HOW BILL SOLVED THE RUBIK'S CUBE
-
@HighEliteMajor careful! Saying it’s all luck will get you in trouble! Lol
We can’t hang on to 08 forever, even though it was perhaps our best KU hoops memory. Sooner or later, Self will need to get the job done again. Can’t keep making excuses - at some point we need results.
-
I don’t have a problem with @elpoyo posting his hate for KU. Yes he’s never made one positive comment about KU.
I just wish he would announce the real team/school he loves.
By all means come talk and play the game, but at least be fair and tell us real KU fans who you root for.
I don’t know about other KU fans but I have a hard time taking someone seriously when they claim they are KU fan, yet they never have anything positive to say.
Smells like a troll to me. In fact smells like a Missouri fan to me. Yet all I ask is tell me who you really root for, and then lets have the conversation or debate.
I think it’s fair enough.
-
Come on @HighEliteMajor, we both know that @elpoyo comes to this board only occasionally and mostly to make outrageous statements and to get a reaction.
Now, you are a smart fellow…are you saying the the NCAA does not involve a fair amount of luck? If you say no, you are being disingenuous.
Also, how is it A coaches fault when he has a good game plan and the team picks the wrong time to have an off game? Take the last game of the season against Oregon, KU shot 5 of 25 or 20% from the 3 point, 4 of 10 or 40% in the first half and a putrid 1 of 15 or 6.67% in the second half. When is the last time the team shot so poorly from the 3?..and most of the misses were not even contested shots but wide open ones that the various players made routinely during the season…how is this Coach Self’s fault? I am sure that if Coach Self could have played he would have shot better than that.
I have always maintained that if from the Elite 8 forward the format is switched to 2 of 3 or 3 of 5 the end result would be quite different. KU probably does not win in 1988 but likely wins at least 2 or 3 more titles in other years, maybe even this past season.
By the way, one man’ garbage is another man’s treasure.
-
@HighEliteMajor Glad you’re back once again joining in the pathetic fun. I’ll wager Elpoyo really missed your hiatus.Yee haw boys sic em
-
@JayHawkFanToo it’s never the coach, yet his teams, which means different players same result, keep having their worst offensive performance of the year in the elite eight. 07, 08, 11, 16 and 17. We got fortunate in 08. You know why they played better in 2012 in the elite eight? They weren’t tight. When Bill doesn’t feel tight, his team isn’t tight. Those terrible performances keep happening for a reason. Maybe this year will be different…
-
@JayHawkFanToo Flattery is always good
for soothing a bruised ego …
-
@globaljaybird I didn’t say it was fun, just pathetic.
@JayHawkFanToo Every basketball game entails a “fair amount” of luck. So that really means nothing. I know we disagree on the “luck” factor in the NCAA tourney. A matter of degrees separate our perspectives. Folks that favor a coach’s perspective tend to be more in the “luck” camp. Those that tend to be more critical of coaches tend to be more in the “less luck” camp.
The tourney results speak for themselves and prove that great teams and programs win titles, with few exceptions. In the last 9 seasons, Duke, UNC, and UK account for 5 titles. And KU won the title the year before that, and Florida had gone back to back preceding KU, and UNC won in 2005, UConn 2004, etc. It’s a large amount of other stuff, beyond “luck.” When we win the next title, the narrative changes. If we win this season, suddenly we’ve won 2 titles in 11 seasons. It’s that sudden. But we have to win it. I defend @elpoyo because of the lack of civility of those who respond to him – meaning personal attacks.
We are national title deficient among blue bloods, and it is always a burr in the saddle. We went 20 years without one, now have gone another 10. I, like others, grow tired of the fawning over Big 12 titles. It’s not a substitute for the ultimate prize.
@DoubleDD Some people may be fans, but may only see the negative, or may only choose to comment when something irritates them. That doesn’t mean they are not a fan of the KU or the program. It may be annoying. Some folks think everything that can go wrong, will go wrong – and some are right (see the MU fan base). And all of the fatalists that get anxious at the start of every NCAA tourney, that somehow, someway, we’ll lose before our seed line, have only been wrong a few times since Bill Self took over (Self’s regular season success raising that tourney bar, of course).
