courtside

>Courtide you are right, this is all that I have read or have >heard. It seemed like he wasnt happy about changing the new >arena to smaller capacity in order to have the offices, >weight room, etc... which I think it dumb, jmho. Then he >says that people in the Athletic Department not the director >were up in arms over addtional changes that he never >revealed. He responed by "im in the know". > >Honestly I can give two shits about it. In over a year or >so we will have a new arena and excitment surrounding the >program hopefully it will lead to numerous NCAA tourney >appearances. Then we wont have to worry about him. I am not going to assume what he was thinking, because he didn't say other than to say there was more information. As for the Arena itself...that alone will not solve SLU's problems.

I see that the Miklasz rips SLU's new donor thread is a long huge thread that nobody wants to read start to finish. For the record, BrianStl fabricated those remarks when he began the other thread, and admitted later in the thread that he fabricated those remarks. And I clarified at the bottom of the thread what Miklasz posted in his forum. Amazing how one can come to an internet message board and make something up out of the air, and post it.....and watch how wild it goes. But that is why people can't believe everything they read or hear, unless it is confirmed credible. No one had reason to believe BrianStl was making something up ....although some took it to be a joke, many many others didn't apparently.

>he wrote this in his pressbox regarding SLU naming rights. >Not sure what he is trying to prove with the AD and the >changes. > >Some of the foolks in the AD office were alarmed by other >proposed changes.... and were trying to fight them off. > >So I know what I am talking about, but it does not matter, >because SLU fans prefer the Candyland version of reality >they hear from SLU's media spin doctors. > >--B I actually went back to look for it and read it. BM's comments in tha particular thread were regarding SLU's building itself and the construction of the building. Originally the design of the building was not satisfactory for SLU's AD and Atheltic Dept and that dept had to fight off many other proposed changes to the new Arena, besides seating capacity, assumably from higher administration and others. He never in his forum said anything about the new donor. He basically stuck up for SLU's AD. Unless there is something else I missed somewhere else? And we all know the other comments to start this thread were fabrication. If something else was said I would be interested to know and would ask him myself and report it back here. A thread like this begins out of fabrication and many people don't read the entire thread to know that it is fabrication and that is how false rumors etc...get started and escalated. If something else was said somehwere else besides this, then I am under-informed, but this was all that was referenced to my knowledge....the same thing every one here wanted to fight for themselves...a first rate facility.

Elgin is doing what many would do for its conference. Though some would say this is our resume, and let's move on. The real story is Patty Viverito's job as assistant commisioner for many years, and Frank Viverito's job for many years as President of the STL Sports Commission. They are good at their jobs. These people are the ones with excellent media relationships, excellent relationships in St. Louis. Building relationships is a big part of building a program, or a conference.

>I hope the games that Duke won with game clock issues >reflects a Duke loss and lowered seed. Isn't it amazing the >MD and Duke have identical records - yet Duke is ranked #17 >and MD goes unranked. Actually for what its worth....Maryland is ranked 24th this week in the AP poll. And, as long as they defeatr NC St tomorrow, and after their win this week as well....they will be ranked in the teens. Also...prior to this, non-conference.... Duke beat Air Force, Indiana, Georgetown, Gonzaga and lost to Marquette earlier in season. Maryland beat Mich St and Illinois as their best non-conference wins, lost to ND. Many of Maryland's non-conference wins were not that strong, and in conference Maryland has gotten hot later in season, after defeating a lot of non-ranked teams. Ranked 24th this week, and likely in top 20 on Monday's next poll.

>Where did I say anything about Bernie's appearance? That is >the reason you gave for my post being in poor taste. You >can't admit you were wrong about that, just like you can't >admit you were wrong about the reason the MVC plays a 18 >game schedule. I wasn't wrong on why the MVC currently plays an 18 game schedule. I actually know differently. I am not guessing about it. I am wrong all the time, just like anyone else, but not about that. Actually I already commetned on the other stuff. I posted that the physical appearance comments were in poor taste. Then I also posted that the entire fabricated quotes and thread were in poor taste too. Whether your comments had anything to do with physical appearance or not, I wouldn't know, because like the thread itself, it was strange, as commented by other posters in this thread. And one would have had to ask you. After the fact, you said it had nothing to do with that. I really don't care at this point, because again, my comments are on what I read in the thread. I have already covered this.

