TheBootleg.com®
Posts of the Week
Each week, we will
highlight a few entertaining and/or informative posts from the
previous week. Please keep in mind that it is hard to keep
track/prioritize all posts so we would welcome input from all
Booties. You can make a "Bootie Selection" post as a
response to any post that you deem worthy or you can email a link
(to the nominated post) to me at lars@thebootleg.com.
Below are the posts that
made this week's list:
Poster: terry
Subject: Another note regarding LW's post of the week
Date: 11/30/01
Like Hulk, I disagree with LW's assertion that Stanford fans
are more prone than others to bring up moral/ethical issues. Hulk
mentioned the ongoing battle for the moral high ground on some
other schools' message boards. The same thing happens over on the
Cal board. In my opinion, there's a difference in the attitudes
of Stanford supporters and Cal supporters. I previously posted
some thoughts on this. Here's an edited version. . . .
It seems to me that Stanford supporters usually make claims of
superiority over Cal based on facts: 7 straight Big Game wins, 9
consecutive basketball wins over Cal, 7 Sears Cups in a row, etc.
Some Cal supporters, on the other hand, make a different claim of
superiority on behalf of their school. They seem to suggest Cal
is better than Stanford because Cal students and alumni are
better people than their Stanford counterparts. For example, Cal
fans often assert that Stanford students have everything given to
them, while Cal students earn their achievements. They describe
Stanford people as arrogant and elitist, while they view
themselves as open and accepting (an opinion that Fresno St. fans
might not share). They often mischaracterize Stanford people as
the wealthy, privileged upper class, while they see themselves as
the humble, virtuous working class. They see Stanford people as
wealthy and successful, enjoying the upper hand at the moment,
but at the core, morally corrupt -- sort of an evil empire. In
contrast, they describe themselves as a diverse community, joined
by a common bond, struggling against setbacks with persistence
and determination -- underdogs fighting the good fight. In other
words, we're Darth Vader and they're Luke Skywalker. They seem to
see the rivalry as a Frank Capra movie -- the evil, rich,
powerful machine against the good, decent, courageous individual.
We're Mr. Potter, and they're George Bailey.
Because of this conviction of their moral superiority, some Cal
supporters see Stanford's success as not just unfortunate, but
unjust. In a just world, they think, Cal would prevail, because
Cal has a righteous cause. That's why many Cal fans just cannot
admit that Stanford's success is earned on the field and in the
classroom. Rather, they argue that Stanford does not deserve its
success and they try to explain it away, the most common theory
being that Stanford bought it. That may be one reason that things
sometimes turn ugly when Cal loses: some Cal fans see a loss as
not just a loss, but an injustice. That's a recipe for
resentment.
The notion of moral superiority is ridiculous, of course.
Consider that many students apply to both Stanford and Cal. Does
a person who applies to both schools become "good" if
he ends up at Cal and "bad" if he ends up at Stanford?
Do the admissions offices base their decisions on the moral
character of the applicants -- like the Sorting Hat, with Cal as
Gryffindor and Stanford as Slytherin? I don't think so. . . .
I certainly don't think all Cal fans hold these views. However,
just reading the cold words on the screen on the two schools'
message boards, I think the themes I've described come through. .
. .
Poster: tommy4
Subject: Re: Q for tommy4 (long)
Date: 12/03/01
ME-97 - Thanks for the question about Azevedo and I'll give a
shot at an answer. He's received so many accolades that it is
hard to condense what he represents to water polo and Stanford in
particular.
My first statement to Stanford fans would be that if you were
ever struggling for a reason to go to a water polo game, you now
have one. He really is a "once-in-a-generation talent."
I graduated in 94 and played for the 93 championship team, and
two runners-up before that, with the chance to play with and
against some of our recent and current Olympians. Tony is
incredible on any scale. There are other players who've had as
good a year as he has statistically and what not, but never as
freshmen.
His father was the Jr. National Team coach back in my day, and at
the workouts you would see young Tony flipping around a ball at
the end of the pool at age 8, and looking good doing it. His
father is one of the best shooting coaches in the country and
Tony's offensive play reflects that. He can create shot
opportunities from anywhere and has many different release points
from which to hose it. His strength and balance are the key.
