MU88

Absolutely no connection to Marquette. None.

Yes, I think it would be an excellent hire. I know am getting ripped for spreading rumors, but this isn't a rumor. BTW, to the guy that made the suggestion, he is not affiliated with Marquette, nor has he ever been associated with Marquette.

I am kind of in uncomfortable position. I know how stressful a coaching search can be for fans. So, I want to say more, but right now, I can't. I know you guys don't have any reason to trust me, but my information is 100%, positively, accurate.

No.

I know a candidate that has been informally contacted to gauge his interest. So, the search has begun. He is an assistant on a team that will be in the NCAAs. Known as a great recruiter.

Linc Darner at UWGB would be a great hire. He is a rising star. His team won the D-2 national championship last year and got GB in the NCAAs this year. Was a finalist for the DePaul job last time it opened up. If you are looking at assistants, TJ Otzelburger makes a ton of sense. One of the best recruiters in the country. Recruited most of Iowa State's current roster. Has been the associate head coach at ISU and Washington, under Romar. Doesn't hurt that he is a Catholic boy from Milwaukee. Both would make excellent hires.

NBA is a boring game. Too many one on one and two man plays. It may be better if Milwaukee had an NBA team. Listened to Hammond at a private event a couple of weeks ago. Ilyasova has a contract that makes him a trade bait in the final year of his deal. The team can opt out of the contract for $200,000. Hammond thinks he can turn Ilyasova's contract into a first round pick in a couple years from a team needing cap relief. He also said, Exum is not a point, he just thinks he is one. He really liked Randle, but you could tell Parker was his favorite. He was a bit indifferent about the Kansas kids. As for the rest of the team, Sanders is awful. No court sense on the court, no common sense off the court. Being suspended by the league for the positive dope test is just the lastest screw up. Henson has regressed this year. Don't know why. Not athletic enough for the 4, not strong enough for the 5. I like Giannes, but he has a long way to go. Needs strength.

Kohl bought the Bucks for less than $20 million. He has no direct heirs. Kohl has a net worth of several hundred million dollars in addition to the value of the Bucks. The team is profitable at this point in time. Kohl has promised to make a "significant" contribution to the new arena, even if he sells the team. There are rumors that he might contribute the profit from his sale of the team towards a new arena as a legacy gift to the community. He has also repeatedly stated that he will not sell the team to anyone who will move it. So, under that backdrop, there are rumors of a sale. As someone said, Junior Bridgeman is a favorite to be involved. He is one of the 250 richest African-Americans in the US, with an estimated net worth of around $400 million. He is currently part owner of the Kings. Bridgeman got involved with the Kings to help keep them in Sacramento. JB probably can't by the team outright, but it ts rare for a single individual to buy a team nowadays. Most of the time, it is some kind of group. Hence, there are rumors that the owner of the Brewers might be interested. He too has indicated that he might contribute to a new arena. Other names mentioned as potential owners include Oprah, a native or Milwaukee, and Craig Leapold, NHL owner who married into the SC Johnson family. Leapold lives in Racine, just south of Milwaukee. In view of the foregoing, I am optimistic that the Bucks will not leave Milwaukee.

Well, you can panic, although I don't think its necessary. PC President indicated during the press conference that would be reviewing membership during the middle of next year (I am assuming he meant middle of the next school year, so around Christmas) Things are fallings exactly the way I heard two months ago. 10 teams to start, including X, Butler and Creighton. Four schools fighting for the last 2 spots. SLU, Dayton, VCU and Richmond. With Georgetown leading the charge, the east coast schools are vehemently against VCU for reasons that have nothing to do with academics.

Well, I have been a member on this board for a long, long time, probably since we were in the same conference. Given that we may be in the same conference, I am interested in what you guys are hearing. As for UConn and UC, the issue was the BE football conference. There will be no football in the C7, hence, no decisions will be made with football in mind. If UC and UConn are fine with that, I would be perfectly happy with them in the conference. I know its a minority opinion. But, I would rather have a stronger conference, then keep out those schools simply because they play a sport outside the conference. I view it no differently than Providence's hockey program. If they decide to leave in the future, so be it. Losing those 2 would not have any long term effects on the conference.

