Quality Is Job 1

>This year the Big 12 POY was a transfer from penalized >Baylor. Wouldn't it be great if that happened again but >this time to Mizzou. No, it wouldn't be "great." Deserved, maybe, but certainly not great.

How can you blame a kid for wantig to take his full allotment of all-expenses-paid trips?

Now I do recall that the SLU-UMass game was part of a doubleheader -- it was a made-for-t.v. event. As I said before, if Duke is bringing the Billikens in as part of a television event, then I have no problem with it, but I don't think SLU should be bought for a regular non-conference Duke home game without a return.

Remember when UMass came in and Lou Roe ate the Billikens up? Hey, did SLU go to Amhearst the next year? (I'm thinking they didn't.) If not, we go from being able to bring in a top notch opponent without playing in their place to having to go to a top-notch program without getting them to come back (if that's what will happen). Ugh!

...Duke should still be coming to St. Louis to finish a series.

>The real issue is that some Bills fans on here are more >interested in what they can brag about around the water >cooler than what the team's goals are....some people in here >don't want us to play at Duke because we may get our butts >kicked on national TV??? If we have any aspirations of >being a national program, which by the way Coach Soderberg >has had from the very beginning. We need to play the Duke's >of the world when we get a chance to play them on national >TV. Anywhere and anytime.... I think you misunderstand. I have no qualms about SLU playing Duke. The game can even be at Cameron. What I have an issue with is that Duke should be willing to return the game and play on the Billikens' home court. I don't understand the mindset that an elite team doesn't want to play on the road. I do understand that every school is allowed a certain number of guarantee games and needs to have them to fulfill the season ticket holders' demand, but other than that, the balance of games should be played on a reciprocal basis. If they're so great, then they should be able to win away from home. There's no excuse for Duke wanting SLU to play there but then not coming here, if that's really what's going on.

What if Duke rolls over the Billikens, led by a freshman point guard, to the tune of a 30 point victory as they celebrate a National Championship, complete with a banner-raising ceremony? I'm not saying that would happen, but it's a nightmare. I would think that such an occurence would hurt, not help, SLU's image in the eyes of casual basketball fans and national recruits. (I hope Duke loses to UConn tomorrow to eliminate part of my possible nightmare-come-true.)

Brad Soderberg has said on more than one occassion that he'll play anyone in the country as long as they'll return to play on his team's home court, so it seems doubtful that he would willingly accept a deal to play Duke at Cameron without the Blue Devils coming the following year to play on SLU's home court. Perhaps it's a decision Doug Woolard made, but I have trouble imagining that Doug would do that without Brad consent, particularly not after the fuss Brad made about Southern Miss's selling a home game to a promoter who put the game in Green Bay and his concerns about the subsequent resignation of his friend Jerry Green because the administration didn't support him. I could see SLU playing Duke one time on a "neutral" court near Duke's campus (i.e., not Cameron) as part of a made-for-television event. I could also see SLU playing at Duke (even at Cameron) as part of a "classic" four-team tournament (remember a few years back when Alabama and a couple of teams played at Savvis and the same two pairings were guaranteed regardless of who won the first day?). But I can't see SLU just playing an ordinary non-conference game at Duke without bringing that money-making draw back to St. Louis the next year.

Examining the text of the article: BIG GAME: SLU students, faculty, alumni and honcho the Rev. Larry Biondi will be beaming next year when the St. Louis University men's basketball team heads to North Carolina to take on the nation's most prestigious basketball team, the Duke Blue Devils. ESPN has signed on to carry the game, which will give the Billikens and Coach Brad Soderberg a chance to take down the powerful Blue Devils and Coach K (aka Mike Krzyzewski - pronounced Sha-SHEF-skee) on national TV ...I don't see anything that says there wouldn't be a return game in St. Louis the following year. Nothing there confirms it is a guarantee game. I don't think we dare presume that Deb Peterson is savvy enough about college sports to mention or even pursue the possibility that Duke could be coming to St. Louis the following season. I think what Deb is doing here is trying to picque interest among casual fans, and the angle of this rumor ("nation's most prestigious basketball team," "chance to take down the powerful Blue Devils," and "...beaming...") would certainly do that. Besides all that, it appears Deb's information is premature.

