Pistol

This topic is the single most annoying thing about being a SLU fan this decade. If there are still people out there who don't understand this, they just don't have the capacity to take on the explanation. They are provincial, and lack a fundamental understanding of SLU as both an institution and athletic program. I would be happy to sit down and explain in good detail and in a short amount of time why SLU is where they are, but I'm afraid it would feel like trying to convince people that the world is round in the 6th century.

I know the theme of the board today seems to be to never discuss any program other than SLU, but Xavier has a pretty decent model for the pre-game meal scene. They use the banquet/conference room at the end of the arena (through the windows at the end of the arena, on the same level as the concourse) and make it a pre-game room for season ticket holders. There is an usher that scans tickets at the door to ensure that only season ticket holders can get in. It opens 90 minutes before game time and closes at tip-off. They set up a few beer and soda stands, as well as stands for Skyline Chili (coneys only), LaRosa's Pizza, and a barbecue place. The room has space and seating for several hundred and it normally gets pretty close to full before each game. The food is the same price as out on the concourse, and I think the items are all things you can find out in the concourse, too. The atmosphere, food, and drink are nothing special, but they're keeping that season ticket holder money in house. The other difference is that there aren't many other options around the Cintas Center and Xavier's Campus. There's a decent on-campus bar, Ryan's Pub (mostly students and hard to sit unless you get there over an hour before tip), and a couple bar-restaurants a few blocks north of the arena, but nothing else without driving a little ways. So I'm not sure if I'd rather have a place in the arena for all season ticket holders, not that Chaifetz has room anyway, or keep it the way it is now, with the booming restaurant scene around campus. I guess there are plusses and minuses to both.

40 is the default rating for players who have not been evaluated by them yet.

Holy smokes, are you seeing the margin of victory for GC against those teams? An average of 53.6 over three games? Ridiculous. I looked up some more stats for Smith and GC. The team is 14-2, first in its division and ranked third in the Columbus area. Smith is averaging 19.2 PPG, good for tenth in the area, but some of the kids ahead of him play at tiny schools and aren't college prospects. He's also sixth in the area in rebounding, with 11.3 RPG. I know this kid was Xavier's backup choice to the guy they wound up signing (Parrom), but he could be a very nice get. A long, athletic 6-7 kid- kind of player we haven't had in a while. I'm thinking he'd be a nice 3 on our roster, though he might be playing more of a 4 right now in high school.

Thanks, Roy. I hadn't heard that about Stallings. He came to the wrong athletic department at the wrong time for that. Until Majerus, SLU's AD was an embarrassing penny pinching machine. I also hadn't heard that about Romar over Lavin. It's tough to remember the exact timeline of what happened with that situation because it's been a while and it all happened in a short span.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3872564

