Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight

    I went to the Southport vs Park Tudor game (Go Cards!) and he was there watching his son play. His son is a 6'1 sophomore guard who plays both junior varsity and varsity basketball for Park Tudor.

    Anyways when I got there I was told to look five feet down to my right, and sure enough the next person over was Isiah Thomas. I did get his autograph, and I did shake his hand and such. So that was pretty cool.

    The whole entire Southport crowd it seemed then went and followed my lead and went over to meet Zeke. He was very cordial and didn't turn away anybody. He'd flash the golden smile of his and would shake everybody's hand.

    That's not the best part about tonight.......Southport won 48-45 in OT. The Cards have now won five out of their past six ballgames heading into sectionals.

    And we got the Friday night bye in a seven team sectional!!! : range:

  • #2
    Re: I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight


    And we got the Friday night bye in a seven team sectional!!! : range:
    They still play sectionals? I thought these days they just handed out championship trophies to all the schools so that everybody 'felt equal'.

    Afterall, is it fair for some schools not to be able to be a state champion just because some other school just happens to be better?

    -Bball "Not a fan of multi-class basketball"
    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

    -John Wooden

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight


      And we got the Friday night bye in a seven team sectional!!! : range:
      They still play sectionals? I thought these days they just handed out championship trophies to all the schools so that everybody 'felt equal'.

      Afterall, is it fair for some schools not to be able to be a state champion just because some other school just happens to be better?

      -Bball "Not a fan of multi-class basketball"
      ++++++++++

      and I have been an advocate of this same treatment for the Colts and Pacers too! Is it right that we have to compete against the big market teams for a championship?? It definately affects my self-esttem to see us lose. I think the small market teams should be given an equal chance to win a trophy too. Or maybe even a gift certificate to Trophy World where everybody can just pick up a free plastic trophy that says "Champion" on it.
      Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight

        Have to disagree with this one.

        Went my first two years to Muncie Southside (many athletes to choose from) and last two years to Cowan (not enough students to play football). Seeing both perspectives, there was no reason for a school as small as Cowan to have to play the bigger schools in the sectional. Even if the bigger schools were poorly coached or had an inferior starting five, it was almost impossible for the smaller schools to deal with the number of athletes of the opposition. Everyone wants another Milan, but the fact is one has not been seen in 50 years.

        I am for all of the championship winning teams playing an additional tournament. All four class winners squaring off would still show who was the best team. By keeping the class system, the small school would still have reason to be interested in the sectionals.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight

          I guess Zeke didn't want to watch the Knicks then. Of course why would anyone?

          I guess that was a late game so he probably could catch some of it.
          The poster formerly known as Rimfire

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight

            Props to Zeke for taking time out to be a good dad and for being considerate with the fans.

            Had my son's team been playing, I would have had a hard time dealing with the interruptions.

            Boo to bball for converting the thread into a class basketball rant. I liked the old system better, too. It was better theatre and easier to follow. But belittling today's fans and participants because they still care is bush league.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight

              Have to disagree with this one......

              Seeing both perspectives, there was no reason for a school as small as Cowan to have to play the bigger schools in the sectional.
              Do you realize what our state tournament used to be, compared to what it has become?

              I recently saw statistics on both revenues and attendance on an Indy news station and the differences compared to 1990 were staggering. My stats are wrong, because in all honesty I don't remember them, but it was something like one of attendance or revenues was down 60%, whereas the other was down 25%. It was ridiculous.

              Now, I'll admit I'm an old-timer. And I'll even claim that the attendance for the later years of one-class basketball was nothing like the sell-out attendance of the 50's, 60's and early 70's, but come on.

              There is a significant difference in the revenues being taken in. And those revenues, what are they used for? Just the unimportant things like financially supporting the sports programs and scholarship programs of all schools under the umbrella of the IHSAA.

              In other words, even if you have kid that doesn't even play a sport, your kid might benefit by Southport being able to sell out it's 7200 seats in its sectional / regional / semistate or whatever. Your kid might get a sholarship that would be financed by Southport's ability to sell-out it's fieldhouse, or at least it's ability to draw more fans.

              There were a lot of reasons to have one-class basketball, probably the least of which was just to produce a true champion for the state of Indiana.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight

                You guys are discussing these high school players as if they were professional athletes making millions of dollars (i.e. the Colts and Pacers small-market analogies).

                They're 15-18 year-old KIDS for chrissakes. Let them have fun and play the damn game. They'll have plenty of time to be exploited for ticket sales when they get older.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight

                  I miss the old single class system myself. I'm only 19 but I basically grew up in a gym when I was younger.

