billiken class of 15 Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 CBS put together a list of the program best positioned to succeed in each state over the next five years, and for the state of Missouri, they chose.... Missouri: Missouri Tigers Outlook: As a state, Missouri is not that strong on college hoops programs. And the Kim Anderson era is not inspiring Tigers fans, no not at all. But the Tigers have to be the pick by default here. Though Missouri State and Southeast Missouri State are prime contenders to be players in their respective leagues. The state of Saint Louis hoops is interesting. Feels like the program is at a crossroads right now. Will it trend back up in the next two years under Jim Crews? The Billikens won 11 games last season. Obviously it's just the opinion of a group of writers, and I think we have seen in the past that those guys at CBS aren't exactly experts, but I'm interested to see what everyone here thinks. Personally, I was insulted that they chose Mizzou. Our Billikens are certainly at a crossroads, but I wouldnt say we're in any worse shape than Mizzou. Link to the rest of the article: http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25303805/the-united-states-of-college-basketball-the-top-program-in-each-state Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Both programs are at a crossroads but over the next five years I can see a toss-up prediction going to the school that plays in a power 5 conference and has better facilities and can overspend SEC TV money on a new coach when necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milwaukeebill Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I got my money on rockhurst Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Experts or not the people at CBS are in the business of broadcasting and make a living out of viewer ratings. They should be expected to decide toss up opinions in favor of whoever they believe will affirm what the majority of their viewers think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 The thing that sucks is that if this question was asked last year, it wouldn't be a debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Experts or not the people at CBS are in the business of broadcasting and make a living out of viewer ratings. They should be expected to decide toss up opinions in favor of whoever they believe will affirm what the majority of their viewers think. Um, don't more people get clicks and discussion by being controversial and going against what the majority of people think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenfan05 Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Um, don't more people get clicks and discussion by being controversial and going against what the majority of people think? Old guy still goes by subscriptions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Um, don't more people get clicks and discussion by being controversial and going against what the majority of people think? That's the only reason Skip Bayless has a job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 That's the only reason Skip Bayless has a job. OT, do people on this board watch ESPN outside of live sporting events? I think the only other time I am watching ESPN is for College GameDay on Saturday mornings during the fall (used to watch PTI regularly, but I don't remember the last time I watched that show). Guys like Skip Bayless, Stephen A. Smith, and the army of idiot former athletes beating every sports topic to death is just not appealing to me (I understand it is sports/entertainment, but none of those guys are particularly entertaining to me). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 OT, do people on this board watch ESPN outside of live sporting events? I think the only other time I am watching ESPN is for College GameDay on Saturday mornings during the fall (used to watch PTI regularly, but I don't remember the last time I watched that show). Guys like Skip Bayless, Stephen A. Smith, and the army of idiot former athletes beating every sports topic to death is just not appealing to me (I understand it is sports/entertainment, but none of those guys are particularly entertaining to me). -very rarely for me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 They certainly got "at the crossroads" right. Now, do we pull a Robert Johnson and sell our soul to the Devil by covertly starting a coaching search, or do we drift back into the little engine that couldn't type program? I know I'll get hammered for the coaching search thing, but does anyone feel that Jim Crews is the guy to lead us back to the promised land? If so, please share with us your reasoning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 They certainly got "at the crossroads" right. Now, do we pull a Robert Johnson and sell our soul to the Devil by covertly starting a coaching search, or do we drift back into the little engine that couldn't type program? I know I'll get hammered for the coaching search thing, but does anyone feel that Jim Crews is the guy to lead us back to the promised land? If so, please share with us your reasoning. No. I understand why he was given the job (ride the Majerus wave and no reason to mess with that much), but don't understand the length of the contract and don't think he is the guy for the current rebuild. This season sure will be interesting, back to you Steve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 OT, do people on this board watch ESPN outside of live sporting events? I think the only other time I am watching ESPN is for College GameDay on Saturday mornings during the fall (used to watch PTI regularly, but I don't remember the last time I watched that show). Guys like Skip Bayless, Stephen A. Smith, and the army of idiot former athletes beating every sports topic to death is just not appealing to me (I understand it is sports/entertainment, but none of those guys are particularly entertaining to me). Not at all. Their "personalities" are just awful, as are many of the SportsCenter anchors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 The shame of it all is that SportsCenter for a time was great TV. It sucks almost as bad now as most of the other crap they put on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgeldmacher Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 They certainly got "at the crossroads" right. Now, do we pull a Robert Johnson and sell our soul to the Devil by covertly starting a coaching search, or do we drift back into the little engine that couldn't type program? I know I'll get hammered for the coaching search thing, but does anyone feel that Jim Crews is the guy to lead us back to the promised land? If so, please share with us your reasoning. The biggest problem with your thought is the amazingly overinflated view many on this board have of the type of coach we would be able to get to replace Crews. Young coaches on the rise in smaller conferences, the type that we would want, make the jump over us to BCS conference teams. Already established coaches aren't going to make a lateral or downward move to come to us. With the current state of our program, the only coaches we could get are established, formerly successful coaches who get fired from better jobs and aren't getting picked up by another top school, guys who are successful at low level programs but not getting attention from BCS schools, or assistants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 The biggest problem with your thought is the amazingly overinflated view many on this board have of the type of coach we would be able to get to replace Crews. Young coaches on the rise in smaller conferences, the type that we would want, make the jump over us to BCS conference teams. Already established coaches aren't going to make a lateral or downward move to come to us. With the current state of our program, the only coaches we could get are established, formerly successful coaches who get fired from better jobs and aren't getting picked up by another top school, guys who are successful at low level programs but not getting attention from BCS schools, or assistants. This isn't actually correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Seriously, you don't think we could hire another Romar type? With the facilities we have now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 The biggest problem with your thought is the amazingly overinflated view many on this board have of the type of coach we would be able to get to replace Crews. Young coaches on the rise in smaller conferences, the type that we would want, make the jump over us to BCS conference teams. Already established coaches aren't going to make a lateral or downward move to come to us. With the current state of our program, the only coaches we could get are established, formerly successful coaches who get fired from better jobs and aren't getting picked up by another top school, guys who are successful at low level programs but not getting attention from BCS schools, or assistants. No reason we couldn't attract the next Archie Miller. I also like the idea of the formerly successful guy from a bigger program. Off the top of my head, somebody like Herb Sendek would fit that description. I hope the resources are still in place. Is Doc Chaifetz still engaged and willing to write big checks? Bottom line is this program can't sell itself short and just settle. It has potential. We've seen that conference championships, Top 20 rankings and NCAA Tournament victories are possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Um, don't more people get clicks and discussion by being controversial and going against what the majority of people think? Only if their name is Trump, otherwise it is 50 50 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 The biggest problem with your thought is the amazingly overinflated view many on this board have of the type of coach we would be able to get to replace Crews. Young coaches on the rise in smaller conferences, the type that we would want, make the jump over us to BCS conference teams. Already established coaches aren't going to make a lateral or downward move to come to us. With the current state of our program, the only coaches we could get are established, formerly successful coaches who get fired from better jobs and aren't getting picked up by another top school, guys who are successful at low level programs but not getting attention from BCS schools, or assistants. It's been rumored we pay Crews somewhere in the vicinity of $850k. one would think we could land a pretty good up and comer for those kind of $$. Also, the facilities are a big plus, good recruiting area, good conference. Granted any guy we landed might bolt if he's successful here, but hopefully he'd have in place his successor like X has done. Right now I don't see Crews replacement on our staff. I guess Cheyney would be the closest to what you'd like to have, but he's not proven himself to be an A1 recruiter, which is what we need desperately. It can be done look, just look at Wichita St as an example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgeldmacher Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I guarantee that if Crews goes, this board will start lobbing out names that we have no shot at. The hot names every year end up going to BCS conferences. Nobody moves from the Missouri Valley to the A-10. The hot names get hired for more money that the $850K we pay Crews. I'm not saying that this means we have to hold onto Coach Crews if we have another disastrous year, but I've seen too many times when people on this board think that SLU is a top destination for big names. Right now it is not. It will continue that way until we start to have Xavier or Gonzaga type success for about five to six years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 I'll take Harriman and take my chances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwayne's_World Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 If you all had to wager, would you say that Crews is still here this time next year? Or will we have someone else at the helm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 If you all had to wager, would you say that Crews is still here this time next year? Or will we have someone else at the helm? I'd say smart money is Crews is the coach. As for not being able to hire a new coach, get real. The SLU job paying close to a million dollars a year is a very attractive job. They'd have a choice out of a very talented pool of up and coming coaches, head and assistant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 JMM there is the issue of what the salary available for any new HC might be. It does not have to be the same as now, it could be higher or lower depending on many factors. 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.