(11-24-2014 12:39 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(11-24-2014 12:03 AM)opossum Wrote:  

(11-21-2014 05:28 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  There's a lot to why people hated him. He was the best college basketball player I've ever seen. He's also from my home town, so I always followed his career.

1. He was the best. It's not unusual for people to hate the best.
2. He was white and privileged in a sport that's not normally considered "for" the white and privileged
3. He seemed like a dick
4. He seemed arrogant
5. Duke, as a program, has a ton of haters.
6. He stomped a guy who was on the ground
7. He was very emotional, almost femininely emotional at times
8. His haircut was disliked

I'm not saying he actually was all these things. But I don't care even if it's everyday life, if there's a guy that's clearly the best and always beats you at your job or whatever, AND is rich and privileged, AND has an arrogant manner about him, AND is kind of a dick to everyone, AND makes a giant show of his emotions...yeah, you probably hate that guy.

Laettner had just a murderers row of qualities most people don't like. Not one or two, that generally make someone endearing...but the whole slate.

As for Laettner being perceived as 'privileged' in #2, Laettner grew up in a Polish-American working class family in Buffalo. He attended a private prep school, but only could do so by getting a financial aid package that -- think about this -- included Christian Laettner working as a janitor at his own high school. As a kid he picked cucumbers for 50 cents a bushel to help his family make ends meet. On Coach K's first visit to the Laettner home, their dining room table was a ping pong table with a sheet over it. Coach K remarked on their "Polish Chandelier," which was a shop light hanging from the ceiling. I strongly recommend Gene Wojciechowski's book The Last Great Game, my source for those facts.

Maybe he needed better PR, beacuse like you said the perception was one of privilege. I had it too -- insofar as I thought about it until I read the book -- I would have guessed his dad was a dentist or something like that. Maybe he was offered better PR and turned it down.

I can't say I know him personally, but I have been around him and I know others who have as well. I have heard he can be very direct and honest in a way that probably covers your #3, #4, and #7.

As for #1, he indisputably the best college basketball player of all time. By the numbers without a doubt, but also by how he mastered the relationships with the coach and his teammates (operating in a set of dynamics that are unique to college basketball) to create winning teams.

That doesn't necessarily make him the best basketball player of all time or even necessarily put him on the list.

As for #6, it was a tap, not a stomp. Watch the tape.

Thanks for clearing that up. I was trying to figure out all of this privileged talk as this is the first time I heard of it. I didn't know his family was that poor, but I also never heard about them being privileged either.

Growing up in Buffalo, anyone who went to Nichols was going to get that tag. That description of his home wouldn't have screamed out poor to most of us. Just not rich.

And the kids that went there carried that arrogance with them.

Obviously, the whole Nichols thing is lost on the national level anyway. But it doesn't matter...he's partially hated for being white and privileged, even if it turns out he wasn't all that privileged. No different than Richard Sherman or any number of black players with tattoos inaccurately getting tagged as thugs because of how they look or act. That becomes the reality.

(11-21-2014 05:28 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  1. He was the best. It's not unusual for people to hate the best.
2. He was white and privileged in a sport that's not normally considered "for" the white and privileged
3. He seemed like a dick
4. He seemed arrogant
5. Duke, as a program, has a ton of haters.
6. He stomped a guy who was on the ground
7. He was very emotional, almost femininely emotional at times
8. His haircut was disliked

Bump. So who watched the 30 for 30? I thought it was pretty well done. It gave background into where and why he developed his mentality, while not pulling punches that the guy was still a huge ****. Interesting to hear from former teammates. Grant Hill seemed to choose his words very carefully but still called him a bully to other Duke players and said he never played with anyone else like him in his career. That last part didn't come off as a compliment.

Lou hit on the topics very well months before. They used a 5 pronged devil's fork to list the reasons for the hatred.

1. Privilege
2. White
3. Bully
4. Greatness
5. Looks

They even went into the oddities around his relationship with Brian Davis. Curious to hear what others thought.