                  I remember in 1997 when my cousin lead Mooresville to a sectional title under the single class tourney. We went to regionals in the morning at Terre Haute and Dugger high school, lead by Brody Boyd, defeatd Mooresville. In the evening Dugger almost defeated Bloomington North, who later went on to win the state championship.

                  Since Mooresville lost in the morning I went to the Columbus North Regional to watch Franklin take on Columbus North. I remember Franklin's Mark Pitcher hitting a jumper as time expired to lead Franklin to a two point victory.

                  Next week I went to semi-state at Hinkle Fieldhouse to watch Franklin take on #1 New Castle. New Castle that year had all those players who were Butler senior last year, including Miller and Archey. Franklin behind huge games from Michael Whitted, and Joe Hougland upset #1 New Castle.

                  So on that day, we had a future 1A school defeat a future 4A school. And at semi-state a 3A school (now 4A) defeated a 4A school.

                  I just really disagree with how the IHSAA views things. This quote that I got off HickoryHusker, Indiana's best high school message board, really disturbs me:

                  "If you're a small school, you're fortunate if you have a close game with a large school. Can they compete with the next one and next one and next. I never think they can. Why continue to go on and on if you know you're no good and you know your not going anywhere"

                  Our lovely IHSAA commish, Blake Ress, said that during the Muncie Central/Milan 50th Anniversary game. It's really distrubing that he's basically saying since you're a small school you have no chance anyways, so let's not even play the games. I honestly don't know how he could show his face at the 1A and 2A state finals games now after saying that.

                  I know Waldron's coach this year has been quoted as saying he'd love to be able to take the floor against Pike or Lawrence North just to see how his team would match up. They'd be on the floor seeing who really is the best, and you know the Waldron kids would give it their all.

                  I'm also sure they'd rather face Shelbyville to stick it to them in sectionals, but now they don't get that chance anymore.

                  Here's another post off HickoryHusker that I agree with:

                  A counterpoint to Tim Cleland’s “Classes not the ruin of Hoosier Hysteria” column from last week.

                  Quote:

                  It's easy to conclude that multi-class basketball killed the Indiana high school tournament. But it's simply not true.

                  Yes it is easy to conclude, and I will prove it by comparing tournament attendance during the 1950-1997 time period with the 1998-2003 multi-class era, and back it up with facts, not generalizations.

                  Quote:

                  Multi-class basketball didn't kill Hoosier Hysteria. Here's what did:

                  1. MORE SPORTS

                  With sons and daughters competing in a variety of sports, parents and grandparents spent their dollars on admission tickets to volleyball games, girls' basketball games, gymnastics meets and baseball games - not just boys' basketball games.

                  Now I could’ve sworn we were talking about attendance during the boy basketball tournament, but apparently there are parents who won’t attend the their son's basketball sectional because their daughter played volleyball five months prior. I understand the conflict with girls basketball, but thought that this is the reason a conscious effort is made to not have them playing at the same time.

                  Quote:

                  2. SCHOOL CONSOLIDATIONS

                  The consolidations impacted attendance in more than one way. Not only are there fewer tournament games played overall, there are not as many intense rivalries. Some of the rivals of the past now share the same school building and are teammates.

                  I totally agree with this and contend it is the main, and probably the only reason for the 40% attendance decrease from 1950 to 1997. I’m glad he mentioned the fact that there are fewer tournament games played, because I think this is a key point as attendance per game was greater in 1997 than it was in 1950:




                  I know this isn’t a perfect indicator since tourney attendance is based on sessions, not games, but it must be pointed out that there were 64 fewer sessions in 1997 compared to 1950:




                  If there had been as many sessions played in 1997 as 1950, the attendance would have increased by 236,160 (64 times 3,690) bringing the total to 1,022,184. This still leaves 1950 with about a 275,000 edge, which can easily be accounted for when you consider there were over 50% more teams (players, cheerleaders, parents, siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc.) in 1950.

                  The number of schools cannot be blamed for the attendance problems of the last six years however. There were more teams in the 2003 tourney than in 1997 who played one fewer game. Televisions, VCRs, shopping malls, computers, cars, tennis, girls sports, etc. all existed to distract us in 1997 just like they did in 2003. So how do we explain a 49% decrease? Could it be that something changed in 1998?





                  Quote:

                  3. TELEVISION

                  Now, with cable packages and satellite options, fans can watch live basketball all evening every evening. This availability coincides with the tremendous increase in the fan appeal of professional and college sports.

                  Where did the high school basketball fans disappear to during the last 40 years? The first place I would look is the sofa next to the TV.

                  So if the increased availability of NBA and college games on TV has caused high school basketball fans to stay at home on the sofa, why hasn’t attendance at NBA and college games decreased by 49% over the last six years? It would help me see his point if all high school games were televised and I could watch my local team from my sofa, like I can college and pro. I would also estimate that the popularity of the NBA has decreased since 1997 and the end of the Chicago Bulls dynasty.