You are wrong on a number of things. Creighton is a long time rival of MU, having played almost 100 times. I would guess MU has played Creighton at least twice as much as SLU. Historically, outside of the 15 year period between 1989 and 2004, MU has minimal history playing SLU (outside of football, that is). In addition, the President of Creighton is on the MU board. It could be a reason why MU has actively supported inviting Creighton to the new conference. Further, Creighton would be a good draw in Milwaukee, at least as good as SLU, which has never drawn all that well, There are a fair number of MU students come from Omaha and MU actively recruits the area. That said, I have heard nothing about MU supporting or not supporting SLU as a member of the conference. MU has had some issue with Dayton in the past, which could be an issue. But, I haven't heard anything about them either. My understanding is the east coast schools are against VCU for a variety of issues. Richmond is being pushed for one of the final two spots by Georgetown. As for undeserving of praise, that is your opinion. It seems to have touched a nerve that MU doesn't consider SLU a rival and isn't fighting to get SLU into the conference. However, given the minimal history between the schools on the court, its not surprising that few MU fans who are over say 45 or under say 28 consider SLU a rival. But for the Jesuit connection, the schools have little history. So, like most MU fans, I really don't care one way or another if SLU gets in the new conference. I (and most fans I know) feel the same about Richmond, VCU and Dayton too. None of them stir up any excitement or great distain for that matter. They are simply warm bodies getting the conference to 12. Personally, if they were interested, I would let UC and UConn park their non-football sports in the C7 till the get in a BCS conference. Those programs would certainly increase the national appeal (and potential tv revenue) of the new conference. However, that does not look likely.

Well, as to point 1, the tv offer is evidently from Fox Sports 1. Just like ESPN was, its a new network. Unlike ESPN in 1979, Fox Sports 1 has an over the air network behind it. The new conference could get significant exposure during NFL games, and maybe even, a game of the week on Fox after football ends. Sunday afternoon BE basketball on Fox has a nice ring to it. As for your other point,the original BE had 5 of the Catholics in the C7, Pitt, Syracuse, BC and Uconn. So, 2 public schools. UConn and DePaul are about the same size. UConn, like DePaul now, was also a pretty much a doormat with no fans for most of the 70s and 80s. If the new conference adds VCU, its about the same size as Pitt, albeit in a smaller market. Syracuse is a wildcard because it is a fairly big private with a pretty large following in NYC. So, while the old BE might have had a bit larger alumni base, its was not that much larger than what is being proposed right now.

For basketball, 12 doesn't make a lot of sense, but for increasing the number of games available for broadcast. However, how valuable is a Dayton-Seton Hall game on a Tuesday? I think people assume 12 is a good number because football conferences think it is, but I am not so sure its a good number for basketball. 10 is a good since it allows for an 18 game home-home schedule. 12 does allow for a few more midwestern teams, which will reduce travel costs for non-revenue sports. Actually, 9 isn't a bad number. The old BE had 9 for many years. Leaves room for some nice out of conference, made for tv matchups. I think the 7 view themselves as a league already. I would guess the reduced payout would be akin to an enterance fee for the other schools. Long term, I think everyone will receive the same payout. I also question ESPN reporting on a FOX offer. Doesn't make much sense. ESPN ceased being a news source years ago. There has to be an alterior motive for the report.

Most likely, you can find a stream for the game on Wiziwig.

Actually, Cream made more his last year at MU ($2.35 million) than his first year at Indiana. MU will match any offer for Buzz. What they can't match is the lure of home. Buzz went to OCU and his wife is from Oklahoma City, I believe. If his family wants to move closer to home, there is nothing MU can do to stop it. That said, he is very happy at MU. Plus, he has a huge buyout. The number $3.8 million has been floated. Not sure if that is correct. I have heard its very large. In any event, will OU pay it, after coughing up over $2 million for Capel plus give Buzz $2+ million per year? That is a huge investment. BTW, I don't think Rick would want to come back to MU. He has reconnected with the school over the past few years, but I think there are still some hard feelings. I just read that Jeff Goodman wrote in is online chat that Rick was unhappy at SLU. I am a little surprised. He seemed energized when he took the job. I wonder if its true.

About $13.4 million Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

MU spends about $10.3 million on hoops. The most in the Big East. NY Times Article

No offense, but why should MU play SLU? It makes no economic sense. SLU is going to want a home-home, so that means MU has to give up a home game to play in St. Louis. So, MU gives up $400,000-$500,000 in gate revenue, for what? It is doubtful the game will be on national tv. MU has no players from the St. Louis area. The game will not draw more in Milwaukee than a traditional buy game. It doesn't make sense. Now, I am sure that MU would be willing to play a 1 and done in Milwaukee. But, SLU won't do that, nor should they. Further, MU has a limited history with SLU. It is not a longtime rival. Yes, we were in the same conference for about 15 years, but prior to that, the schools rarely played. In the past 15 years, I believe that MU has played at Loyola, Santa Clara, Fordham, Xavier, Dayton, Detroit, San Francisco, and others. However, with a $23 million athletic budget, the school needs to play as many home games as possible. It already has an ongoing home-home with Wisconsin, and has 2 for 1s with UWGB and UWM. That leaves room for 1 road game (2 on the outside) and a tournament each year. Next year, MU is playing at USC. In 2011, MU is playing at LSU. Sorry, ESPN has is significantly more interest in BCS schools, than A-10 schools. Put it this way, should SLU play a home-home with say Drake, a school with which SLU has a fairly long history with (83 games), even if it didn't make financial sense? Why not? Why isn't Rick willing to give up a home gate to do a favor for an old rival? What about Loyola? SLU has a long history with them. Its another Jesuit school. I don't see SLU having home-homes with them? Detroit anyone? Schools have to do what is in the best interest of their program to be successful. We are dealing with big money here.

