SLUSER Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 kool-aid drinkers. Did any of you read Tommy Amaker's resume at Michigan? I know many of you have posted recently what team in America would possibly fire a coach who just got 20 wins. Well gentlemen, it happens. Brad actually got 19 wins in a piss-poor conference, Amaker got 22/23 wins in the Big Ten. He won them a NIT championship and several appearances, Brad can't even make the NIT. So why did Michigan make such a move? THEY DON'T SETTLE FOR MEDIOCRITY and the NIT is exactly that. Kool-Aid drinkers, what lame excuse will you respond with now? don't go back down the budget road. you can't go down the "well, he got us 20 wins...sign of progress" road. Obviously the anti-Tommy Amaker voices were heard...no reason why the anti-Brad voices won't be heard either. Or are Michigan's expectations just so much greater than ours? they shouldn't be. drinkers, wake up and smell the coffee!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 Welcome to the life of the mid-major. Unlike the bigs, mid-majors don't have the opportunity to play Top 25 frequently. In another post, someone mentioned that SLU has not played a Top 25 team during conference play in several years. In the past we had the ability to pull an upset over at Top 25 team: usually Cincy, Memphis and Louisville and sometimes Marquette and Charlotte. These teams not only helped with RPI, gave us recognition/status but gave us the ability to demonstrate a signature win. How many years did Mizzou get in the NCAA pointing to their win over Kansas who had been ranked #1 or #2. Further, playing in such a conference with other talent and exposure/TV, made it easier to recruit. Who wouldn't want to play the above teams instead of either the A-10 or the Valley teams. Unfortunately, not a reality. Mid-majors cannot lose conference games to Duquesne at home and on the road to St. Bonnie and must win at either XU, UD and/or UMass. Did not happen. As far as 19 wins v. 20 wins, recall that Brad took a gamble and wanted an additional game to get ready for the Texas A & M tourney. Because of conflicts with the Scott, he could not get a date and went Division 2. For all those who downplay facilities as an excuse, that was the difference between 20 and 19 wins this year. Also, along these lines, we should not have played Houston twice this year. Recall that the second time we lost to them and their RPI really didn't help us that much. Again, we will never have to play a team like Houston - twice - once we move into our new arena. My point: often it is harder to win 19 in a "piss-poor conference" than in the Big 10. Michigan did not have the scheduling, recruiting and facilities challenges (not excuses) that SLU had. While I cannot speak for all who don't want to fire Brad now, it's not like we like and approve all of his decisions and methods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 > >My point: often it is harder to win 19 in a "piss-poor >conference" than in the Big 10. Michigan did not have the >scheduling, recruiting and facilities challenges (not >excuses) that SLU had. While I cannot speak for all who >don't want to fire Brad now, it's not like we like and >approve all of his decisions and methods. Amaker inherited a huge scandal(recruiting challenges) and the team up the road is winning National titles.(recruiting challenges)....and the facilities have been extremely outdated and a big issue at Michigan. It is harder to win 19 in a weaker conference? Huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basketbill Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 it is harder to make the NCAA tourney in a mid major conference. BCS schools can schedule 12 nonconference home games and a couple good teams on the road or neutral court games.......they do not have to worry about a conference game lowering their RPI even if they win........they get invited to preseason NIT, better preseason tournaments etc...... It seems to me that people who are ready to can BS still think we are in CUSA at its prime. We are not. The A-10 got only three post season bids this year. We were close to getting one, is that satisfactory NO. Is this team improving, I think we are. I think in a good non-BCS conference we have to ask is the team/program improving.......the sludrews and SLusers out there can post all you want but It will not change anything. So go ahead waste your time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 >it is harder to make the NCAA tourney in a mid major >conference. > >BCS schools can schedule 12 nonconference home games and a >couple good teams on the road or neutral court >games.......they do not have to worry about a conference >game lowering their RPI even if they win........they get >invited to preseason NIT, better preseason tournaments >etc...... > >It seems to me that people who are ready to can BS still >think we are in CUSA at its prime. We are not. The A-10 got >only three post season bids this year. We were close to >getting one, is that satisfactory NO. Is this team >improving, I think we are. I think in a good non-BCS >conference we have to ask is the team/program >improving.......the sludrews and SLusers out there can post >all you want but It will not change anything. So go ahead >waste your time. Creighton went 6-5 non-conference, mostly pedestrian wins, didn't win its league, and despite winning conference tourney, could have lost in the final and still made the NCAA. Tougher for mid-majors? Try playing a conference schedule in the Big East or some of the other ones. You have to win games in conference and out of conference. Are people wasting their time like you just did? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 Basketbill. Very good post. As mentioned, I have a real problem with Brad not playing Freshmen. He didn't play DB, DP and Luke as much as I would like their first year. I find no reason why DM and AK could not have played 5 minutes a game for this team. BH also deserved more time. I understand that their games need work and that game time is rewarded by performance in practice but that would seem the difference between 5 minutes or more. Also, while I like the assets that DP brings to this team, his height greatly limits him in half-court conference games and defending the perimeter when we lack a legitimate 4. Hence, a 7 person rotation is not smart. Brad can compare our 7 man rotation to other teams with 7 or 8 men rotations, as he did all year, but I question how many of them had a 5'9" guard and a guy like LM playing the 4. Also, I blame Brad for not getting a JUCO these past 2 years. Yes, Stemler would have helped but he does not play the 4. Relying on OI and HD was not smart. Could he not have gotten another Frericks? Why has SLU gotten no transfers since Spoon? Are there not dis-satisfied St. Louisans who want to come home? Pederson and Jamal Johnson? As mentioned previously and extensively, Romar left the cupboard bare. Add to this Brad is not a household name and that his luster as being a hot and up-and-coming former assistant had worn off a year while being Romar's assistant coach, and that explains his early reaches at recruiting. JJ was in that first class along with AD and IO. Then came IV and BH. We are and have been paying for these reaches and mistakes. Since then, LM, DP and DB have been an improvement and step in the right direction. Then, TL and KL were great additions - though I have mentioned and believe this class should have had an additional player. Then, DM and AK seem good but we don't yet know. Relaphorde and Mitchell sound good but I am waiting for more. After this fall, we will know if Brad is right for SLU. How is this Kool-Aid? SLU has already addressed my 2 biggest concerns with the program: AD (Woolard literally destroyed this program - but that is another post) and the facilities/control over scheduling/home court advantage. Now, CL need to clean house in the SID office and get SLU a good TV/radio package. Brad need to complete this 2007 class over the next month and land some kids this fall. If Brad comes thru, these posts will become a distant memory. If Brad does not, let him go. With the new arena built, new TV/radio contracts in place, additional changes made by CL "behind the scenes" in place, will not SLU be in a better position to bring in a new HC ? I suggest, to all those who want Brad gone now, that waiting a year would actually be better for SLU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VTIME Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 What do you mean SLU has not played a top 25 team in conference play in several year. As recently as 2004-2005 the Bills were still in C-USA and play ranked Memphis, Louisville, and Marquette teams. Last year, their first in the A10, they played GW that was ranked most of the year including their matchups with the Bills. What the heck are you talking about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 Clock was paraphrasing another poster and Clock also discussed the CUSA teams. Maybe you should reread the post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinfootes Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 Michigan actually has a history of success. SLU does not. They should absolutely have higher expectations that any mid major team. I love all of the Bills fans who think that posting bold expectations on the internet will somehow change the perception of the program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUSER Posted March 18, 2007 Author Share Posted March 18, 2007 good call, kevin....continue to think mediocrity is acceptable. let's look at the past, and not the future. the Billikens are lucky to have someone who thinks with an average outlook on this program. why can't we start NOW with success? do you realize what you just posted? "come on guys, we never have been good, why are we going to be good now" give me a break. like i said, running out of excuses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 that's right ... you just keep on demanding. Official Billikens.com sponsor of H Waldman Official Sponser of the Stemmler and Ahearn could and would have helped club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 SLUSER.Get serious and answer my prior question. Will SLU be in a better position to attract a new coach next year? Next year, the arena will be completed and hopefully SLU will have a new TV package, hopefully the A-10 conference package will be better and even SLU might have a radio package which can extend to 1/2 of the St. Louis area. Once again, we all want SLU to focus on St. Louis kids. Have no problem extending the terms "local" and "St. Louis" to Jeff City/central Missouri. If so, how can anyone (recruits, their families and friends) follow the Bills from Jeff City? Poplar Bluff? Internet broadasts on their laptops? Making a change now only to prove we won't accept mediocrity could make things worse. With all of these issues, most good coaching candidates might take a pass on SLU for the reason that they might think 20 wins isn't that bad for a program with little sustained success, little recent success and numerous inherent challenges. Also, any incoming coach would be a no name head coach from a lesser program or an unproven assistant. This guy would need to form a staff immediately, convince the 2 oral recruits to stay (they don't have to until they commit in May), get 2 to 3 more guys to fill out the roster and then make in roads with the 2008 class which, undoubtedly, will commit this fall. Most of these guys will not still be around next year at this time. These guys have built relationships with many coaches for years and I cannot see some no name or unproven assistant come in and land 8 - 9 guys in 6 months. Even if CL now believes Brad is not the future for SLU, making a change now would not seem to be in the best interest of SLU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 >Making a change now only to prove we won't accept mediocrity >could make things worse. Your entire post is based on the premise that SLU is close to much greater success right now. That isn't the case. They are coming off of 3 out of 5 zero post-season play seasons, and no NCAA's in 5 of those 5 years. This, despite the fact that in 2 of them the initial years of the new conference have been much weaker than the previous conference. Currently there are 26 D-1 openings and most are mid-major to low major, and that fortune of many not being high majors won't happen every year. But this is SLU, and Brad makes less than half of what