|
Post by hyperion on Mar 10, 2023 0:25:13 GMT -5
The idea that it would be "buying the record" is just BullShit--probably the most Bullshitty argument made here. Teams play games according to the rules. If the CBI wants him to play, because it will help the CBI draw interest, that's up to them. It's then up to us to decide whether to play. Nobody is bribing the CBI, or paying off officials. I remember way back in 1969, the Titans started strong and were ranked #7 in the country at one point. But they succumbed to a tough schedule and finished just 16-10. There was considerable discussion of whether they would get an NIT bid, with the knowledge that that bid would largely hinge on whether or not the NIT wanted to Spencer Haywood, considered the most exciting player of the day (even over Maravich!). Indeed, the NIT long selected its field based in part on fan appeal. They wanted New York area teams to draw crowds, and they often seeded accordingly, too. Playing in the CBI is no more "buying a record" than playing in in-season invitationals, which allow you to schedule 31 instead of 29 games. It's no more buying a record than a big school paying guarantees for more home games. As I've said before, EVERY record is determined in large part by time and place. If Babe Ruth played from 1894-1915 instead of 1914 to 1935, he never would have hit 500 home runs, let alone 714. If Henry Aaron were born 15 years earlier, he wouldn't have broken Ruth's record, because he would have been stuck in the Negro Leagues for another decade. And if we're giving AD an asterisk for year five, don't we need an asterisk for all the guys who set records in year 4, since Maravich, Alcindor, Elvin Hayes, Oscar Robertson, Elgin Baylor etc. only got three years of eligibility? Do we retroactively take Tom Gola out of the record book as the all-time leader in rebounds, since, due to many changes in the game, rebounds are harder to come by now than they were when Gola played. Or do we list Bill Russell as number 1, even though under the theory that if he'd had 4 years of eligibility, he might have the record? Some people had the three point line. Some played with a narrow "key." Some played when the game was super fast, some when it was much slower. (By the way, despite the shot clock, the game is much slower now than when Pistol Pete played). As Sam pointed out, some played when major conferences, notably the SEC, were all white. There have been different rules for shooting fouls, and different definitions of what constitutes various fouls. Some played when there was a jump ball after every basket. Records are cool, but holding the scoring record doesn't say you were the best--it just says you scored the most points. But I'm far from my initial point. This "buying the record" argument is pure, 100% BS. Why is it acceptable for you to use a profanity against an opinion (you call it an argument) made here? Isn’t this in itself subject to the same “bullshitty” label? You brought this post back to life by quoting one of my posts from a year ago!! Really? Just recently and on another post, you wrote “…And mostly, I want to win. AD will always be a nice footnote to this season, but what will make this season is winning the HL tournament. Yeah, we'll be a 16th seed if we do, probably with a play-in game (and we can win that, too!). But it's a start, and it will be remembered.” How is this working out for you? Still think AD is a nice footnote to this season? Lastly, it’s hard to argue against the fact that we are buying this record, amidst a miserable losing season (By my standards). We’re paying to play!!!! This is the only way possible for AD to obtain the record. Don’t sugar coat this fact.
|
|
|
Post by ptctitan on Mar 10, 2023 7:35:09 GMT -5
If we get an invitation to either tournament (and that is not guaranteed), then yes, we are paying to play in a postseason tournament that will most likely result in Antoine Davis holding the NCAA record for most points scored in a college career.
But let's remember one fact. Immediately after our loss at YSU, it was the CBI, not us, that used social media to try and capitalize upon Antoine's predicament in order to gin up interest in its for-profit tournament. The CBI posted that map - not us. Why? Because of Antoine.
If we don't get an invitation to the CBI, then Antoine should send them a bill for $440,000 for using his name and fame without his permission to drive interest in their for-profit tournament. And if we do get an invitation to either tournament and we pay to play there, so what! They are using us as much as we are using them. It then becomes a win-win business deal.