>What child like response did I make. If it is not referring >to someone by name, then let me explain. A columnist >benefits by having people talk about their columns, their >sport show, their opinions. Your friend has repeatedly >thrown in little childish jabs here and there which hurts >both his argument as well as his subjects. Burwell however >can write an article, critically without such childish >jabs. > >He has clearly in my view become the number one sports >writer at the Post. Until his assistant starts to behave >professionally I choose not to name him, > >No comment about personal characteristics, just his >behavior. I posted referring to people who make fun of people for their physical appearance as many did in the thread. I also posted because the quotes were fabricated. Those were separate from yours, ...I said your comments were childish and they were. Your commetns were everything you say you don't like of Miklasz. Miklasza and Burwell are columnists. One is not the assistant of the other. That is known to 100% of this board, including yourself. So therefore, your comments are no better than whatever comments you allege. Brad Soderberg is a friend of mine too. It would be no different for him, or for any stranger. Whom I know doesn't matter in this instance. I don't see the relevance of Brad's physical appearance to his job. I also would point it out if someone posted fabricated quotes from Brad. I'd probably do the same for you too Basketbill.

>Courtside will never admit when he is wrong. You can hit >him upside the face with the proof, but he will never admit >it. Not sure what the Kshoe comment is.... But I definitely do not fabricate facts in my posts....and I do not hold bias against people for their physcial appearance, ...race, weight, looks, etc....and try not to call people names.

>I agree that our top teams would probably not be quite as >succesful in the top leagues, except the Big 10 where SIU >might win 12 or 13 games. > >The difference is the bottom of our league is so much better >than the bottoms of other leagues. Indiana State finished >last in our league, but beat Butler and Purdue (4th place in >the Big 10). The best illustration is that Illinois State >beat St. Johns at St. Johns by 30. St. Johns is looking >like they will make the big east tournament. > >RPI is an indicator of overall conference strength, not the >ability of top teams to compete in other leagues. I really >feel that top to bottom the Valley can at least compete with >any league in the country. > >I think that the Valley is here to stay. Unlike other >"mid-major" leagues (I hate that term) we have the resources >to keep coaches and when you are able to keep coaches long >term, recruiting relationships are stronger and the >continuity makes it easier for kids to make the decision to >go to a Valley school. > >Now, I am serious that SLU needs to be in the Valley. We >need to add you guys and one other and get rid of Evansville >and Indiana State!! I certainly applaud your civil tone, something not shown by many other Valley fans who come to this site or others I have seen. With that said, you are talking about a school joining a conference based on 1-2 years of play. That is where I disagree or have a problem. You also talk about the Big Ten as if it will be down every year. That won't happen. Have you seen the next two year recruiting classes at IU for example? Do you not think former MVC coach Matt Painter will do well at Purdue. I sure do. I disagree with how many games you think SIU would even win this year in the Big Ten, though they would do well this year...but that is subjective and can be debated all day. Every conference will have a down year in some years. The MVC will likely receive less bids than last year, but I am not going to say they are no longer one of the top mid-major conferences. When I look at a conference and evaluate it...I look at long term past, recent past, present and the direction it is heading, and long term future. I think the MVC is doing a great job in recent years and currently. People jump on me because I say it is not at the level of the big boys. I think the MVC is one of the better mid-majors in recent years. That statement upsets people, but it is a complement. If the MVC wants to be more than that....they have to send many teams a year to NCAA for many many years, and...win in the NCAA tourney at a high rate. The ACC for one example has had two teams in the Sweet 16 for 27 straight years. If you want to be a bigger conference, you have to maintain success and increase it over a long period of time. The MVC had two sweet 16 teams last year and no other winners. That was a nice sucess for the league. It shows that the MVC is one of the better mid-majors right now. The next thing is to see if the MVC can maintain its status as one of the better mid-majors for a while, then after that try to jump up even further. People take one year of only two teams winning a game in the NCAA and somehow if you do not put MVC as a major conference it is bias etc...People in the MVC are excited about their teams and conference, and that is great. St. Louis media gives it a lot of attention. Perhaps SIU and two others will get in....and all win a few games in NCAA this year....then do it again and again...etc....then add a few more teams that get in down the road, then get to an elite 8 or Final Four....etc...down the road. Right now, the MVC is establishing itself as a top end mid-major in the current time period. And that is great. For those who for whatever reasons are not satisfied with that and want more...then the next step would be to get 5, 6 etc...teams in annually for a long time...get deeper in the NCAA's annually for a long time...etc... The first step in that long process is to maintain the status of where the league is right now....and get some NCAA wins this year. Good luck.

