Scoop Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Wow. Nothing against TL3 or Coach RM. Just saying his game was better suited for a team like Mizzou. Chuck and run. He would have got his points somewhere else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 No, because SLU has sometimes (or usually) added a rigid "system" coach who rarely hires and cultivates young assistant coaches who area players can identify with to the facts that the program has very little winning tradition and lesser visibility in a second-tier conference, the school continues to be a tough sell to many players (and their coaches) who have both the talent to elevate the program to consistent Top 50 or Top 25 reputation and the ability to cut the school's academic mustard. I think Calbert Cheaney is a young assistant who many players could identify with. Or does this person have to be a young black guy from St Louis? And I will never, ever buy the academics part. I sat through many classes with a player or two that couldn't cut any sort of academic mustard, but they graduated. And they weren't even good, at all. If a guy can cut the mustard at any other D1 school, he can probably cut it at SLU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 I think Calbert Cheaney is a young assistant who many players could identify with. Or does this person have to be a young black guy from St Louis? And I will never, ever buy the academics part. I sat through many classes with a player or two that couldn't cut any sort of academic mustard, but they graduated. And they weren't even good, at all. If a guy can cut the mustard at any other D1 school, he can probably cut it at SLU. I agree. I'm not referring to the current coaching regime. Nevertheless, SLU has bridges to mend with local basketball youth and their coaches. I believe the healing is underway, but there are still obstacles, with regard to perception, to navigate around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 No, because SLU has sometimes (or usually) added a rigid "system" coach who rarely hires and cultivates young assistant coaches who area players can identify with to the facts that the program has very little winning tradition and lesser visibility in a second-tier conference, the school continues to be a tough sell to many players (and their coaches) who have both the talent to elevate the program to consistent Top 50 or Top 25 reputation and the ability to cut the school's academic mustard. In the last five or so years, how many local players who fit that description has SLU missed out on? Rosie Jones is one of the few I can think of, but we did pretty well without him. Remember all the hand ringing when we missed out on sCam Biedschied? Rather than a few over-hyped locals, the type of players I miss are guys like KM, DE, MM, JJ and CE. I could care less if they are not from St. Louis. I'm not originally from here, so being local doesn't mean as much to me as maybe it does others. I just want guys who can play first and foremost, regardless of where they are from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 In the last five or so years, how many local players who fit that description has SLU missed out on? Malcolm Hill would have averaged over 15 ppg as a starter for us this year. Considering the dearth of young frontcourt talent we had when Majerus took ill, Nolan Berry would also have started this year. Butler had better options than him coming into last season but we certainly didn't. And Ryan Rosburg, who is totally overmatched in the SEC, would have been an upgrade over our other centers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 I think Calbert Cheaney is a young assistant who many players could identify with. Calbert Cheaney is not that young, he was playing at Indiana before the guys he is recruiting were alive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 How many forgave Rick for "wasting" Tommie and Kevin's senior season by installing his system come hell or high water or 8 point games............ Excellent point. Had RM been promoted to head coach following the death of the head coach for whom he was working, I could see RM (and other coaches) dismantle things and start fresh with his own players/system instead of continuing what was already in place. To me, I will always be grateful to Jim Crews for giving us those 2 great years. Without those year's, RM's legacy at SLU would be nowhere what it is now. Jim Crews was an excellent "interim" coach for those 2 NCAA Tourney years and kept the team going in RM's direction. To me, that is saying alot in that D1 head coaches are all, by nature, head strong, ego driven alpha males who want to do things their own way. Crews put his ego aside and kept the team in RM's status quo. Now, would RM have won more games than Crews? probably. Would RM have reloaded better than Crews? probably. Would we be better off today with RM at the helm? probably. But comparisons to a HOF coach are not fair. And while I am disappointed with the way we played last year and the apparent lack of progress, I am very encouraged at the bold steps Crews took last Spring to let guys go and replace them with what appear to be promising players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Agree with you clock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenbill Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Agree with you clock. +2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 The above claim seems so bizzare it's difficult to accept. What coach wouldn't create for his players their best chance to succeed, ie playing to their strengths, and then try and design a system that takes advantage of those strengths. I think most modern day coaches think this way. Yes, they'll have diverse talents, so it's his job to take those parts and make a functional system out of it. If the coach goes the other way he has to be saying, "I'll recruit players that will work in my systems." I think this was RM's approach. He knew his systems worked very successfully and put together the pieces that would buy into them. If he made a mistake in a player he recruited, he'd run them off. For example, Relphorde was one of Brad's better gets as evidenced by his success at Colorado, but the story is he didn't agree with Rick's idea of where and how he would best fit into his system. Consequently, Rick and he decided he'd be better off somewhere else. Fair enough. If the above is true about Crews about not utilizing a player's strengths, I suspect there may be a mass exodus if this season goes south like last season. No player likes playing on a consistent loser, but they'd really be upset if they're thinking, "we could win if he'd just put us in a position to win." It's not just putting them in the position to succeed, it's allowing them to take the opportunity when it presents itself. I get not wanting them to force it, but you're bringing the ball up and you have an open lane to the basket ... you can't take it? Nope move the ball so we can throw up a prayer with 2 seconds left on the shot clock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Unfortunately it is true and has now been confirmed by a separate source. Not saying this year will be the same but last year Crews set certain roles for each player and did not want that player going out of that role. Due to some recruiting errors, he had to have players play away from their biggest strengths to fit the role he wanted/needed. BBlog. According to a source of mine, you are correct that frustrations were high and that Crews was trying to implement things which were not being done. And yes, Crews' method of coaching/teaching did include yanking players out. And to go even further, I had heard that there may have been disagreement (at times) within the coaching staff on different topics. At the same time, I do believe certain context needs to be added and that more of the story needs to be added. First, none of the players were so frustrated that they left and all of the coaches were retained by Crews and returned for this season. Second, frustrations and conflict are normal (and is actually a good sign) when a team loses and has a dismal season like we did -- especially have three (3) years of NCAA Tourney success. I don't want a docile team (players and coaches) that isn't frustrated and which remains quiet and simply follows orders as they lose game after game. Third, having guys accept their role on the team occurs with every team and every coach in every sport. Fourth, I believe you are correct in that Crews did tell certain guys to do x (fulfill a role the team needs) and then either did not do x or did not do x well but instead brought y (provide a role/talent/skill they prefer or believe they are best suited for) for the benefit of the team. Instead of allowing the guys to do y, Crews required they do x. If they did not do x, then they stayed on the bench and/or were pulled. To me, this is the best explanation of why certain guys played alot in a certain game or half but not much in the next game or half. Now, I clearly see both sides. Our team failed last year on the basketball court and most of the failures were because our guys had break downs where 3 or 4 played good defense but not the 5th guy so the other team scored. On offense, 3 or 4 guys did their role but the other 1 or 2 decided to do their own thing. I would say this means that our guys not embrace their roles and/or perform them well while preferring to do other roles. A team must gel and come together. A team must accept and fill roles. Not everyone can be the natural scorer they were on previous teams/high school. Possibly, this is the modern player approach versus the old school disciplinarian at work. Most likely, though, I believe that Crews will relax and let most of the guys contribute in all aspects (allow them to do y) AFTER they prove and demonstrate they can perform their required role (perform x for the good of the team). The end goal is for our team to play together as a team. RM was very good at getting the whole (team) to exceed the sum of the parts (players). Last year was a learning process and I believe we will be off having gone thru last year. No way does Jim Crews tell our best shooter not to shoot or or best dribbler not to dribble. Instead, some bad apples are gone, new players have been added, some guys have improved and all the guys have chosen to return/join this team so now I am expecting the current players to accept their roles, and once they perform them well, to then earn other privileges and freedom rendering this topic as ancient history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 BBlog. According to a source of mine, you are correct that frustrations were high and that Crews was trying to implement things which were not being done. And yes, Crews' method of coaching/teaching did include yanking players out. And to go even further, I had heard that there may have been disagreement (at times) within the coaching staff on different topics. At the same time, I do believe certain context needs to be added and that more of the story needs to be added. First, none of the players were so frustrated that they left and all of the coaches were retained by Crews and returned for this season. Second, frustrations and conflict are normal (and is actually a good sign) when a team loses and has a dismal season like we did -- especially have three (3) years of NCAA Tourney success. I don't want a docile team (players and coaches) that isn't frustrated and which remains quiet and simply follows orders as they lose game after game. Third, having guys accept their role on the team occurs with every team and every coach in every sport. Fourth, I believe you are correct in that Crews did tell certain guys to do x (fulfill a role the team needs) and then either did not do x or did not do x well but instead brought y (provide a role/talent/skill they prefer or believe they are best suited for) for the benefit of the team. Instead of allowing the guys to do y, Crews required they do x. If they did not do x, then they stayed on the bench and/or were pulled. To me, this is the best explanation of why certain guys played alot in a certain game or half but not much in the next game or half. Now, I clearly see both sides. Our team failed last year on the basketball court and most of the failures were because our guys had break downs where 3 or 4 played good defense but not the 5th guy so the other team scored. On offense, 3 or 4 guys did their role but the other 1 or 2 decided to do their own thing. I would say this means that our guys not embrace their roles and/or perform them well while preferring to do other roles. A team must gel and come together. A team must accept and fill roles. Not everyone can be the natural scorer they were on previous teams/high school. Possibly, this is the modern player approach versus the old school disciplinarian at work. Most likely, though, I believe that Crews will relax and let most of the guys contribute in all aspects (allow them to do y) AFTER they prove and demonstrate they can perform their required role (perform x for the good of the team). The end goal is for our team to play together as a team. RM was very good at getting the whole (team) to exceed the sum of the parts (players). Last year was a learning process and I believe we will be off having gone thru last year. No way does Jim Crews tell our best shooter not to shoot or or best dribbler not to dribble. Instead, some bad apples are gone, new players have been added, some guys have improved and all the guys have chosen to return/join this team so now I am expecting the current players to accept their roles, and once they perform them well, to then earn other privileges and freedom rendering this topic as ancient history. THE FREAKING CUP IS HALF FULL! Well written CT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MB73 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Two excellent posts, Clock. Nailed it. Finally, an intelligent, knowledgeable, mature, experienced opinion... as opposed to the group of hissy-fit, panic-button-prone usual suspects on here; the rotation of which is about nine, ironically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Finally, an intelligent, knowledgeable, mature, experienced opinion... Does this characterization apply to all posters who post things in line with your opinions? I am sure several posters could write pages why they think that the program under Crews is in fact headed for the toilet and could do so in an intelligent, knowledgeable, and mature manner. I am too apathetic at this point to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 I am sure several posters could write pages why they think that the program under Crews is in fact headed for the toilet and could do so in an intelligent, knowledgeable, and mature manner. I am too apathetic at this point to do so. And thank goodness! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted August 29, 2015 Share Posted August 29, 2015 Fully agree Clock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Time for some Monday morning positive thoughts: - If it is the case that Crews mis-managed the talent last year and is committed to not doing so again this year, this should give us a bump in # of wins. - We've had numerous discussions since last season ended re: how many extra wins can this team achieve. Some point out that returning players alone don't mean we'll get 5-7 more wins, and they may have a point to some extent. But what if Crews better using his talent could lead to 2-3 extra wins all by itself? Then its not so far fetched to see a core group of freshmen becoming sophomores leading to 3-4 extra wins. Add it all together and the 5-7 wins many believe will be out of reach is doable. - None of that explains why Crews mis-managed the team last year but at this point I'm not too concerned about why we won 11 games instead of 13-14 games. Rather, I'm concerned with how can this team make a major leap forward and get back to some level of respectability. And Crews being a better coach could certainly be a leading contributor to that improvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Should we expect that the coach we hire for about $1 million a year should need on the job training? Mismanaging your team is what a young inexperienced coach would do not a guy with as many years of head coaching experience that JC has. If you also hire a young inexperienced coach then my guess would be that you would not make him one of the top A10 paid coaches. Now that being said, I agree what is done is done and only going forward matters but how do we really know that our experienced head coach can change? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Malcolm Hill would have averaged over 15 ppg as a starter for us this year. Considering the dearth of young frontcourt talent we had when Majerus took ill, Nolan Berry would also have started this year. Butler had better options than him coming into last season but we certainly didn't. And Ryan Rosburg, who is totally overmatched in the SEC, would have been an upgrade over our other centers. Butler was not good the season Nolan Berry was there and he still couldn't get off the pine and Rosburg from a crappy, bottom-feeder SEC program helps prove my point. They don't make the situation better. Those guys are not in the tradition of winning Billiken players - DE, KM, MM, JJ and CE. That's what we need to get back to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Time for some Monday morning positive thoughts: - If it is the case that Crews mis-managed the talent last year and is committed to not doing so again this year, this should give us a bump in # of wins. - We've had numerous discussions since last season ended re: how many extra wins can this team achieve. Some point out that returning players alone don't mean we'll get 5-7 more wins, and they may have a point to some extent. But what if Crews better using his talent could lead to 2-3 extra wins all by itself? Then its not so far fetched to see a core group of freshmen becoming sophomores leading to 3-4 extra wins. Add it all together and the 5-7 wins many believe will be out of reach is doable. - None of that explains why Crews mis-managed the team last year but at this point I'm not too concerned about why we won 11 games instead of 13-14 games. Rather, I'm concerned with how can this team make a major leap forward and get back to some level of respectability. And Crews being a better coach could certainly be a leading contributor to that improvement. I don't understand the assumptions or the numbers here. Did Crews acknowledge mismanagement of the roster? I think I remember he indicated he'd rather go with a shorter rotation this year, but I'm sure he would've said he was experimenting last year, not that he mismanaged minutes - even if most of us agree that he did. Furthermore, why would a shorter rotation will be the answer? And how does simply trimming a rotation to a more manageable 8 or 9 translate into a certain number of wins? Given what we've seen, how can we be certain his rotation will actually feature the best 8-9 players? (I'm assuming your "committed to not doing so again this year" is in regard to the rotation. Correct me if you meant something else in your post.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I don't understand the assumptions or the numbers here. Did Crews acknowledge mismanagement of the roster? I think I remember he indicated he'd rather go with a shorter rotation this year, but I'm sure he would've said he was experimenting last year, not that he mismanaged minutes - even if most of us agree that he did. Furthermore, why would a shorter rotation will be the answer? And how does simply trimming a rotation to a more manageable 8 or 9 translate into a certain number of wins? Given what we've seen, how can we be certain his rotation will actually feature the best 8-9 players? (I'm assuming your "committed to not doing so again this year" is in regard to the rotation. Correct me if you meant something else in your post.) I'm responding to posts #252, 259 and 264, which many people responded to as being upset with. I didn't say anything about the size of the rotation although I did make an assumption that Crews would rectify some of his coaching mistakes last season. If he fails to rectify those mistakes then shame on him. But if he get's back to quality coaching like he did the two previous seasons, one of which he was named national coach of the year and in both of which took our team to its highest NCAA tourney seeds ever, then its reasonable to assume an improvement in our W/L record that goes simply beyond player improvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 So you're saying that if Crews coaches better, the team will be better? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 So you're saying that if Crews coaches better, the team will be better? I'm saying that there are reports out there that Crews made some fundamental mistakes in how he coached last year's team. If he eliminates those fundamental mistakes (mistakes I saw little of his two prior years in charge) then the team could be noticeably better simply by Crews making some changes. In any given year, coaches may get the most out of their team or the least. Last year Crews got the least out of the team but in the prior two he got pretty close to the most. It fits with my long standing belief that the talent on last year's team was far better than the 11 wins would suggest. Others have suggested that we simply have no talent so it doesn't really matter if they all get a year older. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 So you're saying that if Crews coaches better, the team will be better? I got a good laugh out of this post when read next to the picture of Jamm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I got a good laugh out of this post when read next to the picture of Jamm. You got Jammed! 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.