New York Times rides with Cornell Hoops

[cornellbasketball.blogspot.com]

*sigh*

[cornellbigred.com]

or even more directly,

[thequad.blogs.nytimes.com]

It's too bad, CornellFan's site is really quite nice. I suspect more of us might go to it if he were to post it something like:

New York Times rides with Cornell Hoops.

A NY Times reporter will be traveling with CU B'ball. You can read about this at (insert the NY Times web address here) or see my site for that and much more.

I really recommend CornellFan's site. He does an excellent job.

I think its time to take a break from hockey and lacrosse and focus on Men's and Women's hoops. They have a chance to bring a lot of national attention to Cornell.

Go Red.

I've never been a big fan of basketball, though I find the College game much more interesting than the professional one. I agree that Cornellians should embrace any sport that is bringing positive recognition to the school, be it a smaller niche sport or something more main stream. That said, I don't think it's too hard to follow two sports at once. I don't see myself choosing a basketball game over a hockey game anytime soon and I think that feeling will be echoed by many here. By all means cheer on your favorite sport, but any fan who drops a team because they're not beating the world this year (or the past two years) isn't really one that I want next to me in Lynah during a game.

Nobody argues that CornellFan is providing a lot of great information about the game at his blog, jksnake. The objections are to his self-promotion and pageview whoring. As Jim noted, the typical style is to link to the original and then to your own site for more analysis (or, better, a link to the original with the analysis actually written here sometimes). Instead, he just links to his blog - and then you see "violation" number two: he doesn't excerpt from his sources, he cuts and pastes entire articles (or the parts of them relevant to Cornell).

RichH
*sigh*

[cornellbigred.com]

or even more directly,

[thequad.blogs.nytimes.com]

Folks, I think people are a little too hyper about CornellFan. It's not like he's charging your credit card when you hit the link to his site .

I wasn't suggesting that anyone stop following the other Cornell teams. I'm just stunned that Cornell is trying to make the most popular sporting event in the US this side of the Super Bowl (for the first time in 20 years) and there seems to be greater interest in the lacrosse season which hasn't even started yet.

To each his own.

Regarding CornellFan's site, I wish he would link to articles also instead of cutting and pasting. I also understand the frustration with his making people go through his site to see an article.

I'm just saying that there's lots of great stuff there if you can get past these things. If they bother you too much to go to the site, that's obviously your call.

jksnake06
I'm just stunned that Cornell is trying to make the most popular sporting event in the US this side of the Super Bowl (for the first time in 20 years) and there seems to be greater interest in the lacrosse season which hasn't even started yet.

To each his own.

Perhaps it's in part because the lacrosse team has historically demonstrated the ability to achieve some success in its sport's post-season tournament (e.g., three national championships and many Final Four appearances, the latest just last year) whereas basketball will with almost certainty follow the Ivy League's standard one-and-out pattern.

jksnake06
I'm just stunned that Cornell is trying to make the most popular sporting event in the US this side of the Super Bowl (for the first time in 20 years) and there seems to be greater interest in the lacrosse season which hasn't even started yet.

It shouldn't really be that surprising. For all that the squeakball team is having a fabulous year the odds of them winning even one game in the tournament are pretty long. The lacrosse team, on the other hand, was a legitimate contender for the national title last year and came pretty damn close to making the finals. All things being equal it makes sense to be more interested in the sport where your school has better long term prospects.

KeithK

jksnake06
I'm just stunned that Cornell is trying to make the most popular sporting event in the US this side of the Super Bowl (for the first time in 20 years) and there seems to be greater interest in the lacrosse season which hasn't even started yet.

It shouldn't really be that surprising. For all that the squeakball team is having a fabulous year the odds of them winning even one game in the tournament are pretty long. The lacrosse team, on the other hand, was a legitimate contender for the national title last year and came pretty damn close to making the finals. All things being equal it makes sense to be more interested in the sport where your school has better long term prospects.

Not to mention that lacrosse is just a much better sport

(or, to say it non-biasedly, naturally appears that way to a bunch of people who are primarily ice hockey fans)

(1) I am not promoting my blog on here. I am promoting Cornell basketball.

(2) ALL of my articles on the blog have links. Click on the underlined text and you will be linked to the original source.

Why do I paste the articles on the blog rather than only having links? Here is the answer:

(a) Sometimes the 3rd party websites remove the article after a few days (e.g. the Ithaca Journal does this). Thus, by placing the article on my site, it is always available in the archive.

(b) Most of the Blog's readers like the fact that they don't have to jump around to 100 websites. They jump on the Blog and all of the articles are right there.

