More from Dayton Fans

[cheeseman]

Grawer's teams missed out on the NCAAs because they couldn't win on the road, and never got past Xavier in the conference tourney. Those are precisely BG's problems!

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/SLU/1989-schedule.html

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/SLU/1990-schedule.html

Just look at those backbreaking 2pt losses to Dayton (12-17, 6-6) and Detroit (7-21, 4-8) in 1989. Without those losses, we're 24-6 and co-MCC champs with Evansville and possibly avoid X in the MCC tournament. If that team had won @SMS or @Colorado (or beaten a good Iowa team on a neutral court instead of losing by 3) they'd have been 25-5 and almost certainly in the dance.

Don't use Upchurch as a blanket excuse. That team had Bonner, Gray, Douglas, Newberry - a good coach would have had them in the tournament.

Grawer missed out on the NCAA tourney because only 48 teams were eligible then - today he would have gone at least twice and maybe one other time.

[Duff Man]

As to X, yes, Grawer/SLU could never seem to get past them. Sure, we had a few wins over X but I'd say X probably won 3 out of 4. Unfortunately, the MCC was a one (1) bid conference and we were number 2.

Stop repeating the lie that the MCC was a one-bid league. It was for a while in the 80s (for good reason), but Evansville received an at-large bid the year we had our best team (1988-89). We could have gotten one too if we didn't 1) fail to get a single quality win away from Kiel 2) lose those games at Dayton and Detroit and 3) lose by double digits to X in the MCC tourney semis.

Still, I don't think I's say that Grawer failed to get the most out of his talent like Gregory does. Not all Grawer teams had guys like Bonner, Gray, Douglas and Newberry each year. Instead, we had guys like Rahim Al Matiin, Tony Brown, Jim Roder...

I'm not faulting Grawer for failing to win in the early 80s. I'm faulting him for failing to get to the dance even once during the window of opportunity he had in the late 80s. You don't think those teams should have done better than

1988: 14-13 regular season (5-5 T3rd MCC), lost to Detroit (6-22, 2-8 MCC) 66-63 in MCC 1st round

1989: 22-8 regular season (8-4 2nd MCC), lost to X 79-56 in the MCC semis, NIT runner-up

1990: 17-9 regular season (9-5 3rd MCC), lost to Loyola 67-58 in MCC 1st round, NIT runner-up

I don't really recall the 2 point loss to UD you are referring to

Do you remember us losing to Grambling St at home in 1987?

but a 2 point loss to a 12 win team is not the same as a 20 point blowout to a 12 win team, at home on Senior night, when it also is to a team that you handled rather easily a month earlier.

The comparison doesn't correlate game for game, but in each case you have a coach who is by all accounts 1) a nice guy who 2) advanced the program in the right direction (i.e. boosted attendance), and 3) got a free pass for underachieving from fans who can't see past 1) and 2).

[slufanskip]

Who pissed in your Cheerios? Just pointing out that not everyone shares your view on the topic.

It doesn't matter if we as fans like RM's tactics, it only matters if it works and the players can accept it. Imo there are two players who's actions strongly show that they believe in RM and what he's building. Those 2 are KM and WR. Either or both of those guys could have ducked and ran, but they didn't. They chose to come back despite it all. Do we not believe KM could have had his choice of some decent BCS schools to transfer to had he chosen. Of course he could have, but it appears to me he believes his best opportunity is here, under RM despite what a meanie he is.

[MusicCityBilliken]

It doesn't matter if we as fans like RM's tactics, it only matters if it works and the players can accept it. Imo there are two players who's actions strongly show that they believe in RM and what he's building. Those 2 are KM and WR. Either or both of those guys could have ducked and ran, but they didn't. They chose to come back despite it all. Do we not believe KM could have had his choice of some decent BCS schools to transfer to had he chosen. Of course he could have, but it appears to me he believes his best opportunity is here, under RM despite what a meanie he is.

