brianstl Posted March 29, 2011 Author Share Posted March 29, 2011 Before the situation, were you upset with the direction of the program? Last Feb/March, I don't recall anybody on here complaining about where the program was heading.No I wasn't. What the situation did was expose the complete lack of depth in the program. Do you think without the situation we would have made the tournament? I don't. Not with an ineligble Willie. Everyone wants to compare us to VCU, but they neglect to mention VCU barely made the tournament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 First of all I agree with MUTGR - recruiting locally is overblown for both SLU and MO. Second, there are advantages to recruiting locally, coaches can keep more of a personal "in touch" feeling with the kid, coaches travel less/spend less, coaches can get to know the parents of the kid much easier thus creating a more comfortable feeling for them, just to name a few. The problem with recruiting locally for SLU has been we have had a lot of "aces and spaces" pool of talent in recent times. We have a great or a couple of great players each year and they attract all the big name schools which makes our opportunity less as an option. The local players someone mentioned earlier - Clagget, Bonner, Gray, Monroe - they were not star quality players in high school. They were very good players or developing raw talent types who garnered interest from schools similar to us - Bonner's choice was between us and SIUC, Gray followed Monroe (by the way he might have been a cut above this group but not in the star quality level) Clagget had us and Northern Iowa and maybe some slight interest from Iowa State if memory serves me right. Even Highmark had us and SMS to choose from not MO where he really wanted to go. My point simply is we have not had a lot these types of players level recently and when we have for whatever the reason we have chosen not to offer and in a few cases it backfired and they went on to have decent careers but many simply were just "guys" as it turned out. Third, "the situation" - nice pc term - happened this year so for some to refer to it is still legit - heck some still talk about Upchurch not getting in as key problem for us - now I would agree after next year or two it will be a tired excuse. I want us to get good players that help the program no matter where they come from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 We need an editor for Broy. The above response would have sufficed. backhand, considering that for about 20 years i took the opposite stand and only last year saw the light on this scenario, i think it was indeed relevant as to my flip flop on the debate. sorry to bore you. you can now return to your job ranking rams cheerleaders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 No I wasn't. What the situation did was expose the complete lack of depth in the program. Do you think without the situation we would have made the tournament? I don't. Not with an ineligble Willie. Everyone wants to compare us to VCU, but they neglect to mention VCU barely made the tournament. Would Xavier have made the Tournament without Holloway and Lyons... Would Temple have made it without Fernandez and Allen... would Richmond have made it without Harper and Anderson? All of the A-10 teams that made the Tournament would not have had the depth to withstand losing their two best players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 Before the situation, were you upset with the direction of the program? Last Feb/March, I don't recall anybody on here complaining about where the program was heading. And seeing that it's basically the same VCU team we played tough in the CBI championship game make it to the final 4 a year later proves we were headed in the right direction. Not saying by any stretch we'd be in Houston this weekend, but it does make one ask, what if. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MB73 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 Would Xavier have made the Tournament without Holloway and Lyons... Would Temple have made it without Fernandez and Allen... would Richmond have made it without Harper and Anderson? All of the A-10 teams that made the Tournament would not have had the depth to withstand losing their two best players. 100% correct! But opportunistic Majerus haters like Brian repeatedly drill the point that the incident is not an excuse. Every chance they get... "I am tired of excuses". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SluSignGuy Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 Painter won't affect Majerus. Painter however may ultimately affect Moser if he takes the reins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonka Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 That isn't the point. Whether or not parents and and/or hangers on try to influence their kid where to attend school. The point is that it is the kid's decision, not the parents or others.I guess that's one way to look at it. Real life scanario: There are over 300 D1 Schools a kid can go to. Parents: Son, you can go to this school, that school, or that school. Son: I'll go to that school. Parents: Great for you, good choice. Son to his friends: I picked "this school" because I think it was the best fit for me. Yes, it sure looks like it was all the kid's decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 No I wasn't. What the situation did was expose the complete lack of depth in the program. Do you think without the situation we would have made the tournament? I don't. Not with an ineligble Willie. Everyone wants to compare us to VCU, but they neglect to mention VCU barely made the tournament. No doubt it exposed the program. In short, Brad recruited TL and KL but that was about it. Those 2 helped us by playing for RM for 2 years but no one came afterward. RM's first year, he was hired too late and could not bring anyone into the program. RM's second year, he cut the "older" players and went with the Freshmen while KL and TL anchored the team. Last year, RM's third year, RM added CE (1/2 way into the year) and the youngsters started to win games -- impressive second half of the season with 23 wins and the whole team to come back. This year, the talent levels would have finally been full: KM, WR, BC and KC all Juniors; CE as a Soph (along w/ CS and CR) and our 4 Frosh. IMO, RM made a calculation that he could win with young players. In hindsight, RM got burned by losing our 2 best players (both upperclassmen) and not having a good enough Soph class to carry the load. The injury and loss of local Femi John also did not help. Again, my biggest surprise of the RM era has been the lack of a transfers -- JB will be our first to play next year. Our team could have really benefitted from a "bridge" player even if this player was another guy like Barry Eberhardt or even last year's Josh Harrelson. Had KC, CS and/or CR been able to step up their games, we could have survived The Situation. Instead, we did not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 I guess that's one way to look at it. Real life scanario: There are over 300 D1 Schools a kid can go to. Parents: Son, you can go to this school, that school, or that school. Son: I'll go to that school. Parents: Great for you, good choice. Son to his friends: I picked "this school" because I think it was the best fit for me. Yes, it sure looks like it was all the kid's decision. Wow. You really underestimate kids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 backhand, considering that for about 20 years i took the opposite stand and only last year saw the light on this scenario, i think it was indeed relevant as to my flip flop on the debate. sorry to bore you. you can now return to your job ranking rams cheerleaders. Never too late to see the light Roy. Good for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonka Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 Wow. You really underestimate kids.You act like I am guessing and speculating here. It may be naive to think in some families that ultiamtely a kid will do whatever he wants. Of course that exists. Some parents will allow their kids to whatever they want regardless of the potential outcome. But, it would be equally naive to think that parents don't steer a kid toward a school they are comfortable with. You act like it doesn't go both ways, which makes me want to borrow a line from you..."Wow". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 You act like I am guessing and speculating here. It may be naive to think in some families that ultiamtely a kid will do whatever he wants. Of course that exists. Some parents will allow their kids to whatever they want regardless of the potential outcome. But, it would be equally naive to think that parents don't steer a kid toward a school they are comfortable with. You act like it doesn't go both ways, which makes me want to borrow a line from you..."Wow". I think I covered that at 2:52pm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 29, 2011 Author Share Posted March 29, 2011 Would Xavier have made the Tournament without Holloway and Lyons... Would Temple have made it without Fernandez and Allen... would Richmond have made it without Harper and Anderson? All of the A-10 teams that made the Tournament would not have had the depth to withstand losing their two best players. My question was did you think the team would have made the tournament if it was only missing Willie. X lost their best player Crawford. He decided to enter the draft early. The guy that was Richmond's best player was a shell of his former self due to knee injuries. They had depth to make up for those losses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 29, 2011 Author Share Posted March 29, 2011 100% correct! But opportunistic Majerus haters like Brian repeatedly drill the point that the incident is not an excuse. Every chance they get... "I am tired of excuses". I am the Majerus hater defending him in the CS transfer thread. Yeah, I am the hardcore Rickma hater. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
For-DaLove Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 I'm mixed on this subject. I believe StL talent is overrated as a whole, but there are some gems. People are acting like we aren't recruiting the area; we are. No we couldn't land Beal, but we gave it a shot. We have offered Otto Porter, while he isn't from St. Louis, he is close to our campus. It's not our fault McLemore and Young will struggle to qualify. If they were in the same situation Beal is, and had the same character make-up, we would have been on them hard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 Wow. You really underestimate kids. I'm not really sure we can characterize it as one decision, the kid's decision is different from the parent's decision. We need to be sure to objectively view every component and not give too much weight to any single component. So, we'll need to analyze the parental influence and child's influence separately since they are each different things. I love the offseason. Also, Brian, it's clear you're a Majerus hater. "Harry, jimmy, trent........f you too!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 29, 2011 Author Share Posted March 29, 2011 And I am not just faulting Majerus here. recruiting St Louis has been a problem for SLU going back to Romar. Are failures on this front allowed for the rise of SIUC in the last decade. They loaded up on kids we didn't even really recruit. It is not just losing the top 50 national players from the area. It is losing the other kids that are needed to round out a team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 Painter won't affect Majerus. Painter however may ultimately affect Moser if he takes the reins. Would you not think that the doors that RM gets in are now the same doors that PM can open since he is a top recruiter for RM? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adman Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 Speaking of Nolan Berry, does anyone know if we have offered him yet? Also, will anyone from STL in his class (currently Soph) be more hotly recruited than him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 maybe malcolm hill from belleville east. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonka Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 I think I covered that at 2:52pmCourtside, never sure you know what or not is covered. It seems like it needs to be explained to you. Even Cheesy had to point out in another thread you were not commenting on the right thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken4life5 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 The long term impacts of Painter to Mizzou will be interesting but I think the short term effects may be more interesting. I'm a huge Tigers fan but even I admit that since Painter and Anderson's systems are completely different Mizzou will most likely struggle for a couple years. I believe Painter has 3 scholarships available this year and 6 after next so it's going to take a while for Painter to get his type of players into the system and develop them. If Rick and SLU can finally put it together the next two years SLU has a legitimate shot to be the best team in the state. I think if SLU could make the NCAA tourney the next two years and Mizzou does not it would help increase our fan base, air time in the media, and give us an edge in recruiting in Stl. For the first time in my lifetime, SLU could be the premier team in the state and we will need to maximize the benefits of this if we want to become a consistent tourney participant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetorch Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Speaking of Nolan Berry, does anyone know if we have offered him yet? Also, will anyone from STL in his class (currently Soph) be more hotly recruited than him? Swopshire, Martin, Hill, Virdure are all gettting looks from majors. Swopshire is setting himself up to be a top 50 recruit being invited to the national squad. I thought Virdure was snubbed somewhat on the All metro squads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 backhand, considering that for about 20 years i took the opposite stand and only last year saw the light on this scenario, i think it was indeed relevant as to my flip flop on the debate. sorry to bore you. you can now return to your job ranking rams cheerleaders. -so you can change your mind, wonder if you would give rick another look and have a different opinion? no need to answer, i think this one maybe set too deep to change 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.