Carey

Tampa for the win. I won't boast and say they're winning in 5. I'd be shocked if they won twice on the road (unless it occurs in a 7-game span). New York was really rising despite their close call, but Tampa has been crushing it for the past several years. Colorado is very, very good; they probably should win the cup, but despite the recent timeline, completing a season for the 3rd time in as many years (especially this year) is just that damn impressive. Six games is a fair enough length for this final round

The good news for Boston is that it's not over until it's over. Especially after their rally at the expense of Miami & Milwaukee. The bad news? Golden State > Heat X Bucks

For those that care, Charl Schwartzel won the first event. Just a 54-hole event. Whatever. While TPTB for ATP and the PGA are not the same, I'd like to see people make decisions that are fair game, whether people agree with it or not. IOW, I wouldn't see the harm of banning people from the majors for one's "deflection", which would be fair game, more than someone saying no thank you to talking to the media. CBS did address the LIV FWIW on Saturday. Rory (and probably moreso JT) were a little more classy on television than they would've been as it relates to the people that left. Jim and Nick, IMO, were anything but classy, which was perfect since they actually gave their opinions in a respective manner. You could tell that they were bashing the new league; at least I could sense it from the broadcasters

Yeah, I miss Inside the NBA as well. Even though ESPN/ABC has the Finals, I sorta wished that they'd run the program at the conclusion of the games (which would follow random TNT programming but whatever). Instead, we have to settle for SVP (after changing the channel). There was a brief postgame after Game 2 but as is the custom, it was an early start. One thing I'll say briefly is that it'll be a total bummer if ESPN/ABC loses their rights to the Finals to Turner several years down the road. People might say it was long-overdue; nothing against folks like D-Wade, Candice Parker, and Draymond, but it'll be a shame if/when TNT gets exclusive coverage of the NBA Finals without the star power of Ernie, Kenny, and Charles as part of the team. FWIW, I purposely excluded Shaq because I think he'll still be active in about a decade from now. On a separate note, SVP is very good overall. When talking about hoops, it's not Inside the NBA, but it's quality programming (and top notch during the football season). Both Boston & Golden State have something I'd admire about them, while having something I dislike about them. While I'm leaning Warriors, the Celtics are a very good team. While they'll probably have to deal with better East teams next year, they are improving themselves. As are the Warriors, who'll probably have to deal with Dallas and a healthier Phoenix team in 2022-2023. I'm glad the Warriors won on Friday. I'm not a fan of sweeps, gentleman sweeps, or 3-1 stuff. I'd also prefer not to see a team down 0-2 win their next four games either (not a big deal as it's a competitive series before it's not). I like a very solid series, where the teams are trading back and forth. This year's NBA Finals are doing just that. Curry could crush it going forward, to where he's the best player from either team, but he's not winning series most valuable player unless the Warriors win 2 more games. What's crazy is that either team can win; I can totally see Boston win on Monday and then Sunday, or Golden State can win out. Unlike in the NFL or College Basketball, you have a chance to adjust after a loss. Probably easier said than done, especially when there's a great defense in Boston. However, a team that's been there before always finds a way. They might not win the Finals, but their not going to get run out of the final round either. For the most part; they could actually get routed in Game 5 & 6; but at least we're getting at least two more games

I have. Yep; I watched a game, stuck around for the postgame and analysis, and posted on Social Media & the Internet about the game. The only thing left to do was turn in, but by the time I was done with the above, it was time for work

I can't recall if and what their chances of making it to the NL LA squad, but if there was a case made, while I'm sorry to "disrespect" the AL version (close enough), that's worse than turning down New York. Both the Mets and even the Yankees

I might have made more off of a bet that Both Girardi & Maddon would be gone before July than the combined total of what's owed to them (except no I would not have. Even with max parlay bet, it's Major League Baseball)

I'm not theatremouse, but I think the situation here was posting a link and then summarizing the contents of the link. Posting info elsewhere tends to trend toward a negative situation where one's post includes info that wasn't there own (but from the original writer instead). It's your typical copyright violation; you didn't do anything wrong, shok. I believe it's just a heads up going forward since someone might post an entire article if said article was very short. I think a sentence or two (quoting & crediting the author) could work. I'd be clear with it, but in the past, I've usually just made mention to an outside article instead of posting anything within my posts

