Grawer and SLU may finally bury the hatchet

[thetorch]

Why Spoon didn't retain Lee Winfield is a mystery to me. Julian would have stayed, and just imagine what other local talents SLU could have gotten. Then, the program would have become so attractive, with the success and the improved conference affiliation, that later recruits, like Archibald, Lee, and Baker, probably would have been Billikens as well.

Lee Winfield was a Grawer man first and Missouri man second. Winfield would never have stayed at SLU without Rich there. He was also paid much better at Mizzou. No way Winfield would have stayed to coach with Spoon.

Also remember Julian was the big man in that recruiting class. It was apparent that he was 3rd best at the end of the season (4th best if Grant hadn't gone down). He had to transform his game from trying to be a point guard to be an undersized PF and hustle guy in the Big 8. He was a fine player in the big 8 and would have been great at SLU but he thought he was a scoring pg when in actuality he was a tweener 3 or 4 man. He had to realize a lot about his abilities while at Mizzou. The skill level he played against made him do that. Had he stayed here 4 years later he may have been the same guy trying to be a pg and we wouldn't have H. Those teams would not have made the NCAAs with Winfield playing the point.

[Quality Is Job 1]

Lee Winfield was a Grawer man first and Missouri man second. Winfield would never have stayed at SLU without Rich there. He was also paid much better at Mizzou. No way Winfield would have stayed to coach with Spoon.

Also remember Julian was the big man in that recruiting class. It was apparent that he was 3rd best at the end of the season (4th best if Grant hadn't gone down). He had to transform his game from trying to be a point guard to be an undersized PF and hustle guy in the Big 8. He was a fine player in the big 8 and would have been great at SLU but he thought he was a scoring pg when in actuality he was a tweener 3 or 4 man. He had to realize a lot about his abilities while at Mizzou. The skill level he played against made him do that. Had he stayed here 4 years later he may have been the same guy trying to be a pg and we wouldn't have H. Those teams would not have made the NCAAs with Winfield playing the point.

Then that's a problem with the administration's vision.

Would Julian Winfield have continued to insist on being a point under Spoonhour? How do we know Spoon wouldn't have still brought Waldman in and persuaded Julian that his best position was on the wing? Besides, Julian was pretty much the de facto point guard much of the 1994 season, when Missouri went undefeated in the Big 8 and reached the regional final. Melvin Booker wasn't a true point, either.

[kevinfootes]

How convenient of you to ignore the issues of facilities and pay for assistant coaches to focus on how much Spoonhour got paid in 1993 compared to how much Soderberg got paid in 2007. They may have paid Spoon considerably more than they paid Grawer and thrown in Cardinals season tickets, and he improved attendance remarkably, but the administration's mindset was not about sustaining prominence. The past eight years are evidence.

I'm not sure how you can say that SLU wasn't in a better mindset at the time they brought in Spoon compared to before he was there. They had just moved into a MUCH better conference a year earlier and then brought in a proven coach who was regarded as one of the best Xs and Os guys in the business. They paid him a LOT more money than they were paying Grawer. Again, after Spoon quit they brought in two coaches making less than he made. That's how I can say that SLU was in a better mindset during the Spoon era than beforehand or afterwards until the chaifetz got rolling and they brought in RM.

Was SLU's "mindset" better during the Spoon era than it is now? Obviously not. I never said that. Please show me where I made a statement like that. How am I conveniently forgetting something? Do you understand what 'better" means? Better than with Grawer and better than with Brad for sure. Was it perfect? Absolutely not. Should it have been better? Obviously.

SLU obviously could and should have done more during the Spoon era. Spoon could and should have gotten off his butt and recruited better while the program was at such a high point.

[kevinfootes]

They made Spoon pay for ice cream for the team out of his pocket. I wouldn't call that the right mindset.

So you're saying that SLU was in the exact same "mindset" during the Grawer era, when they moved into a horrilbe conference just to try to keep the program going?