Matchups are the most important thing when playing in the NCAA's imo. I will gladly repeat that again. Seeding btw....doesn't just screw the little guy. West Virginia was given a 6 seed after finishing 4rd in the 16 team Big East last year. That isn't a lot of respect is it? On the other hand, Syracuse finished 9th in the conference and was given a 5 seed. And speaking of those little guys, take the MVC for one example....everywhere I go on this board, other boards, St. Louis media etc...MVC no longer a mid-major....MVC wants to be a big boy....etc....well...last year the 2nd place SIU team played above mentioned West Virginia. 6th place Georgetown played North Iowa, another MVC team.....all of this seems fair to me. The mid-majors do not have to play the top couple of seeds each year to open the tourney. In your premise...after the top 10-15 or so it doesn't matter, most teams are the same in your opinion. So who cares who is seeded what? The top handful of MVC teams need to defeat the very top teams in the big boy conferences to move up in league status. Right now, the MVC is not dominating the middle level top league teams. MVC can throw an upset here and there...and once they consistently win, annually for years, they could move up in league status....if they can do this with more than a few teams in its league. Let's take out the top 10-15 teams as you say....and then let everyone else play each other. The problem with this is when it happens, the mid-majors are not consistently winning these games year after year...hence their status as a mid-major. SIU should get a top 5 seed this year. Wichita St. had a 7 last year. The NCAA's are all about matchups, whom you are playing, and how is your team at that time and how do they match up with that opposing team. Plenty of major conference teams get seedings a lot lower than they deserve too. Throw up the ball and play the games and see what happens. I'll tell you what will happen...there will be exciting games, upsets, great performances, controversy, and plenty of teams nowhere near the top 10 gunning for the Final Four. You are aware that none of last year's Final Four teams were in that top 10 at the end of last season?

>However he comes close to a similar statement on his >blog....now Courtside he can stand up for himself. However >childish jabs at SLU or whoever he is targeting at the >moment is tiresome. He should try to be more like Burwell >and lose the childish antics. > >It seems most every sports journalist at the post is better >than Burwell's understudy. Several people in this thread did not know it was a joke. I actually have spoken to people fro this board who did not know it was a joke, and someone posted over in BM's forum with the information received here that was not taken as a joke. I am sure some people, like yourself and myself found it to be some sort of attempt at humor, but obviously "everyone" didn't see it that way. Many did not. I have a problem with fabrication to intentionally try to harm anyone. I also have a problem with making deragotory comments about people's physical appearance. It just so happens this is about BM. I would do the same for anyone else. I disagree often with BM, especially regarding college sports, but I don't deem it necessary to lie, fabricate and make deragatory comments about his physical appearance. I have a problem with racial bias and bigotry too, for example, ....but that wasn't a topic in this thread. I can easily debate and disagree with people without the childlike antics....like you just pulled basketbill. So if you think someone makes childlike remarks....why join them? that makes you the same. Why not just debate the topics without the childlike antics?

Now you are telling me what I think and my entire thought process. Interesting. I didn't tell you what you should or shouldn't do. I told you my opinion ....that is different than telling someone what they should or shouldn't do. And the end result is the petty name-calling. Par for the course with this board. You, not me decided to make a quotes to someone else and post them here to get some sort of satisfaction from it. Many believed what you posted to be true, because you didn't insinuate your were lying and fabricating. And even one person questioned why you would even start such a thread. You can spin it all you like, but you intentionally fabricated quotes and fabricated a story to intentionally put someone in a negative light.

I "should" have done whatever I wanted and however I wanted to do it. Several people posted in that manner. This entire thread in fact, is also in poor taste, making up quotes and attributing them to someone else. I obviously knew it was a poor attempt at humor, but a long list of others didn't, making your thread murky at best. You can post again, I am finished with this thread.