many of those mid-majors will pay, with already in place facilities. He's a bargain, because how the team performs and how the program is perceived on and off of the floor doesn't matter at SLU. Put the feet up, kick back, life is good at SLU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 I'm not sure that what UB makes is half of what many of those mid majors will pay. I think his salary is competitive with most of the high mid majors. To give you an example, College of Charleston offered a package of around $375k to Greg Marshall, Winthrop coach, this past summer. I think Cremins took it for slightly more. Also, I don't think SLU is a piker when it comes to a coach's salary, ie we were willing to match UW's offer for Zo. Some people who post are critical of the administration, whether it be CL or Fr. Biondi, as having their head in the sand when it comes to the realities of D1 hoops. I don't buy this at all. They know the $$$ landscape a lot better than we do. We all know UB is not going anywhere this year and will be the man on the bench for the 2007-08 season. This may have something to do with his current contract situation, but it may also be they in charge feel a whole lot more confident in his leadership than a lot of us here. Keep in mind, one of CL's first acts as AD was to ink UB for the long term. She'd hardly met him yet thought this was a very important step for her to take. So, she's probably not ready to admit this may have been a mistake. Hence, UB gets his pass this year, and for all we know, may see his contract through to the end. I can't buy the excuse the admin is content with the results of tha past five years. They are not blind to the fact that schools similiar to SLU are having success on a national scale. They know it brings in additional funds, some prestige, and lots of name recognition to attract new student applicants. To think that they shrug off the program as, "oh, well we need to do this sports thing", is ridiculous. Even at our level, high mid major, they know it's not that simple. Otherwise that construction site off I-40 would not be there. Look, I wish UB would walk in and resign today and admit he's not up to the task at SLU for whatever reason. But it ain't gonna happen. He's going to get one more and possibly two to right the ship. This season was not progress. Not at all. UB and the team stated the season would be a failure if they weren't dancing. It was a failure. Failure and progress don't go together, other than learning from the experience of failure. I guess, the point of this latest rant is to us ABC'ers; sit back and see what he does this Spring, next fall, and next year because nothing we post here is going to change the situation, we're stuck with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUSER Posted March 19, 2007 Author Share Posted March 19, 2007 It all depends on who SLU would hire. I would rather play for Tommy Amaker (just one example) than Brad Soderberg. There are coaches that can come and make a difference immediately based off name alone. We need to get a big name coach for the sole purpose to fill up the new arena. Who is going to support the mediocre bills and pay high ticket prices to see average basketball? SLU and CL are fully aware of this. Unless there is positive info about upcoming recruits in 2008 (suggs) that we are not aware of, brad will be gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jp18 Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 If Amaker can't recruit and bring in the players at Michigan, how in the world would you think he could get it done at SLU? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quest Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 Great post, SLUSER. This is exactly the kind of ##### we put up with at SLU. All these old people think that the NIT is great. Well that was in 1950, when these guys were drinking Schlitz beer where Griesidieck Hall now sits. The NIT is not the standard. We need Tommy Amaker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinfootes Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 I don't think anybody is happy with the way this season worked out, but you can't deny SLU has improved each of the last 3 seasons. What you and your ilk are doing is akin to asking an ugly girl to be the belle of the ball overnight. It takes some work. Just because you decide SLU should suddenly have the same expectations as a traditional powerhouse doesn't mean that it can happen in one season. We all want SLU to have the same expectations as the big boys, but the big boys have earned it. SLU hasn't yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 Ok, if you get to use the 9 win season in your favor, we get to hold it against Sodie, right? Also, SLU did have what, 4 more games this season too. Quite frankly, these points aren't the main ones. Who is calling for SLU to be a bball powerhouse? I don't think that asking for one NCAA tourney appearance in five years sets a "powerhouse" expectation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry the Legend Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 I think we can almost all agree that BS will coach out his two remaining years of his contract. If things go drastically bad next year, maybe a drastic move will be made to can him but I doubt it. IMO, BS simply does not have the marketability or image in the St. Louis area. He is nowhere to be scene on tv, no advertising, no public appearances, etc. I am sure it has a lot to do with the local professional sports teams and the lack of success that SLU has had. Unfortunately, if you were to ask 10 St. Louisians who SLU's coach was, you would probably get 3-4 who knew. Will this change when the arena is up and when/if SLU makes a tourney? Maybe, only time will tell and local Bills fans are getting very anxious and will not stand for this average play two years from now. At least I won't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinfootes Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 with no games on TV it's harder to see the coach and makes less sense for sponsors to jump in. Brad is by no means a media darling, but even Dick Vitale would have a hard time getting on t.v. if he were coaching SLU. 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.