[kevinfootes]

Where are you getting that from? I find that interesting if true, but do you have some inside info?

Biondi shares the salary information with me each year.

I recall reading that Spoon made about $500K while at SLU. I believe Brad was in the neighborhood of $300K when he was let go. I think SLU made a counter offer to Washington that exceeded $500K, but he wasn't making that while coaching here. I beleive Rammer has discused it on his radio show at different times over the years.

[Quality Is Job 1]

I'm not sure how you can say that SLU wasn't in a better mindset at the time they brought in Spoon compared to before he was there. They had just moved into a MUCH better conference a year earlier and then brought in a proven coach who was regarded as one of the best Xs and Os guys in the business. They paid him a LOT more money than they were paying Grawer. Again, after Spoon quit they brought in two coaches making less than he made. That's how I can say that SLU was in a better mindset during the Spoon era than beforehand or afterwards until the chaifetz got rolling and they brought in RM.

Was SLU's "mindset" better during the Spoon era than it is now? Obviously not. I never said that. Please show me where I made a statement like that. How am I conveniently forgetting something? Do you understand what 'better" means? Better than with Grawer and better than with Brad for sure. Was it perfect? Absolutely not. Should it have been better? Obviously.

SLU obviously could and should have done more during the Spoon era. Spoon could and should have gotten off his butt and recruited better while the program was at such a high point.

Come on Footes. You're revising your statements on the run.

I said:

I just think that if SLU's administration had adopted the mindset it has now back in 1988, Rich Grawer could have established the Billikens program into what Gonzaga become later.

So you said:

SLU had a pretty good mindset during the Spoon era. He was very well paid for that era. I think Soon made more in his first year st SLU than Sodie did in his last year...some 14 or 15 years later. And Spoon delivered to the tune of more than 15K per game on many occasions. I just wish he would have been more interested in recruiting.

To which I responded that the mindset was inadequate, especially compared to the current mindset, which was the foundation of my original statement: "If SLU's current attitude were in place in the height of the Grawer era, the program would be in a much better place" -- better even than at the height of the Spoonhour era. You said that the attitude was "pretty good," but I say it was not good enough and not where it is now.

Bottom line: "Better" doesn't necessarily mean "pretty good."

[kevinfootes]

Come on Footes. You're revising your statements on the run.

I said:

So you said:

To which I responded that the mindset was inadequate, especially compared to the current mindset, which was the foundation of my original statement: "If SLU's current attitude were in place in the height of the Grawer era, the program would be in a much better place" -- better even than at the height of the Spoonhour era. You said that the attitude was "pretty good," but I say it was not good enough and not where it is now.

Bottom line: "Better" doesn't necessarily mean "pretty good."

How is answering your questions revising statements?

We're talking about a matter of opinion. I'll stand by my belief that it was pretty good. Especially when compared to any other SLU era until now. I don't agree with your belief that SLU would have been better under Grawer than it was at the height of the Spoon era because I don't think Grawer could match Spoon as a coach. Are you saying that Grawer would do a better job with current facilities than Spoon would do with current facilities?

You're trying to ding me for saying SLU had a "pretty good" attitude. Geez, that's not exactly a ringing endorsement I was giving them. If you've read the posts I've made for years and years on here I've been as critical of Biondi as anyone for his lack of commitment to the program. I could probably name only 2 or 3 guys on here who've done more of it than I have. You are certainly not even close to being on that list thicks.

I'm just shocked that you can throw away the three tourney trips that Spoon made. How many times have they been to the big dance? If Grawer would have taken the handcuffs off of Monroe Douglass he might have kept his job. I appreciate what Grawer did at SLU, but poor coaching contributed to his downfall as much as anything else.

Tell me which candidates I should be supporting in my signature so I can get the special treatment from you!

[Pistol]

They made Spoon pay for ice cream for the team out of his pocket. I wouldn't call that the right mindset.