-
@JayHawkFanToo If the Elite 8 losses are bad luck, explain why KU has had their lowest scoring game in that round in 5 of those 7 games. That’s not bad luck, that’s a trend.
-
I’m curious. It was said when HCBS is tight his teams play tight. Is there a source we can go to that will tell us his level of tightness prior to a game so that we may prepare ourselves by lowering our level of expectation thereby reducing our anxiety level? Perhaps an unknown location on the KU Athletics website that receives data packets from a unit attached to his sphincter. I know my heart would appreciate such info.
-
It’s more just watching, especially how they shoot on the offensive end. You can tell the team is pressing in certain games, trying to make plays out of nothing. Against Purdue, KU was drilling shots, laughing and smiling, having a great time just playing ball. Against Oregon, they looked like they were locked in a phone booth with a tiger. That’s visible in their play.
-
Whether he choked the first two Elite 8 flameouts is debatable. But after that the monkey has been on his back, EVERYONE feels the pressure.
Next year, he needs to come out and run about 10 set plays in a row. Nothing that the other team could have scouted that entire week. Throw off the other coach and team and then lets get into our normal flow. Or even come out in a zone or something.
Either way, the psychology behind it is interesting. We are expected to win that game. So instead of being excited like most elite 8 teams, we come out scared. We have pressure most other teams don’t. But, it comes with the Blue Blood territory.
-
I actually think he needs less structure in the Elite Eight. Let the guys go play ball. Self seems to want to control every aspect of the outcome in big games, rather than letting the talent on his team decide the outcome. If you say to guys, hey, I trust you - go play our game, they can relax and play ball. If you tighten up, they do too because they are trying to avoid mistakes.
-
Better competition? You can look at any data and come up with all kinds of trend and coincidences, most of which don’t mean a thing.
Have you ever read the list of similarities between Lincoln and Kennedy? At first sight it seems hard to believe that there could be so many coincidences but when you look at it in more detail it is really not that big of a deal and a number of coincidences can be found for any two people and it has even been debunked by Snopes.
Likewise, you can take any number of stats and arrange them to fit any desired outcome. Remember what Will Rogers said…there are lies, damn lies and statistics.
-
@HighEliteMajor the problem is when the only measure used is a national title, then you miss the genius of bringing in experienced players in order to prevent a full rebuild year. Now, if I had posed the initial question of : “will the 3 transfers lead us to the national title”??? then I would understand el putrid’s stupidity, and blatant attack ( for the 10,000th time) on our program. Here is the definition of what el putrid did:
In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion,[3] often for the troll’s amusement.
See how the entire gist of the thread went from complimenting Coach Self on his transfers, to running down Coach Self for not winning more national titles?
-
@justanotherfan I thought he did that this last year. And our guards minus Frank all got tight. DG passed up several open 3s he took all season long.
-
@KUSTEVE No one said the “only measure” – it is, however, the “ultimate” prize. You can see the difference, right? One can appreciate and enjoy what we have done, but be extremely dissatisfied by our lagging behind the other blue bloods on national titles.
But now you criticize @elpoyo because, in your opinion, he didn’t respond either directly to your topic or in the manner you preferred (suggesting “stupidity”)? You said Self solved something. @elpoyo said until we win a title, we can’t say anything is solved. He’s right.
I’ve posted enough threads that change or morph into something not intended. It happens. It’s discussion. But the NC issue seems a reasonable tangent here.
@brooksmd It is legendary that Bill Self appears tight in tourney games. Much comment on that. Vs. Oregon, I recall both Newell and Tait posting on twitter that Self seemed relaxed. I buy that that. He seemed more relaxed all season to me. I guess my take is that there was nothing vs. Oregon that I saw that might create tightness. Other times, when he was ranting and flopping, and all that stuff we’ve seen, maybe more so.
Most of the time, though, as @justanotherfan referenced, a team reflects the coach much of the time. I do think that feeling prepared, have answers to the opposition (which we didn’t have vs. Nova), can help there. Jay Wright had a plan; we adjusted; Wright countered. And it ended there. That might tighten up a player a big – when they’re jumping our hand-offs, preventing normal entry passes, etc.
