Bobby Metzinger Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 A & M over UT Acie Law IV set almost every single-game Aggie record against us back in 2006-07 I believe. SLU doesn't fare well in Aggieland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted March 14, 2011 Author Share Posted March 14, 2011 It's funny to me that you'd be willing to take a buy game against Arizona St but it would be insulting to do anything less than a home and home against Mizzou (not your words but the general tone of the board). Absolutely. Make them my words. Mizzou and the Illini can play us on equal terms or not at all. Too much pride to do anthing else. Don't get me wrong. I don't like the mega conference concept and the unwillingness of the BCS schools to play anyone good outside of a staged event/tournament on a neutral floor. At the same time, I am realistic to know that complaining and waiting for the BCS teams to come to town is not the answer. IMO, G'Town should have come to Mizzou Arena and allow the season ticket holders to watch the only decent OOC game. Mizzou should then return to the G'Town next year. These staged events/tournaments are just not good for the college game. Likewise, Mizzou plays the Illini here in the Lou. This is a more of a unique event, good for both schools to come here, please their alums/donors, get exposure and goodwill and play a good game. If we truly cannot get the good teams to town, then we have no choice but to add a BCS game and be someone's buy game. I will stop being season ticket holder, though, if we become Mizzou's buy game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 The last thing we want to become is a buy game for anyone. That was the whole problem with the Duke game (and the fact that if the Duke game wasn't on the schedule we could have started a home/home with Seton Hall this season). Now we have fans of our own program ready to sell the team out like a cheap ***** to various middle of the pack BCS programs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesycow Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Absolutely. Make them my words. Mizzou and the Illini can play us on equal terms or not at all. Too much pride to do anthing else. Don't get me wrong. I don't like the mega conference concept and the unwillingness of the BCS schools to play anyone good outside of a staged event/tournament on a neutral floor. At the same time, I am realistic to know that complaining and waiting for the BCS teams to come to town is not the answer. IMO, G'Town should have come to Mizzou Arena and allow the season ticket holders to watch the only decent OOC game. Mizzou should then return to the G'Town next year. These staged events/tournaments are just not good for the college game. Likewise, Mizzou plays the Illini here in the Lou. This is a more of a unique event, good for both schools to come here, please their alums/donors, get exposure and goodwill and play a good game. If we truly cannot get the good teams to town, then we have no choice but to add a BCS game and be someone's buy game. I will stop being season ticket holder, though, if we become Mizzou's buy game. I agree that I prefer home and homes between top 10 conferences (BCS +CUSA, A10,MWC, etc) but the realities are what they are. But Arizona state offers so little to even be considered a buy game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Metzinger Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Arizona state offers so little That's what Herb Sendek thought when he left NC State. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted March 14, 2011 Author Share Posted March 14, 2011 The last thing we want to become is a buy game for anyone. That was the whole problem with the Duke game (and the fact that if the Duke game wasn't on the schedule we could have started a home/home with Seton Hall this season). Now we have fans of our own program ready to sell the team out like a cheap ***** to various middle of the pack BCS programs. Brian. If you are correct, then fine, I'll wait and be patient a little longer. No one at SLU is really talking but I wonder how much our boring schedule these past 3 to 4 years is the fact that RM wanted time to rebuild before enhancing the schedule and how much is the result that we cannot get BCS schools here (Boston College who said no more comes to mind). I agree. We are not in a desperate situation. Fortunately, b/c of the A10, we still get games against the likes of X, Temple, Richmond and UD. Missouri State would love to play these schools but don't. Also, we have been able to play schools like Georgia on a home & home basis and if we can get Seton Hall, then great, bring them on. If 1 buy game each year against the likes of Duke, Arizona or the like will undo future games with Georgia, Seton Hall and the like, then fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lefty Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Absolutely. Make them my words. Mizzou and the Illini can play us on equal terms or not at all. Too much pride to do anthing else. Don't get me wrong. I don't like the mega conference concept and the unwillingness of the BCS schools to play anyone good outside of a staged event/tournament on a neutral floor. At the same time, I am realistic to know that complaining and waiting for the BCS teams to come to town is not the answer. IMO, G'Town should have come to Mizzou Arena and allow the season ticket holders to watch the only decent OOC game. Mizzou should then return to the G'Town next year. These staged