When LBJ, Wade and Bosh joined forces on the same team, I believed (and fully expected) many sportswriters to point out the obvious: that it diminishes the reputation of each of them that they'd rather form a defacto all-star team to claim a title than to play against each other and EARN a title.... and to be fair, I did comments to that effect being made here and there.
However, overwhelmingly, what I've witnessed are sportswriters wholly embracing the new Heat team as some sort of dynasty to be. Any questions surrounding the integrity or competitivenes of these high-profile athletes have quickly been brushed aside in favour of an editorial "love-in" with the newly formed Heat.
That raises two questions:
First, does the close relationship of sports columnists with teams and athletes create a conflict of interest because the media are increasingly unwilling to be critical of their superstar meal tickets?
Second, do I have it wrong? By effectively reducing the level of competitiveness and quality of play in the East by banding together on one team, have the three amigos helped or hurt the reputation of the NBA? I say it hurts the league. Am I wrong?
However, overwhelmingly, what I've witnessed are sportswriters wholly embracing the new Heat team as some sort of dynasty to be. Any questions surrounding the integrity or competitivenes of these high-profile athletes have quickly been brushed aside in favour of an editorial "love-in" with the newly formed Heat.
That raises two questions:
First, does the close relationship of sports columnists with teams and athletes create a conflict of interest because the media are increasingly unwilling to be critical of their superstar meal tickets?
Second, do I have it wrong? By effectively reducing the level of competitiveness and quality of play in the East by banding together on one team, have the three amigos helped or hurt the reputation of the NBA? I say it hurts the league. Am I wrong?
Comment