(12-03-2023 06:44 PM)BucDoctor Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 05:25 PM)bucfan81 Wrote:  A truly nice win on the road against a decent team. Thank you coaches and players. Now Bucs get a deserved week off for some rest and exams. Go Bucs!

Well, not exactly. Exam week isn't until December 9-14. Classes don't end until this Friday, December 8.

Yes I was mistaken. Coach said the players were going to get to study for exams this week and I misinterpreted it.

(12-04-2023 08:14 AM)bucfan81 Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 06:44 PM)BucDoctor Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 05:25 PM)bucfan81 Wrote:  A truly nice win on the road against a decent team. Thank you coaches and players. Now Bucs get a deserved week off for some rest and exams. Go Bucs!

Well, not exactly. Exam week isn't until December 9-14. Classes don't end until this Friday, December 8.

Yes I was mistaken. Coach said the players were going to get to study for exams this week and I misinterpreted it.

This change is a big deal among faculty and staff. It took ETSU out of alignment with local fall breaks, etc.

(12-04-2023 07:50 AM)Buc66 Wrote:  

(12-04-2023 02:46 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 07:08 PM)Buc66 Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 06:47 PM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 06:13 PM)Buc66 Wrote:  OK, then enlighten us all on why a college team of any sport plays — for a nice workout?

*Of course* a player or team plays to win. The problem is saying it's the ONLY thing. So you would defend the Michigan and Astros cheaters? There's tons of analogies and examples, but those are obvious and recent. What's the point of playing if it's not a fair contest? Playing to win *with* proper ethics, sportsmanship, etc., is the way to go. Hating to quote bartow (eyeroll) , but "winning the right way".

Don't know if you have kids, but would you really want them to behave like that in life?

Where are you coming from? What are you talking about -my kids? You are off the rails here. How did you come up with the notion that I condone cheating, am unethical, etc. in order to win or for anything else? OF COURSE I AM NOT FOR CHEATING OR BEING UNETHICAL FOR ANYTHING!! Sports, with exceptions, is one of the few things left that has equally enforced rules. And, for example, Michigan should have been disqualified from the playoffs and placed on probation. The NCAA has one big black eye for that one, and has turned the 2023 CFP into a joke.

Where am I coming from? Pretty obvious that I was trying to show how "winning is the only thing" is a terrible policy - or philosophy for life (of which sport is part). Since words have meaning, cheating would be acceptable to get to "winning", right? After all, that's the "only thing". Playing fair and honest would be secondary to winning. As to your kids, it was hypothetical, pretty obviously, since I clearly made it speculative ("don't know if"). Coulda been my kids, or Brooks Savage's kids, or, pardon the horrible thought only for giggles, Marky Mark's kids. I'm NOT saying you condone cheating, but that's exactly one of the things that old saw implies.

Wasn’t talking about a “philosophy” for life. Wasn’t talking about cheating as a way to win at all cost. Don’t think the old UCLA coach in 1948 was advocating cheating either in order to win. And, never heard that Lombardi was a cheater or advocated cheating by using the saying. I was thinking specifically of ETSU’s win over Jax State with the post. I can only assume ETSU won honestly, by the rules — and coached and played by people of integrity. Guarantee you, WINNING that game by the rules was the goal of both teams when they walked on the court. Guarantee you - ETSU fans wanted the Bucs to win that game - by the rules and with integrity. Again - there’s nothing like a win in a sporting event.

So what does that old quote mean then? What is it excluding? Losses? Sure. "Kissing your sister" ties? Ok. What does the word "only" mean in that context if not excluding all other options? Maybe even more germane................why bring up a quote from 1948 if you were only commenting on the win over Jacksonville St.? It's an old saying that I hear about once or twice a year, usually regarding football, but it's tired, overused, and totally without moral underpinnings.

