MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[CCIWchamps]

It's also too bad that I can't have my animosities lined up perfectly by having Giovanine coach Wheaton rather than Augie. That would be ideal as far as I'm concerned. Unfortunately, the likelihood of Giovanine ever coaching Wheaton is right up there with the likelihood of Ozzy Osbourne enlisting the Mormon Tabernacle Choir as his backup singers.

Tell us newer members of the boards the story of where the animosity towards Wheaton comes from?

This was my response to a similar query posted by a Wheaton football alumnus four years ago on the CCIW football board. The Wheaton folks who read that board seemed to think it was pretty even-handed, so I'll post it again:

GS, I'm curious about the institutional dislike of Wheaton by NP folks.  How is it different - other than being closer geographically - from the dislike or resentment of Wheaton by many other schools with similar missions? 

Faculty poaching?  Theological differences?  Perceived Wheaton arrogance?  Single-denomination affiliation vs. broadly evangelical affiliation?  Dislike born from institutional similarity - or dissimilarity?  Is it of such a sensitive nature that you can't spell it out beyond "it's an institutional thing"?  Maybe I'm denser than average.  Maybe if I knew more about North Park as an institution and how it differs from Wheaton the answer would be obvious. But I can't figure out what you're saying the source of this longstanding, non-athletically related animosity is.  I'm not trying to argue - just curious.  When you find out someone doesn't like you, you at least want to know why.

It's not a secret, and I'm happy to spell it out for you in the interest of open dialogue and enlightenment. In so doing I run the risk of boring those of us who aren't affiliated with NPU or Wheaton, of course, but when have I ever let the risk of boring people stop me from posting something?

Several of your guesses come close to zeroing in on the answer. The single-denomination evangelical school vs. non-affiliated evangelical school issue does enter into it, because there's a proprietary sense among Covenanters regarding Covie kids and the denominational school. While nobody really thinks that NPU owns the rights to Covie kids, there's still a (not entirely rational) feeling that the Covenant's teenagers (and their parents) should be supporting the school rather than a rival. That doesn't distinguish NPU from some of the other denominationally-affiliated Christian schools that you mentioned (e.g., Calvin, Messiah, both Bethels), but since the Covenant is a small denomination the feeling is more acute. Mugsy's probably encountered some variation of this sentiment in those discussions at Glen Ellyn Covenant to which he's alluded. Still, this isn't the biggest issue behind NPU's anti-Wheaton sentiment.

The "perceived Wheaton arrogance" thing sometimes rears its head as well, which is probably an outgrowth of Wheaton's visibility as the mainstream media's default "get me an interview with an evangelical for this piece" focus upon Wheaton as the archetypical Christian college. But Parkers are reasonable enough (usually ) to realize that Wheaton College doesn't cultivate that; the mainstream media cultivates that. After all, the downside to it is that Wheaton gets ridiculed by the pundits and stereotyped by the public more than does a comparatively anonymous evangelical school such as North Park. And not even the most rabid anti-Wheaton person at NPU would argue that Wheaties foster this arrogance, since (to our consternation) most of you are just too darn nice for us to successfully accuse you of being full of yourselves.

The "theological differences" and "institutional dissimilarity" answers are the closest to hitting the nail on the head. I spoke before of some of the animus borne by Parkers coming from a sense of misunderstanding Wheaton, and this is where that enters into it. There is a widespread suspicion among NPU students and alumni that Wheaton is a fundamentalist school, and that Wheaton is filled with fundamentalists, and while the Covenant has had its share of fundies over the years the denomination itself (and most of its membership) has managed to define itself as broadly evangelical and committed to doctrinal freedom (within biblical bounds, of course) while resisting fundamentalist dogma. Naturally, any Parker with even a scintilla of awareness of what Wheaton is really like (and what truly fundamentalist schools such as Bob Jones and Liberty are really like) doesn't hold that opinion of Wheaton, but, nevertheless, enough do think it for it to be a source of misunderstanding. Like a lot of misunderstandings, it emanates from ignorance of the institution in question.

Some of that perception of Wheaton arises from the fact that Wheaton students have to sign a pledge regarding their social behavior (or, as it is now ironically termed, a "covenant"), whereas the form of in loco parentis practiced by North Park has never involved signing anything. One merely was presented with the rules (which were less stringent than Wheaton's, although Wheaton's recent concession to allow dancing has brought the two schools more in line, social-behavior-wise), and either abided by them or was disciplined for breaking them. But the fact that Wheaton required a signed pledge/covenant of its students (and faculty, too, for that matter) implied the sort of social control and directed behavior usually associated with fundamentalism, which is why so many Parkers over the years have thought of Wheaton and Wheaties as fundie. Remember my mention of that April Fool's issue of the NPC newspaper back in '71? That's a not-so-gentle allusion to said enforced social behavior, which in the fevered imagination of college students often ends up being equated with fascism.

(Ironically, the one area in which Wheaton College might be accused of having fundamentalist overtones -- the school's requirement that faculty members adhere to a premillennialist position in terms of eschatological belief -- is something of which very few Parkers are even aware.)

Nowadays, though, I'd say that by far the biggest source of division -- and by far the biggest source of Parker animosity towards Wheaton -- has to do with institutional dissimilarities. North Park has always differed from Wheaton in that they sit on the opposite sides of the fence in terms of Christian-school enrollment philosophies: North Park is open, and Wheaton is closed. That is to say, NPU does not require its students to make a profession of faith in Jesus Christ, while Wheaton does. North Park is an avowedly evangelical school whose requirements and mission in and out of the classroom are explicitly Christian, and its professors are required to be professing Christians, but it does not require its students to be born-again Christians. Wheaton, on the other hand, does.

Neither enrollment philosophy is better than the other, and there are plenty of examples of both schools within the wider Christian-school rubric. But Wheaton's closed philosophy, coupled with its location in a distant upper-middle-class suburb and its overwhelmingly white, suburban, upper-middle-class student body and orientation, conveys the impression among Parkers that Wheaton is an ivory-tower sanctuary filled with sheltered Christian kids who have no exposure whatsoever to the real world and who are never seriously led to question their faith, or even desire to have their faith challenged.

At NPU, by contrast, the real world is right outside the front door of the dorm (the school is located in a safe neighborhood, but it's an unmistakeably urban environment filled with people of all colors speaking strange languages) and even inside the dorm itself (the kid in the next dorm room over might be a Buddhist from Korea, or a nominal Catholic, or a religiously-indifferent mainline Protestant, etc.). The experiences of the real world in all its nitty-grittiness challenge and refine faith and raise hard questions (or so goes the NPU mantra), even as the school itself tries to shape and nurture by asking those questions within a Christian context. Social-outreach involvement (tutoring inner-city kids, Meals On Wheels, soup-kitchen and homeless shelter work, Habitat For Humanity, ESL tutoring, etc.) is pushed very hard at North Park, and traditionally a very high percentage of resident students are involved in these sorts of urban ministries. At NPU the emphasis is placed upon the thesis in the epistle of James that faith which does not bear fruit in good works is not really faith at all.

Unfortunately, this plays right into the hands of that traditional stereotype of Wheaton and its students. I'm afraid that Parkers sometimes are the ones guilty of arrogance, not Wheaties, because Parkers feel that they are the ones living out Christ's precepts to minister to the poor, the sick, the imprisoned, etc., and that they are the ones who truly have a genuine faith that has been tested by engaging the real world -- the world doesn't get any more "real" than a block of apartment buildings in Albany Park or Uptown -- and its inhabitants. Wheaties, they feel, hold the world at bay by excluding non-Christians from their campus and by residing in a starchy, white-bread Leave It To Beaver suburb.

As I said, there's some truth here mixed in with a lot of misconceptions and misunderstandings on the part of my fellow Parkers. My hopes in posting this agonizingly long essay are that: a) some of my fellow Parkers might realize that they don't necessarily have the straight 411 on Wheaton; and b) some of the Wheaton folks who really don't know any thing about, or understand, NPU will grasp a little more of where we're coming from.

Very interesting, and very thorough.  It's evident why you prefer NPU to WC, perhaps as a matter of a recruiting pitch, but I'm not sure where that translates to animosity or would put WC on equal footing with Coach G.  I was expecting something like, "I don't like Wheaton because a group of Wheaton students beat me up when I was 16 and I've never forgiven them."   

[toooldtohoop]

It's also too bad that I can't have my animosities lined up perfectly by having Giovanine coach Wheaton rather than Augie. That would be ideal as far as I'm concerned. Unfortunately, the likelihood of Giovanine ever coaching Wheaton is right up there with the likelihood of Ozzy Osbourne enlisting the Mormon Tabernacle Choir as his backup singers.

Tell us newer members of the boards the story of where the animosity towards Wheaton comes from?

This was my response to a similar query posted by a Wheaton football alumnus four years ago on the CCIW football board. The Wheaton folks who read that board seemed to think it was pretty even-handed, so I'll post it again:

GS, I'm curious about the institutional dislike of Wheaton by NP folks.  How is it different - other than being closer geographically - from the dislike or resentment of Wheaton by many other schools with similar missions? 

Faculty poaching?  Theological differences?  Perceived Wheaton arrogance?  Single-denomination affiliation vs. broadly evangelical affiliation?  Dislike born from institutional similarity - or dissimilarity?  Is it of such a sensitive nature that you can't spell it out beyond "it's an institutional thing"?  Maybe I'm denser than average.  Maybe if I knew more about North Park as an institution and how it differs from Wheaton the answer would be obvious. But I can't figure out what you're saying the source of this longstanding, non-athletically related animosity is.  I'm not trying to argue - just curious.  When you find out someone doesn't like you, you at least want to know why.

It's not a secret, and I'm happy to spell it out for you in the interest of open dialogue and enlightenment. In so doing I run the risk of boring those of us who aren't affiliated with NPU or Wheaton, of course, but when have I ever let the risk of boring people stop me from posting something?

Several of your guesses come close to zeroing in on the answer. The single-denomination evangelical school vs. non-affiliated evangelical school issue does enter into it, because there's a proprietary sense among Covenanters regarding Covie kids and the denominational school. While nobody really thinks that NPU owns the rights to Covie kids, there's still a (not entirely rational) feeling that the Covenant's teenagers (and their parents) should be supporting the school rather than a rival. That doesn't distinguish NPU from some of the other denominationally-affiliated Christian schools that you mentioned (e.g., Calvin, Messiah, both Bethels), but since the Covenant is a small denomination the feeling is more acute. Mugsy's probably encountered some variation of this sentiment in those discussions at Glen Ellyn Covenant to which he's alluded. Still, this isn't the biggest issue behind NPU's anti-Wheaton sentiment.

The "perceived Wheaton arrogance" thing sometimes rears its head as well, which is probably an outgrowth of Wheaton's visibility as the mainstream media's default "get me an interview with an evangelical for this piece" focus upon Wheaton as the archetypical Christian college. But Parkers are reasonable enough (usually ) to realize that Wheaton College doesn't cultivate that; the mainstream media cultivates that. After all, the downside to it is that Wheaton gets ridiculed by the pundits and stereotyped by the public more than does a comparatively anonymous evangelical school such as North Park. And not even the most rabid anti-Wheaton person at NPU would argue that Wheaties foster this arrogance, since (to our consternation) most of you are just too darn nice for us to successfully accuse you of being full of yourselves.

The "theological differences" and "institutional dissimilarity" answers are the closest to hitting the nail on the head. I spoke before of some of the animus borne by Parkers coming from a sense of misunderstanding Wheaton, and this is where that enters into it. There is a widespread suspicion among NPU students and alumni that Wheaton is a fundamentalist school, and that Wheaton is filled with fundamentalists, and while the Covenant has had its share of fundies over the years the denomination itself (and most of its membership) has managed to define itself as broadly evangelical and committed to doctrinal freedom (within biblical bounds, of course) while resisting fundamentalist dogma. Naturally, any Parker with even a scintilla of awareness of what Wheaton is really like (and what truly fundamentalist schools such as Bob Jones and Liberty are really like) doesn't hold that opinion of Wheaton, but, nevertheless, enough do think it for it to be a source of misunderstanding. Like a lot of misunderstandings, it emanates from ignorance of the institution in question.

Some of that perception of Wheaton arises from the fact that Wheaton students have to sign a pledge regarding their social behavior (or, as it is now ironically termed, a "covenant"), whereas the form of in loco parentis practiced by North Park has never involved signing anything. One merely was presented with the rules (which were less stringent than Wheaton's, although Wheaton's recent concession to allow dancing has brought the two schools more in line, social-behavior-wise), and either abided by them or was disciplined for breaking them. But the fact that Wheaton required a signed pledge/covenant of its students (and faculty, too, for that matter) implied the sort of social control and directed behavior usually associated with fundamentalism, which is why so many Parkers over the years have thought of Wheaton and Wheaties as fundie. Remember my mention of that April Fool's issue of the NPC newspaper back in '71? That's a not-so-gentle allusion to said enforced social behavior, which in the fevered imagination of college students often ends up being equated with fascism.

(Ironically, the one area in which Wheaton College might be accused of having fundamentalist overtones -- the school's requirement that faculty members adhere to a premillennialist position in terms of eschatological belief -- is something of which very few Parkers are even aware.)

Nowadays, though, I'd say that by far the biggest source of division -- and by far the biggest source of Parker animosity towards Wheaton -- has to do with institutional dissimilarities. North Park has always differed from Wheaton in that they sit on the opposite sides of the fence in terms of Christian-school enrollment philosophies: North Park is open, and Wheaton is closed. That is to say, NPU does not require its students to make a profession of faith in Jesus Christ, while Wheaton does. North Park is an avowedly evangelical school whose requirements and mission in and out of the classroom are explicitly Christian, and its professors are required to be professing Christians, but it does not require its students to be born-again Christians. Wheaton, on the other hand, does.

Neither enrollment philosophy is better than the other, and there are plenty of examples of both schools within the wider Christian-school rubric. But Wheaton's closed philosophy, coupled with its location in a distant upper-middle-class suburb and its overwhelmingly white, suburban, upper-middle-class student body and orientation, conveys the impression among Parkers that Wheaton is an ivory-tower sanctuary filled with sheltered Christian kids who have no exposure whatsoever to the real world and who are never seriously led to question their faith, or even desire to have their faith challenged.

At NPU, by contrast, the real world is right outside the front door of the dorm (the school is located in a safe neighborhood, but it's an unmistakeably urban environment filled with people of all colors speaking strange languages) and even inside the dorm itself (the kid in the next dorm room over might be a Buddhist from Korea, or a nominal Catholic, or a religiously-indifferent mainline Protestant, etc.). The experiences of the real world in all its nitty-grittiness challenge and refine faith and raise hard questions (or so goes the NPU mantra), even as the school itself tries to shape and nurture by asking those questions within a Christian context. Social-outreach involvement (tutoring inner-city kids, Meals On Wheels, soup-kitchen and homeless shelter work, Habitat For Humanity, ESL tutoring, etc.) is pushed very hard at North Park, and traditionally a very high percentage of resident students are involved in these sorts of urban ministries. At NPU the emphasis is placed upon the thesis in the epistle of James that faith which does not bear fruit in good works is not really faith at all.

Unfortunately, this plays right into the hands of that traditional stereotype of Wheaton and its students. I'm afraid that Parkers sometimes are the ones guilty of arrogance, not Wheaties, because Parkers feel that they are the ones living out Christ's precepts to minister to the poor, the sick, the imprisoned, etc., and that they are the ones who truly have a genuine faith that has been tested by engaging the real world -- the world doesn't get any more "real" than a block of apartment buildings in Albany Park or Uptown -- and its inhabitants. Wheaties, they feel, hold the world at bay by excluding non-Christians from their campus and by residing in a starchy, white-bread Leave It To Beaver suburb.

As I said, there's some truth here mixed in with a lot of misconceptions and misunderstandings on the part of my fellow Parkers. My hopes in posting this agonizingly long essay are that: a) some of my fellow Parkers might realize that they don't necessarily have the straight 411 on Wheaton; and b) some of the Wheaton folks who really don't know any thing about, or understand, NPU will grasp a little more of where we're coming from.

Sounds like a good old rivalry to me. 
In major doctrine unity, in minor doctrine understanding, and in all things love (just not sports!).

(modified by GS for formatting purposes)

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

PS  The whole handshake situation can be seen On Demand as well...

http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/iwu.portal#

1:54:00 or so the final shot sequence starts.  At 1:54:38 Coach Feeney talks to Victor to make sure he apologizes to Coach G...and then you can see what happens from there.

The sequence ends with, it appears, Coach G in an exchange with Coach Feeney.

#cciwdrama

Seriously - what was that?! It didn't look like Coaches G and Feeney were in an exchange... that looked like it was getting heated. Listen... I am sure Coach G yelled in his ear on purpose when he shot it - I see coaches do that kind of thing all the time, much to my surprise (and not necessarily to my approval)... and Victor decided to get one back - so be it. If you can't take it... don't dish it. But to skip a player at the handshakes 30 some-odd-minutes of basketball later... and then have the balls to tell the opposing coach apparently why you didn't shake his hand... well... grow up. I am surprised the school, conference, and even refs haven't had enough. I know they are all used to it... but when you give more leash... the more will be taken. Here is hoping maturity prevails in the end.

[Pat Coleman]

Seems I have been reading about this sort of thing for years ... not sure if we can expect any change.

[bopol]

PS  The whole handshake situation can be seen On Demand as well...

http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/iwu.portal#

1:54:00 or so the final shot sequence starts.  At 1:54:38 Coach Feeney talks to Victor to make sure he apologizes to Coach G...and then you can see what happens from there.

The sequence ends with, it appears, Coach G in an exchange with Coach Feeney.

#cciwdrama

Seriously - what was that?! It didn't look like Coaches G and Feeney were in an exchange... that looked like it was getting heated. Listen... I am sure Coach G yelled in his ear on purpose when he shot it - I see coaches do that kind of thing all the time, much to my surprise (and not necessarily to my approval)... and Victor decided to get one back - so be it. If you can't take it... don't dish it. But to skip a player at the handshakes 30 some-odd-minutes of basketball later... and then have the balls to tell the opposing coach apparently why you didn't shake his hand... well... grow up. I am surprised the school, conference, and even refs haven't had enough. I know they are all used to it... but when you give more leash... the more will be taken. Here is hoping maturity prevails in the end.

When I umped baseball, loudmouth coaches always had the opposite of the desired effect.  You think my strike zone is too big; it just got bigger (at least when your team is batting).  Now, we're talking high school here and I don't think I handled it as I should have it retrospect (should have just tossed the manager for annoying me), but I always find it curious when bully coaches seem to actually get the refs to bend their way. 

I would have Ted up G on the next possession when he was pushing onto the ref's back on the court. 

Like I said, G is asking for crap from students on the road for the rest of the year.  Heck, I hope Bosko sends over some of the not-so-dry dry campus students to prop behind Augie's bench and harass him for 40 minutes.   

[Mr. Ypsi]

PS  The whole handshake situation can be seen On Demand as well...

http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/iwu.portal#

1:54:00 or so the final shot sequence starts.  At 1:54:38 Coach Feeney talks to Victor to make sure he apologizes to Coach G...and then you can see what happens from there.

The sequence ends with, it appears, Coach G in an exchange with Coach Feeney.

#cciwdrama

Seriously - what was that?! It didn't look like Coaches G and Feeney were in an exchange... that looked like it was getting heated. Listen... I am sure Coach G yelled in his ear on purpose when he shot it - I see coaches do that kind of thing all the time, much to my surprise (and not necessarily to my approval)... and Victor decided to get one back - so be it. If you can't take it... don't dish it. But to skip a player at the handshakes 30 some-odd-minutes of basketball later... and then have the balls to tell the opposing coach apparently why you didn't shake his hand... well... grow up. I am surprised the school, conference, and even refs haven't had enough. I know they are all used to it... but when you give more leash... the more will be taken. Here is hoping maturity prevails in the end.

Grey is in his 14th season at Augie, and, having graduated college in 1982, I would assume is past 50.  By this point I would think senility is likely to arrive before maturity.

[sac]

this whole day doesn't happen without Q's crack reporting.

Well done Q, well done!

[Titan Q]

Nice article on Matt Nadelhoffer and the Big Blue in Around the Nation...

http://www.d3hoops.com/columns/around-the-nation/2012-13/cabrini-gets-its-stud-back

[AndOne]

Can there be any doubt that The Stomper is the CCIW coach that inspires the most "love" across the board? No other coach could come close to generating anywhere near as much discussion.

