Burwell Article - MU vs. SLU

[Pistol]

Been having this convo on twitter, and I'll quote my SLU fan buddy here: "If I were Mizzou I would be doing what they are. Why play a 75-125 RPI team in their Superbowl when you can play a 75-125 team in an easier win?" It might be a fun game to watch, but do you really blame Alden for not making the game happen?

As a Mizzou fan, what bothers me about it is the media. Sportswriters only crow about it when SLU is good. There is never an article in the Post-Dispatch calling Mizzou out for ducking SLU when SLU isn't any good; it's only that one out of every five years that SLU is good and all of the sudden it's a crime that Mizzou won't play them. Give me a break.

SLU is 30 in the RPI. As already stated, this would have been Mizzou's strongest non-conference game and third-strongest opponent overall. You and your friend aren't very good at The Internet.

The Mizzou-educated local sports media bothers you, and you are a Mizzou fan. This indicates you will never, ever be happy with the media.

Yes, we do blame Alden for not allowing it to happen. He has a chance to play a series that means more money for his program, which has to pay millions to the Big 12. Perhaps you don't remember the distant past (1999-2001), but there was a sold-out game at Mizzou's place in Columbia, a sold-out game at our place, and a crowd of 27,000 at the Dome. The largest margin of victory in the three games was 2. Fans of both sides absolutely loved it. Then Mizzou stopped returning calls.

The ball is in Mizzou's court. Until it accepts our challenge, I will stand steadfast in my belief that Mizzou's athletic department, coaches, players, and fans are gigantic *******.

[tigerluke]

Not that I want to defend Mizzou and/or the Big 12, why is everybody acting like Mizzou will get pounded in the SEC? It's not any better than the Big 12 in basketball, which I assume is what we're talking about.

Thing is, going forward, we're not a 75-125 program. So if you're going to resume this series, now is the time since we're set up for longer term success.

Cool, let's actually talk about reality. Thanks for having an actual conversation and not just throwing haymakers as soon as a tiger fan hops on here. If it's going to happen you are correct, this is the time, as both teams seem set up for a good next 3-5 years or so. My original point was just that it bothers me that the media blow it up like this when everyone knows it didn't make sense for them to be playing the last 5-10 years.

[SShoe]

FYI Norm Stewart & Spoon were the ones who made the three-year series happen in the early 2000s, they just both happened to have moved on by the time the games they scheduled were played. So, to say Stewart was a wuss is to be completely ignorant of history.

Also, Marquette is a consistently good team, with a rich basketball history, who plays in the BIG EAST. Not the Atlantic 10, the BIG EAST. That's a big boy conference, and Wisconsin has nothing to lose (actually, they probably have more to gain than to lose) by playing an in-state major conference basketball program in their non-conference schedule. To compare Wisconsin-Marquette to Mizzou-SLU is laughable.

That's not how I remember it at all. Rather, the only reason it did happen was because Stewie was no longer coach (forced out, not moved on) and Mizzou had put together a recent string of mediocre seasons. It was a perfect storm.

Marquette and Wisc. started playing before the move to the BE, so don't use conference affiliation as a reason that game is acceptable.

[NashvilleBilliken]

Not that I want to defend Mizzou and/or the Big 12, why is everybody acting like Mizzou will get pounded in the SEC? It's not any better than the Big 12 in basketball, which I assume is what we're talking about.

Thing is, going forward, we're not a 75-125 program. So if you're going to resume this series, now is the time since we're set up for longer term success.

Hell, with all that we have coming back and that they lose, we might not want Mizzou's RPI weighing us down next year.

I was actually referring to football in my post. I don't think they will even be competitive...but maybe that's what I get for living in the heart of SEC country for most of my life.

I think they will be middle of the pack in basketball. Some good years and some bad years, but over all middle of the pack. Maybe it's perception, but I don't know if Missouri has the $$$ to excel in the SEC.

[kshoe]

FYI Norm Stewart & Spoon were the ones who made the three-year series happen in the early 2000s, they just both happened to have moved on by the time the games they scheduled were played. So, to say Stewart was a wuss is to be completely ignorant of history.

Also, Marquette is a consistently good team, with a rich basketball history, who plays in the BIG EAST. Not the Atlantic 10, the BIG EAST. That's a big boy conference, and Wisconsin has nothing to lose (actually, they probably have more to gain than to lose) by playing an in-state major conference basketball program in their non-conference schedule. To compare Wisconsin-Marquette to Mizzou-SLU is laughable.

Well, considering Norm ducked SLU all the way from the late 70s to the late 90s when he was on his way out, I think any characterizing of him as a guy unafraid to play SLU is ridiculous. He was as much a part of the problem as anyone. Putting together a 3 game series just as he's retiring doesn't undo 20 years of being an arse.

Mizzou has been ducking SLU no matter what conference we are in. UK/UL and Marquette/UW were playing when SLU was in the same conference as UL and Marq. The conference argument is weak.

[tigerluke]

Ive never understood the entire "we have nothing to gain from it. It a lose lose situation. if we win we are supposed to if we lose its a bad loss" type arguments.

Couldnt those same arguments be used when they play the Binghamptons of the world?

Wouldnt a loss to one of these cupcakes they schedule be much more damaging?

The argument isn't about how good SLU or Binghampton ACTUALLY is, the argument is that since SLU is small school in the state, and Mizzou is the large state school with the bigger program, that SLU would be much much much more motivated to play the game against Mizzou than vice versa, so Mizzou would have a better chance of losing to SLU (to whom beating Mizzou would mean the world) than to a comparable team that has no reason to hate Mizzou or feel that little brother/big brother thing that motivates SLU when they get a shot at Mizzou. It's about risk management, and if you want to call it ducking then I guess that's fine, but it doesn't make sense to set up a game where the other team has all the motivation to be David and take down Goliath.

[AlumniFan]

Tigerluke, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Enjoy getting your brains splattered on the curb in the SEC.

Hey, hey now. Take it easy on him, after all he did only go to a public technical college in Boone County.

[billikenfan05]

The argument isn't about how good SLU or Binghampton ACTUALLY is, the argument is that since SLU is small school in the state, and Mizzou is the large state school with the bigger program, that SLU would be much much much more motivated to play the game against Mizzou than vice versa, so Mizzou would have a better chance of losing to SLU (to whom beating Mizzou would mean the world) than to a comparable team that has no reason to hate Mizzou or feel that little brother/big brother thing that motivates SLU when they get a shot at Mizzou. It's about risk management, and if you want to call it ducking then I guess that's fine, but it doesn't make sense to set up a game where the other team has all the motivation to be David and take down Goliath.

You think you are goliath? You really have an inflated self worth, if a team has trouble motivating itself for ANY game on their schedule than it has some real problems.

[tigerluke]

Mizzou has been ducking SLU no matter what conference we are in. UK/UL and Marquette/UW were playing when SLU was in the same conference as UL and Marq. The conference argument is weak.

The conference argument isn't weak, because when Kentucky was playing Louisville and Wisconsin was playing Marquette while they were in C-USA with SLU, guess what, C-USA had Marquette, and Louisville, and Cincinnati, and Memphis, and was a pretty good basketball conference. Then Marquette and Louisville went to the Big East and were in an even better conference, so again, it wouldn't damage Kentucky or Wisconsin much to lose to teams from a strong conference. Say what you want, but since the big boys abandoned C-USA, SLU has not been in a conference that anyone nationally sees as "big boy basketball." So I think the conference argument still stands.

[tigerluke]

Hey, hey now. Take it easy on him, after all he did only go to a public technical college in Boone County.

I didn't go to Mizzou, I went to Clemson & then to Wash U. - I'm a Mizzou fan b/c family all went there and I grew up going to every football & basketball game with my dad until I left for college.

[SShoe]

Cool, let's actually talk about reality. Thanks for having an actual conversation and not just throwing haymakers as soon as a tiger fan hops on here. If it's going to happen you are correct, this is the time, as both teams seem set up for a good next 3-5 years or so. My original point was just that it bothers me that the media blow it up like this when everyone knows it didn't make sense for them to be playing the last 5-10 years.

While the local media's coverage of college hoops is generally awful, you can't completely blame them for only bringing this up when SLU is any good because that's really the only time you can generate support for the game. It's also the only time they ever pay attention.

Regardless of the past, now is the time to resume this thing. The noise from local media is only going to get worse if/when SLU maintains this level of success for a few years. And if Mizzou is not inclined to play a 25-50 range team because its in-state and might be "embarrassing" to lose, then that truly is chickensheat.

[kshoe]

The conference argument isn't weak, because when Kentucky was playing Louisville and Wisconsin was playing Marquette while they were in C-USA with SLU, guess what, C-USA had Marquette, and Louisville, and Cincinnati, and Memphis, and was a pretty good basketball conference. Then Marquette and Louisville went to the Big East and were in an even better conference, so again, it wouldn't damage Kentucky or Wisconsin much to lose to teams from a strong conference. Say what you want, but since the big boys abandoned C-USA, SLU has not been in a conference that anyone nationally sees as "big boy basketball." So I think the conference argument still stands.

