Coach Like Bobby Knight example essay topic

Comparison between two persuasive arguments Should legendary coach Bobby Knight been fired from the University of Indiana? Does the punishment fit the crime? The two articles "The Knight Who Thought He Was King", and "Knight Fall" try to answer these two controversial questions. Each of these articles present the debated issue in their own distinct ways. "Knight Fall" is written in a way that the reader really doesn't know what side the author is choosing, that is until the last few sentences.

On the other hand, the other article is very distinct, and the reader knows for a fact, just from reading the first few sentences, that the author is not what you call a "Bobby Knight fan". Both of these articles use the three rhetoric appeals to help persuade their audience. "He also thought -indeed, no thought to the contrary seems ever to have made its way into his head- that he was larger than the university itself... he signed the papers placed before him and then blithely violated the very agreement he supposedly had accepted, obviously on the assumption that the policy simply did not apply to a god such as him". (Yardley.) Well if this isn't straightforward enough for one to understand, then the reader has problems. This is how Yardley uses intrinsic ethos. He is an author for the Washington Post, in the style section, and writing about sports.

One who is reading this article is not expecting a remarkable well-informed sports article. Throughout the article he uses a sophisticated vocabulary and strong, powerful words to grasp the attention of his audience. This article doesn't exactly give the reader much leeway in choosing a side; there is not one good thing about Bobby Knight in this article. Throughout this editorial, the author really tries to get to your emotions.

He uses pathos to try to persuade the reader into not liking Bobby Knight. "He screamed at referees, berated and belittled members of his own team, heaved chairs". (Yardley) He is trying to make you dislike Knight, for the things that he has done in the past. He is making Knight to be this immoral individual, who tries to hurt and inflict pain on others. He also states how Knight violated policies, only because they didn't apply to him. All of this is mentioned just to get the reader to think "yea, I'm glad he was fired, he was a confused menace to society, who should have been fired years ago".

Never have I read such a piece of literature in my life, as one so full of hate and disgust. He is also trying to reach the parents of college students. He says that universities like Indiana are schools based on alcohol and sports, and academics are only secondary. He states, "The party scene connected to big-time college sports events- replaces meaningful undergraduate education". (Yardley.) Now is this true? Whether it is or isn't, he is trying to persuade the reader, his audience, to believe this to be true.

He is trying to instill in his audience that Indiana is bad, disrespected school, and because of that, Bobby Knight is even worse, and more disruptive to the university, and the universities reputation. Logos is definitely used the most out of the three appeals. Yardley gives many examples of Knight's corruption throughout the article. "The public record suggests nothing so much as that in all important respects he is a lout, but Indiana stuck with him for 29 years-because his teams won and won and won, and in doing kept the alumni and undergraduates happy... ".

(Yardley) He is implying that a university, such as Indiana, only uses a coach like Bobby Knight, to win games, keep students happy, and most important, bring in loads of money. Also, he compares Knight to Jerry Tarkan ian, former coach of the University of Nevada. He was also fired, and was eventually picked up by Fresno State. This is inferring that some low respected school will eventually pick up Knight for publicity, and use him for his name. The other article, "Knight Fall" takes a totally different approach. This article has extrinsic ethos.

The author is writing for the most popular sports magazine in the nation, Sports Illustrated. When reading this article, or any article in this magazine, you trust it more, and believe what the writer is saying; a lot more than one would from reading a sports article in The Washington Post. "A legend dies... thanks Brand". (Wolff) A student of the university wrote this slogan. It takes up about one-half of a page in the article. Now this can only be put here to show you how most of the students feel, and maybe how you should feel also.

The author wants you to see how Knight's career and character affected so many people, and now how his absence has left an empty space in everyone's heart. "This is a sad day", Don inger said. "I really hoped it would work. Myles did too. That's why he's so disappointed now". (Wolff) This is typed in extra-large, bold print.

This is put in the article to try to get the audience in a way to feel bad for Knight, but at the same time, make them realize that it was time for him to leave. Throughout this article, Wolff makes it out to be that he feels bad for Knight, but believes he should have been fired. He keeps putting in quotes of what people said about Knight, good things, and then in the next few lines, critiques them, and states some reason why Knight should have been fired. When I read this article, I began to feel bad for Knight, basically from the wording of the article, and the quotes put in from the reactions of the students.

"Show me some fu -- ing respect. I'm older than you". (Wolff) this is what Knight told Harvey after grabbing his arm. Knight states that he never used profanity, only touched him on the arm, and was only teaching him "manners and civility". Now only one of these events could have occurred. Wolff puts both of these in so it doesn't seem like he is choosing any sides, so he is presenting all of the evidence.

Wolff spend most of the article stating facts, about what Knight has done in the past, good and bad things. He states incidents of Knight losing his temper and throwing chairs, and also states Knight's amazing winning record, and how that had such a positive affect on the university. Also, Wolff keeps asking the "What if Knight... ?" questions; stating that if Knight did / didn 't do something, then he wouldn't have been fired. Wolff is making sure that he brings up all points of view, because he knows that his audience consists of sports fans, who either want to inform themselves of the situation, or already in some way have their own opinion. Now these two articles are pretty much opposites of each other. "The Knight Who Thought He Was King" uses a lot of comparisons.

It states that all big time universities are nothing more than a place to party and watch sporting events. This helps in his argument about Knight being fired, as an excuse to why the University of Indiana put up with him for so long. This article also uses some cause and consequence arguments. The author states that maybe if Indiana didn't put up with Knight for so many years, then maybe the school, academically, would be taken more seriously.

He is saying that Knight is a mockery of the school, and the school must have stricter guidelines and set better examples. But on the contrary, the article also brings up the point that if Knight himself had listened to people, and actually followed the rules, then he would still be coaching. Just look at the title. The word "Knight" is used as pun; it carries two meanings. It is referring to his name, and also as a knight, one who serves a king. If Bobby Knight, would only obey the rules, and act like a knight, and not like a king, then possibly he would still be a coach today.

"Knight Fall" also uses cause and consequence. It brings up the point that if Harvey (the student) didn't come forward and complain about Knight's abuse, then Knight probably would still be coaching. But that incident was only the tip of the iceberg. Knight had done so many things before that, and in the article, each incident is brought up, and questioned; whether if Knight had not done that, if he still would be coaching. Of course all of this means nothing; it's all too late. It's just the two different perspectives.

Well these two articles aren't too hard to compare. One uses such vulgarity, that it makes such an impact on the reader, that the reader has no choice but to believe what the author is telling you. The other, a very informative and thorough article, lets the reader read, and learn, before "choosing a side". Reading this will help you understand the situation, from both points of view, and then only to see the authors point of view in the last paragraph of the entire article. In the other article, Yardley doesn't waste any time in stating his opinion, opening his article with disgust for Knight. These are two perfect articles to compare.