events/tournaments are just not good for the college game. Likewise, Mizzou plays the Illini here in the Lou. This is a more of a unique event, good for both schools to come here, please their alums/donors, get exposure and goodwill and play a good game. If we truly cannot get the good teams to town, then we have no choice but to add a BCS game and be someone's buy game. I will stop being season ticket holder, though, if we become Mizzou's buy game. Sounds like you are aware (correctly) of the story that Mizzou tried to get a home and home with G-Town and was rebuked.Same thing with Michigan State. Next year the conference schedule goes to 18 games v. 16 so the OOC games shrink by two. Unless SLU's willing to take a 2 for 1, you probably won't be on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesycow Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Sounds like you are aware (correctly) of the story that Mizzou tried to get a home and home with G-Town and was rebuked.Same thing with Michigan State. Next year the conference schedule goes to 18 games v. 16 so the OOC games shrink by two. Unless SLU's willing to take a 2 for 1, you probably won't be on it. I have a feeling too that Mizzou's gonna lose 2 of their tough noncons vs. getting rid of 2 of the cupcakes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Sounds like you are aware (correctly) of the story that Mizzou tried to get a home and home with G-Town and was rebuked.Same thing with Michigan State. Next year the conference schedule goes to 18 games v. 16 so the OOC games shrink by two. Unless SLU's willing to take a 2 for 1, you probably won't be on it. There is a story floating around that Georgetown chose to play a single game in KC rather than play a home and home with Mizzou? Seems kind of far fetched to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Metzinger Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 There is a story floating around that Georgetown chose to play a single game in KC rather than play a home and home with Mizzou? Seems kind of far fetched to me. Sprint Center: 19,000 Mizzou Arena: 15,061 $$$$$ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Sprint Center: 19,000 Mizzou Arena: 15,061 $$$$$ The Verizon Center holds 20,000 plus. I think the Hoyas would have liked the home payday it would have got with a home and home. And the game at the Sprint Center didn't even draw 15,000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Part of scheduling is forecasting. The Santa Clara Coach sat right in front of us at a SF Giants' game early last season, and said there was a proposal for an A-10-WCC challenge among the 4 Jesuit schools in each league (Xavier, SLU, St. Joe's, Fordham and Gonzaga, USF, Santa Clara, and Loyola Marymount). The issue was who was going to play whom, but he said that SLU was matched with Santa Clara, and that SLU was willing to play out here first. Now I can tell you that Santa Clara and San Francisco (USF) are both on the upswing, especially USF IMO. They may not have gaudy RPI's this season, but they are both still playing in the CIT, and USF under Rex Walters has a young up and coming team composed of mostly sophs and freshmen. USF just won 10 games in the WCC for the first time since restoring the men's basketball program. I read that Santa Clara is playing in the post-season for the first time in 15 years. These would be opponents that would play SLU. I say this partly from a selfish perspective, as we would like to see SLU play in Northern California again, but also from the SLU perspective because these would be worthy opponents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 It's that LA market they want! O'Neill will leave that program in ruins. I'm surprised Pat Hayden didn't just fire him on the spot after that run-in with the booster from Arizona. If Hayden was looking for an excuse, that was it. OT- This is reportedly the first time since 1991 that none of the 6 SF Bay Area schools are in the NCAA Tournament. However, 5 of the 6 are still playing: St. Mary's and Cal in the NIT, USF and Santa Clara in the CIT, and San Jose State in the CBI. Only Stanford is done for the year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Metzinger Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Part of scheduling is forecasting. The Santa Clara Coach sat right in front of us at a SF Giants' game early last season, and said there was a proposal for an A-10-WCC challenge among the 4 Jesuit schools in each league (Xavier, SLU, St. Joe's, Fordham and Gonzaga, USF, Santa Clara, and Loyola Marymount). The issue was who was going to play whom, but he said that SLU was matched with Santa Clara, and that SLU was willing to play out here first. I think that would be a great tournament/challenge. But with 8 Jesuits in the room, you're going to get 8 enormous egos. 8.5 if you include Biondi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted March 14, 2011 Author Share Posted March 14, 2011 Sounds like you are aware (correctly) of the story that Mizzou tried to get a home and home with G-Town and was rebuked.Same thing with Michigan State. Next year the conference schedule goes to 18 games v. 16 so the OOC games shrink by two. Unless SLU's willing to take a 2 for 1, you probably won't be on it. No, I hadn't heard that. Appreciate the insight though. Personally, I think the scales have tipped too far in the direction and power of the conference. In the past, conference was more of a status/brand but teams still could and did play a full OOC schedule. Now, with the mega