(c) By placing an article in my blog's archive, I allow the readers to "search" my blog for relevant information (using the search feature). Thus, the Blog becomes a central depository of Cornell basketball information. If you want to search "Alex Compton" or "Newman Arena"-- then every article ever written on those terms will pop up.

Sorry all of you are not happy with the blog's format... but I tend to think it works quite well. And I only have Cornell Basketball's interests at heart.

KeithK
It shouldn't really be that surprising. For all that the squeakball team is having a fabulous year the odds of them winning even one game in the tournament are pretty long. The lacrosse team, on the other hand, was a legitimate contender for the national title last year and came pretty damn close to making the finals. All things being equal it makes sense to be more interested in the sport where your school has better long term prospects.

I guess another way to look at it would be to say: If the basketball team had made it to the NCAA Final Four last year, there'd be one helluva lot more enthusiasm for this year's team here on eLynah.

Fair enough.

I would point out, though, that there are 56 D1 lacrosse teams (so, more than a quarter make the tournament) and 59 D1 hockey teams.

By comparison, there are 340 Division 1 Men's basketball teams. Cornell's RPI is currently #81. Making the field of 65 is no small achievement- I'd put it at least on par with a tournament appearance in hockey or lacrosse.

I guess its mostly that I love basketball so much that I have difficulty understanding how anyone prefers another sport. I may be the only Cornell fan ever who once left a tight hockey game early to go watch a relatively meaningless basketball game a few years ago.

To each his own.

There are actually 341 Division I basketball teams-- PLUS--- there are an additional six teams in the "exploratory" phase. These six teams are not counted in the RPI. Thus-- in actuality, we are talking 347 D-Is in basketball.

[collegebasketball.rivals.com]

Its pretty damn hard getting one of those 65 bids.

jksnake06
Making the field of 65 is no small achievement- I'd put it at least on par with a tournament appearance in hockey or lacrosse.

It's designed to be that way. In theory the fraction of teams making the tournament is supposed to be no more than 25% of the field in all sports.

jksnake06
I guess its mostly that I love basketball so much that I have difficulty understanding how anyone prefers another sport...To each his own.

Fair enough.

CornellFan
There are actually 341 Division I basketball teams-- PLUS--- there are an additional six teams in the "exploratory" phase. These six teams are not counted in the RPI. Thus-- in actuality, we are talking 347 D-Is in basketball.

[collegebasketball.rivals.com]

Its pretty damn hard getting one of those 65 bids.

In fairness, that there are 341 teams is irrelevant for us getting a bid; it's just necessary for Cornell to beat out the other 7 Ivies (which of course has proven elusive over the years)

scoop85

CornellFan
There are actually 341 Division I basketball teams-- PLUS--- there are an additional six teams in the "exploratory" phase. These six teams are not counted in the RPI. Thus-- in actuality, we are talking 347 D-Is in basketball.

[collegebasketball.rivals.com]

Its pretty damn hard getting one of those 65 bids.

In fairness, that there are 341 teams is irrelevant for us getting a bid; it's just necessary for Cornell to beat out the other 7 Ivies (which of course has proven elusive over the years)

Exactly.

Further, in addition to making the NCAA's recently, lax and hockey have also claimed at large bids by proving themselves among the top programs in the nation. Basketball cannot make such a claim. The program will likely never be in the at-large discussion.

If we win 20 games this year--- we will be in the discussion of the other postseason tournaments-- the NIT (32 teams) or the new tournament hosted by the Gazelle Group (16 teams).

While I want to be in the NCAAs, an NIT is a huge step forward for our program.

I respect your reasoning and your desire to create a useful repository... but you do know that in all likelihood you're violating copyright law when you copy and paste the whole article, don't you? If the NY Times copies Blogspot.com on a "Cease and Desist" letter, they could shut your entire blog down quite easily with no qualms whatsoever.

jksnake06
I may be the only Cornell fan ever who once left a tight hockey game early to go watch a relatively meaningless basketball game a few years ago.

Probably, but hey, props to you for going against the grain.

CornellFan
(1) I am not promoting my blog on here. I am promoting Cornell basketball.

By exclusively providing links to your blog. I read your blog and subscribe to the RSS feed, but the way you post stories here really grates.

(2) ALL of my articles on the blog have links. Click on the underlined text and you will be linked to the original source. Why do I paste the articles on the blog rather than only having links? Here is the answer: ...

Those are all good answers. Can I request that you post a summary or the lead paragraph and then move the full text of the articles you are pasting behind a "read more" jump? When you post a string of long articles, scrolling past the ones I don't want to read is a PITA and new articles don't get lost because they are pushed so far down the page (obvs not a problem with RSS, but I'm one of 2 subscribers on bloglines).

jksnake06
I guess its mostly that I love basketball so much that I have difficulty understanding how anyone prefers another sport.

