Bluejays

[WSUwatcher]

Cold

MTXE's long-winded analysis, and his apparent lack of anything better to do than tell us what he thinks and why, remind me of Cold.

To give him his due, he is much nicer. Still, could he be the new, kinder and gentler incarnation of Cold sneaking back in with a new IP address? Let's wait to see what he thinks about Shocker football. (On the other hand, if he's actually just Mr. BJ as some believe, he presumably won't care about football, inasmuch as it isn't part of the Creighton universe).

[MTXE]

All I read was "blah blah blah blah blah." Let me hate Creighton in peace. Heck I'm Creighton alumni and I still hate them. I have a lot of hate in my heart and it feels so good.

Then sharpen your blade (see: wit) and remove all opportunities for an easy counter-attack in your dialogue. Represent well.

[HockeyShock]

It's saddens me so few were able to comprehend the logic let alone intention of my post...

I must also assume that the emotional responses are merely another symptom of the insecurity that has infected our fanbase for some time now.

While I have cause to rebuke those that chose to manifest their insecurities in nonconstructive ways (i.e. attack me personally), I will instead attempt to further clarify my point of view.

Are we rivals?

A few definitions: a person or thing that is in a position to dispute another's preeminence or superiority; One that equals or almost equals another in a particular respect. As you can see by a deeper understanding of the meaning, one competitor is often looked at as superior and the other inferior but not by much.

Another popular definition of the word rival connotes a nearly equal relationship, with perhaps each opponent obtaining victory over the other often enough that superiority cannot be established -at least not for any length of time. This is what I would call the ideal rivalry.

Then you've got a loose, more urban definition of rivalry that roots itself in something less competitive and something more emotional -like hatred. Now hatred of course can be present in the previous definitions, but it is usually also accompanied with respect.

Notice the following scenarios:

K-State thinks they are rivals with KU in basketball. Since the inception of the Big 12 they are 2-30. From a purely win-loss aspect, it wouldn't seem to be the case at all looking at the first two definitional examples. However, using the third definition, we can explain how K-State and KU fans consider themselves rivals. There is strong dislike for each other based upon aspects other than what happens on the court.

Now let's look at the Army - Navy all-time football win-loss record: 53-49. This would be a very excellent example of the second definition of rivalry.

When we look at Creighton versus Wichita State we cannot use the first or second definition because of one glaring fact: we are 5-27 in our last 32 games. We can however use the third definition of rivalry to identify our mutual hatred for one another. I question though the merits of even bringing up the term rivalry (or using it in the context of mockery??) in the first place. It is a weak and potentially embarrassing position due to our vulnerable record and the ease by which a Creighton fan can throw it in our face.

If a Shocker fan wants to inflict some measure of discomfort on a Creighton fan, perhaps a better strategy would be to focus on Creighton's actual weaknesses relative to us.

For example:

1) They play in a rented gym that Nebraska also plays in from time to time.

2) The size of our hardcore fanbase relative to theirs in not comparable.

3) Their coach is Mr. one and out in the NCAA tourney. We have a recent Sweet 16. But then again we don't have that coach anymore either.. :(

4) Our depth of athletes and recruiting.

5) Their recent embarrassing losses.

6) Our private facilities.

7) Our tradition, our game-time atmosphere etc. etc.

There are many tangibles and intangibles that cause Creighton fans to be jealous of us, their win-loss record isn't one of them. Since win-loss records are fundamental to most "rivalries" in sports, we should avoid those discussions in our trash talking. It simply doesn't make sense. If you want to go into battle with an opponent, don't carry a double-edged sword.

Hopefully we can sweep Creighton this year as it is way overdue that we beat them at their home.

Your points are well-made, but I still fail to see why this is such a big deal to you? Why should we temper our language just because the W/L record isn't on our side? What is the proper split before the term can be applied per definition 2? 50/50? 40/60?

Moreover, I'm a bit perplexed as to the paradox of your legitimizing the KU/KSU rivalry and delegitimizing the WSU/Creighton 'rivalry' on the same grounds. Admittedly there isn't such an obvious natural delineation as Silo Tech/Snob Hill, but there are still plenty of natural boundaries that WSU and Creighton stand on opposite sides of: the aforementioned Kansas/Nebraska border, public school vs. private, jesuit vs. secular, good coach vs. weasel-faced crybaby. And besides, when it comes down to what motivates people on a day-to-day basis, isn't definition 3 the only real definition?

My example: Chiefs/Raiders. Now, circa 1970 this probably fit definition 2 rather well, but since 1980 neither team has been especially dominant, yet the rivalry continues. I've watched numerous NFL Films interviews with old Chiefs and Raiders players talking about the rivalry. Record was hardly ever mentioned, but every player would mention how much they simply hated the other team.

Records are nice and statistically neat, and proving dominance does make for interesting games and can spur the start of good rivalries. Example: Colts/Patriots. But the lasting rivalries have emotional stake beyond the lifetime record.

We've been searching for a villain since Tulsa left the league, and we've finally found one, especially since the last MVC tournament. I do see why you would think such lopsided behavior would be embarrassing in a normal psychological context, but as I've said, this is not a normal psychological context. This is college basketball, and this is fun. If my behavior causes a few Creighton fans to look down their noses at me, so be it. I've been called worse things by better people.

So I ask, one more time, why do you care? What end result of this 'embarrassment' is so painful to you? What real negative impact does this have? The only impact I can see is more ticket sales for WSU/Creighton games, and perhaps a few more electrons lost in cyberspace over the topic. What real, existential consequence do you fear from this?

