Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Adam is a smart man. While I don't find his arguments convincing, I admire he is publicly advocating a position he believes in. He isn't in any way foolish or superficial, he's giving it all he's got because he believes strongly in the merits of his case and in the destructive effect campus sites could have. I recommend reading his articles about it on CHN.
He's wrong, but in a forthright and honorable way, and that's how all sides of a debate should proceed.
I agree that Carle utterly destroyed his arguments -- it is a masterclass in debate -- but Adam set up the interview, knowing it would be difficult to debate somebody who is a fervent advocate and has the cred of a coach. And he'd do it again. That's awesome. I'm hoping we move to campus sites because they are so clearly superior, but at least we have a worthy opponent.
It was telling that at the end of the interview Adam says "it feels like we are going backwards" and "we were supposed to be growing as a sport" and "admitting defeat." I think, unconsciously, the media advocates (not Adam so much, as like I said he has a genuine understanding and opinion) of things like this, like uncontrolled expansion or blind cloning NHL rules, are attaching the "bigness" of the event to the importance of being media for that event. ESPN does this pathologically: bigger is better, more professional is better, more slick is better, more commercialized is better, more revenue is better. That feels like BIRGing to me. Granted, I have a quick gag reflex about that, but I do think it is a real psychological effect.
He's wrong, but in a forthright and honorable way, and that's how all sides of a debate should proceed.
I agree that Carle utterly destroyed his arguments -- it is a masterclass in debate -- but Adam set up the interview, knowing it would be difficult to debate somebody who is a fervent advocate and has the cred of a coach. And he'd do it again. That's awesome. I'm hoping we move to campus sites because they are so clearly superior, but at least we have a worthy opponent.
It was telling that at the end of the interview Adam says "it feels like we are going backwards" and "we were supposed to be growing as a sport" and "admitting defeat." I think, unconsciously, the media advocates (not Adam so much, as like I said he has a genuine understanding and opinion) of things like this, like uncontrolled expansion or blind cloning NHL rules, are attaching the "bigness" of the event to the importance of being media for that event. ESPN does this pathologically: bigger is better, more professional is better, more slick is better, more commercialized is better, more revenue is better. That feels like BIRGing to me. Granted, I have a quick gag reflex about that, but I do think it is a real psychological effect.
Last edited:
