Bob Knight

[EvilMD]

So many people defend this piece of crap, even today. Read this article by Frank Deford of SI (Oscar Combs put it on twitter). Scroll down to the point where his ex player and the IU women's coach are watching his practice. Then imagine any of that happening today.

http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2015/01/14/rabbit-hunter-frank-deford-bobby-kight-si-60

 

[Chuckinden]

Bobby has always been an egotistical prick.

 

[OldEvilleCat]

"But he's a bully, always having to put people down. Someday, I'm afraid, he's going to be a sad old man." Says an Eastern coach, "He'll get away with the bullying and the vulgarity only so long as he wins."

Bob is a doucher!

 

[preacherfan]

I tried to read that article but I couldn't do it. It was horribly written and just lacked any kind of human interest. Maybe the author should have written the same kind of aricle on Hitler? It would make about the same amount of sense.

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

I always get annoyed at people that point out the things he does for some charity or some of his players or whatever. Doing good things does not give you a pass for treating everybody else like dirt. He has no respect for anyone that doesn't do things exactly the way he wants, nor does he respect the opinion of others. He doesn't exhibit any kind of grace, humility, or positivity towards others.

 

[tbone.ky]

The article was written in 1981, but the author was better than Nostradamus at predicting Knight's future:

"But he's a bully, always having to put people down. Someday, I'm afraid, he's going to be a sad old man." Says an Eastern coach."

 

[UK90]

Originally posted by preacherfan:

I tried to read that article but I couldn't do it. It was horribly written and just lacked any kind of human interest.

FWIW, what you regard as "horribly written" is actually one of the most famous SI articles ever written, and has been frequently cited as one of it's best as well (especially by Frank Deford fans). But, hey, everyone's opinion is different.

 

[Poetax]

Originally posted by UK90:

Originally posted by preacherfan:

I tried to read that article but I couldn't do it. It was horribly written and just lacked any kind of human interest.

FWIW, what you regard as "horribly written" is actually one of the most famous SI articles ever written, and has been frequently cited as one of it's best as well (especially by Frank Deford fans). But, hey, everyone's opinion is different.

It's famous for being about a bully.

 

[mj2k10]

Originally posted by Poetax:

Originally posted by UK90:

Originally posted by preacherfan:

I tried to read that article but I couldn't do it. It was horribly written and just lacked any kind of human interest.

FWIW, what you regard as "horribly written" is actually one of the most famous SI articles ever written, and has been frequently cited as one of it's best as well (especially by Frank Deford fans). But, hey, everyone's opinion is different.

It's famous for being about a bully.

It was written in early 1981. You need to understand the context of the times. That was less than a decade after Rupp retired, barely over 2 years after Woody Hayes' career ended. Bear Bryant was still coaching (and just months removed from winning a national title). Bo Schembechler was pretty much in the middle of his Michigan tenure. Not that all of those guys were exactly like Knight, but the imperious, militaristic head coach was still very much a part of the landscape.

That article was actually far less of a hero-worshiping hagiography of Knight than almost anything that had been written about him up to that time. In fact, there's far less rationalization and justification of Knight's behavior than the more famous "Season on the Brink", which was written 5 years later.

 

[hotelblue]

the narrative that intrigues me is how the iu fan base loved him like a dictator lol. they feared him first. the writer had a great analogy of that when he kicked the basketball. and that people try to humor him instead of respond to him was a major psychological jab. there was good stuff in the article. a definite time capsul. and for all uk fans who wouldn't bother to read that, i understand. it's mostly apologetic. for people that watched him in the 70's i can understand the annoyance. he can fish until the cows come home, he's still a bully. i respect his personal discipline and nods to former players and coaches. but even in '81 his out-of-date politically incorrect self was asking to be questioned. just a very weird and complex person, who all but missed the 60's according to this piece.

 

[preacherfan]

Originally posted by UK90:

Originally posted by preacherfan:

I tried to read that article but I couldn't do it. It was horribly written and just lacked any kind of human interest.

FWIW, what you regard as "horribly written" is actually one of the most famous SI articles ever written, and has been frequently cited as one of it's best as well (especially by Frank Deford fans). But, hey, everyone's opinion is different.

Yep, I realize that. Maybe it is the subject matter that I couldn't handle or maybe it is the style? I don't know. Maybe it is because I started reading it last night after a long challenging day? Or, maybe I am simply not a Deford fan?

 

[thepip]

I've said it many times, I've met many people like knight "big bully". The minute a fight breaks out he would be the first to run.

