Jump to content

cgeldmacher

Billikens.com Donor
  • Posts

    3,506
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    34

Posts posted by cgeldmacher

  1. 23 hours ago, WVBilliken said:

     

    20 rounds??? Do not like it.  Takes too many kids out of college to pursue an NBA dream that will never happen.  Rather see the marginal NBA kids get an education rather than chasing an NBA dream that isn't to be.

    Most of the draftees would be there just to fill out the rosters for the very few who will make the league.  

    If a kids chooses to go to the draft, it shows you where his head was in the first place.  Baseball has like 40 rounds.  The system I described above works perfectly for baseball.  Some kids go right from high school into the draft.  Some kids spend a few years in college before going pro.  Some end up with degrees.

    There is not a single person, not even yourself, that would say that baseball should change and require kids to go to college for a year or two.  The only reason we accept it in basketball is that we've lived with these rules for years.

    If the NBA is allowed to continue having 7 rounds, the rule changes won't matter, because kids who aren't one and done types will still not have reasonable access to making the league without being forced into college ball.

  2. 3 hours ago, Taj79 said:

    I read with great curiosity "The Undefeated" column on Wendell Carter Jr. and his mom's comments on the plight of the one-and-doners, which her son obviously will be.  I find it somewhat hypocritical that she would bemoan the entire NCAA process and tournament as a "con" (taken loosely and interpretively from the 'pro and con' discussion) but the article also focuses on how she ran around all season embracing the whole process and being a Duke "fan" with all the usual Duke "fans."  She cried her way out of the arena after Sunday's loss after vividly enjoying a one-year wild ride and is now moving towards the giant payday her son is about to reap as a wet-behind-the-ears newbie among the men of the NBA.  She is quite lucky in my opinion.  My initial reaction to that was "fine, don't let the door hit you in the arse on the way out."  But her points are salient and I think need to be discussed and resolved soon.

    She's right:  why should a kid like her son who is obviously talented, waste a year of his talent when that talent obviously leads to benefits reaped by the NCAA and not the actual person who is displaying said talent?  What makes a kid any better to ply his trade in shorts and a t-shirt better at 19 then say 18, the year most graduate high school?  Why does a kid have to do a one year sentence in a place that does nothing but maybe negatively impact his earning potential?  Why should a kid endure the burdens of western civ and English comp when they don't care?  A kid could get hurt.  A kid could be exposed as a flop.  A kid could have his game picked apart by the experts, lessening the inflated value he may have reaped when coming straight from high school where he obviously dominated and looked all the part of the gazillion dollars some NBA team would shower him with?  And I purposely began each sentence with "a kid" because that's what they are --- and I don't frankly waste a dime on tickets or a second viewing any of these kids once they hit the NBA.   Just don't care.  And that might be why Mrs. Carter actually makes sense to me.  If I don't care about the NBA and they do, why are they forced to care about something I do but they don't?  And don't for a moment think that a college education negates all that stuff because I would love to see a survey of just what does happen to all these athletes that graduate every year.  What part of corporate America is accepting all these kids with bachelors in parks and recreation and sociology and communication?  Many who we later find out can't even read. 

    I know some of the conferences are now pushing two-and-dones as a minimum.  I know the NBA is looking to cooperate with possible options.  There is talk of doing it like baseball or soccer does --- if you sign with college you're in for a few years, more than one, but if you don't we have the minor leagues.  Go ride the bus from Monroe to Angeline for tens of thousands a year --- unless you domake the big time.  The NBA is getting tight in the G League now so they seem to be moving that way as well.  Is this the answer?  There is some overt rumbling in Kentucky that while the local denizens like winning, they are losing their affection for Calipari's way of one-and-doners.  There's no continuity.  There's no establishment of relationships between fans to players.  Kids are technically there not even a year --- from August to March because once the tournament starts until its end, they are gone and then (at least in Kentucky) stay gone because they are all declaring for the draft.  You can't penalize the schools or the coaches, they are playing by the current rules  And there seems to be enough Clayton Custer's and Kevin Huerter's around to fill collegiate rosters and still play the NCAA games.  So why not let the big kids move on?  Connie Hawkins did it.  Wilt.  Spencer Haywood.  Lebron.  The Greek Freak.  Sure, Marvin Bagley III and Zion Williamson will get picked first round no matter where they are ... look at Kyrie Irving and Harry Giles.  Michael Porter Jr. is getting drafted on potential.  His 53 minute splayed this year obviously mean nothing.  Let those that want to go, go. 