I was always surprised by this:

Concerning KM, I think Rick made a lot visits to Milwaukee visiting 2 mothers during the months of October, November and December. His and KMs. But Willie did surprise me. With his dad bad-mouthing practically everyone through the media, he came back and had to fight his way back. He could easily taken the Smith way out and went to a Wichita State, UTEP, MO State or any of a dozen or so mid-major big public school type programs. Good for Willie. Rick can't be all that bad to play for if can get that type of loyalty.

[Duff Man]

Grawer missed out on the NCAA tourney because only 48 teams were eligible then - today he would have gone at least twice and maybe one other time.

The field expanded to 64 in 1985. Grawer's best teams (the Gray/Douglas/Bonner years) were after the field expanded.

[kappy96]

It doesn't matter if we as fans like RM's tactics, it only matters if it works and the players can accept it. Imo there are two players who's actions strongly show that they believe in RM and what he's building. Those 2 are KM and WR. Either or both of those guys could have ducked and ran, but they didn't. They chose to come back despite it all. Do we not believe KM could have had his choice of some decent BCS schools to transfer to had he chosen. Of course he could have, but it appears to me he believes his best opportunity is here, under RM despite what a meanie he is.

Great post. Couldn't agree more. I think the loyalty shown by so many of RM's former players supports that fact that he truly puts their growth as a person above all...they may not see it at the time but as they mature they understand there is a reason he does things the way he does.

[Taj79]

Now, I don' know hoe true this is but during today"s CBS CS telecast, near the end of the gsme, when color man Ton Wolf was spouting effusively about Mike McCall, he explained that McCall wasn't supposed to get all these minutes because he would have been behind Kwamain. The camera then showed Kwamain in unifrom in the bench, rooting his teammates on. Wolf talked all bout Mitchell and a little bit about Reed. Talked about how Saint Louis "is going to be loaded next year." Talked about how Majerus "really waxes on positively about his current group." Talked about how they got to see yesterday's practice and how "one minute Majerus is going off on someone and then the next how Majerus praised" so-and-so for "doing things right." It was interesting.

But he also said that "almost every school in the country that needed a point guard came after Mitchell hard" when thigs went south earlier this year. That's a testament to Mitchell's belief in Majerus and his belief that next year will be special."

On one hand that's great but on the other, without Kwamain getting a release, which he never did unlike Willie, isn't that tampering and an NCAA violation? Wolf never named names though.

[JettFlight5]

Now, I don' know hoe true this is but during today"s CBS CS telecast, near the end of the gsme, when color man Ton Wolf was spouting effusively about Mike McCall, he explained that McCall wasn't supposed to get all these minutes because he would have been behind Kwamain. The camera then showed Kwamain in unifrom in the bench, rooting his teammates on. Wolf talked all bout Mitchell and a little bit about Reed. Talked about how Saint Louis "is going to be loaded next year." Talked about how Majerus "really waxes on positively about his current group." Talked about how they got to see yesterday's practice and how "one minute Majerus is going off on someone and then the next how Majerus praised" so-and-so for "doing things right." It was interesting.

But he also said that "almost every school in the country that needed a point guard came after Mitchell hard" when thigs went south earlier this year. That's a testament to Mitchell's belief in Majerus and his belief that next year will be special."

On one hand that's great but on the other, without Kwamain getting a release, which he never did unlike Willie, isn't that tampering and an NCAA violation? Wolf never named names though.

The way I've heard it explained is that as long as he doesn't receive an official offer, there is no tampering.

[billiken_roy]

No I don't think there can be any contact. Even if kwamain initiates the coach is supposed to politely remind him they cannot talk until he is released from slu. My guess if there indeed was any attempt to contact him it would be via a third party. Old aau coach. High school coach the usual street agent etc. That also would be illegal as well.

