Pistol

How was I being contradictory? I said the 2006 team had a hyperinflated RPI, didn't play anybody, and didn't beat anybody. Oh yeah, and they failed to make noise in the Valley tournament. Then they became the team on Selection Sunday that the CBS cameras could film crying. They figured out they needed a marquee win the following year, beat Wisconsin to take care of that, but then uh oh, early exit in the Valley tournament to a much lower seed. Now they're sitting there sweating it with double digit losses after getting their shorts handed to them in their conference tournament, and it's deja vu all over again. I am baffled at how that is contradictory. Both of those teams had major strikes against them and had to battle loads of other qualified teams for the last spots in the Dance. Just because one team has one major flaw (no big opponents, no big wins) and the next year there is another major flaw (double digit losses, big loss right away in the conference tournament) doesn't mean they are contradictory. It's a moving target and the committee has different decisions to make every year. Also, I never wrote anything in my argument upholding the A10. Granted, the A10 is a superior conference and unfortunately was too balanced for its own good this year, but that had nothing to do with my argument about MSU. I do agree with you about your last point. For example, I'd rather see those 3 WCC teams get in than the .500 teams from the SEC.

Chances are it will stand for at least a while. I don't know if there is the money or sense of urgency to make anything happen. My guess is that a couple other departments will creep in and have some minimal uses there, but no major renovations will take place. They won't put much money into it other than very basic upkeep and it will deteriorate for a few more years until they finally decide to knock it down. Just a guess. I know that the housing department would desperately want more housing to draw some of the off-campus students into shiny new on-campus housing. They area at Vandeventer and Laclede was supposed to be more Village apartments before they ran out of money and had to come up with the dreadful Trova sculpture park- which is now, thankfully, an extra field for intramurals/rugby/ultimate frisbee/general use. They also had to tear down some Grand Forest apartments for the arena. The problem is that funding is never what they need it to be to get their master plans done. They wanted Clemens and Walsh to be converted into brand new suite-style quads for freshman with a general room adjoining four to six single bedrooms. They were short on funds and also ran into a problem with load-bearing walls in Clemens. It still got renovated, but not to the point they wanted. I don't know what else the space could be used for, but I'm sure there are plenty of departments with some ideas. I am more a fan of the old brick buildings in Midtown than those built between WWII and the 1980s (Ritter, Marguerite, Pius Library, Fusz, the science buildings and Kelley Auditorium) that SLU either built or bought, all of which are kind of ugly. I'm looking forward to the day those can be replaced. I like to keep the good old buildings around, but I really don't see much use in the WPG.

I would take a Tournament berth and humiliation over not making it at all. Anyway, if we won the A10 Tournament, I think we'd be a 13 or 14 seed. Remember that Xavier got a 14 seed (totally screwed) in 2006 and almost knocked off 3-seed Gonzaga, losing 79-75 to Adam Morrison's bunch. They had a 21-10 record before that loss. A 16 seed is generally reserved for the smallest conferences with unlikely winners and I still don't think we'd get stuck with a 15, either. We would be 20-14 (19-14 with Houston Baptist taken out) with a sweep in AC.

Two things, Roy: 1. Missouri State fired Hinson a lot earlier than SLU fired Soderberg. The timing of Soderberg's firing made it a lot more head-scratching than had it been done in early March like Hinson's. By the time Brad was let go, most coaches had already made their moves. For that reason, it didn't make sense to most people, not knowing we had a potential ace in our sleeve with Majerus. The athletic department at MSU has given itself a lot more time to find someone by firing Hinson early in case they don't have someone waiting in the wings already. 2. You put in another thread that they got screwed in 2006 and 2007. Their final RPI in 2006 was 22, making them the team with the highest RPI in history not to make the Tournament. Hearbreaking- yes. Screwed- no way. The 2005-06 edition of Missouri State was all smoke and mirrors. They didn't play anybody, and they didn't beat anybody. All they did was expose the big flaws in the RPI system and the committee fortunately saw through it. Last year they had the win over Wisconsin but then shot themselves in the foot by laying an egg in the Valley tournament. 22-10 is very respectable, but if you have double digit losses in a non-major conference and bow out early in your conference tournament, you just made the committee's decision a lot easier.

I can't open this at work. Could someone copy and paste the list of all the teams, players, and awards?

Those are incredible (I especially appreciate the Afroman and "What's the Difference?" graphs). Apparently there is someone out there with total recall for popular rap songs, a basic knowledge of Microsoft charts and graphs, and an unbelievable amount of free time at work.

Let it die. I can't believe the "we should be in the Valley" camp still exists. Unreal. There are so many reasons that SLU made the right move that I'm not going to go into it for the 20th time. By the way, awesome name, 420. I remember when that reference was mildly amusing to my peers. Then I turned 14.

