johnbj14

That might be the case from points scored, but he shot 33% from the field and 16% from 3 in those 4 games. Small sample size, but over his two years, DJ appears to be the bigger offensive threat. And once again, as I do often in this debate, I will say I like Thatch and think he’s a big part of the program moving forward.

That’s objectively false. Kick % following timeout ice situations are lower than standard FG attempts. edit: forgot the link. https://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/analysis/icing-the-kicker-does-it-really-work/

I’m a bit confused what people are seeing in this Jacobs vs. Thatch debate. We haven’t seen much out of Fred offensively. Jacobs, while streaky, is a good shooter and ball handler while also being no slouch defensively. I love Thatch, but Jacobs brings a ton to the table and will be a massive x-factor next season.

Pitbull. Now!

It’s pretty simple. The companies that design and administer these tests exist to make a profit. It is advantageous to the companies, not modern universities, for the current system to go on. There are many ways to determine the quality of incoming students in today’s world, and any school with admissions based on a standardized test number alone isn’t doing their job.

I’m glad less emphasis is being placed nationally on these for-profit tests. The ACT and SAT prove you can train yourself for pattern recognition, and aren’t a great barometer for academic success. Props to SLU for getting on the train.

I will say, the folks I run into that do know what the school is always will ask that question.

I will say, it is not far fetched that a casual sports fan would not know SLU is D1, or even what SLU is in general once you venture outside of St. Louis. Just in my own experience, I’ve had to explain to many people in Chicago what/where SLU is.

I thought he decommitted?

This is purely conjecture on my part, but something tells me that FBLHJ is going to shoot up the rankings as his role on CBC increases.

As much as I would like it, it probably will be a no. Val Ackerman, commissioner of the Big East, was talking about this earlier in the week and stressed that jerseys with names, as well as video games, would be pretty difficult. This is because under the proposed rule changes, players have to individually negotiate endorsements and compensation for NIL. A videogame would require a collective bargaining agreement for compensation, which could lead to what the NCAA doesn’t want: a player’s union.

No I get it. My argument is in a vacuum and not real life. University workings are a tricky balancing act, and while I believe athletics should get a large portion of attention and funding, I can see why stakeholders might not agree.

While the view of a psychology major is nice, they are likely not a revenue center for the school. Even if their work is worthy of research grants, it pales in comparison to what the basketball team can generate. I’m all for creative a holistic environment of input for the advancement of SLU, but trustees should absolutely have the improvement of athletic’s national profile on the short list.

I’d argue that increasing the athletic profile of SLU, to the point where we are more attractive to a higher conference, would make many happy. Athletic success can drive increases in enrollment, as has happened at schools such as Butler. If SLU wants to be a nationally recognized name, which it currently is not, athletics are an integral part of that. SLU might not pay for a second of advertising time on televisions outside the metro area, but sports serve as a fantastic advertisement.

I don’t disagree. There were rumblings towards the end of the season that he might be gone, I just wish the timing were flipped. Looks better for all involved.