courtside

Box, That's how trolls speak.

I do believe SLU needs a commitment to winning. I don't think Levick is going to hang around without getting her say into what is going on...if SLU fails it is on her as well. As I said SLU needs to be more prepared with resources and finaces to attract the next coach whenever that may be. I do also believe that the coach doesn't get a free pass. There are a lot of things involved with being a head coach, and how many are BS doing well? I do believe it is possible to bring in a coach that can get to an NCAA within five years even right now...overachiever? yes. I also believe the other things need to be in place to ensure longer term success. I disagree with the notion that no coach can win at SLU under the current system. I do not believe it helps the coach at all, but obviously it has happened at other places within 5 years...and maintained. And some of those places out there didn't begin with that commitment...and after the coach made progress, gave the commitment to winning and resources..etc.. When BS waas hired, I questioned whether he was that coach who could overcome the obstacles at SLU, and those questions remain. You think it takes a University commitment first...and I have seen and believe it takes a coach first to have a little success to get that commitment from the school.

Roy let me also be clear that as much as it might frustrate, hurt, pain people...that is a distinct possible I may not be opposed to...I no way shape or form endorsed or condemened Brad. I am not in favor of keeping Brad automatically and shaking up the other stuff. I believe Brad should be evaluated after this season and every season. I do believe SLU can hire a coach who can dance within 5 years.(it happens a lot actually). I also believe it would be only fair to give that coach the same amount of time as Brad if that coach hadn't yet. I believe after 5 years you have a pretty good picture of the direction of your program from your head coach...practices, recruiting, game day x's and o's, adjustments during games, adjustments in other aspects of the program, how is he in the community, how is he involved with marketing, overall game day presentation, is he very active on campus getting students to games and spending time with them....and so on....it is a big total picture... I just wanted to post this for clarity. Just because it may mean starting over at some point...sometimes that is necesary, and as opposed to that as you are Roy...there are capable talented people out there who may can come in and succeed in a shorter amount of time in all said areas or some etc...

And that still doesn't matter. RPI isn't a be all end all. If it were Florida wouldn't get anywhere near a 1 seed. And so on...and I will be expecting a top handful seed for SIU. ...because the RPI is such a be all end all.

Simply put, no other team in their league defeated two big boys this season. Sure, Wichita St has struggled since...but no other MVC has accomplished as much. His past achievements taking a down and out program in a down and out area of the country, and succeeding, while also having two stops at BCS conference good basketball schools. ...and has Midwest ties...among other national ties...I think Turgeon is more than qualified. Obviously he would never be interested in SLU. The next time SLU ever hires a coach, I am in favor of hiring somebody who has been a high major assistant, preferably at multiple stops, and has head coaching experience at D-1 level. SLU will be looking to get someone with smaller D-1 conference head coaching experience, or someone who has had higher but wants the job for various reasons. SLU will need to be ready with money and resources etc...They will not attract any coach at the Mid-Major level or higher that is currently in place as a head cocah. If they chose a coach without head coaching experience, that coach will need to be given Soderberg time, serveral years to start his own program and learn head coaching on the job. Some coaches in that category will be able to avhieve more faster and some won't.

SLU wasn't pressing because they do not have the athletes to do so.

>It's not because of some 'manipulation' of the RPI (as some >on this board have suggested.) It's because the MVC >schedules tough games in the preseason. > >Record against the BCS conferences this year: >Big East:5-0 (DePaul, Rutgers, Syracuse, St Johns, So. Fla.) >Big Ten: 5-4 (Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa 2x, Purdue) >Big Twelve: 3-1 (Iowa St 3x) >SEC: 1-1 (LSU) >ACC: 1-2 (VaTech) >Pac 10: 0-1 Upon further review...hmm...Minnesota already fired their coach this year, because they are not good. S. Florida, 1-4 in conference and not good, Iowa St....again their claim to fame this year is winning at NIT at best Mizzou. Purdue first year coach after bad final year, not good. ...and so on..Rutgers, another team in transition wat bottom of Big East. So...the top MVC teams can beat the bottom majors in a one game scenario early in season...wow. Should a do cartwheels? Not really. Had you come in with the posititve examples, and not tried to mislead...you would be taken more seriously. How has Drake and Evansville done vs these conferences? I said in my other posts, Wichita St, MO St beat higher tier teams. And they are taken most seriously. MO St won one game neutral court on an island early season. It is the game of their life, and just another on the docket for Wisconsin, but MO St won the game and obviously Wisconsin is a very good team, so that continues to help the rest of the season. One game. The MVC plays an 18 game league schedule,(with only 10 league teams wow) also helping their RPI cause and chase. It isn't difficult, with few exceptions, the top couple of schools in the league schedule games mostly vs big conference bottom dwellers, and a few vs the big boys, ...if they can win a few...not many and then instead of scheduling low level other games...schedule top 200 RPI games vs not good teams...it can keep RPI afloat. Add two extra conference games to help that. Yes you have to win games, but you really only need to win a handful of the early season one shot deals. Wisconsin will obviously go on to play a very tough schedule, etc...and has plenty of opportunities to do well. MO St doesn't.....so...all they need to do is win one game...or lose one game to make a huge difference in their RPI. And as I stated last year, RPI isn't the lock you think it is...look again at none other than MO St. 20 something RPI, no dance invite. Imagine that. Creighton for example is on the ropes big time. The MVC is not helping its own cause by being a parity league. It will bump out potential invites. Out of 15 examples you gave, 2 are ranked. And a couple more are good decent teams. And with the RPI ...and how it stands, that is all you need...handful of wins for conference, while piling up wins vs bottom tier teams because even those bottom dwellers won't have worse than 200 RPI. It is smart scheduling to gain a better RPI, and it is deceiving. Your MVC bretheren stopped by to suggest 6 teams from MVC would dance. I suppose we will all wait and see for that one. Las tyear the MVC was getting 3 bids....in its best year ever. The NCAA reluctantly gave 4 because conference tourney winner wasn't in top 3. I have no reason to believe it will be much different this year. MVC is a nice good league. It will never be considered a major league with tons of invites. If it can't at its peak, in a year when the Big Ten is way down, and Big East to lesser extent...can't imagine the upcoming years. SIU and MO St are the two schools looking the best right now for MVC.

Let me put it another way for you...the only time you should never see 1-2 Freshman get some experience their first season...nobody is aksing or much....is when your team is one of tops in nation loaded with upper classmen. And still, a few minutes here and there. I repeatedly pointed out to people last year that their expectations for TL and KL were way too high..and the adjustment level it takes....and even with high majors...it will take them half a season...and it did...and they were progressively better last year and this year. SLU is not a great team, they have a desperate need for Freshmen to come in to gain experience, and also to make small contributions. None of this year's Freshman are high majors. They are role players, like Sloan, like LM...etc...3 high major recruits in 5 years, and one that is regressing...is gonna cost you at times...and it has. The pressure is enormous to land at least 2 high major recruits for 08 class. If not, SLU will not be competitive. If the current Freshmen were good enough to play, believe me, they would be playing. SLU has had desperate times where there were needed for short times and minutes...and there is no sunstitute for experience and they haven't played. AK is a one dimensional ball player. DM is as well. DM's release is slow, his feet are slow, and he like many frosh have to learn defense. He will be a good sized role playing jump shooter at SLU iif he works at all of the above...he will play a lot more next year and he will get ripped hard for mistakes that many will say he should have been making his Frosh year. At most he will provide SLU with a shooter for two years. Anything can happen, magic dust can fall out of the sky...but the kids who imprve a lot are usually the high major recruits ...and they are the ones who can do many different things...like TL.

DeSmet Billiken and Pdolwick are th eonly realistic posters in this thread. At least as far as thought process.

I have repeatedly posted that many other better programs...the coach does not appear after tough losses. Happens all the time. I do not take anything a ocach says to media with anything more than a grain of salt. People are excited in a bad way and are looking for more material, and unfortunately Brad doesn't have a media coach. But do I care what Brad says to the media. No, not one bit. I will never condem a coach for what they say at media stuff. That's silly.

>Courtside - Burwell and Gordon have both written articles in >the last two weeks citing the outcry of the SLU fans against >Brad. If you listened to KFNS after the game today, you >would have heard 3 straight hours of fans--literally >one after another--calling for Brad's ouster. David, I respect your opinion and I am entitled to mine. If you asked the mentioned people and other media types, they wwould likely tell you that SLU isn't on the general St. Louis sports radar. It occupies a small corner. It is winter, no other D-1 program in town, and only the struggling Blues in the struggling NHL to compete with, ...one article from Burwell. an every once in a while update on college hoops from Gordon, not much at all from Miklasz, etc...isn't a lot to me. I wish it were different, but I honestly think most STL people don't care. And who can blame them. There is a lot of work to do to change that, and it will take a few years of course. If I had a different opinion, I would say so. It would be nice if it were really a huge topic of discussion. Obviously that small corner...many are on the page of changing coaches and that can appear to be louder than it really is imo. It doesn't mean I don't follow it closely, go to games, am interested and even travel far to games, as most here know I do. I think SLU in generaql is an afterthought and that needs to change, and has needed to change for a very long time.

>doesn't seem to support your argument. > >http://www.billikens.com/cgi-bin/dcforum/d...orum=DCForumID3 > >My example with louisville was perfect. YOU stated that >because the fans still come to Billiken games they must not >care if they win. In the years at Louisville where they >didn't win...like the ones near the end of Crums >career...the fans still came out. We all know that the >Louisville fans do care if they win or lose. By your logic, >the fans of Louisville should STOP going to games to show >that they care when they lose. No...what I said was SLU will always have a group of fans coming to games win or lose. And, those fans don't put any pressure whatsoever on the school to win. They are satisfied with losing. Louisville is a much different place. They pack the place, and if you do not win...pressure pressure pressure. You can't go anywhere in Louisville year round without hearing about the men's hoops program. Denny Crum made the NCAA's 23 times in 28 years, and had two losing seasons in his last 10. That is pretty competitive. 6 Final Fours and so on...of course fans are going to come out to see them play. They are on Pitino's butt in Louisville, big time...imagine that. And all because he hasn't made the Final Four in gasp 2 years. People care about winning hoops there. And, they win big time. SLU doesn't win big time and that is okay with most people, because it has never changed...and going 5 years without NCAA's...isn't a big deal to SLU. Fans come out at Louisville because they dance. Pitino made Final four, two other NCAA appearances...etc..at U of L...so people come. 23 of 28 NCAA appearances for Crum. That is why it is packed all the time, they win. If they had never won...people wouldn't go...you compare a guy who went to 6 Final Fours, Two National Titles, 23 NCAA appearances out of 28 tries...then hands torch to a guy who went to Final Four in his first 5 years and two other NCAA's....to SLU? If SLU had same resume, games for this year's team would get 20k ...even as it is now. SLU would be able to have occasional down years and get 20k. That is why people go to Louisville games. And that is why they demand excellence each year...still go to games, but it is well known you better win.

>"then why do they keep coming most years and not seeing a >winnner." > >It is complete faulty logic to say that because fans contiue >to come when the teams lose then they must not care about >winning. Its complete nonsense. If fans quit coming when a >team loses they are called fickle and fairweather. If fans >continue to come they are said to not care if they win or >lose. You can't win! > >Did the Louisville fans that still sold out Freedom Hall in >Crums final (losing) years not care if they won? Of course >not. > >The decrease in attendance the past 6 years to its current >levels should be obvious proof that: >- many fans in St. Louis will only support the Bills if they >are a winner >- there is a core of about 6k that will still support the >Bills no matter what. > >The existance of a group that will support through thick and >thin should NOT be used as evidence that the majority of SLU >fans don't care if we win. Support at the games does not >mean they don't care. > >Similarly, the rantings of a few posters on this board like >Billikan that will support the coach no matter how many >times we lose should NOT be evidence that the majority of >SLU fans are OK with the way this is going. If the majority of SLU fans were in an uproar over SLU losing...and this is a good solid group...then why no noise? No noise on tv, newspapers...in the community? Ok compare Freedom Hall to SLU. Are you aware they still have an ex-coach who rips the current coach on the ex-coach's Louisville radio show all the time? Down seasons aren't allowed at Louisville. You picked a bad example...they just went to the Final Four and still people aren't satisfied there. Louisville had over 20 different busloads of fans for their road game at DePaul today. It is of my opinion that the small core is just that...small and that is the point I made. Most people don't care. SLU doesn't draw any buzz postitively or negatively in St. Louis. Shouldn't there be more noise? Even if negative?

>"maybe the regulars on this board care if SLU has a >commitment to winning, but not may others" -courtside > >I have a problem with this quote. Many people on this board >think b/c they have 15,000 posts that they are the ultimate >fan. Or that only true fans post on billikens.com. The >fact is I would guess this board doesn't represent 5% of the >donors to the billiken club. It probably represents less >ten 5% of the money donated to the billiken club. It easily >represents less then 1% of season ticket holders. > >"SLU has a small, very small, core of fans that will >continue to come out win or lose" -courtside > >False - what an awful statemnet. SLU has over 5,000 season >ticket holders and will sustain crowds of 6,000 plus at >scotttrade no matter what. That's not a small number to me. > Small would be the fact that there was not 5,000 fans >combined at the Fordham, Temple and St. Bonny games. > >"And with the University and big dollar $$ not stepping up" >-courtside >Were you in a coma when 50% of the money to build an $85 >million arena was raised by SLU alum > >Intelligent posters/people have realized that you can not >blame this solely on the administration and claim that they >do not care. > >I have faith in CL > >CAG Hmmm...SLU has ZERO other D-1 schools to comptete with in town...unlike NY, Philly, Cinci, etc... It is a small loyal group that doesn't care if the team wins or not. I haven't blamed this soley on the admin...you apparently haven't been to this board pretty much ever. I do like CL, and she is 1 for 1 in her hires so far. But as we all know the only hire that matters is men's hoops coach. I would agree that this baord is a small representative of SLU fans, and said so...and I do believe SLU doesn't have a large group of fans. These people do not care if SLU wins or loses. They don't. Maybe you do, great, most SLU fans don't. Use your own argument...yuo think SLU has all of these fans...ok...then why do they keep coming most years and not seeing a winnner. Why don't they expect more? SLU hoops is not big noise in the community.

SLU's margin for error is very small. You can get away with it sometimes at home(Ole Miss, Hou) but not too often on the road. The very good teams have handled SLU easily. The mediocre teams have beaten SLU at home, and the mediocre teams have lost at SLU. SLU is not capable of competing vs the big boys and only capable vs the solid clubs at home. Loyola and Pacific so far are not as good as expected. It's getting players. IV is only player in his class and without the needed serviceable not even strong help, his effectiveness can be shut down. People like to count numbers in classes..I count high majors and high level role players below that...and junior class comes up weak imo, weaker than the Soph class where people like to say only two players. And nothing in Frosh class. A one dimensional shooter, one dimensional rebounder/defender etc...point guard, etc...these dont' even need to be high majors for this year's team to be very good. All that was needed were role players better than the role players SLU has...and those are much easier to recruit than high majors. Then after this year the pressure would be back on because returning seniors have zero high majors and the Frosh and Soph classes have none. That is two in your program, and that is less talent than this year. SLU is capable of the nice home win over a top 40 caliber team. But not consitently, and definitely not on the road or neutral court. With that said, due to conference being down etc...SLU still has NCAA chance in conference tourney if theydon't win their conference. They are capable of playing with anyone in their conference...but doing it consistently away from home...haven't seen it yet.

As for the post-game stuff...don't kid yourself...many many coaches with higher profiles than BS skip the post-game stuff when they lose.

>and I will point out that there are a few internet fans that >have had it in for Brad for years and that she should not >ever make any decisions based upon a coordinated effort from >a few negative internet posters to get a coach fired because >they do not like him. > >I have been out of town on business and I leave again >shortly for three weeks where I will be working 16 hours a >day. The good news is that I will not have to read the super >negative and whiney posts on this site. > >After thinking long and hard about what is the issue with >this site it finally hit me. I do not believe that more than >a few posters have ever played basketball at any level >beyond grade school or a pick up game. Yet they all chime in >with supposed expertise about the players, the coaches, the >game plan, etc, etc. When everyone was saying that Luke was >not a D1 player and then when he played well they said well >he is not a D1 starter it should have come to me. The fact >is that he is a terrific all around player. > >Anyone who thinks that any team in the country could lose a >player as important as Kevin on offense and defense and be >the same team, particularly on the road, is smoking >something. the coach tried everything today--started in a >zone, switched defenses, etc. But you have to hit shots and >you have to have intensity on defense. I was able to rerun >many plays on my DVR and without calling out any particular >player, there were many times when we just gave a wave at >the shooter rather than close out hard. They hit some 25 >foot shots and that made it more difficult but you need to >close out hard. I am sure that is what the coach is saying >about Drejaj. > >Ian drew about 10-11 fouls on players from the other team >and when he scored at will against single coverage they then >double and triple teamed him. Tommie was very inconsitant >and I think the fact that Kevin was out of the game really >cut down on his three point opportunities. He ended up with >fine stats because he got a bunch of points and rebounds at >the end and I am happy that he will keep up his scoring >average. > >I said at the beginning of the year that we could not afford >an injury to any of the big 3. I would now say we cannot >afford an injury to the big 4, including Luke. With Kevin >out we are not nearly as good a team. But as I said earlier >if you take a player of Kevin's contribution off of any team >in the country it would leave a huge hole--other than a team >like North Carolina and even they would suffer if you took >Wright off of the team. As long as Kevin is injured the Brad >haters will be as happy as clams because the Bills will >struggle to win games. My big question is--Are you a fan of >the Bills only if the Bills fire Brad and hire a coach you >like or will you support the team and live and die with the >losses regardless. i think most of the naysayers would >rather see the Bills lose so Brad can be villified in their >repeated and now extremely boring posts. And by the way...am I more qualified to discuss basketball because I played at a higher level than Mark Few and Tom Crean??? You know those two guys...neither of which played college basketball. They have done okay I think.

>and I will point out that there are a few internet fans that >have had it in for Brad for years and that she should not >ever make any decisions based upon a coordinated effort from >a few negative internet posters to get a coach fired because >they do not like him. > >I have been out of town on business and I leave again >shortly for three weeks where I will be working 16 hours a >day. The good news is that I will not have to read the super >negative and whiney posts on this site. > >After thinking long and hard about what is the issue with >this site it finally hit me. I do not believe that more than >a few posters have ever played basketball at any level >beyond grade school or a pick up game. Yet they all chime in >with supposed expertise about the players, the coaches, the >game plan, etc, etc. When everyone was saying that Luke was >not a D1 player and then when he played well they said well >he is not a D1 starter it should have come to me. The fact >is that he is a terrific all around player. > >Anyone who thinks that any team in the country could lose a >player as important as Kevin on offense and defense and be >the same team, particularly on the road, is smoking >something. the coach tried everything today--started in a >zone, switched defenses, etc. But you have to hit shots and >you have to have intensity on defense. I was able to rerun >many plays on my DVR and without calling out any particular >player, there were many times when we just gave a wave at >the shooter rather than close out hard. They hit some 25 >foot shots and that made it more difficult but you need to >close out hard. I am sure that is what the coach is saying >about Drejaj. > >Ian drew about 10-11 fouls on players from the other team >and when he scored at will against single coverage they then >double and triple teamed him. Tommie was very inconsitant >and I think the fact that Kevin was out of the game really >cut down on his three point opportunities. He ended up with >fine stats because he got a bunch of points and rebounds at >the end and I am happy that he will keep up his scoring >average. > >I said at the beginning of the year that we could not afford >an injury to any of the big 3. I would now say we cannot >afford an injury to the big 4, including Luke. With Kevin >out we are not nearly as good a team. But as I said earlier >if you take a player of Kevin's contribution off of any team >in the country it would leave a huge hole--other than a team >like North Carolina and even they would suffer if you took >Wright off of the team. As long as Kevin is injured the Brad >haters will be as happy as clams because the Bills will >struggle to win games. My big question is--Are you a fan of >the Bills only if the Bills fire Brad and hire a coach you >like or will you support the team and live and die with the >losses regardless. i think most of the naysayers would >rather see the Bills lose so Brad can be villified in their >repeated and now extremely boring posts. I think what you misunderstand and what many people on this board misunderstand, is that much of the St. Louis community isn't interested in SLU basketball. SLU has not built any level of expectations from the their fans either. I think you grossly overestimate the people who actually care if SLU wins. It is the same 20-30 people on this board. Sure you get the obligatory flamers after losses for a few posts and few hours. You also overestimate the power of the messgae board. The bottome line for SLU hoops...maybe the regulars on this board care if SLU has a commitment to winning, but not may others. SLU has a small, very small, core of fans that will continue to come out win or lose, and have done do for many years. It is not a big core of people. This board in relative to many other boards, is not a big core of people. SLU will continue in mediocrity because nobody cares. The powers that be at SLU don't care, the fans don't care, the community doesn't care. Like I said, we here who do care if SLU wins are a very very small group. St. Louis itself is a solid sports town, so if a team wins, fans will then come out and go see them, especially if the opponent is also good. That is how it works in St. Louis. SLU will continue to be what they are, the Rex Hudlers. Why? Because not enough people care...and also because the people who matter most don't care...i.e. big dollar boosters, admin, etc...a small group of billikens.com fans do not matter. People come here because they would like to see SLU succeed. Some are patient, some are not. Some drink Kool-Aid, some do not. Some are trolls, some are not. and so on. that is how message boards work. As for people's comments on the board...it doesn't get a SLU grad to figure out who the regular intellligent posters are, and who come onlywhen they lose and provide nothing but venom. Look at some of the people complaining today, they are pretty positive regulars too. They pay money follow the team and only ask for a more competitive squad in return. They have given BS 5 years, not 1-2-3 years...etc...and BS, the team, the fans, everyone expects the NCAA's this season...very very patient people waited 5 years...again try other message boards. And SLU very well can still do that and satisfy those posters. They are a very small group of core die-hards. The reason why your posts are challenged by so many, is because not once has anything ever been Brad's fault in any of your posts. It is one thing to be very very positive, but at best BS deserves mixed reviews. Your reviews of him have not been mixed. People here think you are Mrs. Soderberg. SLU has a very small margin of error to win games. Why? Because that is their talent level. That ius the talent level of their starters, bench, role players, high majors...all combined. And also the talent level of their coach. Sure, losing a star player affects any team greatly...but this would go to the point of depth and how do you compete with depth. You talk specifics about defense, and IV etc.,..wouldn't that also be a part of lack of talent to consistently do those things well...and also lack of making the necessary adjustments during the game? or for the game? See...this is calm, kind, intelligent discussion. Most of the very small group of SLU fans out there are like you. They do not care about winning. Winning means NCAA's. And that is exactly what SLU gets most years. So sometimes the small futile army on here dissects positives and negatives etc...and demands a winning team. But there aren't nearly enough of them to make a difference. And with the University and big dollar $$ not stepping up...nothing will change any time soon.

Senior John DiRaimondo was selected in the first round, 4th overall by the Colorado Rapids of MLS in the Supplemental Draft. Congratulations and best of luck making the team, and with MLS Career. People here like to talk about academics, athletcis etc...he is an athletics and academic All-American(accounting major). http://slubillikens.cstv.com/sports/m-socc.../011907aab.html

>The way you play the RPI game is for teams in a conference >to schedule as many power teams before conference play >begins. Then when conference play begins losses to each >other have little effect on RPI. The MVC does this very, >very, well. Give them some credit. Just because the A10 >sucks at this, don't blow off the MVC as somehow "beating >the system." Except, that system didn't allow MO St and their 20 something RPI to dance last year and that system doesn't guarantee you to dance. You can also schedule mediocre teams on the road and win those games as well. There are many ways. Sure, credit for playnig the RPI game before other mid-major conferences did. But it isn't an automatic dance ticket.