Count me as one of the people who doesn't think Saint Louis U. should be a guarantee opponent for anyone, not even Duke. Bob Ramsey on KFNS just announced that he talked to adminstrators at SLU who told him that no contract has been finalized, though there have been negotiations as recently as yesterday. I should hope that if Duke agrees to play SLU, they'll play a game in St. Louis and a game in Durham, N.C.

Brehms, courtside was responding to NYBill.

The key is education. If children aren't in an environment where education is important, then it doesn't matter what dialect of English is spoken. African American English is no different, in that respect, than any other casual language. Even the President speaks one way in casual conversation with his closest friends and another way when reading speeches (which are standard written English -- and almost no one talks that way). What got all this started was the conversations among Amy Stewart, Carmento Floyd, and Ricky Clemons. Well, they may talk that way in private, but don't think that they talk that way when wider English is expected. In those situations, they use the language of wider communication (so-called standard English). They appear to be successful enough, to me (excepting Clemons). Your very notion that AAE shouldn't be used around children perpetuates the notion that it should be eradicated. If it's not used around children, the children won't acquire it, and the dialect will eventually die. Then all the people with the assimilation mindset will be very happy. It won't happen, because when people are at home, comfortable, around their friends and family, they will speak their native language, whether that's near-standard English, Spanish, or African American English. And, as long as the community educates, they all learn the language of wider communications, so I don't think African American children are endangered by being exposed to AAE.

slu72, I apologize for diverting the topic of your "hot stove" thread so far away from the topic. In this thread I will reintroduce it and reply to your points. >Okay let's open the hot stove season. What the Bills need to do to make the dance next >year or in keeping with our mascot...the Icon of what ought >to be.... > >>Recruitment of a Juco PF who can start now >>A healthy Tom Frericks-don't schedule any games after a rodeo >>A more assertive IO, take it strong to the hoop also shoot that mid range jumper the D gives you. RB can't be the only go to guy >>JJ to develop strong over the summer-see #1 >>AD to get some minutes, make that a lot of minutes, at PG over the summer >>DP to be ready for D-1 ball, from what you guys say who have seen him play, he ain't far away and will step up immediately, but, he's still a frosh >>TL to qualify...if he doesn't, land a JUCO pg >>Darren Clarke has to develop over the summer into a scorer, again RB can't be the only go to guy >>Have IV stay in St.Louis and play in the Bonner league >>Find two guys to replace JF and CS's leadership and heart >>A much better out of conference schedule > >Would this be a lineup that would give us a chance at the >dance: > >DP pg >RB #2 >IO #3 >JUCO PF #4 >TF #5 > >or if TL qualifies start him instead of IO, I think that >would be scary...starting two frosh against CUSA level >talent? >>Recruitment of a Juco PF who can start now I believe Brad Soderberg will get his man. I'm not worried about it; I'm just waiting to see who it will be. >>A healthy Tom Frericks-don't schedule any games after a rodeo Tom Frericks will be a consistent scorer, averaging double figures. >>A more assertive IO, take it strong to the hoop also shoot that mid range jumper the D gives you. RB can't be the only go to guy While I do believe SLU needs more than one offensive threat AND that the Billikens will have more than just Reggie Bryant next season, I don't know if it will be Izik Ohanon. I think Ohanon will average double figures (around 10 ppg), but that could come from his scoring nine points per game nine times out of 10 and having one outburst of 19 points once every 10 games. >>JJ to develop strong over the summer-see #1 I suspect we'll be waiting yet another year for Justin Johnson to put it all together (I hope he proves me wrong and tells me to my face when I see him next summer). >>AD to get some minutes, make that a lot of minutes, at PG over the summer Anthony Drejaj will be a leader -- possibly the heart and soul of the team -- but I don't think he'll be the point. When AD is in the game, look for at least one of the other ballhandling guards -- (in order of preference) Dwayne Polk, Tommie Liddell, and Darren Clarke -- to also be in the game. >>DP to be ready for D-1 ball, from what you guys say who have seen him play, he ain't far away and will step up immediately, but, he's still a frosh Dwayne is the least of my concerns. As a Floyd Irons-coached player, he'll be ready to go from day one. The main question is: how much will Polk grow during his Billiken career? I've noticed that Div. I players from Vashon seem to have fully tapped their potential in high school and, while performing reasonably well, don't have much upside. Now, Anthony Bonner was an exception to that trend, so maybe Dwayne will be too. >>TL to qualify...if he doesn't, land a JUCO pg I believe Tommie Liddell will qualify. I won't contemplate any other outcome. >>Darren Clarke has to develop over the summer into a scorer, again RB can't be the only go to guy. Capital D will be just fine. He was just a freshman this season. >>Have IV stay in St.Louis and play in the Bonner league I agree that Ian Vouyoukas should be around the team and should play in the Anthony Bonner summer league, but I also think he should go to a big man camp and should also spend a couple of weeks away from St. Louis scrimmaging with more accomplished big men. The competition he'll face from local bigs won't prepare him well for the Conference USA swan song. >>Find two guys to replace JF and CS's leadership and heart That will work itself out, but I think Tom Frericks, Anthony Drejaj, and Dwayne Polk will be major motivators (hey, Polk has never experienced losing when healthy, so I think he'll instill a hatred of losing in his teammates. >>A much better out of conference schedule No doubt. >Would this be a lineup that would give us a chance at the >dance: > >DP pg >RB #2 >IO #3 >JUCO PF #4 >TF #5 > >or if TL qualifies start him instead of IO, I think that >would be scary...starting two frosh against CUSA level >talent? It's probably too early to speculate on lineups and rotations. I wouldn't worry, though, about Liddell and Polk both starting as frosh. If Coach Soderberg believes the Bills can win with them out there, then we'll see it, and if not, we won't. I suspect Liddell will start the season on the bench and work his way into the starting lineup.

