FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[Gregory Sager]

Good grief. The question was never about basketball.

If you don't want to talk about NPU men's basketball, then don't post this question:

Although I understand the analysis of NP and why they can't field a better football team, but by that very logic, why isn't their basketball program better?

or make this declaration about NPU men's basketball:

NPU won the CCIW championship in men's basketball a mere three seasons ago, HOPEful. The current downturn has nothing to do with institutional circumstances.

The basketball team has gone 4-12, 5-20, 18-8, 14-11, 15-10, and 6-19 over the past 6 seasons. One could argue that the anomaly was the 18-8 season and that Jordan Robinson had more to do with that success than the institution.

... on the CCIW football board.

[formerd3db]

I don't mind discussing the general state of NPU athletic recruiting here. But HOPEful's specific comments about NPU's recent fortunes in men's basketball really are not pertinent to this board. The CCIW men's basketball board is one of the busiest on d3boards.com as a whole, and there's all kinds of fruitful conversation to be had there on that topic if he wants it.

Okay, Greg.  Then let's just petition Pat about instituting a rule to allow only discussing a sport (in ALL aspects) for that sport's specific board.

I think the concept of on-topic is pretty self-explanatory and shouldn't need me stating so.

Then you will be enforcing it on all the boards, right?

[Gregory Sager]

I don't see why not. After all, Pat's got nothing better to do with his life.

[formerd3db]

I don't see why not. After all, Pat's got nothing better to do with his life.

Yeah, he's just like the rest of us! 

[Pat Coleman]

I don't mind discussing the general state of NPU athletic recruiting here. But HOPEful's specific comments about NPU's recent fortunes in men's basketball really are not pertinent to this board. The CCIW men's basketball board is one of the busiest on d3boards.com as a whole, and there's all kinds of fruitful conversation to be had there on that topic if he wants it.

Okay, Greg.  Then let's just petition Pat about instituting a rule to allow only discussing a sport (in ALL aspects) for that sport's specific board.

I think the concept of on-topic is pretty self-explanatory and shouldn't need me stating so.

Then you will be enforcing it on all the boards, right?

So here's the difference that seems like it needs clarification, for some reason:

I don't mind when a board strays from its topic. These are communities of like-minded people with affinities for a specific level of sport who may well have other things in common to talk about. (There are some obvious topics of conversation excepted which I normally would assume we understand, but I feel the need to point this out now because this conversation seems to be capable of veering into the pedantic.)

But I do mind when people talk off-topic about something that we already have a board for. So, IWU opera singers, reluctantly acceptable here in limited does. CCIW women's basketball, on the CCIW women's basketball board. CCIW men's basketball, on the CCIW men's basketball board.

I would have thought this was clear, but maybe it needed to be made explicit.

[formerd3db]

I don't mind discussing the general state of NPU athletic recruiting here. But HOPEful's specific comments about NPU's recent fortunes in men's basketball really are not pertinent to this board. The CCIW men's basketball board is one of the busiest on d3boards.com as a whole, and there's all kinds of fruitful conversation to be had there on that topic if he wants it.

Okay, Greg.  Then let's just petition Pat about instituting a rule to allow only discussing a sport (in ALL aspects) for that sport's specific board.

I think the concept of on-topic is pretty self-explanatory and shouldn't need me stating so.

Then you will be enforcing it on all the boards, right?

So here's the difference that seems like it needs clarification, for some reason:

I don't mind when a board strays from its topic. These are communities of like-minded people with affinities for a specific level of sport who may well have other things in common to talk about. (There are some obvious topics of conversation excepted which I normally would assume we understand, but I feel the need to point this out now because this conversation seems to be capable of veering into the pedantic.)

But I do mind when people talk off-topic about something that we already have a board for. So, IWU opera singers, reluctantly acceptable here in limited does. CCIW women's basketball, on the CCIW women's basketball board. CCIW men's basketball, on the CCIW men's basketball board.

I would have thought this was clear, but maybe it needed to be made explicit.

Thanks for the clarification Pat.  That is fine. Glad you cleared that up, IMO, it was appropriate you do so because it was brought up, and, in all honesty, it has been allowed to slip before.  And as you said (and I think most people here will admit, that there sometimes is a tangent slope that can occur in these discussions, inadvertently, of course. Anyway, now that you have made it clear, we'll expect that you will uphold this every time someone strays off topic for which there is another board for, even if it is inadvertent or not.   

[Pat Coleman]

Actually, the best part is that the community does a great job of policing itself in this regard.

Exactly as Greg attempted to do. Which is why I'm not sure why you interjected into it?