Imagine if Casey Jacobsen were being smothered at the 3pt line
but was able to leap over his defender and send in a finger roll
from 19'9". That's the type of stuff Tony can do. He's the
most dangerous shooter in the country and one of the best in the
world which he proved before ever playing a game at Stanford,
starring in one Olympic Games and one World Championship
tournament. World Water Polo Magazine has named him the best
young player in the world, and first team All-World. He could
surpass the great Manuel Estiarte of Spain (leading scorer in 4
of 6 Olympics, and only 6' tall) by the time he is done, and in
the world of H20 Polo that is big.
Dante has often dropped that he's the "Michael Jordan"
of water polo, and has actually defended that statement pretty
well. To go with his shooting Tony is fiercely competitive, is
active away from the ball and always trying to make something
happen. He can also score from anywhere, which is like being a
hoops star that can run the point and also post up - maybe Magic
instead of Michael? Opponents have to structure their defensive
game plan around stopping him which opens things up for his
teammates. If you are watching him and waiting for one of these
shots I'm talking about and frustrated that he's not getting the
opportunity, just pay attention to how close to the goal (3-5
meters) his teammates will be with their shots, while a defender
is pressing Tony 7 or 8 meters from the goal. That's huge for
us...it's like if basketball defenses doubled Casey or Josh and
left Curtis alone underneath the basket.
When you watch him move in the water he has much more control of
his body and what he wants to do than anyone else. His
positioning and passing are superior to most others as well. He
was able to make entry passes to Peter Hudnut at 2meters this
year, that few others could have threaded in. This is like a
point guard feeding the post player a sweet pass that leads to a
scoring chance, despite a double-team.
His will to win and succeed is unmatched. The closest comparison
to that I've seen is in my former teammate, and Tony's Olympic
pal, Wolf Wigo. (I would also say that Wolf was the best high
school prodigy to come to Stanford before Tony). It's no small
wonder that Wolf worked as an assistant to Dante and Ben this
year. The Card played his style of ball. Remember stories you
would hear about Jordan spanking everyone in pool at his house?
These guys have the same drive. You also can't discount Tony's
presence in the huddle and as the first freshman to ever be team
captain on the farm (and that's a rich history of good players).
I went to as many games as possible this year and you never saw
the team get rattled, even in the loss to Cal. That's a credit to
Tony's attitude as much as to the experience and depth of the
team. I'm sure he was even a calming presence for the coaches,
who sometimes get excited.
I see that I'm blowing past my self-imposed word limit and will
wrap this up.
In terms of basketball he is Magic Johnson, with his ability to
dominate in all areas of the pool, but with the ferocity and
attitude of MJ.
In football - he's like the new breed of quarterback that can run
and throw equally well and can kill the defense with foot or arm
- Vick, McNabb - but with the maturity and composure of Joe
Montana.
He will change the way that people play the game, and I've seen
that already as the high school players that I help coach already
try to emulate him.
Barring serious injury he should have a long, prosperous athletic
career and will hopefully bring new attention to water polo
outside of the CA "power-base."
He should rank up there with all the other great Stanford/Olympic
athletes. What I'm curious to see is if he can do some
unprecedented things like lead the team to four titles in a row.
And finally, like in any sport, there is no way he could do it by
himself.
Nick Ellis is one of the best goalies in Stanford history. His
quickness and passing are amazing, and I hope he comes back to
play as a 5th year senior. He constantly outplayed the UCLA
goalie, who is the National team back up, in every match and
tournament this year.
Peter Hudnut is a strong and versatile 2meter man, and would have
swept the headlines if not for Tony this year.
Jeff Nesmith is probably the best lefty in college (also Tony's
hs. teammate) and I can't tell you how important it is to have a
great lefty. It opens up both sides of the pool on offense. I
don't think any Stanford title team has been without one.
Onno Koelman was a great crowd favorite as the only guy under 6'
and the most active player in the pool. You gotta love Aussies in
general, especially those that show up for the big games and play
with intelligence as well as emotion.
Congrats to all the guys. Soak it in for the next few weeks, and
you know the countdown for 2002 will start with the first plunge
into the pool in January.