The *literal* meaning of that saying *implies* that cheating, gouging eyes, flat-handing O-linemen, kicking in the groin, pass interference you can get away with, shirt-pulling under the basket you can get away with, etc., is ok - as long as you win. I KNOW you didn't mean it like that - no "guarantees" needed - but that's what that phrase implies. It should be put to rest.

(12-04-2023 02:31 PM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  

(12-04-2023 07:50 AM)Buc66 Wrote:  

(12-04-2023 02:46 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 07:08 PM)Buc66 Wrote:  

(12-03-2023 06:47 PM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  *Of course* a player or team plays to win. The problem is saying it's the ONLY thing. So you would defend the Michigan and Astros cheaters? There's tons of analogies and examples, but those are obvious and recent. What's the point of playing if it's not a fair contest? Playing to win *with* proper ethics, sportsmanship, etc., is the way to go. Hating to quote bartow (eyeroll) , but "winning the right way".

Don't know if you have kids, but would you really want them to behave like that in life?

Where are you coming from? What are you talking about -my kids? You are off the rails here. How did you come up with the notion that I condone cheating, am unethical, etc. in order to win or for anything else? OF COURSE I AM NOT FOR CHEATING OR BEING UNETHICAL FOR ANYTHING!! Sports, with exceptions, is one of the few things left that has equally enforced rules. And, for example, Michigan should have been disqualified from the playoffs and placed on probation. The NCAA has one big black eye for that one, and has turned the 2023 CFP into a joke.

Where am I coming from? Pretty obvious that I was trying to show how "winning is the only thing" is a terrible policy - or philosophy for life (of which sport is part). Since words have meaning, cheating would be acceptable to get to "winning", right? After all, that's the "only thing". Playing fair and honest would be secondary to winning. As to your kids, it was hypothetical, pretty obviously, since I clearly made it speculative ("don't know if"). Coulda been my kids, or Brooks Savage's kids, or, pardon the horrible thought only for giggles, Marky Mark's kids. I'm NOT saying you condone cheating, but that's exactly one of the things that old saw implies.

Wasn’t talking about a “philosophy” for life. Wasn’t talking about cheating as a way to win at all cost. Don’t think the old UCLA coach in 1948 was advocating cheating either in order to win. And, never heard that Lombardi was a cheater or advocated cheating by using the saying. I was thinking specifically of ETSU’s win over Jax State with the post. I can only assume ETSU won honestly, by the rules — and coached and played by people of integrity. Guarantee you, WINNING that game by the rules was the goal of both teams when they walked on the court. Guarantee you - ETSU fans wanted the Bucs to win that game - by the rules and with integrity. Again - there’s nothing like a win in a sporting event.

So what does that old quote mean then? What is it excluding? Losses? Sure. "Kissing your sister" ties? Ok. What does the word "only" mean in that context if not excluding all other options? Maybe even more germane................why bring up a quote from 1948 if you were only commenting on the win over Jacksonville St.? It's an old saying that I hear about once or twice a year, usually regarding football, but it's tired, overused, and totally without moral underpinnings.

The *literal* meaning of that saying *implies* that cheating, gouging eyes, flat-handing O-linemen, kicking in the groin, pass interference you can get away with, shirt-pulling under the basket you can get away with, etc., is ok - as long as you win. I KNOW you didn't mean it like that - no "guarantees" needed - but that's what that phrase implies. It should be put to rest.

I bet you're popular at social gatherings.

(12-04-2023 04:44 PM)squeak Wrote:  I bet you're popular at social gatherings.

Pretty much, yes! Great insight! LOL....

Good win. From what I saw Jacksonville State is a little better than last year, but certainly not great. The Bucs are 2 notches (at least) better than last year.
The SoCon got off to a great start in the non-conference but lately Chattanooga and Western have cooled off. Bucs can certainly win 11 or 12 conference games. The bottom 3 seem to be VMI, Mercer, Wofford. Going 5-1 against them and 6-6 against everyone else makes 11-7. A couple of unexpected sweeps and it could be even better.