RE: Bird tribute

[Jim Meninno <jim_meninno@hotmail.com>]

>From: Gregory Odegaard <grodeg@kalama.com>

>Thanks for putting my feelings so clearly into words.  This piece in a word 
>was pathetic.  Amatuer video journalism as best.  Woolridge and  Nantz?  I 
>thought I was in the freaking twilight zone.  Whether Bird deserves the 30 
>ranking; probably in light of the entire century and considering all 
>sports.

Pretty much my thoughts too.  I felt like and idiot after forcing my wife to 
watch this show because I didn't want her to live her life without knowing 
just how great a player Larry Bird was.  What she was treated to consisted 
of a few clips of him playing, most not put into any context, and a whole 
lot of talk about the fact that he was actually a white man who played 
basketball well.  Terrific.  And, Orlando Woolridge?  Please.

My questions are, have all the pieces been like that?  I haven't watched any 
others, but I certainly expected more playing highlights.  And, were these 
rankings based on the voting they had on the internet last year, or did they 
assign their own rankings, independant of those polls?  Is anyone following 
it closely enough to answer?  I guess Russ must be the only Celtic left to 
look out for?  Althoug, after seeing Bird's piece, I don't think I'll make a 
special effort to see Russell's.

Jim



_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com