Quality Is Job 1

Mine too, and I was the one saying all that!

Nick doesn't edit people's posts to reflect his beliefs (edited posts there are marked just like they are here), but he and his moderators are moving to inappropriate places and/or deleting posts that they (Nick) feel are detrimental to the Mizzou program by way of any kind of speculation or is related in any way to the circumstances by which Missouri is now under investigation. Just as Mizzou may be sweeping stuff under the rug, Nick Witthaus is making sure he's a good company man by sweeping stuff under the rug of his board. This is by FAR a better place to discuss college basketball. I think even Missouri fans aj_arete and MUTGR enjoy discussing hoops here more than at Tigerboard.

Possibly, though I can't really think that there were any games it was obvious Clemons would be shaving points in. He was basically awful for the remainder of the season after being charged with assaulting Bunge, but before then I believe he was Missouri's leading scorer. One would think that his legal troubles, not gambling pressures, would contribute to his drop-off in performance. Or was that whole thing orchestrated? More wild speculation. I guess some money or federally illegal activity had to have been going on (or is suspected) if the FBI is interested in Clemons. I seriously doubt it has anything to do with Missouri's possible NCAA violations. Even so, it's another potential black eye for Mizzou.

Hey, I'm not saying you have to project the record or the non-conference games right now; I was just saying you can't wait until January 1 (I miscalculated three months and 11 days from today -- my bad) or even December 1. By all means you may wait until after practice has started (and even after the exhibition games) to go on record. I have to wonder, though, just how much spectators can glean from practice (when the players are going against each other) other than individual abilities (and last year's team definitely demonstrated that the team is greater than the sum of the individual parts) and exhibitions. You're correct that it will be a while before we know how good (or bad) this year's team will be; however, we still have to project (but not just yet -- in November).

Nick has posted words to that effect. He says that everyone cheats and his beef with Snyder is getting caught. Really, he doesn't mind cheating, he just doesn't want to get caught cheating. It's like, you should tell you children, "Don't lie," rather than, "Don't let me catch you lying."

I was thinking of having contestants pick whether SLU would win or lose a game. A correct pick would equal one point. Tally up the points at the end of the season and the person that picked the most games correctly has the most points and wins. THAT I could do with a spreadsheet. If you want to incorporate margin of victory, I think I could come up with at least one way to acheive that. For example, if a contestant correctly predicted the outcome of the game, then the absolute value of the difference between the projected margin and the actual margin could be subtracted from the actual margin and assigned as points to the contestant (I foresee lots of nested parentheses in this formula!). For instance, if a contestant projected that SLU would win by five points, and the Bills win by eight points, then 8 - 3 ( 8 - |8 - 5| ) would grant the contestant five points. Oh, never mind. That one wouldn't work well. Perhaps I could take the number 11 and subtract the result from that. I can thin of something. What I cant' think of is any way to single out individual contestants to assign bonus points. Well, let me know.

I doubt I could accomplish that with any number of linked Excel spreadsheets. I'm sure it's possible with any number of languages, including Perl, but it goes WAY beyond my current capabilities. Maybe if I started reading the Perl book I have I could have a program ready for you for the beginning of the 2004-05 season. The script could exist on your server. Users could call up the script from their browsers and input the data, and the script would calculate all the information you've outlined. I think anyone would charge for such a script (especially considering that it would be possible for clients to profit from the use of the script).

The FBI has requested Ricky Clemons's phone converstations and mail, but it doesn't mean it's related to Missouri or that they're investigating Clemons. Maybe Clemons, who has a shady past and shady associations, has information on someone else that the FBI is investigating. Also, if the FBI is investigating Clemons, couldin't it mean that he was getting the money Jessica Bunge is alledging he received from some source other than the Mizzou athletic department? Remember, Clemons says he can get away with anything, and perhaps he wants to stab Mizzou in the back. I still hold on to the hope that Mizzou hasn't done all the wrong they're being accused of doing and that Clemons is the lone guilty party, but at this point not much would surprise me, anymore. This junk is definitely getting more bizarre by the week.

