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

2012-2013 Butler Basketball

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

  • #31
    Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
    This is an argument for another thread probably, but I think Few is actually pretty overrated. There are a number of reasons for this, but mainly he's been trying to do what Stevens did in back to back years for over a decade and hasn't been able to do. He recruits and plays in a watered down area for college basketball. The midwest and the east coast are the bed of basketball talent and competition. Don't get me wrong here Few is a good coach, but Stevens IMO is establishing something much bigger at Butler than Few ever could at Gonzaga. So to say that Stevens is doing at Butler what Few did at Gonzaga is IMO a slight to Stevens.

    I mean Stevens is 13 years younger, we really need to understand that. He has only been at Butler for 5 years and he already has two more final four appearances than Few's 0. Few has made 4 Sweet 16's, so Stevens is almost there on that and I think he could likely claim number 3 this year.

    Stevens is the best coach in college basketball right now. I firmly believe that. I have a lot of faith in Crean and Stevens toyed with him. Stevens has also toyed with Roy Williams already this season.

    Their two losses were against Illinois when finally Butler's talent gap and fatigue could not be closed by Stevens game plan, and to Xavier who unfortunately for Stevens also loves to play his brand of basketball.

    Butler's talent level the back to back national title games was firmly mediocre, especially the second time. I don't say that to be cruel because those kids played their butts off, but it is what it is. The same is true of this year's team IMO, but Stevens just puts these kids in the perfect spot to succeed Roosevelt Jones is the perfect example of this, Stevens gets him the ball in the correct spot every single time he runs a play for him.
    Our talent level the second year was pretty bad. I remember being astonished through the tournament at what Stevens (and the hard-working players) could do, because it didn't seem like we really had the horses. I mean Mack was our go-to scorer guy, and he's a guy with, what, two moves in total? I remember thinking he was the most limited go-to scorer I had ever seen on a successful team.

    Do you think there's any scenario where we keep Stevens the full length of his career?
    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

      Originally posted by SoupIsGood View Post
      Our talent level the second year was pretty bad. I remember being astonished through the tournament at what Stevens (and the hard-working players) could do, because it didn't seem like we really had the horses. I mean Mack was our go-to scorer guy, and he's a guy with, what, two moves in total? I remember thinking he was the most limited go-to scorer I had ever seen on a successful team.

      Do you think there's any scenario where we keep Stevens the full length of his career?
      I don't know it's tough to say.

      Butler has to figure out why they can't sell out Hinkle on a consistent basis. This should not be a hard thing to do and for some reason they struggle to fill that upper deck pretty regularly.

      I think Stevens would love to stay, the only school I think he would leave for without a doubt if the opportunity presented itself is IU because he grew up an Indiana fan, but at the moment I don't see Crean leaving anytime in the near future unless things go way off track.

      Brush's scenario of an offer you can't refuse from Texas is interesting and I think that's absolutely what it would take to even get Stevens on the phone, but then you are talking about big deals like that the coaching search could include other folks besides Stevens. I mean there is not being motivated by the money and then there are scenarios where you would be financially irresponsible to not take the deal. But Texas? I don't know, it would really change his recruiting venue, but maybe that wouldn't matter to him.

      Stevens to Duke to replace Coach K has always been everyone's favorite scenario and I have to admit I think it would be tough for him to pass up if Butler couldn't match the money. I also look at Boeheim and think Syracuse would make a big time run for Stevens as well. The fact is this though, whether Stevens will stay or won't, it is going to be a constant fear Butler fans will have to live with until they can pay him the same amount of money as these big schools.

      Historically, guys staying at small schools are the exceptions, not the rule. Mark Few is so often referenced in discussions like this not because he's won multiple national titles or anything like that (heck, like I pointed out Brad has the better resume at this point), but because he's really just about the only guy to do it. (Win big at a mid sized program and stay there for an extended period of time.)

      The other interesting thing in all of this is that Shaka Smart is viewed on a national level in a similar way to Stevens. They will likely be 1a and 1b on every major schools call list until one of them leaves. There is also that additional variable.

      It's actually kind of interesting. I can't really remember the last time two mid major coaches were both young and highly coveted. I don't know that it has ever really happened.
      Last edited by Trader Joe; 12-18-2012, 05:34 PM.


      Comment


      • #33
        Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

        The ideal scenario for Indiana basketball fans is that Stevens stays at Butler and continues to build what he is building there and we get a great modern day rivalry between IU and Butler. There was an article about this on ESPN the other day and it definitely painted an awesome picture so I would love for this to happen.

        To keep him, Butler has to become Duke midwest IMO, which then you have to ask, what od you have to do to become that? I guess the logical answer is that you have to win a title. Duke turned itself into a national brand and Butler is still mentioned with Gonzaga or Xavier way more than you hear them mentioned as a Duke in the making and that is with back to back national title appearances.

