Comment by jmduke | Hacker News Reader

Comment by jmduke | Hacker News Reader

I hate Golden State. They're an eminently villainous team: overconfident and insufferable. (This can also be said of many of their fans -- most of whom I suspect had not called themselves a Golden State fan until 2013 -- and their owner, who described their organization as 'light-years ahead' of the competition because they had the good fortune to sign Curry to the best contract in the NBA due to his reputation as injury-prone.)

I can't hate Steve Kerr. He's self-deprecating, he's insightful, and he's fun. He's spoken passionately about basketball, obviously, as a coach and player and commentator, but his use of his platform is truly admirable. The sports world needs more people like him.

Largely speaking, it's becoming easier and easier for me to watch the NBA instead of the NFL, if for no other reason than I don't feel guilty about it. As more evidence piles up that American football devastates the human body and mind, it disgusts me a little to watch owners, GMs, and coaches avoid talking about "the world beyond the gridirons" as much as possible.

Contrast this with figures in the NBA like Kerr, Gregg Popovich, and even the commissioner Adam Silver (who handled things like Donald Sterling and the All Star Game in Charlotte very well), and it just feels better to be a fan -- and I hope the coming generation of aspiring athletes feel the same way. (This is not to diminish the great job that players like Lebron, Carmelo, and Cousins have done off the court to improve their communities and speak out about issues, but I think the calculus is a little different as a player.)

[EDIT -- I forgot to include perhaps my favorite Steve Kerr moment, the speech he gave after his game-winning shot in Game 6 of the '97 finals: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOCcd-iAljI]

I was bummed when Kerr became a coach. He was one of the best parts of any NBA broadcast he was a part of. He was insightful of what was happening on the court, and his stories of playing with MJ were fun to hear. There was one off the cuff story during a game where he talked about the immense pressure MJ put on you when he passed you the ball. You never wanted to miss a shot because of the look he would give you running back down the court.

Another cool story: http://www.espn.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/61933/landing-a-...

I've stopped hating basketball teams. There are only a few players I really don't like. Harden comes to mind. I'm a Warrior fan but I like LBJ and Kevin Love. (JR Reid not so much).

Kerr is a blessing to the Bay Area. I'm a long time Warriors fan. I've had my shot blocked by people who've had their shot blocked by Manute Bol. My bad was coined by Manute Bol! But I really wasn't watching the Warriors for awhile until I saw they'd 1) fired Mark Jackson 2) swooped in and got Steve Kerr. Jackson was a bad fit for the Bay Area and feuded with his players.

Kerr on the other hand had incredible pedigree. Lute Olson, Phil Jackson, Gregg Popovich, Mike D'Antoni. He played with Michael Jordan and Tim Duncan. He won five rings. Wow, the Warriors scored Steve Kerr! Bob Myers then won the NBA Executive of the Year deservedly.

Anyways, the Warriors are very popular in the Bay Area, yeah because they win but also because they're actually pretty nice people who are out in the community quite a bit. Bogut was kind've sour but extremely honest. A great interview. The only Warriors jersey I own is a Bogut jersey.

But I really think there's a lot for Silicon Valley to learn from the Warriors organization. Starting Iggy in the Finals (the Small Ball Death Lineup) was an idea that came from their video guy, was debated by the assistants and OK'd by Kerr.

It's a trade-off and it's a tradeoff that a lot of NFL players are clearly becoming aware of but are willing to make. In some weird sense you can only appreciate them for making that tradeoff.

Effectively, they are at 20 (with today's knowledge) given 15 years at the top of the most popular American sport. They make hundreds of millions in the process (possibly).

By the time they are 40 or 50 they might be a vegetable or have committed suicide, but honestly how is that different than any other job? It's a decision they make for celebrity and money and competition - how many CEOs have killed themselves via overwork?

On the other hand when Tony Dorsett says "I didn't expect the end to be like this", it does shock you to the core. And it's a sport that kids should not be playing.

Football is a violent sport but that's what makes it magical....you can't have men that are 6 foot 6 and can run a 4.3 without it happening. But you can't get something that completely tactical and brutal without those dynamics. I'd hate for football to die.

There's also genuinely good owners in the league; hate someone like Jerry Jones all you want but he has taken care of all of his former players and is one of the most giving people in the league. There's also some really brilliant and good front offices (New England or even Dallas with Will McClay).

....also regarding Kerr, he's had an amazing career.

Bulls in the 90s, Spurs in the 00s (killed the Mavs in 03 WCF), then goes to Phoenix and helps build the Seven Seconds or Less Suns, now GS. And he was a pretty good analyst! Talk about a winner.

The median NFL salary is $1.9million. The median NFL career length is 3.5 years. If you're in the NFL for 15 years, you are an extremely fortunate outlier.

I think the main difference between someone putting their health on the line as an NFL starter and as a CEO is that, as a CEO, you know what you're getting into. There has been, to my perception, a concerted effort to avoid educating football players about the risks they face and the precautions (financial and health) they need to take to ensure safety after their time in the league.

I agree that there are great owners and individuals in the NFL; it's unfair of me to paint them all with the same brush.

> you know what you're getting into

This is the crux of it for me. The concussion/injury risks are an issue, but if you're informed, so be it. Bodily risk doesn't stop normal people from lots of things, from driving all the way to heliskiing, and for others it's something they actively seek out. If society has an avenue to reward it, then good for them.