...when the Tigers are playing in April in New Orleans (assuming they don't ban themselves or the NCAA doesn't bar them from the Tournament)? I'm sure your passion would grow beyond your control by then. By the way, while as a Mizzou fan I "hate" Kansas and Illinois, it can't be anything compared your (and Roy's) hatred of Mizzou, and I think I would love it if both KU and IU lost every game. (Strangely enough, as SLU is my favorite team by a centimeter over Mizzou, I like and root for SLU's Conference USA "rivals." Other than Cincinnati (possibly), I can't think of a C-USA school I root against when it's not playing SLU or Mizzou.)

Give me more details about what you're proposing. I'm wondering if it can't be done with Excel. I already have Excel files on my computer to compile SLU's season stats and note which games have been won or lost (after I enter each game's raw data by hand of course, but maybe one day I'll build a Perl script that can do it automatically on a server), and I might be able to come up with something for this community's contest (so long as there are only around 20 to 30 contestants -- 100 leads to too much data entry!).

>I read your two responses on the Tigerboard. For one, I >appreciate you objecting to me being mobbed over there. I >didn't really think my post over there was that >controversial. Admittedly, I was testing the waters to see >if I would be mobbed after learning about the rule from you >and MUTiger. It's too bad you weren't there when the thread was growing. Some poster named Navy Cat '53 objected to your post and appealed to Nick to move it to the Smack board. I got into a debate with him (in two different subthreads), saying that Nick's rule is poor because the topic is not smack and is related to Mizzou basketball and that the prevailing attitude is like Mizzou fans sticking their heads in the sand like ostriches. However, despite my making many good, rational points, both subthreads got deleted, even though the rest of the thread remained, and eventually the whole thread got moved to the smack board. I beginning to sour on TigerBoard. They're violating my free speech and are sticking their heads in the sand and pooh-poohing cheating. It seems very suspiciously calculating to remove rationally-worded posts explaining why a topic is NOT smack then move it to the smack board. If I weren't a fan of Mizzou, I would almost wish that the NCAA would hit the university with major sanctions to stick it to Nick (who condones cheating as long as the perpetrator isn't caught!) and all the Mizzu fans who want to make the allegations out to be much ado about nothing even if they're true. >To answer your question about where my allegiance lies, it's >so close that it's difficult for me to answer. However as a >fan, I feel it's OK to be critical of a team that you root >for. Just because I'm not happy with Quin, that doesn't >make me a less of a fan of Mizzou basketball. I agree that it's perfectly healthy to maintain an objectively critical eye of the team(s) you pull for. But I was just needling you about your allegiance. >As to why I don't post on the Tigerboard as much, I don't >like how your posts get buried within minutes there. I >appreciate how Steve organizes his posts here at >billikens.com where an initial post can reappear at the top >of the list if there is a response to it. I agree with you about disliking some things about TigerBoard. However, when Nick introduced new software about a month ago, it included an option of listing threads by activity, like on this board. Just go to "settings" at the top of the board and change "By Chronology" to "By Activity." For users who use the "by activity" setting, the message most recently responded to bounces to the top of the board. That doesn't mean your post won't get buried, though, because I think most of the community's users still go by chronology, meaning that what you and I see at the top of the board might be on the second page to most viewers and they'll never see it or respond to it. Also, users here have the option of changing the appearance of this board for themselves if they don't want the most recently active message to bounce to the top. The options are next to "Sort topics by" just above the messages list.

I understand you want to wait, Roy, but before the season starts you're going to have to participate in the annual "guess the Bills' final record" contest. You can't wait until January first, after nine or so games have been played, to project the team's final record in the contest.

If Quin Snyder only goes after the best players, then please explain to me why he had to run off (or see depart) Wesley Stokes, Dwayne John, Najeeb Echols, and Ricky Clemons. I think Randy Pulley will fit the bill for Missouri. He won't score a lot of points or be all conference, and he won't be "the show" (as Clemons tried to be), but he'll fill the Tigers' need, which is a steady ballhandler who can set up the offense and get the ball to the big guns (Arthur Johnson, Rickey Paulding, Jason Conley, and Jimmy McKinney). I wouldn't bend myself out of shape comparing Pulley to Brandon Morris (on either side, Mizzou's or SLU's). Each will be a good fit at his respective school. Jason Edwin will be where? To me, "KSU" means "Kansas State." You had me doing a double take! I had to think about where I'd seen Edwin headed. Is that Kentucky State or Kentucky Southern?