>If we want tests and society to be unbiased, it should be >used cautiously around children. Okay, I am dropping the >subject. I do not want to be involved in your posts of >these matters anyway. I mistakenly jumped in, my friend. "If we want tests and society to be unbiased, it should be used cautiously around children." What does "it" represent? I value your thoughts on the subject. Can't we have meaningful dialogue? Maybe together we can help find a way to right the tilting ship of educating all children in America.

I am neither a proponent of "Ebonics" being taught in schools nor "okay with it." First of all, "Ebonics" is a misnomer -- and an inaccurate term. As a contraction of "ebony" and "phonics,' "ebonics" would mean "black sounds," and that's woefully inaccurate to describe the language many African Americans speak -- a true dialect with features such as multiple negatives, consonant deletion, copula deletion, the lack of a concluding &l;r&r;, the habitual "be," and a number of other features absent in the English of wider use. Therefore, (AAE) African-American English Dialect is the term I prefer. This dialect is prevalent among African-American speakers, especially those with less education (some use more features than others). It is primarily a conversational dialect, and those who use it are reasonably proficient in it from childhood on. It doesn't need to be taught in schools, because the students already know it. English (or grammar), as taught in schools is primarily written language. Formal written English is different from conversational English, even for speakers of so-called proper English. Our students need to learn that the standard of written English is different from the way they talk when they're with their peers. The thing I've been preaching is that it must be considerably more effective to appreciate AAE as a true dialect and guide students into understanding the difference between it and standard written English than to set out to eradicate the students' language. Doing the latter, essentially you'd be saying, "You're a barbarian; I'm going to teach you the right way to talk." Umm, no, you won't! But with the former, you'll be able to teach your students to write the conversational "I be too tired to do no homework when I walk through da do'" as "I'm always to tired to start my homework when I first get home."

Schasz, is that speculation on your part, or have you heard or read something along those lines?

Thank you, jjray, for saying what I was trying to say. You did it much more succinctly.

You're right that anyone can succeed in life, but it sure is a heck of a lot easier for people who can read and write well to succeed than those with highly-developed social and motor skills without adequate reading skills. Without reading comprehension, a person would have to work probably 10 times as hard, likely shortening his/her lifespan in the process, as someone who can read well.

>Lower-income families from East St. Louis are at a >disadvantage due to some cultural values. > >On the other hand, I was never asked how I was doing in >school. The importance of education was never stressed to me >by those surrounding me in the same way as some others might >have been. My parents preferred the "laissez faire" approach >to my education, allowing me to discover things on my own. >I'm not trying to compare my upbringing to TL's, because we >obviously grew up in two totally different worlds, but I >think education is a conscious choice. I made the conscious >choice to read books, and I managed to get a 30 on my ACT. By reading and appreciating education, were you following your parents' example, even if they didn't beat you over the head about it?