That probably should have been a foul when they inbounded to Anderson but it's a tough one to call. He needs to secure the ball better to make that an easy call for the refs. As for the over-the-backboard make by Shipp, I like that it counted. It wasn't from behind the backboard completely, just on the corner. I know the rule says that if the ball passes over any point of the backboard, it shall be ruled out of bounds. The way I see it is that if the guy shoots it from inside the lane, it's nearly impossible not to have it cross the corner of the backboard, but if he's outside the key I think it should count. I think Shipp's feet were outside the paint. The crazy part is that UCLA has won it's last two games on questionable calls, but is a lock for a #1 seed in the west, which would put them in Anaheim for the first and second rounds and Phoenix for the regional. I like them back in the Final Four this year. Also, to all the Howland and UCLA haters- why? Howland has been a great coach there and run what appears to be a clean program. He's recruited well and gotten to the Final Four two years in a row. I don't know what I'm missing here and I don't think there's a controversy with the refs on his or UCLA's side like there is with Duke.

Did you mean "Hysterical" or "Historical?" That would give me more insight as to how you actually feel about preserving the building. As with the example of the Old Red Gym at Wisconsin-Madison, there is absolutely no comparison between the WPG and Cupples House. The Cupples House has been on the National Register of Historic Places since 1976 and cited by the National Victorian Society as an outstanding example of historic preservation and restoration in 1989. And the West Pine Gym- none of that. Your argument about buildings in the city and buildings on SLU's campus makes no sense to me. SLU deservedly has autonomy over the buildings on its campus and can do whatever it wants with them (unless they're on the Historic Register, like Cupples House). If WPG were in another area of the city, not on a university campus, of course it would be a more lengthy process to tear down. It has nothing to do with historic designation- because it has none- but rather because it costs money to tear down and the city wouldn't do that unless there were development plans for that space. For all of those who really want to keep the West Pine Gym standing, how familiar are you with the building? Have you seen more than just the entrance, gym, and stands at a couple games? If that's all your knowledge of the building, I encourage you to step in there sometime and kick the tires. Walk around, check out the hallways, offices, bathrooms, basement, and whatever isn't locked up. If after further examination of the building you can think of a reasonable way to renovate/reuse the building, I would be interested to hear it. I absolutely love old architecture and support the preservation of good buildings from the past, and it breaks my heart that so many significant buildings have been torn down. The West Pine Gym is not one of them and the university could make much, much better use of that prime campus space.

Comparing the WPG with the Old Red Gym is just not right. Every building is different. Both are old gyms; one is a significantly larger facility with plenty of usable space and is on the National Register of Historical Places (since 1993); the other can claim none of that. I'm going to assume you've walked around the WPG enough to know what it's like in there. Now look at this: http://www.jgwaarchitects.com/portfolio/ad...nsin-armory.htm http://hum.lss.wisc.edu/uwhist/redgym.html It's not even close. Even if by some miracle SLU is able to convert the WPG into something like that, it would not even deserve the title "poor man's version" of the Old Red Gym. When you look at the list of all the departments housed in the ORG, those groups at SLU would have to move from significantly larger spaces in DuBourg Hall and the Busch Student Center into smaller, older spaces in the WPG. The ORG was originally built in 1894 for a number of uses; the WPG went up 26 years later pretty much just as a gym and the basic offices that go with it. I would also be surprised if SLU has the same amount of people who love the WPG as Madison had for the Old Red Gym, and therefore I would assume that there will be a lot less interest and money people are willing to devote to restoring it properly for other use. I emphasize "properly" because as it stands now, there are no other reasonable uses except as a horribly dated athletic facility.

I'm also not a fan of that rule. Plus, I don't understand why WIU and other schools ever refuse to let a kid out of his LOI if he makes it 100% clear that he wants to play elsewhere. I understand talking with him and trying to get him to stick with it, but everyone loses when they don't release him.

That seems more likely to me than just gutting the inside per Nark's suggestion, but even that would be a challenge. The walls, floors, stairs, etc.- everything in there is very, very thick old brick, stone, or concrete. Some of those walls are like a bomb shelter. I would also suspect most of them are load-bearing and that it would be nearly impossible to change the layout at all. I'm guessing they'll either keep it pretty close to what it is now or raze it completely. I hope they just demolish it to keep the campus modern. If I were a prospective student or parent interested in a particular department of the school and that department was using an 80+ year old former gym for offices, I might have some second thoughts.

Kris Humphries was the recruit that overshadowed Clarke at Hopkins HS. He originally signed with Duke and then changed his mind because he wanted to stay closer to home. Duke let him out of his letter of intent and he signed with Minnesota and wasn't forced to sit out or lose any eligibility.