conferences, conference tournaments and NCAA rules allowing teams to play more games if they are in certain tournaments, the OOC has turned into little more than "preseaon" or conference warm-up games. A real shame that we don't get better matchups aside from certain holiday tournaments and the NCAA Tourney itself. The days of brutal OOC schedules of Denny Crum and John Chenney are a thing of the distant past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOSLU68 Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 A 10 would help it's own SOS if every team Played twice-the way it is now prevents Rivalries withinin th conference. It may not Allow for more 20 game winners but I would Rather see Fordham home and away than Bradley even I think BU proximity is a travel Plus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearvision Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Few things that hopefully won't be construed as trolling: The A-10 is much better than the Valley, and that is not debateable. I know it, and that's fine. That said, the A-10 isn't better than the Valley because of SLU. The A-10 is better because of Temple, Xavier, and Dayton being consistently good teams. Xavier is probably the one mid-major that consistently gets NBA guards somehow. The scheduling thing with the Valley has been overblown for some time, as some sort of way to discredit the Valley in a very good 2006 season. Look at Illinois State and a few other schools to show that there isn't some sort of scheduling mandate that artifically pumps anything up. 2006 was just full of really good teams, who played and beat some good teams. The Valley this year; they played some good teams and got worked. They played the Mountain West challenge and lost 8-1. They went 3-7 in Bracket Busters. The conference simply wasn't great this year. Missouri State was pretty good this year, and won the league in a not great year. Creighton is traditionally a very solid program, and one that resembles SLU pretty closely. However, to use them as an example to denigrate Missouri State isn't a great example. Missouri State has now beaten them six straight times after all. Missouri State is not going to be as good next year, and I acknowledge that. However, Missouri State has beaten SLU something like 8 of the last 9 times they've played (this is from memory, so this is not stated as fact, but to show that it's quite a few with only one loss). That spans a lot of seasons and a lot of different players. The evidence just really doesn't support MSU being scared of SLU. That's not a slam, that's just facts. MSU may truly have had a handshake deal with SLU to play next year, and may have broken that deal, I don't know. If they did, it isn't because they're scared of a loss. There isn't a bluff to call against Missouri State. They already made the decision to not play the game. It's done. If SLU doesn't want to continue the series after this year, that is their prerogative. It seems like it would be cutting off their nose to spite their face though. Over their past two seasons, they have been the #2 non-con opponent for 2011 (Duke), and 2010 (Notre Dame) for SLU, and will actually schedule a home and home with them, unlike the teams rated above them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Few things that hopefully won't be construed as trolling: The A-10 is much better than the Valley, and that is not debateable. I know it, and that's fine. That said, the A-10 isn't better than the Valley because of SLU. The A-10 is better because of Temple, Xavier, and Dayton being consistently good teams. Xavier is probably the one mid-major that consistently gets NBA guards somehow. The scheduling thing with the Valley has been overblown for some time, as some sort of way to discredit the Valley in a very good 2006 season. Look at Illinois State and a few other schools to show that there isn't some sort of scheduling mandate that artifically pumps anything up. 2006 was just full of really good teams, who played and beat some good teams. The Valley this year; they played some good teams and got worked. They played the Mountain West challenge and lost 8-1. They went 3-7 in Bracket Busters. The conference simply wasn't great this year. Missouri State was pretty good this year, and won the league in a not great year. Creighton is traditionally a very solid program, and one that resembles SLU pretty closely. However, to use them as an example to denigrate Missouri State isn't a great example. Missouri State has now beaten them six straight times after all. Missouri State is not going to be as good next year, and I acknowledge that. However, Missouri State has beaten SLU something like 8 of the last 9 times they've played (this is from memory, so this is not stated as fact, but to show that it's quite a few with only one loss). That spans a lot of seasons and a lot of different players. The evidence just really doesn't support MSU being scared of SLU. That's not a slam, that's just facts. MSU may truly have had a handshake deal with SLU to play next year, and may have broken that deal, I don't know. If they did, it isn't because they're scared of a loss. There isn't a bluff to call against Missouri State. They already made the decision to not play the game. It's done. If SLU doesn't want to continue the series after this year, that is their prerogative. It seems like it would be cutting off their nose to spite their face though. Over their past two seasons, they have been the #2 non-con opponent for 2011 (Duke), and 2010 (Notre Dame) for SLU, and