Isolation basketball will always be part of the game. But the system has to be predicated on ball movement and, more importantly, player movement.
In less than a century we experienced great movement. The youth movement! The labor movement! The civil rights movement! The peace movement! The solidarity movement! The women's movement! The disability movement! The disarmament movement! The gay rights movement! The environmental movement! Movement! Transformation! Is there any reason to believe we are done?
I've been a Gunner for life. They play similar football to Barcelona. So ball movement and player movement is important to me in basketball; I think I picked it up from watching those guys.
I had been a basketball fan growing up, and I felt that if we brought in the proper coach, and we played basketball the old fashioned way - where defense is paramount and offense involved movement off the ball and movement of the ball - we could build a winning team, and Chicago would respond to that.
My template for everything is organisation. With the ball you have to know the movement patterns, the rotation, the fluidity and positioning of the team. When we have the football everybody's a player.
To have a great player like Neymar at PSG would be a great honour. He's a phenomenal player, and to have great player is a great thing for the team.
I would love to have a role with the Browns. I think that's what every ex-player would like to do most of all: to be a contributor to the success of an organization that he was a player that brought a certain amount of success.
Behind the visible movement there is another movement, one which cannot be seen, which is very strong, on which the outer movement depends. If this inner movement were not so strong, the outer one would not have any action.
It is one of my biggest regrets that Niall Quinn was not here during my time... I felt he was an intelligent player. It would have been a good combination with Thierry Henry. What I like with Quinn is if you look at the player who played next to him, he always scored 40 goals because he had a hand for his head and he just put the ball where you were. He was a team player. A top-class player makes other players look good and he had that player.
I think winning a championship, for me, it put things in perspective. You can either be a great player on a so-so team, or you can be a role player on a championship team, or, in an extreme case, a great player on a championship team.
I go to places and I see all these people working on peace education and on a culture of nonviolence and non-killing. You look at all these different movements going on: the environment movement, the interfaith movement, the human rights movement, the youth movement, and the arts movement.
The whole reason for the success of Dr. King's civil-rights movement was that it was not a movement for itself. The civil-rights movement understood very clearly, and stated very beautifully, that it was a question of humanism, not a sectarian movement at all.
There is movement and movement. There are movements of small tension and movements of great tension and there is also a movement which our eyes cannot catch although it can be felt. In art this state is called dynamic movement.
If you're a great defensive player, you're a great defensive player 100% of the time. You can't be a great defensive player half of the time because you didn't get the ball once or twice. That can't sidetrack you. It's got to be 'I live for my defense, and my offense I'll get. But I can't let it affect my defense. Nothing affects my defense.'
A winning player is nothing more than a player on a winning team. A losing player is a guy who played on a losing team that year.
It's obviously a great sign of growth and success that the media no longer try to embody the bigness and diversity of the women's movement in one person. Only a diverse group can symbolize a movement.