Once again someone thought it was a good idea to have the Lakers and the Celtics meet in the NBA Finals. I, for one, think it’s marvelous.
When it comes to rivals in sports, this is the best. Unlike Cardinals-Cubs, where the Cubs never win anything, or the Yankees-Red Sox, where Boston recently have found themselves winning two World Series after going over 80 years without winning one.
You can go back to the ‘60s and you will find a Lakers-Celtic match up. If you just go back to 1975, these two teams have won 14 championships with Los Angeles winning nine times. There have never been two more dominant teams in one professional sports league.
While the Yankees and the Cardinals are the elite in baseball, with the Yankees winning 27 times, the dropoff is great when you look at things from 1975. Since then the Yanks have won seven times, the Cardinals twice. The Montreal Canadians (NHL) and the Pittsburgh Steelers (NFL) each have six championships in that time frame. The Lakers in that same time frame have nine titles, and the Celtics five. Welcome to the cream of the crop.
Now that we have a Finals that we can get into, where will it stack up? From a TV ratings standpoint, St. Louis will be interesting. There is no Cardinal baseball tonight, so there should be big local ratings. Sunday night is a different story as the Cards are on ESPN the same time game two of the Finals is underway.
As for the teams, both have some different faces coming off the bench and that is where this thing may be decided. The Lakers have gotten very little from their bench recently, and that could pose serious problems as Boston has a few legitimate contributors for Glenn Rivers to go to.
The key stat is this: In 47 playoff series, when Phil Jackson’s team wins game one, they go on to win the series. Enough said. Lets get it on and, oh yes, GO LAKERS!
Khan and Kronke
Recently the NFL owners met to discuss a variety of things that they feel will make their league better as well as their pockets fatter. While there was no formal statement on the potential ownership of Stan Kronke and the St. Louis Rams, after hearing form New Orleans owner Tom Benson say, “Everyone likes Stan, and he will make a great owner,” you have to assume that this may already be a done deal.
While Kronke is well known among owners with his minority stake in the team, I found it somewhat odd – with his ownership issues in other sports – how quickly the owners and media are willing to look the other way to make sure Kronke gets the team.
That brings us to Shad Khan. You remember him, the Illinois businessman who made the initial offer to purchase the team only to be thwarted by Kronke in the 11th hour. While his money seemed to be in place and he checked out on other levels that would appear to make him a competent owner, Khan was looked over by the NFL as if he did not belong on their bus. Khan had no intentions of moving the team, and he has made that clear from day one. Ist. Louis is a 20-minute plane ride from his home.
In Kronke’s case, he had to do a front page story in the Post to let everyone know that moving the team is not his intention … right now. Why am I raising my eyebrow on this? There were indications that the lease issue and prescribed improvements would be addressed. In Kronke’s case, the option of moving the team to Los Angeles on the eve of a new TV deal, along with some real estate interests in L.A., makes you scratch your head.
Unlike some who were trying to buy the Rams, Khan actually had money and it was his. One problem, though.
While many in my business will be quick to say it’s not the case, you cannot look at this situation and not wonder if his heritage had something to do with the cold shoulder Khan got and the “we love Stan” campaign.
Khan is from Pakistan. He has been in the U.S. since he was teenager, and he has fulfilled the American Dream. With that, some would still say he is not “one of us.” Pardon me, but I – like many of my readers – have gone down this path before. The convenient excuses that you hear on these matters are oh too familiar.
I do not know Shad Khan. I have not been in a room with him long enough to say I know Stan Kronke. They both may be great people; they may have shortcomings like the rest of us. I do know that there have been some rules bent to accommodate “one of their own,” and I am not talking about ownership.
It’s the NFL. It’s their club and they can choose who they want, much like some of the country clubs in town who have unwritten rules on No Blacks or No Jews. Yes, it happens. Is it happening to Shad Khan?
