I know it sounds like I'm harping on this subject and I apologize, BUT, it is so frustrating when you read article after article with only certain teams highlighted. The teams that are known by reputation, not just performance, and the writers just won't let go. For example,(here I go again!)at the IBC this weekend, KU defeated #1 ranked Saginaw Valley in double elimination Friday 4-2, and they defeated Nebraska 4-3, but no mention of those key matchups.

I think every team should hold their heads high that competed at the IBC, and as a spectator, we thank you for great, exciting performances. For anyone who does not consider bowling a sport - Thursday's Baker games started at 9am and finished about 9:30pm with an hour break in the afternoon. That is endurance - both mentally and physically. These bowlers are athletes!

Congrats to all who participated, for making it that far showed your ability as a team, and can only be the result of a successful season on the lanes.

[ 04-23-2001: Edited: bowl4life ]

Get over it

Maybe if they'd have advanced further, they would have gotten press, like Florida State did.

Hey man, I'm over it! They have no reason to hang their heads. No one expected them to advance as far as they did and they showed why they deserved to be there.
You were there watching, Jeff, so what did you think of the IBC? Its true...its true!


[ 04-24-2001: Edited: bowl4life ]

My opinion of the tournament is mostly good. It is truly an event.

It is no secret that I am not fond of Baker competition. I believe that it either works or doesn't, and there is no in-between. In a format like double elimination best-of-seven, I think it works great. It is very intense and the fans really get into it.

That said, I can't stand the baker qualifying the day before that. They bowl 32 games, each one pretty meaningless in and of itself. It is not terribly exciting, especially as the day wears on.

I think they should change the format to make Thursday's baker qualifying to be some sort of round robin match play. This accomplishes a few things. First, each school gets to bowl against every other school, and not just "with" them. The way it is now, a team can get into the bracket, bowl two teams and then go home. At least this way the University of Utah can bowl against St. John's and see how they stack up. The way it is, Utah was done before St. John's ever got to the bowling center on Friday.

They can do 2-game baker sets kind of like the team challenge does, then give bonus pins for winning games and series. Now teams have more of an incentive to bowl better, and fans can get into it more because each individual game means more.

If this doesn't work for them, I'd still like to see them bring back some kind of 5-man team games in some capacity or another. I just find it incredibly stupid that for the entire season, they bowl a vast majority of their games in the 5-man format, then to decide the national title they do only baker. To me, this is like shooting free throws to decide the NBA title.

Hey,

I have no idea who is good or not at the college level anymore, but I agree that the Baker format is not true bowling for any competition, even though I've bowled more of it out of college than in. I even got to talk to Mr. Baker about it in 86 in Houston. No matter how nice a guy he is, and how exciting the format is, I think college bowling is making a big mistake by putting so much emphasis on that format. It is too closely tied to how to make bowling more interesting and exciting for TV and people who don't appreciate it for the great sport it is in its truest form.

Clark Green, former PSU bowler, team captain, coach and advisor. Down with the Baker format, back with real bowling!

Well, neither of you are probably going to agree with this, but I think the Baker format is the truest form of TEAM bowling. The teams that do very well in Baker are generally the teams that put their emphasis on the accomplishments of the team over the accomplishments of individual bowlers. These teams trust each other and know how to communicate. The teams that have some big egos on their team, have a real problem in Baker format, and if you look at the teams that did well at IBC, this seemed to hold true.

I do, however, agree that for a National Championship title, it should be a mix of both team and Baker format games. That would level the playing field, and the best teams at both should rise to the top. :rolleyes:

Hey Bowl4Life:
If you think the Baker format is the truest form of team bowling why don't you invent the BAKER/SCOTCH Format, where no bowler bowls more than one ball consecutively? Scotch is more team than Baker!
Clark(My humble opinion)

"As Rush Limbaugh claims"(As if he has a HUMBLE opinion)

Wow, I didn't realize Baker format was so
controversial! Don't care for Scotch - its another thing entirely to have to clean up a mess that someone else left rather than to be responsible for 2 frames entirely yourself. No one else to blame.

What is so wrong with contributing 2 frames per game and relying on your teamates to come thru with the rest? Or is it that a bowler just likes to brag about what score he/she shot?

Just my very humble opinion.......don't tell me your a Rush fan?????? :rolleyes:

Sorry,
I just think it's funny every time Rush says "In my humble opinion", and no, I'm not a fan of someone who doesn't take all sides of an argument in. Or is that hypocritical? I actually enjoy the Baker System and have done well in it. I just don't like it that it is SO important at that level in collegiate bowling.

Clark

Not hypocrital at all Clark....and I agree.

As the coach of a team that struggles in the Baker format, I can see all points. I still like a mix of team and Baker - a true test of team skills.