GOPBilliken Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 Battles are won before they are even fought. Apparently Brad has never read "The Art of Recruiting/War." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 Apparently neither did Dubya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 kshoe said, "The decrease in attendance the past 6 years to its current levels should be obvious proof that: - many fans in St. Louis will only support the Bills if they are a winner" or it demonstrates what a terrible job the administration did capitalizing on some great attendance seasons by not stepping up all aspects of the program to match the top 7 attendance numbers. where was the marketing? where was the step up in facilities? where was a push to capture the media when it was there for the taking? where was the money to give romar and spoon to build on the recruits and assistant coaches? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 On the surface, i agree with your points although it is a somewhat difficult practice to look back in time and guess at what the budgets were without some tangible evidence. Re: the marketing, et. al. the proof is in the pudding and you are correct, there wasn't a big push. I guess my only point is, we don't know the budgets that spoon and romar were operating under and to compare those unknowns to UB's budget is guesswork at best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 moytoy, looking back in hindsight, what did you see during the spoon and romar years that leads you to believe that they had bigger budgets than coach soderberg? i had no idea until the recent publishing of the budget numbers that slu was that far behind. and now looking back i see nothing that tells me that it is a sudden step back of any sort. in fact i would think that if anything it has probably gotten better. the slu administration failed to capitilize when the opportunity presented itself. they have proven that the top 50 wish was all talk. or at best wishful thinking that was never intended to be backed up. biondi needs to open the checkbook to a visionary the likes of cheryl levick and let her do whatever she feels is necessary. take the athletic program away from the bean counters or we are forever going to be nestled in top 100 purgatory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 that suggest in the days when our revenues were higher (95-98) there wasn't more money being spent on the basketball program? Or is this just pure speculation? It is quite possible that as our revenues increased in the 90s so did our expenditures but as our revenues started to decrease after Spoon left so did the expenditures. Its called a balanced budget. Its easy to blame Biondi for everything but it does get old, Roy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 and assuming a new coach is the end all to our problems gets old to me. i am not saying soderberg is the answer, but the fact that romar failed in hindsight tells me that the problem is less likely the coach. what in hindsight let's you beleive we were spending more then? did we have a blockbuster athletic dept then surrounding doug woolard with plenty of personnel with years and years of experience and success stories at other fine institutions? were the games on channel 5? what improvements were made to west pine 6-10 years ago? did we have the media in our pocket proving that our sports information dept was out and about smoozing to get us the optimum coverage? what about billiken sports apparel? available in the day at every store? maybe it was in marketing? ads on tv and radio constantly, couldnt turn a corner without seeing a billiken billboard? get serious kshoe, nothing has changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 The games were on channel 5 for a while there... We brought ESPN in for midnight madness... KMOX made us their flagship college program... Seems like a major West Pine improvment is happening right now... Biondi and Spoon used BM to get us better dates at the Savvis... I bought and still have a bunch of Billiken apparrel from places in the Galleria. When we were winning things were great, when we ar mediocre like we have been the past five years then things aren't so great. At this point I feel like we know what we are going to get out of Brad. Time to let someone else try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 "and assuming a new coach is the end all to our problems gets old to me." I'm not going to speak for everyone else, but i'm not saying a new coach is an end all to our problems. But i am saying i think a new coach could do better than brad under the same circumstances. "but the fact that romar failed in hindsight tells me that the problem is less likely the coach." Romar failed? Odd, i thought he left from SLU to Washington. That's an odd transition for someone who failed at SLU. When did Romar become the standard for SLU? You're certainly high on Romar (with good reason i think). If we can land a Romar at a time without any support from the administration, then it stands to reason that we can a Romar-like coach with more support in the form of a new building on the horizon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 Doctor B or someone else can give you the logical terminology, but just because i don't have evidence of bigger budgets during the Spoon/Romar years, doesn't mean they had the same or smaller budgets. You imply that since i don't have evidence of Spoon/Romar having larger budgets, that they must have had equal or smaller budgets. Quite frankly, you are guessing about the budgets. I don't know the answer, but neither do you. "i had no idea until the recent publishing of the budget numbers that slu was that far behind." Really? So you thought SLU was in the what...50-75 range in rankings? 