courtside

Nice spin from Levick but I am not buyin...sorry. Blah blah blah...SHE couldn't lead the effort to raise the necessary funds, so the new arena will scal eback to 10k. I sure hop ethe goal is to have a LOT more than 1k students. What happens IF and hopefuly when SLU moves up in the world.....? And 2k-3k for student tix is more like it? SLU wil get the hanfful of big gmaes at Savvis, and anything is better than nothing....but bottom line is on Levick's watch they had to scale back...a big positive sure....but objectively....this is her job, her gig....and any other evaluation than mixed result isn't correct. She can give all the quotes she wants about jammed this and that...not buyin, thanks. Don't want to damper the day and positive....but I will at least always be objective.

As it currently stands....I believe 3 games are allowed off campus...i.e. Savvis. So three big ones will be played at Svvis anyway. Keep that in mind too.

Cheeseman, What I am saying is I disagree. We disagree that is all, no big deal. I do not believe it is remotely necessary to in any way shape or form answer random rumors. Coaches have better things to do if in fact they are even informed. Most coaches are oblivious to much more than you think. They worry about coaching tthe team and recruiting. MANY rumors float around all the time all over campuses everywhere, most unfounded. Should Missouri have come out and refuted the Bob Knight rumors of house buying in that areas while Snyder was the coach? A big fat NO. If this was on everyone's 10pm newscast, all radio stations...constantly....then I would open discussion more with you on it. There would need to be HEAVY CONSTANT coverage. ....as for Slaten....or Tuna...if a show isn't getting ratings, it will disappear or change format. It is all about ratings. I always find it humorous to hear people say they hate Slaten, but yet still listen. If you want something done about it, don't listen, and he will go away, just like that.

I would agree that ultimately Tuna's presence reflects on BM. I have heard Frank Cusumano speculate and throw out rumors without any fact or merit. It happens. Obviously Cusumano deservedly commands more respect. I didn't hear the show or comments...if he made comments, and others were present with him in studio on air...I suppose the response would be who did you speak with, can you confirm this....etc...orgee I didn't hear or know that, interesting. Was it said, I spoke iwth Liddell or I spoke with Liddell's folks...or John Doe at John Doe paper is reporting... Probably not on all of the above, so most intelligent normal people don't care. Do you really think people listen and believe the things Slaten says on air? They listen for laughs, not hard hitting sports information. You can always get your psorts info elsewhere.

Multiple issues here: In no order: 1) If Tuna bothers you, Tuna will be tough to budge. People LOUDLY voiced their opinions on Strickland on BM's show...Strickland's role was reduced in a major way. Basically BM listened. But Stricklans is young, less experienced, Tuna is not. BM needs a big push to shove him out the door. BM is a friend of mine and I have met Tuna several times through him...has always been nice to me, but I don't think anyone understands his loyalty to Tuna. BM is a very very loyal person, and is more prone to the save a guy mentality when he can't be saved. He is aware of Tuna's lack of popularity....imo it is a combo of giving Tuna yet another chance, and also to try to stir up some hot buttons and topics. Tuna is much more capable in a private conversation than on radio. I would never listen to him on a radio program, as his on air credibility is none. 2) BS doesn't need to squash diddly poop. Who cares? I tried to explain it...you din't understand or disagree, that is fine. 3) TL....depends on the program and need....he would have gotten time at most places this year....how much depends on the team and need. He would have started some places,(top 50) and would have come off the bench in other places(top 25)....but would have gotten some time. I have seen comparable players be a role playing starter or regular bench contributor their frosh season. Obviously he has been asked to do more at SLU...but also on the flip side he doesn't have the tealent around him to make life easier for him either....obviously hypothetical estimates. I would finish with, if Liddell say is a good kid, good team player, a top player on team....etc...gets along with staff and team, no issues...and left SLU say after this year, BS would be in serious trouble. This isn't going to happen because it is rare. Now, I have seen players in that range of talent...who do not develop, and get bad advice that they should be the man on some solid teams.....and want to be more of a focal point, and clash with the coach and transfer. It is "possible" for a kid to play somehwere have great success, and transfer up from a smaller program to better one. I would think SLU is good enough as a program, though not strong, to combat this. At SLU Liddell is "the man." He would NOT be the man at a lot of top programs. He would be a good solid contributor. But I think the underlying topic has merit. Stlye of Play. This is something that has been brought up in past as one of big question marks for Soderberg, and how it would affect attendance and recruiting. Regardless of style of offense, if your team can't score in the upper 60's and 70's most nights, over a multiple year time period, it is an issue. Style of play has been an issue on offense for BS. It is a fair topic. If approached in an informed way, nothing wrong with hearing discussion questioning the offense under BS. Kids don't want to go to a place that scores in the 50's. And fans don't want to go see it either.