But you wouldn't play us when we were in a good conference either. So that can't be the reason, its really just a b.s. excuse.

[DirtyRican]

Mizzou is by no means Goliath. From where I sit they have never won anything of relevance. I guess maybe it is because I grew up in Florida where the so called "large schools" won championships.

[tigerluke]

You think you are goliath? You really have an inflated self worth, if a team has trouble motivating itself for ANY game on their schedule than it has some real problems.

Probably shouldn't have said the David & Goliath thing, the big brother/little brother analogy was more apt. Just having so much fun getting you guys all riled up, haha.

[AlumniFan]

God I love swiss cheese.

Which hole do I even start with? How about...

(1) Are you really quoting all-time-series stats to try and argue that SLU is on par with Mizzou program-wise? SLU has all of, what, SIX (going on seven) appearances in the NCAA Tournament ALL TIME? Compare that to Mizzou's TWENTY FOUR (going on twenty five) trips to the big dance, and how is that comparable? We haven't even talked about league titles or the competition that they play in the leagues either, but I just don't have all the time in the world to set you straight.

(2) The idea that playing SLU is the difference between playing a cupcake non-conference schedule or a legit non-conference schedule is, if possible, even more laughable than the idea that SLU and Mizzou are programs on the same level. So it qualifies as "duck season" to play teams like Illinois, Villanova, Cal, and Notre Dame, but adding SLU to that mix would suddenly give it credibility? Don't be ridiculous.

I get it, you want to see the game happen. Hell, I'd even enjoy watching the game happen, but let's be realistic about why it's not happening, and quit getting all offended by Alden's decision-making because it makes sense why he's reluctant to sign on.

The "idea" that you are insecure enough to post comments on another team's forum pretty much says it all.

[prebilliken]

FYI Norm Stewart & Spoon were the ones who made the three-year series happen in the early 2000s, they just both happened to have moved on by the time the games they scheduled were played. So, to say Stewart was a wuss is to be completely ignorant of history.

Also, Marquette is a consistently good team, with a rich basketball history, who plays in the BIG EAST. Not the Atlantic 10, the BIG EAST. That's a big boy conference, and Wisconsin has nothing to lose (actually, they probably have more to gain than to lose) by playing an in-state major conference basketball program in their non-conference schedule. To compare Wisconsin-Marquette to Mizzou-SLU is laughable.

Cool, let's actually talk about reality. Thanks for having an actual conversation and not just throwing haymakers as soon as a tiger fan hops on here. If it's going to happen you are correct, this is the time, as both teams seem set up for a good next 3-5 years or so. My original point was just that it bothers me that the media blow it up like this when everyone knows it didn't make sense for them to be playing the last 5-10 years.

So when Marquette was in the CUSA and Wisco still played them... That isn't realatable to SLU-Mizzou? Marquette is basketball rich, I agree. But has suffered many a drought like non-football schools. Their lone National Championship is back in the 70's, but I would most def cede that they have more basketball history than SLU. But that's not why that game happens, it happens because people want it to and the schools abide! Mizzou has this BS Penn State like view of "We are the only team in the state, if you're a fan of sports you have to be a fan of us." Its pathetic.

Stewart was a wuss. He was over rated.

Why wouldn't I throw haymakers at a TIGER fan talking sh!t on a Billikens board?

[tigerluke]

Mizzou is by no means Goliath. From where I sit they have never won anything of relevance. I guess maybe it is because I grew up in Florida where the so called "large schools" won championships.

Fair, Mizzou isn't an "elite" basketball program, but the fact remains that there is a very real gap in program size, relevance, and national opinion between SLU and Mizzou.

[AlumniFan]

Cool, let's actually talk about reality. Thanks for having an actual conversation and not just throwing haymakers as soon as a tiger fan hops on here. If it's going to happen you are correct, this is the time, as both teams seem set up for a good next 3-5 years or so. My original point was just that it bothers me that the media blow it up like this when everyone knows it didn't make sense for them to be playing the last 5-10 years.

"and not just throwing haymakers...". Oh, you mean like you did in your opening comments on another team's forum? Highway 70 west - take it.

[tigerluke]

So when Marquette was in the CUSA and Wisco still played them... That isn't realatable to SLU-Mizzou? Marquette is basketball rich, I agree. But has suffered many a drought like non-football schools. Their lone National Championship is back in the 70's, but I would most def cede that they have more basketball history than SLU. But that's not why that game happens, it happens because people want it to and the schools abide! Mizzou has this BS Penn State like view of "We are the only team in the state, if you're a fan of sports you have to be a fan of us." Its pathetic.

