cgeldmacher
-
Posts
3,492 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
33
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by cgeldmacher
-
-
On 6/17/2024 at 3:27 PM, billikenfan05 said:
You can. Baseball got a brand new hitting facility and softball did not. If a donor specifically donates something for baseball, softball is not entitle9 to the same. And vice versa.
I get what you are saying, but I just don't think that SLU would be in a position to say that they're making a major upgrade to the baseball facility, but not to the softball facility without taking some major heat about gender inequity.
There is plenty of space between the baseball field and Olive Compton/walkways. I don't think anyone is expecting any upgrade to extend even to the outer red line below. Mostly just sit in the exact footprint as now, just with real amenities. Hell you could even mix in some dual purpose infrastructure for gameday ops for soccer.
I mistyped my original statement. I meant to say the softball field would have to be pushed east. As far as the baseball field, in the picture you sent (good job, BTW, getting that picture) there would be several of the light standards that would have to be redone if you made big improvements to the stands. Thus, it doesn't make sense to improve lights and then take them down to do the improvements.
Why not? To avoid drumming up interest and/or donations?
Because its just the way its done. We didn't know details about Chaifetz until the money was secured and the plans were all but done. We didn't know about the O'Loughlin Center until the money was secured and the plans were done. Same thing with the new soccer building. No one is complaining about keeping the fans in the loop on any of those projects. I just think that this is in the works. All of those project were probably years in the making before they got to the point of a public reveal. I'm not saying it will be next year or in the next three, but I think upgrading the baseball/softball facilities is coming soon.
-
Agree about Thames having a potential breakout season. I would really like to see what he does in Schertz's system.
-
During the basketball season when everyone thought we weren't going to fire Ford, I suggested that guys calm down, because the powers that be were going to take care of the situation. This was met with sneers and calls that we can't wait, the fans needs to rise up and make this happen. In the end, it was correct that firing Ford was in the works and that a new, very popular coach was on the way.
I have a new, similar, prediction to make about SLU Baseball. I think that upgrades to the facilities are already in the works. However, those upgrades are complicated by several factors. For instance, in the times of Title 9 and equity for all, you cannot upgrade the baseball field without, at the same time, upgrading the softball field. So, now we're talking about double the cost, double the planning, double the everything. Also, the changes to the stands that people on this board want would require encroaching on the walk way that allows basketball fans to get to Chaifetz from the Olive Garage. This means that the entire baseball field would have to be moved 15-20 yards east. Again, this requires much more of an investment and not simply erecting some stands. Moving the field a bit east now means that MSD approvals become involved since the area your encroaching on an area that I believe is considered a water run off area. If the plans for the field involving having to move it east, this also means that the present lighting would no longer work where it is and would have to be moved or replaced. It this is true, this would explain not allowing lights to be put into the existing standards that will have to come down anyway. Also, the field hockey facility came up and this may have delayed a baseball/softball project further.
Again, my point is that I believe that baseball/softball upgrades are already in the pipeline. The athletic department will not and should not keep us apprised of every or any project that is in the planning stage. Just be patient.
- DOC and billiken_roy
-
2
-
-
I think that Steve has reasons for every decision he makes with regard to Billikens.com and doesn't need added pressures put on him with regard to how to run the board. Some of the comments above are probably exactly why Steve got rid of the bad post designation in the first place. It only serves to exacerbate dust-ups between board members rather than the opposite. Then again, if Steve decides to bring those things back, I'd be fine with that too, because its his call. I just don't think we should be telling him what to do.
- Old guy and SLUMedBilliken15
-
2
-
NM - Little Bill said what I was going to say, but with much more info.
-
Hurley saw that he would be the Lakers coach for a few years before fans wanted him fired (it's a constant carousel), or he could continue being UConn's coach in perpetuity and he chose stability.
-
Just have a four team event every year and constantly rotate through with teams that are within driving distance for their fans. Illinois, Mizzou, Arkansas, Kansas, Butler, Indiana, Memphis, Depaul, Kentucky, Louisville, Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Iowa, Iowa State, Bradley, Missouri State, Purdue, Cincinnati, Xavier. add the Billikens to that list and that makes 20 that makes for a fresh tournament every five years. That’s exactly what Kansas City’s been doing for decades.