Saint Louis University loses four players to graduation (Marque Perry, Kenny Brown, Drew Diener, and Chris Braun). That fact is at the foundation of my projection that the Billikens' record in 2003-04 will be about the same as it was in 2002-03. Built on top of that foundation is another fact. SLU has seven newcomers (Reggie Bryant, Tom Frericks, Brandon Morris, Justin Johnson, Ian Vouyoukas, Darren Clarke, and Bryce Husak) and Floyd McClain returns from an absence from playing spanning two years (the entire time coach Brad Soderberg has been at SLU). Topping it off, SLU returns just five scholarship players (Josh Fisher, Chris Sloan, Izik Ohanon, Anthony Drejaj, and Ross Varner). None of them has lit up the Div. I scene as of yet. That building seems rather shaky to me, hence my projection of around .500. However, then I considered the following. Each of the departing players will essentially be replaced by two newcomers. Brown will be replaced by Frericks and Johnson. Braun will be replaced by Vouyoukas and Husak. Diener will be replaced by Bryant and McClain. Perry will be replaced by Morris and Clarke. If the newcomers gel, the team would theoretically be better even if the holdovers don't provide any more production than they did last year. Here's why: Greater depth. Even if Husak redshirts as expected, the Bills will go from having just nine scholarship players available for action in games to having 12 guys itching to get and stay on the floor until fatigue forces them to get off. The team will have greater insurance against fatigue, injury, foul trouble, and the occasional off performance by individual players. Also, the increase in competition among the players in practice should make the team better. Greater athleticism. Each of the players "replacing" Diener is far more athletic than he was. Johnson also favorably adds to the mix. Better shooting. It appears that each of the departing players is replaced by a tandem that features at least one member that can shoot comparably or better. Braun is the lone possible exception, as I don't think Vouyoukas can hit three-point shots. I would even argue that Bryant will be a better shooter than Diener because he'll be better able to keep opponents off balance with athleticism and greater slashing ability (it doesn't take much slashing to be better than Diener) and get his shot off. Better ballhandling and playmaking. Morris is reportedly a true point. It will be the first time SLU has not had to rely upon a combo guard to run the point full time since John Redden departed. Soderberg's offense may well run with more precision in this, his second year. Besides all of that, it's reasonable to expect the holdovers to improve the quality of their play (even if the quantity decreases as a result of greater depth and competition for playing time), not remain the same. Well! Is that enough for me and "my followers" in the "pessimists" camp to switch allegiance to Nark and "his followers" in the optimists camp? Maybe I'm starting to hedge, as there's an eternal optimist in me trying to get out, but I've got to stick to my projection of "about the same." While I tend to believe the 2004 team will be better at the end of the season than the 2003 team was at the end of last season (and that's scary, because that team managed an eight-game win streak), I also believe that the 2004 team will be searching for its identity at the beginning of the season even more than the 2003 team was at the beginning of last season.

The comparison isn't meant to suggest that Pulley has become a good three-point shooter; rather, it's intended to point out that Kansas's Aaron Miles is an awful three-point shooter himself.

tseugnekillib (and Roy), I was not saying that there's no distinction between the "2" (shooting guard) and "3" (small forward) positions; rather, I was saying that both positions are wing positions. Similarly, the "4" (power forward) and "5" (center) positions are different, but both positions are "bigs."

Some of us know Nark's untruncated last name from the old Billikenboard or from reading his news stories on either that site or this one. Besides that, I believe it may be found in his profile. I have no idea what the quoted foreign language is, let alone understand what it means. And you're totally confusing me with your allusions. Lastly, would you care to link or quote this alleged letter to the editor that Nark wrote? I don't get the Post. Thanks

I consider a "2" (a shooting guard) to be a wing player. Both the "2" and "3" postions are wings, in my opinion. Why do you make a distinction between a "2" and a "wing"?