    I don't think it will hurt college ball in the long run.  There are still 4500 scholarships out there at 351 Division 1 schools for basketball players to earn.  There is enough talent out there to stock those rosters and still make March the Madness it is.  Maybe it evens the collegiate playing field some where the Loyolas of Chicago and UMBC's are not the oddities and upsets that they are now.  More fish are in the pond with a fighting chance.  Maybe interest goes up even higher  ... right now, I watch Kentucky and Duke and Arizona and all those fat cat blue bloods to see when they lose, not if they win.  I'm hoping for a Nova/Loyola final right now.  No matter how much you can't stand Butler or Gonzaga or Xavier, don't you root for them more than Kansas, Michigan State and North Carolina?  I do. 

    Life's an evolution, a journey.  Maybe its time to decide college ball doesn't need the mega-talents anymore.  Not a single guy from Florida Gulf Coast has been drafted in my hazy memory.  Yet we all remember "Dunk City."  I think the one-and-done backlash is starting to grow some.  Thoughts?

    I've been advocating a fix for a long time that some are just now discussing.  I don't claim that I'm the only one that's thought of this, but here goes:

    1. Eliminate the one year after high school rule.

    2. Make the NBA create a multilevel (at least 2) developmental program; as a corollary to this one, the NBA expands its draft to 20 rounds.

    3. Raise the academic standards to play NCAA college basketball

    4. Require those who sign with a college to play college ball for at least two years

    Some kids go to college to because of the current rules.  Some want to try to make that one year run for a championship.  If you make it clear that college basketball is only for guys that can handle the classwork, then you will change who decides to go to college.  You will start to only get guys that really want a degree, or, at the very least, guys who can handle the academics and want to work on their game to, hopefully, someday, get drafted by the NBA.

    If the above happens, coaches will be forced to look for guys that can cut it academically.  Also, players that know they can't cut it in the classroom have an outlet to still get to the league.

  3. On ‎3‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 8:26 AM, RiseAndGrind said:

    Remains #88 in the USNWR 2019 report

    http://blog.spiveyconsulting.com/2019-usnwr-rankings/ 

    23 spots lower than Mizzou

    70 spots lower than WashU

    14 spots lower than Loyola Chicago 

    23 spots below Villanova 

    7 spots above Marquette

    25 spots above Gonzaga

    31 spots above Duquesne

    37 spots above Creighton

    40 spots above DePaul

    53 spots above Dayton

    And the #1 ranked Health Law program.

    Guess you forgot these comparisons when you decided it was appropriate to compare the law school to Loyola Chicago and Villanova.

  4. 3 hours ago, billiken_roy said:

    hargrove is a star.  shoots pretty good, big hops, willing to rebound and defend.   my only beef is that he is at east st louis and i think the politics and dumbed down academics hurts any player coming out of there.   if was to get out of there even for one year his prospects really soar imo.   the rumor is that mom is looking for a place to live in belleville so he can get out of the estl academics.  

    I'm okay with a whole roster of 3 stars that are willing to defend and rebound.  Thought it before, but now K-State and Loyola Chicago have driven that point home.

  5. 1 hour ago, brianstl said:

    Louisville is offering him $9 million more total than X.  I could imagine staying if the offers were $1 or 2 million apart total.  Mack would be a fool to leave $9 million on the table.

    That may or may not be true.  If he goes to Louisville, yes, he's locking in more money.  However, he's entrenched at Xavier.  He knows how to recruit to Xavier to be a top level program, and he's been successful in doing so.  If he goes to Louisville, he now has to recruit to compete with Duke and North Carolina.  Pressure is higher.  Expectations are higher.  Chance of getting fired at some point is much, much higher than if he stays at Xavier and keeps cashing his $3.2 million dollar checks every year from now until he retires.

    Coaches are starting to realize this (Few, Marshall).  I think he might actually be using this situation to cash in at Xavier.  I think he'd be smart to stay, even though there is a difference in salary.

  6. There is no question that SLU was the national champion in 1947/48.  The competition in the NIT was much better at the time.  The following year, the very first AP rankings came out and guess who was Number 1; not Kentucky, it was the Billikens.

    I totally agree with changing the banner to say "National Champions."  Even if it stirs up debate, we have the stronger argument, and getting people talking about that championship will only be a good thing.