The NBA is a little different than the NHL. The Bucks rarely play back-to-back home games. Consequently, as primary tenant, MU gets second choice of dates, after the Bucks, but before the Admirals, Iron and concerts. MU has will 4 Saturday games in a row during January and February. I know a lot of schools that get booted out of their off campus arenas for ice shows, etc. That supposedly won't happen as a primary tenant. As for the BC, its a terrific arena. Its almost in as good shape as the day it opened. However, it does have issues which primarily effect the income stream for the Bucks. The problems really have no effect on MU. The arena is pristine. It only has 40 or so luxury boxes. Too many of the seats are in the upper bowl, instead of downstairs. There is no room for expansion for shops, year round restaurants, a hall of fame, etc. NBA teams make a lot of money off these side businesses. Finally, the arena was build for hockey so some of the sight lines stink since you are a little far from the action. However, being 6 blocks from campus, its almost an on campus arena. From that perspective, its one of the best in the country. I have been to a number of arenas throughout the country, and the BC ranks right up there. Weighing in on the Spoon vs. Deane debate, I think Deane was probably the equal of Spoon as a coach. Spoon recruited slightly better players. More importantly, Spoon seemed to get people excited about SLU basketball in St. Louis. Deane did the opposite. Deane rubbed certain people the wrong way (although he was always willing to sociallize with the alums). He liked to have cocktails and he didn't pull punches. He also didn't have a lot of vision for the school. You may think MU has limited potential, but you can't say it. Like any fanbase, no one wants to be told you can't be the best. I think SLU's future is bright. There is no reason SLU can't be battling X each year for the A-10 title. But, you have to be patient. Let Rick's kids get some experience. Next year will be a work in progress, but I see a lot of potential for a terrific year in 10-11.

Facilities: The AL at Marquette is considered the finest practice facility in the country according to Sporting News. The BC is about 6 blocks from campus (as was the arena before it). It is considered a primary tenant in that building. Until SLU's new arena was built, MU enjoyed a huge advantage over the past few years. Budgets: MU had the 4th highest bball expenses in the country last year, around $8 million. SLU's budget was around $2.4 million. Even in CUSA, MU spent a lot on hoops. Recruiting: MU rarely recruits locally. I am not sure if there are any Wisconsin kids on the roster this year, but for Matthews. Al made a name for itself recruiting NY. Chicago has produced many of MU's greats, Ellis, Rivers, McNeal, etc. Sure, a Novak or Chones comes around once in a while, but not all that often. Wade and BE: Little or nothing to do with MU's entry in the BE. MU almost entered the BE with ND in the early 90s. It was a long term goal put in place by MU prior AD. I think their relationship with ND was MU's foot in the door. Success: I am not sure Wade is the reason MU is successful now. MU has always been successful to differing degrees. 40 winning seasons in 43 years is proof of that. Joining the BE allowed MU has allowed MU to take a good program and make it better. Is luck a part? Sure, but you kind of make your own luck. 10+ years of banging on the door of the BE coupled with a huge financial investment in the program put them in this position. That said, a few mistakes and it all could slip away. Staying good requires a lot more than luck. BTW, O'Neil was a huge potty mouth and a pain in the heinie. But, the man could recruit and coach on the defensive end. Deane inherited a Sweet 16 with a top recruiting class coming in. Deane was a terrific, albeit eccentric coach, but he was a terrible recruiter. After his statement that an NIT should be considered a good year and that the best MU fans could hope for was an occasional NCAA run, he was fired. The administration found his comments unacceptable.