25-50? Come on Roy, your argument that you didn't know until recently about the budget situation is hollow. I know you didn't know the exact budget numbers, but your shock at how far behind SLU is strikes me as disingenuous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billinikens Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 >i think most of the naysayers would >rather see the Bills lose so Brad can be villified in their >repeated and now extremely boring posts. Well you're right about some posters being extremely boring, but I think you've failed to realize that it's you that has become boring to read. Okay, we get it, you prefer to think positive. Most of the board prefers to focus on the fact that this team has grossly underachieved, has wasted spectacular efforts from Tommie Liddell, and has an insufficient core of talent to compete from night to night (when we go to the bench it is such a dramatic drop in talent and competency, it's pathetic). We also have focused on the fact that when looking to the future, our recruiting success (or lack thereof) gives little hope that this situation will be better anytime soon. We have FOUR unused scholarships at this point, have NO recruits signed for SIX open schollies next year, and our best prospect left this year (Powell) appears as likely to sign with Illinois as SLU. Spin it however you want, this program is in trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 "and I will point out that there are a few internet fans that have had it in for Brad for years and that she should not ever make any decisions based upon a coordinated effort from a few negative internet posters to get a coach fired because they do not like him." Who has said they don't like Brad as a person? Most posters that are down on Brad say he is a good guy, but just not the right guy for SLU. "I have been out of town on business and I leave again shortly for three weeks where I will be working 16 hours a day." Wow. You must be important. Honestly, who cares? "I do not believe that more than a few posters have ever played basketball at any level beyond grade school or a pick up game." Plenty of successful coaches did not play the sport they coach. "When everyone was saying that Luke was not a D1 player and then when he played well they said well he is not a D1 starter it should have come to me." Quit your damn whining about Luke. 90% of the posters on here have been very complimentary of Luke. The biggest complaint is not about Luke as a player, but that we would rather see him at the 3. "I said at the beginning of the year that we could not afford an injury to any of the big 3. I would now say we cannot afford an injury to the big 4, including Luke." Why? Because we have no quality depth. We should be able to suffer an injury to a starter and weather the storm. "As long as Kevin is injured the Brad haters will be as happy as clams because the Bills will struggle to win games." Who is happy? We're mad as hell. "i think most of the naysayers would rather see the Bills lose so Brad can be villified in their repeated and now extremely boring posts." You are becoming more comical with each post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 moytoy, i have no doubt that we can land a good coach. i think that grawer, spoon, romar and soderberg have all been good coaches and with a top 25-50 budget we would have succeeded with any of the 4. that has been my point all along. it isnt necessarily the coach. and until we fix the other issues the chances of sustained success with any new hire is not good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 "I think that grawer, spoon, romar and soderberg have all been good coaches and with a top 25-50 budget we would have succeeded with any of the 4." I think it is wrong to lump soderberg with spoon and romar. I didn't know grawer that well, so i won't comment there. IMO, Romar and Spoon were both much better pure coaches than UB is regardless of infrastructure. If it isn't necessarily the coach, then why did Spoon and Romar have success (meaning NCAA) and UB hasn't had any? Bang the infrastructure drum all you want, but UB isn't even living up to past standards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 romar had a special player, justin love, lead him to the tourney via the conference tourney. spoon had claggett and highmark and then the best billiken player i have ever seen, larry hughes, do the same. who's to say that liddell and lisch wont do the same over the next three postseasons at some point. winning percentages as billiken head coaches: grawer-516 spoon - 581 romar - 536 soderberg - 514 not much difference Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 "romar had a special player, justin love, lead him to the tourney via the conference tourney. spoon had claggett and highmark and then the best billiken player i have ever seen, larry hughes, do the same." If you're saying something the effect, "but for justin love, romar wouldn't have gone to the dance...", i think that is in error. Romar DID get to the dance. Same for Spoon. Are you kidding with the winning %ages? Different times, different opponents, etc. Also from an above post i had: "i had no idea until the recent publishing of the budget numbers that slu was that far behind." Really? So you thought SLU was in the what...50-75 range in rankings? 25-50? Come on Roy, your argument that you didn't know until recently about the budget situation is hollow. I know you didn't know the exact budget numbers, but your shock at how far behind SLU is strikes me as disingenuous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 i am not lying. i never had a clue that our program was that poorly funded. like i said, i knew it wasnt top 50, but i assumed we were closer to the top 50 than the top 100. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 I didn't say you were lying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.