(03-16-2015 01:59 AM)CollegeCard Wrote:  

(11-21-2014 05:28 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  1. He was the best. It's not unusual for people to hate the best.
2. He was white and privileged in a sport that's not normally considered "for" the white and privileged
3. He seemed like a dick
4. He seemed arrogant
5. Duke, as a program, has a ton of haters.
6. He stomped a guy who was on the ground
7. He was very emotional, almost femininely emotional at times
8. His haircut was disliked

Bump. So who watched the 30 for 30? I thought it was pretty well done. It gave background into where and why he developed his mentality, while not pulling punches that the guy was still a huge ****. Interesting to hear from former teammates. Grant Hill seemed to choose his words very carefully but still called him a bully to other Duke players and said he never played with anyone else like him in his career. That last part didn't come off as a compliment.

Lou hit on the topics very well months before. They used a 5 pronged devil's fork to list the reasons for the hatred.

1. Privilege
2. White
3. Bully
4. Greatness
5. Looks

They even went into the oddities around his relationship with Brian Davis. Curious to hear what others thought.

Ha, yeah, I got it pretty good I must say.

Good show. I was surprised they touched on the gay rumors, even I didn't want to touch that, other than obliquely with the femininely emotional comment.

I was surprised to hear about the abrasiveness of the relationship with Hurley. I think most of us assumed those two were thick as thieves.

It's amazing...I texted all my Buffalo friends last night when it came on, and they were all watching. They all hate the guy also. That's really remarkable, if you know Buffalo.

You're talking about a town that embraces its own, or anyone it can even remotely call its own, like no other. You hear it when the Bills get elected to the Hall of Fame, but it's like that to an extreme. I was in a room with about 50 people when the OJ verdict came in, and most cheered.

It's a town that has a deserved inferiority complex, and is viciously defensive of it's reputation. They claim Mark Twain as a native son because he lived there 18 months.

And people in that town, which produced arguably the greatest college basketball player ever, and definitely the best of the last couple generations, largely can't stand the guy. They talked about how his sisters were harassed...that is an unimaginable situation for anyone else in that town. It wouldn't be a stretch to say that OJ Simpson, a believed murderer, and a guy who couldn't give two craps for Buffalo the moment he was done playing, is more popular than the greatest college basketball player of all time.

Honestly, I think Scott Norwood would place higher than Christian Laettner in a "most popular athlete" poll of Buffalo.

It's really bizarre, and it started before he ever left for Duke.

And personally, I drove a considerable way for a Buffalo vs Canada prep all star game his senior year, and he no-showed the event. I probably like him more than almost any non-Duke fan I know, which means "a little bit", and even that was hard.

Oh, and they did conveniently fail to mention this...

http://www.foxsports.com/collegebasketba...ans-030912

(03-16-2015 09:57 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(03-16-2015 01:59 AM)CollegeCard Wrote:  

(11-21-2014 05:28 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  1. He was the best. It's not unusual for people to hate the best.
2. He was white and privileged in a sport that's not normally considered "for" the white and privileged
3. He seemed like a dick
4. He seemed arrogant
5. Duke, as a program, has a ton of haters.
6. He stomped a guy who was on the ground
7. He was very emotional, almost femininely emotional at times
8. His haircut was disliked

Bump. So who watched the 30 for 30? I thought it was pretty well done. It gave background into where and why he developed his mentality, while not pulling punches that the guy was still a huge ****. Interesting to hear from former teammates. Grant Hill seemed to choose his words very carefully but still called him a bully to other Duke players and said he never played with anyone else like him in his career. That last part didn't come off as a compliment.

Lou hit on the topics very well months before. They used a 5 pronged devil's fork to list the reasons for the hatred.

1. Privilege
2. White
3. Bully
4. Greatness
5. Looks

They even went into the oddities around his relationship with Brian Davis. Curious to hear what others thought.

Ha, yeah, I got it pretty good I must say.