-
I've said it before, and I'm saying it again. The St. Louis Sports Commission should have started the Gateway Classic MTE here in St. Louis years ago. Not sure why it hasn't happened. You're only taking two dates away from the Blues by hosting one of these things and, if you schedule it with regional teams, you can bring thousands into downtown St. Louis.
Kansas City has been hosting one for years. Why not St. Louis?
-
On 6/6/2024 at 9:14 AM, billikenfan05 said:
Dueling For Lincoln beat The Town 3-2 yesterday evening on an own goal in Target Score Time. They take on Borussia Dortmund at 1:30CT on TST website. Dortmunds roster, compared to Bayern, is actually filled with guys who have played professionally, including current and retired Dortmund guys. Weidenfeller is in goal for them, being the most notable.
I was able to open the website you linked, but could not get the rules pages to open up. What is the size of the field, if you know, and how many players on the field at a time?
-
On 6/2/2024 at 11:19 AM, TheA_Bomb said:
Many fans' enjoyment of the sport appears tied to their past views of student-athletes remaining at a school for four years or being penalized should they transfer. The arguments for this view are the enjoyment of watching an athlete develop or because a player is loyal. I, too, enjoy believing that a student-athlete is loyal to my chosen school and watching such an athlete develop. However, why would enjoyment be increased by restricting an athlete's freedom? If athletes are genuinely loyal, they will choose to stay if given the freedom of choice. Sport has no meaning but that which we assign to it: wins/losses, enjoying a player, bragging rights over fellow fans. The rule changes don't preclude an athlete from staying at a school for four years or even six years, in the case of Jimerson. The rule changes allow greater freedom of choice and allow players to pursue happiness how they see fit, whether at SLU or another school. It is up to SLU and us fans to make our team a desired destination so that better players choose to play here. Those deriving their enjoyment from loyalty should see their enjoyment increase as they no longer watch Sisyphus push the ball up and down the court but players who freely chose to attend SLU.
In every team sport that most Americans follow (MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL, WNBA, MLS) the system is set up so that players are on a team for several years. They are required to be with the same team for several years. Then, when free agency hits, players rarely sign one year deals. This allows fans to get to know a player and cheer for him or her for several seasons.
College sports is now set up to allow players to change teams every year if they choose. Nowhere else does that. Whether you agree or not that this should be the way that it is, there is nothing wrong about someone saying that this will make college sports less enjoyable.
- HoosierPal, CenHudDude and SLU_Lax
-
3
-
In the NBA guys, guys his size guard the perimeter all the time. And that’s with better shooters and a three-point line that’s further out. you just have to play the right system where guys help each other on defense and move quickly to close out on guys at the three-point line.
-
8 hours ago, billikenfan05 said:
There are things that all NCAA Division 1 programs should have. A partnership with an NIL merchandise company like this is one of those things. Think of it like this: SLU having it doesn't move the needle for recruits/current players, if SLU didn't have this it would move the needle negatively. It does move the needle for fans of the program.
I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again, I’m not at all saying that they shouldn’t have the store or that it’s not something cool for the players. I completely agree with all of that. Only saying it’s not some huge game changer like some people are making it out to be. It will be a small blip to the bank accounts for some of the players. Does it mean we shouldn’t have it though.
-
I certainly hope our Athletic Dept. is doing the same thing. I'm sure many of the Fortune 500 companies Mizzou is going after are located in St. Louis.
-
21 hours ago, NextYearBill said:
I’d take $450 as a college kid. I’d buy an Oz in those days
Agree, but the guys selling the most merch on the site are the guys that will be making the most NIL money anyway. So, yes, $1000, if they can make that on t-shirts, is $1,000. But if the guy is earning an d $80,000 NIL deal, that $1,000 isn't affecting in any way whether or not he comes here or not and isn't doing all that much for his bottom line. He already has much more money than other college kids.
-
4 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said:
I do not understand any of the push back here on this whole deal. This is what NIL was supposed to be. The schools are clearly subsidizing the hosting and design fees for their athletes with NIL Store. If the designs aren't your bag, they aren't your bag. Jersey's aren't your thing? Fine, but to expect customizable Nike jerseys from this store, I'm not sure you were paying attention. Is the design on Robbie's face outline shirt way too small? Sure, valid complaint. But it's a weird to criticize the quality without actually touching the merchandise.
