Awful Commentary

[moytoy12]

If players didn't like Brad, I'd think it would be based on his playing style and not the type of person he is. As Miklasz noted about SLU fans, many of you are sanctimonious. Again, I would have no problem with that if SLU didn't hire Majerus, who dropped his pants in front of a player. From my limited lens of a Sports Illustrated article, Majerus doesn't seem like a nice guy. I know Majerus talks a good game, but something about him appears phony to me.

In all my years on here, I have not chastised SLU fans for attacking Mizzou for their indiscretions with the NCAA. That is because it was indefensible in my book. However, that changes with the hiring of Majerus.

Your position is laughable, anything else from your soapbox?

[Clock_Tower]

How does this statement of yours: "I like coaches, who aren't dogmatic, but evaluate cases individually" square with your own "dogmatic" view that "a sin is a sin." If you care to retract your own statement, please do so. You are free to like or not like RM and you are free to have certain gut feeling about MA, Soderberg and Romar v. RM but so far you have not documented anything.

Why are you not open to "evaluate cases individually" with respect to RM's violations while at Utah a decade ago but you give free reign to MA, Brad and Romar? As to Romar, Nick Kern had no business walking any college campus (and never did) much less SLU's campus and I am glad he never made it to SLU. Likewise, Randy Pulley showed no interest in academics and flunked out of Mizzou, regathered himself at JUCO and then laid an egg at Mizzou for his second chance at college. The fact that he failed so miserably at Mizzou/college on his second attempt show his total lack of character. Brad recruited Obi who was not a guy a real character and Horace Dixon who did not belong on SLU's campus. Don't forget Jason Edwin (Romar's guy) who likewise flunked out and failed to return.

While I have respect for Romar, Brad and MA (none for Quin), there has not been a hint of scandal with RM/SLU who is now beginning his 3rd year and, by all accounts, none of his players/recruits point to any real concern.

[aj_arete]

So your conclusions are based off minimal information? Solid.

As an athletic director of SLU, who proclaims strong ethics, I would not have hired Majerus or any other coach cited by the NCAA. If I was an Athletic Director of Georgia, then I would consider hiring a coach, who was cited by the NCAA for minor violations.

Does that not make sense? Do you not remember Father Biondi and his vision for the program?? He wanted to be a Top 50 program, but do it the right way. Different institutions have different standards.

[moytoy12]

As an athletic director of SLU, who proclaims strong ethics, I would not have hired Majerus or any other coach cited by the NCAA. If I was an Athletic Director of Georgia, then I would consider hiring a coach, who was cited by the NCAA for minor violations.

Does that not make sense? Do you not remember Father Biondi and his vision for the program?? He wanted to be a Top 50 program, but do it the right way. Different institutions have different standards.

No, given Majerus' violations, which you admit you know almost nothing about, it does not make sense.

Further, do you have any evidence that SLU hasn't done it the right way? Oh, that's right, they hired that criminal Majerus.

[slufanskip]

If players didn't like Brad, I'd think it would be based on his playing style and not the type of person he is. As Miklasz noted about SLU fans, many of you are sanctimonious. Again, I would have no problem with that if SLU didn't hire Majerus, who dropped his pants in front of a player. From my limited lens of a Sports Illustrated article, Majerus doesn't seem like a nice guy. I know Majerus talks a good game, but something about him appears phony to me.

In all my years on here, I have not chastised SLU fans for attacking Mizzou for their indiscretions with the NCAA. That is because it was indefensible in my book. However, that changes with the hiring of Majerus.

Again, I don't have ALL of the information on Butterfield and Anderson. However, I had no problem with Romar taking a chance on Nicholas Kern of Vashon. I think he's willing to take chances on marginal students with questionable backgrounds and I don't have a problem with that. Romar is in the business of saving lives and I believe Anderson is too. For that, I respect them for it.

You'd think wrong about Brad. However, I believe it's probably impossible for a coach to be liked by all.

Majerus's NCAA findings are available and have been linked on Bills.com before. Look them up, it's many small things. I had the same thoughts as you and initially didn't want RM hired. After looking into it further it was clear he needed to pay more attention to the details, but the majority of the violations he did the right thing regardless of NCAA rules.

The NCAA has a history of stupid rules.

[Westy03]

No, given Majerus' violations, which you admit you know almost nothing about, it does not make sense.

Further, do you have any evidence that SLU hasn't done it the right way? Oh, that's right, they hired that criminal Majerus.

I heard Majerus was racist toward werewolves while at Utah so I wouldnt hire him either

[ACE]

If players didn't like Brad, I'd think it would be based on his playing style and not the type of person he is. As Miklasz noted about SLU fans, many of you are sanctimonious. Again, I would have no problem with that if SLU didn't hire Majerus, who dropped his pants in front of a player. From my limited lens of a Sports Illustrated article, Majerus doesn't seem like a nice guy. I know Majerus talks a good game, but something about him appears phony to me.