                  Quote:

                  4. OTHER REASONS

                  The fitness boom of the 1970s gave many adults the impetus to become athletic participants (road races, tennis, racquetball, weight-room workouts, cycling) instead of spectators.

                  Didn’t he just tell us we were on the sofa watching games on TV? I can’t keep up with these cultural trends. It was always tough in the 1970s on Friday and Saturday nights in March to decide between going to the sectional or running a marathon, or perhaps going for a bike ride.

                  Quote:

                  Most certainly VCRs, DVD players, computers and video-game systems now keep many potential basketball fans entertained at home instead of in the gymnasiums.

                  Way back when I was in school we went (in cars that we apparently didn’t have in those days) to movie theaters, played Atari, and had a TRS-80 computer… but I never really considered these a better option than going to the sectional. Since nearly every home had a VCR in 1997, does the increased quality of DVDs explain why 386,000 people now choose to stay home?

                  Quote:

                  There are many more examples of schools such as the one I attended (tiny Hauser High School) that never won a single sectional title.

                  Poor little Hauser probably wouldn’t have won many class sectionals either considering their winning percentage was .430 from 1958-1997. This includes a ten year stretch from 1986-1995 with records of: 3-18, 3-18, 4-17, 3-19, 5-16, 7-14, 8-13, 5-16, 3-17, and 8-13. Unless they were playing all huge schools in the regular season, I don’t think it would have mattered all that much whether they were playing Columbus North or Medora in the sectional. Hauser had only lost one game prior to the 1981 sectional, does that mean it wasn’t fair for them to not win the sectional? Tell it to current Class A Covington, who entered the sectional undefeated in 1978, only to lose to a school smaller than them (Seeger).

                  Quote:

                  Columbus North won 49 sectionals, 20 regionals, and two semistate titles in single-class, zero sectionals in multi-class.

                  Columbus’ first semistate champion was the regular season undefeated 1964 team (can't believe 6-15 Hauser didn't knock them out of the tournament). The only Columbus North semistate champ team was in 1975, who went on to lose to some tiny little school in the final four…. I think maybe NormanDale knows who it was.

                  Quote:

                  Vincennes Lincoln won 67 sectional titles, 10 regionals, four semistates and two state championships in single-class basketball and has yet to win even a sectional in multi-class. Richmond won 56 sectionals, 13 regionals, four semistates and one state crown in single-class, zero sectionals in multi-class.

                  4A Bloomington North won the last single class championship in 1997, but this also was the first sectional they had won in 6 years (.166 winning percentage). Since class basketball, they have won 4 sectionals in 6 years (.666). 4A Pike won 5 sectionals and one regional in 87 years of single class (.057), and has won 5 sectionals (.833), 4 regionals, 4 semistates, and 2 state crowns in multi-class. 4A Columbia City was 0 for their last 19 in single class sectionals, and they've won 2 of 6 multi-class.

                  On the other hand, Class A White River Valley won 4 out of 7 single class sectionals it played in (.571), and has won 1 out of 6 multi-class (.166).

                  Quote:

                  Hoosier Hysteria will never be the same as it was 50 years ago.
                  But don't blame multi-class basketball.

                  I know it will never be like it was in 1954, (as the narrator said on national television Saturday night: “Indiana saw to that”), but you’re going to have come up with better reasons than girls gymnastics, DVDs, and watching NBA basketball before I will blame anything but multi-class basketball for the demise of Hoosier Hysteria.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight


                    Boo to bball for converting the thread into a class basketball rant. I liked the old system better, too. It was better theatre and easier to follow. But belittling today's fans and participants because they still care is bush league.
                    I'm not belittling today's fans or participants.... the IHSAA is.

                    -Bball
                    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                    ------

                    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                    -John Wooden

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight

                      You guys are discussing these high school players as if they were professional athletes making millions of dollars (i.e. the Colts and Pacers small-market analogies).

                      They're 15-18 year-old KIDS for chrissakes. Let them have fun and play the damn game. They'll have plenty of time to be exploited for ticket sales when they get older.
                      Actually, there's another angle to this besides the fact that the new system is not working financially. It has to do with nobody telling anyone what they're not able to do. Everyone having the same opportunity. Not creating more trophies to make more winners. Maybe the players that want to win a championship need to work harder... whether at a small school or large school? And maybe the work and dedication (and teamwork) to a common goal are more important in the long run than the trophy the eventual winner carries away?

                      ...But what do I know? If 4 champions are good... why not more? Afterall, think of all the losers of the opening sectional games. Is it fair to them to no longer have a shot a championship because they happened to lose their first game? How about adding a 4 more trophies and letting the first round 'victory challenged' teams square off in another tournament still divided by the 4 classes? Then we could have 8 champions and if 4 are good then 8 must certainly be better.