Clock, if you want to keep pulling me back in, fine: First, your numbers for Brad's salary aren't right. They are low; he never earned under $300,000. Also, your number for Romar is just based on one Seattle Times reporter's speculation. $500,000 would have been rounding up for him. Second, I'm aware that the assistant rankings do matter. They get paid differently, have different roles, and must have someone ready to step in if the HC leaves suddenly. But you said before that Romar was an "up and coming assistant" from the West Coast, which wasn't true. He and all the other assistants from that UCLA national championship team became head coaches two seasons later. Lavin was top, and he got the job Harrick left open. Gottfried and Romar both got HC jobs elsewhere. Third, who else was considered besides Stallings and Romar? Did Stallings want the job? I know Stallings had a few really nice years with Illinois State, but the season before the SLU job opened, his ISU team slipped back into the middle of the conference (granted, after losing their studs). Point is, there are a lot of variables when hiring a coach and if I were doing the interviewing, I'd have a hard time passing on Romar. Fourth, I wasn't comparing Romar to Pitino. That was my example of a guy using his home connections to attract players to an unlikely destination. Obviously Romar was here too short, was too early in his career, and wasn't a $2.3 million-a-year guy recruiting to a huge program with a huge budget. If Romar had stayed and had time to build the program further, who knows, he could have attracted more West Coast kids. Fifth, we're just going to disagree on this point. I wasn't happy about seeing the coach I liked leave when I was a freshman at SLU, and I was very patient with Soderberg for a few years and wasn't pleased with how things went with him in the end (recruiting failure after TL and KL, particularly). Romar's potential success is just my speculation, but I've argued that here a number of times and if people disagree despite my points, there's nothing else I can say. Sixth, judging where a coach is today proves exactly what we're arguing - what they can do. A coach has to be judged on his whole body of work, and Romar is the winner by a landslide in that department. The Wooden comparison isn't even relevant, since he is retired and is the winningest coach (title-wise) in history. Romar and Soderberg are both still active, and as nice as Soderberg's gig sounds to us outsiders, he's only there because he couldn't get another job as a D-I head coach, which is what he wants to do (except Detroit, which he turned down). Many say the program would have collapsed on Romar- it's hard to say. My guess is that since all those guys loved him, they all would have stayed. Pulley and Edwin may have been ineligible and/or may have had to transfer. Floyd's chronic injuries couldn't be helped. He may have talked Seyfert out of his homesickness. Nick Kern probably never would have showed up. But all of these guys chose SLU based on their relationships with Romar, and none of them had much time to show what they could bring to the program yet. They're all "incompletes." And I would gladly take a freshman class of Ryan Hollins and Taj Gray to go along with Marque Perry, Josh Fisher, Chris Sloan, Kenny Brown, and the rest of those guys. Plus, the local high school kids and coaches were developing good relationships with him, too (but don't take my word for it, p diddy and others have confirmed this). Seventh, you're overrating the conference switch. Yes, C-USA was better- I never said otherwise. Marquette, Cincinnati, Louisville, Memphis, DePaul- these are schools I loved playing twice a year and with which we had long-standing conference affiliations. The rest of C-USA I don't miss. The A10 is better than C-USA right now, and we had nowhere else to go. It was unfortunate, but not a deal killer. You're forgetting that we are recruiting high school kids. There are so many more important factors than the conference for them. There are a lot of things about the A10 I don't like (TV, travel distance, lack of history between SLU and others), but there are a lot of things you undersell about it. The schools are similar in size and mission to SLU, some of them have nice histories and rivalries among each other, and we have some natural foes nearby in Dayton and Xavier. There have been a lot of great players in the conference, great coaches, and some programs with the potential to make some noise every year. It could be a lot worse and you are very much dramatizing what this does to recruiting.

I know you were responding to off-the-court; I was too. Why do you assume you were responding to someone with no insight? Do you believe you have an insight into the RM-TL relationship that other posters do not? The fact that you were responding to off the court issues is what made me question singling out Femi. I didn't realize you shifted to their playing styles. Your whole argument was about TL being a good fit with Majerus based on personalities and their relationship, so I assumed you still were talking about that. If the whole point is that TL's play might be affected negatively by his relationship with Majerus, then asking how Femi will help us is not the same thing. Femi is a different player with a different personality. Maybe he and Rick work together better, I don't know. As incoming college freshmen, though, Tommie was a better player, so unless Femi is a late bloomer or develops rapidly under Rick, people would just be wishful to think he'll be a better player than Tommie when all is said and done.

Respecting the man and wanting to play for him are two different things. Tommie and Kevin had options; if they knew what they were getting into they might not have signed here, particularly Tommie. He showed up late for a few meetings with Brad, and he also had to sit (at least for the start of) some games. It wasn't all the time, though. I also don't understand why you think Femi and Tommie go hand-in-hand. Why single out Femi? Why not any of the other guys?

I'm so glad I roped you into this. That was a perfect response. MU88 says in his last post that Bucks have first priority, followed by Marquette, and so on. Therefore, I wouldn't call them 'primary,' whether preceded by a or the. They are secondary in the truest sense of the word as a Bradley Center tenant. The Bucks and Golden Eagles cannot share primary status, as blue and red would on the color wheel, as one's scheduling has priority over the other's. We are all in agreement, but I could not avoid a semantics argument.

I would contend that there can be only one 'primary' tenant. The article doesn't make a difference. The Bucks are still priority #1, as they are the NBA team. Marquette has definitely gotten more respect, as demand for tickets has been stronger than it has for SLU. The Bradley Center is not a typical NBA arena- it was done about 1989 if I have my facts right, and it doesn't have very many luxury boxes or other bells and whistles that other NBA arenas have. It's a good size for that market and has good sightlines for basketball but I'm curious to see how long they keep it around.

