Hotdog
Well-Known Member
It's not common sense and your eyes must be bad.The eyetest and common sense are enough for me.
It's romancing the past. That's all it is. People tend to look at the past and talk it up to make it seem better than it really was.
The physicality of the NBA is about the same. That's the truth. The NBA is still a physical game. Banging with someone down low is still the same. Bodies don't change. Certainly not for the worst. If anything, it can only be argued that players are bigger faster stronger now. Not the other way around. Players were a lot less informed and conscious about what goes into their body than ever before.
There are slight differences. Like more power forwards shooting threes, and the hand check rule. But not much.
I can argue that stars like Jordan had it much easier than stars of today. It seemed like if you even got close to Jordan a foul was called. What about that aspect? Why doesn't that make its way into the argument of whether it was more physical?
Maybe there were more fights. But that don't mean anything. Most the fights were comical anyways. And it's only because the emphasis on staying on the bench changed it a little.
I watched 90's NBA too. I can turn on old highlights and look back on it. It doesn't appear to me to be any more physical or harder to play in, or the players were better.
Steph Curry would still light up the 90's. He'd probably average more ppg tbh since the refs would send him to line more. That's really the biggest difference. The game was officiated a lot different. A lot less fair.