[Rosiak's Blog] MU not interested in Lucious

[Benny B]

PRN...you're right...I don't deal with the Big Ten, or the NCAA, or ESPN, or Fox Sports, etc, etc all the time, sometimes on a daily basis during certain times of the year.  You're so right. I would assume that you realize that sources don't have to always be at the school....but for the record, I still have several good friends there as well as a few at UW-madison in their athletic department.   

Chicos... it is quite often that you post "inside-information" from your various sources, but when called out on who your source is, we get the standard "I can't tell you who told me because it's a secret" type of response.

Do your "sources" know that from time to time you're publicizing information they've relayed to you in confidence?  It seems to me that if they would be so upset with you naming them, that they'd still be upset if you were repeating their words even if unattributed.

[4everwarriors]

Is anyone else ready to scream like a girl?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Chicos... it is quite often that you post "inside-information" from your various sources, but when called out on who your source is, we get the standard "I can't tell you who told me because it's a secret" type of response.

Do your "sources" know that from time to time you're publicizing information they've relayed to you in confidence?  It seems to me that if they would be so upset with you naming them, that they'd still be upset if you were repeating their words even if unattributed.

That would be the reason why you don't post who the sources are...right?  That's the whole point of sources.  When source gives a reporter something knowing full well they will report it, they do so with assumption the source isn't stated.  Correct?  No different here.  And yes, some of them absolutely know it may go here or CS. 

It's no different than someone here saying Crean will get fired this year or next year or whatever.  I've spoken to enough people at IU, in the sports world, at the Big Ten, etc, to know that's absolute crap.  I know what the parameters that were put on their team in terms of recruiting early on.  Am I going to come straight out and tell you who those sources are?  Nope, but I'll be collecting several bets next year that will show how right I was when I made those bets.


4ever...only TC screams like a girl.   

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

Chicos... it is quite often that you post "inside-information" from your various sources, but when called out on who your source is, we get the standard "I can't tell you who told me because it's a secret" type of response.

Do your "sources" know that from time to time you're publicizing information they've relayed to you in confidence?  It seems to me that if they would be so upset with you naming them, that they'd still be upset if you were repeating their words even if unattributed.
[/quote
It's all a staggering load of bullsh*t. I am quite sure the folks at the "Big Ten, or the NCAA, or ESPN, or Fox Sports" are talking about Marquette's recruiting practices with some stooge from Direct TV. Those conference calls must be hellaciously long, particularly when particulars arise about when people "made contact" with high school sophomores. It's a wonder anything gets done with all that "inside information" floating around.

Utter and complete NONSENSE!!!!!

[Spaniel with a Short Tail]

I may be the only poster here saying, "Welcome back Chicos" - but I suggest you not take the bait many put before you.  I know I wouldn't respond to many of these posts that are just disguised attempts to call you out for your "in-the-know-but-can't-cite-my-sources" posts.  Can it be irritating as a reader...sure!  However, it's your style and I'm not going to waste my time calling you on it every post you make. I mean, this is a blog not a Masters thesis. Regardless of citation, I do find Chicos posts informative at times which is why I'm glad he's back. I just wish I didn't have to wade through the argumentative responses to get to the informative posts.

[T-Bone]

If anyone posts something they assert as fact which they choose not to reveal the source of, do something about it instead of attacking the messenger (Journalism 101).  Make efforts to try to refute the argument being made.  Where this board gets me is that, sometimes we see a name and go in attack mode.  But we're all smarter than that.  Too often the conversation becomes a personal thing that amounts to he said-he said.  It's annoying and beneath us. 

Consider it like this:  A friend/colleague of yours shares information with you that is not public.  Do you betray them and reveal the source jeopardizing their job or other comfort?  Hell no. 

In this particular instance we have what a player said - which may have been intentionally vague, and it may not have been.  We'll never know.  No one has called anyone a liar.  We also have a source (Chicos) which may or may not be reliable - that's up to each of us to decide.  We may never know that either.  Regardless, we don't have information to support either argument.  We've asked one side.  And denied the request - I assume for the reason I mentioned above.  The other sides (MU Staff, Blue) we can't really ask for verification.  At some point we have to take people at their word.  If it conflicts, well then make up your mind, but there's no reason to go after someone.  It's much easier to ignore or take it with a grain of salt.

We are a well educated bunch, we should be able to make solid arguments that are well reasoned.

Wait were we talking about Lucious?  I hear good things about this "Singleton" kid.  Hear he's changing his name to Javid to fit in better with the other players with "J" names.   
And I wasn't a Journalism major so ignore that mention of Journalism 101 earlier.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

classic among many...  Ziggy saying I was the only one on CS not using my name when that's also a lie/untruth.  

