Littlebill Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 1 hour ago, Billboy1 said: Great article on this by Dan O'Neill in today's PD. "great" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 39 minutes ago, Littlebill said: "great" What is this fool talking about... "give your new basketball coach the support and means to recruit a few capable players." Isn't that what is happening?... including a nationally-ranked Top 50 local recruit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmart23 Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 49 minutes ago, LongLiveLisch said: The billiken is not going to hurt recruiting, that's ridiculous. Also, no one is saying that the focus should be on addressing this monstrosity over focusing on winning basketball games, that's an equally ridiculous statement. However, different than other schools/programs, our mascot has a direct correlation to the perception of what the hell a billiken is. If you didn't know what Mizzous mascot looked like, you could take a pretty good guess based on knowing that it's a tiger. If you don't know what a Billiken is supposed to look like, you now have this dumpster fire to guide you along. A school has every right to change the image of their mascot, but the legacy of what it is should not be modified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 He's right. We need to start winning games. I'm more on board with Ford than I was when he was first hired, but the question with him was always whether he can actually win games despite the talent. That question hasn't been answered yet and won't be for at least another year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 20 minutes ago, ACE said: What is this fool talking about... "give your new basketball coach the support and means to recruit a few capable players." Isn't that what is happening?... including a nationally-ranked Top 50 local recruit. Plus, he made a pitch in there for SLU to join the Valley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 4 minutes ago, slufan13 said: He's right. We need to start winning games. I'm more on board with Ford than I was when he was first hired, but the question with him was always whether he can actually win games despite the talent. That question hasn't been answered yet and won't be for at least another year. I don't think there is much question that Ford can win games... he made the NCAA Tourney in 5 of his 8 seasons at Okie State. The question with him has been can he win in the NCAA Tourney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 Sulfan not sure if I agree with having to wait a full year to evaluate Ford. We all agree that our prospects for this year are not very good. Well, IF the team performs significantly better than we all expect, we may have a reason to feel that Ford has made a real difference. This is only IF mind you. If they do not perform better than expected I think we still have to give Ford the extra year to show what he can do with the 2017-18 team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 I really don't get people saying this was a good article, but then again I can't remember a Dan O'Neil article I thought was good in 20 years of reading him. Yeah, SLU needs to win basketball games. Thank you for the professional sportswriter's insight there. Everything else in the article shows he's simply not paying attention to the topic. Like Ford hasn't recruited "a few capable players" already? Rehashing the tired argument about the A10 and "regional identity" without offering a less "mediocre" alternative for SLU to join? Hyperventilating over the history of the mascot only to suggest at the end the school has bigger problems to worry about? Articles like this are exactly why I don't even care anymore whether SLU is covered by the P-D or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 4 hours ago, hsmith19 said: I really don't get people saying this was a good article, but then again I can't remember a Dan O'Neil article I thought was good in 20 years of reading him. Yeah, SLU needs to win basketball games. Thank you for the professional sportswriter's insight there. Everything else in the article shows he's simply not paying attention to the topic. Like Ford hasn't recruited "a few capable players" already? Rehashing the tired argument about the A10 and "regional identity" without offering a less "mediocre" alternative for SLU to join? Hyperventilating over the history of the mascot only to suggest at the end the school has bigger problems to worry about? Articles like this are exactly why I don't even care anymore whether SLU is covered by the P-D or not. It was not a great article. He managed to bring up all kinds of unrelated issues to the mascot. He was taking a cheap shot at SLU and he brought up the old Valley nonsense. I agree with hsmith - if this is the kind of crap from the Post then who needs them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonwich Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 I would have thought that the old "just win, baby" mantra would have been put to rest by now. We won. We went to the Dance three years in a row. During those three years, we played more tournament games than 90-some percent of D1 teams. And yet we had limited sellouts. Our season ticket base grew only nominally. Our local profile was raised, but arguably not as much as people thought. There's a whole lot more to a holistically successful basketball program than winning. Oh, and those were just general observations. O'Neil's article was moronic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Ken Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 Bigger question is why has this program not taken off, forget nationally, locally over the years? Over the summer we were visiting the Seattle area and saw a lot of Zags hats and shirts everywhere. Rarely see Billikens stuff on people around town. Go to Omaha and Blue Jays are relevant too. Those are both very general statements but if you've been to either city I hope you get where I'm coming from. Does the whole mascot thing make us even more irrelevant in our own city? I don't know. Agree with bonwich there is a lot more to long term success than just winning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
