Jason Whitlock, a polarizing figure in the Part of the reason more people are watching these playoffs is because the average fan isn't constantly repulsed by the appearance of most of the players on the court. Most of the key players left in the playoffs don't look like recent prison parolees.As CSTB argues, it's a fun theory, but it is rooted in nothing more than absurdist theology and/or some tainted carne asada. Brian Powell at The Sporting Blog tries to rescue Whitlock with a strained link to increased team play, though I'd tend to disagree with any assertion that the number of a team's tattoos are inversely proportional to that team's sharing attitude. I mean, seriously. (Nation of Islam Sportsblog doesn't buy it either.)
If a lack of tattoos draws fans in, why are the Spurs a panacea to Finals ratings? Why was Allen Iverson one of the biggest road draws in the league for a half-decade? How on Earth does Detroit fit this hypothesis? Did Kobe get his ink removed? How did Phoenix survive the tats of Marion and Amare? And the competition level combined with the rebirth of the two most storied franchises in basketball history is only part of it? C'mon, dude.
There have been some monumentally ridiculous columns penned the past few months, but this one takes the quesadilla.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
5-31-2008 @ 12:59PM
NBA fan said...
how idiotic. I am watching the playoffs because I love NBA basketball, not because players on those teams in the conference finals have less tatoos. The same goes with every person I know. I don't even like tattoos but this is not going to stop me from watching a sport I love. If tattoos stopped me from watching basketball games, then I wouldn't be a huge fan to begin with. Besides, NBA ratings have been HUGE even during the regular season. People love watching LeBron. And isn't LeBron tattooed? Or how about Carmelo Anthony and Allen Iverson's jerseys being some of the most popular jerseys among fans? Just take the Denver Nuggets. I think they are the team with more tattoos in the league. Well, the attendance at Nuggets games is good and their local tv ratings are way up. So, this goes to kill Whitlock's theory.
Another thing. Are people really that stupid to believe that basketball players are the only ones having tattoos? Really? I have seen countless actors, singers, athletes in every sport (hey, even Beckham..his arms are covered with tattoos), common people etc. having lots of tattoos. NFL and MLB players have lots of tattoos as well, but unlike basketball players they don't play in jerseys and shorts so you don't see their tattoos. But it doesn't mean they don't have tattoos. I was watching the Super Bowl's media day a few months ago and those players were covered with tattoos. But no one complained about it. So, why NBA players have to be singled out when it comes to tattoos? Isn't it a double-standard?
Reply
5-31-2008 @ 1:01PM
Brent said...
no, I think it is true, from my expirence people dont care about the nba because of people looking like lowlife convicts, its completely true. I dont think you can match it to specific game ratings but you certainly can for the interest in the league as a whole
Reply
5-31-2008 @ 1:45PM
NBA fan said...
no Brent, those people who think that about the players don't even watch the nba to begin with, so I doubt they watched the playoffs anyway. Ratings have been up the whole season so this thing Whitlock posted completely goes to kill his theory. Plus, just think about NFL players. They look like NBA players. But no one says anything about them because they don't see their faces, bodies etc. since they don't play in shorts and jerseys.
Besides, those people who think like that are idiots and racists (and I am white btw, so even white non-racists people can see that). The fact that those people think that black tattood people look like criminals (or are criminals) should tell more about them than the players. Are those people really that stupid to believe only NBA players have tattoos btw? Like I already said, the fact basketball players only wear a jersey and shorts has a lot to do with the bad rap those players get. But there are lots of athlets in other sports, actors, singers, common people who have tattoos as well. Just look at Beckham, for instance. I have never heard anyone complaining about his countless tattoos. Maybe is it because he's white so, even if he has tattoos, he doesn't look like a criminal? mmmmmmmmmm
Again, Whitlock's article is garbage.
Reply
5-31-2008 @ 5:29PM
henryclemente said...
I don't understand how people like Whitlock get jobs writing professionally. I'm not saying he doesn't have a right to his opinion, ridiculous as it is. But someone paid him to write this this? Athletes are "no different" than swimsuit models? This reasoning got past an editor? Wow.
But... lots of people agreeing on the comments thread. Not sure if I should be surprised about that or not. Sigh.
Reply