will actually schedule a home and home with them, unlike the teams rated above them. I wouldn't consider this a 'trolling' post as it is well thought out and really not all too argumentative. However, I will debate a couple of items you brought up. One, I don't think anyone really thinks that SLU being in the A-10 makes it a stronger conference, and that is part of the point. SLU being in the MVC would raise the profile of that conference. However, SLU being in the A-10 perhaps ends up raising SLU's profile. The Valley is sadly stuck in Juan Bid status now and will gladly compete in Bracket Busters. But overall, you seem to acknowledge that, so no real reason to go any further with that. The only other thing is in regards to the last two seasons games. Technically, per RPI, you could say that MO State was the #2 non-conf opponent for this season. However, Georgia did make the NCAA tournament (and 46 RPI) and we had a home and home with them. Some, or maybe even most, would consider them the #2 non-conf opponent this season. Last season, that definitely was the case, as Georgia, Belmont and Nebraska weren't nearly as good last season as they were this year. However, we weren't a buy game for Notre Dame, as that was part of a tournament played in Chicago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Few things that hopefully won't be construed as trolling: The A-10 is much better than the Valley, and that is not debateable. I know it, and that's fine. That said, the A-10 isn't better than the Valley because of SLU. The A-10 is better because of Temple, Xavier, and Dayton being consistently good teams. Xavier is probably the one mid-major that consistently gets NBA guards somehow. The scheduling thing with the Valley has been overblown for some time, as some sort of way to discredit the Valley in a very good 2006 season. Look at Illinois State and a few other schools to show that there isn't some sort of scheduling mandate that artifically pumps anything up. 2006 was just full of really good teams, who played and beat some good teams. The Valley this year; they played some good teams and got worked. They played the Mountain West challenge and lost 8-1. They went 3-7 in Bracket Busters. The conference simply wasn't great this year. Missouri State was pretty good this year, and won the league in a not great year. Creighton is traditionally a very solid program, and one that resembles SLU pretty closely. However, to use them as an example to denigrate Missouri State isn't a great example. Missouri State has now beaten them six straight times after all. Missouri State is not going to be as good next year, and I acknowledge that. However, Missouri State has beaten SLU something like 8 of the last 9 times they've played (this is from memory, so this is not stated as fact, but to show that it's quite a few with only one loss). That spans a lot of seasons and a lot of different players. The evidence just really doesn't support MSU being scared of SLU. That's not a slam, that's just facts. MSU may truly have had a handshake deal with SLU to play next year, and may have broken that deal, I don't know. If they did, it isn't because they're scared of a loss. There isn't a bluff to call against Missouri State. They already made the decision to not play the game. It's done. If SLU doesn't want to continue the series after this year, that is their prerogative. It seems like it would be cutting off their nose to spite their face though. Over their past two seasons, they have been the #2 non-con opponent for 2011 (Duke), and 2010 (Notre Dame) for SLU, and will actually schedule a home and home with them, unlike the teams rated above them. I agree with you on a few things but disagree on others Agree: 1) It makes no sense for SLU not to continue the series after this 1-yr break. We simply don't have that many other options. I do think you over-value your worth by just looking at the last two years RPI and saying you were our 2nd best non-con opponent. 2) Agree that scheduling is not the issue for the Valley. The quality of the teams in the Valley is the issue. Bernie tried to make the schedling argument in his column today, saying the Valley played 29 games against top 100 teams while the Colonial Athletic Conf had 39. What is important though is that the Colonial WON 18 of those games while the Valley only won 5. For all the nonsense over the years about schedule strength and gaming the RPI, the simple truth is you have to WIN the games to get a decent RPI. Only good teams win games against top 100 opponents. Disagree 3) It may be pure coincidence that MSU didn't play the game 2 years ago when KL and TL were seniors and MSU had an RPI in the mid 200s. It may also be pure coincidence that they aren't playing next year when we would be significant favorites. Still, the more coincidences that happen the more it starts to look like you are dodging us. 4) You are correct that SLU, to date, has not added much to the A-10. I'm pretty sure that 3 years from now, after we've danced 3 times in a row, people won't feel that way anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