-
@JayHawkFanToo Bill Self has coached in 4 Final Four games, that’s supposed to be even better competition than the Elite 8, yet KU hasn’t had the scoring issues in those rounds they’ve had in the Elite 8.
You can try and justify it however you want, but it doesn’t change the reality that when KU reaches the Elite 8 (50% of the time under Self), the odds say KU is going have their worst scoring game of the season that night.
-
@KUSTEVE All it takes to start a pissing match is one d@%k… or who knows what else it may prefer? Anyway, that’s the kinda stuff they expect on the old site - El poyo trollo has a track record that belongs anywhere else, not here. And he even has a buddy or two doesn’t he? Absence doesn’t always make the heart grow fonder …
-
the off-season is too long. is that the gist of the this so far?
-
@BeddieKU23 Svi plays in like two weeks. At least that will give us something…
-
@Kcmatt7 I think he’s played in some exhibition games, saw some box scores somewhere.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 He has played in 4 or 5. A couple more to go, then the tournament. Then he plays for KU in Italy. After that, in late August and early September, he plays for the Ukrainian team in a FIBA Euro tournament taking place in Israel and I think another country.
Svi is definitely going to come back with some major experience this fall. Hope it proves helpful!
(This is all discussed in a Gary Bedore article in that newspaper you have, I believe, sworn never to read… thus, I have not included a link.)
-
@HighEliteMajor against oregon, from the tip, our guys did not have the same energy and intensity as oregon. It was painfully obvious. Twice now a zone or matchup zone has contributed to our elite eight loss - you know, the thing bill doesn’t believe in. It would be nice to see him use something to that effect.
-
@JayHawkFanToo Great post!
-
If not for a BS foul called on Graham against Villanova and 2 pick fouls on Jackson against Oregon, we could just as easily be back to back National Champions. Losing sucks and it always will. However, we win more than we lose. These setbacks will make winning our next one all the more sweeter.
-
@brooksmd Perhaps one of our famed & supremely qualified alter ego buckets coaches would politely & galantly probe a probiscous near that scphinter to take one for the team & rescue a few at risk from such peril? Anyone come to mind?
-
@globaljaybird The head, and attached probiscus, which comes to mind most quickly for nomination to undertake such a probe is, I am afraid, previously engaged in a deep self-examination of a similar nature.
-
-
@mayjay @Crimsonorblue22 Are there any box scores to those exhibition games?
-
@Kcmatt7 I didn’t see any, not sure if Gary wrote the article? I know he only scored 4 in one game.
-
You can try and justify it however you want, but it doesn’t change the reality that when KU reaches the Elite 8 (50% of the time under Self), the odds say KU is going have their worst scoring game of the season that night.
I don’t think so. I can count at least 5 games last season when KU scored less points. I have not checked other years but I am sure the result will be similar. Hyperbole will not make your case stronger.
-
@Kcmatt7 No box scores. He has been in 4 games vs France, scoring 13, 4, 22, and 4 (if memory serves correctly). On Sunday he scored 25 with 7 rebs vs Turkey. This weekend starts a 3 game exhib tourney in Italy. His shooting has seemed to be in the 25 to 35% range.
The info on the 1st 4 games is from Bedore’s article about Svi’s reaction to the draft. The rest is from an add-on to an article by Bedore about Jeff Graves starting a women’s minor league bb team in KC.
-
As long as it does not involve politics (they have a deep liberal bias), Snopes is not that bad. But why listen to me…or Snopes, do your own research and reach your own conclusions; at least I provide some links to support my statements, what do you provide other than hot air?
-
JayHawkFanToo said:
You can try and justify it however you want, but it doesn’t change the reality that when KU reaches the Elite 8 (50% of the time under Self), the odds say KU is going have their worst scoring game of the season that night.
I don’t think so. I can count at least 5 games last season when KU scored less points. I have not checked other years but I am sure the result will be similar. Hyperbole will not make your case stronger.