Turgeon is doing well at Wichita St. He is doing it with the usual 3-4 guard MVC lineups because like most MVC teams they can't recruit many high quality bigs. He has spent exactly one year coaching anywhere near a major city....he is a small town campus guy...and absolutely loves KU more than you would imagine, played there, assistant there. I think it is possible to see Turgeon leave Wichita St for somewhere other than KU, but I think that would be a BCS conference school. He's a young guy, so winning at Wichita St. and waiting around for KU job a while is not a big deal to him right now. His previous coaching stops have been assistant stops at major schools. He, like many others have that dream, his is KU...but if the MVC people think he wouldn't leave for the right fit at a different major, they are mistaken. The one thing he has in common alread with many SLU fans, is is hatred of Mizzou. He would have come to SLU from Jacksonville St or his oother assistant stops, KU, or Oregon to be head coach. ...but not now.

>Very well summarized. As you mention, and is often >overlooked, possibly the best aspect of the A-10 is that SLU >can rekindle its ties with XU and UD while developing new >ties with St. Joe in the event the "Catholic Conference" >ever materializes. Not that far-fetched to think that the >Big East could shift more toward football leaving DePaul, >Marquette, St. John, Villanova and Georgetown looking >elsewhere. >I truly believe, and hope, that these 12, 14 and 16 member >conferences break apart and conferences go back to 8 and 10 >members. I think an ideal number is 12 for a conference. With that said, the B.E. is thriving. It is going from 16 game conference schedule to 18 game conference schedule. I wouldn't be waiting for a "Catholic Conference" any time soon.

>It proves my point. If it was all about academics they'd be >the Big 10 but it's not. The Big Ten conference is mainly >about sports. That proves my point. > >What "academic" value is there in playing Fordham in >basketball because they have good business school? > >I really don't get the "academic value" of traveling to East >Coast and playing some team nobody gives a crap about in >basketball. I'll start with your last comment first. You make the large and wrong assumption that fans attending SLU games care about the MVC. If this were the case, why wouldn't more people go when the MVC teams are scheduled? And I am talking about years and years and now. Why is that? And surely those "neighboring" schools would come to STL to see their team play SLU in big numbers. Right? Surely the local tv ratings would be through the roof? The term academic value was used with many other listed reasons as to why SLU didn't choose to play in the MVC. It's meaning in the list was used to point out yet another thing that SLU and the MVC schools do not have in common. Collectively adding up all of the pro's and cons etc...is how one comes to a decision. And last on a seperate note...last time I checked, Michigan Wisconsin, Northwestern, etc...were monster academic schools.

>Exactly. Money is a great reason. But you are the one that >started the thing about "academic institutions" and my point >is that a lot these great academic institutions "stoop" and >play in conferences with lesser instituions for the >financial well being and competitive attractiveness to their >SPORTS programs. > >And where are all these great revenue streams from the A-10? >Nobody can tell me the money, through saved travel, >attendance and local interest AND eventually TV wouldn't be >better in the MVC. Always seems to be a new MVC person everyday on here...if only they would just all come at once, get their info and be gone. First and foremeost, this is Steve's board. He runs it, and he and the other moderators decide the content of the board. Next, you posted saying there is a reason why U of Chicago is not in the Big Ten. I replied by saying schools can succeed academically and athletically. We can go back to that yet again if you like? Or can we just move forward? Great. As was also pointed out to you, plenty of strong academic schools in the major conferences as well. You ignored them. Yes, some small 6000 student private schools take their lumps vs the 50,000 student schools and in turn get money to pump back into their academics. The MVC as I pointed out doesn't bring any of this $$ value to SLU. They also don't bring the academic value. They also don't bring the any likeness as far as being an urban inner city private school. They also don't bring any value to big city exposure for a multitude of things. They also don't bring big local interest value. SLU has been playing MVC teams for years, and those teams wnever outdrew the games vs past conference rivals built by competitive play and other factors not relating to geographic distance. SLU's first choice was Big East, and didn't cut it, and they were left with A10 and MVC, A10 was clearly the better choice of the only two choices they really had.

Your first comment mentioned that U of Chicago doesn't play in the Big Ten. I replied that plenty of schools excel in both academics and athletics. To answer your next inquiry. Mmmmmmmoooooonnnnnneeeeeeeyyyyy. Or $$$$$$$$$$$$$. Or simply Money. Those schools get to share in all of that BCS football money...millions and millions of dollars. I missed it. What BCS games did the MVC play in???