cheesycow
-
Posts
1,927 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by cheesycow
-
-
Wichita St is a better program than both SLU and Mizzou.
Wichita St has had a better couple of years than SLU and Mizzou.
-
Well, until we're offered or not, it doesn't change the goal of continuing the winning ways of the past 3 seasons and hoping the A10 builds upon it's strengths. A case could be made that last year our top 10 teams were better than the 10 Beast teams. If the A10 can remain that superiority maybe we can negotiate a better TV deal. Our markets are similar to their's, so it's up to the individual schools to get fully behind their BB programs. Fordham for starters. Be nice to see them be viewed as a better program than St. John's.
The NYC market is pointless for college sports. People here just don't care unless it was the old big east tournament.
-
Serious question. When you come to this board, do you just type in keywords like Mizzou, Missouri, SPUMAC, etc. into the search function in the upper right? If there are any new mentions, you post a response back. If there aren't any mentions you go on with your day.
I dare say your reply rate on the few times people talk Mizzou on this board is about 90%. Your reply rate on anything that deals purely with SLU is about 0.02%.
I read almost everything but I know way less than most posters about specific SLU stuff so I typically comment on more national stuff or Mizzou stuff because I feel knowledgeable enough to comment.
-
I have identified myself as a fan of both programs and have never hiden that. I think you are wrong, but I don't care to argue with you since it really doesn't matter. If you ask people within the college basketball community they would tell you that Mizzou is a good job and a better program than Wichita State regardless of the recent success the Shockers are having (one huge tournament run followed by a great season). I like your narrative though, I love the faction of the Billiken fanbase that hates Mizzou so vehemently.
The Wichita state is a better program narrative meshes well with SLU is a better program narrative so it'll be a popular one here.
-
Not sure Mizzou will ever lose casual fans simply by playing a few games against SLU. Instead, Mizzou knows that they risk the appearance of superiority simply by playing us. Just like with a Presidential campaign, when the many challengers in the primary (non-Power 5 schools) take the stage against each other, they look "small." but when the primary is over and a candidate is selected, and when this candidate takes the stage with the incumbent President (Power 5 school), the superiority gap closes. Now, if the challenger is unprepared, mis-speaks and/or looks foolish (the non-Power 5 school loses by 20+ points), superiority is confirmed. Otherwise, if an equal performance, then the superiority argument vanishes.
For years, Mizzou loyalists have said: "We're better b/c we are in the Big 8/12, we play/beat KU each year... Now, they play in the SEC and lose to Florida and Kentucky each year... and to Vandy, and to Old Miss and to Arkansas and to...),
Yeah the Mizzou faithful have never really recovered from that loss to SLU ~15 years ago.
-
Question I've always had, but know nothing about him. Why isn't Tim fuller in line for the job? Seems like he was so important to keep and since he stayed I assume he's a mizzou guy not a Haith guy?
Fuller's known for his recruiting but not his coaching acumen, per se. I imagine he'll get his head coaching shot at some point. I know Florida A&M offered him the job.
-
From the radio on February 27th
Wow so all of the theories here are confirmed.
-
That is complete bs. The mere act of being unwilling to play a team that is basically your equivalent in a home and home is pretentious.
Just because Alden or others have slick non answers to the questions when the media asks about it does not mean that their demand that SLU do something more than a home and home (like a 2 for 1) does not stink of "having the unpleasant quality of people who want to be regarded as more impressive, successful, or important than they really are."
p.s. I took that last part directly from Merriam-Webster's definition of pretentious.
please link me alden ever commenting on it.
-
What's the point of having a bragging rights game against a school that's not even in the same state or conference? I will never understand what the point is or ever was....
Wouldn't a bragging rights game against SLU be more logical? For years, Mizzou has had this pretentious attitude that they are "out of slu's league" and should not play us because it would hurt their rpi or whatnot. Oh how the tables have turned...
It's been played every year since 1980, with matchups happening before that. Are you saying Mizzou should end that series to play a game against SLU? It's one of the biggest games on the STL basketball calendar every year.
And again, any pretentiousness is not from Mizzou itself just from Mizzou fans you interact with.
-
They play in StL every year against IL. So, that is not the reason. The reason they have given in the past is that they see no benefit to playing us inn a home and home series. They have offered to play a 2 home at MU and 1 in StL but not at our home court. Actually, I really do not care if we ever play them - I see no point in it anymore. I just don't like their disingenious attitude.
First of all that game against IL is Bragging Rights.
Second of all, Mizzou has never given a reason. Fans have speculated as to possible reasons.
-
This will hurt Xavier's rpi. I would rather play a good program and academic school like Vandy than SPUMAC.
okay.
-
I thought their argument was that they didn't want to play mid-majors?
I think they just don't want to play in St. Louis unless it's bragging rights.