        So yeah, Butler has to become a national brand and hated by a lot of people to keep Brad Stevens I guess is what I am saying if you compile all my thughts. I think Brad would love to stay, but there could be a lot of good jobs opening up in the next couple years, like I said Duke, Syracuse, UCLA if Howland is canned. What if Cal goes to the NBA? Doesn't UK come for Stevens too? I wouldn't want to be a Butler fan during this it's going to be very stressful, but it's also pretty awesome that you have a coach that pretty much any fan base in America would immediately go "yeah I'd take him" if someone said your coach was gone tomorrow and you had to hire someone new.
        Last edited by Trader Joe; 12-18-2012, 05:42 PM.


        Comment


        • #34
          Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

          Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
          I don't know it's tough to say.

          Butler has to figure out why they can't sell out Hinkle on a consistent basis. This should not be a hard thing to do and for some reason they struggle to fill that upper deck pretty regularly.

          I think Stevens would love to stay, the only school I think he would leave for without a doubt if the opportunity presented itself is IU because he grew up an Indiana fan, but at the moment I don't see Crean leaving anytime in the near future unless things go way off track.

          Brush's scenario of an offer you can't refuse from Texas is interesting and I think that's absolutely what it would take to even get Stevens on the phone, but then you are talking about big deals like that the coaching search could include other folks besides Stevens. I mean there is not being motivated by the money and then there are scenarios where you would be financially irresponsible to not take the deal. But Texas? I don't know, it would really change his recruiting venue, but maybe that wouldn't matter to him.

          Stevens to Duke to replace Coach K has always been everyone's favorite scenario and I have to admit I think it would be tough for him to pass up if Butler couldn't match the money. I also look at Boeheim and think Syracuse would make a big time run for Stevens as well. The fact is this though, whether Stevens will stay or won't, it is going to be a constant fear Butler fans will have to live with until they can pay him the same amount of money as these big schools.

          Historically, guys staying at small schools are the exceptions, not the rule. Mark Few is so often referenced in discussions like this not because he's won multiple national titles or anything like that (heck, like I pointed out Brad has the better resume at this point), but because he's really just about the only guy to do it. (Win big at a mid sized program and stay there for an extended period of time.)

          The other interesting thing in all of this is that Shaka Smart is viewed on a national level in a similar way to Stevens. They will likely be 1a and 1b on every major schools call list until one of them leaves. There is also that additional variable.

          It's actually kind of interesting. I can't really remember the last time two mid major coaches were both young and highly coveted. I don't know that it has ever really happened.
          Great post, and that bolded bit does seem to be the money quote.

          Like Brush said, sounds like we'd be much better off growing and increasing revenue rapidly . . . rather than just hoping Stevens always likes it here enough to overlook what he could be earning.

          That we can't sell out Hinkle makes me think that the sports dept is poorly managed at some level . . . that's pretty sad really.
          You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

            Originally posted by SoupIsGood View Post
            Great post, and that bolded bit does seem to be the money quote.

            Like Brush said, sounds like we'd be much better off growing and increasing revenue rapidly . . . rather than just hoping Stevens always likes it here enough to overlook what he could be earning.

            That we can't sell out Hinkle makes me think that the sports dept is poorly managed at some level . . . that's pretty sad really.
            My brutally honest opinion is that Butler does a really bad job marketing themselves to Indianapolis so the idea of them turning into a national brand ala Duke is kind of a pipe dream IMO, but again they are trying steps in the right direction.

            I mean it is cheap to go to a Butler bball game and a lot of fun. They are in a pretty big city and they should be able to capitalize on that. Even if you are not getting all "butler" fans you should be able to ge tpeople who just want something fun to do on a cold winter night in Indy. Maybe it's just not in the budget to market, maybe the change to the A10 and perhaps to the new big east will have a big impact on this. I don't know, but it's a major, major hurdle.

            And like you said, if you want to keep Stevens, you have to do it now. Not later IMO.

            I mean honeslty look at some of the best coaches in America, I already mentioned that Duke, Cuse, and UCLA could all be coming up soon.

            But Roy Williams isn't exactly a spring chicken at UNC either, Izzo at MSU, I could see Izzo transitioning to like an AD role at MSU too. There could be some good jobs with deep pockets opening. Butler has to get going on growing their pot of gold ASAP.


            Comment


            • #36
              Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
              My brutally honest opinion is that Butler does a really bad job marketing themselves to Indianapolis so the idea of them turning into a national brand ala Duke is kind of a pipe dream IMO, but again they are trying steps in the right direction.

              I mean it is cheap to go to a Butler bball game and a lot of fun. They are in a pretty big city and they should be able to capitalize on that. Even if you are not getting all "butler" fans you should be able to ge tpeople who just want something fun to do on a cold winter night in Indy. Maybe it's just not in the budget to market, maybe the change to the A10 and perhaps to the new big east will have a big impact on this. I don't know, but it's a major, major hurdle.

              And like you said, if you want to keep Stevens, you have to do it now. Not later IMO.

              I mean honeslty look at some of the best coaches in America, I already mentioned that Duke, Cuse, and UCLA could all be coming up soon.

