[QUOTE=run49er;207535]Hereâs what he said. If Coach Soderberg had said that, then he would have been reprimanded by the A-10 (well, maybe not!).
Nothing earthshattering, new, etc. Actually, sort of the thing you would say about Vouyoukas if youâre on the other team! I just found it interesting that the Big O omitted it from the story.
BTW, hereâs what Gary Parrish had to say about BCâs loss to DuquesneâŚ[/QUOTE]
Run49er,
Have you forgot the disturber is located in chapel hole? Comments such as those above always help me in showing no mercy to âoutsidersâ.
[QUOTE=Over40NINER;207544]I donât know what the big deal is about the biased Observer article. This crap has been going on for a long time. Propaganda at its finest.
Parrish had a great INFORMATIVE and NON-BIASED article.
Run, thanks for pointing this out.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you Over. It does make me wonder why someone would pay to haul "trashâ inside his or her house.
It is untrue that the Big O put the BC excuses in. I read this article out of state (New York City) and it has the comments about BC playing without their top players, so that was written by the AP reporter or stringer.
In my opinion, contrary to what Mike P wrote, I donât think the Duquesne stuff is all that relevant ⌠they won without them. Putting that stuff in would be like saying âhey not only did they pull the upset, but they could be even better.â Iâd rather know what contributed to the upset, i.e. BC missing some key players.
Also, the fact that BC was playing without their players was a relatively new development; meanwhile the players that got shot happened a while back and they were not expected to play in this game and (though admittedly Iâm not following the situation) they havenât been playing ⌠so it wasnât ânewâ.
I think any time a top team gets upset Iâd rather know why or how they got upset. It is notable obviously that Duquesne should and could be better, but again I feel thatâs âoldâ news whereas BCâs injuries are ânewerâ I think.
I would expect Duquesneâs injuries to get play in an article if they lost to someone on their level or someone they were expected to beat.
I could be wrong, but thatâs how I read it. Thatâs usually how it is, since you expect the âhigherâ team to win, you look for reasons they didnât, rather than reasons the other team was âdownâ to begin with.
[QUOTE=Brick Tamland, Weather;207548]It is untrue that the Big O put the BC excuses in. I read this article out of state (New York City) and it has the comments about BC playing without their top players, so that was written by the AP reporter or stringer.
In my opinion, contrary to what Mike P wrote, I donât think the Duquesne stuff is all that relevant ⌠they won without them. Putting that stuff in would be like saying âhey not only did they pull the upset, but they could be even better.â Iâd rather know what contributed to the upset, i.e. BC missing some key players.
Also, the fact that BC was playing without their players was a relatively new development; meanwhile the players that got shot happened a while back and they were not expected to play in this game and (though admittedly Iâm not following the situation) they havenât been playing ⌠so it wasnât ânewâ.
I think any time a top team gets upset Iâd rather know why or how they got upset. It is notable obviously that Duquesne should and could be better, but again I feel thatâs âoldâ news whereas BCâs injuries are ânewerâ I think.
I would expect Duquesneâs injuries to get play in an article if they lost to someone on their level or someone they were expected to beat.
I could be wrong, but thatâs how I read it. Thatâs usually how it is, since you expect the âhigherâ team to win, you look for reasons they didnât, rather than reasons the other team was âdownâ to begin with.[/QUOTE]
Read it again. Read the original AP story.
The AP article states BC can make no excuses, even with a player missing, because Duquesne had some missing too. The Observerâs version made excuses for BC because they conveniently left out part of the story.
BOSTON (AP) â [URL=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=31965][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Robert Mitchell[/COLOR][/U][/URL] scored 20 points and [URL=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=27235][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Aaron Jackson[/COLOR][/U][/URL] and [URL=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=31963][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Scott Grote[/COLOR][/U][/URL] 19 each to lead Duquesne to a 98-93 overtime upset win over injury-hindered Boston College despite a triple-double by Eaglesâ center [URL=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=22199][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Sean Williams[/COLOR][/U][/URL] on Thursday night.
Williams had his triple-double with 13 blocked shots, 19 points and 10 rebounds, but spoiled his night with a pair of gaffes in the closing 65 seconds of overtime.
[URL=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=15432][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Kieron Achara[/COLOR][/U][/URL] added 17 points for the Dukes (4-7).
[URL=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=15465][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Sean Marshall[/COLOR][/U][/URL] scored a career-high 30 points and [URL=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=27170][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Tyrese Rice[/COLOR][/U][/URL] added a career-best 29 to lead Boston College (7-4).
The Eagles were minus starters [URL=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=17911][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Jared Dudley[/COLOR][/U][/URL], the teamâs leading scorer at 18.8 points per game, and [URL=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=23737][U][COLOR=#0000ff]John Oates[/COLOR][/U][/URL], both sidelined with left foot injuries.
In overtime, Mitchell was fouled on a 3-point attempt and hit all three free throws, making it 87-84.
After Rice hit two free throws, Scott Grote was fouled on a drive by [URL=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=16121][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Tyrelle Blair[/COLOR][/U][/URL] and Williams was whistled for a technical foul on the play. Mitchell hit both free throws on the technical and Grote nailed one, pushing the Dukes ahead 89-86 with 65 seconds left.