Good show. I was surprised they touched on the gay rumors, even I didn't want to touch that, other than obliquely with the femininely emotional comment.

I was an undergrad at Duke then, it originated from a "Blue Jeans Day" event sometime in the fall or early spring, organized by the Lesbian/Gay/Transgendered association. They would announce the night before that the next day would be "blue jeans day," which meant that anyone wearing blue jeans the next day was gay or supported gay rights. They usually did it in a season when most students wore blue jeans everyday. Most people dressed as they would have otherwise, including Laettner and Davis. The supposedly kissed when someone called them out on it as "Blue Jeans Day." That's it beginning and the end of it, as far as I know.

I remember him as good (not great), a whiner, overexposed (media-wise). Because of that combination, I was tired of seeing/hearing him.

Unfortunately, people will watch in greater numbers if the story has a negative connotation. I'm guessing "I Hate Christian Laettner" got twice as many viewers as a more realistic title of "Christian Laettner, pretty good college player from 20 years ago" would have.

Few, if anybody, outside of Duke knew about the jeans thing. He was rumored as gay because of some feminine qualities and his relationship with Davis.

(11-19-2014 12:52 PM)HRFlossY Wrote:  Especially since All Louisville fans Love the guy.
FLossY Out...

God Bless Christian Laettner !

(03-17-2015 07:00 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(11-19-2014 12:52 PM)HRFlossY Wrote:  Especially since All Louisville fans Love the guy.
FLossY Out...

God Bless Christian Laettner !

That shot is one of my favorite sporting moments.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

(03-17-2015 09:15 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(03-17-2015 07:00 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(11-19-2014 12:52 PM)HRFlossY Wrote:  Especially since All Louisville fans Love the guy.
FLossY Out...

God Bless Christian Laettner !

That shot is one of my favorite sporting moments.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

Mine also!

I thought it was well done. I was young...I was 10 his freshman year. He is my second favorite Devil after Grant Hill. I have the newspaper picture (it's a full two page pic) signed by Laettner and Brian Davis

Laettner came across as a self centered jerk when he was in college. We all could have been wrong. He could have been misunderstood. But his business life since then has shown the initial impression was absolutely correct.

Also, to call him the greatest college player ever is just plain wrong. He was very good, but a lot of players were very good. Lew A., B. Walton, Bill Russell, David Thompson, the Big O, Phil Ford, Danny Manning come to mind as contending for the honor of being the best college player ever, just off the top of my head.

(03-17-2015 08:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Laettner came across as a self centered jerk when he was in college. We all could have been wrong. He could have been misunderstood. But his business life since then has shown the initial impression was absolutely correct.

Also, to call him the greatest college player ever is just plain wrong. He was very good, but a lot of players were very good. Lew A., B. Walton, Bill Russell, David Thompson, the Big O, Phil Ford, Danny Manning come to mind as contending for the honor of being the best college player ever, just off the top of my head.

No college player accomplished more than Laettner, if you don't think he was the greatest, it's probably because you're applying some subjective criteria like "didn't play for Duke." I mean Phil Ford? Really?

The same way some people don't recognize Krzyzewski as the greatest college coach, because one of their criteria is "didn't coach for Duke."

I totally get it, and I sympathize. My biases on those two questions dovetail quite perfectly with objective reality, but I can understand how uncomfortable it can be when one's biases don't. Maybe that's the real answer to the documentary's title question.

(03-17-2015 08:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Laettner came across as a self centered jerk when he was in college. We all could have been wrong. He could have been misunderstood. But his business life since then has shown the initial impression was absolutely correct.

Also, to call him the greatest college player ever is just plain wrong. He was very good, but a lot of players were very good. Lew A., B. Walton, Bill Russell, David Thompson, the Big O, Phil Ford, Danny Manning come to mind as contending for the honor of being the best college player ever, just off the top of my head.