Now what more likely happened is the coach called rickma asking if he was going to be released. And since the announcer was in the midst of retelling majerus earlier discussion that makes sense

[cheeseman]

I was always surprised by this:

Concerning KM, I think Rick made a lot visits to Milwaukee visiting 2 mothers during the months of October, November and December. His and KMs. But Willie did surprise me. With his dad bad-mouthing practically everyone through the media, he came back and had to fight his way back. He could easily taken the Smith way out and went to a Wichita State, UTEP, MO State or any of a dozen or so mid-major big public school type programs. Good for Willie. Rick can't be all that bad to play for if can get that type of loyalty.

Hey Coop missed you this weekend.

[cheeseman]

The field expanded to 64 in 1985. Grawer's best teams (the Gray/Douglas/Bonner years) were after the field expanded.

thanks for setting me straight.

[Clock_Tower]

Grawer's teams missed out on the NCAAs because they couldn't win on the road, and never got past Xavier in the conference tourney. Those are precisely BG's problems!

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/SLU/1989-schedule.html

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/SLU/1990-schedule.html

Just look at those backbreaking 2pt losses to Dayton (12-17, 6-6) and Detroit (7-21, 4-8) in 1989. Without those losses, we're 24-6 and co-MCC champs with Evansville and possibly avoid X in the MCC tournament. If that team had won @SMS or @Colorado (or beaten a good Iowa team on a neutral court instead of losing by 3) they'd have been 25-5 and almost certainly in the dance.

Don't use Upchurch as a blanket excuse. That team had Bonner, Gray, Douglas, Newberry - a good coach would have had them in the tournament.

Duff. No. First, BG's problems are not that UD cannot win on the road or that they cannot get past a particular program such as Xavier. Instead, BG's problem appears to be that while he recruits and lands highly regarded and talented players, they don't seem to develop under his coaching. Instead, they rely upon their athletic ability while neglecting other portions of their game. Also, they appear to start the season with impressive win totals but then do not seem to adjust and improve. Instead, they seem to play soft down the conference stretch. These past 2 years, UD lost to SLU at home on Senior day -- not on the road. This year's performance was a lackluster one where they were down by 20 points to us in the first half!! This year, despite the hype and talent, UD finished 7-0 in conference going only 4-4 at home and 3-5 on the road. Last year, UD was .500 in the conference. If UD were coming in second/third place each year, the comparison with Grawer would be more appropriate. UD and BG are not.

In contrast, Monroe Douglas and Roland Gray were big local recuits but not top, nationally acclaimed players. Douglas received much more attention than Roland Gray and had a really good 4 years for us. Roland Gray received attention in highschool b/c he was Douglas' teammate. Gray, though, quietly improved each year, and IMO, end his career at SLU as a better player than Douglas. Anthony Bonner had very little interest from other schools coming out of highschool and was a project, in part, b/c he did not even play ball each year in highschool. He had the raw talent but needed alot of coaching... and he got it from Grawer and as a result, he got better each year. Until his final year, I would not say that Grawer's players quit on him or routinely played lackluster down the conference stretch. Instead, we gave X alot of good and close games. While we had Bonner (future NBA), X had 2 future NBA bigs (Derek Strong and _____). While we had Monroe Douglas, X had Byron Larken. I'd suggest, though, that the drop off from our top 3 players was much larger than the drop off for X.

Did Grawer's teams lose some big games? Sure. Bottom line, you are right in that Grawer never made it to the NCAA. For a guy who saved our basketball program and rebuilt it, I do feel bad that Grawer never made it to the NCAA and never got the full credit he deserved. Grawer had his window of 3 or so years and didn't get it done. No getting around that. Still, I'd suggest that Gregory inherited a good program at UD, has consistently been getting alot more talent than Grawer ever had to work with, and has not met expectations for most of his 9 years.

[Duff Man]

Gregory's failure to develop his players is where the Grawer comparison fails - agreed - and yes, the Billikens have thumped them at home on Senior Night 2 years in a row - which never happened under Grawer - BG has had better recruits, yet none of them have developed into NBA players - no doubt Grawer did better with the hands he was dealt

BG's problems are not that UD cannot win on the road or that they cannot get past a particular program such as Xavier.

How are those not BG's problems?

