Comments on: Paul Pierce - Future Pro Soccer player?

By: Myspace Proxies

Myspace Proxies — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 20:26:14 +0000

Excellent articles and great blog, i shared it with my Digg friends on New York , Stumble UP ! , Cheers Andy Colleman - Chicago

By: bschofield

bschofield — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 21:19:24 +0000

Ok. I can admit that I agree with both of you on a couple points also. But I can’t agree that soccer is more physical than basketball. Not even close. Espn the magazine just threw some figures together about the most physical sports based on reported injuried and basketball was easily tops by over 10-1 over soccer. Soccer has it’s moments but running up the field and occasionally bumping someone isn’t what basketball is as far as physical and the size and strength of those playing. We can argue that one all day.

I never said PIERCE wasn’t really hurt and I probably should’ve mentioned that. I believe he sustained a real injury but the whole wheelchair thing was ridiculous. I’ve seen cortisone and the miracles in provides but anyone who studies it knows that Cortisone isn’t immediate at all with its powers.

And JOE, i’ve had knee injury after knee injury and I know how scary it can be. I’ve thought I blew mine out more than once and I sure wasn’t playing again within 5 minutes of the injury.

Pierce obviously suffered a real injury and I want Pierce to be 100% so the Celts can win the whole thing.

By: Erik

Erik — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 04:26:48 +0000

I highly disagree with you on a number of points.
1) Soccer CAN be more physical than basketball, and is most of the time. I’ll debate that all day.
2) Yes, soccer has its problems with divers, but aren’t floppers just as worse?

Assumption: Paul Peirce was not injured, and that he milked that injury for all he could to make a ‘dramatic’ comeback and inspire the team.

Reality: Peirce probably did sustain a semi-serious injury. I do not question his pain after the injury, as it looked quite bad from a spectator’s POV. What you’re failing to account for is that 5 minutes he spent in the locker room. No, he didn’t muster up the strength to play through it valiantly. It’s called cortizone. That happens all the time. I’ve seen it first hand. Players get a decent injury, get carried off to the locker room in a stretcher, and come running back out feeling better than they did before the game. I highly doubt Peirce was trying to make the injury look worse than it was. A little steroids always does the trick.

By: joe

joe — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 20:21:58 +0000

Your sardonic wit fails. I say this as a basketball fan and not as a Celtic fan. I’m sure you play sports, as do I, and have never had a “scare” with a knee or ankle, right? I think it says a great deal about someone’s character who thinks he is done with a potential season ending injury but it ends up being not as bad as first thought. It wasn’t as if the Celtics needed a miracle to win game 1. It was a close game throughout. It just seems media types (and I don’t include the armchair bloggers in that category) want it both ways. They want these pro athletes to act more professional and yet when they do something with heart, it’s claimed to be fake. All the more reason why I hate reading sport columns because everyone wants to take shots instead of being honest with themselves. The reality is that sports writers are on the same level as entertainment reporters. Unfortunately, Britney’s team is all filled up at the moment.