I guess I'd be surprised if Watson played (at all) this season. TBH, I wouldn't be surprised if he did, but the Browns sucked anyway. It's Cleveland. They find ways to ruin whatever, even if it's actually impossible to screw something up. While it probably would not have worked anyway, maybe be super serious in saying that Baker and DeShaun are battling for the starting role. Actually, just stick with Mayfield since losing is traditional, and then maybe strike lightning in a decade before you celebrate by blowing that up over trying to win a championship at that moment

For some reason, I could actually see Draymond getting kicked out in Game 3. As mentioned, the league doesn't really call a ton in this segment of the season, but they might want to keep things under control. That sorta would mess with Boston & their "physicality" but their fans might actually get to Green to where the game could go off the rails

One quick thing before I get back to the current discussion on hand: That post 72-hole scene with Memorial Champ Horschel and his family was so sweet! No surprise that money tops a lot of things if not everything. There still is an ounce of surprise with DJ, but IMO, I think the opposite is the case when it comes to an established star and some up and coming golf player. When you're a newbie and having earned a lot of money, sure it would make sense to jump to the Saudi-backed league. However, I'd think a new star would want to win (a lot) on the PGA Tour (and for awhile) before jumping ship. You can make a lot there (and maybe invest well too). With Dustin Johnson, I'm not sure he has much to prove anymore. Especially if he's still able to play the Open & PGA Championship (the two majors he hasn't won). Plus there are a lot of people rolling that are younger than him to where it's probably not easy to win as much anymore. It's easier to say it on 06.07.22, but I probably would not have made the move. Sure you'd be turning down a ton of money, but these days (in other sports especially), people are doing more to "build their brand" or obtain more that it might not be necessary to join another league for their nine-figures. They're pursuing other things in life (outside of sports), and IMO, there's nothing wrong with that

I'm not a Boston fan, so I'm not going to lose sleep over them losing Game 2. In a professional sport where you have to win 4 games in the final segment of the postseason, you're probably going to get business BS to prevent an early end to a season. As mentioned, the refs weren't the reason for the Celtics losing, but it's not a good look when officiating comes into question. TBH, I couldn't picture Golden State losing both of their first two games with home court advantage to start the NBA Finals

Vintage, classic, dialogue with Sir Charles there. I didn't watch on Wednesday, but it's not a shocker that TB12 is more fit than people like Patrick & Josh. It is surprising because both are 26, in and/or around their primes, and are professional athletes. Whereas Tom will be "eligible" for Medicare 20 years from this autumn period. To be fair, Brady takes care of himself in such ways that no one is willing to; however, some of those steps & methods are unattainable to most people on Planet Earth (to be fair to whoever wants to come close to, match, and exceed TB12's physique). Looks like if anyone other than Billy Horschel wins the Memorial, it's not going to be due to the 54-hole leader MIA from the final round. Though he had to crush it on Saturday in order to have a dominant 5-hole lead. It's not the six hole lead many have had (and prevailed) in the past. It could be the difference, but other than Vegas, Berger, and definitely Cameron Smith, I don't see anyone else shaking Jack's hand today

I'm not going to look it up either. I have other things to do (that are more important). I will if I plan to post an accurate number since I'm a fan of facts & research when it comes to one's totals. Plus, I didn't look up how many French The Joke has because 22 > 20. Off the top of my head, I don't think Novak has that many French. I remember how he needed it to complete the career grand slam, and that wasn't too long ago. Before and after that, Nadal was still crushing it. I believe Novak shines or shined the most at the Australian (similar to how Federer rolled at Wimbledon & Rafa at the French). Outside of 2004-2008, it's been a title here and there at the US Open for those three. Though I don't know if Roger won a sixth major in the US outside of a period where he won 5 straight at Wimbledon one-year plus in advance

While it feels like the competition is getting (or has gotten better on the men's side), I think he has a rather decent shot to catch & maybe surpass Court

Prior to Nadal 14th and 22nd, I had to laugh for a second at a quick dialogue between Hicks and Carillo. "Rudd's never lost six to love. Rudd's never faced this guy." ETA: McInroe may have added to that, but I believe he said that Rafe may have been stunned about how he won, not that he won

