Thread Tools

Display Modes

**sa1177** · 03-10-2006, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hap

1. Canada is in America

2. A canadian invented the game

3. there's NHL and MLB teams in Canada.

4. I don't know why anyone could actually say that the NBA should "only be" in the US.

Yeh better get used to to it...One of Sterns goals is to have a NBA team in Mexico by 2010 I believe. Then possibly Europe...

Quote:

PHILADELPHIA — The NBA is looking anew at international expansion and could have more than one franchise based overseas by the end of the decade, commissioner David Stern said Saturday. "It wouldn't surprise me that at the end of the decade there would be a very strong NBA international presence on the ground," Stern said at his annual All-Star weekend news conference. "I've changed my thinking." Stern said the league was examining a number of overseas scenarios, from operating a league in a different continent to placing at least two teams outside of the United States and Canada. He said arena construction plans in European cities have made the idea more viable.

Stern also ruled out domestic expansion in much the same language that he used in past years to deflect speculation on international expansion.

The NBA expanded internationally in 1995 by placing franchises in Toronto and Vancouver, and the general consensus back then was that a move into Mexico City would be the next step.

But with the failure of the Grizzlies in Vancouver and the changing economic conditions in Mexico, Stern in recent years had been consistent in stating that expansion into other countries would probably not work for a variety of reasons.

Now, he has changed his outlook.

"Realistically, the places we could place NBA teams would be Mexico and Europe from a travel perspective. The places where we would consider NBA-sponsored leagues would be anyplace, including Asia, Latin America, Africa and Europe," Stern said. "The timetable is give us 3-4 years to come up with the right plan."

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/nba/0...nsion.htm#more

Utherhimo · 03-10-2006, 02:44 PM

i agree HAP heck lets have system like baseball

CL Canadian League
USL United States League
AL Azteca League

the top two team of each league from the west and east of each league is placed into the championship classic

1. League champ with best record
2. 2nd champ by record
3. 3rd champ

4. top non-champ by record
5. 2nd non " " "
6. 3rd " " " "
7. wild card - team that lost to one of the champs picked by ping ball
8. wild card - " " " " " " " " " " ' "
example

1 play 6 = Portland Trail Blazers vs Baja Federale
2 play 5 = Mexico City Azetca vs Winnipeg Mounties
3 play 4 = Vancouver AlCans vs OKC Stampeed
WC vs WC = Gadalhara Bandetos vs Calgery Badlands

PTB vs Calgery
MCA vs OKCS

PTB vs MCA

NBA Champion your Portland Trail Blazers

ohok i had too much time on my hands being snowed in! :P

or this

US League
Canadian League
Mexican league
Euro League

teams play 82 games agianst teams for all four leagues with plays in each but shortened series to 3 games but the champion league game which is 5 then the 4 champions play each other

ping pong balls for the seeding

example

1. Canadian League champ = Vancouver ALkans
2. Azteca League = Mexico City Aztecas
3. US League = Portland Trail Blazers
4. Euro League = Benetton Treviso

BrooklynBaller · 03-10-2006, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sa1177

As I remember he claimed Grizzlie attendance was much higher then Portlands;

Ok, where did I ever say that the Grizzlies had higher attendance than the Blazers?!?! You're reading into my statement way too much. It's almost like you don't comprehend English.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sa1177

..and then based most of his argument for moving the Blazers to Vancouver on this premise. I proved the premise wrong and posted evidence proving so.

What?!? There's really no point in evening debating with someone who so clearly has no clue what my post was all about. I was simply pointing out that if Vancouver wanted to put together an investor group to purchase the Blazers, they could. That's it. That was my point. Was that put in simple enough terms for you to understand?

Also, where did I ever say I WANTED the Blazers to move to Vancouver?!? I simply stated that it would be a possibility given the investor group and fan interest. I wouldn't want the B's to move (not even to Vancouver) - I've been a Blazer fan since the 1987-88 season and I continue to be one today. In fact, of the 20 or so Grizzly games I attended while the team was in Vancouver, Portland was the opponent in probably half of those games. So, where exactly do you get off calling me a fairweather fan when you have no evidence to prove your point. Using your logic, I guess that makes you 'foolish'?

This all started because I interpreted Hap's ambiguous original comment to mean that, in his estimation, Vancouver could not support an NBA franchise given that the city had already failed once. I simply pointed out that Vancouver had 16,000 plus fans for games (which they did in the four seasons between '95-'96 and '98-'99) and that Portland was currently officially drawing about the same number (but like I mentioned in another post, almost 4,000 of those are no shows on any given night).

BrooklynBaller · 03-10-2006, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Utherhimo

1. Canadian League champ = Vancouver ALkans
2. Azteca League = Mexico City Aztecas
3. US League = Portland Trail Blazers
4. Euro League = Benetton Treviso

Dude, what the heck is an "ALkan." Is that even a word? And where do you get Calgery (it's Calgary) Badlands from. You realize the 'badlands' (if you wanna call 'em that) are about 800 miles north of Calgary, right?

