I don't get it, so what was the point of this write up? That Phil is smart? That the mental aspects of basketball are over or under rated? Oh, i get it, you were drunk at home and had to turn something in before your deadline and you quickly drummed this up? Please help! i am grabbing at straws here!

He definitely is a master at what he does. Pure genius at bringing up the Kobe free throw discussion before any of the Jazz had a chance to complain about it and lobby for some position themselves. (like Houston did every time) Instead, by doing so he acknowledged that the Jazz play physical(which they do, but I don't think any more than the next team), and that the refs did a good job even with Kobe shooting 23 free throws(which is preposterous!!!). But the refs love that... who doesn't love hearing that they've done a good job? Especially from someone like Phil Jackson!

I do wish we had someone who could work the minds of the league and refs like Phil. We would then have a real chance for a title!

This was a lame article. Not very informative at all and lacked a point. But, just for arguments sake . . . I'll bite.

Every coach plays mind games through the media to try and influence the refs. Some do it more than others - Jackson is just famous because he coached the Bulls and the Lakers and gives it a Zen spin. If anyone paid attention to the rest of the coaching comments in the league that would be very evident.

As for what he does? Whatever it is - it works. He took Shaq and Kobe and got them to work together for 4-5 years despite their obvious differences. He surrounded Jordan and Pippen with 3 players with the talent of my grandmother and got them to win. He has done a great job of maturing his teams. So - love it or hate it - it works.

That being said - Sloan is also an amazing coach and the only reason he hasn't won a championship is because he went against Jordan and in the Finals and struggled against the Lakers and the Spurs in the West.

This article is pointless! plz dont write to write.

Did any one else notice that after game one Jackson tried to nip the complaints about officiating in the bud? He said he knew that the Jazz would complain. Did they? NO! Jackson tried to be prophetic, but is now left with egg on his face. I hope his players see him for what he really is. Please Mr. Jackson stick to coaching.

Okay - your crack analysis is pretty dramatic. All Jackson said was that because of the FT Kobe shot the Jazz might question the FT. He wasn't trying to be prophetic - it 's what usually happens. One player or a team shoots a lot of FT and the other coach brings it up. Except in this case, Jerry Sloan was a class act and didn't blame the FT on bad reffing, he blamed it on his own teams slow feet and poor defensive sets. He called out his own team as "pulling jerseys" to play defense. Maybe the Jazz fans should listen to Sloan on this too - not just when it's convenient for them.

Hey, I never said the Jazz did not play lousy. All I said was that Jackson has egg left on his face. He is so sure of everything, but he got this one wrong.

As a Jazz fan, how am I supposed to listen to Jerry Sloan and play better defense? Convenience has nothing to do with it. Your last statement doesn't even make sense.

I'm trying to figure out how someone gets "egg on their face" if they think another team will make a comment and they don't. . . Players and Coaches must walk around with egg on their face after every game.

Clearly I need to explain in greater detail. . . Jerry Sloan . . . told the media . . . that his team . . . had committed too many fouls that were a result of poor defense. . .

So . . . all the Jazz fans are blaming Kobe for shooting 23 FT and the refs for calling the fouls . . . but maybe instead of complaining you should listen to Sloan . . . who admits it was a Jazz problem. . .

I kind of get tired of the whole "Zen Master" silliness with Phil Jackson. Look, the guy's a fantastic coach and a hard worker. But he's no intellectual and it's funny when journalists try to turn him into one. I think it strikes journalists' fancy more than anyone else, since reporters tend to gravitate to intellectuals. But c'mon until Phil Jackson comes up with something deeper than meditation and talking trash about opponents, let's cut with the Zen Master/psychologist stuff, okay? All I have to say is: Go Jazz!

Jerry the farmer = ZERO championships

Phil the shrink = 9 championships

If a person has been around long enough to remember P Jackson as a Knicks player, you know he wasn't very good (maybe a step or two above "O-tag"). But he lasted enough years in the NBA to be vested for a pension.
He's not one of my favorites (like Popovich or Adelman). He just seems like one lucky opportunist.
In this article, reference was made to him remarking about the "dominant culture" in Utah. If that reported remark is accurate....I agree with Phil. For those of you that don't agree (and don't see the seriousness of it), your 'veil' will be lifted when you breathe your last breath.
I miss the Wasatch front but Jerry's team is still my favorite (and I used to have season tickets to the Sonics).