>>Graduated St. Louis U. basketball player Chris Braun was hired as the director of Sports, Teens and Family Director of the Webster Groves and Kirkwood YMCA. I doubt Miklasz intended to have the redundant "director" in there. I guess the correct title is "Sports, Teens and Family Director." Congratulations, CB!

Considering this topic is about censorship, should estiger's crass post be allowed to stand unedited? I'm tempted to change it, but I think it best to ask the members of the board. My feeling is that Missouri's problems (possible impending probation) and the fact that tigers fans can hardly express themselves on TigerBoard has estiger understandably frustrated. He forgot himself for a moment; perhaps he should slide this time. I don't see why Billikens fans should be in the middle of a Mizzou "civil" war.

Yes, Coach Soderberg made the statement that they are primarily looking at perimeter players because they will be pretty well stocked in the lane but not so much so on the perimeter, but he also said that he wants to get a look at the collection of players he's brought in over the last two years play together and the recruit based on his knowing what he has and doesn't have. During the interview, Soderberg said, in response to a "no-hedging, rapid-fire" query that the worst NCAA rule is that coaches can't work with players individually during the summer. Taking that further (and considering the statements of Mike Jarvis a couple of years ago), it means that a coach spends the summer recruiting without really knowing what kind of players he's got coming in already. Does Brad know just how much of a ball-handler and point guard Darren Clarke is? Well, without knowing that, he's bringing in Dwayne Polk. Additionally, without knowing how Bryce Husak might or might not develop, he's putting less emphasis on big men. What I want to say is this: If a really good big man that is the type of big man Soderberg likes wants to come to SLU, he'll take him, but other than that, he's focusing on signing players that operate outside of the paint.

Well, I've yet to get a response from KFNS whether or not I can publish the recording of the interview on the web, but I have re-listened to the entire interview (it's nearly 40 minutes long, comprising 9 megabytes of a low-grade mp3 file). It was a really enjoyable listen, and I hope that those of you who missed all or part of it will get the opportunity to hear it. Roy's synopsis of the interview was good, but I'd like to correct one thing. Roy insinuated that Coach Soderberg didn't seem particularly excited about Justin Johnson, but Coach did say JJ will have a good shot at contributing this year. He said that what he like about him is that he can shoot, in addition to hitting the boards. Coach also said he thinks pretty highly of Darren Clarke's chances of contributing if he comes in and works hard and plays well. He said the guys said he shot the ball extremely well this summer. Regarding recruiting, Coach said that he plans on filling all three scholarships (vacated by Josh Fisher, Chris Sloan, and Ross Varner), and that he's looking at perimeter players, as they're pretty well stocked in the lane, but not as much on the perimeter. He also spoke highly of the high school class of 2004 in St. Louis, saying that there are six or seven players capable of playing in a top six or top seven conference. One of my favorite parts of the broadcast was when Frank asked Coach about the beginning of the winning streak that capped the regular season, and I picked that to pull out as a transcription: Frank C: What a stretch there for you, as a head coach, when you have those victories, Louisville, Cincinnati, DePaul, back to back, because at the time many people were thinking, "Boy, this is really going to be a tough season; how're you going to sell season tickets next year," and then, boom, that stretch was exactly what the doctor ordered. Brad S: Yeah, you know, it was one of those things where you stick with what you believe is the right thing to do and hope it works out, not knowing for sure that it will. I mean, we could have just as easily, you know, had Marque missed the one he had against Louisville, or whatever the case may be, we could have had that string broken easily, and things just fell into place. And I feel some real momentum with our program now, not just with boosters, not just with calls and letters, but with our players, and that's what matter the most. I saw a different level of intensity this summer, and committment, and guys really wanting to get better, and that, I think, is a reflection of the end of the season we had this past year.

I have a dial-up connection myself, and it takes a long time to UPLOAD the file. Patience is a key. When I make the file available (if KFNS grants permission), I'll try to offer options that may help those with various connections. I haven't learned that much about sound files and streaming yet.

Did anyone listen to Frankly Speaking with Frank Cusumano during the 11 o' clock hour today? Brad Soderberg was on with him the whole hour. I recorded it and will seek permission from KFNS to put it on my website.