Under the current set of rules, basketball sucks, IMHO. When they institute rules such that the last two minutes of game time are played in five minutes or less of clock time--with no more than one time-out per team--I may consider it a watchable sport again.

New York Times article on the Harvard game:
[thequad.blogs.nytimes.com]

jkahn
New York Times article on the Harvard game:
[thequad.blogs.nytimes.com]

You knew some jerk from Penn would add his two resentful cents to the article.

Al DeFlorio

jkahn
New York Times article on the Harvard game:
[thequad.blogs.nytimes.com]

You knew some jerk from Penn would add his two resentful cents to the article.

It's amusing to see the "anyone but..." posts from both Pen and Princeton fans. [thequad.blogs.nytimes.com]

I also like this quote [thequad.blogs.nytimes.com] (emphasis mine)

Lavietes isn’t much larger than a typical high school gymnasium, holding 2,050 fans. It looks as if it could be an intimidating place if full. That’s not expected to be the case tonight. Harvard has lost five straight games and typically doesn’t draw too well.

Full article today: [www.nytimes.com]

Basically a rehash of the blog entries. Some pictures though.

scoop85

RichH
*sigh*

[cornellbigred.com]

or even more directly,

[thequad.blogs.nytimes.com]

Folks, I think people are a little too hyper about CornellFan. It's not like he's charging your credit card when you hit the link to his site .

First, did my post seem "hyper" at all? I was just providing a service (direct links) that CornellFan declined to offer. I didn't even do that to protest any perceived self-promotion as ugarte suggested. CornellFan isn't a spammer, so I don't mind promoting his own work.

No, he's not charging my credit card, but he is charging my time. Often, I'm in a rush. I appreciate it when posters linking to media give a brief one to two sentence blurb about what they're linking to and provide a direct link so I can decide if it's interesting/important enough to either skim or read. I'll paraphrase CornellFan himself from this very thread: Most of eLynah's readers like the fact that they don't have to jump around to 100 websites. They jump on eLynah and all of the links to articles are right there. I open a thread...I don't want to have to click to go to someone else's blog or website in order to hunt for *another* link.

In this case, the thread title is fine as long as the original poster gives me more information. I would've appreciated a sentence telling me that a NY Times writer was following the team for the weekend trip and had several interesting "behind the scenes" entries. He has a link to his blog in his signature, so he could have pointed to that for more detail after giving the NYTimes link. I appreciate people putting their blogs in their signatures. I've been to ugarte's multiple times because he puts it in his sig.

All I'm looking for is what Chris '03 did in his most recent post in this thread. Perfect. (or, in re-reading this thread, exactly what Jim Hyla suggested)

That said, I appreciate CornellFan's passion and enthusiasm and providing information on this forum that I probably otherwise wouldn't have found out about.

Al DeFlorio

jksnake06
I'm just stunned that Cornell is trying to make the most popular sporting event in the US this side of the Super Bowl (for the first time in 20 years) and there seems to be greater interest in the lacrosse season which hasn't even started yet.

To each his own.

Perhaps it's in part because the lacrosse team has historically demonstrated the ability to achieve some success in its sport's post-season tournament (e.g., three national championships and many Final Four appearances, the latest just last year) whereas basketball will with almost certainty follow the Ivy League's standard one-and-out pattern.

Even if Ivy hoops is again one-and-done, it's Cornell that gets to be the sacrificial lamb, not Penn or Princeton. That's progress if not martyrdom.

billhoward
Even if Ivy hoops is again one-and-done, it's Cornell that gets to be the sacrificial lamb, not Penn or Princeton.

Whoa. Last I checked, there were still 6 games remaining on the schedule and the lead in the standings is 2 games. I've seen crazier things happen, and Cornell sports have had the unfortunate habit of getting my hopes up and crashing them at the most inopportune time.

Let's just take care of business first, one cliche at a time.

RichH

billhoward
Even if Ivy hoops is again one-and-done, it's Cornell that gets to be the sacrificial lamb, not Penn or Princeton.

Whoa. Last I checked, there were still 6 games remaining on the schedule and the lead in the standings is 2 games. I've seen crazier things happen, and Cornell sports have had the unfortunate habit of getting my hopes up and crashing them at the most inopportune time.

Let's just take care of business first, one cliche at a time.

I don't think Bill was saying it's a foregone conclusion, just that IF Cornell wins it, well, better us getting the cup of coffee in the tournament than Penn or Princeton.

A similar type of story about a small school in Mississippi. I know that the nytimes article portrayed Cornell as a bit of a "have-not" in the sense that they had to ride a bus, but I think we can all pretty much agree that the players at Alcorn State have it much worse.

[sports.espn.go.com]