs until it is forced upon them. And as a Laker fan, I'm not sure why you are saying this. Now the Lakers, that's respect. You can't mention the NBA without hearing about the Lakers. And this is a team that has only won 1 more championship than the Spurs since the 90's? If there is any point that I'm trying to make, it is this: The Spurs are an afterthought mainly due to their location in the mid-market city of San Antonio. I'm not complaining about the Spurs being in SA, especially since I've proudly lived here for 16 years, but it's one of those things like: "Life's a *****." We play in a mid-market town, so the Spurs aren't mentioned until the media has to mention them by default. That's it. There are some good NBA minds who give respect to the Spurs, but there is still a large portion of NBA fans who don't give a lick about the Spurs or their good run in the Duncan era. I'm not calling for the Spurs to be crowned by the media, nor am I asking for the Spurs to get more love than a team than the Lakers; All I'm asking is that people will stop degrading and ignoring the Spurs like some nobody team. That's it. Stop trying to degrade out accomplishments, and I'll stop complaining. Until then, we are disrespected.


----------



## XxMia_9xX (Oct 5, 2002)

because the spurs doesn't like all the media hype.. they just like to play good and simple. i like that about the spurs, i love their atitude.... if that's boring to other people then who cares?


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

I'm not even going to argue about the stuff you put up against PJ because I prefer to let the record speaks for itself. I don't recall PJ coaching in 99 when Spurs won their first title.

Well, why you let other people's opinion to get you on your nerves? I am Laker, and will always be, will always love to see my team winning championship every year, but I've great respect for every team in the NBA 'cause I'm a Pro homie!


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Lynx</b>!
> I'm not even going to argue about the stuff you put up against PJ because I prefer to let the record speaks for itself. I don't recall PJ coaching in 99 when Spurs won their first title.
> 
> Well, why you let other people's opinion to get you on your nerves? I am Laker, and will always be, will always love to see my team winning championship every year, but I've great respect for every team in the NBA 'cause I'm a Pro homie!



I usually can accept other people's opinions, but it's hard for me to understand a Laker's fan's point-of-view on the Spurs. I objectively hear and listen to the Spurs, as you might just casually hear and listen to the stuff. I believe the Spurs get disrespected because SA isn't a major market, and if you don't agree with that, fine, I have no beef with that. That's what opinions are for. I just get defensive when a non-Spurs fan comes in and tells me to stop whining, when they don't see things the same way as I do. For example, many non-Lakers fans say the Lakers they benefit from calls, as you Lakers fans strongly dissagree with that. Why? Because of the different view point. We (Non-Lakers fans) want to see the Lakers lose, you (Lakers fans) want to see the Lakers win, so we both view and hear the same things, but that view is translated into our own objective opinion. So if you don't agree with me, fine. Just don't tell me to stop crying because you don't agree with me. I'll voice my opinion, you voice yours. Simple as that.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

Dont get me wrong, I know PJ wasnt coachen the Lakers at the time the Spurs won their first championship but he still made a lame *** excuse as to why his team didnt win. I have respect for every team in the NBA even if i dont like them but I have zero respect for Phil Jackson. He is a punk and a sellout. Sure he is a good coach but he needs to think before he speaks.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>texan</b>!
> Dont get me wrong, I know PJ wasnt coachen the Lakers at the time the Spurs won their first championship but he still made a lame *** excuse as to why his team didnt win.


hmmm what team was PJ's coaching when Spurs won the title in 99?

If you are so sure about the lame comment PJ made, why can't you back your claim with neutral source?


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

The Spurs definitely don't get enough respect on these boards, but that's just because there aren't many Spurs fans who post here. I don't know why you expect non-Spurs fans to say all nice things about the Spurs, because they just won't. A fan is going to overrate his own team and underrate all the other teams in the NBA. And if his team loses, he is going to make excuses for why his team is really still better than the team it lost to. That's just the way sports fans always have been and always will be, and it doesn't seem worth flipping out over.

When the Spurs won the championship, it was to be expected that Lakers fans and Kings fans were going to talk about asterisks and how the Spurs are boring and make excuses. Just like when the Lakers won the championship, we heard Kings fans talk about the referees and Peja's injury and things like that. Sure some people tried to take away from the Spurs championships but it was no worse than the people that tried to take away from the Lakers championships.

It's cool that you're here as a Spurs fan to defend one of the best teams in the NBA, keep doing it, you do a good job. When someone writes a retarded post saying the Spurs are the worst champions since 1970 and they're boring and bad for the NBA and their titles carry an asterisk, rip into him. But there's no point in complaining to the heavens about how everyone's out to hate on the Spurs, because they're not, they're just not Spurs fans. I guarantee you that every other fan on this site sees a ton of dumb stuff written about his own team. For example, every time this season that the Pacers lost a couple of games, a bunch of people said they were obviously on the verge of their annual second-half collapse and on track for another first-round loss. These are just the kind of things that homerish sports fans like to say.

Like Damian said, all that matters is if you're winning.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Lynx</b>!
> 
> 
> hmmm what team was PJ's coaching when Spurs won the title in 99?
> ...




