The Cornell Daily Sun - Independent Since 1880

The Cornell Daily Sun (https://cornellsun.com/2001/04/02/izzo-lashes-out-at-cornell-basketball/)

April 2, 2001

Uncategorized

Izzo Lashes Out At Cornell Basketball

By ryan | April 2, 2001

Following his team’s 80-61 loss to Arizona in the Final Four on Saturday, Michigan State’s head coach Tom Izzo didn’t wait long to point fingers for the Spartans second half debacle.

But rather than place the blame on senior Charlie Bell’s anemic three point performance or the squad’s incessant turnover problem, Izzo found a different source for his woes.

“We should have never played that damn Cornell team during the Thanksgiving tournament,” Izzo told reporters during the postgame press conference, gently wiping the tears away from his cheeks.

Izzo was referring to the Coca-Cola Classic at the Breslin Center in East Lansing, Mich., in November, when the Spartans smashed the Red 89-56.

“Scheduling Cornell was a huge mistake,” Izzo lamented. “That really fucked up our RPI ranking. Had we actually scheduled a decent team, we probably would’ve been ranked higher in the polls and we probably would have gotten a No. 1 seed in the West.

“That woulda made winning the Final Four a cinch. We coulda killed Duke,” Izzo continued. “The only team we didn’t stack up well against was Arizona, and thanks to that stupid Cornell game, we had to play ’em.”

Spartan seniors Bell and Andre Hutson, who lost their chance to win back-to-back titles, didn’t have any kind words for Cornell either.

“You think playing against a guy like Ray Mercedes can prepare us for the Final Four,” Hutson yelled at a New York Times reporter who persisted on pressing the issue. “No way!”

“That Cornell win gave us a false sense of security,” Hutson added in a quiet, solemn voice. “Beating them by 30-plus points made us think that we could go out and hammer anyone in the country. Man were we wrong.”

Michigan State had the option next year of repaying Cornell’s favor and playing a game in Ithaca. But after this season, Izzo doesn’t seem to keen on that anymore.

“Hell no,” voiced an incensed Izzo. “There’s no way I’m gonna do that now. And if anyone from Cornell steps into East Lansing, they’d better watch their backs.”

Editor’s Note: It’s April Fools! Tricked ya!

Archived article by Sun Staff

Related

Get Off the Court

By ryan April 3, 2001

As a sports enthusiast I came to Cornell four years ago with dreams of playing basketball every night. Soon after dinner I imagined I imagined hitting the hardwood for an hour of good ole’ fashion hoops. Unfortunately those lofty aspirations were squashed quickly into my college career. For four years I have waited on the sidelines of the Helen Newman basketball courts patiently waiting my turn. Now, I am partly to blame because the court is designated as winner-stay-on, so if I am part of a winning team, my playing time continues. Still my inability to win should not translate to a “blockade” on the rest of my intended basketball night. It sometimes seems that the Helen Newman administration is indirectly punishing the winless players by making us sit on the sidelines while we enviously watch at least three more games before we get another crack at a win. The problem is that the far side of the split gym in Helen Newman gives preference to badminton and volleyball. I would not have qualms with this policy if there were an approximately equal number of participants looking for a pickup badminton/volleyball match as there people desperately awaiting a shot at a basketball game. From what I have observed, though, the numbers are heavily slanted on the basketball side. If the numbers were measured on a balance, the small number of badminton/volleyball players would be catapulted so high off the measuring apparatus that they would be propelled for a complimentary skyride around Ithaca. The peak basketball hours are from 7-10 p.m. Therefore, from these hours, I suggest that the badminton/volleyball deference be revoked to allow the overflow of potential basketball participants to play on the other side of the divider. Though this might aggravate a small percentage of badminton/volleyball players it would make the Helen Newman courts much more enjoyable for the larger majority of its participants. To compensate for this inconvenience to badminton/volleyball players, I recommend a time slot dedicated solely for volleyball and badminton to control the both sides of the gym. Let’s imagine for a second that the administration takes my suggestion and changes the system. The court’s shoddy floor would then be the next problem to fix. The floor is the most slick, injury prone one I have ever stepped foot on. I know that the Cornell brass is obsessed with its beloved hockey team, but trying to make amateur players play basketball on a court as slippery as Lynah rink’s ice is downright vengeful. Games end up being played not to see which team can score the most points, but rather which team can have the most players last the longest without taking a spill. With the 10% increase on statutory tuition, I recommend putting some of that money into redoing the Helen Newman floor. I am sure many others have a similar opinion and I recommend that they jump on this basketball bandwagon. For when we basketball junkies unite, we will all be able to relish in the sweet smell of new lacquer on the Helen Newman floor. Then we can drop our hockey skates off at Lynah and lace up our basketball shoes and let the winless and hapless players battle on the far side of the blue divider. That will be the day. Archived article by Jason Skolnik
Panelists Engage in Debate on Abortion