In all my years on here, I have not chastised SLU fans for attacking Mizzou for their indiscretions with the NCAA. That is because it was indefensible in my book. However, that changes with the hiring of Majerus.

Again, I don't have ALL of the information on Butterfield and Anderson. However, I had no problem with Romar taking a chance on Nicholas Kern of Vashon. I think he's willing to take chances on marginal students with questionable backgrounds and I don't have a problem with that. Romar is in the business of saving lives and I believe Anderson is too. For that, I respect them for it.

To your first point, bullsh!t. You have a long track record of taking shots at the SLU program. As others have pointed out, you have no credibility.

Your second point is ridiculous... "saving lives"??? They are like most coaches at the D1 level, they are in the business to win games. Now coaches may go about it differently and some enter into grey areas more than others, but it is about winning games. If they really wanted to "save lives", they would have gone into a different profession.

[moytoy12]

I heard Majerus was racist toward werewolves while at Utah so I wouldnt hire him either

WHAT??? I'm on AJ's side now.

[aj_arete]

To your first point, bullsh!t. You have a long track record of taking shots at the SLU program. As others have pointed out, you have no credibility.

Your second point is ridiculous... "saving lives"??? They are like most coaches at the D1 level, they are in the business to win games. Now coaches may go about it differently and some enter into grey areas more than others, but it is about winning games. If they really wanted to "save lives", they would have gone into a different profession.

Certainly, I have attacked SLU before, but not about their ethics. I stated that Liddell lacked the drive in high school to excel at SLU and I was attacked. I stated that previous recruiting classes weren't as great as many thought and I was attacked. That's the difference. I see your crude methods remain.

Now have my predictions or opinions always been right, of course not.

With Majerus, we can certainly see that winning is all that matters. That's why he kicked players off the team. That's his right, but I like to see balance where the coach truly cares about his players and committed to winning. I think you can do both.

[moytoy12]

With Majerus, we can certainly see that winning is all that matters. That's why he kicked players off the team. That's his right, but I like to see balance where the coach truly cares about his players and committed to winning. I think you can do both.

You don't let the facts get in your way. Congrats. I'm hoping for more silly statements. I know you have 'em in you.

[aj_arete]

You'd think wrong about Brad. However, I believe it's probably impossible for a coach to be liked by all.

Majerus's NCAA findings are available and have been linked on Bills.com before. Look them up, it's many small things. I had the same thoughts as you and initially didn't want RM hired. After looking into it further it was clear he needed to pay more attention to the details, but the majority of the violations he did the right thing regardless of NCAA rules.

The NCAA has a history of stupid rules.

I'm biased in that I think the NCAA is trying to do the right thing. I know people up there, who work at the NCAA and I asked the same questions many of you have referenced. There are some rules that the 'everyday' man may think is ridiculous, but there's a reason behind them. Specifically, you have to draw the line somewhere because coaches will take advantage of innocuous rules such as paying for meals and use that as a competitive advantage against another program. Unlike Majerus, I respect authority and follow the rules. If it is against the rules to pay a meal for a player, then I wouldn't break that law. Even though, I believe college athletes should be paid. The difference is there is a right way to go about it. Advocate changing the rule to allow players to be compensated, rather than break rules that you think are stupid.

[aj_arete]

You don't let the facts get in your way. Congrats. I'm hoping for more silly statements. I know you have 'em in you.

Enlighten me. Did those players leave SLU willingly?

[moytoy12]

Enlighten me. Did those players leave SLU willingly?

Skip just described how majerus cares about his players and you said all he cares about is winning. But hey, preach on. You've really got a compelling argument.

[aj_arete]

Skip just described how majerus cares about his players and you said all he cares about is winning. But hey, preach on. You've really got a compelling argument.

Now back up your statement. You just said that my statement was silly, so tell me the errors of my ways. Did those players, Mitchell, Relephorde, Maguire and that other PF that I can't name, leave willingly or unwillingly.

I await your reply.

[brianstl]

I certainly remember Rich DALY'S shenanigans under the Norm regime. I also can go farther back and recall the dark era of SLU basketball under Ron Ekker.

I'm a believer in focusing on present regimes, rather than past regimes. As far as I know, SLU no longer has the moral advantage with their present coaching staffs because I'm not aware of ANY NCAA violations committed by Mike Anderson at UAB or Mizzou. As we know, SLU cannot say the same.

There was a time when Father Biondi could proudly point to the pristine image of SLU basketball as a program up until the time that Soderberg was fired. Of course, that was one of the few positives of SLU basketball that exceeded mediocrity. We could also point to Indiana and their clean image with the NCAA under Bobby Knight, but that changed all in one season when they hired Kelvin Sampson.

