SLUDrew Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 That makes two A-10, Jesuit, non-BCS, non-football schools in two days that have managed to sign top 150 players. So, whoever would like to chime in, what addendum can we add to the excuse now? Yesterday it was added that Xavier had a winning tradition, so we can't be expected to compete with that. Fordham certainly doesn't have much of a tradition and they play in a dump of a gym so we have to add a line to the excuse. I think we are at "Besides BCS schools only schools with football programs, or if not a football program, than a winning basketball tradition can reasonably expect to recruit players." Whichever one of Brad's groupies would like to add the next line to explain how Fordham can recruit top players, but SLU can't, please do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SluSignGuy Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 Drew, this not just directed at you. But people on both the Pro and Anti Brad debate, stop attacking one another. It is getting tiredsome, and no one likes it. At least don't do it by name. You can still make your points and not attack one another individually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUDrew Posted March 29, 2007 Author Share Posted March 29, 2007 nm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 16. "Who said that" In response to message #15 I didn't say that. I said bcs programs have a built in advantage and that is easier to compete a high level at them yearly. I never said that non-bcs schools couldn't compete and couldn't land recruits. I said they just have a harder time, becuase the don't have the same infastructure as football bcs schools have. If you are going to compete at these other schools and hope to remain copetive over time you must make the committment from the top down. Drew you are just starting to read what ever you want into the opinions of people who don't agree with everything you say. Almost everyone on this board believes it can and should happen here. 90% of the posters on here believed at the begining of the year that we would be in the tournament. I still think we should have and I put the blame for that squarely on Brad's shoulders. But if you want to cure the cancer you don't just treat the symptons, you have to cure the cancer itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 let me know when fordham hits the top 50 for a couple of years in a row. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 Yeah, but you start with the tumors...and we got a whopper. Isn't the April 15 signing date fast approaching? I'll bet you $25, Brian, he doesn't sign any one other than the two verbals he has right now. The man couldn't recruit Bill Clinton to a private video session with Paris Hilton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 Steve, I didn't see Drew call out anyone by name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 I'll take that bet. I bet we get the 2 verbals and at least 1 other. 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...
SLUDrew Posted March 29, 2007 Author Share Posted March 29, 2007 Roy, aren't you at all impressed that Wittenburg can recruit kids of this caliber when he plays in a gym that is smaller than St. Louis U High's and his program about 456th on the list of items covered by the media in New York? Do you think Soderberg would have gotten this kid if he coached at Fordham? He can't get recruits when he is the number one basketball show in town and has an arena coming about five times the size of Fordham's. I am sorry I almost forgot, this kid probably committed to the administration not the coach, as it is solely up to the administration to determine how good a team will be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 "let me know when fordham hits the top 50 for a couple of years in a row." Doesn't that make Drew's point even more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 1. Good for Fordham - anytime a team in our conference can do well recruiting it helps all of us. 2. Not knowing all the issues at play with this recruit - how do you know it was not a personal thing like the Larry Hughes thing? The flip side is how do you know it is not and just simply a great recruiting job? Who knows. 3. The signing date is April 11 - at least that is what someone posted to a question I asked a few days ago so the bet may well be lost long before April 15. 4. Steve is correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUDrew Posted March 29, 2007 Author Share Posted March 29, 2007 I did pose a question to specific posters so that must have been what Steve was referring to. I completely agree. There is zero need for name-calling on this board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 how do i know if soderberg would have gotten him. there are a lot of factors that go into it. maybe this kid had some sort of extenuating circumstance that contributed to his selection. vtime brought up the kid going to mckendree the other day. this morning there is an article in the belleville news democrat about the kid. come to find out that the kid just wants to stay close to home so he can hunt and fish at his favorite hangouts http://www.belleville.com/mld/belleville/sports/16991620.htm the point i was making is that one recruit doesnt mean that fordham has all at once become a player in the big time recruiting wars and a top 50 annual team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinfootes Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 why are you shocked by XU getting good players? It's been going on for 25 years. Cross that one off your list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOSLU68 Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Our two verbals look as good as AK and DM and the A-10 is on the way up, again that is what bringing in Charlotte and SLU was all about-rasing the bar for this league-that is our mission. We have plenty of time and lots of interest from a number of high school and jucos- Brad and staff have been working hard-but it is time to sign all available scholarships and to learn to coach and play 10 or more players-this thing of saving scholarships to be awarded to the walk on we begged to come out because we did not sign players is a travesty-If a head coach and staff can not coach 13 players plus a few walk ons that is really poor-that is a teaching ratio of 3 to 1 they would kill for that in math or language classes. Players like AK, DM,and BH deseerved more playing time-work harder at that coach Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUDrew Posted March 30, 2007 Author Share Posted March 30, 2007 I find it funny that some on here offer every excuse they can think as to why Brad doesn't land big recruits (of course never admitting Brad can't recruit)and then fellow A-10, Jesuit schools land top 150 guys in suicessive days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 You're on Skip. Just to clarify, I said he'd land the two verbals he has...but will not ink anyone else by 04/15. Clear? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taj79 Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 "the point I was making is that one recruit doesn't mean that ... has ... become a player in the big time recruiting wars and a top 50 annual team." Saint Louis University. 1997. Larry Hughes. Case in point. 'Nuff said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inthelou Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Every other post is either directed at him or attacking him or from him attacking another poster who disagrees with him. And a lot of it is petty. What is the obsession with this guy? I'm relatively new to the board but he's one fan, one guy. He should have his say but the board shouldn't revolve around him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoctorB Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 The hypocrisy involved in the line of reasoning associated with this thread is amazing. The logic is an insult to western civilization. In addition, the motivation to come on here and howl in delight whenever another program gets a verbal, and remind everyone how terrible our staff is, borders on the obsessive/pathological. I will just leave it at that. also: I would like to get in on that bet that only 2 guys will sign with SLU by the signing date. But instead of $25, how about wagering our retirement accounts? It would be great to double mine, now that I am getting past the midpoint of my career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 I agree with a lot of what you are saying Doctor B. But, an insult towWestern civilization? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUDrew Posted March 30, 2007 Author Share Posted March 30, 2007 I was getting so frustrated with the litany of excuses I was reading as to why we shouldn't expect Brad to be able to effectively recruit under the current administration. None of us consider the situation at SLU to be perfect, but there are multiple examples of coaches being able to recruit quality athletes to schools that have far less going for them than SLU. By the way, sometimes you try to hard to sound like an academic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Western Civilization has a whole lot more to worry about than UB's failure to sign 18-20 year old kids. I'll pass on the retirement fund bet, but will take the 25 w/ you as well. Again, he signs no one by the 15th other than Mitchell and Relphorde. You game, Doc? Drew don't be apologizing to the Kool Aid Club. I think it's fair to point out that lowly Fordham can get an early quality signee, while we can't ink a PG who would rather wait to see who Iowa is going to hire. Broy, where does Fordham rate on the all important budget list? I'm thinking UB is just having a difficult time making any kind of connection with kids who have other options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoctorB Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Drew; I am not trying -- I am an academic, since Reagan was president. I quit trying a long time ago. God help us if someone actually uses words outside the 250-300 words that people generally use in a day (that is roughly a statistical reality, by the way). Thanks for a humane response, by the way. And also by the way, I certainly expect effective recruitment. My bet is that just about everyone on here is hoping for great recruits. Personally, I would say that Xavier and Fordham, just to take those 2 examples, do not have "far less going for them" than SLU. In fact, from the perspective of a highly confused 17-year-old, they probably look about the same (although, for instance, Dayton, NYC, and St. Louis represent 3 very different urban areas). In addition, I have said this before -- but I really think a lot of people overestimate the rational thought of teenagers making their college decision--especially young athletes beings hit from all sides. In that sense, it may have very little to do with what a school "has going for it"--and involve much more emotional/irrational things (such as, did I enjoy the party with the other players? did the coach remind me of my Dad, or not remind me of my Dad? did a pretty cheerleader smile at me the right way?? do I like the Rams and Cardinal, or am I a Mets fan?? Do I like hanigng with Kevin Lisch and Luke Meyere or dio I prefer hanging with Mateen Cleeves or Lawrence Funderburke?? etc. etc.) My main point in all of this is to suggest that to frame this in largely rational ways may be quite mistaken, and exaggerating the factors that actually go into these decisions. They might tell a reporter that "I really like the coach"; but other factors may be unstated, to say the least. Sorry if all of this is too academic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marlow Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 >I find it funny that some on here offer every excuse they >can think as to why Brad doesn't land big recruits (of >course never admitting Brad can't recruit)and then fellow >A-10, Jesuit schools land top 150 guys in suicessive days. Brad can't recruit. Romar couldn't recruit. Spoon couldn't recruit. Grawer recruited one super class, and it was left to Spoon. Ekker couldn't recruit. Coleman couldn't recruit. The last person to recruit was Bob Polk. Something is rotten in Denmark! 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.