2007: 2-6 on the road in the A10

lost to X in A-10 quarterfinals

2008: 3-5 on the road in the A10

lost to X in the A10 quarterfinals

2009: 3-5 on the road in the A10

lost to Duq in A10 quarterfinals

received at-large bid toNCAAs as 11-Seed

2010: 2-6 on the road in the A10

lost to X in A10 quarterfinals

won NIT

2011: 3-5 on the road in the A10

[Clock_Tower]

Because BG's teams did not do so well at home either. Had they ONLY played bad on the road, then I'd agree. BG's teams, though, had similar conference records at both home and on the road. For instance, this year they were 4 wins and 4 loses at home and they were 3 wins and 4 losses on the road. In 2008, they similarly were 5-3 at home and 3-5 on the road. I'd suggest that their 4 -4 conference home record this year did more to hurt their season than their conference road record.

As to the conferences, I take you at your word that the MCC got 2 teams in the Tourney in 1989. Not saying it never happened but instead that would have been the exception rather than the rule. Grawer-led teams finished second to Xavier and went to the NIT while Xavier went to the Tourney. Not all that uncommon. I remember some very good Rich Herren SIUC teams that went to the NIT b/c Spoon brought his Bears to town and worked his magic in the Valley Tourney. Very unfair period of time for mid-majors. In constrast now with the A10, we have had 3 to 4 teams get into the Tourney each year. Gregory has taken his Flyers to the Dance (Brad did not and RM has not yet) but the other years when BG did not make the Tourney, I would suggest it was because of their mediocre conference records (both home and away) and their failures down the stretch (losses to several teams) as opposed to constantly losing to the same team like Grawer did. To me, that's a big difference.

Gregory's failure to develop his players is where the Grawer comparison fails - agreed - and yes, the Billikens have thumped them at home on Senior Night 2 years in a row - which never happened under Grawer - BG has had better recruits, yet none of them have developed into NBA players - no doubt Grawer did better with the hands he was dealt

How are those not BG's problems?

2007: 2-6 on the road in the A10

lost to X in A-10 quarterfinals

2008: 3-5 on the road in the A10

lost to X in the A10 quarterfinals

2009: 3-5 on the road in the A10

lost to Duq in A10 quarterfinals

received at-large bid toNCAAs as 11-Seed

2010: 2-6 on the road in the A10

lost to X in A10 quarterfinals

won NIT

2011: 3-5 on the road in the A10

[Cowboy]

-here is a question about dayton....will the folks that project records and conf standings again next year over shoot the mark on their record? it could just be me but it seems like it has happened for the last couple of years, at least, that they have been picked to finish with a better record than they have. not sure what makes them more attractive than they turn out to be other than perhaps the guy that could have been our coach

[kmbilliken]

Duff. No. First, BG's problems are not that UD cannot win on the road or that they cannot get past a particular program such as Xavier. Instead, BG's problem appears to be that while he recruits and lands highly regarded and talented players, they don't seem to develop under his coaching. Instead, they rely upon their athletic ability while neglecting other portions of their game. Also, they appear to start the season with impressive win totals but then do not seem to adjust and improve. Instead, they seem to play soft down the conference stretch. These past 2 years, UD lost to SLU at home on Senior day -- not on the road. This year's performance was a lackluster one where they were down by 20 points to us in the first half!! This year, despite the hype and talent, UD finished 7-0 in conference going only 4-4 at home and 3-5 on the road. Last year, UD was .500 in the conference. If UD were coming in second/third place each year, the comparison with Grawer would be more appropriate. UD and BG are not.

In contrast, Monroe Douglas and Roland Gray were big local recuits but not top, nationally acclaimed players. Douglas received much more attention than Roland Gray and had a really good 4 years for us. Roland Gray received attention in highschool b/c he was Douglas' teammate. Gray, though, quietly improved each year, and IMO, end his career at SLU as a better player than Douglas. Anthony Bonner had very little interest from other schools coming out of highschool and was a project, in part, b/c he did not even play ball each year in highschool. He had the raw talent but needed alot of coaching... and he got it from Grawer and as a result, he got better each year. Until his final year, I would not say that Grawer's players quit on him or routinely played lackluster down the conference stretch. Instead, we gave X alot of good and close games. While we had Bonner (future NBA), X had 2 future NBA bigs (Derek Strong and _____). While we had Monroe Douglas, X had Byron Larken. I'd suggest, though, that the drop off from our top 3 players was much larger than the drop off for X.

