Hating on the Nyets and New Jersey

People hate the NJ Nets! Why? I don’t know for sure, but I do have theory. New Jersey has something like 9 million people who live in a dense area but the Nets are hard pressed to fill half the arena playing one of the most popular US sports. I think the reason is, people love to hate on New Jersey, even people from New Jersey, and the Nets get the shit end of the stick because of that.

Fact: The Nets have been a much better franchise than the Knicks for the past decade. The fact is the Nets have made the NBA Finals twice in the past decade. They have also made the playoffs seven times in the past decade. The Knicks, by comparison, have not had a winning record in the past 10 years and only made the playoffs once, as the 8th seed, at which time ironically they were swept by the Nets.

So, the Nets have obviously been better, for a long time than the Knicks. Yet, even in Northern New Jersey, the Knicks are the team to root for. Why? The Knicks have made one bad move after another, yet, even at the height of Knicks suckdom, they sell out games. By contrast, during the Jason Kidd years in which they made the NBA finals twice, the Nets were hard pressed to fill the arena.

I have attended some Nets games over the past 10 years and it has been a sad sight. Even when they were good, the arena was half empty and, of those in attendance, only a small percentage were cheering for the Nets. Often times, shopping in NJ over the past decade, at Models or Foot Locker, Nets tickets were given away with crappy shirts and shoes, yet people still would not go to the games, and if they did, it was to see the opposing team.

The Nets are like the fat kid that lost weight, but still gets picked on for being the fat kid. People picked on them when they sucked, yet, even when they got good, people in NJ still viewed them as the easy target to hate.

The past summer should have been the time that Nets made the big dive into the free agent market. Last summer a Russian billionaire (hence the Name Nyets) became the principal owner of the team. This Russian dude seems mad cool, billionaire playboy type, who travels in a private jet with hot chicks. Also, Jay-Z is a partial owner, which is obviously mad cool. They also have cap space and young talent, yet they can’t attract any big name free agents because they play in Jersey.

It breaks down like this; if you live in North Jersey you falsely identify yourself as a New Yorker. If you live in South Jersey, you falsely identify yourself as Philadelphian. Hence, if you live in North Jersey you root for the Knicks. If you live in South Jersey you root for Sixers. Nowhere in NJ is Net country, because people from NJ hate their own state. As an aside, I think this self-hatred and desire to latch onto a big city for identity shows in our feelings towards Rutgers Football as well. When I used to meet people, especially when I was younger, I would advise people I lived “right outside New York.” I don’t even think I used the words “New” or “Jersey.” I guess the Nets need to move to Brooklyn to get some love because New Jerseyeans will never embrace a sports team as their own because of their own NJ identity issues.

New York Icons / Random Notes 11.21.10

1)  New York Icons

Howard Stern is running out of time in his current contract with Sirius Radio.  Last week, he did two amazing interviews with Jay-Z and Billy Joel.  Great radio.  The interviews were sincere, candid, and compelling.  Both Jay-Z and Billy answered Howard's questions openly and thoroughly, and answered questions about their creative process.  Jay-Z is promoting a book, and the interview served its purpose as I'd love to read the book now.  The Billy Joel session made me realize just how talented Billy Joel is, regardless of whether or not his music is your cup of tea.  (I'd say the same about Jay-Z, except I already realized how talented he is.)

Overall, I reflected on the fact that these three figures were so compelling, as all three truly are New York icons.  All three were born and raised in New York.  All three are icons for our generation (maybe Billy Joel a little earlier than us), and all three have built their legacies on their own terms.  None of the three are conventional, and none of the three sound like people we'd heard before them.  They are all influential and have rich careers that have lasted years.  All three still work and reside in New York primarily.  To me, they are three people that are unquestionably different facets of New York People, who did it their way.

2)  Derek Jeter

Recently, our own blogger Moon was on Facebook lamenting the treatment of Derek Jeter by the New York Yankees.  Moon feels like Derek Jeter is a New York icon as well, and the Yankees are doing him a disservice by not treating him as such.  Has Derek Jeter earned a substantial contract extension that might be a "thank you" of sorts for being the face of the franchise for so long?

3)  Randomness...

(a)  Blake Griffin absolutely shit on the Knicks last night, even though the Knicks won.  These highlights rank up there with the athletic dunks of Dwight Howard, Shawn Kemp, etc...  He is worth the hype and we can probably give him Rookie of the Year right now.  Some manly shit from a guy with an un-manly first name.

(b)  Your own WCF is laying down the groundwork to go back to school for a Ph.D.  I do not want to reveal the details yet (superstitious, until it all works out), but stay tuned.

(c)  Would any of your Teaneckites consider raising your family and settling in Teaneck?  All of us seem pretty attached to Teaneck... why did most of us move to other places?  Thanksgiving makes me think about how all of us attempt to reunite even as we have entered our 30s... and therefore that the allure of meeting up in our hometown still pulls at all of us... and I am bummed out that my knee keeps me from participating in the annual Toilet Bowl football game.