This happens in EVERY city. Trust me, there are print, radio, and tv people like this in every town...always one or two that do this stuff. If I had a nickel every time Mark Few, Tom Crean etc...were mentioned for another job every year.....or rumors of recruits leaving....btw those two schools are doing just fine. People, stop the paranoia. People can say and will say whatever they want to get edge in recruiting, or to try to spread ill will for their own vindictive reasons in the media. If the kid actually left, then you examine the kid and the coach and decide is there a problem with one or the other. I am quite certain Tommie Liddell knew SLU would be a .500 type of team this year, an NIT team....and that they wouldn't have the level of players to consistently score in the 70's his first year. He knew it was a turn around job. Let's stop underestimating the kids. These aren't babies. Most kids who do transfer,...yes it happens all the time, and always will...are kids who are not good enough to play, kids who don't improve, or kids who think they are better than they are.

But do you/we really care what is said on local sports radio in STL? So Joe average guy or gal gets in their car, flips on radio, hears Tuna's comment and thinks Liddell is set to transfer. Let's say this premise is true. This isn't someone eho is going to attend a SLU game anyway....and if they do it would be vey infrequently. If somebody had interest in going to a SLU basketabll game, or being even a casual SLU fan, I would have to think they are going to go a little deeper than hearing one person on a radio. While I agree that STL radio and tv media MUST be held to a higher standard and more accountable...shame on those people for believing everything they hear. People in STL ....even casual sports fans, know who has an inkling of sports knowledge or fact and who doesn't. BM has been wrong plenty of times, Cusumano has been wrong plenty of times...etc...but at least those two have some levels of credibility for example. I think people, even the stupid will consider the source on average.

Steve I would buy your POSSIBLE curiosity factor, and light-hearted approach that there is a percentage, probably not great, but a percentage that may do what you suggest....and sure it would interesting or entertaining fodder. I don't see it as more than that. I do believe there is a very small percentage of coaches who read regularly of their message boards...sadly.

Billsboys...past and present people regular or non-regular...have backgrounds playing college, pro, coaching college....or have been family members, former players...etc..plenty of the types you mentioned as well. I don't think you can assume anything. WHO CARES if the players or coaches read this board? These are adults or young adults in student cases. I would assume any 18-22 athlete and student would not have the time nor care. If it were me, I wouldn't be interested....unless someone walked me over and said hey look at this...then curiosity for minor moments. People better be thicker skinned and more intelligent than that to let any time of board bother or help them. It is a place for people to get SLU hoops info...some vent....or want an outlet for venting for seeking fellow SLU supporters....for out of towners or frequent travelers like myself to check in on occasion to get info and updates on anything missed. And the one other thing that stood out to me above...this board may or may not be the most rabid SLU fans....there are many other good SLU fans who either don't know this board exists, and/or don't have interest in internet message baords. I really don't think a player could read this board and have major negative effects from it. Perhasps some are overestimating the power of message boards. I do enjoy this one, and appreciate the info etc....and I leave it at that.

