SpencerFilibuster

I'd love to see this happen.

To add to that..... Bring on Femi John.

Impossible to be more serious than I was when I brought it up. Cassity was a key figure for the first leg of that terrific run. The alleged late-night stay-the-course convincing sessions by Conklin and Cassity should be enough reason to want to see him back together with those guys. And if the name is Majerus' SLU Crew, then I'd argue that Cassity HAS to be on the team. Forget Danny Brown's buds , they already have a super solid crew of SLU guys.

Bring on Cassity.

Ok...but the NBA isn't NCAA. I don't think it needs to be. There are (30x15) ~450 NBA players. There are (351x13) ~4500 NCAA D1 scholarship athletes. The skill level isn't going to be the same, so the game isn't going to be the same. The NBA players are the best of the best. The style and format in which the NBA plays has evolved into something that works well with the type of ultra-skilled and ultra-long athletes that are playing in it. It doesn't mean that all levels of play should strive to be like the NBA or that the NBA is 'better' basketball. The advocates pushing for this change seem to think that it is a fact that pace and high-scoring is 'better' and more 'exciting' basketball. Would they please define what 'better' basketball means? Why can't college basketball exist how it is? The viewing #'s for March Madness keep breaking records. Many conferences have tv contracts; there's more in-season CBB games on tv than ever before. NBA players can take (and make) shots off the dribble, perform well in isolation plays and put balls through the hoop that most would deem poor shot selection. (MOST) College players aren't at this level. My personal opinion is that if you start taking time off the shot clock, there will be more 'bad' shots from the college players, and fg% will do down. There will be less touches, less passes, more early-in-the-shot-clock shots, and less opportunity to set up. I believe that the NCAA tournament is the heartbeat and backbone of NCAA college basketball. There are so many things to love about it. One of the main things I love about it, is that any of the 351 teams have a chance to doing something great in a particular season. When you start changing the game, it could potentially affect the tournament, positively or negatively. If you change the rules of the game enough, to where it is more closely resembles the NBA rules, there will be consequences. I'm not claiming to know what those could be, but I can speculate. One thing I love about CBB is the variety of strategies across the board. You have multiple different kinds of zone defense, you have tons of traps, full court pressure, defensive scheme changes in the middle of plays. You have princeton offense, dribble-drive, motion, flex...etc etc. You have coaches with different recruiting strategies, trying to figure out how to succeed. Right now, in the current format, there is enough flexibility in the rules for the 'little' guy to work with, in order to have a shot. I appreciate that as well. If the rules keep changing, and some of those things I love (variety of strategies, upset potential, offensive efficiency, NCAA tournament) are affected for the sake of having higher scores and a faster pace, I'll be disappointed. Obviously I don't know what will happen, or could happen, or how the game would change...but I'm in the camp of not wanting to find out. I don't think anything is 'broken'.

Where did that graphic come from? I thought they were announcing proposed rule changes, not actual rule changes.

At least the changes aren't for next year.

E Washington is not bad, and aren't going to be bad. Tyler Harvey was far from being the whole team. Venky Jois returning, and Bogdan Bliznyuk is going to break out. Von Hofe will be ok. Losing Harvey, Parker Kelly and Drew Brandon is going to hurt big time, but with that front court, they could still make noise in their conference. Probably not the same ('potentially') giant killing team they were this year with the 3 ball with out those guys though. That being said, McB made a good choice in my opinion, tons of playing time available. In terms of wanting success with that 5th year, getting back to the big dance isn't impossible for E Washington. Sac St losing their back court too, Montana another year removed from coach Tinkle, and will rely on fmr Billiken target Breunig a lot. NAU will be very young. Weber St should improve with Bolomboy as a sr, but have a ways to go. If E Washington can get that backcourt to gel, they might have a shot in the Big Sky (maybe not, just talking out my ...)

David Wacker - Boise St Quinton Chievous- Hampton

How many 1-man fast breaks by MY have resulted in a TO, and how many of those TO's have resulted in fast break points for the other team? Geez.