**sa1177** · 03-10-2006, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrooklynBaller

Ok, where did I ever say that the Grizzlies had higher attendance than the Blazers?!?! You're reading into my statement way too much. It's almost like you don't comprehend English. ).

hum ok then I guess I misunderstood what you meant by this:

Quote:

The stadium routinely had 16,000-plus fans for games (more than I can say for the Blazers).

Quote:

What?!? There's really no point in evening debating with someone who so clearly has no clue what my post was all about. I was simply pointing out that if Vancouver wanted to put together an investor group to purchase the Blazers, they could. That's it. That was my point. Was that put in simple enough terms for you to understand?

Also, where did I ever say I WANTED the Blazers to move to Vancouver?!? I simply stated that it would be a possibility given the investor group and fan interest. I wouldn't want the B's to move (not even to Vancouver) - I've been a Blazer fan since the 1987-88 season and I continue to be one today. In fact, of the 20 or so Grizzly games I attended while the team was in Vancouver, Portland was the opponent in probably half of those games. So, where exactly do you get off calling me a fairweather fan when you have no evidence to prove your point. Using your logic, I guess that makes you 'foolish'?

This all started because I interpreted Hap's ambiguous original comment to mean that, in his estimation, Vancouver could not support an NBA franchise given that the city had already failed once. I simply pointed out that Vancouver had 16,000 plus fans for games (which they did in the four seasons between '95-'96 and '98-'99) and that Portland was currently officially drawing about the same number (but like I mentioned in another post, almost 4,000 of those are no shows on any given night).

Sorry but did you really expect to come in here and make suggestions about moving OUR team to Vancouver and not have anyone take you on about it. Were you really nieve enough to think your original post wouldn't annoy a few hardcore Blazer fans who would then respond?

And please please don't tell me I don't understand English..clearly you don't either since you have violated the simple rules of this site by launching some kind of personal vendetta/attack against me. Please review the rules posted in the sticky thread at the top of our board.

BrooklynBaller · 03-10-2006, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sa1177

hum ok then I guess I misunderstood what you meant by this:
Sorry but did you really expect to come in here and make suggestions about moving OUR team to Vancouver and not have anyone take you on about it. Were you really nieve enough to think your original post wouldn't annoy a few hardcore Blazer fans who would then respond?

And please please don't tell me I don't understand English..clearly you don't either since you have violated the simple rules of this site by launching some kind of personal vendetta/attack against me. Please review the rules posted in the sticky thread at the top of our board.

What suggestions did I make exactly?!? Like I said in my post above, I DON'T WANT THE BLAZERS TO MOVE. I'M A BLAZER FAN MYSELF. I reiterate for the third time that it would be possible for the franchise to move A. Because the investor group being put together in Vancouver is solid; and B. Because there is enough fan interest in Vancouver to support an NBA franchise. That's it. Also, it's a moot point due to the lease agreement that the Blazers have in place with the RG Arena. I don't know what you've got your panties in a bunch about.

Also, for future reference, if you're not prepared to be 'attacked' then I suggest you simply not call other poster's 'foolish.' There's other ways to elicit a good debate besides name calling. If I feel attacked, I'm going to respond in kind. 'Nuf said.

**sa1177** · 03-10-2006, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrooklynBaller

What suggestions did I make exactly?!? Like I said in my post above, I DON'T WANT THE BLAZERS TO MOVE. I'M A BLAZER FAN MYSELF. I reiterate for the third time that it would be possible for the franchise to move A. Because the investor group being put together in Vancouver is solid; and B. Because there is enough fan interest in Vancouver to support an NBA franchise. That's it. Also, it's a moot point due to the lease agreement that the Blazers have in place with the RG Arena. I don't know what you've got your panties in a bunch about.

Ok fair enough but remember you did not mention being a "Blazer fan" in your original post.

Quote:

Also, for future reference, if you're not prepared to be 'attacked' then I suggest you simply not call other poster's 'foolish.' There's other ways to elicit a good debate besides name calling. If I feel attacked, I'm going to respond in kind. 'Nuf said.

A foolish uninformed post deserves to be called for what it is IMO

Quote:

The stadium routinely had 16,000-plus fans for games (more than I can say for the Blazers).

..

the number's I posted clearly showed yours was exactly that..a post likely made in haste in which the information it contained was not accurate or well researched.

I attacked the post not the poster...I said I made you "look a tad bit foolish" which is a big difference from calling you foolish.

Quote:

think he was upset because I made him look just a tad bit foolish...well let that be a lesson on what happens when you don't do your homework.

You then chose to respond by attacking me directly.

So anyway I apologize if I offended you...I will admit I get a bit feisty when talk of moving the team comes about.

Utherhimo · 03-11-2006, 01:25 AM

ALCAN - Alaskan - Canadian Highway that my old unit the 70th engineers built during Vietnam before they got shipped to the war.

Well i figured they wouldnt give Edmonton a team and there is the Terrell Meusum of Paleotology in Drumheller and I didnt want to name them a dino.

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes