bonwich

I was only aware of the Nads. Several others of those still have incredible marketing potential for series with STLCOP.

I don't even find RISD on his by-state list of colleges. Too bad. The sponsorship opportunities for a RISD-STLCOP home-and-home are epic.

He must binge on "Timeless" before writing/proofing some of this stuff. And since you gave me an opening, I'll pile on: Did anyone notice that they didn't have any concourse tables set up to sell gear during the last game before Christmas?

I would wonder if the athletic department has any kind of deal in place with SLUcare or any other SLU-affiliated medical facilites. I know in the (very) old days that faculty had certain privileges with SLU Hospital and its doctors.

And then, of course, there was the family-home "move" that allowed Stipo to transfer from Chaminade to DeSmet without loss of eligibility.

I think we've already had several of our Next Years. I believe our actual motto is It's Hard Work Being a Billikens Fan.

I seemed to remember hearing Majerus himself say that it was very difficult to get strong OOC opponents, especially those from "power" conferences, and indeed, I found the exact quote. "The list of schools that Rick Majerus said have turned SLU down is long. 'Last week, Porter (Moser) called Marquette, Minnesota, Iowa, Notre Dame -- the Notre Dame AD's daughter goes here. We'll play anybody. We called Georgetown, Boston College. We wanted to keep the Nebraska series up.' " I don't doubt that our internal abilities at scheduling could be improved, but it has been somewhat doctrinal for quite a while that SLU, in general not for lack of trying, has trouble booking "quality" ("name"?) opponents.

Is it possible that this year's women's team is in the same never-never land as the men's team used to be, that is, too risky to be a buy game but not yet a guarantee of improving the other team's SOS? So at least a few potential OOC opponents would keep their distance?

Wow, Taj. I was going to tell you what an amazing, accurate and well-written piece of sportswriting this was, but then you left a name off of the Trekkies, so FU.

Our current favorite among athletes at the 'fetz.

As for the other board mandate, there's a scouting report that he is, but the source does not appear to be authentic.

And before anyone asks, yes, he can dunk.

Your logic is good, but since none of the top 20 schools is a big (state) school, there must be more than meets the eye in the stated criteria. Edit: And even though I employed it, I believe the "OT" designation is formally waived for this year.

In US News, us 96, SPUMAC 111. Seems like we used to be much closer and at least 10 places higher each. WashU is also now at 19, which means it's dropped. The up and comer is Maryville, which is 164 in the national universities ranking. (And Davidson is #9 in liberal arts colleges, which I think is pretty cool for a school that also has a D-1 competitive basketball team.)

Although I guess, in fairness, it should be noted that the immortal Dan Kelly (the elder) always called Walt Tkachuk "TAY-chuk."

I don't know if this is behind the paywall or not, but here's the home page for the survey: http://www.wsj.com/graphics/college-rankings-2016/ And here's the short form of the methodology. The overall methodology explores four key areas: Resources Does the college have the capacity to effectively deliver teaching? The Resource area represents 30 per cent of the overall ranking. Within this we look at: Finance per student (11%) Faculty per student (11%) Research papers per faculty (8%) Engagement Does the college effectively engage with its students? Most of the data in this area is gathered through the THE US Student Survey. The Engagement area represents 20 per cent of the overall ranking. Within this we look at: Student engagement (7%) Student recommendation (6%) Interaction with teachers and students (4%) Number of accredited programmes (3%) Outcomes Does the college generate good and appropriate outputs? Does it add value to the students who attend? The Outcomes area represents 40 per cent of the overall ranking. Within this we look at: Graduation rate (11%) Value added to graduate salary (12%) Value added to the loan repayment rate (7%) Academic reputation (10%) Environment Is the college providing a learning environment for all students? Does it make efforts to attract a diverse student body and faculty? The Environment area represents 10 per cent of the overall ranking. Within this we look at: Proportion of international students (2%) Student diversity (3%) Student inclusion (2%) Staff diversity (3%)

Well, given that this is the first ranking, I think you might be overreacting.

Hey, beats talking about basketball these days. Other notables: WashU 11, Georgetown 29, Illinois 48, BC 63, Davidson 77, Creighton 134, Marquette 159, Dayton 182, Fordham 197, Zags 215, Xavier 229, DePaul 270, Saint Joe's 292, Methdale 315, SPUMAC 325, SIUE "501-600," UMSL "601-800," Missouri State ">800"

The first syllable was Pee.

And as I've noted before, Ekker can't be separated from Albright-spelled-Albrecht and Coleman. I guess we could call that era Two Rons and a Randy, but that leaves out Albrecht.

The high point of the game was the unexpected entrance of Psimitis and the amazing result that came out of Gus' mouth.

Jimmy, you ever seen a man dunk naked?

I shall be leaving the board forever as I shall never live up to this standard.

I think that's simply standard practice after 5 fouls, much the same as the Jaws theme after 4 fouls. What I was wondering was why Crawford didn't simply hold the ball at the end, which I think is proper sportsmanship. As it happened, he got his jock handed to him in front of everyone...twice.

35-26 half.