Talk:College Basketball
WikiProject College Basketball (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject College Basketball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of College Basketball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject United States  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

The color barrier and college basketball

Although more attention today is paid to Texas Western's 1966 NCAA Basketball Championship (thanks in part to the recent Disney movie "Glory Road"), it was the Loyola University-Chicago team's of the early 1960's that were actually responsible for breaking every color barrier that still remained in men's college basketball. This included breaking the longstanding gentleman's agreement by fielding four black starters for parts of the 1961-62, and the entire 1962-63 season, as well as being the first team in NCAA Division I history to place an all-black lineup on the court (Dec. 1962 vs. Wyoming). [1]

Coach George Ireland's 1963 NCAA Championship with Loyola, three years prior to Texas Western's, was for decades considered to be the pioneering achievement for racial equality in college basketball. Loyola's use of four black starters, and five black players for much of the game, to defeat two-time defending NCAA champ Cincinnati left no color barrier intact in men's college basketball, and was then considered to be the final and ultimate blow to racial inequality in college basketball.

In fact, the lack of historical significance given at the time to Texas Western's 1966 championship is well evidenced by these quotes, featured in Sports Illustrated following Texas Western's victory 1966, and the Lexington Herald Leader in 1991:

"The wrap-up of the championship weekend didn't even hint at any of this. It didn't even
mention the fact that Texas Western was all-black." (Frank Deford, Sports Illustrated, "Go-Go 
With Bobby Joe,", March 28, 1966) 
"I don't know, I was always surprised at the significance placed on that (1966 NCAA 
Championship) game," [Frank] Deford said. "The Loyola-Chicago team that won it a few years
before was virtually all-black. That had been the big fuss. Not much was made of Texas Western
being all-black at the time. It was sort of a discovery by the outside world that came a 
little bit late, as is often the case." - John Clay, Lexington Herald Leader, "The Runts: Still
Special After All These Years," February 9, 1991.


How about talking about the integrated CCNY teams of the late 40's and early 50's? How can U.S.F. be ignored, winning two championships in the 50's with blacks leading the way. The integration of college basketball did not have a seminal event as did baseball. There was no first day, with Jackie Robinson going out to 2nd base. There was no Supreme Court decision, and no congressional legislation. It was a process, slow, bit by bit. Too mmuch emphasis on 1963 Loyola in this article. Mwinog2777

I agree that those teams were also important, and should also be mentioned. Perhaps you can add to the article? However, I disagree that there is too much of an emphasis on the Loyola teams, considering what they accomplished and the barriers they broke. CollegeSportsGuy 08:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

http://www.bigbluehistory.net/bb/rupp.html

More information, including a complete game-by-game schedule with stats and audio from the historic 1962-63 championship season, can be found here: [2]

Incorrect statistic reverted

Quote:

Only ten schools have reached the last eight Men's NCAA Division I Tournaments.

I have removed that statement because that is simply not correct as it stands. The official NCAA data indicates that 65 teams competes for a spot in the tournament, and of that 65, only 64 are actually seeded. Please provide evidence to the contrary that is well-sourced. Alternatively, if that was a less than optimally worded statement meant to mean something else, please modify it until it says exactly what was intended. Thanks! Dsf 01:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Umm, I don't think you're reading that statistic correctly. It's saying that those teams have made the last eight consecutive (i.e. ALL of the last eight!) NCAA tourneys. And it's actually correct. It says the same thing right here in my NCAA Tournament Men's Final Four book. So now that we've cleared that up, I'll go ahead and revert this accurate statistic. - CollegeSportsGuy 19:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

MVC A Major Conference?

Is the MVC really a major conference? Sure they have had a couple good seasons but they hardly constitute for a major conference. Perhaps a good mid-major.

It does appear that the editor of this page is extremely biased towards the MVC. They are clearly a mid-major, not a major, yet anytime someone fixes the page it gets thrown out and declared "vandalism." What's really funny is one of the citations is a link to the current top 25 of which no MVC team is member as of 1/5/2007. My guess is there is a dedicated group of kids at some MVC school who have mede it their objective to glorify the MVC. For an unbiased take on this issue, look here: mid-major.

Obviously it is someone from Illinois State, they have the main picture as well. Truly biased article.

Proportion

How is African Americans in College Basketball a larger section than History? I wish I knew enough about the topic to do something about this, but someone needs to. --Djrobgordon 06:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Undue Weight

The article currently seems to lead very heavily towards NCAA Division I. I think a more neutral tone would discuss all divisions and associations with equal weight. Perhaps someone could propose a lead that gives equal weight and then subsections could be developed to discuss the different associations (NCAA, NAIA, etc) and divisions (I, II, III). Absolon S. Kent (talk) 16:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

You are absolutely right. D-2 baasketball is actually very interseting to watch and so is D-3 Baseballboy2 (talk) 01:54, 30 March 2011 (UTC)Baseballboy2
Interesting and historically significant are two very different things. There's a reason most of this is DI-slanted: it's more important to the evolving of the sport. Jrcla2 (talk) 19:26, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Historical aspects