              But Roy Williams isn't exactly a spring chicken at UNC either, Izzo at MSU, I could see Izzo transitioning to like an AD role at MSU too. There could be some good jobs with deep pockets opening. Butler has to get going on growing their pot of gold ASAP.
              This is exactly how I see it. With Stevens and the cachet of those two runs, we have a really special opportunity available to us. A chance to go from "remarkable story" to building something great and lasting. From "one of the good mid majors that makes some noise a few times a decade" to . . . whatever that next tier is. Everything I read and hear about Stevens suggests to me that he is the type of guy who can build that sort of thing.

              But you would need someone equally special on the business end of things to grow it alongside him . . . and if we can't even capture the Indy market, well then that's certainly discouraging. Inexcusable.
              You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                Texas's complacency with Mack Brown and Rick Barnes really legitimately baffles me. They're probably the richest athletic department in the country by a large margin, have all the positives in the world, and are just cool with being the giant that gets made fun of.
                Here in Arkansas, people generally are of the opinion that they hope Marc Brown stays there forever (Ark and Texas haven't played in years but people still hate them from the SWC days). My general understanding is that he knows how to please the right people. In the SEC or Big Ten the thought of anyone underperforming for so long would be unthinkable but not there. It baffles me too, you have to wonder with Texas A&M rising so quickly, if that will put pressure on them to make a move.

                Ahem, where were we...Butler? Oh yes. It is odd that is not sold out all the time. Is it a reflection on the small size? That people generally find there style of play boring? That everyone hopped back on the IU bandwagon?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                  Butler will start selling out frequently next year when Hinkle is reduced in size. It'll be around 8,000. I do understand why it doesn't always sell out. Butler is great but there are so many games against Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Illinois-Chicago, and Wright State that people can stomach. It'll be different with the A-10 and Catholic 7 in a few years.

                  Another big reason why is the lack of local alumni.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                    I agree the main problem with attendance, which isn't nearly as bad as it is being portrayed (hell, it was mostly full for the IUPUI game on Tuesday night and that's one of the worst teams I've ever seen), was the schedule. It's always packed to the brim when a good opponent is on the schedule. Getting out of the Horizon Conference will alleviate most of those issues. Getting into the Big East should solve the rest.
                    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                    -Lance Stephenson

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                      The thing about Stevens that impresses me besides that his teams are nearly always elite at being of the most physical and defensively sound teams in the nation is that he wins with non-top tier guys. In that regard, he's a bit like Tom Izzo (although Izzo still gets more McDonalds HS Americans and prospects than Stevens gets). Would a jump to a power conference like a new Big East help in that regard? Sure, Stevens would probably get some Cody Zeller types that would be successful and gel into any system. However, I'm not sure it would drastically improve things. He's still going to be highly selective in getting "his" type of guys aka the Butler way type of prospects.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                        Speaking of attendance, the Gonzaga game is already sold-out and the Evansville game looks to be very crowded, probably around 9,000 without students. That's impressive.

                        Butler recruiting is already getting better. Not McDonald's All-Americans but Butler has 2 Rivals150 commits for 2013 and are seriously in it for Trevon Blueitt and Shane Hall in 2014.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                          Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                          To keep him, Butler has to become Duke midwest IMO, which then you have to ask, what od you have to do to become that?
                          Become a Big Ten team instead of the likes of Rutgers....
                          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


                          • #43
                            Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                            Proud of the crowd and the performance today. Roosevelt Jones is a fullback playing basketball and has the touch to match the strength. Kellen Dunham really stepped up, and he has clearly worked on his game outside of 3s. Andrew Smith and Rotnei Clarke were great, keeping up the trend. Turnovers were a big problem, but a lot of those were uncharacteristic charges and great D from Evansville. The near-sellout crowd was great too. At a TV timeout Barry Collier came out and had everyone stand & started sitting people down by their first time being at Hinkle. "If your first game was in the 12 years, sit down" "If your first game was in the 90s, sit down" and when it got to the 20s, there was one little old lady who had been to Hinkle Fieldhouse in the 1920s. That was really cool.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                              Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
                              Proud of the crowd and the performance today. Roosevelt Jones is a fullback playing basketball and has the touch to match the strength. Kellen Dunham really stepped up, and he has clearly worked on his game outside of 3s. Andrew Smith and Rotnei Clarke were great, keeping up the trend. Turnovers were a big problem, but a lot of those were uncharacteristic charges and great D from Evansville. The near-sellout crowd was great too. At a TV timeout Barry Collier came out and had everyone stand & started sitting people down by their first time being at Hinkle. "If your first game was in the 12 years, sit down" "If your first game was in the 90s, sit down" and when it got to the 20s, there was one little old lady who had been to Hinkle Fieldhouse in the 1920s. That was really cool.
                              Clarke is putting the team on his back when the games are getting tense. He's such a reliable player
                              Smothered Chicken!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                                I saw Park Tudor star Trevon Bluiett at the game as well. He'd be a massive pickup for this team. Biggest recruit in Butler history.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X