Wouldn't that be an NCAA violation? It seems like the Majerus violation where he bought a late-night dinner for a grieving Keith Van Horn.

[billiken_roy]

Wouldn't that be an NCAA violation? It seems like the Majerus violation where he bought a late-night dinner for a grieving Keith Van Horn.

it was spoon's own ice cream. he didnt buy it for a player. as the legend goes, spoon was on a recruiting trip and after his meeting on his own stopped for ice cream. he put it on his expense account and apparently the slu athletic dept denied the expense.

[jimbofive]

it was spoon's own ice cream. he didnt buy it for a player. as the legend goes, spoon was on a recruiting trip and after his meeting on his own stopped for ice cream. he put it on his expense account and apparently the slu athletic dept denied the expense.

I can't help but laugh at this. I just think of Scarface in the backseat giving Ice Cream Spoon® all kinds of crap about it, and asking when they can quit the BOWL$H!T and go burn one, B.

[kevinfootes]

it was spoon's own ice cream. he didnt buy it for a player. as the legend goes, spoon was on a recruiting trip and after his meeting on his own stopped for ice cream. he put it on his expense account and apparently the slu athletic dept denied the expense.

I've worked with people in the past who have tried to expense things like newspapers and shoeshines. On one hand, it's funny to deny an expense like that. On the other hand, it's funny that Spoon would get worked up over having to shell out a couple of bucks.

[slufanskip]

I've worked with people in the past who have tried to expense things like newspapers and shoeshines. On one hand, it's funny to deny an expense like that. On the other hand, it's funny that Spoon would get worked up over having to shell out a couple of bucks.

My understanding was it wouldn't have been a problem had he not added the sprinkles. I mean you have to draw the line somewhere. It was really Spoon's own greed that did him in.

[kevinfootes]

My understanding was it wouldn't have been a problem had he not added the sprinkles. I mean you have to draw the line somewhere. It was really Spoon's own greed that did him in.

Skip, I'm sure that's "no sprinkles" was clearly stated in Spoon's contract. It's pretty standard.

[billiken_roy]

i disagree footes. the fact he was denied the trivial expense is what spoon was upset about. i would think a head coach likes to think he can take an ice cream break at his leisure. i doubt the $2 was his irritation. it was the fact someone was overlooking him and controlling him that closely.

[slufanskip]

i disagree footes. the fact he was denied the trivial expense is what spoon was upset about. i would think a head coach likes to think he can take an ice cream break at his leisure. i doubt the $2 was his irritation. it was the fact someone was overlooking him and controlling him that closely.

The fact that he'd file a $2.00 ice cream as an expense would be a problem if it was my company. Being cheap goes both ways and maybe because he did file expense vouchers for a $2.00 ice cream was the reason he needed to be closely monitered. You'd think he was a politician.

[kevinfootes]

i disagree footes. the fact he was denied the trivial expense is what spoon was upset about. i would think a head coach likes to think he can take an ice cream break at his leisure. i doubt the $2 was his irritation. it was the fact someone was overlooking him and controlling him that closely.

I have mixed feelings about this one. I'm not sure if you've ever had a job that required travel, or worked for a company where there were many employees traveling quite a bit. In my experience, you can expense three meals per day plus hotel, cabs, mileage on you car, etc. If you're entertaining customers, that can extend to things like golf, tickets for sporting events, cocktails, etc. However, I've never worked for a company that was okay with doing things like expensing an ice cream for yourself late in the evening or Coke that you buy during the middle of the day (or newspapers, shoeshines, etc.)

I don't have first hand knowldege of how SLU works these things. There are many companies that don't require receipts for a bill that is under a certain dollar amount. In that case you could usually add something like an ice cream purchased at night to your lunch or dinner if you're so inclined.

roy, do you think a coach should be able to watch a movie in the hotel room and have the university pay for it? How about the mini bar where you can spend $7 or $8 dollars on a beer? How about a massage at the hotel spa? I'm frankly shocked that Spoon would be so cheap as to try to expense something like that and then complain about it.