 

[Mojocat]

That was a great piece by Deford. I'm not a huge fan of his, but the man can write. Many people, including most of this board, have a simplistic view of Knight. To be sure, there is bad - the ugliness, the bullying, etc. Clearly, there was a lot more to him, or he wouldn't have achieved what he did, wouldn't be defended like he is and was by others. This article captures the dual nature, the conflict inside Knight. Like here:

He's also a clever man and delightful company when he chooses to be. Beyond all that he has an exemplary character, without any of the vices of the flesh that so often afflict men in his station and at his time of life. He's devoted to his family, Nancy and their two sons, Timothy, 16, and Patrick, 10. His supporters fall over themselves relating tales of his civic and charitable good works, a light that Knight humbly hides under a basket. In this era of athletic corruption Knight stands four-square for the values of higher education that so many coaches and boot-lickers in the NCAA only pay lip service to. His loyalty is as unquestioned as his integrity. He is the best and brightest ... and the most honorable, too. He has it all, every bit of it. Just lying there on the table. He has only to lean down, pick it up and let the chip fall off. But he can't. For Knight to succeed at basketball -- not only to win, you understand, but to succeed because "That's much harder," he says -- all the world must be in the game. All the people are players, for or against, to be scouted, tested, broken down, built back up if they matter. Life isn't lived; it's played. And the rabbits are everywhere.

Specifically, the bold part.

Thought this was interesting:

But that's subsidiary to the main point: Knight loves all coaches. He will ask people who knew Rupp well to tell him about the old man. What made the Baron tick? Why did he do this? How?

And this was perhaps the key part of the whole thing, from an old mentor who knew Knight well:

"Bobby has got so much," Bates says. "And nobody can ever get him. He doesn't cheat. He doesn't drink. He doesn't even chase women. But for some reason he thinks he has been a bad boy, and no matter how successful he becomes, he thinks he must be punished."

Lot of amateur psychology there, but it amounts to something....

 

[maverick1]

Originally posted by Mojocat:
That was a great piece by Deford...This article captures the dual nature, the conflict inside Knight. Like here:

And this was perhaps the key part of the whole thing, from an old mentor who knew Knight well:

"Bobby has got so much," Bates says. "And nobody can ever get him. He doesn't cheat. He doesn't drink. He doesn't even chase women. But for some reason he thinks he has been a bad boy, and no matter how successful he becomes, he thinks he must be punished. Because of this self-loathing, he's really into S&M, particularly dominance/submission and ball gags."

I think you left part of the quote out Mojo

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

Originally posted by Mojocat:
That was a great piece by Deford. I'm not a huge fan of his, but the man can write. Many people, including most of this board, have a simplistic view of Knight. To be sure, there is bad - the ugliness, the bullying, etc. Clearly, there was a lot more to him, or he wouldn't have achieved what he did, wouldn't be defended like he is and was by others. This article captures the dual nature, the conflict inside Knight. Like here

Well, if despising a man that chokes a player, head butts a player, wipes his butt and gives the toilet paper to a player, tells a female reporter that if rape is inevitable she should lay back and enjoy it, attacks a police officer, throw a chair on court, and lies about UK players not going to class, is simplistic, then so be it. I guess I am.

 

[Mojocat]

Originally posted by maverick1:

Originally posted by Mojocat:
That was a great piece by Deford...This article captures the dual nature, the conflict inside Knight. Like here:

And this was perhaps the key part of the whole thing, from an old mentor who knew Knight well:

"Bobby has got so much," Bates says. "And nobody can ever get him. He doesn't cheat. He doesn't drink. He doesn't even chase women. But for some reason he thinks he has been a bad boy, and no matter how successful he becomes, he thinks he must be punished. Because of this self-loathing, he's really into S&M, particularly dominance/submission and ball gags."

I think you left part of the quote out Mojo

yeah, I didn't want to bias anyone before they had a chance to read the whole thing....

 

[maverick1]

Originally posted by Mojocat:
yeah, I didn't want to bias anyone before they had a chance to read the whole thing....

 

[Joneslab]

Say what you want about Deford, but the main could write. Jesus.

This is horribly written? No. This is the sort of thing you don't see anymore: real, poetic, breathtaking sportswriting. I like blogs but the trade-off is that we're going to lose pieces like this.

 

[55mgtf]

Well written piece. If possible, I would say that both a simplistic view and a more complex view are valid. His outward behavior warrants a very negative simplistic view. Digging deeper, it gets complex quickly when trying to understand why he behaves as he does.

One positive note: Knight would not have tolerated the behavior of Indiana fans when we last played in Bloomington. He would have grabbed the mic and told the fans in no uncertain terms to stop. And they would have.