I think Phil Jackson thinks of himself as some Zen Master but he isn't and never will be. He just joe blow from cocomo same as every body else. He probably thinks he does no wrong and neither does his prize player Kobe Bryant. Maybe we'll see in the end just who is standing and who is laughing.
If it wasn't for Michael Jordan there wouldn't be a Phil Jackson to coach the Lakers.

First, the championships argument: If Jerry had chased the best player(s) in the NBA around like some kind of groupie, he'd have a few rings too. Simple as that.

Second, the idea that they don't like or respect each other: I distinctly remember Jax calling it "absurd' That Sloan has never won a COY award.

Third, the idea that Jax is some kind of intellectual: Pure hooey. Maybe he seems like one compared to the rest of the drooling jocks, but his psychologies and philosophies are dimestore paperback material at best. He's an ego-inflated phony.

Have you guys considered that the Media is driving all of these issues? It's people like the author of this article who make that garbage up - they feed off of it and it gives them another story arc to write about.

The whole Zen Master Philosopher is a bit blown out of proportion. Jackson has never called himself a Zen philosopher. He definitely has talked about his interst in Buddhism but it was the sports announcers and sports media that started calling him a Zen Master. Just because he tells his team to "be in the moment and remove all personal attachments" doesn't mean he thinks hes a zen master. How is that any different from Sloan who might tell his team to "stay focused and forget individual problems so they can play as a team".

Look past the tabloid media to what's actually happening when you make comments that sound . . . off.

Saying that Jackson is only a good coach because he coached great players is a pretty lame argument. If you want to make that argument you have to make it for all great coaches. . . starting with Sloan. At least be open about your double standards.

Sloan (0 rings)
Jazz: Malone, Stockton, Dantley, Williams, Boozer

Riley (4 rings)
Lakers: Magic, Kareem, Worthy
Heat: Wade, Shaq

Sharman (1 ring)+ 33 Game Win Streak
Lakers: Wilt Chamberlain, Jerry West, Gail Goodrich.

Popavich (4 rings)
Spurs: Duncan, Robinson, Parker

Red Aurbach (9 rings)
Celtics: Bird, Russell, McHale, Johnson, Havilachek, Cousy

Jackson (9 rings)
Bulls: Jordan, Pippen
Lakers: Kobe, Shaq

Why are Jackson's teams any better than the rest of the coaches? Why is it only Jackson's coaching that Jazz fans question? Be consistent if you want your arguments to have any credibility.

Jerry Sloan was kept from a championship by the following:

1. The force of nature that was Michael Jordan.

2. The propensity of Karl Malone to choke in pressure situations.

If Jerry had a fault, it was the failure to recognize 2. Same with Stockton.

DWill and Booz don't belong on the list of players you constructed quite yet, I'm sure you will agree.

I guess what it boils down to for me is that I believe Jerry could, and would, have won championships with the Bulls and Lakers teams that Jax helmed. I don't think that Jax could have done the same with a choking PF and an overly deferential PG.

how many rings did jordan get before jackson joined teh bulls? ZERO

how many rings did kobe and shaq get before jackson joined the lakers? ZERO

how many times did kobe, in the post shaq era, make the playoffs before jackson rejoined the lakers? ZERO

lakers and jackson hater's argument that jackson won rings b/c he had good players is pathetic. Jerry Sloan couldn't win with two hall of fame players. great players don't auotmatically give you rings.

How many rings does Jackson have without MJ or Shaq? ZERO

Math is fun!

Math is fun - let's do some now.

0 rings + 0 banners = Jazz

1 Jazz team + 0 other things to do in Utah = only 1 thing to obsess about in Utah.

Sarcasm aside - go back to the comment above. . .

How many rings did Popovich win without Duncan, Robinson or Ginobli? How many rings did Aurbach win without Bird, McHale, Parrish, Cousy, Russell?

All of the sudden great coaches are suppose to win without any superstars? When did the rules change? Seems to me like every team trades and drafts to make their team better and to try and find the superstar player to be their franchise player. Is Jackson a bad coach because he coached great players? Is Riley bad because he coached great players? Is Sloan bad because he coached Malone and Stockton?

I almost hope the Jazz win a ring so I can watch Jazz fans turn around 180 degrees and say "Well, Sloan's not good, he only won a ring because he had Boozer and Williams" Oh wait . . . you wouldn't say that. Talk about hypocracy and double standards.

Rating of your ability to pick up on obvious sarcasm in the first place: ZERO.

In other words, um, yeah, I think that was the point of the post, i.e. that it's a circular, stupid, pointless and unwinnable argument.

ok