What people need to understand is the difference between his current competition and Frosh year. By all accounts he will have less of an impact than Liddell and Lisch in their Frosh years. BIG difference shooting wide open looks in HS and college. His advantage will be that others around him will be one year better...but imo it won't be enough. It will be a learning experience for him, limited time etc...in his upperclassmen years the hope is he will get opportunities created by others and convert. I have seen a LOT of dead-eye elite shooters in HS ...top 50 kids go to college and take a couple of years to make the same impact in college, and no offense to him, he isn't in that category. SLU needs shooters, so he will be good to have...but his impact won't be felt next year imo.

I disagree with Bonwich. Kids choose schools for a VARIETY of reasons. We are talking about two things here. 1) Having a high profile sports program can and HAS shown that a school can reach more prospective students if one didn't exist. It has been documented at different places that the quality of overall applicant has increased with some connection to it. ....and seperately take, say # of applicants....if it rises dramatically furing a several year period, and the school isn't admitting far more students...the sompetition for admisson increases. I know people at the schools mentioned and other possible case studies as well...and I can tell you some people who got in at another point in time would be hard pressed to do so now...if it was based on academic performance....the numbers have risen. 2) No one is saying that you have to have a successful high profile sports program to achieve in academics. What I was saying is that having a high profile successful athletic team that receives wide esposure, increases the possibilities of your applicant pool besides those people who choose base only on other factors. I would also argue that having a high profile sport can extremely increase the quality of a school in many intangible areas as well, besides the academic ones reported by universities. Sure, Harvard will always be Harvard, and Tennessee will always be UT....but there is a lot of merit and fact that can be attributed to certain places.

http://www.marquette.edu/opa/newsroom/news...emand1606.shtml Fr. Wild Marquette University President has attributed the men's basketball program as a big part of this succes.

Well put Bonwich. What I think Doctor B fails to see...and I can always provide this more specifically if he likes...are the BENEFITS of a winning and successful, committed hoops program at SLU, as a whole. University morale rises exponentially. General applications rise, and the school becomes more selective for students as a whole. This has happened at other places. The positive exposure of the school to help those rhetoric programs can in part come from a successful basketball program. Academics at a university do not have to be compromised with a commitment to athletics. Many fine institutions do both.

My bad...I had BM's comments on the brain, and not the above post regarding other coaches' comments...therefore I thought you were speaking of BM's comments instead.

> the problem isn't thinking it or saying it too higher ups >... it is a problem saying it too the general public > > > Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. >Waldman ? Why?

IMO of course... SLU is not good enough to consistently win on the road in the A-10 this season. I am not rationalizing, nor am I being critical, but SLU is an average team, not a good team this year. Maybe people see a flash of something, or see what they want to see, but those are the facts. Will SLU win a game or two this season perhaps they weren't suppose to win, sure, and lose some they shouldn't sure. I don't care what conference you are in, only the elite conference teams, and elite teams period win consistently on the road. Xavier losing at home to LaSalle today didn't exactly help SLU either.

I don't know what's more predictable, Bernie's mention or the immediate response and thread...I am surprised at how split this thread is so far...perhaps Billiken Nation is getting a little restless on the Arena front? While the comment might initially hurt the feelings of hard core Billiken fans, the message is purposeful. Would you rather continue to go a LONG time with no arena news, swept under the rug and no one being held accountable? The shot is not at Joe SLU fan, it is at he administration of the school. If people are not held accountable, action is never taken. And yes it is entirely possible to have strong academics and strong athletics and strong facilities for both.

