TheChosenOne

I have no idea. I am starting to follow local high school basketball more and these are some of the names I have heard. Once these kids get a little older I will ask around to see if I can get an idea what kind of interest SLU has in them and what interest they may have in SLU. Obviously it is really early and these kids are nowhere near finished products, but a couple of them appear to be major college prospects with SLU already showing interest (Watson and Gordon).

It isn't due to one down season (in my time since enrolling at SLU back in 2001 there have been way more down seasons then not and I have been going to most games since then, 4 as a student manager, a couple in between living out of town but still getting to a lot of games, 1 working the clock in the first season at Chaifetz, and then as a season ticket holder), it is mostly due to poor scheduling the past few seasons and not having much interest in heading to the games when they play lousy opponents (which is fairly often). The games aren't overly enjoyable especially when we play uninspiring opponents and I get that most programs do, but they make up for it with great conference rivalries and it is hard for me to fully embrace the A-10 despite the recent success of the conference. I don't think the athletic department will miss my wife and I not attending games in the future (although the tickets have been in her family since she was a little girl).

I have heard mixed things about the Ramey kid. What are you seeing/hearing about him? One guy I talked to thinks he may have peaked and will struggle to stand out at the high school level playing with older and more developed kids. Granted his son who is a year older completely shut him down not long ago (prior to high school), so his perception may be a little harsh.

I don't add anything of substance, but I do fit the programming quite well.

Do it. Billiken basketball, beer, and exotic gay porn; I think your show would be a hit.

Most people aren't as enthused about watching a bad team struggle to beat bad no-name opponents as you are and really do not care if that means we win an additional 2 or 3 games. The two sides are clearly drawn and my decision is not to buy season tickets beyond this year, so I guess I shouldn't even care.

I just don't think it matters (telling someone we are 7-4 as opposed to 5-6), but I can see your argument (putting lipstick on a pig). Obviously we have a group that thinks a young team benefits more from playing a soft schedule and winning games, while I and others would prefer them playing some tougher competition (again we are talking about better buy games and an additional home and home with a power conference or like opponent) and think it benefits the players more to play tougher competition. As a season ticket holder for the last time this season, I would have come to more than 1 game at this point had we played a better schedule as well, so as a now more casual SLU fan I would prefer a tougher schedule.

Right. People are talking about an upgrade to our buy games and adding another solid home and home opponent to Wichita State. Our record would possibly be different by 1-2 games. The perception is that we are not very good, losing to a good program instead of beating Texas Pan-American would not change that perception.

Do you think the 5,173 people that decided to go to the Texas Pan-American game did so because we had 1 or 2 more wins than had we played a tougher schedule? We aren't a good team, so it is not like the weak schedule has us nationally relevant or even locally relevant anyways. Recruits decide on schools for many reasons and for SLU the recruiting pitch does not change whether we win anywhere from 12-17 games this year.

I don't think it really matters at all. It didn't matter that much when Majerus struggled to a 12-19 season with a young roster. Winning 16 or 17 games this season against a bad non conference schedule compared to 12 wins with a slightly better schedule really does not matter in any capacity. We are a young team that is currently not very good, winning a few extra games does not change much.

I have heard really good things about Watson at Whitfield. Kid sounds like a big time player. I need to get out to see Carte'Are and Vianney sometime, but he is putting up solid numbers for a freshman. Having seen Chaminade a handful of times this year, I am not sure I would consider Jerricole Hellems a major prospect. The 2018 class has had a lot of success nationally as kids (especially that Team Ramey), it will be interesting to watch them develop. The names that I have heard include Torrence Watson at Whitfield, Carteare Gordon at Vianney, Courtney Ramey at Webster, Fred Thatch from Sikeston, Jericole Hellems at Chaminade, and Jontay Porter from Columbia (younger brother of Michael Porter who was on SportsCenter this morning). I have not seen any of these kids play outside of Hellems, Catchings from CBC when they played Chaminade, and Ramey in a scrimmage, but hope to see a few of these guys this winter.