Actually it shows I don't judge people based on their physical appearance, unless it is a requirement for the topic, i.e. a basketball player. Several people here did in the thread.

Not a fan of making fun of people for their physical appearance.

*

>>>>Although most other leagues with far more teams play less >>>>than 18 game league schedules. >>>> >>>>It is done for multiple reasons. A few are... RPI purposes >>>>for the league, and because it makes the top league records >>>>look better by adding victories. 9-7 does not look as good >>>>as 11-7 in conference for example. And because the MVC is >>>>not a major conference ...a few wins over .500 in the league >>>>doesn't look as good. >>>> >>>>The Big East is moving to 18 game leasgue schedule next >>>>sesaon. They of course have 16 teams in the league instead >>>>of ten. >>> >>>The MVC is not a major conference. They are ahead of the Big >>>East. Is the Big East not a major conference? If it looks >>>like a duck, and quacks like a >>>d............................... >>> >>>Last updated - Wed Feb 28 15:13:27 PST 2007 Switch to >>>Conf. Power Ratings >>> >>> >>> >>>Rank Conference Avg. RPI Avg. SOS SOS Rank Teams >>> 1 Atlantic Coast 0.5871 0.5760 2 12 >>> 2 Southeastern 0.5868 0.5784 1 12 >>> 3 Pacific-10 0.5762 0.5710 3 10 >>> 4 Big Ten 0.5754 0.5689 4 11 >>> 5 Missouri Valley 0.5619 0.5566 5 10 >>> 6 Big East 0.5611 0.5557 6 16 >> >> >>Then I fully expect the MVC to receive more NCAA bids than >>the Big East and to perform better in the NCAA tourney with >>several teams. Good luck. >> >>But some of us don't you use a conference RPI rank to decide >>what league is better. I will be watching for more MVC bids >>than Big East, and I also will be watching to see those many >>MVC teams make deep runs in the NCAA. >> >>Because if it walks like a duck.... > > >MVC is 5-0 against the Big East. As far as the NCAAs, it is >all about seeding. I am sure I will be the "bad" guy. When in fact, I simply will state objectively what I think if a team or conference etc.... Are you sure you want to go with that last statement? I couldn't disagree more. The NCAA's are all about matchups rather than seeding. Seeding matters far less than matchups. This is typical of many posters who come to this board and many otehr STL area boards. St. Louis is HQ of MVC...and the MVC plays in its region. It will always be typical of some fans to have distorted reality, and to believe everything they hear. The local media tries to pump up interest for fans to attend the MVC Tourney in STL and spend that money. The bottom line is simple. A fan comes here and touts that the MVC is better than the Big East or at the very least in its class. However the Big East will receive at least twice as many NCAA invitations as the MVC. What the fan didn't show was that 4 of the 5 teams mentioned will finish 10th or worse in the Big East...including multiple teams that are currently 3-12 in the league. But if you do not do cartwheels for the MVC, you are an MVC hater. The MVC is a good mid-major conference. But that, the truth upsets people and hurts their feelings. But it is factual, objective, and honest. Instead of enjoying the progress of the league...and its recent climbs of no longer being an annual one bid league....the instant gratification society we live in has gotten to a lot of people, who want to hear nothing less than the MVC is the same as the Big East, or other top conferences.

*

I read V-Time's post to mean that you have one team celebrating, and one team having sour grapes for losing....not that he was in the Vashon corner of agreeing with the cheating, considering he said he wasn't even there. I also was offended by the use of the term "midget" but didn't feel like going down that road at the time I read it.

Hardly the same comparison. Let's be factual. Please tell me where I said anything personally demeaning, negative, and non-factually acusatory in that link you provided. In this thread, you have proceeded to call me, "paranoid," and lumped me in with people who tell the MVC to "Go to hell," ...and accuse them of "cheating"...believe you used that twice, and "anti-rants" etc.... As I already stated, the Pac 10 is the only major conference in America playing an 18 game league schedule. The Big East with 16 teams is moving to one next year. There are many mid-major and low major D-1 conferences with even less than 10 teams that do not play an 18 game schedule, too many too count. The MVC has had an opportunity to either play less conference games or to add more teams to its conference and has not done either one. That is their right and choice. I stated that the reason for the 18 game league schedule was not soley based on number of league teams. And that statement is true. I said "multiple reasons" and that is the case. If you want to believe otherwise, go ahead. You could have simply said you disagreed and this would have moved on....but you chose to add all of the other unnecessary stuff.