I second this request. I think someone could start a new thread as I don't see a problem with why not. To be honest, I thought there already was a thread I've come around to be okay with Draymond. Some of the stuff he's done on the court is probably cause to hate him. However, people don't know Green. Or anyone in the sport (or other professional sports). A lot of people tend to think that what they see on television is enough to be in a group of people that "know that guy". Outside of actually knowing a professional athlete (or actor, musician, etc), people don't know them. You saw them in action, that doesn't equate to to knowing them like a family, friend, classmate, coworker, or whatever else. Then whenever someone famous does or did something unethical (or says/said something unpopular), then they're sorta stunned by it (to where they feel betrayed, which ain't the case really). Chances are Dray is a decent human being. Maybe he's not that nice. Doesn't mean he's the opposite either. Ditto everyone else. For what it's worth, there are a lot of people worse than GS No. 23 (that people probably would not admit) that may or may not appear sweet in the public eye

I don't believe one could make a bet on the length of a match, but I might have hit the lottery if I had a parlay with the visiting team for Game 1 of the NBA Finals and Women's Final Total Time. Great things going forward for Coco while greatness continues for Iga Swiatek. The 2022 Champion just had places to go. If there actually was a time length wager, I'd probably would've avoided it, as it would've been disrespectful to Gauff if I went under 45 minutes

I think someone gets to (passes) 57 consecutive hits before the DH vanishes from both leagues, but that's just me

Just one game, but I guess that stats model was accurate

That number was for the Celtics?! Wow! Goes to show you how I've had success in terms of my moderation for what I pay attention to within television content. Plus, I'm doing a ton of stuff simultaneously. On that note, I thought Wilbon was referring to how absurd it was that Golden State had an 86% chance of winning. I figured he agreed with the Warriors winning, but not an 86 percent chance of clinching the title. I think Boston can win the series; as mentioned, I like GSW FTW, but this should be a competitive finals. While anything can happen, the West champion probably has a slight advantage at best

While it's still a thrill to see everything play out, production is not off to a great start if the winner is sorta spoiled not a week removed from the previous season (when said season is in the preceding TV year)

Well, for what it's worth, Toronto also had Kawhi. In addition, Gasol is/was pretty good. Coach Nurse ain't no exclusive figurehead; that guy knows how to coach. BTW, I don't think San Antonio was winning more than 2 games against Golden State in 2017, but before Leonard went down, they were cruising by in that first WFC game. I'm not going to put this Warriors team over the 2015-2016 one on a general level, but this year's team in terms of their postseason performance, IMO, is better than the one from the previous decade. What will be nice to see is how a healthy GSW squad performs against a decent team and historic, accomplished franchise in Boston. No more Cleveland nonsense, which was all but a total rout in the past. As mentioned, the Raptors were blessed they faced a banged up Warriors team 3 years ago, but the latter still managed to win 2 games. Had that team been healthy, they probably win another title, but with the Raptors actually looking competitive. Probably it ends in 5 or 6, but at least most games would've been one or two possession games. I don't think Boston wins this series, but I think they have a chance to make it a series. Really, I don't promote losing, but if there's ever a game the Celtics should punt prior to opening tip, it's the Thursday game. Then see what you can do on Sunday without draining too much energy for a sorta must win third & fourth game

Really! As someone elsewhere said (I can't take credit), the 90s are calling and they want their basketball back. I guess Golden State is happy that the East Finals went the distance! Some series would be better off ending ASAP, but there are other series that are competitive to where you never want it to end. This year's ECF would be the latter, but that can be connected to injuries, and really the teams involved. In terms of a nine-game series, I was mainly referring to the later round, specifically the WCF, the ECF, and the NBA Finals. Not the first two rounds. The above allows me to go the other way in terms of series length. I would not mind it if they went down to a best of 5 (or 3 in the early rounds). That's not going to happen. People aren't going to be pleased with a super long series, but would defend the current system with the argument being the league would not want to give up money/revenue and that would be a loss if they shortened the series. I don't think I'd bet the NBA to emulate the collegiate format. However, Colin Cowherd did bring up a fair point. The best postseason is the one-and-done stuff. That's what makes the NCAA Tournament and the NFL so spectacular (while the entire College Football season is/can be so spectacular). I'd disagree with a one-and-done format, since it would be bad for business if an upset occurs. However, if the upset makes the most of it, and not to just knock off a team only to lose right after, then I'm for it. The main thing is that why should it take 4 tries to take out a team or why should you be allowed to compete for the title after losing 3 times to the same team. Call me a cheapskate, but I think twice is enough. The exception is if both teams are evenly matched. Despite that, and despite this East series, it's still nice that there is a Game 7. I believe there was not a winner-take-all in the first round, and don't think there were more than two in the second. It'll be great since I have no idea who'll win tonight. Plus it'll be great for Golden State who should be able to wrap up the season two weeks from tomorrow as of this post