Did Grawer's teams lose some big games? Sure. Bottom line, you are right in that Grawer never made it to the NCAA. For a guy who saved our basketball program and rebuilt it, I do feel bad that Grawer never made it to the NCAA and never got the full credit he deserved. Grawer had his window of 3 or so years and didn't get it done. No getting around that. Still, I'd suggest that Gregory inherited a good program at UD, has consistently been getting alot more talent than Grawer ever had to work with, and has not met expectations for most of his 9 years.

[kmbilliken]

Duff. No. First, BG's problems are not that UD cannot win on the road or that they cannot get past a particular program such as Xavier. Instead, BG's problem appears to be that while he recruits and lands highly regarded and talented players, they don't seem to develop under his coaching. Instead, they rely upon their athletic ability while neglecting other portions of their game. Also, they appear to start the season with impressive win totals but then do not seem to adjust and improve. Instead, they seem to play soft down the conference stretch. These past 2 years, UD lost to SLU at home on Senior day -- not on the road. This year's performance was a lackluster one where they were down by 20 points to us in the first half!! This year, despite the hype and talent, UD finished 7-0 in conference going only 4-4 at home and 3-5 on the road. Last year, UD was .500 in the conference. If UD were coming in second/third place each year, the comparison with Grawer would be more appropriate. UD and BG are not.

In contrast, Monroe Douglas and Roland Gray were big local recuits but not top, nationally acclaimed players. Douglas received much more attention than Roland Gray and had a really good 4 years for us. Roland Gray received attention in highschool b/c he was Douglas' teammate. Gray, though, quietly improved each year, and IMO, end his career at SLU as a better player than Douglas. Anthony Bonner had very little interest from other schools coming out of highschool and was a project, in part, b/c he did not even play ball each year in highschool. He had the raw talent but needed alot of coaching... and he got it from Grawer and as a result, he got better each year. Until his final year, I would not say that Grawer's players quit on him or routinely played lackluster down the conference stretch. Instead, we gave X alot of good and close games. While we had Bonner (future NBA), X had 2 future NBA bigs (Derek Strong and _____). While we had Monroe Douglas, X had Byron Larken. I'd suggest, though, that the drop off from our top 3 players was much larger than the drop off for X.

Did Grawer's teams lose some big games? Sure. Bottom line, you are right in that Grawer never made it to the NCAA. For a guy who saved our basketball program and rebuilt it, I do feel bad that Grawer never made it to the NCAA and never got the full credit he deserved. Grawer had his window of 3 or so years and didn't get it done. No getting around that. Still, I'd suggest that Gregory inherited a good program at UD, has consistently been getting alot more talent than Grawer ever had to work with, and has not met expectations for most of his 9 years.

[Duff Man]

Because BG's teams did not do so well at home either. Had they ONLY played bad on the road, then I'd agree. BG's teams, though, had similar conference records at both home and on the road. For instance, this year they were 4 wins and 4 loses at home and they were 3 wins and 4 losses on the road. In 2008, they similarly were 5-3 at home and 3-5 on the road. I'd suggest that their 4 -4 conference home record this year did more to hurt their season than their conference road record.

Perhaps your perception of Dayton's home performance is obscured by the fact that they were shittier than usual this year, and that they've dropped 2 in a row to SLU. They'd actually won 14 of 15 home conference games heading into last year's senior night.