You have some good points in there, but you're completely forgetting about the NBA's Milwaukee Bucks. The Bucks are the Bradley Center's primary tenant, just as the Blues are Scottrade's top priority.

...And then takes off his shoes and socks, and starts crying.

That's a good point and you're not even counting all the guys that come from the other big Midwestern Catholic schools- St. Ignatius, St. Xavier (both Cincy and Louisville), Creighton Prep, Rockhurst, Brebeuf, Marquette, the ones in Chicago, and so on. A ton of SLU kids go to these high schools. I gotta hand it to the Chaminade guys that I went to high school with, who consistently showed up to games while we were in college and were among the loudest and drunkest. And they're still going to games.

No anger whatsoever, I was just pointing out the numerous holes in your argument. And yet, there are more. Romar was not paid nearly double what Brad was paid. I'm not sure where you heard that but it is incorrect. Their salaries were very comparable. Romar was part of a huge coaching staff at UCLA, with Gottfried and Lavin as the other two assistants and Harrick as the head coach. All 3 of those assistants became head coaches shortly after the championship. It doesn't matter where he was "ranked" among them because he got the head gig at Pepperdine straight after that job. Washington does not have a storied basketball history, true. But I would still take the honor of being the best head coach at a Pac 10 school instead of AD at a D-III school in Dubuque, Iowa. Just saying. How does being from the West Coast help Romar at SLU? By attracting recruits from across the country, not just in the Midwest, that's how. How does Pitino get NYC kids to play in the state of Kentucky? I would have loved to see Ryan Hollins in a SLU uniform. Romar was not here long enough to see how this would have paid off. Romar was here 3 years. Brad was here 5. I know they weren't his players, but Romar did see us into the NCAA tournament. Brad never came close in two extra years. Brad was a horrible recruiter, with two cornerstone local kids (Lisch, Liddell) that he followed with a wasted class (Knollmeyer, McGuire, Mitchell, Relphorde), a few nice finds early on (Vouyoukas, Bryant, Frericks- despite injuries, Drejaj), a few that never met their potential (Ohanon, Polk, Husak), a couple solid kids (Meyer, Brown), and some embarrassing failures (Johnson, Newbourne, Ikeakor, Clarke). Once again, that was in two more years than Romar had. I would have put money on Romar to come up with a better five-year run than that, no matter how things fell apart when he left, and which we've already discussed in another recent thread. The conference change was out of the control of the coaches. Other A10 schools have landed future NBA players, plenty of them, so that should not have been much of a loss for Brad. Keep in mind that the bottom half of C-USA was similar to the caliber of the bottom half of the A10. I know the A10 isn't as strong as a conference with Memphis, Louisville, Cincinnati, and Marquette, but I'm not sure recruits see this as a devastating change.

Some programs succeed without future NBA players, but most that sustain any level of success have future pros on the roster. I don't think these teams need lottery picks necessarily, since most programs don't have lottery picks very often. But I tend to think that you need real talent in college basketball if you're going to win. Butler hasn't had any pros in a long time and has been a very successful program. But even as good as they've been, they've only been as far as the Sweet Sixteen (twice). Can anyone think of other programs that have been very successful without NBA players? Oh yeah, and Derrick Brown on Xavier has a shot at being a lottery pick this year or next.

So your point in these paragraphs is that the AD made two mistakes: hiring Romar and not giving Soderberg the proper resources? Really? Isn't it possible that Romar could have achieved more with some resources? Isn't it also possible that Romar is a better coach than Soderberg? I'll go ahead and answer these two questions: yes to both. While you can swear up and down that hiring Romar was a mistake and Brad never got a fair crack (which is amazing to me, as Romar had less resources, no hope of a new arena, not to mention a worse AD in Woolard while Brad mostly had Levick), the rest of the college athletics world must disagree with you, as Brad is the AD at D-III Loras College and Lorenzo is on track to be the winningest coach in University of Washington history. You're also ignoring another key detail: Lorenzo asked Brad to come on as his assistant after he was fired by Wisconsin. Brad never would have been considered for the job at SLU if he hadn't already been in the program. Oh yeah, and Romar wasn't hired away from an assistant job. He was the head coach at Pepperdine. He probably only would have been considered an "up and coming" assistant when he actually was an "up and coming" assistant at UCLA, when they won a national championship. If he was a complete unknown to you, it's because you already don't care what's going on west of St. Louis, judging by your dismissive attitude toward the west coast. Using that as a knock against him makes no sense to me, as we should be trying to hire the best coach possible, regardless of where he's from. Was Doug Woolard a bad AD at SLU? Absolutely. Could we have opened up the war chest to keep Spoon from retiring? Maybe, I don't know. It obviously wasn't a top priority for Woolard or the boosters. Was Romar a bad hire? No, he was the best candidate for the job at the time. And he and Brad both could have had more success at SLU than they did if they were given the resources and support that Majerus now has.