Agree to disagree. I would have preferred to play some tougher competition and think it would have been better for our development than playing an incredibly soft schedule and struggling through that. And as a season ticket holder who has only been to one game, I would definitely have had more interest in going to the games had we played some decent teams. Personally I don't think winning 17 games this season vs. 12 would make much difference to recruits or casual sports fans. What has our attendance been this season? Doing a quick look, outside of the Carbondale game we are drawing pretty weak crowds and you would have to think it would be easier to sell tickets when you are playing programs that have some name recognition. The big recruits for 2016 are all local, so the pitch is still the same whether we win 17 or 12 especially considering the programs we are recruiting against for Tatum and Cook (teams who have recent National Championships).

Who cares what our record is? We are still a real bad team at this point. I would think playing a relatively competitive schedule and getting the younger guys experience against legitimate teams would do more for their development then struggling to beat terrible teams. Does anyone really care what our record is? We have all seen the games.

SLU fans who don't think shooting for a program like Xavier is high enough are delusional and should expect to be disappointed. Doing some quick "research," since 2000 Xavier has made the NCAA Tournament 12 times including 5 Sweet 16s and 2 Elite 8s as well as being conference regular season champs 7 times. That recent success is under 4 different coaches (Skip Prosser, Thad Matta, Sean Miller, and Chris Mack) who moved on from Xavier to elite jobs. They have also enjoyed considerable academic success and put guys in the NBA. Xavier should be the target in every way.I am most curious to see whether we can continue the success that Majerus brought us with the current staff and beyond (I realize Crews has had considerable success since taking over for Rick, but Majerus molded those teams and brought in the players).

We should have raised money to keep him there...

I would add: 6. Teams playing Kentucky. Kentucky is playing some incredible defense limiting Kansas to 40, Providence to 38, UCLA to 44, and Montana State to 28. At this point we are left primarily with their SEC conference schedule which is a really bad league. I would think teams like Missouri (they play twice), Auburn, and Mississippi State could be candidates.

They definitely could have played together with Jones being a perimeter player and Evans never quite developing that ability. Can you imagine a trio of Jett, Jones, and Evans? Talk about tough. Who would be a good comparison for Roosevelt Jones?

Yeah, Evans was a 2010 recruit while Jones was a 2011 recruit. I never got the impression that we were recruiting Jones, but he would have been a better use of a scholarship then our current seniors. Just a really tough kid who is going to find a way to produce. I have heard people compare Jordan Goodwin (sophomore at Althoff) to Roosevelt Jones. Looking at our roster, the coaches need to do a better job recruiting regardless of where the talent comes from.

Who do you see in the 2016 class locally that make it a stacked class? Obviously Tatum, but beyond him who do you see as must get players? I have seen Tyler Cook a few times this year and I still don't see how he is a top 75 recruit. I have heard good things about Xavier Sneed, but other than that I am not sure there are other local kids in the class of 2016 we should be offering. I don't see the CBC guards as being above mid-major players. I like the idea of keeping the local kids home, but I am not so sure the talent is there consistently in St. Louis to build a program around local talent and be real successful. It seems like it has been mostly mid-major and below talent with a few elite prospects mixed in.

I guess I better admit I am wrong on that one. I am shocked he got a degree at SLU.

So he did get a degree at McKendree. That is all I was asking.

It is a serious question, did Justin get a degree at McKendree?

He is a high school basketball coach at a school that is not far from going under financially, I think he would jump at a college coaching gig. Does SLU require a college degree to be a coach and does anyone know if Justin got one while at McKendree?

Are there any examples of individuals later coaching at a program that they were kicked out of as a player?

I was a freshman working for the team the year Justin was asked to move along, so he was around the program that first semester. I was really good friends with one of the freshmen on that team who spent a lot of time with Justin. I don't want to get into it too much, both neither of them had any place on a college campus let alone mentoring youth (both would be kicked off of the team and I believe both are now in coaching).