Gregory's Flyers in the A10 '07-11

2007 H: 6-2 A: 2-6 (2 A10 Bids)

2008 H: 5-3 A: 3-5 (3 A10 Bids)

2009 H: 8-0 A: 3-5 NCAA R32 (3 A10 Bids)

2010 H: 6-2 A: 2-6 (3 A10 Bids)

2011 H: 4-4 A: 3-5 (~2-3 A10 Bids)

5-year totals

H: 29-11 .725

A: 13-27 .325

Those home/away splits are hardly 'similar'.

Grawer's Bills in the MCC '87-91

1987 H: 5-1 A: 2-4 (1 MCC Bid)

1988 H: 4-1 A: 1-4 (1 MCC Bid)

1989 H: 6-0 A: 2-4 (2 MCC Bids)

1990 H: 6-1 A: 3-4 (2 MCC Bids)

1991 H: 6-1 A: 2-5 (1 MCC Bid)

5-year totals

H: 27-4 .871

A: 10-21 .323

Note the conference road winning percentages are nearly identical.

As to the conferences, I take you at your word that the MCC got 2 teams in the Tourney in 1989. Not saying it never happened but instead that would have been the exception rather than the rule.

Would you take the Internet's word for it?

Grawer-led teams finished second to Xavier and went to the NIT while Xavier went to the Tourney. Not all that uncommon.

Technically, it never actually went down as you describe it. Here's what actually happened...

1986: SLU finished 2nd to X in MCC, X beat SLU 74-66 in MCC Final, no NIT for SLU

1987: SLU finished 4th in MCC, 3rd place X beat SLU 81-69 in MCC Final, SLU advanced to 2nd round of NIT

1988: SLU finished 3rd in MCC, lost to last place Detroit in MCC Quarterfinal, 1st place X wins MCC Tourney, no NIT for SLU

1989: SLU finished 2nd to Evansville in MCC, 3rd place X beats SLU 79-56 in MCC Semifinal then beat Evansville for the automatic bid, Evansville received an at-large bid having won the regular season and finishing 2nd in the conference tournament, SLU placed 2nd in NIT

1990: SLU finished 3rd in MCC, lost to 6th place Loyola in MCC Quarterfinal, 2nd place Dayton beat 1st place X for the automatic bid, X received an at-large bid having won the regular season and finishing 2nd in the conference tournament, SLU placed 2nd in NIT

1991: SLU finished 3rd in MCC, 1st place X beat SLU 81-65 in MCC Final, no NIT for SLU

In order to make the dance, SLU either needed to win the conference tournament (which they never did - losing to X every time they got close), or they had to win the regular season title (which they never did - because they dropped too many road games to bad teams) then win a game in the MCC tourney against a crappy team (which we couldn't do in '88 or '90 when we actually had good teams).

I remember some very good Rich Herren SIUC teams that went to the NIT b/c Spoon brought his Bears to town and worked his magic in the Valley Tourney. Very unfair period of time for mid-majors.

You're thinking of 1992 (SMS didn't join the MVC until 90-91 and Spoon went to SLU in 92-93). SIUC beat Tubby Smith's Tulsa twice in the regular season, then lost to them by 3 in the MVC semis. Tough break, but if you look at their schedule that year, they played a cream puff schedule - only had 3 games against quality opponents and lost all 3 (getting swept by SMS and losing 99-98 at Evansville), not to mention they were one of the 5 teams to lose to SLU that year. I don't know about unfair, but they were definitely unlucky.

In constrast now with the A10, we have had 3 to 4 teams get into the Tourney each year.

If by 3 to 4, you mean 2 to 3.

Gregory has taken his Flyers to the Dance (Brad did not and RM has not yet) but the other years when BG did not make the Tourney, I would suggest it was because of their mediocre conference records (both home and away) and their failures down the stretch (losses to several teams) as opposed to constantly losing to the same team like Grawer did. To me, that's a big difference.

See above. Grawer didn't just lose to X. He lost first round MCC tourney games to BAD teams in 1988 and 1990 when we had Bonner.

I will concede it's probably not fair to Grawer - who revived a comatose program and actually made players better over their careers - to put him in league with Brian Gregory - who inherited an NCAA caliber team and consistently failed to develop his players into something better.