Roy, I don't see how you took anything I said as a shot to your dedication. Everyone knows who you are. No one questions your dedication. But you said earlier in this thread that us younger fans should be buying tickets and showing older fans how its done, and that until then, the older ones pay the bills. This was after you said you stand as the game dictates (whatever that means) and you won't stand for standing's sake. You seem to have this attitude that since you've been a season ticket holder for so long and give your annual Billiken Club donation plus a little extra that you're somehow more important than the other fans in the seats. Well, behind the scenes, maybe that is true. But as far as the rest of the crowd, players, and cameras are concerned, you're no different than any of the other 9,000 fans in the house and when you sit there and do nothing, it doesn't make you any better than the guy who walked in off the street, bought a cheap ticket, and is screaming his lungs out. And I know your feelings toward Metz, but you can't deny that he's exactly what you want from a young alum- someone who is dedicated to the program and goes to the games. I live in Cincinnati, I'm 25, but I still have 2 season tickets and go whenever I can, wear SLU stuff, and make my presence known. I also have been in the Billiken Club for two years. I'm not content to sit there quietly, thinking about how entitled I am to sit there quietly because of the support I've given the program. When a game is on, every fan is equal, and every fan needs to act like one.

It's a vicious cycle. Winning first and foremost will attract more students, but so will a raucous atmosphere. I heard a lot of students complain while I was at SLU that games weren't fun. That fun atmosphere isn't being created by the very old fan base, but would be with more students.

I don't think the engineering program is a highlight of SLU's advantages over Marquette in a conversation about basketball programs. How many D-I players care about that? "Sorry, Coach Williams, UNC is nice but there is a much, much better engineering school in Rolla, Missouri."

Typical SLU fan attitude. You and Roy should petition the AD to establish a "silent section" for tough guys and geriatrics. I'm guessing this would also be the section that would have the highest number of people leaving early to beat traffic, such as those who left with 2 minutes down by 6 (surely these old folks remember just a few years back when we were down 9 with less than a minute against Houston, tied it on a tip by Phil Hunt, and won in OT).

It was gone by the time my representatives (i.e. parents) picked, but I like that section- next to the students, and surprisingly close to the floor. I have a few buddies down there as well. Maybe if there's an opening next year, I will.

Good response, Bonwich. I'm glad to see you participating and even leading. I agree that it isn't about us diehards, but I disagree that cheerleaders did much for the casual fans. I see no difference between the overall fan cheering now than I did in the Scottrade Center and when we had a full cheerleading squad, and it's actually louder because of the more appropriately sized arena. The fact is that we have too many fans who are content to sit there with their arms folded and mouths closed. It's always been that way at SLU games. I don't understand it because it looks so boring to me. The older fans aren't like this at other arenas. I go to a lot of Xavier games here in Cincinnati, and everyone gets into it throughout the game. It also helps that they have what appears to be a more across-the-board fan base in terms of age. We basically have the students and the alums of decades ago. When I go to the games, I don't see many more recent alums like me (20s, 30s, or even 40s), who are more likely to come in bigger groups, be loud, stand up, cheer, and buy more beer to help the whole process. The examples you give are well-established traditions that these schools do every game. Yeah, we could use a cue from our band to get going with certain ones, but we still don't need cheerleaders. We need fans who know how to show that they care and more young fans.

That was my whole point, yes. We need the other filler because there isn't enough impressive history to sell the fans on, and those bits don't get the crowd into it anyway, unfortunately.

I don't understand your response- aren't we on the same page? I want people to show support throughout the whole game.