Thanks, I got your message from "MUOmbudsman".  

[Benny B]

That would be the reason why you don't post who the sources are...right?  That's the whole point of sources.  When source gives a reporter something knowing full well they will report it, they do so with assumption the source isn't stated.  Correct?  No different here.

Actually, it's completely different.  You're not a journalist.

And yes, some of them absolutely know it may go here or CS.

So that would be a some (but not all).  I'll take that as a "yes, I do on occasion betray those who trust me with a secret."  What little credibility you had as a judge of morality just went down the toilet.

In this particular instance we have what a player said - which may have been intentionally vague, and it may not have been.  We'll never know.  No one has called anyone a liar.  We also have a source (Chicos) which may or may not be reliable - that's up to each of us to decide.  We may never know that either.  Regardless, we don't have information to support either argument.  We've asked one side.  And denied the request - I assume for the reason I mentioned above.  The other sides (MU Staff, Blue) we can't really ask for verification.  At some point we have to take people at their word.  If it conflicts, well then make up your mind, but there's no reason to go after someone.  It's much easier to ignore or take it with a grain of salt.

We are a well educated bunch, we should be able to make solid arguments that are well reasoned.

We may be a well-educated bunch, but the recruits, parents, coaches, etc. that read this board do not know the reputations of anyone here and therefore may be misguided in choosing where they place their grains of salt (e.g. assigning an element of truth to someone's statement simply because they have more posts on this board than everyone else on the thread combined).  Vander isn't the only student-athlete in the nation that has gone on record saying that his decision was swayed by fanboards... I'm sure many others feel the same way, they simply haven't come out and said it.

If this was a closed message board and we knew who everyone was, then I would have no problem with the flaming that goes on here.  However, this is a public board that could be read by anyone, and therefore, some of the nonsense spoken could be unjustly slanderous and potentially detrimental to MU, our players' and coaches' reputations, recruiting efforts, and the overall state of MU athletics.

[babytownfrolics]

Very well said by Benny b.  Quite frankly, the moderators of this board should do a better job of censoring posts, because the stuff that goes on here has the potential to do more harm than good.

[brewcity77]

Very well said by Benny b.  Quite frankly, the moderators of this board should do a better job of censoring posts, because the stuff that goes on here has the potential to do more harm than good.

Honestly, as a moderator on another message board, it's a double-edged sword. Yes, this is a Marquette fan board, but that doesn't mean you want to censor anything negative. As soon as you start doing that, the mods come under fire from all the users. Moderation is one of those things that snowballs. Once you start to crack down, the plebes try even harder to find ways to get around the rules, which forces you to crack down even more. Before you know it, you're just the prick moderator with a stick up his backside that everyone hates. Site traffic goes down, people complain about where all the good posters went and why they can't have a decent discussion, and by the time you try to lighten up, it's too late.

Of course, if you are lenient and let everyone state their opinions, you end up with flame-fests that seem to go on endlessly, topics that spiral out of control, and it only takes a small minority of negative posters to take over a topic and make it look like the entire site look like a bunch of overly critical psychos and jerks. And of course, the casual viewer (or potential recruit, parent of a recruit, etc) thinks that the fanboard posters are a microcosm of the fanbase itself and you end up seeing the kid go somewhere else. After all, if they're this critical of Vander Blue, the top rated recruit Wisconsin has put out since Brian Butch, how will they treat me, a mere four-star who isn't even from the state (hypothetically)?

I think the mods on here do a tremendous job. While I think they should have pulled the trigger a bit quicker on nomorebuycks (admittedly, I was vocal on that one) and think they should probably do the same on warriors1965 (who's probably nomorebuycks with a new name), many of the people who are sometimes perceived as negative are simply somewhat misunderstood. ErickDJ08 (sorry if that's not exactly right) isn't a negative guy, he just made a thread that ended up critical of a player and was probably a bit too open-ended in titling it. Chicos doesn't hate Marquette, but he is quick to defend those he likes to the point that he'll attack anyone who attacks those he respects, which often makes it out to be him hating on Marquette when his real target is the individual. willie warrior also isn't a hater, he just fiercely defends his viewpoints, which are often in the minority. It doesn't make willie wrong by any stretch, but when people try to debate and he sticks unfailingly to his guns, it makes it look like we're just sniping back and forth.