[billiken_roy]

I have mixed feelings about this one. I'm not sure if you've ever had a job that required travel, or worked for a company where there were many employees traveling quite a bit. In my experience, you can expense three meals per day plus hotel, cabs, mileage on you car, etc. If you're entertaining customers, that can extend to things like golf, tickets for sporting events, cocktails, etc. However, I've never worked for a company that was okay with doing things like expensing an ice cream for yourself late in the evening or Coke that you buy during the middle of the day (or newspapers, shoeshines, etc.)

I don't have first hand knowldege of how SLU works these things. There are many companies that don't require receipts for a bill that is under a certain dollar amount. In that case you could usually add something like an ice cream purchased at night to your lunch or dinner if you're so inclined.

roy, do you think a coach should be able to watch a movie in the hotel room and have the university pay for it? How about the mini bar where you can spend $7 or $8 dollars on a beer? How about a massage at the hotel spa? I'm frankly shocked that Spoon would be so cheap as to try to expense something like that and then complain about it.

i am following your thinking completely. and i agree that i couldnt get an ice cream on an expense report. however i am not the head coach of a major d-1 basketball team making a half million dollars a day with the ego that comes with that. that is my point. spoon thought he deserved that leeway and luxury and slu bean counters didnt. personally i would be on spoon's side on this one. as long as the aggregate amount of "minor luxury" didnt just get stupid or start smelling like something wrong or illicit, i say you better pamper your coach if he is doing a good job.

[Clock_Tower]

i am following your thinking completely. and i agree that i couldnt get an ice cream on an expense report. however i am not the head coach of a major d-1 basketball team making a half million dollars a day with the ego that comes with that. that is my point. spoon thought he deserved that leeway and luxury and slu bean counters didnt. personally i would be on spoon's side on this one. as long as the aggregate amount of "minor luxury" didnt just get stupid or start smelling like something wrong or illicit, i say you better pamper your coach if he is doing a good job.

Agree. During those nervous days waiting and waiting to hear, for sure, that RM will be our new head coach, RM apparently was holding out for private charters, strength and conditioning coaches, extra tutors, etc. Nearly everyone wanted to give these benefits, and more, to RM. Can anyone truly say that had RM also demanded $2 ice creams that Fr. Biondi would have (or should have) put his foot down and said "No, the deal's off. That's the same demand the assistant cafeteria workers (insert your favorite job position) wanted, and we at SLU have to put our foot down, say no and be consistent with all employees. Likewise, when coaches are being lured away, funny how quick schools are to then throw money at their coach. Like it or not, head basketball coaches cannnot, and should not, be treated like any other employee.

[Pistol]

Funny story. I'm not surprised at all. I'm sure Billy Donovan or Coach K would have gotten this one approved. It's the principle, not the amount- he was on business-related travel.

I don't know what it's like in there now, but when I was at SLU there were some crazy bean counters in that AD, particularly under Woolard's reign. Lori Flanagan was the WORST, particularly for men's teams.

[OrlandoStewart]

When I worked there, our team to to the CUSA tourney in Memphis and I had to carry $12,000 in cash to memphis. The Athletic department had no credit cards for the coaches, you had to carry cas or put it on your own credit card. SInce it took about 6 months to reinburse you for your cc you opted to choose cash. I think it is a little better now.

[cheeseman]

I have mixed feelings about this one. I'm not sure if you've ever had a job that required travel, or worked for a company where there were many employees traveling quite a bit. In my experience, you can expense three meals per day plus hotel, cabs, mileage on you car, etc. If you're entertaining customers, that can extend to things like golf, tickets for sporting events, cocktails, etc. However, I've never worked for a company that was okay with doing things like expensing an ice cream for yourself late in the evening or Coke that you buy during the middle of the day (or newspapers, shoeshines, etc.)

