Reusse column: Even with Knight at courtside, bedlam at Barn is mostly benign

Donate To GopherHole
Yeah, the crowd was not great, although they woke up late, and helped push the Gophers to the win in the last two minutes. I was a bit more subdued than normal because it was the return of the ref who almost threw me out of the arena last year, and I didn't really want a repeat. However, once again, Reusse goes with the easy jab. It'd be nice if we could have one writer in this town who likes the local sports teams and wants them to succeed.
 

"I'd love to have Pat research the Bobby Knight vs. Musselman game that he talked about in his article where the barn was rocking and figure out whether it was a 1pm Saturday game or an 8:30 Wednesday night game. Night and day between the two start times."

January 8, 1972 was a Saturday. I think they played night games back then as television didn't dictate the start times. The hockey schedule may have impacted the time of the basketball game.
 

If Reusse doesn't find attending a game sitting next to Gopherlady exciting, there is no hope for him!!
 

Reusse is talking a different era of Gopher BB. The Musselman reign at the Barn was the best of times and Gopher BB was indeed the talk of the state. The Barn was at its old,moldy best. I believe it was the Marquette game when Al McGuire was coach the fire marshalls looked the other way and the attendence was 19,000. I can remember people sitting on the steps in the aisles. After that they moved the overflow crowds into the hockey arena to view the game on big screen.
 

Moonlight said:
If Reusse doesn't find attending a game sitting next to Gopherlady exciting, there is no hope for him!!
Click to expand...

I think the phrase "best night of my life" may have come out of his mouth....or at least he was thinking it!
 


BigGopherFan said:
My guess is he had an idea for this column before the game even started and just expected the Gophers to lose and the crowd to be subdued. That simply didn't happen. I wasn't there, but it seemed like the crowd was full of life. What a terrible, negative article.
Click to expand...

Bingo! Spot on! Was surprised last night to see Bleed post this 10 minutes after I got home. He's good, but Reusse had most of this written before the game. Basic premise was to point out how pathetic another U team is. So we pick a game at the Barn at its finest between the U's fiercest coach and probably our fans' most hated coach that was played almost 40 years ago. And we're going to contrast it with a game that starts at 8:15 on a Tuesday against a non-conference team most fans know nothing about. The fact the Gophers won doesn't allow Reusse to ridicule quite as much, but, hell, let's go with the basic premise.

No mention of how the team scrapped; or how Elliott surprised everyone; or how Rodney seemed to play better and be more comfortable at power forward; or how the ball movement in general seemed a whole lot better, etc. That would have meant we throw out some of our historical research or maybe even have to work a new angle.

Some folks who seem to always come up with the, "Reusse's points are hard to refute," miss the big picture. Like, why the constant negative drumbeat against University athletics? That's what people react to. Here was a chance for something fresh from him, but it still didn't happen.

Hell, I'll give you a "Reusse column" about Reusse.


It's been almost 40 years since a bright young sportswriter from Fulda came onto to the sports scene in the Twin Cities. Pat Reusse's irreverent style combined a love of sports with an entertaining wit that was a breath of fresh air to reader's of the sports pages. (Insert a couple of young Pat's good lines here.) (Tell a story about some adventure young Pat during his drinking days here.) (Since he likes facts, let's throw in the Pioneer Press's circulation numbers from 1972 here.)

(Mention some old guy named Ralph reading the Tribune sports page at a Starbucks to comment on the current column here.)

Ralph from Circle Pines put down the paper without even looking at the story about Glen Taylor at the top of the page. Someone sitting near Ralph commented as Ralph yawned, "Boy, you sure don't seem that excited about that story on the Gopher game last night."

Ralph mumbled something about why does the guy now fill over half of his typical column nowdays telling you about something that happened 20 or 30 or 40 years ago. "Seems to me that's sort of lazy," Ralph said. "Heck, I'm old and I'm tired of reading about the old days. Can't imagine what some 20 year old thinks of these columns." Unfortunately, Ralph is on to something about Reusse. Oh, he still tries to be funny after his Newt-like history lessons, but his writing now is filled with nastiness instead of humor. Sorry, Ralph, that's the best Reusse can do now days. What was once fresh and fun has now become old and without a point. The fun has gone from the writing and all that's left is cynical negativity as the man mainly is interested in waging a personal war with Gopher fans.
 

Mulligan said:
Basic premise was to point out how pathetic another U team is. So we pick a game at the Barn at its finest between the U's fiercest coach and probably our fans' most hated coach that was played almost 40 years ago. And we're going to contrast it with a game that starts at 8:15 on a Tuesday against a non-conference team most fans know nothing about. The fact the Gophers won doesn't allow Reusse to ridicule quite as much, but, hell, let's go with the basic premise.

No mention of how the team scrapped; or how Elliott surprised everyone; or how Rodney seemed to play better and be more comfortable at power forward; or how the ball movement in general seemed a whole lot better, etc. That would have meant we throw out some of our historical research or maybe even have to work a new angle.

Some folks who seem to always come up with the, "Reusse's points are hard to refute," miss the big picture. Like, why the constant negative drumbeat against University athletics? That's what people react to. Here was a chance for something fresh from him, but it still didn't happen.
Click to expand...

Outstanding and correct in my view. Even when presented with a prime opportunity to write something against the grain of the standard boilerplate article he writes, he defaults to the easy route, and grouses about The Barn's crowd. Its tiresome and stale. He just can't bring himself to write anything in a positive light.

We should start playing a game here on Gopherhole - where we try to write Souhan's or Reusse's article (or at least headline) before they write it. It's formulaic enough that we should have no trouble nailing it. The winner can submit the article to the Strib and suggest they fire FatPat/DimJim and pay us half their salary for the same drivel.

Great faux 'Reusse on Reusse' article, BTW:clap:
 

BigGopherFan said:
My guess is he had an idea for this column before the game even started and just expected the Gophers to lose and the crowd to be subdued. That simply didn't happen. I wasn't there, but it seemed like the crowd was full of life. What a terrible, negative article.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Its hard when life doesn't go your way!
 




sconniegopher said:
I like Reusse. I think he's correct in this case, as well.
Click to expand...

Correct about what? That the Barn isn't what it used to be? Well, bravo to Pat for figuring that out. I don't think anyone would disagree.

The major point of contention that people have with the article is that on a night when the MAJOR storyline revolved around a short-handed lineup that didn't include either of the Gophers top two big men, Minnesota got a win.

And, Pat chooses that night to roll out the "Barn isn't what it used to be" story??

Interesting approach to say the least.
 

I think he had the idea for the article because Bobby Knight was going to be in the building and we're approaching the 40th anniversary of his first coaching appearance at Williams.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom