Retiring Jerseys

[mwwbbfan]

I saw the thread about retiring Ejim's jersey and thought I would pass this along. I talked to someone in the athletic department and they said the administration had put together a list of criteria for retiring a jersey. They said it is very unlikely that we would have another WBB player's jersey retired and would be a reach for a MBB player. They said with the current criteria they know that there would not be any WBB players jerseys retired that would have met these criteria and maybe only one or two MBB. They did not say what the criteria was but said they had a committee lead by JP that had set them.

Just an FYI for anyone interested.

 

[roundball]

I motion to add "the player's name is Melvin Ejim" to the list of criteria if it's not already there.

 

[bigdaddykane]

What is criteria for retiring a jersey?

 

[Farnsworth]

Odd that a WBB is out of question when one of the big criteria is staying 4 years, bot MBB is a possibility.

 

[CycloneErik]

Did they spell out their criteria, or is this just another Internet "Hey, I want to say I knew somebody" kind of thing?

 

[CtownCyclone]

Odd that a WBB is out of question when one of the big criteria is staying 4 years, bot MBB is a possibility.

Maybe they added a height requirement.

 

[mwwbbfan]

Odd that a WBB is out of question when one of the big criteria is staying 4 years, bot MBB is a possibility.

I got the sense that the criteria was more of the level of success that WBB would have a tough time attaining, such as consensus 1st team All American (do not know if this is one of the criteria but was an example I was given)

 

[erikbj]

Men criteria:
1. Final 4 or maybe a NC team
2. Big 12 POY
3. 1st Team A.A.

 

[HGPuck]

Just to clarify, I am almost certain that the unnamed person in the AD meant that there are no current WBB alumni that meet the criteria to have their jersey retired and that there may be one or two MBB alumni that do meet the criteria or are very close. They were not speaking about the probability of future (or current) players meeting the criteria.

This is based on things I've heard through the grapevine on the topic.

 

[ImJustKCClone]

Men criteria:
1. Final 4 or maybe a NC team
2. Big 12 POY
3. 1st Team A.A.

That one seems odd...it requires the efforts of the entire team. A player could meet all the other criteria, but the team falls short of making the final four...

 

[jkclone]

Men criteria:
1. Final 4 or maybe a NC team
2. Big 12 POY
3. 1st Team A.A.

1. The final four or national title team would be ridiculous as that has little to nothing to do with a player. Besides I'm pretty sure that all of the ones currently retired don't meet that since we have one ever.
2. I wouldn't be totally against this one.
3. This is again very difficult to get.

I don't really think you can have real strict criteria. This is something where you know it when you see it. Besides it isn't all about numbers it has more to do with what they meant to the program.

 

[bigdaddykane]

1 +2000 points
2 first time all big 12 2 or more time
3 big 12 POY
4 either +1,000 reb. or +750 ast.

 

[SoapyCy]

Who is going to ask JP at the next public event?

I understand keeping the list secret allows them to rearrange it should someone spectacular come around but not putting it public makes people think it doesn't exist and doesn't give players something to shoot for (?)

If we go to the Final Four and Niang gets an AA nod this year and again next year you'd think he'd be a shoo-in.

 

[twocoach]

I got the sense that the criteria was more of the level of success that WBB would have a tough time attaining, such as consensus 1st team All American (do not know if this is one of the criteria but was an example I was given)

What he's saying is that there are no past women's basketball players that meet the criteria that they drew up, not that it would be unattainable in the future.

 

[mwwbbfan]

What he's saying is that there are no past women's basketball players that meet the criteria that they drew up, not that it would be unattainable in the future.

That is correct.