This article seems to fall short on historical aspects. Intercollegiate basketball was played well before 1939. Just throwing it out there as a suggestion for those that might be interested in contributing.CrazyPaco (talk) 01:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved appears that there are several options to keep and expand, or fork the article. Since this is stale and there appears to no longer be a need to move the article, I suggest someone begins boldly working on addressing the current article based on the ideas presented below. Tiggerjay (talk) 21:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)



College basketball -> NCAA basketball - fix WP:Systematic bias, since NCAA basketball is not the only type of college basketball in the world. NAIA Men's Basketball Championships clearly shows this case. "College basketball" should either become a stub article, or a set index article (disambiguation like list) -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 01:57, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
  • There are several issues in this request. I say Keep college basketball article, but as a general college basketball page (not a stub, or redirect, but a valid article about general college basketball (ideally with a summary of list of various "college basketball pages" we have, plus a discussion of some leagues that we don't actually have...). Concurrently create a specific and distinctly separate second article to be called NCAA Basketball. Most of the materials we have now should be shipped, by an experienced colleague in such matters, to this newly created page. That is there SHOULD still be a Wikipedia college basketball page discussing it generally. The see also section in this to be created "college basketball" page would possibly accommodate other college basketball leagues linked including NCAA. So from this standpoint, one of the original proposal's points is valid, that yes, there are actually other college basketball leagues as well. werldwayd (talk) 01:31, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
    • Comment this is not a general college basketball article. We don't have such a beast. That is why I suggest moving this article to NCAA baketball, and creating a new article at "college basketball". Obviously, the first draft after a move would be a stub article, yet to be fleshed out. As almost all the history of this article concerns the NCAA, the edit history, and the majority of the content should be moved. That would leave the admin who performs the move what to do with the title "college basketball" The simple thing to do would be to create a stub, afterwhich, we regular editors, can then split the content apart from the newly renamed NCAA basketball article, and expand on the generic concept article. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 04:00, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
  • As a general discussion, I feel the notion of what really "college basketball" is, is a far "wider" notion than just the so-called NCAA Basketball. Dubbing NCAA as "college basketball" is an overused and grossly unmerited Americanism. "College basketball" for everybody should be any basketball played in colleges (pre-university level educational institutions). Furthermore everybody knows NCAA is not "technically" a "college basketball" even at US level. It is non-sensical, demeaning, humiliating to call it a college league. Furthermore, it is an idiotic misnomer as so called "college basketball". It is for everybody to see and predominantly so, that actually NCAA is more a combined UNIVERSITY and COLLEGE basketball rather than mere COLLEGE basketball. It beats me how renowned esteemed universities like Harvard, Notre Dame, UCLA or Duke even would AGREE to be dubbed mere "colleges". Don't they have a sense of pride at least of being a university, not some corner college in some obscure town? This is an atrocity being committed on a daily basis in the NCAA and by its team members. Calling NCAA as some "college basketball" league from an international point of view is a misnomer and a huge misrepresentation, just like calling some purely American event a "World Series" or whatever. How can it be a "World" series if there is not even one SINGLE team from outside the United States. Wikipedia is an international site, not an American site. I suggest "college basketball" becomes a general discussion of proper "college basketball". At top of the page, a disambiguation lead can be added to say, "For American NCAA college basketball, see NCAA Basketball". Or if colleagues still come to a concensus that it is still "college basketball", then let that page be called "College Basketball (NCAA)" and also "College Basketball (NAIA)" and "College Basketball (XXXX)" or "(YYYY)" for example. In conclusion, I suggest to keep College Basketball" as a general discussion of proper college basketball the world over. A brief section could be consecrated in this College basketball article for the NCAA, and shift most of materials pertaining to NCAA to a new article called "NCAA basketball" (with no college or university to be mentioned in title) werldwayd (talk) 22:23, 31 March 2013 (UTC) werldwayd (talk) 00:39, 1 April 2013 (UTC) werldwayd (talk) 01:46, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
    • Why not just move this article to NCAA basketball and then create a new article at the then empty title College basketball instead? IF you're moving almost all the content, wouldn't it make more sense to move the entire page first, and then create a new article? If you don't like the title "college basketball", we could always use a descriptive title, "competitive basketball found at tertiary education institutions", or just add a redirect from university baskbetball -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 04:00, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
      • I agree for a massive move to NCAA Basketball and creating a stub or a redirect or a brief disambiguation page on College basketball. I would even volunteer once this is done to create at least 1-2 paragraph general "college basketball" article myself once all the NCAA material is moved with consensus. werldwayd (talk) 15:04, 1 April 2013 (UTC) werldwayd (talk) 15:18, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Incidentally, if there is too much resistance for the change, as a compromise, and since many Americans do know the NCAA as college basketball, I suggest a move to "College Basketball (NCAA)" instead. That way we could also have "College Basketball (NAIA)" etc. I think that would be an option, although frankly I prefer NCAA Basketball. Simpler and clearer. I stand by my promise regarding establishing and maintaining a "college basketball" page immediately after the move is made. werldwayd (talk) 15:18, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
    • The only one (so far) lodging any objections is yourself, but you also seem to support the move. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 20:15, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
      • Actually I see no responses, pro or against. But knowing how passionate people are in basketball, I know I am one, there will be an outcry now or later on... For that reason, I believe we simply have to wait for other responses as well on such an important move. Such a drastic action on such an important matter cannot be effected after a discussion between just two contributors. My cautionary comments and alternatives are intended to avoid later headaches, big headaches. We may perform this move as is, with minimum discussion and no input, and then the floodgates open that it was an unwarranted move done after "mimimal discussion" between two persons. By providing arguments for both sides, more valid points are made, further interest is aroused and discussions stimulated, better responses obtained, and you never know, by additional comments by me (a sort of a devil's advocate), our discussion and eventual decision either way gets more in depth acceptance and consensus. werldwayd (talk) 15:41, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Keep and broaden. Red Slash 05:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Insufficient inline citations.

This article only has 6 inline citations, and they are very unevenly disbursed. -- Preceding unsigned comment added by Berserkhaggis (talk o contribs) 22:18, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Balance and scope

This article is neither balanced nor neutral. By name this purports to be about college basketball, but by structure and content it is rigidly about only one organization, the NCAA. The NCAA is large, but what about the hundreds of colleges in the NJCAA, NAIA, NCCAA, USCAA and other organizations? They deserve space in any article entitled "college basketball". -- Preceding unsigned comment added by JaconaFrere (talk o contribs) 23:04, December 12, 2013? (UTC-5)

  • @JaconaFrere: I agree the coverage should be more balanced, both in regard to the different organizations, but mainly in regard to college basketball in other countries of the world, notably Canada and the Philippines. --PanchoS (talk) 14:44, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 29 June 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. Although there is some support for a concept dab, a number of opposers also cite PTOPIC grounds that the current status quo is fine, with the main article talking about the US  -- Amakuru (talk) 09:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)



College basketball -> College basketball in the United States - Besides the lead there's almost no mention of college basketball in other countries of the world, most notably Canada and the Philippines. I therefore suggest moving the whole article to a title that properly describes its content, per precedent College basketball in the Philippines, while creating at this generic place a disambiguation page that may progressively evolve into a WP:Broad-concept article. -- PanchoS (talk) 14:44, 29 June 2016 (UTC) --Relisting.  -- Amakuru (talk) 22:13, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Support: per WP:PRECISE and WP:CONSISTENCY, clearly this page is only about the United States. Ebonelm (talk) 19:49, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Support per WP:PRECISE and WP:CONSISTENCY; the current name is a hold-over from the days when WP had few articles, and no one had yet contemplated writing about college basketball outside the US. -- SMcCandlish ? ? ¢ ???????? 22:08, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I really wish that when people made proposals like this to create a broad-concept article they would at least mock up a rough draft. Too often we have a discussion like this end in move and then no one ever gets around to writing the concept dab. Jenks24 (talk) 03:00, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose unless someone is working on a WP:CONCEPTDAB. Leaving College basketball pointing to College basketball in the United States would be a pointless move that would hinder navigation.--Cúchullain t/c 16:22, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Relisting comment @Jenks24: @Cuchullain: the proposal above actually says to "place a disambiguation page" at College basketball, not to leave it as a redirect, and I think PanchoS intended to put a simple dab at first which might be worked into a concept dab later. The current setup implies that college basketball in the United States is the primary topic for the term "college basketball" (which it might well be). But another option woudl be no primary topic, with a simple two entry dab pointing to either College basketball in the United States or College basketball in the Philippines. I suggest we need to see if there's a consensus one way or the other. Thanks  -- Amakuru (talk) 22:13, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the clarification, I should have read more closely before. But unless there is college basketball in more than just the Phillipines, or some better arguments are provided, then I still thin that US college basketball is the primary topic on the English Wikipedia. Jenks24 (talk) 08:19, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Amakuru:Sorry, I should have been more clear. I don't see the point in moving this article and creating a dab page for only 2 articles on college basketball. The American article has many times more views and a cursory look at Google Books has comparable results. While there's a threat of systemic bias in this sort of thing, it's also the case that college basketball is more prominent in the US (which invented the sport) than in the Philippines. Given that there's not much risk of confusion requiring disambiguation - we can easily distinguish the Filipino article with a hat note - I wouldn't want to move such a widely-viewed topic unless we had some content to replace it with.--Cúchullain t/c 15:00, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose. College basketball in the U.S. is far and away the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here, getting 75 times the page views as college basketball in the Philippines (see here). Feel free to add a brief mention of other countries, but we shouldn't inconvenience readers who are clearly looking for information on the sport in the U.S. Calidum ¤ 01:27, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
I think the request would make more sense if there was an existing article about college basketball in general.--188.10.253.123 (talk) 07:27, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on College basketball. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the , on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.--InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:24, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on College basketball. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the , on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.--InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:58, 10 August 2017 (UTC)


  This article uses material from the Wikipedia page available here. It is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share-Alike License 3.0.


Talk:College_basketball



 


US Cities - Things to Do