It’s not hyperbole, KU’s lowest single game point total has come in the Elite 8 five times under Bill Self. KU is 1-4 in those games with Davidson in 2008 being the only win. The 5 times KU has put up a season low in points in the Elite 8 are 2007, 2008, 2011, 2016, and 2017. You can dispute it all you want and claim hyperbole all you want. You can claim to @jaybate-1-0 that you use facts all you want, but when you claim you can name 5 games KU scored fewer than the 60 points they did against Oregon, you better be able to back it up which I know you can’t because the schedule doesn’t lie, and doesn’t support your claim in any way, shape, or form.
Here’s the link to KU’s schedules in those 7 years. Prove me wrong, prove it’s hyperbole and not reality that Bill Self and KU have not had their lowest single game point total 5 times in 7 Elite 8 appearances. I’ll post the link to KU’s schedule all 7 of the seasons KU went to the Elite 8 or deeper and you can look for yourself to see if it’s hyperbole or reality.
2016-17 schedule: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/team/schedule/_/id/2305/kansas-jayhawks
Show me where KU scored less than the 60 they put up against Oregon?
2015-16 schedule: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/team/schedule/_/id/2305/year/2016
Show me where KU put less than the 59 they put up against Villanova?
2011-12 schedule: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/team/schedule/_/id/2305/year/2012
This is one of the two Elite 8 appearances KU did not have their lowest scoring game of the year, that happened in the Sweet 16 against NC State.
2010-11 schedule: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/team/schedule/_/id/2305/year/2011
Show me where KU scored less than the 61 they did against VCU?
2007-08 schedule: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/team/schedule/_/id/2305/year/2008
KU also only scored 59 against USC so the E8 game against Davidson is tied for the lowest that year, but still the lowest.
Show me where KU scored less than the 59 they put up against Davidson and USC?
2006-07 schedule: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/team/schedule/_/id/2305/year/2007
Show me where KU scored less than the 55 they put up against UCLA?
2003-04 schedule: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/team/schedule/_/id/2305/year/2004
The only other year besides 2012 where KU did not have a season low in the Elite 8. KU’s lowest scoring game that year was against Nebraska in Lincoln.
There’s all 7 of KU’s Elite 8 or better seasons under Self. I’ve given you the point total KU scored in each of the 5 Elite 8 games KU had their lowest scoring game of the season and I even told you which game was KU’s lowest in the 2 years it wasn’t the E8.
I’ll even give you KU’s worst scoring game in the other 7 seasons in which KU didn’t reach the Elite 8.
2014-15: Kentucky (Neutral court) - 40 points
2013-14: San Diego St. and Stanford (Round of 32) - 57 points
2012-13: @TCU - 55 points
2009-10: Memphis (Neutral court) - 57 points
2008-09: UMass (Sprint Center) and @Missouri - 60 points
2005-06: Arizona (Neutral court) - 49 points
2004-05: Nebraska - 59 points
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 I really like this post. It is backed up with a lot of facts about KU’s struggles in the Elite 8. Very interesting (and a bit scary).
One of the things that I do find interesting is how well our guys have played in the Final 4 and Finals. To me Bill Self coached teams have looked extremely tight (and occasionally choked) in Elite 8 games but have looked anything but that in the Final 4 and in the actual Final. The thrashing of UNC was the opposite of looking tight. The great comeback win over Ohio St. was all guts. The epic win against Memphis was one of the all time displays of late game confidence in the history of the tournament. Even our “almost” comeback against a far superior Kentucky in 2012 was a display of grit and determination that was not remotely derailed by being nervous.
So, what is it? Is it that the Final 4 is simply the measure of a successful season and that everything after that is gravy? I certainly don’t know the answer but I do know that Bill Self teams (like all great teams) have days that they look tight and choke and they have days where they play college basketball at the highest level and achieve greatness.
-
mayjay said:
@globaljaybird The head, and attached probiscus, which comes to mind most quickly for nomination to undertake such a probe is, I am afraid, previously engaged in a deep self-examination of a similar nature.
A real shame, sure they could most accurately & professionally sniff this one out, pompous or not.
-
So: you DO believe Snopes!