  7. By my count, the Billikens played 10 of their games against teams that were in the tournament this year (Houston, Murray State, VA Tech, Providence, Butler, Bonnies (2), Davidson (2), and Rhode Island).  Someone will probably come up with a team that had more, but I think that this may be the most games played against tournament teams by a team in a non-power conference.

    My point is that we are doing a decent job of scheduling in difficult circumstances.  By this, I mean teams not wanting to come to Chaifetz.  I hope this level of scheduling continues.

  8. Loyola Chicago hasn't been good in forever, and he made it happen.  I'm just saying that if built the program from the ground up without the flashy Chicago recruits, but with a group of guys that are slightly more talented than what he has at Loyola, he could have success at DePaul.  Anyone who has any amount of success at DePaul would have some serious job security for a while.

  9. DePaul might actually be a good landing spot for him.  The recruits in Chicago are seeing what he can do.  He obviously builds from fundamentals outward.  Most attempts at rebuilding, or building, DePaul have involved bringing in talent that ends up not playing well together or not living up to the hype.  Even Mo Valley level talent coached up by him and his staff might perform better in the Big East then DePaul does now.   With success, he could start bringing in better recruits.

  10. 15 hours ago, BigMouthBilliken said:

    http://pr.nba.com/nba-board-governors-new-rules-away-from-the-play-fouls/

    Are you familiar with the NBA’s recent rule change to decrease the frequency of the “Hack A Shaq” strategy? 

    And there used used to be an “intentional foul” rule in NCAA when a player fouls someone on a fast break. So to say “there is no way refs can be expected to make determinations about what is an intentional foul” is not necessarily true. 

    There are plays where they make a determination between something that it truly intentional, like the breakaway example you mentioned.  I agree with that.  The problem is taking away a team's ability to aggressively go after a steal at the end of a game, because the refs have to call any reach in an intentional foul.  That I disagree with.  Then, I suspect that you are going to expect the refs to be able to tell the difference between aggressively trying to get a steal and an intentional foul like we see at the end of games now.  That is going to be an impossible distinction to make.

  11. 4 hours ago, Cowboy said:

     

    -I've wondered about this too, could help the community, might help recruiting, but I wonder what it costs the U or the management company to open and close the arena versus the rent, if any, MSHSAA would pay

    -it has been a long time since I've seen a game at Parkway West, heck they might have a new gym since then, and I get these are high school games and MSHSAA might want to keep as many of them in high schools as possible, but guessing there might have been venues with more capacity available so more could see such a big-time game

    Charge a nominal amount for rent and then make money on parking and concessions.  Also, show all the kids coming in the new locker rooms and player lounge.

  12. 18 hours ago, BigMouthBilliken said:

    “There have been cases” as opposed to almost every college basketball game within the final few minutes. No comparison based on your own wording. If you trip a player and he has a breakaway he gets a penalty shot. Intentionally walking a player does not delay the game (especially since MLB changed rule to have no pitches thrown). Intentional walks are uncommon occurrences.   Ticky tack intentional BS fouls happen too often and needlessly extend the game

    There is no way refs can be expected to make determinations about what is an intentional foul and what is a guy going for a steal.  I understand why you want to do this with regard to speeding up the end of the game, but it's just not feasible.  We'd go nuts if the Billikens were down two, other team had the ball, one of our guys tries to strip the ball away, and the other team gets foul shots and the ball back.

  13. 2 hours ago, TheChosenOne said:

    Very true and you are talking about a system where everyone is getting rich except the players, so you are going to bust them for taking a few thousand bucks and not claiming it when some of these kids listed are only in college because they can't go professional straight from high school. That would be such a waste of time. We all know this crap is going on, but the NCAA is not incentivized to actually go after their top programs and players. And these coaches are smart, so good luck catching most of the $s being exchanged. 

    The whole system is a joke, I just hope everyone acknowledges that as we find a better system moving forward. Big time college football and college basketball is a minor leagues for the NFL and NBA. Let's just be comfortable with that fact. Shockingly, kids from the worst school systems in the country who spend the majority of their time in a gym or on a field are not going to be productive students at the top academic institutions in the country (schools many of us would never get into). So let's just acknowledge what it is and find a system that puts these programs on a relatively even playing field because it is dumb to have everyone trying to figure out how to cheat to keep up. I am all for eliminating the tie between academics and athletics when it comes to college football and basketball and treating as a true minor league. We don't need the FBI involved with proving what every college hoops and football fan already knows. I kind of question the point of selectively punishing when they are likely just scratching the surface. Any time these scandals come up I just laugh at Majerus getting in trouble for picking up the tab when meeting with players during a meal.