Most MU alums view Deane as a great coach who couldn't recruit. MU graduates more engineers than any Catholic school. It is very highly regarded and is about to build a new $100 million Discovery Learning Complex on campus. MU peaked at the right time to get into the BE. But, truth be told, MU was working on BE membership for 15 years. According to MU's old AD, SJU changed their vote when ND was admitted or MU would have been in the BE in the early 90s. So, I am not sure how much Wade, the Final Four and Crean had to do with it. I think MUs longterm success has made it a fairly easy job. MU has had something like 40 winning seasons in the past 43 years. The fan support is extremely strong. Attendance has averaged over 10,000 per game for every year but one since the late 60s. Poor facilities led to the downfall of the program in the late 80s and probably hurt recruiting through Crean's early years, but the AL changed all that. So, why is MU successful? In a radio interview last week, Buzz was asked what surprised him most during his tenure at MU. His response was the administration. He said he has never been around an administration that was so supportive of the basketball team. There is nothing that he has asked for that hasn't been provided. He said it was the finest administration that he has ever been around. No reason why SLU can't be successful. Although, I am not convinced an on-campus arena is a must. Georgetown does pretty good without one. Other schools like Creighton also do fairly well. You have a quality coach in place. You have new facilities. Right now, I think all you need is patience. You need your freshman and soon-to-be freshmen to grow up. If the administration at SLU continues to support the team, good things will happen. Viewing it as an outsider, it seems to me, that in the past, SLU's commitment to D-1 hoops was up and down. Romar was learning on the job during his SLU tenure, and why anyone would think hiring Soderburg was a good idea is beyond me. I remember having an ongoing disagreement on this board about the guy after he was hired. While he won at SDSU, his records were worse than the coaches prior to and directly after him. His style of play alienated fans, and he couldn't recruit. Very, very poor choice. Anyway, things are looking up and if you stay the course, you should be at the top of the A-10 shortly.

I read on another board that he has high interest in Wisconsin (his mom is evidently an alum), but they are out of scholarships. He may be waiting to see if something frees up. As with all message board ramblings, take it with a grain of salt.

I am not sure anyone can expect a schedule with multiple high major home games. It just doesn't happen anymore. Most schools need to maximize the number of home games for budget reasons. The only reason high major schools travel are: 1) rivalry games (this is happening less and less); 2) made for tv games; 3) play a game in a recruits home town or for a favor to a coaching friend; 4) to play in an exempt tourney; or 5) to fix a scheduling problem/mistake. They don't need to play a tough non-conference schedule to get in the NCAAs because their conference schedule is so tough. There aren't very many exceptions. Marquette is a prime example. They are playing Wisconsin at home (home-home rivalry series); an exempt tourney in Chicago (which will be close to a home game); Nashville against UT in the BE/SEC challenge; and at NC State on tv. The home non-conference schedule if full of buy games. Major schools don't play home/homes anymore without a reason. Even North Carolina's best non-conference home games last year were against Valpo, Nevada, and Kent State. Decent, but nothing to write home about. Given the changing circumstances surrounding college basketball, I am not sure that SLU's home schedule is going to upgrade significantly even with the new arena.

Rick quit to become an assistant with the Bucks. He then left the Bucks for Ball State. I have no doubt that RM isn't going to MU. Rick felt like he was under too much pressure at MU. I don't think he wants to come back. By the same token, I don't think MU is interested. Rick and MU have made nice, nice over the past few years. I think both are at peace with the current situation. Heard today that MU is willing to pay around $2 million for the next coach. It has the nicest practice facilities in the country (according to Sporting News a couple of years ago). The team is talented with almost all its starters returning next year. It has one of the highest budgets in college basketball at around $5.8 million. Its a good job. There is a reason that it has had only a couple of losing seasons in the past 40 years. It will attract a number of highly qualified applicants. Will it be Miller, Bennett, etc? I don't know. People change jobs for all sorts of reasons. It won't be because of a lack of pay or because the facilities are subpar.

Okay, but its not true. The BE had 8, the same number as the A-10. But, so what? The BE had a higher out of conference strength of schedule so their schedules could not have been too bad. As for scheduling non-BCS teams, its a matter of money. It makes no financial sense for schools that draw well to play on the road. I am a Drake and an Marquette alum. So, I see both sides of the issue. But, I understand why MU won't play a home-home with Drake. Let's say Drake draws 7000 per game at probably less than $20 per seat. So, Drake's gate is around $140,000. MU averages 15,000-16,000 per game at $25-$30 per seat. Face it, except for maybe Memphis, no mid-major, is going sell any significant number of seats, much less fill the BC. So, you are looking at a gate of $375,000 minimum for the Drake game, and nothing the following year when you go to their place. Why give up a home game against Little Sisters of the Poor to play a home-home against Drake, when you are going to lose the $375,000 gate when you play anyone? Drake isn 't going to compensate MU enough to give up that home game, because their gate isn't large enough. So, for financial reasons, MU plays Florida Gulf Coast one year and Coppin State the next, instead of Drake. Non-con road games should only be played by schools with high attendance if 1) its a tradional rival; or 2) its part of an exempt tourney; or 3) it made for tv with some extra cash on the table. Sure there are a few exceptions, you are stuck scheduling, you want to do a favor for another program, etc. Otherwise, it makes no financial sense. This argument that BCS schools are afraid to play non-BCS schools on the road is silly.