My point had more to do with losing games in the last 5 minutes, and hanging in there against (many) quality teams. I didn't mention close wins (against bad teams) because I didn't think it had anything to do with the point I was trying to make.

Here's why I'm positive: A list of the losses, that I've arranged by drubbing-size, in my own opinion. Stompings: MissSt (Neutral) @Wich St @Davidson Semi-Stomp: Vanderbilt, @GM Second Half Stompings: @Dayton (Billikens down 1 with 17:20 left in second half) @Fordham Close Losses: SD St: Billkens up 1 with 2:00 left in second half, then fell apart TA&M-CC: Billikens up 1 with 2:50 left in second half, then fell apart RI : 50 - 46 with 5 minutes left, fizzled out after that VCU: Down to the wire, last second win for VCU UMASS: Down to the wire @GW: Tied 66-66 with 4:00 minutes left in second half, hung in there until the end Dayton: Billikens up 1 with 3:15 left in second half My main point, and the reason I'm optimistic, lies within the games listed under 'Close Losses'. I think it should be noted that the losses in the other categories have not been home games (with the exception of Vanderbilt). The SD State and TA&MCC losses can be attributed to early season issues, not knowing how to close out a game. Four of the close losses have been to the teams currently tied for 1st in the A10. And GW is tied for 5th. I feel like there is a tendency to analyze our players individually, to put each player in a vacuum, and then piecemeal all of those individal assessments together to come up with a conclusion about the whole team. I prefer to look at the team from an outside-in approach and decide if the team is displaying growth as a unit. I believe the Billikens have already proven that they have the chops, athleticism, desire, talent, and balance to be very good, just by hanging in there with some very good teams. This has been a fluid lineup for the most part, which provides its own challenges, and the Billikens are still finding ways to stay in close games. Closing out a close game takes experience, strength, iq, poise and maturity....all of the things our team doesn't have....yet. I don't see how we can conclude that we haven't seen the potential for progress. After listing all of the close games, I remembered how fun each game was to watch. I'm definitely not bored.

That'd be Tres Tinkle. He's good.

Before the start of the season, I thought we'd have some major growing pains, but didn't think our record would be this bad at this point of the season. Before it all began, I thought it would be a lot of fun to watch a different group of guys try to succeed on the court as Billikens. We were going to miss the guys that had played for 4 years, but I was excited to see some fresh faces. Then the season started. The first couple games were a lot of fun to see all the new players getting minutes, and we were seeing all kinds of promise. Then the inexperience started to bleed through, and the losses started piling up. Crews insisted on giving extended minutes to all of the players, even through the hard times. As a fan, it was hard to make sense of everything that was happening on the court, especially since the constant lineup changes caused a lack of flow between the players. I wasn't having as much fun watching this new-look Billiken squad as I thought I would, and it was hard to watch. Then for the last few games, the roster started to take more shape, and is starting to make more sense. The rotation(s) that Crews is employing (outside of the TL thing in the RI game) is starting to look more like he intends to compete in the current game, not just trying things out and experimenting for the future. There were actually many times in the Rhode Island game where I was watching our defense, and I could see the young players starting to do the polished things we have come to expect as Billiken fans. We had many great defensive stops, people were rotating, positioning themselves in smart ways, and doing the right thing more often than they have thus far this season. Some of that would change when substitutions were made, and we'd lose that defensive cohesion, but for the most part, I could see a noticeable change for the better during that game. It seemed like there were many instances where our players were clearly following orders, and that the execution of those orders were paying off in real-time (charges, driving to the hoop, getting fouled, etc). In order for this to happen, the players needed to process and act immediately instead of over-thinking. I don't know how Crews allocates time or energy towards defense vs. offense. But from what it seems, that an understanding of the defensive scheme plays a large role in getting minutes on the court. I guessing that with such a young team, that their focus is largely on defense. I'm imagining that once the team starts to adopt the defense, and know it like the back of their hand, that more and more time will be dedicated to polishing the offense. Having said that, I'm surprised that there are so many people on this board that aren't taking notice of the positive things that are happening in the last few games. To me, winning the last 5 minutes of a close game is an art form. There are a lot of elements that go into the last 5 minutes. Expert level type of stuff. I see the Billikens starting to turn the corner, and the experience needed to win the end of a game will eventually come.

