Link</p> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'></p> <h2>The Players Like the Nets, the Times Not So Much</h2> October 29, 2007, 11:58 pm</p> <div class="entry"> Charles Barkley has already said he’s pickingthe Nets as Eastern Conference champs. Gilbert Arenas likes the Nets and his Wizardsin the conference finals. Now Jalen Rose adds his voice to the chorus, picking the Nets and Pistons as the EC’s top two. And Stephen A. Smith (not a player) goes further. He likes the Nets, period. Alas, the New York Times doesn’t agree, relegating the Nets to the role of “potential party crashers” in the rebuilt East.</p> </div> NBA Shootaround Preseason Predictions (Video) - - ESPN Celtics’ New Stars Stand Out in Crowd - Howard Beck - New York Times</div></p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kidd)</div><div class='quotemain'></p> We posted at the same time.</p> </div></p> </p> lol I'll let someone else decide which one to delete </p> </p>
wow another paper saying the nets are no big deal. how about they post their views when they actually see the nets as a top team. then again there would never be any nets news in papers. all of this is fine with me because i prefer the underdog role and i think players like playing the underdog/dissed role instead of the top dog. i think it takes the pressure off the players to live up to outside hype and puts a chip on their shoulder. some teams are fine with it like the spurs, but i think with the guys we got its better to be underrated than overrated. cant wait for wednesday!</p>
I really don't mind those writings by the pundits. Let them write about C's. It only put pressure on them.</p> Let the Nets glide in the background, do their thing, and be recognized by their accomplishments later on. They can only go up in the rankings from here on. I'll be laughing later when these pundits eat their own words (or eat all those papers they published).</p> </p>