Howling!
No, wait! What am I thinking. I’m all hot air. You said it so it has to be true. Holy cow, I’m not worthy. I feel so insecure and submissive. I can’t even stop dry washing. I am wracked with self doubt. My anti-perspirant is failing me. I am full of hot air. You said so, so it has to be true. I can barely look at myself in the mirror. Hot air. All is lost. Woe, woe, woe.
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
- Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it – especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
- Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used to show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the ‘How dare you!’ gambit.
- Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such ‘arguable rumors’. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a ‘wild rumor’ from a ‘bunch of kids on the Internet’ which can have no basis in fact.
- Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
- Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary ‘attack the messenger’ ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as ‘kooks’, ‘right-wing’, ‘liberal’, ‘left-wing’, ‘terrorists’, ‘conspiracy buffs’, ‘radicals’, ‘militia’, ‘racists’, ‘religious fanatics’, ‘sexual deviates’, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
- Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain critical reasoning – simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.
- Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
- Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough ‘jargon’ and ‘minutia’ to illustrate you are ‘one who knows’, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
- Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
- Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man – usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues – so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
- Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the ‘high road’ and ‘confess’ with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made – but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, ‘just aren’t so.’ Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly ‘call for an end to the nonsense’ because you have already ‘done the right thing.’ Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for ‘coming clean’ and ‘owning up’ to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
- Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
- Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.
- Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
- Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
- Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.
- Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can ‘argue’ with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
- Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how ‘sensitive they are to criticism.’
- Ignore facts presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the ‘play dumb’ rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
- False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations – as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
- Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
- Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
- Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
- Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
- Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen. Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
- Avoidance They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.
- Selectivity They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.
- Coincidental They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.
- Teamwork They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
- Anti-conspiratorial They almost always have disdain for ‘conspiracy theorists’ and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a News Group (NG) focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain. Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.
- Artificial Emotions An odd kind of ‘artificial’ emotionalism and an unusually thick skin – an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the ‘image’ and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It’s just a job, and they often seem unable to ‘act their role in character’ as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later – an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game – where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.
- Inconsistent There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat ‘freudian’, so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within. I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I’m not aware of too many Navy pilots who don’t have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.
- Time Constant There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation: ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT - FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth. –anon.
25 ways, yeah baby!
-
You are right and I stand corrected. I misread the score of the KU- Oregon game.
I have no problem admitting when I am wrong or post incorrect information. Not the first time and probably not the last either.
-
mayjay said:
@globaljaybird The head, and attached probiscus, which comes to mind most quickly for nomination to undertake such a probe is, I am afraid, previously engaged in a deep self-examination of a similar nature.
I see what you did there…
-
@mayjay Now this is a chippy thread right here.
-
BeddieKU23 said:
the off-season is too long. is that the gist of the this so far?
Didn’t start like that. KUSTEVE started a pretty decent topic but it morphed that way. Some seem to be very challenged in the productivity category. But I must admit, trolls can be amusing when a clever adversary gives them a thorough scalding. @jaybate-1-0 has always been quite accomplished at that.
-
@globaljaybird
He had a really good starting thread/discussion point. I fully agree that Self hit a home run with the cycle of players we have leaving the program between this past year and this upcoming season. Landing 3 of the most sought after transfers that were not only high school Top 100 kids but studs at the College level already adds even more to it. We don’t have to use the brain too hard to understand these guys are starters waiting in the wings. Whether they help us win championships which a lot of this conversation went towards is another story/unwritten conclusion at this point. I know one thing, they certainly give us a foundation for 2018/19 that Self can work with.
And its clear after 2 + months of no KU games that we are already starving for games. The off-season discussions always veer off the wagon and have no balance because there are no games to fill in the gaps.
-
@Kcmatt7 Chippy can be more fun when people try to be humorous, or creative, or informative–at least something besides “You stupid moron.” “Jane, you ignorant slut” was a funny parody on SNL in the 70’s, but that type of attack is too common in modern digital fora.
Of course, I come from a generation that thinks proofreading is worth it all the time, so maybe I expect too much!
-
@mayjay Heaven forbid it’s a case of ophthalmologic rectomitis … Sometimes that is incurable.