I think ACCESS to a bigger 20k place is a good thing for a handful of games a year, but not needed for every game. Seton Hall would be included in the above group as well. I am LONG a fan of 12 teams leagues. Seton Hall however plays in NBA/NHL arena and can't fill it up, and on campus is too small...they need a facility. What you need to also consider....an example.....Georgetown is finally on the way back...after getting 6k-7k a game at best unless it was a top team, then they can fill it up. I anticipate bigger crowds for them now that hey have a great team again. But, off campus, no metro stop, huge arena...Providence does not fill up their place at all....the teams of the above that draw are ND, Marquette, Dayton, Xavier, ...Nova plays big games in the big pro arena, and others on campus. Nova, Providence, are smaller schools than SLU. The rest of the mentioned schools can fill it up in big games. But very sporadic attendance. 20k big game, 7k the next. The rest mentioned wouldn't fit into any type of future league with long shot being a catholic league that included Creighton. I think if SLU had a 10k-13k on campus arena, it would be fine. They can always schedule a bigger game at Savvis a couple of times a year. I would say 12k-13k would be preferred. But if it has to go to 11k to be a better facility...I am okay with that. The biggest thing imo is the QUALITY of the new building. Offices, practice facilities, multi-purpose for other revenue...i.e. concerts etc...

While I can greatly appreciate the effort...I do not understand the relevance of some? How can you compare SLU to any school with football? And, how can you compare SLU to a school like say...GW which is surrounded by two high profile basketball schools and up the road from 5 others. SLU is private school, medium size, no football, located in perhaps medium size market. Two other schools within 2 hours located in small towns. I do appreciate the effort and find the list interesting.

What I am saying is that fundamentally the students are most important. I actually even have sympathy for the Blue Hairs too. People age, and shouldn't be discriminated against for that. The old people need seats where they can see etc...One day I will be old and you guys too. I am not advocating giving seats away if they won't be used either. What I am advocating is making student attendance THE top priority of the school. And, if/when they do come and SLU looks less like a commuter school atmosphere at basketball games, ...that alums and or older season tix holders become part of the solution too... Hearing talk about having to shift a little bit in location and seats seems way down on the list of priorities to me. If students go to games and it means seat adjustment for some people, I would favor doing whatever it took to get students to games. A whole other thread could be started (and has previously) about how to do it, and what it takes...to get the students. SLU shouldn't have this wild disconnect from blue hairs to middle age alums to students....I left out young adults because I don't see any at SLU games. The stand offish nature of the different types of fans at SLU games. When I go to games in other places...there isn't this disconnect among age demographics...part is on the blue hairs too, the students, the middle aged alums etc... I would hope that everyone on this board would have a goal or hope that at some point SLU would have a college like atmosphere at games. I actually think some or possibly many here don't really care as long as they get their seats, with a small minority of exceptions. This something I can't agree with.

One last thing....I get tired of alums and random ticket holders. We all went to college, or at least some of us...and we all/some pay good money to see games, have season tix etc...Obviously the money and support of alums and others is vital and important. But the students will always be priority one. Period. Anything else, and I do not agree.

I don't disagree with this sentiment, poor student fan support. But St. Louis Univeristy has to do their part too, or else this will just be a smaller version of the way it's been. Gotta be a prt of the solution and not the problem. If MANY other schools of similar size and background can do it, so can SLU. It takes a LOT more than the BlueCrew people to make it happen, while not trying to discredit them. It also isn't going to hapen with the snap of a finger. SLU has never had this type of student supoort. NEVER. For many many decades SLU was that local commuter school. I thought the idea was to change all that. If sitting up and over a bit more helps out in any way, I am all for it. This is part of the disconnect and problem ino with alums as well. The general idea is to win, and to win with a total college atmosphere imo. It is very easy to say well this year for example these kids don't go, etc...etc...but the GOAL needs to be to fill the stands with students, and give them low cost general admission seating in high profile sections. SLU frankly is running their hoops program mom aand pop style for many years. Maybe Brad can go door to door and sell cookies or something. While it is very easy to be frustrated whith the students, the program etc...I expected more in response....well maybe not from Rich...but certainly from Roy. Gotta look beyond...have a greater goal than what it is....

Isn't the idea to do it for the students? Sure alums fitting the bill...but shouldn't STUDENTS get the priority seating etc...and not you? Frankly this is one of the problems with the SLU program. It is all about the ever aging alums and not the students.

Based on my personal experience, I would agree with you Bob.

*