And, by the way, we already do rib Creighton for all those things that you mention. You should know that we leave no ammunition unused. ;-)

:clap: :wsu_posters: :yahoo: :clap:

EDIT: This is what happens when I take too long to respond. I understand being embarrassed by the record. However, that record stands and will be brought up no matter what we say. The statistical facts of Creighton attendance when we come to town, combined with the well-documented exploits of certain Creighton fans and media outlets point to the reality that WE ARE RIVALS. They hate us, we hate them. They hold the record edge for now, but that fact shouldn't take away from the primary fact.

[Aargh]

We can hate if we want to.

We can call a school a rival if we want to.

We don't care about no stinking history of W's and L's. We're talkin' about now and next year and the year after.

We're WSU fans and we have no ethics!

[tropicalshox]

We can hate if we want to.

We're WSU fans and we have no ethics!

I kinda like that.

[MTXE]

Your points are well-made, but I still fail to see why this is such a big deal to you? Why should we temper our language just because the W/L record isn't on our side? What is the proper split before the term can be applied per definition 2? 50/50? 40/60?

This is frustrating. When did I say we had to temper our language? I simply made a suggestion that it would be in our best interest not to use this one phrase, "not a rivalry", in it's current sarcastic form.

Creighton has stated they are rivals with Southern Illinois. To argue with them is to grovel for their attention. We understand well that we irritate them in ways that far exceed other Valley schools. Continually throwing this phrase in their face will have, and has had, unintended consequences. I'm surprised some of those that use it have not come to this conclusion on their own.

Moreover, I'm a bit perplexed as to the paradox of your legitimizing the KU/KSU rivalry and delegitimizing the WSU/Creighton 'rivalry' on the same grounds.

Because I have no personal stake or concern in whether or not K-State maintains their dignity. Proclaiming something as existing and condoning it are two different things. If KSU runs around yelling "not a rivalry" I would offer them the same warning.

[HockeyShock]

This is frustrating. When did I say we had to temper our language? I simply made a suggestion that it would be in our best interest not to use this one phrase, "not a rivalry", in it's current sarcastic form.

Actually, you started with the phrase, "Obsession noted," which was not so much a suggestion as a taunt, so please discard the moral high ground you pulled out of your sleeve.

Creighton has stated they are rivals with Southern Illinois. To argue with them is to grovel for their attention. We understand well that we irritate them in ways that far exceed other Valley schools. Continually throwing this phrase in their face will have, and has had, unintended consequences. I'm surprised some of those that use it have not come to this conclusion on their own.

Except that their highest-attended game wasn't against SIU. It was against us, and in my experience Creighton seems to be far 'nastier' to us in general than SIU. So they can 'state' all they want. The proof, as it were, is in the pudding.

The "not a rivalry" dig simply brings attention to these facts. It may bring attention to an extremely disproportionate head-to-head record too, but I ask you: Who's the more pathologically obsessed, us or them? The case can be made that we're taking aim at the top MVC programs because we aspire to be one - an admirable goal to be sure. What can you say for Creighton's antipathy toward us, give that lopsided record? Why the trash talk about our coach? Why the 'Super Bowl' comments? If they really don't give two licks about us, they're doing a right poor job of showing it.

Because I have no personal stake or concern in whether or not K-State maintains their dignity. Proclaiming something as existing and condoning it are two different things. If KSU runs around yelling "not a rivalry" I would offer them the same warning.

And it would still make no sense, because the rivalry extends beyond the record. And while we're discussing records, let's throw away this fallacious assumption that this is only a men's basketball rivalry. Who did WSU beat in the MVC baseball tournament final last year? You want to talk disparaging records, that's a good place to go.

:clap: :wsu_posters: :yahoo: :clap:

[Smooth007]

HATE! HATE! HATE! HATE!

[The Mad Hatter]

Dear MTXE,

You have noted that you think that demonstrating an obsession towards CU is something you think the WSU fan base should avoid.

At the same time, you arguing for multiple days with the rest of Shockernet is the sole reason that there is a 5 page thread about CU at the top the basketball forum.

Think about it.

Regards,

The Mad Hatter

[emmitt]

Who cares if Creighton considers us a rival or not?

For their benefit, they should down play any talk of that because they are going to get b*tch slapped by the Shox at least twice this year.

[MTXE]

Actually, you started with the phrase, "Obsession noted," which was not so much a suggestion as a taunt, so please discard the moral high ground you pulled out of your sleeve.

Touche'

Except that their highest-attended game wasn't against SIU. It was against us,

It's funny how that statistic keeps popping up in this thread. Look back in my history and make note that I was the one to post that when we were visited by a CU troll recently.

[MTXE]

Dear MTXE,

You have noted that you think that demonstrating an obsession towards CU is something you think the WSU fan base should avoid.

At the same time, you arguing for multiple days with the rest of Shockernet is the sole reason that there is a 5 page thread about CU at the top the basketball forum.

Think about it.

Regards,

The Mad Hatter

Unintended consequences.

[MTXE]

Who cares if Creighton considers us a rival or not?

For their benefit, they should down play any talk of that because they are going to get b*tch slapped by the Shox at least twice this year.

As well we should down play that kind of talk because there are bigger fish to fry.

Here's to b*tch slapping them twice this year!

[martymoose]

Maybe it's time to let this die.

[rjl]

Dear MTXE,

You have noted that you think that demonstrating an obsession towards CU is something you think the WSU fan base should avoid.

At the same time, you arguing for multiple days with the rest of Shockernet is the sole reason that there is a 5 page thread about CU at the top the basketball forum.

Think about it.

Regards,

The Mad Hatter

Interesting point, but a bad one.

MTXE has the right and self-obligation to defend accusations leveled against him.