NCHoosier32 Posted February 4, 2018 Report Share Posted February 4, 2018 can't wait! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoB2011 Posted February 4, 2018 Report Share Posted February 4, 2018 On 2/2/2018 at 10:15 PM, Hoosrnight said: I won’t watch it. I’m one of the people that still loves Coach Knight! Yes, he had some issues, but overall he was a good man. He and my dad are basically the same person. Both great men with flaws! No, he isn't. Good people don't do what he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoB2011 Posted February 4, 2018 Report Share Posted February 4, 2018 On 2/2/2018 at 11:09 PM, Montana Hoosier said: Would you have rather not had Knight at all? Answer with perspective and reflection. Yes. https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/college/indiana/2016/01/25/what-if-bob-knight-never-coached-indiana-alternate-story-line/79090870/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rico Posted February 4, 2018 Report Share Posted February 4, 2018 1 hour ago, KoB2011 said: Yes. https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/college/indiana/2016/01/25/what-if-bob-knight-never-coached-indiana-alternate-story-line/79090870/ An interesting read. One I thoroughly enjoyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCHoosier32 Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 can't imagine how people could say we would have rather not had Knight at all. also just because you do some bad things doesn't make you a bad person. tough to speak in absolutes when it comes to that. pretty sure we have all sinned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoosierBGH Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 55 minutes ago, NCHoosier32 said: can't imagine how people could say we would have rather not had Knight at all. also just because you do some bad things doesn't make you a bad person. tough to speak in absolutes when it comes to that. pretty sure we have all sinned Yes, I could see taking that stance if one were asking that question about Paterno at PSU or the enablers at MSU(those proven to have known, not just suspected). I'd even take it a step farther and say I could even see where such a stance would be justified for a cheater like Wooden. Frankly, putting one's hand or hands around another man's neck should at most result in an immediate physical response from the person being man handled not the angst and hand wringing that it has inspired. Speaking of Wooden, I don't recall seeing a 30 for 30 on his rampant cheating instead there is one extolling his ill gotten success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rico Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 1 hour ago, hoosierBGH said: Speaking of Wooden, I don't recall seeing a 30 for 30 on his rampant cheating instead there is one extolling his ill gotten success. I am pretty sure there was a episode on the subject. But I cannot find it, however I did come across this on ESPN........ http://www.espn.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/12227/the-other-part-of-the-wooden-legacy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoosierBGH Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 3 hours ago, rico said: I am pretty sure there was a episode on the subject. But I cannot find it, however I did come across this on ESPN........ http://www.espn.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/12227/the-other-part-of-the-wooden-legacy The only one I recall was the favorable Wizard of Westwood one, though I could be mistaken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rico Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 4 minutes ago, hoosierBGH said: The only one I recall was the favorable Wizard of Westwood one, though I could be mistaken. Well they do make him out to be some sort of demi-God. I tried to find the interview with Digger Phelps with no avail. Digger was talking about what was going on at UCLA. But we are comparing apples to oranges. Wooden and Knight are two different animals. Wooden was violating NCAA rules while Bob ran a clean program but had anger issues on and off the court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoB2011 Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 6 hours ago, hoosierBGH said: Yes, I could see taking that stance if one were asking that question about Paterno at PSU or the enablers at MSU(those proven to have known, not just suspected). I'd even take it a step farther and say I could even see where such a stance would be justified for a cheater like Wooden. Frankly, putting one's hand or hands around another man's neck should at most result in an immediate physical response from the person being man handled not the angst and hand wringing that it has inspired. Speaking of Wooden, I don't recall seeing a 30 for 30 on his rampant cheating instead there is one extolling his ill gotten success. Yeah, because Neil was the only person abused by Bob Knight. Are we really saying people at MSU or PSU are bad because they're sexual abusers, but Knight isn't bad because he was a different type of abuser? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoB2011 Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 7 hours ago, NCHoosier32 said: can't imagine how people could say we would have rather not had Knight at all. also just because you do some bad things doesn't make you a bad person. tough to speak in absolutes when it comes to that. pretty sure we have all sinned Taking the religious undertones of sin out of it, it is pretty silly to compare abusing people to other bad deeds such as cursing or checking out a woman you aren't married to (and many sins wouldn't be considered morally wrong if not for religion). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoosierBGH Posted February 6, 2018 Report Share Posted February 6, 2018 16 hours ago, KoB2011 said: Yeah, because Neil was the only person abused by Bob Knight. Are we really saying people at MSU or PSU are bad because they're sexual abusers, but Knight isn't bad because he was a different type of abuser? Do your really not understand that there are different degrees of abuse and levels of seriousness? Only someone severely lacking in perspective would truly view what Knight did to be anywhere near the realm of sexual abuse in severity or seriousness. Knight was an A-hole and a bully but to equate him to what went on at PSU and MSU only lessens the horror and severity of those two events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoB2011 Posted February 6, 2018 Report Share Posted February 6, 2018 14 hours ago, hoosierBGH said: Do your really not understand that there are different degrees of abuse and levels of seriousness? Only someone severely lacking in perspective would truly view what Knight did to be anywhere near the realm of sexual abuse in severity or seriousness. Knight was an A-hole and a bully but to equate him to what went on at PSU and MSU only lessens the horror and severity of those two events. I completely agree there are levels, I never said otherwise. What level of abuse can one participate in to still be considered a good guy? You apparently think some abusers are good people, so how much abuse do you deem morally permissable? How much abuse would you allow your child or spouse to be subjected to before you decided the person abusing them was no longer a good guy? My point was only that if you're an abuser, or at least an unchanged and unrepentant abuser, you aren't a good person. I never said he was as bad as Sandusky. I mean, you said you can see calling John Wooden a bad guy because he turned a blind eye to the victimless crime of cheating but you can't call Knight a bad guy because he actually abused people physically and mentally. That seems incredibly backwards to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoHoosier Posted February 7, 2018 Report Share Posted February 7, 2018 48 minutes ago, KoB2011 said: I completely agree there are levels, I never said otherwise. What level of abuse can one participate on to still be considered a good guy? You apparently thing some abusers are good people, so how much abuse do you deem morally permissable? How much abuse would you allow your child or spouse to be subjected to before you decided the person abusing them was no longer a good guy? My point was only that of you're an abuser, or at least an unchanged and unrepentant abuser, you aren't a good person. I never said he was as bad as Sandusky. I mean, you said you can see calling John Wooden a bad guy because he turned a blind eye to the victimless crime of cheating but you can't call Knight a bad guy because he actually abused people physically and mentally. That seems incredibly backwards to me. Reminds me of the friend that has a verbally, emotionally, and mentally abusive boyfriend. When you tell her that she deserves better, she speaks regarding her last relationship, "at least he doesn't beat me". I agree, there are differing levels of abuse. Abuse is still abuse and never ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.