Here's the thing: Why did Phil Jackson make a comment like that? Why not just let it be? The bottom line is that Phil Jackson wouldn't have put an asterik on the season had he coached and won the championship.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

Phil Jackson was not coaching in 1999 when the Spurs won the championship. He did however take over the Lakers in 2000 and dont you think its possible that he wants to defend his new team and make an excuse as to why they didnt win it the year before. Maybe as a confidence builder to them? Get the hell off the spurs board and stop riden phil jacksons jock. He made a lame *** comment that he has no backing as to why it should happen and you cant deal with it. I know my NBA facts bud so dont try it.

just admit: phil jackson was wrong!


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>KokoTheMonkey</b>!
> 
> I usually can accept other people's opinions, but it's hard for me to understand a Laker's fan's point-of-view on the Spurs. I objectively hear and listen to the Spurs, as you might just casually hear and listen to the stuff. I believe the Spurs get disrespected because SA isn't a major market, and if you don't agree with that, fine, I have no beef with that. That's what opinions are for. I just get defensive when a non-Spurs fan comes in and tells me to stop whining, when they don't see things the same way as I do. For example, many non-Lakers fans say the Lakers they benefit from calls, as you Lakers fans strongly dissagree with that. Why? Because of the different view point. We (Non-Lakers fans) want to see the Lakers lose, you (Lakers fans) want to see the Lakers win, so we both view and hear the same things, but that view is translated into our own objective opinion. So if you don't agree with me, fine. Just don't tell me to stop crying because you don't agree with me. I'll voice my opinion, you voice yours. Simple as that.


Believe me or not, I've a great respect for Spurs.

So, I see two issues here.

1. SA not being a huge market, and 

2. Lakers getting calls, and other teams not.

I can't really talk about no. 1.

Lakers getting calls? Yeah they do get calls. So does every other team in NBA. But it could be Shaq-Factor since he is the most difficult person to be officiated in NBA. Even David Stern agress on that.

But sometimes, we as a fan, don't like the calls, go against us. For instance, incident of Shaq being ejected in a crucial moment of the game against Utah. I know, many of non-Laker fans would agree with the refs, but in my point of view, it was definitely definitely poor officiating by Bob Deleany, who has done it against Shaq, not once, but five 5 times.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> The Spurs definitely don't get enough respect on these boards, but that's just because there aren't many Spurs fans who post here. I don't know why you expect non-Spurs fans to say all nice things about the Spurs, because they just won't. A fan is going to overrate his own team and underrate all the other teams in the NBA. And if his team loses, he is going to make excuses for why his team is really still better than the team it lost to. That's just the way sports fans always have been and always will be, and it doesn't seem worth flipping out over.
> 
> When the Spurs won the championship, it was to be expected that Lakers fans and Kings fans were going to talk about asterisks and how the Spurs are boring and make excuses. Just like when the Lakers won the championship, we heard Kings fans talk about the referees and Peja's injury and things like that. Sure some people tried to take away from the Spurs championships but it was no worse than the people that tried to take away from the Lakers championships.
> ...




Solid post, soild post. I just had to vent some frustration after seeing someone post that the Spurs were the worst NBA champs since 1970. This is just one of those deals that built up, and built up, and built up until I just had to vent. I don't like crying about stuff, especially when it's open for hundreds of people to read, but at least I know I'm crying, and I know what I'm crying about. 


And yes, it is about winning. I'd much rather have the Spurs in the current state than have a sorry *** team that gets all the media hype in the world. I'm just trying to understand why people seem to dislike the Spurs with a passion, after being a classy team year after year.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Lynx</b>!
> 
> 
> Believe me or not, I've a great respect for Spurs.
> ...





I think you mis-interpretated my example of the Lakers and the officials. I wasn't making that statement myself as I believed in that; It was an example, and a rather popular view-point also. I'm not crying about the Lakers or hating on them in anyway, so hopefully I'm not sending that message.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>texan</b>!
> Phil Jackson was not coaching in 1999 when the Spurs won the championship. He did however take over the Lakers in 2000 and dont you think its possible that he wants to defend his new team and make an excuse as to why they didnt win it the year before. Maybe as a confidence builder to them? Get the hell off the spurs board and stop riden phil jacksons jock. He made a lame *** comment that he has no backing as to why it should happen and you cant deal with it. I know my NBA facts bud so dont try it.
> 
> just admit: phil jackson was wrong!


When I asked about backing your claims, you start harping me to get off the Spurs board. tsk tsk tsk tsk

Let me get the facts straight here for you. PJ took over in July 1999, not in 2000 as you said. He did defend his new team(then in 1999) by saying a team with talent who needs direction; and hell yeah, he was definitely right about it. 67 wins in his first season with Lakers ain't a joke, which ultimately gave us 3-peat ride.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>KokoTheMonkey</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> I think you mis-interpretated my example of the Lakers and the officials. I wasn't making that statement myself as I believed in that; It was an example, and a rather popular view-point also. I'm not crying about the Lakers or hating on them in anyway, so hopefully I'm not sending that message.


