he
ong)
ES
roup
srra,
tana
you;
dyop
dou
plain
hoit!
'Cl,
*iej.
you
sst)
5-Year Man
on Campus
With Ellison Clary
THE CAEOLINA JOURNAL WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1968 PAGE 7
I Letters To The Editor
i Stonestreet ‘Puzzled’ By
Criticisms Of Lafferty, Logan
Forty-Niners Forge
Respectability Image
belis
ass 1)
5 otia
“As you can probably tell, I’m pretty excited,” Coach Harvey
I jpurphy admitted over the telephone Sunday,
i J He was right; I could tell.
I ,'7 And Coach Murphy had a right to be
• ■ ® Forty-Niner basketball team had just
excited. His once lowly
steamed through a two-
weekend to respectability and forged a new image for itself.
° This considerable feat vras accomplished as follows.
Friday night the victory starved Forty-Niners clashed with a
ihHry crew from College of Charleston in Harrisburg Gym. It
iws clearly a battle for the Dixie Conference cellar since Char-
lotte was languishing in seventh place with not a single conference
triumph and Charleston’s only league win had come at its hosts’
? M expense by a mere three points.
‘ ‘■'I But while Chili Pepper jogged topless at the C’est Bon, Char-
! lotte rendered the Charleston attack bottomless by an 86-56 margin.
In the process, five Charlotte players scored in double figures
and even the reserves were able to hold the 30-point lead over the
ama outclassed Maroons.
of jj The next afternoon at Garinger gym, the Forty-Niners fought
to 3 from 11 points down to send their contest with Saint Andrews
le tijinto overtime before succumbing to the Knights 84-81. Again, five
»s In Charlotte hardwooders hit for double figures,
oraft How did a team which had gone two and 13 for the season make
list!such a sudden switch toward hoop prosperity? Murphy sees the
’ CO® change as a gradual transition.
X)i at “We resumed practice a week early after the Christmas holi-
jj^Jjays and since then we’ve improved steadily,” he said. “I’ve seen
t honthu Hoys ac^ire a great desire to win and now they’re working hard
become winners.
riejj, “I don’t think its any secret that there was dissention on the
easSteam last year,” Murphy continued, “But that hasn’t been a problem
gs, (With this team. Now we play as a single unit and it hurts us to
’ I lose.”
;htbo Muri*y said the team’s recent improvement has caused him to
'‘bla((to'’6 * different feeling about himself. “I’ve actually felt this last
chilf month has been the first building season since Pve been here,”
ig, an he said.
Ingredients in the new look are numerous. Jerry Anthony, for
udent example, has begun to emerge as the team’s leader.
“ili, “We moved Jerry from the forward position to guard out of
;e wj desperation during the last Washington and Lee game,” said
lie cj, Murphy. “He’s improved 100% since the move,
m It, “He runs the offense well and makes our patterns work,” he
> added.
K Dissention No Problem
Anthony says he, “just got tired of losing.” He added that con
tact lenses he’s been wearing for the last couple of weeks have
^ helped him a great deal. “Now I can see,” he says.
HU Pete Donahue, another starting guard, has emerged as a po-
rr tential 20-point-a-night man. He swished the cords for a total
of 43 points over the weekend.
1^ Murphy calls Donahue “160 pounds of determination.” He
gr, says Pete has little form but he hustles and gets the job done.
^ Donahue credits his new found ability to produce points largely
to Anthony. “Jerry and I work well together,” he said. “When
^ Jerry leaves the lineup, I get psyched out.”
Many of Donahue’s baskets have come from in close on feeds
i. . from Anttony. “Wehn 1 got 25 against Charleston, Jerry fed me
at least eight times,” insists Donahue.
A ^bounding has improved markedly recently and towering center
,«| Bob Lemmond’s new get-tough policy on the boards has been a major
factor. In the two games over the weekend, Lemmond began to use
tus razor-sharp elbows as lethal weapons.
In addition, Lemmond garnered 20 points against St. Andrews,
I i urphy says Lemmond seems to have regained his confidence and
®^uied his hands which were somewhat unsure earlier.
With all this improvement, the squad still has a great many things
to work on, says Murphy. He says the already fast offense must
oecome even quicker. And the offense must learn not to allow the
opposmg team control its tempo.
Another outstanding fault is the rather high number of turn
overs the Forty-Niners make. Although the turnover rae has been
cut considerably, there are still “too many bad passes and walking
violations,” says Murphy.
IStill More Work Needed
Furthermore, “We still don’t respond quite quickly enough on
defense,” he admitted.
Charlotte plays host to two conference foes this week in Garin-
pr gym. ■ Methodist College invades Wednesday night and the
following night Lynchburg College provided competition.
Then the Forty-Niners hit the road to face two more con-
jtorence rivals before the DIAC tournament. Friday they travel
, |to Greensboro College and then swing to the east for a game
LX; Witt N. C. Wesleyan at Rocky Mount Saturday.
‘We can win all those games,” says Coach Murphy. In regard
to the tournament, to be held February 16, 17 and 18 in Laurinburg,
ouM ™^®ver, Murphy claims he hasn’t thought that far ahead.
Jerry Anthony has, though. “There’s no doubt about it,” he
states confidently. “1 predict we’ll win the tournament.”
Dear Editor:
It is with considerable plea
sure that I reply to the letters
to the editor in the January 31
edition of “The Carolina Jour
nal,” and particularly to the let
ter by Mr. Stonestreet.
Mr. Stonestreet was indeed puz
zled by our letter regarding our
sickly pseudo-literary magazine.
It is amusing to note that while
0. C. HI supposedly attacks our
letter, he is in reality validating
it.
I am pleased to see that Mr.
Stonestreet has acknowledged the
fact that the magazine is “Han-
cocklian”. We think, however, that
he was merely insultedbecausewe
didn’t describe the magazine as
“Stone streetian” or at least “Han
cock-streetian” to give Mr. Stone
street ample credit tor the trite
inclusions he so graciously pro
vides us with—monthly.
Mr. Stonestreet is correct in
assuming that any publication re
flects the tastes and abilities of
its editor. Mr. Hancock’s taste is
apparently limited by the fact that
he has a superiority complex con
cerning anything that he, Mr.
Stonestreet, and a tew others write.
This is the tact that is so hard
to stomach. We think that Mr. Han
cock and Mr. Stonestreet, as well
as any other person concerned,
should realize that signing one’s
name to a few lines of writing does
not automatically ascertain the
lines as poetry or prose. There
is a tremendous amount of feel
ing that goes into a piece of work
and this feeling is impossible to
obtain when one writes a poem as a
“tiller”. I refer to a poem in the
Jan. issue that was written after
a member of the Barnstormer
asked a certain person tor a topic
tor a poem to be used in the maga
zine. Again, the point we are try
ing to make is that signing one’s
name to a writing does not make
it poetry, etc.
I thank Mr. Stonestreet for the
invitation to publish any of our
work in his opening tor second-
rate poetry. I am flattered to learn
that even while Mr. Stonestreet
considers past material third-rate
(agreeing with us) he looks for
ward to the publishing of at least
any second rate poetry that may
come from our pens or someone
else’s. I realize that a change would
upgrade the magazine—it couldn’t
possibly downgrade it and admits
that our addition would be an im
provement. I am sorry to turn down
his most generous and gracious
offer to publish in his magazine,
but , (un)fortunately at this time,
I, by necessity, mustdecline. Pub
lishing any work in the Barn
stormer would virtually assure
me of never being able to have
another line published in a re
putable high-quality magazine.
Mr. Stonestreet acknowledges
the artwork as a tine example of
the “large talent potential on our
campus, which only needs a little
recognition and encouragement.”
May 1 suggest that the Barnstor
mer begin to encourage and rec
ognize some of this talent instead
of merely of a chosen few of
the Barnstormer club. I am cer
tain that you adoring public could
somehow suffer throi^h at least
one issue without the same auth
ors appearing over and over and
over and over and writing abso
lutely few things worth reading.
To Mr. Reddy, 1 reply that I
have felt the blow first—many
times. It is not a pleasant exper
ience to be around while the
“trash” (to quote a professor
from another University) from the
“University at Charlotte” is raked
over the coals time and time
again and laughed at time and
again.
I truly sympathize with Mr.
Hancock for being editor of the
^rnstormer for I admit that it
is not an easy job.
I have no grudge toward the
Barnstormer and its staff; I only
hope to see at least one quality
issue. It there are no objections
within the Barnstormer staff to
publishing the magazine once a
semester, then I suggest that the
Barnstormer and the publications
board should try to arrive at a
new agreement allowing the bi
annual publication. 1 am certain
that the publications board is in
terested in the development of a
quality magazine.
UNC-Charlotte is not too small
for quality publications and it is
high time that a precedent be set
tor quality in our publications—
particularly in our literary maga
zine.
I ask the Barnstormer to lead
this search and not to stop with
the worJts of its editor, or Mr.
Stonestreet or a chosen tew mem
bers of the club. I do not criti
cize the creative spirit—we criti
cize the fact that the creative
spirit of the majority of our stu
dents is being overlooked, that it
is not being recognized, tliat it is
not being encouraged.
Let us all adopt a “new spirit
of the search. . .a new perspec
tive. Let our values dwell in our
hearts, and let our innovations
excite our minds” for the goal
of quality.
Respectfully,
Larry Logan.
‘Constructive Criticism^
Off ered A dm inistration
Dear Editor:
I realize that students are not in
a position to know all the reasons
behind actions taken by adminis
trators. Yet 1 feel that this limi
tation should not prevent us from
offering for consideration con
structive criticism which might
be of benefit to all concerned. The
recent process of registration has
prompted me to make the follow
ing suggestions:
1. A separate line was required
tor the permit to pay tees. Since
the studentmerelycarriedthe card
from one table to another, it seems
reasonable to ask why these cards
could not be deposited in the right
place without ever involving the
student. Yet it this would not be
possible, why not include these
cards in the packet received by the
student at the beginning of regis
tration? An entire line could thus
be eliminated.
2. Those students who do not
plan to operate a motor vehicle
on campus were required to till
out another card and go through
another line just to declare their
intentions. Why not require a card
only tor those who do plan to
operate a motor vehicle on cam
pus?
3. Information concerning the
person to be contacted in case of
an emergency was required on two
separate cards, for the benefit of
two different administrative of
fices. Would it not be sufficient for
only one office to possess this in
formation?
4. Prospective teachers are
required to till out another copy
of the same card every semester.
Why not place a stack of these
cards in a strategic place with
an invitation for only those who
have not previously completed such
a card to do so?
I hope these suggestions may
pennit a reduction in the time and
effort involved in registration in
the future.
Sincerely,
Phil Barnette
This picture has tried to appear in the Journal for several weeks, now. . . And even though
the games this week are away, the message applies throughout the entire basketball season.