[formerd3db]

Most of the time they do.  I joined in the conversation and happened to agree with HOPEful that there was some commonality in the discussion with regard to asking about the college recruiting in general in comparing football with their basketball program (which he did later clarified).  IMO, that was a legit discussion (the comparison). I also mentioned that at times the board does "stray from topic."  However, as the discussion then evolved more into basketball, I did say then that we would look for GS's answers (i.e. his assessment) over on the MBB board, which he never did.  He went on to talk about NP's recruiting in general, which he said he didn't mind, and which, however, included some further comments about basketball.  We could argue this "ad nauseam" or into the pedantic as you noted.   

So you are now saying that I or anyone else cannot "interject" in a discussion (or at least questioning it)? And there certainly are and have been numerous conversations that have veered into the pedantic.  So I'm glad you ended this one. Sheesh.  We'll move on.   

[Gregory Sager]

I don't mind discussing the general state of NPU athletic recruiting here. But HOPEful's specific comments about NPU's recent fortunes in men's basketball really are not pertinent to this board. The CCIW men's basketball board is one of the busiest on d3boards.com as a whole, and there's all kinds of fruitful conversation to be had there on that topic if he wants it.

Okay, Greg.  Then let's just petition Pat about instituting a rule to allow only discussing a sport (in ALL aspects) for that sport's specific board.

I think the concept of on-topic is pretty self-explanatory and shouldn't need me stating so.

Then you will be enforcing it on all the boards, right?

So here's the difference that seems like it needs clarification, for some reason:

I don't mind when a board strays from its topic. These are communities of like-minded people with affinities for a specific level of sport who may well have other things in common to talk about. (There are some obvious topics of conversation excepted which I normally would assume we understand, but I feel the need to point this out now because this conversation seems to be capable of veering into the pedantic.)

Hey, I resemble that remark!

Most of the time they do.  I joined in the conversation and happened to agree with HOPEful that there was some commonality in the discussion with regard to asking about the college recruiting in general in comparing football with their basketball program (which he did later clarified).  IMO, that was a legit discussion (the comparison). I also mentioned that at times the board does "stray from topic."  However, as the discussion then evolved more into basketball, I did say then that we would look for GS's answers (i.e. his assessment) over on the MBB board, which he never did.  He went on to talk about NP's recruiting in general, which he said he didn't mind, and which, however, included some further comments about basketball.

Actually, my general remarks about NPU athletic recruiting in the latter part of the conversation didn't involve men's basketball. They used men's soccer and baseball as comparisons to football with regard to how many suburban Chicagolanders the largest NPU rosters (i.e., those three sports) contained at present. The only time that I directly addressed NPU men's basketball was to refute HOPEful's assertions about Jordan Robinson and the records of recent Vikings hoops teams, which was earlier in the conversation.

As for discussing NPU men's basketball on the CCIW men's basketball board, nobody saw fit to move the conversation over there. As I said, I'm happy to address anything brought up over there regarding North Park men's basketball recruiting, but I'm not going to initiate it.

[Titan Q]

IWU 43
Elmhurst 0

Johnny DiCanio started at QB again for the Titans.

[AndOne]

Augie   71
NPU       0

NCC       62
Carroll     3

In today’s North Central win, Cardinal QB Broc Rutter established a new all-time CCIW record for passing yards. His 256 yards today give him a total of 8,613, surpassing the old record of 8,439 which was established in 1985. Rutter also recently set a new all-time conference record for TD passes. His 4 today give him a current total of 87. The previous record was 70.

[AndOne]

IWU 43
Elmhurst 0

* Johnny DiCanio started at QB again for the Titans.

* Former(?) QB, Brandon Bauer, 4 rushes for 14 yards.
Has Bauer been converted to a RB, or is Norm easing him back into the lineup by letting him run the ball a little, and refreshing his sensation of what getting hit feels like?

[Titan Q]

IWU 43
Elmhurst 0

* Johnny DiCanio started at QB again for the Titans.

* Former(?) QB, Brandon Bauer, 4 rushes for 14 yards.
Has Bauer been converted to a RB, or is Norm easing him back into the lineup by letting him run the ball a little, and refreshing his sensation of what getting hit feels like?

I believe his QB career is over and they are giving him a few chances to be on the field and play football.  His carries today were when it was a blowout, at the RB spot.

[Titan Q]

Late 1st Q:

Wheaton 35
Wash U 0

[blue_jays]

Late 1st Q:

Wheaton 35
Wash U 0

After last year's debacle, let's just say Wheaton made sure it wasn't close this year... the stats say it all. Anthony averaged over 20 yards per completion, Williams 13.3 yards per rush, and the defense smushed the Bears into a fine powder.