Fair enough.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Lynx</b>!
> 
> 
> When I asked about backing your claims, you start harping me to get off the Spurs board. tsk tsk tsk tsk
> ...


july of 99 which was the 2000 season. but the asterick comment was way out of line. thats all im sayen. my bad bout tellin ya to get off i jus got all worked up


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rukahS capuT</b>!
> Duncan shouldn't have won an MVP to date. This year it should be Garnett, last year it should've been Garnett, and the year before was Jason Kidd, no doubt.




This is a perfect example of why I started this thread.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

that comment has to be the stupidest comment ive heard on this board in a while. really.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

For my part, I respect the Spurs more than any other organization at the moment, including my Bulls who are quickly becoming a disgrace of a franchise.

The entire organization is classy. There are no egos, there are no run-ins with the law. There is very little trash talk coming from them. They just show up at the office, win, and go home. I find that incredibly refreshing in the current NBA climate.

I enjoy watching them play. They're methodical and efficient and play tougher defense than any other team. People who can't appreciate Duncan's understated brilliance or their amazing team defense aren't watching the game to see good fundamental basketball, they're in it for dunks and facials and trash-talk. That's fine, and a few good dunks never hurt, but I prefer the Spurs' style. i'd prefer to watch Duncan demolish a defender with superior footwork and a bank shot than watch yet another highlight reel dunk on a hijacked play. The former is much rarer than the latter these days.

so, the spurs may not get all the respect they deserve, but they're highly respected by this pie-loving fan.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ViciousFlogging</b>!
> For my part, I respect the Spurs more than any other organization at the moment, including my Bulls who are quickly becoming a disgrace of a franchise.
> 
> The entire organization is classy. There are no egos, there are no run-ins with the law. There is very little trash talk coming from them. They just show up at the office, win, and go home. I find that incredibly refreshing in the current NBA climate.
> ...




I'm glad to hear someone other than Spurs fans have positive insight on the Spurs. 


By the way, I like pie too. (Consider this a self-invitation to your club)


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KokoTheMonkey</b>!
> 
> By the way, I like pie too. (Consider this a self-invitation to your club)


you're in.

I also intended to rant about how that whole "asterisk" thing is a total crock. Every team played the same 50-game schedule, so how did the Spurs have some advantage? What a joke. And then they went 15-2 in the playoffs, including a demolition of the Lakers. What else could they have done to show that they were the best team that year?

It may have been a bit of a down year for NBA basketball that year, (the play that year was pretty ugly after the extended layoff) but that doesn't mean the Spurs weren't deserving champs. Since we're in the mood of handing out asterisks to champions, I'd give the Lakers of 02 an asterisk before I give the 99 Spurs, on account of the unprecedented 27 free throws in ONE QUARTER vs. the Kings. But neither team deserves it. They're the ones with the hardware and that's the end of it.


----------



## kg_mvp03-04 (Jul 24, 2003)

the spurs do get more calls then any other team besides the lakers eventhough that is less aparent now. Tim "over the back" duncan is always fouling people to grab rebounds and block shots yet is never called for the fouls. They also have Manu "travelling" ginobilli on there team who takes 4 steps to the hoop everytime.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kg_mvp03-04</b>!
> the spurs do get more calls then any other team besides the lakers eventhough that is less aparent now. Tim "over the back" duncan is always fouling people to grab rebounds and block shots yet is never called for the fouls. They also have Manu "travelling" ginobilli on there team who takes 4 steps to the hoop everytime.





Bla bla bla. 



You fit in perfectly with the title of the thread. 



Once there is a physical game that the Spurs win, on come the Spurs haters who claim they get more calls than the other teams. And Ginobili appears to travel, but if you would take time to actually watch the replays, you can clearly see he takes long strides that looks awkward.




Here's a question for you: What does the NBA have to gain with the Spurs? It seems like everyone and their mother thinks the Spurs are a boring team to watch, plus SA is a small-market city, plus SA draws low TV ratings, plus we have little to no media supprt whatsoever. So what does David Stern and the NBA have to gain by cheating for the Spurs? Record low TV ratings? Sounds like a plan to me.


The game tonight was just physical, and both teams were physical. I saw several over the backs by both teams, and IMO the refs called it fair. 



By looking at your user name, it's safe to say you have some beef with the Spurs.


----------



## kg_mvp03-04 (Jul 24, 2003)

they want the spurs to succeed because of Tim duncans image, they want to promote the "good guy" image in a sport that is usually associated with bad things. Kobe on trial for rape, Ai and his crimes. Tim Duncan is one of the only guys that will probably never do anything wrong


----------



## kg_mvp03-04 (Jul 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KokoTheMonkey</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


the refs called it quite evenly till the end when they called two weak *** fouls on lorenzen wright, one of them he clearly got all ball and the other Duncan just lost the handle but they called it a foul with 2 secs left in the shot clock


----------



## Diesel (Apr 1, 2004)

Spurs and Rodney Dangerfield.

A couple of championships doesn't earn you respect.

I would say that maybe 5 could get you a cup of coffee.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

I'm not going to carry this on with Anti-Spurs fans. 


Good luck to whomever your team may be, but get out of here with your BS on the Spurs.


----------