I knew Pius had some issues but libraries are the toughest buildings to change/renovate/expand/move. In a dream world, they would tear it down and rebuild a good one where it stands. That is near impossible, though. I don't understand how WPG could serve as an extra library space, either. I always hated Pius- very ugly and hard to navigate. Then again, I didn't even use it until the end of my sophomore year and probably went there about 5 or 6 times ever. There are always a few empty beds on campus, but that is more a function of mid-semester changes than lack of demand. If they tore down WPG and built student housing, they could fill it. I worked for the housing department for two years. Unless something dramatic has changed since 2005, the housing department would absolutely love more rooms. They want to bring a lot of those off-campus students onto campus. The main issue I have (and this is coming from a person Box and Won would call a "building hugger") is that WPG is essentially a big empty room surrounded by horribly undersized rooms. What use could any department possibly have for a former gym, and an ancient one at that? The offices around the gym are too small, the ceilings are too low, the hallways are too narrow, the cost to maintain the place is too high. It would be short-sighted to try to reuse it now. Tear it down now before some other department starts depending on it.

Some joker apparently took the domain name www.chaifetzarena.com, so the official site is www.thechaifetzarena.com. I've been to the official site before, but never paid attention to this difference. Timmerman mentioned it in his blog recently, I thought it was interesting. The anonymous individual also took the .net and .org versions. The site is nothing but a blue page with the three site names listed. He or she probably thought that jumping on them early would force SLU to buy them. I assume this was also Steve's original intent with this site (just kidding, Steve). Anyway, looks like SLU isn't taking the bait. Also from a comment from Timmerman when I asked what they planned to do with West Pine Gym in that post last week: "It's hard for me to believe that you could successfully (or economically) renovate West Pine Gym, even if you gutted the interior and rebuilt it to install offices and classrooms. And as it currently exists, it would make lousy office space for any program moving in, and you'd still have a large gymnasium space in the middle. It's prime campus real estate, fairly centrally located, near the law and business schools and the library. I know there are plans for some departments to use that space, but I would think it would have to be in a new building. (I also have to admit I'm not sure as I write this if there are any historic building designations that would hinder what they call adaptive re-use.) As for the seismology equipment, I assume it can be moved and relocated, but that was behind a locked door that I couldn't get to."

I wasn't talking about us, I was talking about Missouri State. I absolutely think we have a shot to compete for 4-star players and I think that's what we're working toward.

I agree with you on the first 3 sentences. I look at our 3-star laden incoming class, and Mizzou has one as well. Classes like those won't show up in the top 10 nationally, but a few in a row build strong programs. The guys going to SIU, though- were they really all 3-star guys? There were a few probably, but most of them flew further under the radar or were late bloomers. I think he's starting to bring in higher and higher touted players, I just think the program in the past decade has thrived on guys who didn't get the attention of bigger programs, Scout, or Rivals.

One thing I forgot to remark on was your comment about A10 refs- true, we do get hosed by them. But we also get absolutely pounded by Valley refs whenever we venture into Springfield or Carbondale. We get the "you ain't from 'round here, are ya?" treatment big time. It probably wouldn't be so bad from them if we were actually part of that conference, but as it stands now they are merciless to us big city folk.

Who is going to be able to get the players that would take MSU to the next level? Even if Knight were there, he wouldn't suddenly be getting 4- and 5-star recruits to go to Springfield. Same with the Spoons. It would take one of the biggest name coaches in the country to get those kids to go there over major programs. And even then, I would suspect it would take less-than-legal recruiting to get that caliber of player. The most successful teams in the Valley (SIUC, Creighton) have done it with Valley-type players. Even the Valley's NBA talent- Kyle Korver is a gym rat from Pella, Iowa and Patrick O'Bryant, a very late bloomer out of Blaine High School in Oskaloosa, Iowa- would be considered Valley-type players as recruits; the Valley programs don't compete with high major programs for talent.

There are a few exceptions to this, notably Justin Johnson, Horace Dixon, and Dustin Maguire. I don't think any of them have the level of talent needed to succeed in CUSA or the A10. They were primarily back-up plans anyway, though (back to my previous post). You could make the argument for Obi as well, but he was getting some high major interest before he blew out his knee. Brad saw him as an injury risk with a potential big upside if he could return to form. Had he not been hurt, he might have wound up with some Big 12 offers. The knee injury was killer and he never worked his way out of it; work ethic became his problem after that (vanishing from campus, skipping class, skipping rehab).

I don't think his problem was in detection; I think it was in his hesitation. He knew who the players were and what they could do. He took too long and missed his chances. This is something he's had a lot of time to reflect on now and it is an easy fix compared to just not being able to assess talent.