[Titan Q]

I received an e-mail tonight from someone close to the Augustana program who said that Coach G did not say anything to provoke Victor's reaction after that made 3-pointer early in the game.  Since I watched the game from the comfort of my basement in Lincoln, Nebraska, I have no way at all to sort out the truth.  Just wanted to post that other side of the story to be fair, and out of respect for the person who e-mailed me.

[Titan Q]

Nice article on Matt Nadelhoffer and the Big Blue in Around the Nation...

http://www.d3hoops.com/columns/around-the-nation/2012-13/cabrini-gets-its-stud-back

Of course, No. 20 Wheaton represents a unique challenge Saturday in that this is the first big road trip for many with the Big Blue. Whatever happens will tell the story of where they currently are in Nadelhoffer's rebuildng effort, not necessarily where they are going, although their coach gives them a puncher's chance.

"If we can get over the fact that we're on the road," Nadelhoffer said, "I think we're going to be in the game down the wire."
----------

Tweet tonight:

@CoachNgoBIGBLUE
Thoroughly preparing for Wheaton right now...looking forward to heading home Saturday-great opportunity for us-nothing 2 lose
----------

I think Wheaton will blow Millikin out Saturday, but I'm not sure I'd want to play this game, at this time.  The Big Blue are riding all of that energy and momentum, and now they're really in that "nothing to lose" mentality on the road against a ranked team.  Meanwhile, Wheaton is in an absolute must win situation (at home and already two losses).  Clearly one team will be playing looser than the other.

You never know.  I'll at least be watching the live stats during the IWU/Carthage game.

[USee]

I received an e-mail tonight from someone close to the Augustana program who said that Coach G did not say anything to provoke Victor's reaction after that made 3-pointer early in the game.  Since I watched the game from the comfort of my basement in Lincoln, Nebraska, I have no way at all to sort out the truth.  Just wanted to post that other side of the story to be fair, and out of respect for the person who e-mailed me.

Well, that may be a version of what did/didn't transpire at the time of the incident. Davis clearly said something to Giovanne and the tape shows him pointing and looking at him. We can all make our own conclusions whether Victor Davis just did that on his own or was somehow provoked. What there is NO excuse for is the clear lack of sportsmanship from Coach G in the handshake line which is captured on video. Giovanne made a concerted effort to NOT shake the hand of Victor Davis. I am guessing there were no email excuses for that. That is bad leadership.

[AndOne]

Whoever sent the e-mail to TQ may have been entirely correct in that G did not say anything directly to Victor Davis.
However, there seems to be no question that G yelled something. Lets give the mystery e-mailer the benefit of the doubt, and say G didn't use the word "you," meaning Victor. But, as reports seem to be in agreement that G did say something, it must have been to his team, and it very likely was something on the order of "he can't make that, let him have it." What we have then is G addressing Victor indirectly, by his being the subject of whatever G yelled. So you then have Victor standing right in front of G who yells something negative about Victor basically right into his ear. Under those circumstances I don't blame Victor one bit for turning right around and giving it right back to G by saying "thats for you." No profanity or anything like that---just answering G's statement with one of his own. 
USee is right about G's lack of sportsmanship in not shaking Victor's hand after the game. But, what I loved was the camera clearly showing G immediately pleading for a T or some other form of relief for Victor having the audacity to answer G's statement with one of his own. Its like "I'm GG, he can't say anything to me."   

[bopol]

Page 2112...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEW2-k0EoyE

[Titan Q]

I received another e-mail this morning from someone close to Augustana's basketball program stating that Coach G did not provoke Victor Davis's reaction Wednesday.  Again, I wasn't there and posted what I was told by people at the game.

I value the opinions of both of the people who have reached out to me - good people. I sincerely apologize to Grey Giovanine, his staff, and Augustana fans if what I posted surrounding the initital situation was incorrect.  I should not have publicly commented on a matter so sensitive without having first-hand knowledge of the situation, or being 100% sure about it.  That was a mistake on my part and certainly unfair to Coach G if what I posted here was inaccurate. 

I'll get back to talking about CCIW basketball.