What bothers me is the league itself covering up those facts. It's meant thousands of young men put themselves at risk _unknowingly_ and that's reprehensible.

> By the time they are 40 or 50 they might be a vegetable or have committed suicide, but honestly how is that different than any other job?

The premise of your question is deeply flawed. It is radically different.

How many "young men" end up with broken bodies well before they make it to the big show? We just had a very young man at Univ. of Arizona (Kerr's alma mater) retire from basketball at 19 years old due to a 3rd tear of the ACL.

How many TBI's does it take before we end something that is clearly bad for society? You can't legally double leg tackle a guy standing on the corner, nor can one legally ingest many substances. Yet, society allows this "trade off" because it is sport. The logic falls flat on its face.

We allow a lot of things that are bad for society and even impact larger groups of people just as negatively. Cigarettes? We let people work jobs that break their bodies over decades. Manual labor?

It's how the world works. These guys are at least getting rewarded for doing it....

Cigarettes? We don't allow minors to legally have them, further they are taxed and regulated at great length. Also, there is a massive educational aspect warning everyone about the risks. Show me that with the American Football, please.

Manual Labor? Ever heard of OSHA, MSHA, NIOSH, NIST? Just a few of the agencies looking after the well being of folks working manual labor. I work in a glorified blue collar job, we are regulated very tightly. We have presumptive cancer laws and you can't perform our job as a minor... most don't make it until they are well into their 20's.

Don't disagree with any of that (I said in the first post kids shouldn't play).

But adults? If we start making more rules about what adults can or cannot do with their bodies we're gonna have to start drawing very arbitrary lines.

I agree that the adult aspect is not binary... however, American Football would not exist without allowing children to play as it stands now. Furthermore, the "owner class" of the state sports associations, NCAA, and NFL would stand to lose a great deal of money if children were not allowed to play.

Let's see if we do the right thing.

If it makes you feel any better, they did blow a 3-1 lead in the finals last season.

When you say you "hate" a sports team, it's time to do some self-evaluation.

Don't forget the "I liked them before they were cool":

"most of whom I suspect had not called themselves a Golden State fan until 2013"

What are the rules on when you are allowed to become a fan?

If you simply like a team while they're winning and then don't when they lose. You're not a fan. You're just someone who likes to be part of a winning team. (Echoes Silicon Valley quite a bit eh)

I don't think I've ever met a sports fan who hasn't hated at least one team. Rivalries are fun; teams that you relish rooting against are fun. Emotional investment in the outcome is one of the biggest reasons folks watch sports; rooting for the underdog to win is rooting for the overdog to lose (and I can't remember a larger overdog in quite some time than the Warriors.)

It's also eminently clear from my comment that I don't have some all-consuming blind rage for the team, given that I just complimented the head coach, so I'm not really sure what you're getting at.

Words matter. The word used was "hate" but it's possible that was not the correct word. I live a few miles from where GSW play. The team we lost to in the finals last year is a good team and there is no way I would ever use the word "hate" to describe how I feel about them. In fact, I like a lot of players on their team. I just want my team to win, of course.

I've witnessed a lot of strange and awful things in r/nba (toward my team and others). It does appear there is a lot of hate. There is strong evidence that people from r/nba spend significant time making fake accounts and downvoting posts in r/warriors. As I said above, if that's what you're into, then it's time to turn your gaze inwardm because you have a problem.

EDIT: any it looks like this thread is fairly polarized. Lots of downvotes, which don't seem warranted. Kinda proves my point.

I agree that that's strange and awful behavior, and that if the only joy you get from sports comes from the suffering of opposing fans then you likely have some greater issue at play!

It's weird in another sense because you're only hating the uniform, since players changed teams so often these days.

Team culture can be a thing. Maybe there's something in the team's shadow that irks him, like Draymond's temper. I personally find it fascinating, all the emotions stirred up and that people aren't ashamed to talk about them.

It's part of the "fun" of being a fan and the "hate" is in perspective, for most folks.

I'm a Yankee fan; I hate Boston Red Sox...in most cases, I dislike people from Boston for no good reason. However, when the Boston experienced a tragedy during their marathon, I couldn't care less about baseball and only wanted to support friend and co-workers who were from Boston. During the next Red Sox game, I cheered for them because inside I made the decision to distinguish what I feel as a fan vs. the person that I am and the humanity inside of me.

Do I wish Red Sox luck? No...I still dislike their team, fans, etc. but with a very conscious effort to separate fandom vs. humanity.

On a side note: I travel to Chicago a lot, for work. When I wear my Yankee hat, I catch a lot of flank and in most cases, I partake in some general banter.

If the situation seems a bit too intense, I'll leave them alone since it's not worth the argument + getting in a scuffle while on a work trip is frowned upon.

There are differences, we (fans) understand limits and are okay with the dichotomy of using the word "hate" with no real intention of harm.

Clearly, there are outliners in every case.

There's hate, as in "beat, possibly fatally, a guy who wore the other team's jersey into your team's stadium". And there's hate as in "seldom miss a chance to speak badly of". Fortunately, the overwhelming number of those who would say they hate the Cowboys/Raiders/Patriots/Lakers fall into the second category.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com