For-DaLove Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 I'm pretty sure that 3 years from now, after we've danced 3 times in a row, people won't feel that way anymore.CAN'T WAIT (Bart Scott voice) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOSLU68 Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Mo state is not an old time MVC rival and obviously they don't share RM's business practice of trying to get his recruits seen close to home be it Chicago, KC, or Australia. The way the valley leaders fizzled this year Wichita also losing early in St. Louis they really haven' created a market for next year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearvision Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 I wouldn't consider this a 'trolling' post as it is well thought out and really not all too argumentative. However, I will debate a couple of items you brought up. One, I don't think anyone really thinks that SLU being in the A-10 makes it a stronger conference, and that is part of the point. SLU being in the MVC would raise the profile of that conference. However, SLU being in the A-10 perhaps ends up raising SLU's profile. The Valley is sadly stuck in Juan Bid status now and will gladly compete in Bracket Busters. But overall, you seem to acknowledge that, so no real reason to go any further with that. The only other thing is in regards to the last two seasons games. Technically, per RPI, you could say that MO State was the #2 non-conf opponent for this season. However, Georgia did make the NCAA tournament (and 46 RPI) and we had a home and home with them. Some, or maybe even most, would consider them the #2 non-conf opponent this season. Last season, that definitely was the case, as Georgia, Belmont and Nebraska weren't nearly as good last season as they were this year. However, we weren't a buy game for Notre Dame, as that was part of a tournament played in Chicago. I agree it's a debate on who is the better team between Georgia and Missouri State, but the RPI is generally accepted as the standard for "good" wins and losses etc. so it was used for the purpose of this debate. Plus, MSU did beat SLU by 16 points, while the Georgia game was much closer (comparative scores are a tricky thing admittedly). Only thing I'd disagree with you about is that SLU raises the profile of the MVC. What has SLU accomplished to feel this way? I feel SLU would be an asset due to ancillary factors they'd bring (market, academic quality, facilities are solid), but the quality on the court isn't out of line with what is seen in many leagues. I don't want to get off track though. It feels as though the OP is insinuating that there isn't anything to gain by playing good teams from non-BCS leagues. Either that, or he just doesn't personally like the matchup. SLU's RPI over the past five seasons have been: 175, 81, 129, 136, 137. Decent numbers, but over this timeframe, a win doesn't really do any good, and a loss would be considered a "bad" loss every year but one. In a time when BCS teams do not want to play decent non-BCS teams except on their terms, regionally solid teams available to do home-and-home series should be considered golden, but it isn't always perceived that way by all of a fanbase I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
For-DaLove Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Admittedly, our score against Georgia is deceiving, because they were playing without their best player, Trey Thompkins. I have seen both Georgia and you guys play within the last month, and IMO Georgia is clearly the better team at this time of the year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 I agree it's a debate on who is the better team between Georgia and Missouri State, but the RPI is generally accepted as the standard for "good" wins and losses etc. so it was used for the purpose of this debate. Plus, MSU did beat SLU by 16 points, while the Georgia game was much closer (comparative scores are a tricky thing admittedly). Only thing I'd disagree with you about is that SLU raises the profile of the MVC. What has SLU accomplished to feel this way? I feel SLU would be an asset due to ancillary factors they'd bring (market, academic quality, facilities are solid), but the quality on the court isn't out of line with what is seen in many leagues. I don't want to get off track though. It feels as though the OP is insinuating that there isn't anything to gain by playing good teams from non-BCS leagues. Either that, or he just doesn't personally like the matchup. SLU's RPI over the past five seasons have been: 175, 81, 129, 136, 137. Decent numbers, but over this timeframe, a win doesn't really do any good, and a loss would be considered a "bad" loss every year but one. In a time when BCS teams do not want to play decent non-BCS teams except on their terms, regionally solid teams available to do home-and-home series should be considered golden, but it isn't always perceived that way by all of a fanbase I suppose. Not that I'm bragging about it, but we were 74th in 06-07, not 137th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 -kshoe, huge hypothetical here, if we could schedule almost at will do you continue with sms? my answer is i don't know, would playing them be good for bball? if so maybe play them for the good of building the game--i do think they get more out of playing us in a usually heavy recruiting area for them than we do playing them, our benefit is a team on the schedule we don;t have to buy, travel to the road game is reasonable(driveable) for fans, more times than not i would guess they help nonconf sos, but as you said the last two times the series has a break coincides when we are expected to be better is an eyebrow raiser -but if we play sms for the good of the game do we also have to play semo? maybe 2 or 3 for 1, but i think we would have to go there at some point -and then what about siue at some point down the line? 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.