While it's easy to say the mods should do a better job, it's incredibly tough as a mod to satisfy everyone. Who do you censor? Which posters do you give rope to, and which do you crack down on? My bet is if they conducted a private poll of 20 users here to get lists of which guys need to be reined in, they'd probably end up with 25 different lists, and most of us (I'm sure myself included) would be on some of those lists. Quite frankly, I think that it's not for the mods to control us, but rather for us to conduct ourselves in the proper manner. Imagine that these kids are your kids. Sure, you may have suggestions of how little Johnny (or Jamail, Jae, Jamil, or Juan) could improve their game, but say it in a way that wouldn't belittle them. Act as though Buzz Williams isn't just another employee, but rather your fraternity brother. Sure, you may give him a bit of crap at times, you may not like everything he does, but at least respect his position and realize that while not everything he tries will work out, he is doing it with the best interests of Marquette and our basketball program in mind.

I can happily admit that I need to heed those lessons as much as anyone else. I just hope that a few other people who need that lesson just like I do read it and can put in the effort to do the same. It will make the job of the mods on this site a lot easier, and make this a more pleasant place for all of us to spend our free time.

[babytownfrolics]

Double edged sword?  The answer is, if you cant handle the responsibility, don't have a message board in the first place.

uote author=brewcity77 link=topic=24254.msg270998#msg270998 date=1297484152]
Honestly, as a moderator on another message board, it's a double-edged sword. Yes, this is a Marquette fan board, but that doesn't mean you want to censor anything negative. As soon as you start doing that, the mods come under fire from all the users. Moderation is one of those things that snowballs. Once you start to crack down, the plebes try even harder to find ways to get around the rules, which forces you to crack down even more. Before you know it, you're just the prick moderator with a stick up his backside that everyone hates. Site traffic goes down, people complain about where all the good posters went and why they can't have a decent discussion, and by the time you try to lighten up, it's too late.

Of course, if you are lenient and let everyone state their opinions, you end up with flame-fests that seem to go on endlessly, topics that spiral out of control, and it only takes a small minority of negative posters to take over a topic and make it look like the entire site look like a bunch of overly critical psychos and jerks. And of course, the casual viewer (or potential recruit, parent of a recruit, etc) thinks that the fanboard posters are a microcosm of the fanbase itself and you end up seeing the kid go somewhere else. After all, if they're this critical of Vander Blue, the top rated recruit Wisconsin has put out since Brian Butch, how will they treat me, a mere four-star who isn't even from the state (hypothetically)?

I think the mods on here do a tremendous job. While I think they should have pulled the trigger a bit quicker on nomorebuycks (admittedly, I was vocal on that one) and think they should probably do the same on warriors1965 (who's probably nomorebuycks with a new name), many of the people who are sometimes perceived as negative are simply somewhat misunderstood. ErickDJ08 (sorry if that's not exactly right) isn't a negative guy, he just made a thread that ended up critical of a player and was probably a bit too open-ended in titling it. Chicos doesn't hate Marquette, but he is quick to defend those he likes to the point that he'll attack anyone who attacks those he respects, which often makes it out to be him hating on Marquette when his real target is the individual. willie warrior also isn't a hater, he just fiercely defends his viewpoints, which are often in the minority. It doesn't make willie wrong by any stretch, but when people try to debate and he sticks unfailingly to his guns, it makes it look like we're just sniping back and forth.

While it's easy to say the mods should do a better job, it's incredibly tough as a mod to satisfy everyone. Who do you censor? Which posters do you give rope to, and which do you crack down on? My bet is if they conducted a private poll of 20 users here to get lists of which guys need to be reined in, they'd probably end up with 25 different lists, and most of us (I'm sure myself included) would be on some of those lists. Quite frankly, I think that it's not for the mods to control us, but rather for us to conduct ourselves in the proper manner. Imagine that these kids are your kids. Sure, you may have suggestions of how little Johnny (or Jamail, Jae, Jamil, or Juan) could improve their game, but say it in a way that wouldn't belittle them. Act as though Buzz Williams isn't just another employee, but rather your fraternity brother. Sure, you may give him a bit of crap at times, you may not like everything he does, but at least respect his position and realize that while not everything he tries will work out, he is doing it with the best interests of Marquette and our basketball program in mind.

I can happily admit that I need to heed those lessons as much as anyone else. I just hope that a few other people who need that lesson just like I do read it and can put in the effort to do the same. It will make the job of the mods on this site a lot easier, and make this a more pleasant place for all of us to spend our free time.
[/quote]

[Plaque Lives Matter!]

Double edged sword?  The answer is, if you cant handle the responsibility, don't have a message board in the first place.

uote author=brewcity77 link=topic=24254.msg270998#msg270998 date=1297484152]
Honestly, as a moderator on another message board, it's a double-edged sword. Yes, this is a Marquette fan board, but that doesn't mean you want to censor anything negative. As soon as you start doing that, the mods come under fire from all the users. Moderation is one of those things that snowballs. Once you start to crack down, the plebes try even harder to find ways to get around the rules, which forces you to crack down even more. Before you know it, you're just the prick moderator with a stick up his backside that everyone hates. Site traffic goes down, people complain about where all the good posters went and why they can't have a decent discussion, and by the time you try to lighten up, it's too late.

