Taken me a few weeks to start this…

[Steubenhoosier]

I watched the ESPN 30 on 30 about the last days of Bob Knight as HC of IUMBB. It re-aired about a month ago, and I apologize if this is rehashing old conversations.

At first, I thought this was going to be a hack job on Knight and IU. Done by a sports reporter from CNN. Who knew that CNN even had a sports reporter. In some ways it was what my preconceived ideas thought. It did a great job of portraying Knight as he was, late in his IU tenure. Charlie Miller, a staunch RMK advocate, told a  story not too flattering to Knight, and his use of toilet paper to get across his opinion about how his team was playing . 
 

Sorry for the long message, but the show got me to thinking about RMK, the disciples who believe he could do no wrong, and how the fan base seems to be forever divided over his legacy.

Just thought that this might be a good topic for discussion during the off season 

 

[Inequality]

One of my brothers, who was once a writer for ESPN is now a writer for CNN. Both of which I personally consider perfidious garbage. I haven’t seen this write up but I’m going to assume by its origin, it’s of the same.

[Zlinedavid]

From the mid 70s-early 90s, you could make a case that he was THE best in the game, both from an in-game tactical standpoint and a strategic one. His methods worked. He knew it. Everyone else knew it.

The issue became that both basketball and society began to change, and Bobby didn’t. Note that the words “good” nor “bad” are in the previous sentence in regards to the aforementioned changes or in regards to RMK not changing. The simple fact was that the world that Knight had perfected his methods in didn’t exist anymore. 
 

I’d say the word “complicated” is perfect to describe Knight’s legacy. As a fan and alumnus, I’m proud to have Bob Knight attached to the history of IU, but I’ll also admit that the man had his flaws (as we all do). The thing with RMK is that any criticism that he may draw is all regarding HIM. It’s all 100% his actions and decisions directly. We’ll never have to worry about a Paterno/Penn State situation where it involved a cover up. RMK never claimed to be a saint, and he would let you know where he stood very clearly. His methods may have been questionable at times, but his moral compass never was. 

[MoyeCowbell]

13 hours ago, Inequality said:

One of my brothers, who was once a writer for ESPN is now a writer for CNN. Both of which I personally consider perfidious garbage. I haven’t seen this write up but I’m going to assume by its origin, it’s of the same.

May I ask, what's the point of judging a book by its cover? This story/article could very well be written poorly. It *could* be the worst piece of journalism in the history of the world. But if you haven't read it, and *only* made assumptions about it based off of where it came from, aren't limiting possible outside perspectives and insights?

Genuinely curious.

[IUFLA]

I don't believe I've ever met an IU fan who loved Bob Knight who didn't acknowledge his warts. 

 

[5fouls]

7 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

I don't believe I've ever met an IU fan who loved Bob Knight who didn't acknowledge his warts. 

 

I know he had one on his left thumb, but I never saw any others.  

[IUFLA]

5 hours ago, 5fouls said:

I know he had one on his left thumb, but I never saw any others.  

I knew I was teeing one up for somebody