- Joined
- Sep 5, 2011
- Messages
- 287
- Reaction Score
- 352
Petition to Overturn Men's Basketball Ban
- Thread starter HuskyNationJE
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2013
- Messages
- 385
- Reaction Score
- 594
Not good enough? We're plenty good to cause a stir in both. What fan says anything pushing for progress is a waste. Even if it doesn't get done, the 10 seconds it takes is worth a shot.
It's like spitting into the wind. It's over and done. I am a fan, but at least I understand that the reality of the situation is we are not going so why even entertain the dream.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2013
- Messages
- 385
- Reaction Score
- 594
I hear that. I entertain the dream, because unfortunately, it's all we have this season. It's tough to even watch and get so hyped about games with no light at the end for this season.
I feel your pain. I am proud of these guys and the job KO has done without much to look forward too, but they did have a respectable season. I would like to see them hit 20 wins. I also think they will be very good next year if they all come back.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2013
- Messages
- 385
- Reaction Score
- 594
yea, 20 wins is the goal I'm looking at now also. If we keep everyone, I agree, we will be very good next season. I'd say top 10, if not at least top 15. Gotta get some big recruits for 2014.
Perhaps if we get this conference crap straightened out it might help with the recruiting
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction Score
- 104
I think the Big East would change its mind if the NCAA did.... Remember, the rule specifically applies to teams who are banned from NCAA postseason play. It does not specifically apply to this year's UConn basketball team. If, hypothetically speaking, the NCAA ban were overturned, the rule necessitating the Big East ban would not apply.
I actually think the Big East rule is a good rule and we're unfairly blaming the Big East. Teams who are banned from the postseason shouldn't participate in conference tournaments. That doesn't mean the postseason ban is fair, and it's not in this case, but that's not the Big East's decision to make. I blame the NCAA for both bans. But I don't blame the Big East for passing a rule banning teams who are banned from the postseason from the conference tournament. As long as it doesn't get reversed the next time someone gets banned, I think it's fine.
But that being said, the blame still falls to the NCAA for both bans.
I actually think the Big East rule is a good rule and we're unfairly blaming the Big East. Teams who are banned from the postseason shouldn't participate in conference tournaments. That doesn't mean the postseason ban is fair, and it's not in this case, but that's not the Big East's decision to make. I blame the NCAA for both bans. But I don't blame the Big East for passing a rule banning teams who are banned from the postseason from the conference tournament. As long as it doesn't get reversed the next time someone gets banned, I think it's fine.
But that being said, the blame still falls to the NCAA for both bans.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 724
- Reaction Score
- 2,073
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction Score
- 104
And if I were around back then, I would have disagreed with the ruling to let Syracuse play in the tournament. Postseason ban means postseason ban. I'm only upset that it took them this long to realize this and didn't apply it to Syracuse before us.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 724
- Reaction Score
- 2,073
Well apparently you're just a black and white kind of guy...to each his own...I prefer to look at all the facts in each case and they just don't add up to the ban against this group being fair or right. Just my opinion.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction Score
- 104
I agree, but that's not for the Big East to decide. It creates too much of a slippery slope if they only ban teams from the BET when they think a ban is justified. If you think they have it in for us now, they'd really be able to go after us if that were the policy. If this policy were implemented when Syracuse were banned from the postseason, they would have automatically been banned from the BET. So the policy would have been applied equally to us and them, and the conference would have had no choice but to do so. If the BET had the chance to decide whether the ban was justified in both cases before making a decision, they could have let Syracuse play but not us. Not to mention, they could decide to ban a pesky, tough opponent like us but not a weakling opponent like DePaul in the exact same situation, creating the potential for a conflict of interest. Too much potential for abuse if we let the Big East decide on a case-by-case basis. That being said, we have every right to criticize the NCAA.
- Status