I feel the main component of standardized test is reading comprehension. As a community, we African Americans (particularly middle class and below) have been horrible at teaching our children to read and enjoy reading. It's not that we lack the intelligence, but our priorities are out of whack. We put so much value on sports, music, rapping, dancing, and entertainment that we have little time or interest in reading and writing. We look to sports, etc., as a way out of poverty, but it's really fool's gold. The blame doesn't all rest on the teachers in East St. Louis; it doesn't rest all on the parents; it doesn't rest all on the kids; it doesn't rest all on the government. Rather, they all bear some of the blame and they all must work together to effect a solution. Roy, I don't think I'd be risking much if I wagered that your daughter can read better than Tommie while he could probably cream her in a video game. That's what we're dealing with here. Good reading skills lend well to good ACT scores, but good xbox skills don't. I don't know Tommie personally and am not really speaking specifically about him -- just making presumptions -- but you get my drift.

>So what you're saying Thicks is that since Tommie is black >and from East St. Louis his parents do not stress the >importance of his education and he has not been nurtured in >a way that would promote intellectual growth? > >Maybe it's due to the fact that the kid is 17-18 and is more >interested in chicks and haning out with his buddies than >studying for an exam. We can speculate all we want, but we >shouldn't start calling people racist (which you have done >on more than one occation)or say a kid doesn't have good >influences because his family doesn't make 6 figures. No, what I'm saying is that those things are possible -- even likely -- so it's wrong to insinuate that the kid must be stupid. I haven't called anyone racist, either today or in the past, as you say; rather I've pointed out some social inequities that most non-minorities likely aren't aware of.

College isn't the only way of getting prepared for life.

>Come on - that's a complete punt. I wouldn't be shocked by >research showing minorities don't perform as well on >standardized tests, but I'm talking about getting a >qualifying score. That's not too difficult. > >EVEN IF you are correct that the test is so biased as to >make it reasonable for minorities not to achieve the NCAA's >qualifying score, a GPA of 2.5 (which is what's been posted >on this board) at a public school in East St. Louis is not >indicative of someone prepared for 4 years of high level >(being somewhat generous here) college education. "...so biased as to make it reasonable for minorities not to achieve the NCAA's qualifying score..." It's not so much minorities as folks from lower SES (socioeconmic status). East St. Louis most certainly qualifies. > >To start hurling around insults about bias and possible >racial prejudice is beyond the pale. Frankly, I was more >worried about TL's own well being than anything else. I'm >telling you right now if my son has 2.5 gpa and >non-qualifying score on the ACT I WILL BEG HIM to go the >prep school route. That's what it's for - to PREP him for >the world and (hopefully) 4 years of college education. I didn't mean to insult you, but, in the vein of being brutally honest, I wanted to make you aware that the middle-class suburban world I presume you're from is not the center of the universe. Tommie Liddell's background and upbringing is most likely radically different from that of your son's. In all likelihood, your son would not experience such a scenario because you value education and instill and encourage the value of education in him. Tommie probably doesn't have such nurturing. He may well be intellectually capable of better grades and test scores, but if his exposure to the material of the ACT has been limited and a culture that encourages learning wasn't prevalent while he was in elementary school, immediate success on the ACT is unlikely. Hey, we may be saying very similar things, but I bristle at the suggestion of "remedial" education. It's one of those phrases that rubs me the wrong way.

>And let's be brutally honest for a moment - if you can't get >over the NCAA's ACT hurdle on the first try you need some >remedial education. It might not be the worst thing for TL >to have a year at prep school to better prepare himself for >life. While we're being brutally honest, let me say that the above sentiments mean you are, at best, ignorant and/or insensitive or, at worst, racially prejudiced (I hope it's the former). Point blank, both standardized college entrance exams (ACT and SAT) are biased against minorities and anyone, particularly, in the lower socioeconmic status. I feel it is unfair to Tommie Liddell and many other young people whose background (not intelligence) makes it improbable for them to get an 18 on the ACT for you to say that such people need remedial education. Furthermore, it is your bias that leads you to believe he is not already adequately prepared for life.