Add Pete Maravich and Elvin Hayes...Pistol has to be in there, with a legitimate claim to #1. Laettner wouldn't be in a starting 5 of top all-time college hoops players. Not if I was picking the team.

And K isn't the greatest college coach because that belongs to Wooden, and that is undisputed.

(03-17-2015 09:30 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(03-17-2015 08:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Laettner came across as a self centered jerk when he was in college. We all could have been wrong. He could have been misunderstood. But his business life since then has shown the initial impression was absolutely correct.

Also, to call him the greatest college player ever is just plain wrong. He was very good, but a lot of players were very good. Lew A., B. Walton, Bill Russell, David Thompson, the Big O, Phil Ford, Danny Manning come to mind as contending for the honor of being the best college player ever, just off the top of my head.

Add Pete Maravich and Elvin Hayes...Pistol has to be in there, with a legitimate claim to #1. Laettner wouldn't be in a starting 5 of top all-time college hoops players. Not if I was picking the team.

And K isn't the greatest college coach because that belongs to Wooden, and that is undisputed.

Give Coach K a bye into the Final Four every year and see how many championships he has. How many basketball games at any level did Wooden coach to a win?

(11-22-2014 07:16 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(11-22-2014 12:14 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Right, but back to the reverse racism thing; Michigan's Fab Five of that era was every bit as obnoxious as Duke. In fact, they were probably more obnoxious then the blue Devils.

All they talked about and all their supporters talked about was how they were revolutionizing the game on every level from how it was played to the fashion of the game. Also, no one had ever seen a collection of talent like that and blah, blah, blah.

And yet, despite being so over-the-top and so in everyone's face, and so over marketed and overhyped, they were seen as being cool. They were not privileged but they were certainly overly emotional and they were insanely arrogant. Yet, they were not hated anywhere near the way Christian Laettner and Duke was hated by most of the general public.

I sincerely believe it was because they had more white kids and their lineup and there are a lot of fans, even white fans, who seem to be quick to hate white players who are good.

I am not a Duke fan at all and I have never been a Duke fan. However, I don't see them as being different from say, North Carolina for example, at all. I see them as being Siamese twins. It is weird that they are positioned in a way that makes them seem somehow different because they each have had roughly the same level of success and they each recruit the same McDonald's All-Americans. They also seem both like really good schools who can be a little hoity-toity. I mean North Carolina has a faux cardigan design going down the side of their basketball uniforms. It doesn't get more more hoity-toity than that. And I'm not criticizing UNC, which is a great school that I would be proud to have my son attend that university. I am just saying that I don't see much, if any, difference at all between UNC and Duke.

The only slight difference between the two is that Duke has had more white kids. At least from my standpoint, it seems like a race thing more than anything else.

Duke is an elitist private school for kids from the Northeast.
UNC-CH is an elitist public school for kids from North Carolina.

Both of them put players on the court that would never ( with a few exceptions) attend those universities if they weren't elite level basketball players. It has become clear how CH keeps them eligible, not sure about how Duke does it.

You know, I hadn't factored in the southern inferiority complex as being a major factor in all this but that probably is a bigger factor than most realize.

Sure, both teams and their schools' fans are filled with white kids from privileged families but because North Carolina's privileged white kids are from south of the Mason-Dixon line, usually from in-state, naturally that makes them more virtuous than their shifty northern counterparts, who happen to go to school at an equally tonie campus 10 miles away.

That southern inferiority complex is a tricky deal to understand for those of us who are not born in that culture. It seems absurd that in 2015 it would still exist but it clearly does and it impacts this country on every level including social, political and even entertainment. It is also what allows the North Carolina fans - and fans of other ACC schools too - to rationalize that even though it is plain to everyone else that UNC and Duke are exactly the same program on just about every level, they see themselves as being somehow better and more virtuous then they're evil counterpart in Durham because their kids are southern which means they're more honest, more respectful, more polite, more virtuous, more trustworthy, and all that other horseshit many simpleminded people tend to buy into.