There is no pushback (edit: from me). I'm totally fine with it. I just think that folks on this site think this is some sort of a game changer for our guys, and the reality is that its really not.
-
3 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said:
A quick google led me to the FSU NIL Store and they give the payouts at $8-15
The other small print says that this particular site was made just for FSU as a way of funneling more of the money per item to FSU athletes ("instead of only earning a small percentage"). I am guessing that the SLU NIL store is through a company doing this all over the country for different universities. So, I think my $7 per shirt is still a good guesstimate.
My point is that our guys should be able to make more money for a one hour appearance at a Pasta House or car dealership than all the money they make on this site for the entire year.
-
I love the idea of this store, but I would be shocked if any of our players made any more than a few hundred dollars off of this stuff. I would get guess that if a shirt costs $40, the player is getting $5 - $10 per sale. Also, none of this is being held in stock. The way it works nowadays, the company makes a shirt only after someone orders it.
Let's say one of our player sells 60 shirts (which seems like a lot) and makes $7 per shirt. Congratulations kid, you just earned $420 before taxes. Given the tax bracket some of them will be in given their NIL payments, that means they will probably clear about $250. Doesn't seem all that worth it for someone making six figures on an NIL deal.
-
1 minute ago, wgstl said:
he doesn't look very thin
Rivals has 180 also. ESPN has him at 190.
-
Wyoming took a write up they did on their website down, but part of it was still accessible on a google search:
He averaged over 18 points and nearly 10 rebounds during the state tournament for his career. He was named All-State by the Oklahoman. He averaged over 20 points per game as a sophomore and as a junior scored 15.1 points and added 8.4 rebounds per game.
-
According to 247 Sports, he is 6'5" and 180 pounds. We need to get the strength and conditioning coach working with him immediately.
-
1 hour ago, Pistol said:
- BLIKNS and Dr. Holly Hills
-
2
-
Is displaying high school state championship rings as if they were NBA or NFL championship rings a thing?
-
3 hours ago, billikenfan05 said:
I think it's a reasonable assumption that they will be there.
Well if that's the case, then cool.
2024-2025 Season
in Billikens.com Main Board
Posted
The following is from an article about the Celtics championship and explains how their the first NBA team to win using the "Five Out" or "3 and D" system. If I were Schertz, I would use articles like this in recruiting. Tell kids that the way we play is essentially an NBA style system.
The Celtics didn’t win by having the game’s supreme player, which is the lesson here, because there is only one of those, and damn near impossible to acquire. Instead, the Celtics won by having the best team, one constructed with a certain modern-day vision of a five-out system. The 3-and-D player became en vogue in the 21st century, but this was the first 3-and-D team — a deep squad built to rain from downtown and defend at a high level. For now, 3-and-D was a better formula than M-V-P
There’s a saying in basketball: live by the 3, die by the 3. The Boston Celtics don’t abide by that ethos. They seem to take on a different angle: live by the 3, thrive by the 3.
The Celtics took more 3-pointers than any team in the NBA this regular season. A total of 3,482, to be exact. The second team on that leaderboard was the team they just beat in the NBA Finals, the Dallas Mavericks. The Celtics’ proportion of field-goal attempts that were 3-pointers, 47.1 percent of all shots, set a record for an NBA champion. In the Finals, that percentage swelled to 49.6 percent, exemplifying how much they believed in the shot. To put it in perspective, the 2008 champion Celtics took 121 3-pointers in the Finals. This year’s Celtics just took 207 3-pointers — in one fewer game.
The thing is, the Celtics didn’t even get particularly hot from downtown. Brown and Tatum shot 23.5 percent and 26.8 percent, respectively, from beyond the arc in the series. But overall, through sheer volume, the Celtics scored 66 more points from deep than the Mavericks did and routinely attacked the open driving lanes the 3-point spacing provided.
It’s widely known the NBA is increasingly becoming a 3-point league. More 3-pointers are being taken every year. Rather than buck the trend, the Celtics leaned all the way in, playing a 3-point threat at all five positions — at all times. Did I mention that this was the best offense in NBA history? Yes, with the perimeter-oriented offense, they scored 122.2 points per 100 possessions, a blistering figure even in an offensively charged era.