                      Just adding this bracket for victory challenged teams would double the number of teams getting at least 1 victory in the tournament and that has to feel good. That is at least one more game for these teams' fans too. And with fewer teams in this tournament the path to a championship will be shorter... and thus less victory challenged teams by the end. This whole concept is making me feel really good. It isn't as good as everybody winning but it is a good compromise...for a start. In a perfect world everybody would win.

                      I wonder if we should consider removing coaches from the sidelines? They tend to be focused on victory and this has to be sending the wrong message to the kids. Too much emphassis on winning can't be good for the kids' feelings. Somebody will end up victory challenged at the end and they will feel sad and overmatched. Ultimately, doing away with the scoreboard entirely is a noble goal.

                      Bball
                      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                      ------

                      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                      -John Wooden

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight

                        I come from Lutheran High School, which has roughly 260 students total, class of 1998, so I can tell you a couple things about class basketball in a tiny school. And keep in mind that this tiny school has a good set-up for a modern run towards a cinderella story. We're in Indianapolis, so we've got access to all the modern training facilities and coaching. We actively recruit kids who come from the 5 area Lutheran grade schools to attend Lutheran High School, so in essence we keep all our talent from kindergarden all the way to graduation.

                        However!

                        It simply doesn't matter. In single class basketball, a school our size, even with solid fundamentals, will get crushed by schools who have 10 times the talent pool to draw from. You simply can't beat a bigger, more athletic team that is almost as good fundamentally. Back in the 60's, a huge school had a thousand kids in it. It would be much easier for a school with 200 to beat them, if you also considered that those kids in that small rural school had absolutely nothing better to do than play basketball, most likely with/against their future teammates. They were constantly getting better. Now, they've got AOL, so it's just as easy for them to play a PS2 or surf the web when they get home. Milan today simply wouldn't get to pick and choose from any young man in their school, and get a virtual garauntee that that kid is playing basketball in the back yard 6 hours per day. Now that kid might be watching MTV, or sitting in a Yahoo! Chatroom, or playing Halo with the 6'5" guy that the team would have needed to win a championship. It's just not what it used to be.

                        So, they make it multi-class, which I don't agree with either. Wow, now you have 4 winners instead of win. So it's all better now that 374 schools loose instead of 377? My junior year we almost won sectionals, but we lost to Shelbyville, who crushed us, because their front line was an average of 6" taller than ours, and they were just as skilled. But does it really matter? Imagine that Shelbyville had been replaced by Sheridan, and we managed to win. We hang a 1a sectional banner, and probably get creamed in regionals. Nobody's going to talk about the year we beat Sheridan to win sectionals, or at least, they won't be 8 years from the day we won. It'll just be another dusty banner that nobody remembers.


                        Both systems suck, at least with single class ball it's got a mystique, even if that mystique is never fulfilled or realized. Every small school realizes they have almost no chance to win state. All you do by multi-classing is make the biggest fish in their respective ponds the favorites, and the bottom half of those respective ponds still feel like they have no chance to win state. :

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight


                          And we got the Friday night bye in a seven team sectional!!! : range:
                          They still play sectionals? I thought these days they just handed out championship trophies to all the schools so that everybody 'felt equal'.

                          Afterall, is it fair for some schools not to be able to be a state champion just because some other school just happens to be better?

                          -Bball "Not a fan of multi-class basketball"

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight

                            I hate class basketball. Thankfully though Southport's sectional still does feature most of the teams that we had in the single class system.

                            I can't imagine driving 80 miles into the heart of the middle of nowhere to see a game on a Tuesday evening like some schools get to do each season.

                            Anybody ever look to see Jeff Sagarin's single class system sectionals that he proposed?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: I Met Isiah Thomas Tonight

                              Have to disagree with this one.

                              Went my first two years to Muncie Southside (many athletes to choose from) and last two years to Cowan (not enough students to play football). Seeing both perspectives, there was no reason for a school as small as Cowan to have to play the bigger schools in the sectional. Even if the bigger schools were poorly coached or had an inferior starting five, it was almost impossible for the smaller schools to deal with the number of athletes of the opposition. Everyone wants another Milan, but the fact is one has not been seen in 50 years.

                              I am for all of the championship winning teams playing an additional tournament. All four class winners squaring off would still show who was the best team. By keeping the class system, the small school would still have reason to be interested in the sectionals.
                              Well I don't agree with this one. There may not have been a school as small as Milan, going all the way, but there have been upsets of the larger schools during the sectionals, reginals and semi-state. For a lot of these schools, winning their sectional is a big thing. Getting a chance to take on the big boys is what it's all about. This attitude about not having a chance against the larger and more athletic teams is for losers.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X