I don't have first hand knowldege of how SLU works these things. There are many companies that don't require receipts for a bill that is under a certain dollar amount. In that case you could usually add something like an ice cream purchased at night to your lunch or dinner if you're so inclined.

roy, do you think a coach should be able to watch a movie in the hotel room and have the university pay for it? How about the mini bar where you can spend $7 or $8 dollars on a beer? How about a massage at the hotel spa? I'm frankly shocked that Spoon would be so cheap as to try to expense something like that and then complain about it.

Normally, you are given a per diem amount for food - excluding wine and spirits. The per diem might be $50 and the company or organization does not care what you spend it on for the most part just as long as you don't exceed the $50. If you do you will only get the $50 for the day and the rest is on you or if you spend less that day you will only get the total you spent. Under this situation, Spoon would have only been denied the $2 if he had exceeded his per diem. Not sure how SLU did it then or now but I know when my son was doing research for the medical school and he went to a conference or had to travel out of town for business, he got a per diem. I am not sure if the coaching staff has to follow the same rules as other employees,

[Quality Is Job 1]

Normally, you are given a per diem amount for food - excluding wine and spirits. The per diem might be $50 and the company or organization does not care what you spend it on for the most part just as long as you don't exceed the $50. If you do you will only get the $50 for the day and the rest is on you or if you spend less that day you will only get the total you spent. Under this situation, Spoon would have only been denied the $2 if he had exceeded his per diem. Not sure how SLU did it then or now but I know when my son was doing research for the medical school and he went to a conference or had to travel out of town for business, he got a per diem. I am not sure if the coaching staff has to follow the same rules as other employees,

But even though you get a per diem, the company still wants you to submit receipts so that they know you're not spending it on alcohol or other forbidden items.

[kevinfootes]

But even though you get a per diem, the company still wants you to submit receipts so that they know you're not spending it on alcohol or other forbidden items.

thicks, you typically don't get an itemized receipt to take away from dinner. There's no real way to tell what exactly you're ordering. If there is a per diem specification, the only thing that matters is whether or not you exceeded that amount.

Maybe you do have to pamper a coach, but (once again) I've heard of any job that allowed nonsense like expensing an ice cream cone. If this story is true, Spoon actually goes down a notch in my mind. If he's too cheap to pay a couple of bucks for a stupid ice cream cone, tough s#$% IMO.

[kevinfootes]

Normally, you are given a per diem amount for food - excluding wine and spirits. The per diem might be $50 and the company or organization does not care what you spend it on for the most part just as long as you don't exceed the $50. If you do you will only get the $50 for the day and the rest is on you or if you spend less that day you will only get the total you spent. Under this situation, Spoon would have only been denied the $2 if he had exceeded his per diem. Not sure how SLU did it then or now but I know when my son was doing research for the medical school and he went to a conference or had to travel out of town for business, he got a per diem. I am not sure if the coaching staff has to follow the same rules as other employees,

This is why the story sounds a little shakey to me. If SLU staff carried cash because the reimbursement process took too long, then why would Spoon have been submitting a bill? If he exceeded his cash amount, he would have known there wouldn't be more money coming.

[Quality Is Job 1]

thicks, you typically don't get an itemized receipt to take away from dinner. There's no real way to tell what exactly you're ordering. If there is a per diem specification, the only thing that matters is whether or not you exceeded that amount.

The restaurant will give you a receipt if you ask for one, and it will delineate everything you ordered. When I worked for the Urban League and had to travel, I was given a nice per diem -- more than adequate for most casual restaurants, including dessert -- but I did have to keep my receipts. Snacks and tips were included in the per diem. Any non-alcoholic drink and any food item were fair game, as long as I didn't go beyond the per diem. If I did, it would come out of my own pocket. Any money that I didn't spend during the trip had to be returned to the organization.