Why wouldn't I throw haymakers at a TIGER fan talking sh!t on a Billikens board?

For the record, I came over here b/c there was a story in the P-D that involved Mizzou & SLU, so I thought it would be fun to talk to you guys about it. It's not all that fun to talk to a bunch of Mizzou fans who just agree with each other.

The reason the game happens is only partially b/c of the fans. The reason this game isn't happening and Wisconsin-Marquette or Kentucky-Louisville does is that the national awareness/opinion of Marquette and Louisville are substantially higher than that of SLU. College sports are all about rankings, and rankings are all about perceptions, and whether or not SLU might be better than Marquette of Louisville in a given year is irrelevant, because the SLU program is not as nationally recognizable as they are, so it's a much bigger hit for Mizzou to lose to SLU than it is for Wisconsin to lose to Marquette or Kentucky to lose to Louisville.

[tigerluke]

"and not just throwing haymakers...". Oh, you mean like you did in your opening comments on another team's forum? Highway 70 west - take it.

Making a statement you may not agree with about the SLU basketball team is not the same as making ad hominem attacks like those that were thrown at me as soon as I got on here.

[Billiken Rich]

wah........

[tigerluke]

wah........

I'm still here, I can take it, I just wanted to point out the difference in tone of some (certainly not all) of the comments.

[prebilliken]

The reason the game happens is only partially b/c of the fans. The reason this game isn't happening and Wisconsin-Marquette or Kentucky-Louisville does is that the national awareness/opinion of Marquette and Louisville are substantially higher than that of SLU. College sports are all about rankings, and rankings are all about perceptions, and whether or not SLU might be better than Marquette of Louisville in a given year is irrelevant, because the SLU program is not as nationally recognizable as they are, so it's a much bigger hit for Mizzou to lose to SLU than it is for Wisconsin to lose to Marquette or Kentucky to lose to Louisville.

Yes, today... That logic makes sense today. But how long have those teams been playing? How long has Mizzou refused to put SLU on its schedule? Especially during the 90's when both teams were nationally relevant? When SLU and Mizzou were both consistently ranked? When they were both producing NBA players? When SLU was Top 10 (look it up its true) in National average attendance? Were we not worthy of Truman's best efforts back then?

So then what about now? Next year. After what could be a banner year for the Bills? After what arelady has been a banner year for the Tigers? When you lack a natural rival due to your dance down to dixie? SLU is a top 30 RPI team... Has been ranked in the AP and Coaches Top 25 this year. Is second in a fantastic conference (who has members that have BCS conference rivals who do not shy away from a good game.) Why not now?

[billiken_roy]

this guy is the definition of the arrogant mi$$ouri fan that is the reason i hate the tiger$ passionately. dont waste your time with him. he enjoys playing bingerhappyton and the rest of those winner schools that bring in a 5,000 person crowd each year.

as to the great success he is referring to with all those wonderful ncaa appearances. he can thank the fact they are somehow in the big 12. all the bcs schools have to do is finish 500 in their conference race and they get in by the corrupt committee each year that goes out of it's way to put in as many bcs schools as possible. probably half of those ncaa appearances werent justified. but let him sit in his basement wearing his crown and be happy that their ass beatings from kansas are finally over. of course now they can get it handed to them by the ethical giants like calipari and donovan. i hope they all get bit by snakes in the swamps of mississippi and louisiana.

[tigerluke]

The Mizzou-educated local sports media bothers you, and you are a Mizzou fan. This indicates you will never, ever be happy with the media.

Yes, we do blame Alden for not allowing it to happen. He has a chance to play a series that means more money for his program, which has to pay millions to the Big 12. Perhaps you don't remember the distant past (1999-2001), but there was a sold-out game at Mizzou's place in Columbia, a sold-out game at our place, and a crowd of 27,000 at the Dome. The largest margin of victory in the three games was 2. Fans of both sides absolutely loved it. Then Mizzou stopped returning calls.

It's very clearly not about the money for Mizzou. Big money in college athletics comes from one main source: football. Mizzou will never be motivated by money enough to play SLU because they don't need to. That's one of the reasons it's easy for Alden to not bother with it. To Mizzou, it's only about the cost/benefit analysis of playing the game in the context of the basketball team. From that standpoint: almost nothing to gain, everything to lose. Plain and simple.