Not sure why it is so suprising to you ....this year was the parity party...10-15 schools could all beat another on a given night. It was the case during the season, and still is the case now in the post-season. No surprises here.

All very close area games tonight. Parkway South over Vashon in OT. Webster came from behind to beat DeSmet in the 4th McCluer North over Lafayette in the 4th. Lindbergh over Jackson. Parkway South v Lindbergh in quarters McCluer North v Webster in quarters. And these two winners play each other in semis. Zumwalt South a winner too. http://www.mshsaa.org/results/bracket.asp?Bracket_ID=600

>>Although most other leagues with far more teams play less >>than 18 game league schedules. >> >>It is done for multiple reasons. A few are... RPI purposes >>for the league, and because it makes the top league records >>look better by adding victories. 9-7 does not look as good >>as 11-7 in conference for example. And because the MVC is >>not a major conference ...a few wins over .500 in the league >>doesn't look as good. >> >>The Big East is moving to 18 game leasgue schedule next >>sesaon. They of course have 16 teams in the league instead >>of ten. > >The MVC is not a major conference. They are ahead of the Big >East. Is the Big East not a major conference? If it looks >like a duck, and quacks like a >d............................... > >Last updated - Wed Feb 28 15:13:27 PST 2007 Switch to >Conf. Power Ratings > > > >Rank Conference Avg. RPI Avg. SOS SOS Rank Teams > 1 Atlantic Coast 0.5871 0.5760 2 12 > 2 Southeastern 0.5868 0.5784 1 12 > 3 Pacific-10 0.5762 0.5710 3 10 > 4 Big Ten 0.5754 0.5689 4 11 > 5 Missouri Valley 0.5619 0.5566 5 10 > 6 Big East 0.5611 0.5557 6 16 Then I fully expect the MVC to receive more NCAA bids than the Big East and to perform better in the NCAA tourney with several teams. Good luck. But some of us don't you use a conference RPI rank to decide what league is better. I will be watching for more MVC bids than Big East, and I also will be watching to see those many MVC teams make deep runs in the NCAA. Because if it walks like a duck....

Most naming rights for college basketball Arenas have been in the $1million per year range contracts for x number of years. i.e Comcast Center at Maryland 25 years for $25 million. Ohio St. has a similar deal....as do many others. Now some of the bigger schools that don't have it are looking into doing it...with talks of up to $2 million per season. on the low end ... $500k per year or high six figures per year contracts. The recently opened Galen Center(similar seating capacity) at USC....family donated $10 million for the $144 million building....but added another $40 million for the Arena and practice facility naming rights.

You post ...."instead of making this personal..." after you just made it that way in two separate posts. Again, The Pac 10 is the only major conference in college basketball doing this. Last time I checked the others weren't. ALL of my posts on this board have been 100% objective regarding the MVC. Feel free to post any of them here. You couldn't be more wrong on that topic. I have zero affinity for, nor negativity towards the MVC. The MVC is posted about often on this board. And if my memeber serves me correctly I haven't started about 99% of those threads maybe more than that. If I post objectively about something of which your opinion differs, I am not going to change my opinion to better serve your interests. I have posted on many different related and unrelated topics of the MVC. ....why SLU is better off in the A10 imo....but again, as I have said to so many MVC fans, if you don't hold the opinion that SLU should have joined the MVC, it automatically in some people's minds believe you are ripping the MVC, which is not the case. Nothing short of SLU should have joined pleases people. ....or whether the topic is MVC league status, ...many think it has become more than a mid-major, and I do not agree. "I think I have you pegged pretty good on this one...." language as if you were out to get me..." (sigh) again....more disappointmet with this board. I haven't ripped the scheduling tactics of the MVC...I have in fact(look it up if you like) applauded their scheduling tactics as a league to try to better themselves, though I don't necessarily hold things like RPI, as a be all end all, as do others. You must have me confused with someone else.