Quality Is Job 1

Unca Sodaberger wrote, "In turn, I'd like to see more loyalty from the schools; not just lip service." The reason that Missouri doesn't honor Norm Stewart by naming the building after him is that Bill Laurie was the major benefactor. Not only did he want to get his way, but he also probably has something against Stewart.

Tommie Liddell and Kevin Lisch. There are two other schollies available.

The last announcement regarding the arena was in December; it's been nearly a year since there's been an announcement. The folks in charge of this can't blame us if we begin to doubt that the project will ever be completed.

My alma mater (UMSL) is the best program in the University of Missouri system not on probation? What, is UMKC on probation, or something? If UMKC isn't on probation, then the Rivermen must be pretty darn good, as a Div. 2 program to be better than the Kangaroos. If Missouri-Kansas City is on probation, then UMSL's only competition for that dubious honor of best UM program not on probation is UM-Rolla.

I believe I would find such a trip fun, but I've got a couple of deterrents. My money is really tight, and I'd need the Billiken Club to be sponsoring something. I have no desire to be driving long distances when it's likely the weather will be icy/snowy.

I do not feel I blew Brad's comments out of proportion. After all, he was talking directly to me. All I had from the scrimmage were stats, as that's what I focused on. It's harder to assess general play when you're watching for keeping stats. Besides, my general observatons from Saturday's scrimmage will merely recap stuff that has been said over and over. I did not attend yesterday's scrimmage, and I doubt I'll be able to attend any more practices, considering that high-school practice is underway (we've got a 9th-grade kid who, if he develops, I'd like Brad to watch, but I won't reveal his name until I've talked to Brad, so he can get a head start).

http://www.billikens.com/cgi-bin/dcforum/d...orum=DCForumID5

Do whatever you think is best. Consider the audience you're trying to appeal to. Just because a few old fogies at Billikens.com might not like it doesn't mean that the 18-21 undergraduate set won't.

You're quite right; thank you for the correction. I got my eyes crossed up looking at the roster. It's Danny Brown who went to Houston Alief Elsik (but he comes to SLU out of Air Force Academy Prep). I corrected my post.

No. 2 Wendell Bennett is a 6-3, 220 lb sophomore guard out of Brooklyn, where he played for St. Anthony's. No. 10 Peyton Jacks is a 6-0, 175 lb freshman guard out of Dallas, where he played for Dallas Jesuit. No. 40 Ian Mooney is a 6-4, 220 lb sophomore guard/forward out of Austin, Texas, where he played for St. Michael's Academy.

I think in some games, when the Billikens are superior athletically (such as what happens in some of the guarantee games even in recent years when the Bills have been relatively lacking in athleticism), they will push the ball and look to score more quickly. In other games, when the opponent is on par with the Bills' athleticism or is more athletic, they will probably use more of the possession clock before shooting. Teams that are better defensively take longer to break down, meaning more of the possession clock must run off before a quality shot opens up. Regardless of how quickly the Billikens get a good shot, the defense will still play at the same pace (unless it can get a steal or force a bad shot more quickly). Teams like Iowa and Marquette will still force low-scoring games.

Dave, what we're supposed to avoid is publishing detailed, proprietary information that could give opponents an advantage or erase a Billiken advantage. We can post general observations, but we should not give details on and reasons for which players aren't participating in drills or scrimmages, and we should not publish the stats from scrimmages. I've violated both of those tenets in the past (before I knew better); consequently, it may be a long time before Brad trusts me. I agree that it would be helpful if Brad or someone in his department would establish the ground rules, but perhaps it's a sore topic for Brad. Some people just dislike the Internet, period; when Brad sees me, all he sees is "Internet."