(11-22-2014 07:16 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(11-22-2014 12:14 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Right, but back to the reverse racism thing; Michigan's Fab Five of that era was every bit as obnoxious as Duke. In fact, they were probably more obnoxious then the blue Devils.

All they talked about and all their supporters talked about was how they were revolutionizing the game on every level from how it was played to the fashion of the game. Also, no one had ever seen a collection of talent like that and blah, blah, blah.

And yet, despite being so over-the-top and so in everyone's face, and so over marketed and overhyped, they were seen as being cool. They were not privileged but they were certainly overly emotional and they were insanely arrogant. Yet, they were not hated anywhere near the way Christian Laettner and Duke was hated by most of the general public.

I sincerely believe it was because they had more white kids and their lineup and there are a lot of fans, even white fans, who seem to be quick to hate white players who are good.

I am not a Duke fan at all and I have never been a Duke fan. However, I don't see them as being different from say, North Carolina for example, at all. I see them as being Siamese twins. It is weird that they are positioned in a way that makes them seem somehow different because they each have had roughly the same level of success and they each recruit the same McDonald's All-Americans. They also seem both like really good schools who can be a little hoity-toity. I mean North Carolina has a faux cardigan design going down the side of their basketball uniforms. It doesn't get more more hoity-toity than that. And I'm not criticizing UNC, which is a great school that I would be proud to have my son attend that university. I am just saying that I don't see much, if any, difference at all between UNC and Duke.

The only slight difference between the two is that Duke has had more white kids. At least from my standpoint, it seems like a race thing more than anything else.

Duke is an elitist private school for kids from the Northeast.
UNC-CH is an elitist public school for kids from North Carolina.

Both of them put players on the court that would never ( with a few exceptions) attend those universities if they weren't elite level basketball players. It has become clear how CH keeps them eligible, not sure about how Duke does it.

You know, I hadn't factored in the southern inferiority complex as being a major factor in all this but that probably is a bigger factor than most realize.

Sure, both teams and their schools' fans are filled with white kids from privileged families but because North Carolina's privileged white kids are from south of the Mason-Dixon line, usually from in-state, naturally that makes them more virtuous than their shifty northern counterparts, who happen to go to school at an equally tonie campus 10 miles away.

That southern inferiority complex is a tricky deal to understand for those of us who are not born in that culture. It seems absurd that in 2015 it would still exist but it clearly does and it impacts this country on every level including social, political and even entertainment. It is also what allows the North Carolina fans - and fans of other ACC schools too - to rationalize that even though it is plain to everyone else that UNC and Duke are exactly the same program on just about every level, they see themselves as being somehow better and more virtuous then they're evil counterpart in Durham because their kids are southern which means they're more honest, more respectful, more polite, more virtuous, more trustworthy, and all that other horseshit many simpleminded people tend to buy into.

(11-22-2014 07:16 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(11-22-2014 12:14 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Right, but back to the reverse racism thing; Michigan's Fab Five of that era was every bit as obnoxious as Duke. In fact, they were probably more obnoxious then the blue Devils.

All they talked about and all their supporters talked about was how they were revolutionizing the game on every level from how it was played to the fashion of the game. Also, no one had ever seen a collection of talent like that and blah, blah, blah.

And yet, despite being so over-the-top and so in everyone's face, and so over marketed and overhyped, they were seen as being cool. They were not privileged but they were certainly overly emotional and they were insanely arrogant. Yet, they were not hated anywhere near the way Christian Laettner and Duke was hated by most of the general public.

I sincerely believe it was because they had more white kids and their lineup and there are a lot of fans, even white fans, who seem to be quick to hate white players who are good.