A rather tardy reply or reaction to the article LadyChatts posted earlier in the week (I meant to post prior to the finale or soon after, and not on a Saturday night in a holiday weekend at my place over being out on the town in decent weather and good times). FWIW, I thought it was a great article from Jeff, and the interview pretty much points out what to expect going forward. There was significant discussion on the new format related to the new way they’re doing the finale & reunion during the finale chat and aftermath (episode thread). Meh; I’m okay with what they did this year at the end of the day. While there are some disagreements and things I and maybe others agree on, Jeff stated the reasons for it, and it’s fair enough (right now). Times change and things are different in all aspects of life, especially TV programming. It was tradition back in the day with Survivor on Thursdays, the finale on Sunday, and the spring reunions in New York. Plus, some of the catchphrases, a final 2, paying tribute to the cast before the final IC. In addition, winning a car, no advantages, and a ton more including something I thought of for a second but forgot (probably the season location). In brief, when all of those things (well most of those things) ended, I was like awww, but then if it were up to me to return to it, I’d say nah. Can’t return to Thursday for obvious reason, Sunday finales force a major conflict, and the New York location isn’t a big deal, at least for me. I’ll explain that later. This year’s format was necessary as mentioned due to the obvious, but at the same time, fair enough. Changes are necessary to keep the show current and really on the air. Also, I guess there’s a budget. Both the Season 40 finale and this year’s have their pros and cons. You were away from the cast, but alone with your loved ones in S40. The entire season’s cast participated. This year, no loved ones but the jury and finalists were together. I imagine they’re stick to this format regardless of what happens for season’s 43-44. I’m not betting they’ll make minor changes, but at the very least, I’d prefer they wait 24 hours to give the Top 4 / Final 3 a chance to recover & clean up. It’s not a crime to have the final people all recovered & clean like the jury, prior to Final Tribal Council, especially if you’re going to do the reunion right away on site. I’d also love to see the families of the last 5 present. It’s decent to have loved ones with you during a big moment. In addition, it would be nice to have the people booted pre-jury present. Obviously they couldn’t do all that this year, and I don’t see the need to do it next year. The reason of fewer people is definitely fair, especially the family part who’ll likely blow it in terms of secrecy. As mentioned, the twists are going nowhere, and I’m okay with that. Not a fan (in certain cases), but it’s fair enough. They are never going back to a basics-filled season. Maybe for a show or two, but going forward the players will have benefits from others seasons that past players didn’t have. Probst pimping this cast is rather routine. BTW, if you loved this cast, then everyone should’ve been present in the finale! All joking aside, Jeff might actually mean it this time, but I think I’d definitely see the Top 11 back again. Probably not simultaneously, but if so, that would be great if you brought in 9 of the greatest for a nice 20-member season. I’ll miss the live reunion as much as I will not. I believe they’ve become stale, and the length of those sorta indicated that. Down the road, I’d prefer a reunion once a year as opposed to twice a (TV) year. The logistics would have to be worked out (to make it worth the time). It was nice to see everyone completely glorified, more than they would be on a jury in-game. Plus, as someone that used to attend the post show, finale, and after parties, it’s sad it may be gone forever. While it’s not on my mind at all right now, and while I have no plans of attending anything this year and what not, I’ll always cherish the good times. With a busy schedule added to the fact that it’s on opposite coasts in addition to mid week, it’s not a big deal. In conclusion, whatever it takes to keep one of the best TV shows & reality competition on the air is good for me. It would be totally awesome if & when they’re celebrating 25 years and 50 seasons with Burnett, Probst, past legends and whomever else