-
@BeddieKU23 and @globaljaybird
Two issues need to be kept straight about recruiting.
A. Self’s short-term, annual, shifting tactical brilliance at ad hoc work arounds to apparent recruiting regime dynamics that annually deny him a 5-star/OAD freshman signee at the 1 and 5, and appears to be starting to deny him credible D1 (4-star and higher) freshman signees, so that Self appears to be trending toward producing fewer first round draft choices on average than UK, UNC, and Duke, and perhaps contributing to a possible ceiling of the Elite Eight for KU Carney, er, Tourney runs.
B. Self’s and KU’s long term, strategic problem of not being able to compete on a level, recruiting playing field with UK, UNC, and Duke, at least at the 1 and 5 positions.
We can laud Coach Self for the genius of his short term tactical work arounds, but we must also continue to call attention to the long term strategic problem, or Self and KU are likely to be inexorably marginalized from competing for first National Titles, and then increasingly for conference championships, after KU is forced into junior member status (with concomitant loss in conference political influence) from a move to another Power conference, like the Big Ten.
It is CRUCIAL that KU NOT MOVE into another Power Conference, especially the legacy-intense Big Ten, alone. If it moves alone, it will be doomed and KU Basketball dominance will within a very short time be consigned to ash heap of D1 history. Why?
Think about what has happened to two dominant basketball school’s athletic programs that jumped conferences: Syracuse, Louisville. The move to a new conference leaves them essentially junior members in conferences that will no longer fight to protect them from subversion. The other member schools in the new conference do not NEED the newcomer, no matter how good it is. In fact, the legacy schools are better off if the newcomer is brought down a notch, so as not to upset the legacy alliances and order, as much.
And what immediately befell them? Both were immediately clocked for wrong doing that was, perhaps, kind of a way of life for them elsewhere, and for which they were once apparently enabled due their relatively greater importance in rank at prior conference stops. Compare what happened to Syracuse and Louisville in their new home–the ACC, with what happened to long-time ACC member UNC. At the rate things appear to be going in the Easygate case, UNC might be handed a middling infraction for compromising a substantial portion of entire degree granting institution of higher education, in, oh, say, about the same century JFK and 9-11 are fully declassified. LIKE MAYBE NEVER!
Loyal, but in my view, perhaps somewhat naive KU fans will probably respond that KU is no Syracuse, or Louisville. KU tries to do it the right way and so has nothing to worry about in a move to, say, the Big Ten. No skeletons in KU’s closet, they will think and write. I wish that trying to do it the right way were enough to protect KU basketball from predators after a change of conference. But I strongly doubt that it will be.
Amateurism in college basketball has long made D1 an imperfect sports business, where many that have commented in investigative articles, or books, indicate that it is a place where most bend rules, and the difference between the good guys and the bad guys is probably a matter of who is trying to do it the right way, and who is NOT even trying.
As MSU’s Jud Heathcote was reported once to have said after his retirement in a book about basketball recruiting I have mentioned, many times, but which title escapes me this morning, back in Heathcote’s career, it used to be routine for veteran coaches to order new, young assistant coaches, to engage in recruiting activity that explicitly broke NCAA rules, as an initiation into the coaching profession, so that the new young assistants were compromised and understood the code of professional silence on rules that were violated routinely by all programs, good, or rogue. There has never been any credible evidence presented that D1 basketball has been systematically cleaned up since Heathcote’s time. If anything, recruiting behavior in D1 has probably mutated in the way in which rules are bent and broken, in an era of fantastically more money involved, and it at least appears that the NCAA has loosened, rather than strengthened its policing of recruiting.
So: what am I trying to say?
KU may be the cleanest run program in D1, but the probability is, given the long, sordid history of D1 basketball recruiting, that would merely make KU the lepper with the most fingers, when it moved to a new power conference.
And in a new power conference, KU would be a nice budgetary addition to the new conference’s bottom line and some expansion in politic influence in the political alliance regional political economy that sports conferences are analogs of.