Now Majerus might not be Sampson. Only the future can tell that, but SLU is taking a calculated risk. I believe that risk was done all in the name of money. Therefore, I'd say that SLU's moral compass has changed.

When he was at Arkansas the he was part of the staff that got in trouble for two JUCO kids they signed. In fact he was the lead guy on those two kids. The NCAA got involved and the school had to impose sanctions on the basketball program.

[ACE]

Certainly, I have attacked SLU before, but not about their ethics. I stated that Liddell lacked the drive in high school to excel at SLU and I was attacked. I stated that previous recruiting classes weren't as great as many thought and I was attacked. That's the difference. I see your crude methods remain.

Now have my predictions or opinions always been right, of course not.

With Majerus, we can certainly see that winning is all that matters. That's why he kicked players off the team. That's his right, but I like to see balance where the coach truly cares about his players and committed to winning. I think you can do both.

Talk to me more about the lives coach Anderson has saved. This just keeps getting better.

[moytoy12]

Now back up your statement. You just said that my statement was silly, so tell me the errors of my ways. Did those players, Mitchell, Relephorde, Maguire and that other PF that I can't name, leave willingly or unwillingly.

I await your reply.

The error of your ways is that apparently aren't very good at reading comprehension. Contrary to your assertion, Skip plainly pointed out fact based stories that clearly relay that RM's cares about more than just winning.

The stuff about the players is irrelevant.

[aj_arete]

The error of your ways is that apparently aren't very good at reading comprehension. Contrary to your assertion, Skip plainly pointed out fact based stories that clearly relay that RM's cares about more than just winning.

The stuff about the players is irrelevant.

Of course, that's silly to think that the opinions of former players are irrelevant. Whatever RM says must be true. I see you didn't address the silly aspect of my post because you couldn't.

[moytoy12]

Of course, that's silly to think that the opinions of former players are irrelevant. Whatever RM says must be true. I see you didn't address the silly aspect of my post because you couldn't.

Huh? You said majerus only cares about winning. That's silly and just stupid considering the facts that skip has discussed.

We can discuss the players, but that won't affect whether majerus only cares about winning since that has been proven wrong.

[slufanskip]

I'm biased in that I think the NCAA is trying to do the right thing. I know people up there, who work at the NCAA and I asked the same questions many of you have referenced. There are some rules that the 'everyday' man may think is ridiculous, but there's a reason behind them. Specifically, you have to draw the line somewhere because coaches will take advantage of innocuous rules such as paying for meals and use that as a competitive advantage against another program. Unlike Majerus, I respect authority and follow the rules. If it is against the rules to pay a meal for a player, then I wouldn't break that law. Even though, I believe college athletes should be paid. The difference is there is a right way to go about it. Advocate changing the rule to allow players to be compensated, rather than break rules that you think are stupid.

Oh, since you know people who work up there ....

The NCAA has one goal .... make money.

So are you saying if you were RM you wouldn't have bought the kid breakfast while waiting all night at the airport with him so he could go home the night his father died?

Simple question .... and your answer is?

[aj_arete]

Oh, since you know people who work up there ....

The NCAA has one goal .... make money.

So are you saying if you were RM you wouldn't have bought the kid breakfast while waiting all night at the airport with him so he could go home the night his father died?

Simple question .... and your answer is?

You sound like those Mizloser fans that ACE refers to that get mad when the NCAA comes down on them hard. While I do believe that college presidents are about money, I think the NCAA investigators take their jobs seriously and do the best that they can without having ideal support. For one, no one is compelled to talk to them. They have no subpoena power, and thus they are limited to what they can uncover. That is why when rogue programs are caught it is typically due to those minor violations that you and others seem to dismiss.

As for answering your question, I'd have no problem with that incident by itself. I doubt Utah would have cited Majerus with committing SEVERAL minor violations if that was his only indiscretion. Knowing NCAA investigators like I do, I find it highly implausible that Majerus would have been cited if that was the only violation. Keep believing Majerus... No, I don't know the facts of the case, but I do know that there has to be a pattern of noncompliance for him to be cited by the NCAA.

[slufanskip]

You sound like those Mizloser fans that ACE refers to that get mad when the NCAA comes down on them hard. While I do believe that college presidents are about money, I think the NCAA investigators take their jobs seriously and do the best that they can without having ideal support. For one, no one is compelled to talk to them. They have no subpoena power, and thus they are limited to what they can uncover. That is why when rogue programs are caught it is typically due to those minor violations that you and others seem to dismiss.