I am not a Duke fan at all and I have never been a Duke fan. However, I don't see them as being different from say, North Carolina for example, at all. I see them as being Siamese twins. It is weird that they are positioned in a way that makes them seem somehow different because they each have had roughly the same level of success and they each recruit the same McDonald's All-Americans. They also seem both like really good schools who can be a little hoity-toity. I mean North Carolina has a faux cardigan design going down the side of their basketball uniforms. It doesn't get more more hoity-toity than that. And I'm not criticizing UNC, which is a great school that I would be proud to have my son attend that university. I am just saying that I don't see much, if any, difference at all between UNC and Duke.

The only slight difference between the two is that Duke has had more white kids. At least from my standpoint, it seems like a race thing more than anything else.

Duke is an elitist private school for kids from the Northeast.
UNC-CH is an elitist public school for kids from North Carolina.

Both of them put players on the court that would never ( with a few exceptions) attend those universities if they weren't elite level basketball players. It has become clear how CH keeps them eligible, not sure about how Duke does it.

You know, I hadn't factored in the southern inferiority complex as being a major factor in all this but that probably is a bigger factor than most realize.

Sure, both teams and their schools' fans are filled with white kids from privileged families but because North Carolina's privileged white kids are from south of the Mason-Dixon line, usually from in-state, naturally that makes them more virtuous than their shifty northern counterparts, who happen to go to school at an equally tonie campus 10 miles away.

That southern inferiority complex is a tricky deal to understand for those of us who are not born in that culture. It seems absurd that in 2015 it would still exist but it clearly does and it impacts this country on every level including social, political and even entertainment. It is also what allows the North Carolina fans - and fans of other ACC schools too - to rationalize that even though it is plain to everyone else that UNC and Duke are exactly the same program on just about every level, they see themselves as being somehow better and more virtuous then they're evil counterpart in Durham because their kids are southern which means they're more honest, more respectful, more polite, more virtuous, more trustworthy, and all that other horseshit many simpleminded people tend to buy into.

If Christian Laettner had grown up in Asheville, NC and was still kind of douchey and arrogant had that weird haircut and was feminine (or whatever that means); but he played at North Carolina instead of Duke would he be nearly as hated?

Not a chance. Nope, instead he would be Tyler Hansbrough, who was a hustler and a fighter and a competitor and an overachiever and blah, blah, blah.

The reason why people hated Christian Laettner as much as they did/do was because he was white, he was from the northeast and he played for a program that is the gold standard in the sport over the last three decades. Basically, it can be summed up into words: roster envy.

I am not a Duke fan by any stretch and I get extremely annoyed with the self-aggrandizing nature of that school. It can be way over the top and flat out obnoxious. However, The Duke/North Carolina relationship reminds me a lot of whenever Michigan and Ohio State fans complain about the arrogance of Notre Dame. It's such a lack of self-awareness it is almost breathtaking. It's sort of like the guy who drives the BMW who thinks that his neighbor who drives a Lexus is a little too showy.

(03-17-2015 09:11 PM)opossum Wrote:  

(03-17-2015 08:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Laettner... to call him the greatest college player ever is just plain wrong. He was very good, but a lot of players were very good. Lew A., B. Walton, Bill Russell, David Thompson, the Big O, Phil Ford, Danny Manning come to mind as contending for the honor of being the best college player ever, just off the top of my head.

No college player accomplished more than Laettner, if you don't think he was the greatest, it's probably because you're applying some subjective criteria like "didn't play for Duke."...

Before you put Laettner on that pedestal you better check out the college career of Mr. Bill Russell. Laettner won back-to-back national titles at Duke; Russell won back-to-back titles at the U. of San Francisco! (Never heard of them since? That's my point!).

Russell once blocked 13 shots in a college game (unheard of, considering there was NO SHOT CLOCK!). Not only that, but Russell excelled at the NBA level also.

If you told me to pick an all-time greatest basketball team, my first 3 players would be Bill Russell, Magic Johnson, and Larry Bird... then I'd start looking at guys like Michael Jordan, but as good as he was, no way Laettner sniffs my starting five.

Anybody see that basketball commercial with Laettner in the hammock? I liked it, and it completely fell in line with the "I Hate Christian Laettner" movement.