ChuckBuck wrote:Nalod wrote:Nets won two championships in 74' and 76'. That makes it 2 and 42.ABA championships are not world championships nor the quality of an NBA but fans do like it when they win championships. Do they count? Not if your "defending" the knicks and don't like the N*ts. Do the 74' or 76' team beat Dave Cowens Celtics? I seriously doubt it!
Dolan has not been in charge all 64 years so we don't "blame" his reign for all of history. Prokhorov has only owned the N*ts for two years.
I'd say the current ownerships should only be held accountable for the time they owned the team.
I think Dolan wants to win. I just think he lets his emotions drive decisions.
When I think of ABA I think of Jackie Moon for some reason lol. I don't think anybody put much worth in USFL or XFL or any failed league either. Sure they had a few headliners in there, prominently your Nets hero "Dr J", but give me a break with your tired defense of the Nets and repetitive derision of Dolan, Nets still have 0 Championships dude.
[b] ABA championships are not world championships nor the quality of an NBA but fans do like it when they win championships. Do they count? Not if your "defending" the knicks and don't like the N*ts. Do the 74' or 76' team beat Dave Cowens Celtics? I seriously doubt it!
/b]
I addressed that. I said it does not hold the weight.
I am having an adult conversation and the basis is not defense but accuracy.
The ABA is more like the AFL than the failed leagues you mention. They merged 4 teams into the NBA. The 6mm entrance fee handicapped the four because of the financial stress it took to make the investment. The quality of the players form the defunct teams and those that got "dispersed" via a special draft was in line.
There are some good video's on the ABA and the history of its players besides the Will Farrell movie parody and Jackie Moon. You do know that "Eddy", a movie about a female coach played by Woopie Goldberg was not a biographical depiction of any factual event? You also know the WNBA did not have a player "Juanna Mann"?
I am on record to say the 35 years in Jersey made it a "Pathetic franchise". Roy Boe could not afford the $6mmm fee and sold Dr. J. He owned the very successful at the time Islanders and was sucking cash from them to fund the Nets. It blew up. Nets financially for many years seemed to be underfunded. They sucked for many reasons. Knicks always had money. Go figure.
But 100% accurate statement: The Nets have never won an NBA championships since its inclusion via Merger in 1976.
And in that time frame neither has the Knicks! We not talking about Jets vs. Giants, Mets vs. Yankees. Given the long history of the franchise its fair to say they have not exactly lived up to the legacy of a "storied franchise". Knicks have a great brand identification of a "storied franchise" but little in terms of bonafide success to match it.
I am a knick fan first and foremost. Im not defending the Nets, I am defending accuracy and the history of both franchise's. A fan can accept all things positive and ignore history and cheer them on. A fan can also be historically accurate and still be a good fan. No right or wrong but why argue history? You don't like the Nets, thats fine. If someone is going to go online and converse about a franchise history then accuracy is relevant. Having knowledge about the Nets, or Sonics, or Lakers, Or other teams over the years is not a bad thing.
Ignoring history and facts are.
I also challange anyone to post where I promote the Nets as a better team or compare them other than financially or contractually!
8/24/2012 12:40 PM