I'd have to disagree with this point. I thought in the second half of the Indiana State game we were seeing an offensive flow we had never seen before. The driving to the hoop, then dishing to a cutting teammate was very refreshing to see. In that game, I thought this new wave of Billikens looked to be more aggressive and willing to take a few more calculated chances within the structure of the offense. What I saw in this game against NCAT was just an inexperienced team getting overwhelmed by a zone defense. Just some growing pains, they'll get used to the zone and learn how attack it. And Crews is still founding out what guys to use in general, let alone a good five to put out there against a zone. The team energy just wasn't there until Miles and Manning broke out. I think that was partially due to the frustration of the zone defense NCAT was using.

I'll be there

1. Glaze 2. 18 3. Ash 4. Ash 5. Manning 6. Non-Conference 7. 10 8. 6 9. 2 10. Juniors + Seniors 11. Everybody Else 12. Over 13. December 14. Billikens 15. 1 TIEBREAKER: 8300

His mom was a big time player at Dartmouth.

In 2015 news, Spiedel off the board to Vermont. I'm not sure if he was offered but I know we were looking at him at some point.

Should PWL be on the list?

This is almost surprising to me. Whitt is one of the biggest risers right now with interest coming from everywhere. Interesting and impressive news

I agree. But I'd add GW to that mix.

You guys may be right. However, I've watched maybe 4 or 5 Whitney Young games on TV this year, and I don't really see him as a playmaker/facilitator. Most of his points were off the ball. When he did have the ball in his hands, he was calm and in control. It seemed they used him more as a set-up guy, settle the team down, get in formation, then start the offense. He'd get the ball at the top of the key and just wait until everybody else did what they needed to do. He definitely had poise and it was obvious he was a floor leader. Those are definitely great characteristics to have out on the court, I'm just not sure those are necessarily PG characteristics. Of course, those were high school games....and he had two premier players on his team in Okafor and Young, so maybe he just played his role, and is capable of more playmaking... Maybe the '14-'15 Billikens will need someone like that at the top of the key, considering all the questions we all have about the point guard position (AM).

I did the same thing. Not happy about it. Have you found a workaround?

I had watched some of the SLU games on a fuzzy feed, this is the first one I've been able to watch on TV this season. I'm sure a lot of things have been discussed on the game time thread, but I wanted to see if I could start a new one to mention things noticed. 1) Next year is already here (sort of). We'll lose 5 major players, but watching this game, Crews mixed everyone in a lot, I thought most of the season would consist of at least 3-4 of the seniors always being on the floor, especially against a ranked team Sure, some of that had to do with Evans having 2 fouls early, but I thought we had a lot of youth out there, and was surprised by the complexion of the lineups Crews had in there most of the time. (Re-watching right now and towards the end of the first half there is Barnett, Loe, McCall, McBroom, Glaze on the floor right now) 2) The newcomers that got a lot of playing time aren't shy. Lancona will get there, but he looked eager, and I actually found it refreshing at how trigger-happy McBroom was. He took a lot of shots our normal billikens wouldn't take (early shots, no passes first, etc), but at the very least it is nice to see that next year we'll have some one that wants to take over. I was a little worried about who would be taking the shots next year, think we have less to worry about now. 3) It was like looking in a mirror while playing Wisconsin, especially early in the game, they knew what we liked to do on ball screens, McCall got tied up multiple times, Jett couldn't easily do his snake to the basket, etc. I can't think of a team (Butler is the closest thing I can think of) that we've played in the last year or two that was as methodical, patient and even throughout as Wisconsin. It might turn out that Wisconsin ends up being the most difficult team for us this year. We know how VCU works and I think we can match up with Wich St