For-DaLove Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 5 minutes ago, Billy Ken said: Bigger question is why has this program not taken off, forget nationally, locally over the years? Over the summer we were visiting the Seattle area and saw a lot of Zags hats and shirts everywhere. Rarely see Billikens stuff on people around town. Go to Omaha and Blue Jays are relevant too. Those are both very general statements but if you've been to either city I hope you get where I'm coming from. Does the whole mascot thing make us even more irrelevant in our own city? I don't know. Agree with bonwich there is a lot more to long term success than just winning. It's a good question. Those aren't very accurate comparisons, though. Gonzaga has been to 18 straight NCAA tournaments. Do you know the teams with longer streaks currently? Kansas, North Carolina, Duke, and Michigan State. Add in Gonzaga's 2 elite 8 appearances and it's not hard to see why they're popular. As far as Creighton goes, they have no professional sports teams to compete against. They're the only show in town. It's a much different situation that ours. I understand we had a nice 3 year run recently but the reality is that we haven't had sustained success. Plus, those teams never made it past the round of 32. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Ken Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 I totally agree, the point I was trying to get across was why in such a great sports town, we've never become Gonzaga or Creighton? What holds us back overall through the years from getting to that level or higher? Seems like doesn't matter who is in charge SLU gets in its own way. That's what I was trying to articulate. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Ken Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 I look at us and Louisville twenty years ago and we were even. Now look at Louisville and us! No comparison. Why can't SLU decide to invest in athletics like that? Invest in facilities, staffing, add programs (hockey?football?) more scholarships, the entire infrastructure? I know people will laugh about football but with NFL gone, why not? We aren't even comparable to Lindenwood in regards to some facilities. Louisville is a legitimate national program. This isn't a blame current AD or President rant, this question harkens back to over last few decades. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmbilliken Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 36 minutes ago, Billy Ken said: I look at us and Louisville twenty years ago and we were even. Now look at Louisville and us! No comparison. Why can't SLU decide to invest in athletics like that? Invest in facilities, staffing, add programs (hockey?football?) more scholarships, the entire infrastructure? I know people will laugh about football but with NFL gone, why not? We aren't even comparable to Lindenwood in regards to some facilities. Louisville is a legitimate national program. This isn't a blame current AD or President rant, this question harkens back to over last few decades. Thanks In what way were we even with Louisville 20 years ago? Louisville was miles ahead of us then and still is today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 OK Billy Ken SLU and apparently Louisville took different paths 20 years ago ending where we both are now. You cannot understand why this happened. I would like to give you a name and let you ponder the ramifications. The name is Biondi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonwich Posted September 28, 2016 Share Posted September 28, 2016 SLU and Louisville have never been even in the same sports universe in my lifetime, Marque Perry notwithstanding. And if anything, as much as I dislike the man, Larry at least made us Pluto to Louisville's Mercury. And when Louisville got serious about football, there was no way we'd ever catch up. It depends upon your time reference, but I'd dispute that you "rarely" see SLU stuff around town. I'm aware of it all the time, much more so than 10, 20 or 30 years ago. I high-five people in Schnucks and at the airport. Same thing when I travel -- I tend to get a bunch of "go Bills!" every time I walk around NYC wearin' my colors. (Even got one at Penn's stadium last summer at the US Track & Field National Club Championships, and I got a few in LA as well. None in London, though, dammit.) We're not popular on an ongoing basis because of very slow change of the ingrained bias towards SPUMAC and, I'd argue, because we've just never marketed ourselves worth a sh ! t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Metzinger Posted September 28, 2016 Share Posted September 28, 2016 16 hours ago, Billy Ken said: I look at us and Louisville twenty years ago and we were even. Now look at Louisville and us! No comparison. Why can't SLU decide to invest in athletics like that? Invest in facilities, staffing, add programs (hockey?football?) more scholarships, the entire infrastructure? I know people will laugh about football but with NFL gone, why not? We aren't even comparable to Lindenwood in regards to some facilities. Louisville is a legitimate national program. This isn't a blame current AD or President rant, this question harkens back to over last few decades. Thanks Not sure I can get on board with this comment, Billy. Louisville has always been a national program. Just because they weren't in the ACC 20 years ago doesn't mean much when you look at Denny Crum's tenure in Freedom Hall. 2 National Championships, 6 Final Fours. Maybe you're mistaking Louisville for Marquette. That I can get on board with. Then you go from Crum to Pitino (and tack on another NC)... it's like Jack Welch to Jeff Immelt at G.E. The rich have always gotten richer, BK. Louisville is in the upper echelon of college basketball and has been for the last forty years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted September 28, 2016 Share Posted September 28, 2016 Louisville's also a public school with 25,000 students. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almaman Posted September 28, 2016 Share Posted September 28, 2016 23 hours ago, kmbilliken said: In what way were we even with Louisville 20 years ago? Louisville was miles ahead of us then and still is today. and before! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taj79 Posted September 29, 2016 Share Posted September 29, 2016 I love the "regional" calls once again. I wonder if folks in Omaha and Milwaukee feel that way about being in the Big East? You can't call for support and finances to recruit top kids and then expect them to come and play in places like Carbondale, Des Moines, Springfield, and Peoria. No -- O'Neill just took shots and emptied his b*tch bag magazine there. NCAA Hockey???? Hey, I loved it when I was there because basketball sucked and there was little else going on in the winter. But until then, I never heard of the Soo Lakers, or that Michigan had so many directional schools or that Ferris was more than a wheel or Buehler's first name. That's even less big time then college soccer in my book. Until your mascot is able to be the Chicken or the Phanatic .... who cares. I wouldn't want to be Rudy Flyer, the Syracuse Orange, the Hawk (that never dies) or Xavier's Musketeer or whatever that thing for Evansville is. Purple Ace my sizable arse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeSmetBilliken Posted October 4, 2016 Share Posted October 4, 2016 sounds like the new Billiken might be changed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted October 4, 2016 Share Posted October 4, 2016 Nice to see. They're at least using the negative social media momentum in their favor too. Hopefully the updated version will be property put together. Good for Fred P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenfan05 Posted October 4, 2016 Share Posted October 4, 2016 3 minutes ago, DeSmetBilliken said: sounds like the new Billiken might be changed? This is very good news. I am incredibly shocked but it seems as though pestello has taken the reigns of the new billiken project from the AD. My only issue is that most of the "advice" can only be changed by the actions of the the person inside the mascot not the actually suit/head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.