Bold and Not-So-Bold NBA Predictions

1. Brook Lopez will be an all-star in a break out year.
2. Rajon Rondo will be the starting PG for the eastern conference
3. The Knicks will not make the playoffs with their current roster
4. The Cavs will not make the playoffs either.
5. The Lakers will cruise to the NBA finals.
6. Carmelo will not be traded before the end of the NBA season
7. The Bulls will not make it to the Eastern Conference Finals
8. The Bucks will be over .500
9. The Jazz will win fewer games this year than last year.
10.The Heat will win a lot of games.
11. The Magic will not make it out of the East.
12. John Wall and Blake Griffin will be co-winners of Rookie of the Year.
13. The Hawks will win fewer games this year than last.
14. The Celtics will win more games this year than last.
15. Michael Beasley has a good statistical year despite the Wolves sucking ass.
16. Kevin Garnett is back to old form!
17. People still boo Lebron, but dies down by season end (outside of Cleveland, NY).
18. 1st team all NBA at the end of the year will be- Howard-Durant-Lebron-Kobe-Rondo
19. The Nets make the playoffs, and then get swept!
20 The Celtics win the whole thing in a hard fought series with the Lakers!

We Believe in Nothing!

The above quote is from the Big Lebowski regarding Nihilism, in case anybody missed that one. Anyway, the point of this post is about Tea Baggers. No, I’m not talking about some of nice girls with that I hung out with at Rutgers (HY), but the Tea Party Movement. It’s pretty easy to write a post bad mouthing the Tea Party, but that it is not my intention. I actually have been curious who the Tea Party is and what they stand for. I’ve concluded, like they are akin to Nihilists in Lebowski, “They believe in nothing!”

It appears, as best as I can understand it, they actually want to represent and be the party of anger. That’s right; above all, they want to be the party that is angry. I guess it’s like the Megadeath album “Peace sells, but who’s buying?” According to CBS, “Fifty-three percent of Tea Party supporters describe themselves as ‘angry.’" Wow, what a selling point (obviously sarcastic).

Apparently, the Tea Baggers are primarily mad about government spending. Well, that’s a perfectly logical ideology, but, I’m still trying to figure out what spending they are so opposed to. The only concrete spending item that it seems that Tea Baggers are opposed to is, healthcare spending. According to the same CBS poll “Asked what they are most angry about, the top four answers among Tea Party supporters who identify as angry was the health care reform bill (16 percent).” Aside from the health care bill, they really don’t seem to have one concrete spending item that they would like to cut. They also seemed to be opposed to Entitlement Programs like TANF.

Oddly enough, they seem to support Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the Defense spending. A few facts about these programs that the Tea Party supports…. According to the ever reliable Wikipedia…federal spending for FY 2010 (that’s Fiscal Year) is $3.55 trillion. Yes, that’s a big number. But, by far the largest mandatory spending expense is social security, with payments topping out at $677.85 billion. The second largest mandatory expense on a single program is Medicaid at $571 billion, followed my Medicare at $453 billion. Now, I’m no math whiz but that’s well over a third of the entire spending of the Federal Government. Now, the highest discretionary spending program is the Department of Defense, at $663.7 billion. To give some comparisons on how much is spent on Defense, Health and Human Services is the next largest Discretionary spending program at $77.7 billion, including in that budget is TANF. TANF is the largest, what tea Baggers would call “welfare”, federal program, that they are opposed to. TANF spent only $17.059 million last year. That’s right, not billion, million! When you add up the four programs the Tea Baggers want to spend money on (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Defense) you are well over a half of all spending. As an aside, other big spending programs of the Federal Government are paying interest on debt which accounts for $164 billion.

So, to summarize, you’re angry because we spend too much, yet the only program they seem to want to cut for the next budget is (TANF) at $17 million of the $ 3.55 trillion that the government spends. That’s the whole crux of the tea party!

I get it. You’re angry! I can understand that, I really can. People want to know why the work so hard yet have nothing or little to show for it. They want to think that someone is stealing their money. The easiest to blame, poor people! But believe me; poor people are not stealing your money, well not any significant portion anyway.

As an adult, you need to be able to express ideas, and provide solutions to real problems. Being angry, in itself, is not really a political position. You need to have some beliefs. I don’t like to pay taxes either. However, I still would not agree to cut many programs, but it appears, neither will the Tea Baggers! Yet, it is this idea of cutting spending that the Tea Party is based on. Until I hear what the Baggers want to cut spending on, real things like, “I do not support Social Security and I would not have tax money support Social Security (for example). Social security should be phased out on such and such a date…” Tea Baggers need to shut up, because their position simply makes no sense. Their belief system is based on nothing. Until they say what they want to cut spending on, the party has no point! It appears to me, the whole party is all anger mixed with smoke and mirrors.