Of course, if you are lenient and let everyone state their opinions, you end up with flame-fests that seem to go on endlessly, topics that spiral out of control, and it only takes a small minority of negative posters to take over a topic and make it look like the entire site look like a bunch of overly critical psychos and jerks. And of course, the casual viewer (or potential recruit, parent of a recruit, etc) thinks that the fanboard posters are a microcosm of the fanbase itself and you end up seeing the kid go somewhere else. After all, if they're this critical of Vander Blue, the top rated recruit Wisconsin has put out since Brian Butch, how will they treat me, a mere four-star who isn't even from the state (hypothetically)?

I think the mods on here do a tremendous job. While I think they should have pulled the trigger a bit quicker on nomorebuycks (admittedly, I was vocal on that one) and think they should probably do the same on warriors1965 (who's probably nomorebuycks with a new name), many of the people who are sometimes perceived as negative are simply somewhat misunderstood. ErickDJ08 (sorry if that's not exactly right) isn't a negative guy, he just made a thread that ended up critical of a player and was probably a bit too open-ended in titling it. Chicos doesn't hate Marquette, but he is quick to defend those he likes to the point that he'll attack anyone who attacks those he respects, which often makes it out to be him hating on Marquette when his real target is the individual. willie warrior also isn't a hater, he just fiercely defends his viewpoints, which are often in the minority. It doesn't make willie wrong by any stretch, but when people try to debate and he sticks unfailingly to his guns, it makes it look like we're just sniping back and forth.

While it's easy to say the mods should do a better job, it's incredibly tough as a mod to satisfy everyone. Who do you censor? Which posters do you give rope to, and which do you crack down on? My bet is if they conducted a private poll of 20 users here to get lists of which guys need to be reined in, they'd probably end up with 25 different lists, and most of us (I'm sure myself included) would be on some of those lists. Quite frankly, I think that it's not for the mods to control us, but rather for us to conduct ourselves in the proper manner. Imagine that these kids are your kids. Sure, you may have suggestions of how little Johnny (or Jamail, Jae, Jamil, or Juan) could improve their game, but say it in a way that wouldn't belittle them. Act as though Buzz Williams isn't just another employee, but rather your fraternity brother. Sure, you may give him a bit of crap at times, you may not like everything he does, but at least respect his position and realize that while not everything he tries will work out, he is doing it with the best interests of Marquette and our basketball program in mind.

I can happily admit that I need to heed those lessons as much as anyone else. I just hope that a few other people who need that lesson just like I do read it and can put in the effort to do the same. It will make the job of the mods on this site a lot easier, and make this a more pleasant place for all of us to spend our free time.

They were just following orders!

Tasteless historical jab aside, the mods here do what they can, not everyone will be happy and not all problems will be satisfied. Scrolling through the personal tiffs just makes the real info that much more rewarding in a strangely warped rationalization.

[muarmy81]

I was mostly surprised how few people were concerned about his multiple suspensions and behavior as a reason to just say no.  Seems more people were worried about his ability to play.

Just win baby

You're right.  We should resume promoting stereotypes about traditional/non-traditional players as well as dig up dirt where the real issues are:

JUCO players...everyone knows those guys can't be trusted and carry the most baggage.

[CoachRaymondsClass]

Chico : Scoop :: Murf : MU Hoops

Murf : BB knowledgeable pomposity :: Chico : Questionable BB knowledge pomposity

= two people apparently starved for attention (and also apparently with tons of time on their hands).

Both have diminished the fun and info otherwise available on two excellent sources of news and discussion on MU. My readership and time on both boards has greatly declined because of their constant self-promotion of their knowledge on BB and MU. At least Murf was a fairly successful HS BB coach (albeit in the 60s) and MU player (in the 50s). Like Chico, I worked in sports marketing, but that doesn't make me a knowledgeable BB analyst. Chico's "sources" and reporting style reminds me of Entertainment Tonight or tabloid. Boorish.

I haven't posted in a long time, but this thread... when Chico got involved... he hijacks threads just like Murf. Too Bad. Thank you to all the thoughtful posters and MU fans.

[tower912]

Well said.   Inspiring.   Inspired me to put both on ignore.    Thank you. 

[77ncaachamps]

GETTING BACK TO KORIE...

I asked Rosiak about KL during the MU-USF Live Blog.

"Have you heard any response from Korie Lucious about your article on MU's (dis)interest?"

Todd Rosiak: I have not. And I'm not tough to find.

I guess that MU's door is shut and Korie sees it.