But on the level of sports competition, it just wouldn’t matter much to the new conference, if KU basketball were successful, or not. KU rarely wins a national championship. KU now appears destined rarely to reach a Final Four, if apparent current recruiting regime dynamics are sustained. Thus, KU’s value to, say, the Big Ten, would not reside in KU winning conference titles, displacing legacy members upper level finishes in conference and in NCAA births, and generally remaining a force in college basketball. Mostly KU’s value to the Big Ten would be:
a.) cherry picking KU would weaken the Big 12 and leads to its dissolution, thus allowing the Big Ten TV market to expand into the void and up TV revenues for conference members; and
b.) a new junior revenue generator that would be largely powerless politically in the face of the legacy power alliances within the Big Ten; and
c.) enable the Big Ten states regional political economy alliance to extend political economic influence into infrastructure and regulatory issues and votes in the Great Plains.
And there are probably other political chits that I am not insider enough to recognize.
But the point is: the Big Ten doesn’t want KU for its basketball program. If KU were to stay dominant in basketball, well, that would just be icing on the cake. As a result, the Big Ten legacy power schools–Michigan, Ohio State, Michigan State, Wisconsin, and Indiana are NOT going to fall on their swords for KU Basketball…EVER.
If KU moves alone into minority status in a Big Ten division, it will, like Nebraska, be doomed to junior membership in a conference with dominant members strong enough to play last man standing on every significant issue that comes along.
The Big Ten won’t be irrationally parochial and mean spirited. They just won’t enable KU as much as the Big 12 has, despite its Texas catering.
My idea of a great Big Ten move would be for enough Big 12 teams to jump at once to create one former Big 12 majority division in the Big Ten. That dog would hunt for KU. But going there alone, or with one other member, is like asking to become a permanent pledge in a fraternity house. No thank you.
Rock Chalk!
-
Think about what has happened to two dominant basketball school’s athletic programs that jumped conferences: Syracuse, Louisville. The move to a new conference leaves them essentially junior members in conferences that will no longer fight to protect them from subversion.
I am not sure what you mean by Louisville and Syracuse becoming junior members in the ACC. Syracuse has not been elite, dominant or even good for a while now. Louisville was a good program and still is but it was never better than UNC or Duke. The NCAA violation and corresponding sanctions would have happened regardless of conference affiliation, in a smaller conference, perhaps the penalties would have been greater.
Louisville finished 3rd in the ACC behind UNC and Florida State and ahead of Notre Dame (another newcomer who is doing fine in the new conference) and yes, Duke.; so much for being Junior Member. Syracuse finished in the bottom half as expected; I don’t believe anyone thought it would be a top program in the ACC.
Maryland, who left the ACC for the Big Ten finishes third in the conference behind Purdue and Wisconsin and ahead of traditional powers MU and MSU, Indiana and the Ohio State to name a few.
Missouri was dumpster waiting to catch fire…which it did after leaving the Big 12 for the SEC but it had nothing to do with the move but with the condition the basketball programs was left by Haith, the departure of Pinkel and the school implosion after the Ferguson riots and the consequent mishandling of racial unrest by an inept administration and the ensuing drop in enrollment; none of that can be blamed on the move to the SEC.
-
I am not sure what you mean about not being sure about what you believe I mean.
Let me look down my list of leads for thread cracking and disinforming…
Are you serious about what you say your are serious about? Umm, no.
You have apparently not been keeping up. Ummm, no.
Are you full of hot air? Um, no.
At least I try to present some facts. Um, no.
What are you thinking? Um, no.
Hmmmm, lemme see, I’ve got this site destabilization and disinformation handbook in another window that I want to check. Be patient. Lemmme see, here, uh, what, uh, ah, there it is…
I am not sure what you mean by…
There we go!
I am not sure what you mean by…but I believe you know what I mean, but I could be wrong. Right?
Howling!
Just kidding around!
25 baby.
Let’s see, uh, what leeeeetle, teeeeeny, eeeeeeeens, weeensy things happened to Boeheim and Pitino recently?
-
buffer 1
-
buffer 2
-
I’m pretty excited. This is the first time I recall getting an upvote for a numbered buffer!!!