-
My gut tells me ESPN sits on this story instead of breaking it. They don't want to hurt their relationship with the NBA.
That doesn't seem to stop them when it comes to college football.
-
Serious question: If the Clippers were not in the playoffs and this got leaked would he have still been banned? Or would he have received a large fine along with the league working behind the scenes to make him sell?
Sadly, I believe the later would have occurred. The NBA's problem was that there was zero time for this to blow over since the Clippers were in the middle of a heated series. And, like many pointed out, sponsors began to pull out because they felt they needed to take swift action before the next game was played.
I think the fact that TMZ leaked it played a bigger role than them being in the postseason. If it had been ESPN I don't know that it gets the same kind of national attention. I could be wrong but it just seems that this transcended being a sports story because of the source.
-
This was primarily a business decision by the NBA, not a moral one. Sponsors were dropping like flies. It was a major distraction as the playoffs are getting started. He has a long history of this stuff and the NBA can be questioned why they didn't enforce more discipine earlier, but this appeared to be the final straw for Sterling. Think!
A lot of people are trying to place this event in a vacuum. Context matters for business decisions.
-
Also, since I think a lot of people didn't read the article, it's not even the university "banning" anything. It was a group of students starting a poster campaign to raise awareness about gender stereotyping. Basically a harmless exercise blown up by a conservative leaning website.
-
Punishments were definitely in order, but selling the whole damn franchise is way too much... this man, and I cite earlier in this thread as my reference, took the organization from an estimated $12 million worth to $575 million, yet know he has to get rid of the team for stating his opinion. NOW. I repeat, NOW I AM NOT SAYING THAT ANYTHING HE DID WAS RIGHT OR JUSTIFIABLE, AT ALL BY ANY MEANS. What I am saying is what he said technically isn't illegal, it's just incredibly backwards and disgusting. That being said, I don't think he should have had to sell his whole association. That was his baby and the verdict the committee reached was not too merciful.
Crediting Sterling for the valuation of the Clippers seems wildly inaccurate. The Clippers have been the worst franchise in all of sports for almost his entire tenure, largely because of him.
He approved the constitution which gave his association the right to vote on this matter, and the fact that the vote might be 29-0 is pretty telling if you ask me.
-
Let's be careful with the word "stupid" here, folks... I'm not the Mizzou fan.
When I asked the question I was thinking Duke was a public university and I was questioning why the government was able to ban these students and faculty's freedom of speech. (Does the amendment not apply in that theoretical situation?) And what kind of punishment is in order for violations of these new bans? A slap on the wrist? A fine? Expulsion? Public execution? Having to watch Mizzou basketball? (*crowd cringes in terror*)
I'm not a lawyer so I don't know how the first amendment applies to public universities.
Duke, however, is a private institution.
-
1) My avatar is better than your avatar.
2) The First Amendment gives any American the right to say things that prove they're too stupid to understand the First Amendment -- and not get harassed by the government for saying those things.
I think this is the part where we meet up and bring paystubs.
-
Freedom of speech? Honest question, how does this not violate that civil right?
That's a misapplication of the 1st amendment. Only the government can't impinge on your freedom of speech. If people were getting arrested for the things they say that would be a violation of the 1st amendment.
-
Here is a good article on Fuller. Reading between the lines, I'd be surprised if he stayed but who knows. Similarly, I'd be surprised if both Gant and Wright stayed with none of the coaches that recruited them still being there. If both left, Mizzou would be looking at 5 open scholarships for next season.
Fuller is staying and Gant reaffirmed his commitment. No word on Wright yet.
-
Great take! In the same way that you were the only one to see the UC/Xavier brawl as a hate crime against white people, you have cut through the foo foo media spin again and gotten to the heart of the real story here... Doc Rivers is a hypocrite for taking the side "with his fellow blacks"! Brilliant stuff.
+1
-
1. I'm pretty sure his teams play a tight man-to-man defense and will get out in run, but he also runs a lot of set plays
2. Kevin Punter, a 3 star juco guard decommitted and will visit SMU soon. One of their recruits reaffirmed his commitment but I don't remember his name. I think he's a 4 star big, though
1 is correct, as far as I've read.
As far as 2 goes, Punter decommitted and Jakeenan Gant is who you're thinking of but neither he nor Namon Wright have officially affirmed their commitment, so it's a bit of a waiting game,
-
I wouldn't have a problem with Mizzou not playing SLU if I heard a logical argument. Still haven't heard one. Mizzou leads the all time series 21-19 so the argument that SLU "hasn't been competitive until recently" simply isn't valid.
I wish Mizzou played Kansas, too. I try not to get too worked up about it.
OT: Mizzou to hire Kim
in Billikens.com Main Board
Posted
Not everything certainly but Wichita State has also had a better couple years than Indiana and UCLA.