With 18.4 seconds left and the Eagles trailing 92-89, Williams grabbed [URL=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=31964][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Reggie Jackson[/COLOR][/U][/URL]âs shirt while trying to foul him and was called for an intentional foul. Jackson hit both free throws and the Dukes kept possession.
Williamsâ one-handed turnaround made it 77-74 with 31 seconds left in regulation, but Grote nailed a 3 from the right wing to tie it with 8.2 seconds left.
Rice missed on a driving shot and a pair of tips failed as the horn sounded, sending the game to overtime.
BC had a 75-65 edge with 4:44 to play, but the Dukes scored the next nine points and cut it to 75-74 on Groteâs two free throws with 2:35 left.
Duquesne, which held a 37-34 halftime edge, had won its last game, 72-71 over St. Francis on Friday after losing seven straight.
Williams was the first BC player with a triple-double since Duane Woodward did it against Rutgers Jan. 14, 1998.
[QUOTE=Jim Utter;207550]The Eagles were minus starters [URL=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=17911][U][COLOR=#0000ff]Jared Dudley[/COLOR][/U][/URL], the teamâs leading scorer at 18.8 points per game, and [URL=http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=23737][U][COLOR=#0000ff]John Oates[/COLOR][/U][/URL], both sidelined with left foot injuries.[/QUOTE]
And no mention of Duquesne missing players. Story is biased towards Boston and they were the home team. Stringers, if anything, should slant a bit in the other direction.
Thatâs exactly the story I read as well, the one posted by Jim above. Again, I think that if it were me writing the story, Iâm writing about why a team got upset (missing players) and Iâm not writing about some guys who got shot before the season and werenât a factor at all (except emotionally?). Iâm not writing a feature piece or a column about what a great upset it was in spite of all the turmoil, Iâm writing the game recap. Iâm sure they could have mentioned that, but then youâre speculating about whether they could or would have been a factor ⌠and apparantly they did mention them in a later version of the story, but in the nuts and bolts, beat the deadline story, I think it was apporpriate as written.
You wouldnât expect someone to write a story about Charlotte upsetting (insert big name school here) and then go on to mention âoh and they lost a kid to ineligibility before the season or else this would have been even biggerâ.
I just think a lot of people here are quick to jump all over the Oâs nuts, and itâs not always warranted.
[QUOTE=Brick Tamland, Weather;207594]
I just think a lot of people here are quick to jump all over the Oâs nuts, and itâs not always warranted.[/QUOTE]
I completely agree. It is not ALWAYS warranted.
Most of the time, youâre damn straight it is warranted. I will admit, they have gotten a little better, but now weâve missed our opportunity to get the city of Charlotte behind usâŚ
You still missed the point Run and HP were making. Or did you?
I completely agree. It is not [B]ALWAYS[/B] warranted.
Most of the time, youâre damn straight it is warranted. I will admit, they have gotten a little better, but now weâve missed our opportunity to get the city of Charlotte behind usâŚ
You still missed the point Run and HP were making. Or did you?
I donât think I missed the point, I just take the opposite view that the story was OK as it was written and pubished in the O. Thatâs all Iâm looking at in this situation, I didnât think mentioning the shooting was warranted because it didnât affect the outcome of the game, whereas I think BC missing its scorers did.
PS I also just like to be devilâs advocate a lot of the time, but really in this case I believe it as I typed it. Iâve said that the O needs to improve in a lot of areas before, but Iâm not a conspiracy theorist like some people tend to lean around here. Which is fine, if they want to believe that. I just donât.
Have you guys had a chance to see that FT shooting on the PG we recruited that went to Wake ? Got a glimpse of it last night during the south florida game, wow.
Oh-my, if he would of went here this message board would have a new thread/game about it.
Got this in an e-mail from a guy I know, re: every message board. I think itâs true here, too.
I donât visit âthe boardsâ but 1-2/weekly and then just to be sure the same dead horses are being beaten in the same âeternal flameâ threads. They always are regardless of team affiliation. Those âeternal flamesâ are ⌠1- the media are all idiots ⌠2- our AD is an idiot ⌠3- our coach (or their coach) is an idiot ⌠4- their fans are all idiots ⌠5- a billy bluechip thread ⌠and 6- âthe bbq threadâ. sometimes I actually open âthe BBQ threadâ.
[QUOTE=Mike_Persinger;207629]Got this in an e-mail from a guy I know, re: every message board. I think itâs true here, too.
I donât visit âthe boardsâ but 1-2/weekly and then just to be sure the same dead horses are being beaten in the same âeternal flameâ threads. They always are regardless of team affiliation. Those âeternal flamesâ are ⌠1- the media are all idiots ⌠2- our AD is an idiot ⌠3- our coach (or their coach) is an idiot ⌠4- their fans are all idiots ⌠5- a billy bluechip thread ⌠and 6- âthe bbq threadâ. sometimes I actually open âthe BBQ threadâ.[/QUOTE]
We need to revive the BBQ threadâŚ