brehms13, please check you private messages. Perhaps some of us may have exaggerated what Coach Soderberg meant, but I think I've figured out exactly what he meant and why. Brad doesn't want the statistical results of an in-house scrimmage made public because it could provide future opponents with valuable information they would not be able to find anywhere else. No, the stats don't contain plays and schemes -- and those things don't typically change from year to year, anyway, so the opponents already know them or can get them from watching game tape -- but they do show who the offensive weapons are. By looking at the box scores, coaches can figure out where to focus their defenses. Now, obviously every school publishes the box scores of its games, but the difference between an in-house scrimmage and a game against an opponent is that the scrimmage magnifies everything by nearly doubling the minutes that the players play. Players who would come off the bench and be something of a secret weapon during the season have to start and play major minutes in a scrimmage. Brad doesn't want future opponents to be able to use that information to identify possible trends and focus their defense. But even if I'm off-base on Brad's reasoning, I'll just abide by his wishes.

Some of us sat together during practice, and some of us agreed that some of the details Unca mentioned in his post above should not be disclosed. Those things are not directly related to Brad's telling me he doesn't want me to post the stats from the scrimmage on the internet.

Perhaps you didn't get tseugnekillib's "memo."

...the backup point guard, then ink (not pencil) the Bills into the Sweet Sixteen. Unfortunately, Anthony Beane is out of eligibility.

>Where did anybody say that they were unimpressed with >Reggie's performance today? What am I missing? Obviously, no one said anything like that. I suspect Reggie talked to his sister and expressed some disappointment or ambivalence about his play, and big sister wanted to pump us for more info. Bryant did not pop off for 50, but he did fine, in my opinion. If, indeed, he felt disappointed in his own play, I'm encouraged by his high expectations.

While I agree with what you've said, I think the bottom line is that we're blessed to have Coach Soderberg here (and I expect him to have a fantastic tenure), so we'll have to just grin and bear with what we may feel is an idosyncracy. I do know that I don't want the public to be closed out of pratice, so if that means you have to be there to know what happened, so be it.

I've never made it a secret that I post. When I attend practices and pickup games and when I see the players other occasions, I talk to them; I've never tried to hide that I post. If I were trying to spy on the program, I would have never told Brad that I post. I'm just an enthusiastic fan who loves the Billikens. Marlo, I know you talk to Reggie and some of the other players. Have you talked to Reg since today's scrimmage? I'm curious why you want to know "who was unimpressed by Reggie's performance"? I can only guess that Reggie talked to you and wasn't particularly happy with his own performance. That happens, sometimes, but I don't think Reggie will be the only weapon this year (that's a general comment -- not something based on watching today), so he can get away with not having a stellar game every time out. Personally, I don't think Reggie had anything to be ashamed of today. As far as players' reading the board and taking these comments to heart, I would recommend against that, personally. This is a fan's forum. No sports program would exist (as we know them today) without the fans. When here, we let our hair down and act like fans. I spoke to Ian Vouyoukas after practice to give him feedback, and I was honest, but I'm sure it's still different for him to hear it from me than to read us tossing it around. Lastly, I guess I can see how the Internet poses a danger to the program, but the enthusiasm of the fans, particularly those who care enough to read or post here, can also help the program. Let me reiterate: I love the Billikens and want them to go far (I'm not the enemy).

I don't believe the Coach Soderberg reads the Internet, but he's wary of it and is concerned the rampant availability of information will hurt the program. For him, it's not about Billikens.com, it's about the Internet, period. I'm sure he couldn't identify be on this board, but he has talked with me in the past and he knows that I post on the Internet. I don't know if he's "upset" about things that have been posted in the past. I'm sure things get back to him. I kept stats from a scrimmage in practice this afternoon. Brad noticed that I was "writing a lot" and asked me if I were taking notes; I told him what I was doing. He doesn't want the stats on the Internet, because it may be providing a scouting report for other programs.

I had a good time. It was fun. Beyond that, I'm not at liberty to publish. Coach Soderberg told me that he will close practice if my observations get on the Internet.

He was wearing a shirt and tie and looked very professional. I didn't get to speak to him.

That's the late game; it might not start until 9:30 and probably won't end until near 11 p.m. I don't usually stay for more than a half of the last game of the evening. I might have to beg off the next day of work.