For me, the most important occurrence here has been president Taylor's willingness to let us play. That shows a change in attitude towards men's basketball and Athletics from the one that existed before he took over. Hopefully, this begins a series of positive changes in Athletics and, in particular, the men's BB program.
|
|
|
Post by fan on Mar 10, 2023 9:36:55 GMT -5
Playing basketball at any level is about money. Paying for a young kids trainer, paying for an AAU team, an AAU team paying to enter a tournament, some school charge to join a team, paying for participation awards, paying for players' scholarships, paying for NIL, it's on and on. Where do you want to draw the line and stop paying? Mr. Hyperion, your stated goal is to win, we all do, nobody goes to a game (except a parent)to watch losing, maybe you need to take your need to win to a simple level, let's win the next game and hope the next 2 shots go in, that's a win.
|
|
|
Post by motorcitysam on Mar 10, 2023 21:28:21 GMT -5
If we are getting some negative commentary about possibly accepting a CBI bid, it would seem like a good time for Titan fans to adopt the "Detroit vs Everybody" attitude and defend the program. What's surprising to me is that we have some Titan alumni who have decided to take the side of Everybody.
|
|
|
Post by udmperry on Mar 10, 2023 21:45:43 GMT -5
Sam: I agree for sure. It’s a head scratcher? Don’t get that attitude either.
|
|
|
Post by nctitan on Mar 10, 2023 22:56:46 GMT -5
Sam: I agree for sure. It’s a head scratcher? Don’t get that attitude either. When someone from another school says something negative about the CBI, I ask them if their team had a player a tad away from a career record if they would go to a CBI tournament, buy an extra game, go to a crap bowl game. Anyone honest will say Yes.
|
|
|
Post by fan on Mar 11, 2023 0:30:53 GMT -5
Crap Bowl games is a perfect comparison.
|
|
|
Post by nctitan on Mar 11, 2023 10:27:12 GMT -5
Crap Bowl games is a perfect comparison. But are you agreeing or disagreeing? Donnell Pumphrey holds the career rushing yardage record of 6,405. If your team's star running back had 6,401 yards, would you accept a bowl bid to allow him to get five more yards?
|
|
|
Post by fan on Mar 11, 2023 11:26:40 GMT -5
What I'm saying is all the bowls that take 6 and 6 teams to me equate to the CBI, maybe crap is a bad analogy. They are fine, and it's likely fun for the teams, fans and players, and and any records are valid. So I don't agree with the people blasting the CBI/DTM/AD. If we get in and AD breaks the record I think it's great.
|
|
|
Post by uofdfan1983 on Mar 11, 2023 13:19:46 GMT -5
What is DTM? Data Transfer Methodology? Guys, we are U-D. We will always be U-D.
|
|
|
Post by udballer on Mar 11, 2023 14:28:53 GMT -5
Crap Bowl games is a perfect comparison. But are you agreeing or disagreeing? Donnell Pumphrey holds the career rushing yardage record of 6,405. If your team's star running back had 6,401 yards, would you accept a bowl bid to allow him to get five more yards? Certainly... though crap bowl games do have team standards for entry. If our team was 5-7, our star RB would not be afforded the opportunity to get those 5 yards. Luckily, for UofD and AD, the CBI and other thing do not carry similar standards.
|
|
|
Post by sarfan on Mar 11, 2023 18:37:35 GMT -5
A 5-7 team is not considered bowl eligible in college football. However, if there are not enough bowl eligible teams, a 5-7 team may be offered a vacant spot as an exception. They're selected based on the highest Academic Progress Rate (APR).
|
|
|
Post by Rogobob77 on Mar 12, 2023 22:21:29 GMT -5
3,664 it will be.
|
|
|
Post by udballer on Mar 13, 2023 8:58:48 GMT -5
A 5-7 team is not considered bowl eligible in college football. However, if there are not enough bowl eligible teams, a 5-7 team may be offered a vacant spot as an exception. They're selected based on the highest Academic Progress Rate (APR). Agree... as the bowl schedule is also embarrassing at this point. That said, the point is that even in the current bowl selection process, a 5-7 team cannot be bypassed in favor of a 4-8 team. The point is that there are team standards incorporated... even if the standards drop every year.
|
|
|
Post by titantarheel on Mar 13, 2023 9:08:29 GMT -5
It may sound corny but I would hang a banner with the Maravich's points and showing AD #2 all time. We get a two-fer of recognizing AD and also showing he's among one of the best all time, and in fact just a missed shot or two away from being ahead.
|
|