Jump to content

Indiana Coach Tom Crean Talks about UK Series


16thBBall Fan

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 207
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I don't disagree with that at all. But it's not John Calipari's job to make sure college basketball fans are pleased.

 

Really? Sure seemed like that was the case for his predecessor.

 

I don't know any UK Coach, or any College Basketball Coach for that matter, who job is to make sure that all college basketball fans are pleased. Now if we are referring to only UK fans, then yes that is his job. And yes, Billy Clyde certainly did not accomplish that task. As for Calipari, if there is any doubt in anyone's mind if he is pleasing UK fans, all you have to do is look at the rafters and see #8. In the grand scheme of things, #9 is all that matters to the majority of UK fans, and that makes me proud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If so, not nearly as foolish as Kentucky looks for its chuck-and-duck approach to Indiana.

 

Sounds like Indiana has been willing to make much more in concessions than Kentucky.

 

If someone is offering to play you twice at a neutral arena in your state while not wanting any games in their own state is ducking someone I need a new dictionary.

 

What concessions has Indiana made that are so great? It isn't like they're offering the Baylor contract to UK here. This is laughable that people are saying UK is ducking IU. They said we will not do any 4 year contract. We will however come to your home state the next two years. Here are the dates we can play you in December of this year and the arena is open. Are you in or out? IU may not like UK's offer, but they are in no way whatsoever ducking IU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob Knight is pretty irrelevant to the discussion now, just as would the mention of Joe B. Hall and Rick Pitino.

 

It is not irrelevant to cite historically how the teams have negotiated, comprised, or agreed to play. When Knight refused to play home/home, KY gave in and agreed to a neutral site contract. That is an option for IU just as it was for KY previously. A point which Cal stated today in his presser.

 

This is a case of both coaches doing what they think is best for their schools, which is what they are paid to do.

 

There ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys there's only Cal and Crean and they just disagree. - it could even be a song :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not irrelevant to cite historically how the teams have negotiated, comprised, or agreed to play. When Knight refused to play home/home, KY gave in and agreed to a neutral site contract. That is an option for IU just as it was for KY previously. A point which Cal stated today in his presser.

 

This is a case of both coaches doing what they think is best for their schools, which is what they are paid to do.

There ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys there's only Cal and Crean and they just disagree. - it could even be a song :)

 

Totally agree with the bolded, even though I personally dislike the fact that this game isn't going to continue as it has.

 

But about Crean...I've felt like his Athletic Director is more adamant about Assembly Hall than Crean is. I think Crean wants to play at home, but I also think he'd agree to what Cal wants tomorrow, if the decision were entirely his. I admit I don't have any real basis for that opinion, but it's just how I've perceived this situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But about Crean...I've felt like his Athletic Director is more adamant about Assembly Hall than Crean is. I think Crean wants to play at home, but I also think he'd agree to what Cal wants tomorrow, if the decision were entirely his. I admit I don't have any real basis for that opinion, but it's just how I've perceived this situation.

 

I have not basis for it either, but I definitely agree with you on Crean. He probably thinks and knows that this game is great for his players, no matter where it is played. And I also think he wouldn't be taking quite the hard line stance as the AD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If someone is offering to play you twice at a neutral arena in your state while not wanting any games in their own state is ducking someone I need a new dictionary.
One last time ... the location of the neutral site is irrelevant, given the customary ticket distribution. It matters not at all.

 

I'm not accusing Kentucky of ducking anyone. I'm accusing Kentucky of being obstinate in its dealings with Indiana, which appears to be willing to compromise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One last time ... the location of the neutral site is irrelevant, given the customary ticket distribution. It matters not at all.

 

I'm not accusing Kentucky of ducking anyone. I'm accusing Kentucky of being obstinate in its dealings with Indiana, which appears to be willing to compromise.

 

I'm sure the businesses in KY disagree with you about the importance of location. I also feel offering to play the next two games in Indiana is a compromise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not irrelevant to cite historically how the teams have negotiated, comprised, or agreed to play. When Knight refused to play home/home, KY gave in and agreed to a neutral site contract. That is an option for IU just as it was for KY previously. A point which Cal stated today in his presser.

 

This is a case of both coaches doing what they think is best for their schools, which is what they are paid to do.

 

There ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys there's only Cal and Crean and they just disagree. - it could even be a song :)

 

:lol: Bravo, sir! :clap:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the site you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Policies.