I also think it's a long shot that they even interview him, but I do think he'd be good there. At SLU, there was pressure to land a higher-caliber kind of player. Not to continue to beat a dead horse, but this is why he'd pass on a kid like Ahearn for a kid like Clarke. Clarke had definite upside and didn't pan out. He showed flashes in high school and practice and even in a couple games (at Georgia Tech, for example) that he had some serious ability. He just never got his mind right, never matured, never fit in, and never worked hard to step up his game. Ahearn was more of a sure thing, but you knew where his limits where. What he achieved at MSU was about the cap of what he could do- best case scenario. He may not have gotten the free reign he had at MSU had he come to SLU because he was smallish, not particularly tough, and had a ton of work to do on defense (never was a great defender, even as a senior). That may have held him back a lot especially as a freshman because those are Brad's hot buttons. We might not have seen Ahearn develop the same way, who knows. He would have been good, no doubt, but I would guess his numbers would have been different. Point is, Brad beat himself at recruiting. He wanted the top level of recruits, missed on them, and waited too long or passed on a lot of the reasonable under-the-radar kids or late bloomers that would have accepted a SLU offer. At a school like MSU, he's not in a conference like CUSA where Cincinnati, Memphis, Louisville, and Marquette were getting top-notch talent. There isn't the expectation in the Valley that they'll get better than 3-star talent. They know they have to find the hidden gems and develop programs to surprise the big boys when they get the chance. SLU has constantly been stuck in the in-between place, not able to run with the big dogs yet but not interested in getting stuck in mid-major hell. Brad never found a way to recruit from that spot and build the program out of it. I think he's a good coach who could find more success recruiting the Valley. I think the small-town kids who wind up at Valley schools would be easier to sell on a system. I think he made some mistakes at SLU but doesn't have too much pride to learn from them. I think he has a very Midwestern personality that would help him fit in well in the cities that make up the Valley. The only problem I see is that he looks like a SLU reject to Valley fans and that just won't do for them.

Dude, I posed this question in the "Hinson Fired" thread- way to steal my thunder. Seriously, though, I agree with you that this makes some sense - he's a pretty good fit on paper and comes loaded with a bonus recruit who would be a great player in the Valley. The only problem is it seems that the decisions at MSU right now are coming from big-money outside pressure and I don't know if they'd settle for a guy we let go. Even if it were another Valley school (except SIUC), this would be a lot more likely. I still don't think it's out of the question and a lot of the names being tossed around for this job so far are reaches (it would take ridiculous bucks to get a "name" coach down to Springfield), so they're going to have to interview the next tier of guys who have some solid D1 experience elsewhere and have either been let go by a bigger program or are looking to jump from a smaller one. The 'too close to home' factor for the Bears faithful is the only thing that could keep this from being a potentially good situation for both sides. I think Brad would have a lot more success recruiting his type of guys in the Valley and could stay at one of those schools for a long time and build a strong program.

I'm normally with you, but not on this one. I'll take whoever comes out of the A10- so basically Xavier and hopefully one or two others. I've always stuck with the "once you lose, root for the conference" philosophy. And the last conference I want to see succeed is the Valley. If Drake made a run, we'd hear some more annoying noise out of the group that thinks the Valley would have been a better move for SLU than the A10 (it kills me that they actually still exist).

I agree on 1, 4, and 5, but... 2. The "surrounding 6 state area" argument is kind of cheap. Naturally, kids who live in the cities that MVC schools are in are going to know more about them than small private schools on the east coast. I guarantee no kid in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Virginia, North Carolina, etc. knows or cares about Valley schools except what they might catch on ESPN this time of year. St. Louis kids don't exactly clamor to wind up in Springfield, Peoria, Carbondale, Evansville, Wichita, Bloomington-Normal, Des Moines, Cedar Falls, Terre Haute, or Omaha (the best of the bunch). I'm from St. Louis and applied to multiple A10 schools (SLU was still in CUSA) and never even considered for one second any school in the Valley. Then again, my test scores weren't in the bottom 20%, either. 3. So you're arguing for Springfield, MO (!) over St. Louis in terms of surrounding areas- wow. There is very little to do in Springfield itself, and the surrounding areas are questionable at best. Say what you will about the Ozarks, but it's still more redneck-infested than a NASCAR event- not the people I want to spend my free time with if I'm a college student. What else is within a short drive of Springfield other than small dime-a-dozen southern Missouri towns? Oh yeah, Branson- "Las Vegas if it were run by Ned Flanders." That wouldn't even be fun for me after I turned 80 and dimentia had kicked in with full force. It's even less fun for a college kid. St. Louis isn't New York City, but it's one of the largest 20 metropolitan areas in the US with all the cultural attractions you'd expect and more free public attractions than any other American city outside of D.C. And it's a beer town. St. Louis 1, Springfield 0.