As for answering your question, I'd have no problem with that incident by itself. I doubt Utah would have cited Majerus with committing SEVERAL minor violations if that was his only indiscretion. Knowing NCAA investigators like I do, I find it highly implausible that Majerus would have been cited if that was the only violation. Keep believing Majerus... No, I don't know the facts of the case, but I do know that there has to be a pattern of noncompliance for him to be cited by the NCAA.

look it up and see exactly what the violations were. Then reread the thread and see if you can follow along.

You've conviently dismissed anything that doesn't fit your agenda.

I said RM needed to pay more attention to details, but many of the violations were just like the one and the others I've mentioned. Some were just stupid. Like buying a pizza ...he could have had the same pizza delivered to his room, no problem. He was nailed for a lot of very small infractions, of which many could have been avoided had he been more detailed and aware. You're arguing about something which you seem to have little knowledge. You are comparing his violations which were very minor with those of Mizzou. There is no real comparison. If you think there is .... great. You make me laugh with your I know NCAA investigators line. It's not the first debate we've had where you had no clue ... It will be the last though.

[slufanskip]

You sound like those Mizloser fans that ACE refers to that get mad when the NCAA comes down on them hard. While I do believe that college presidents are about money, I think the NCAA investigators take their jobs seriously and do the best that they can without having ideal support. For one, no one is compelled to talk to them. They have no subpoena power, and thus they are limited to what they can uncover. That is why when rogue programs are caught it is typically due to those minor violations that you and others seem to dismiss.

As for answering your question, I'd have no problem with that incident by itself. I doubt Utah would have cited Majerus with committing SEVERAL minor violations if that was his only indiscretion. Knowing NCAA investigators like I do, I find it highly implausible that Majerus would have been cited if that was the only violation. Keep believing Majerus... No, I don't know the facts of the case, but I do know that there has to be a pattern of noncompliance for him to be cited by the NCAA.

but that incident by itself is a violation .... so you condone violations. Take your time .... and see if you can get your stance on this straight.

[aj_arete]

but that incident by itself is a violation .... so you condone violations. Take your time .... and see if you can get your stance on this straight.

You quote a Rick Reilly article for your support??? Great! Like Majerus doesn't have buddies in the media world. We don't have to debate anymore. I answered your question and said that if it was a one-time incident, then it's no big deal. However when a pattern is noted, that is when the NCAA gets involved.

By the way, Majerus is unapologetic, even though the rules were drafted by college presidents and not the NCAA. It is his duty to follow them. That would be the ethical and right thing to do.

Without looking at the NCAA findings, which I have been unable to find, you can only go by second-hand accounts. I trust the NCAA and the job that they do.

Here's another perspective on the Majerus-era violations:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,600110100,00.html

[GoBills]

Of course, a program needs to win. If Coach Anderson had a mediocre season, it wouldn't have bothered me for him to be fired, though I would have given him another year. I've been patient with past coaches. For instance, I was in the minority that would have given Coach Soderberg another year. Even though Coach Soderberg had a mediocre reign, I still have great respect for him as a person and he has also inspired me in my Christian walk from afar.

You don't know me well enough to determine what inspires me or not. As a Christian, I am inspired by leadership. I consider a person to be a great leader by how people follow and talk about him. How about asking Matt Lawrence what kind of person that Coach Anderson is? What about people that were kicked off the team? Have you interviewed Kalen Grimes? That's how I measure a man's character.

Media articles and interviews form my basis of whether I like a person or not. Of course that is limited, but as an out of area fan that is all I can go on. If I was working in the athletic department or as an influential booster, I can form a better opinion on someone.

As for Mike Anderson, I remember articles talking about his travels on the caravan across the various towns. He talked about his humbleness and hard work that resonated with me. I was also impressed with his ability to bond with people across various walks of life. Regardless of whether he wins or loses in the future at Mizzou, I have great respect for the man based from my limited lens of him.

By the way, I believe that player is Darryl Butterfield, who you were referring to. I've worked in challenging environments where kids lack focus and have questionable pasts. If I was entrusted with players, would I automatically kick them off the squad? It's probable that I would, but I don't know all of the circumstances that Coach Anderson dealt with. Did Butterfield make restitution? Was he truly sorry and accepted the consequences? Was the story true? I don't have enough facts to make a true judgment there.

Of course, no one should condone violence against women and maybe we can look back and question tactics. I had forgotten about the Butterfield incident and if given more information on that scenario maybe my view of Anderson could change. That's my honest response.

Yes, Butterfield was the kid's name. Beat up his girlfriend and then sounds like was involved later in the year with another incident, yet he remained on the team after a second slap on the wrist. Sorry if I'm not too impressed with the character and zero tolerance policy of Coach Anderson. Vioence against women should not be condoned.

You say if Coach Anderson had another mediocre season, it wouldn't have bothered you if he was fired, yet you turn around and praise his character. So it really is all about the winning with you. Just be honest about. All the other stuff is just b.s.