By ryan April 3, 2001

Cornellians and Ithaca residents debated the controversial issue of abortion in front of a packed Hollis E. Cornell Auditorium in Goldwin Smith Hall last night. Organized by the Bioethical Society of Cornell, the debate engaged 10 University and community organizations, including the Cornell Democrats, College Republicans, Cornell Civil Liberties Union (CCLU), and Students Acting for Gender Equality. The audience participated in a discussion following the debate. “The issue of abortion is as contentious today as it was 30 years ago,” said Michael Matly ’03, president of the Bioethical Society of Cornell. “We organized and brought together Cornell groups — religious, feminist, political — to have an enlightened dialogue and to educate Cornell.” The mediator, Prof. Donna McKenzie, religious studies, posed questions to each side and allowed for responses from the opposition. The panelists held widely varying opinions, from opposing abortion in any situation to supporting abortion in some cases, to firmly believing in the right to choose. “We need to give the decision of abortion back to the states after we overturn the Roe v. Wade decision [that allowed abortion],” said Ryan Horn ’02, member of the College Republicans. Other debaters, including Scott Heyman from Tompkins County Planned Parenthood, opposed any anti-abortion legislation. “All children should be conceived by the free choice of their parent,” Heyman said. “My organization believes in the right of women to make their own decisions on when to have children.” Two religious groups, the Muslim Educational and Cultural Association and Young Israel of Ithaca, held more moderate positions. “There is little disagreement that abortion is prohibited after 120 days of conception unless there is certain medical necessity such as when the health or the life of the mother is in danger,” said Abdulrahman al-khalidy grad, the MECA representative. The debate addressed a wide range of abortion-related topics, including the drug RU-486, used to abort first-trimester fetuses. “Because RU-486 has been safe and effective, it should be made accessible, especially to women who don’t have the financial means to obtain it,” said Alex Sanchez ’03, secretary-treasurer of the Cornell Democrat. Others did not share Sanchez’s confidence in the drug. “RU-486 was fast-tracked through FDA approval, and after only six months of testing, it was approved,” said Shannon Speicher, a member of the Cornell Coalition for Life (CCFL). Other situations explored during the debate included abortion in cases of rape or incest, abortion of late-term fetuses, and the man’s role in the abortion decision. “Men have one right — the right to choose to have sex,” said Elizabeth Lorina ’03, representing the CCLU, asserting that men should not be allowed to force their mates to have an abortion or to keep the baby. The only time tempers rose occurred when Sean Breheny ’01, a CCFL representative, was prohibited from showing pictures of fetuses to the audience. At the beginning of the debate, it had been announced that no visual aids could be used. “I thought the debate would allow free expression, and I could have tried to push the issue beforehand,” Breheny said. Nevertheless, despite addressing several charged issues, the debaters avoided major outbursts. After the debate, audience members challenged and questioned the debaters. “I’m distressed because both sides talk about what they think individually and spew ‘facts’ that are not really facts,” one audience member said. Other audience members found the discussion informative and helpful. “I got a more comprehensive understanding of the issue of abortion,” said Umair Khan ’03. “I felt that the debate pitted one side against the other, but there should have been more middle ground [representing moderate viewpoints] represented.”Archived article by Peter Lin