kevinfootes

This is a little bit much, don't you think?

I'm not sure you can use the word "class" to describe anything about this situation.

This is a news story, whether people on here like it or not. Tom is simply passing along information. I don't think I've read him expressing opinions on the matter one way or another (but I also haven't read EVERYTHING he's written on it).

I think RM is building his system. This is pretty much a lost season, so getting ready for next year is probably the best plan. I was critical of RM in his first year because I didn't think his strategy played to the strengths of Lisch and Liddell. However, RM is who he is. Hhe's building his system with a young group, and he's been pretty successful in his career. Let's see if he can get us out of SLU's almost perpetual black hole next year.

It will be a tough call to make if RM would leave. Moser could give some continuity and maybe keep the current players on the team. Plus, I think Biondi would love to go back to having a coach in the $300-$400K range. However, RM is still the coach. He's had a history of missing time due to health concerns. I'd much rather see him doing that now and being in better shape for next season than trying to struggle through during a lost year.. Barring some major health concern I see him finishing out the contract.

Thanks for the update. I agree that this is a major disappointment. I don't expect SLU basketball to bump the Blues, but it would be nice to have more of the games on the air the across the FSMW viewing region the way they used to be. We got the arena built, but still don't have the funding to be the top 50 program that Biondi said he wanted us to be.

I thought I remembered reading (maybe even on here) that SLU basketball couldn't be on Fox Midwest because of the A10 TV deal. Today I just read that several Dayton games are being picked up by Fox Sports Ohio. Does anyone have any details on our TV situation? Thanks.

I'm going to to guess that it's people in the seats, but I don't know for sure. Obviously ticket revenue comes in whether people show up or not. However, the people who actually show up pay to park, spend money at the concession stands, etc. I'm wondering if the drop in attendance is worth the money saved for a D1 buy game.

So many things could happen between now and then (injuries, grades, bad decisions at 3AM, etc.). I'm looking forward to open competition next year. I don't think there will be any guarantees for anybody. There should be some spirited practices next season, and anyone who tries to loaf his way through will be riding the pine.

It's up to you, really.

What's the over/under on how long this will last?

Through 7 games (including Rockhurst), we've averaging 6,246, So far our biggest crowd was for the opener against AP, 7,511. That loss most likely killed out chances for a good walk up crowd against Georgia (7,192). We'll see some improvement with a couple of good conference games coming up. I guess the Rockhurst game makes financial sense. We still drew 5,178 and didn't have to pay D1 money for the opponent. As others have mentioned on here, charging full price for a regular season game against a D2 team is a bit much.

+1 He keeps throwing his opinions around as if they are facts.

I changed nothing. You simply didn't understand plain English even when quotes were thrown in your face. You are implying that golf will go away when Tiger is gone, and that simply isn't true. As far as soccer interest goes, it's hard to fall off the floor. I like soccer and understand that it is years behind other major sports. That's why smaller venues at its inception would have been a good idea (like maybe 10-12K in a city that cares about the game). An increase from $1 to $2 might be a fact. It's also a fact that it is peanuts. Woo hoo, revenue might go up to about $2 million per team. The fact is that number represents peanuts and it will take some time before we're talking about real money and ratings for soccer in the US. "any way you want to slice it"

If he would have done about 10 minutes of research he could have seen how bad things have been since the '60s.

You made a statement that was factually incorrect when you accused me of claiming that there was a plan to expand soccer park to 50K even though I showed you the exact quote 2 different times. The future of any sport's popularity is unknown...like many things in the future. Have you ever heard of tivo, dvr, etc.? It doesn't matter so much what time something is on the air. This isn't the '70s after all. If the average soccer fan is interested in the EPL, then I guess you're claiming that the "average" fan is a 0.4 share. That's a pretty poor average. What does the average MLS team get from the TV deal? My quick seach showed it was about $800K a couple of years ago. Do you have more recent info? Would triple that be $2.5 million? Yippie!

"any was you want to slice it"...as long as I slice it the way you decide. Great! Geez, maybe I should have made a statement along the way that I recognize the importance of Tiger Woods. Oh wait, I've done that 5 or 6 times already! Thanks for reminding me, though. I posted that golf had been poplualr before Tiger and would continue to be after he is gone. You can't refute that. Like most things, it can and will go up and down. BTW, I found an article from 2009 stating that ESPN had drawn their highest EPL ratings ever in the US. It was a 0.3. So much for casual soccer fans in the US being interested in what's going on overseas.

You made the claim "any way you want to slice it", not me. I looked at a familiar event and it took about 3 seconds to find those numbers. Sorry I looked at something like the US Open. Why would anyone be interested in that? It's only one of the biggest events. After all, it's not women's soccer. Perhaps you shouldn't make claims like "any way you want to slice it" if you're unwilling to accept the results. I'm well aware of the relevance of all of this. I understand how Nielsen works and the difference between '70s tv vs. present day. I've also repeatedly acknowledged the impact of Tiger Woods on the game of golf, which you won't acknowledge. But hey, you're right...no one ever heard of golf before Tiger Woods came on the scene. It was never on TV and won't be on again after he retires. Arnie's Army...it didn't exist. The best player ever, Jack Niklaus...who's he? Everyone will be watching women's soccer. Happy New Year, "any way you want to slice it"!

The share numbers for the US Open were greater than 20 each year from 1971-1982 except for 1979 when it was 19. During the Tiger Woods era (through 2008 anyway) the highest share number for the US Open was 20. This is per Nielsen. Does that "slice" work for you? The average US Open HH rating number for 1971-1982 was 6.3. During the Tiger Woods era it was 4.9 through 2008.

For what it's worth, I don't think Upchurch ever made a regular season roster in the NBA. I know he was in camp with the Hawks, but didn't quite get there. Can anyone verify this? That said, we've only had a handful of guys make it that far in my lifetime, and Upchurch was a heck of a college player.

That's even better than "Munsoned"!

We don't mind sharing our war stories with everyone. We'd all prefer more stories about big wins in March, but that's part of being a Billiken. Newcomers should know our history as well.

+1 I've posted before that Biondi's positives for SLU by far outweigh his negatives, but the negatives are real and he's blind to many of them.

I've acknowleged the value of Tiger to the game of golf several time in this thread. Golf was indeed declining before he came around, but it has been on the air for about 6 decades and will always be on the air. There are plenty of ways to look at Nielsen ratings, but golf had a higher share in the '70s that it has had at any time Tiger has been playing. You, on the other hand, have simply put words in my mouth that arent't true. Besides, I'm not sure what any of this has to do with why a lame ladies soccer league failed. The reason for that is that no one cares.

I didn't amend/change anything. Here's what I wrote: "If you read what I posted, when the league started they insisted on a capacity of > 50K. At that point there was talk around town of exapnding the soccer park to try to land a team, but the league insisted on places like the Meadowlands, Arrowhead, etc" I did NOT write that the soccer park would be expanded to 50K. I wrote that it wasn't big enough for what MLS wanted so it didn't happen. So we can agree that you are mistaken. There is no way an expansion like that could have happened. You are correct that no other team built expanded existing strutures. They would have been better if atmosphere-wise if they had, but they didn't. Instead they had <20% capacity for a long time. Tiger Woods has obviously made men's golf more popular, but men's golf has been popular for decades and will continue.