    The fix is not to continue to allow the NBA and NFL to use college sports as its minor leagues.  That is what caused the problem.  The fix is to force the NFL and NBA to create minor league and stop forcing kids who don't belong in college into college to pursue their dreams.  If an 18 year old wants to make it in the NBA or NFL, but isn't college material academically, or if he just wants to cash in, he shouldn't be forced to go to college for a few years.  Instead, he should be allowed to be drafted out of high school, given a signing bonus, and, if he's not yet ready for the top level, sent to a minor league or a developmental league.

  14. 1 hour ago, brianstl said:

    My guess is it was Weathers that fed him crap.  He keeps on stating that Goodwin was accused of sexual assault.  The Post would make him retract those statements, too, if he didn't have a source. 

    The only person that ever accused Goodwin of sexual assault was SLU's hearing officer Catherine Weathers.  The accuser never did.  That is public knowledge now that Mr. Goodwin had his interview with Frank, but Ortiz's comments and article came out before those statements were made.  So the only people that had that knowledge and could have shared that with Ortiz are the Goodwins, lawyers at Rosenblum's firm, the civil rights lawyer and people that work for SLU's Title IX office.  We know the first three weren't Ortiz's source.  That leaves people that work for SLU's Title IX office.  Weathers is the one person that had the most motivation to leak something like that after her findings were found to be incorrect in the appeals process.  So committing a FERPA violation should be added to the reasons Weathers needs to be fired.

    Appears that you came to that conclusion using the famous "process of elimination" which come right out of the Gold Standard playbook. :)

  15. 3 hours ago, billikenfan05 said:

    It shows that chaifetz owns Pestello’s ass 

    That was my thought.  My loyalty now is to Dr. Chaifetz.  If SLU sent out something saying that Dr. Chaifetz strongly believes that we should all start donating to the University again, I would do so.  The only way that Pestello should be kept around at this point is if he is Dr. C's puppet.

  16. 3 minutes ago, RiseAndGrind said:

    I have a hard time labeling him a cancer as well, considering he's never been in legal trouble, left Vianney to play with Ramey, and went on to win a state championship.

    I think the kid probably has dealt with more in his 17 years of life than 99% of posters will ever deal with in a lifetime. I thought Coach Blossom's quotes actually were very loyal to Gordon. "I'm putting my neck on the line for you - very publicly. Now don't let me down."  I have no problem delivering that message in the public realm. 

    He didn't leave Vianney to be Ramey's teammate.  He missed practice, was told he had to apologize to the team to return to practice, and refused.  When the coach held firm that all he had to do was apologize to his teammates, he informed the coach that he quit.

  17. 1 minute ago, LindellWest said:

    I think it's fair to give Gordon, and more specifically Ford the benefit of the doubt. This team has is bought in, and has some extremely dedicated and hardworking players. A new peer situation and different expectations can often do wonders. 

    I hope that's the case.  I'm just concerned, by his history.  Beating up a kid on the middle of the court before a game over a uniform doesn't bode well a sign of someone's future ability to be a good teammate.

  18. I posted this on another thread, but it seems more appropriate here:

    The Webster coach said that working through Gordon's "issues" has been the most difficult thing he's had to do in his 29 years of coaching.  That was a quote from the article.  He also said that he very nearly kicked Gordon off of the team.  This would be the second high school team that he has left/been kicked off of if it wasn't for his current coach's benevolence (or just wanting to keep winning).  I know that no one wants to hear this, but this guy may be a cancer for a team that could be very good already without him.  His talent is undeniable, but his attitude may cause more losses here than his talent gives us.

  19. The Webster coach said that working through Gordon's "issues" has been the most difficult thing he's had to do in his 29 years of coaching.  That was a quote from the article.  He also said that he very nearly kicked Gordon off of the team.  This would be the second high school team that he has left/been kicked off of if it wasn't for his current coach's benevolence (or just wanting to keep winning).  I know that no one wants to hear this, but this guy may be a cancer for a team that could be very good already without him.  His talent is undeniable, but his attitude may cause more losses here than his talent gives us.

×
×
  • Create New...