CBFan Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 Havent seen MB for awhile. You will probably find him in the STL today comment section trashing this board. Some guy named Joe whose writing resembles MB's said we were sick and represented less than 1 percent of the SLU fan base. I beg to differ on both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLU_Nick Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 Sitting here on April 5th, I am very pleased with how SLU handled the coaching search. It seems as if they knew the exact moment that Drew had his eyes on the $EC and found a young tireless recruiter who actually wants to be here. The biggest problem I had with Crews was that I couldnt imagine him actually selling himself to a recruit who had multiple offers from Big Time schools. Hence we got the recruits that we not highly regarded and we were forced to say things like, "He had legit interest from Memphis before he chose SLU. If you would have given Travis Ford this job coming off of NCAA tourney victories three years in a row, there is no doubt in my mind that he would have been able to keep the ball rolling....we'd probably have Tatum as well. Man, Crews sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 Preferring Ford to Drew is revisionist history at its finest (that took long). Which doesn't mean there's necessarily anything wrong with Ford (NCAA and B12 record aside), or that he couldn't be a good fit at SLU. I enjoy how easy the kool-aid can flow on this board (aside from MB after Jan. Crews wins) -for my own piece of mind better to get on board with the new coach, put the rest to bed and hope like heck he and the program have tremendous success while continuing to support it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonwich Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 You will probably find him in the STL today comment section trashing this board. Some guy named Joe whose writing resembles MB's said we were sick and represented less than 1 percent of the SLU fan base. I beg to differ on both. We probably are less than 1 percent of the fan base. We represent many more of them than that. (Think of them as the silent majority.) We're definitely sick, in the context of how this word describes the final two shots of last night's game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majerus mojo Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 -for my own piece of mind better to get on board with the new coach, put the rest to bed and hope like heck he and the program have tremendous success while continuing to support it Absolutely. That's what I found odd about the season ticket thread. The only question should be -- Did we can Crews? Yes? Ok, great! I'll give it another shot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 I agree the past is the past - move on. Ford while not everybody's first choice - although I think 2 things went against him, his rough season this year and some had their hearts set on Drew because people were saying we already had a deal in place with him. At this point I have huge doubts about that and now think all it was was that Drew's agent said yes we are interested, the money sounds good but let the season end before we talk seriously again - all leverage from his end for whatever might come up. Once Dixon left Pitt then the carousel started and that was bad for us. I am not even sure if Drew would have come if the Vandy job had not opened. At this point, it will all come down to if Ford can get players - if he can't then nothing else matters. Truth be told if Drew had come and he did not get players people would have turned on him. We have to give Ford a chance and recruiting for next year at this stage of the game is tough and if people get all in a twist if he does not get a several very good players then they are being unrealistic. To be fair, his time will be for 2017 and 18. Lets just let the cards play out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willie Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 The first report card for Ford will be early signing period next October. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billboy1 Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 First report card is what assistants are hired and any late signees he is able to land Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 The first report card for Ford will be early signing period next October. I believe that is what I said - 2017 season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 First report card is what assistants are hired and any late signees he is able to land It is going to be an interesting few months with Ford needing to hire a coaching staff, potential transfers out, spring/summer roster additions for 2016, and then spring/summer recruiting for the 2017 recruiting class with the big time AAU events starting soon (EYBL Session #1 is in Brooklyn April 15th-17th). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 It is going to be an interesting few months with Ford needing to hire a coaching staff, potential transfers out, spring/summer roster additions for 2016, and then spring/summer recruiting for the 2017 recruiting class with the big time AAU events starting soon (EYBL Session #1 is in Brooklyn April 15th-17th). -and putting together a schedule Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 If you would have given Travis Ford this job coming off of NCAA tourney victories three years in a row, there is no doubt in my mind that he would have been able to keep the ball rolling....we'd probably have Tatum as well. Man, Crews sucks. Again, which is what we should have done. There was nothing on Jim Crews' resume which gave anyone - even those who supported the hiring of Crews - any indication that Jim Crews was the best guy for our job. The politics of SLU being perceived as "loyal", "nice" and speculative fear about SLU firing such a "great guy" who filled in for deceased friend (RM) and after receivng "National Coach of the Year" honors was all bs. Had we hired a proven head coach (Travis Ford, Bryce Drew or Kevin Stallings type guy) there would have been no problems -- especially with a good PR firm spinning stories about Crews' advancing age, his having previously been retired and out of coaching but for RM and Alex Jensen, his not really wanting to be a coach again (whether true or not) and about SLU's need for the program to have a young/high energy guy who is not old or in bad health... Recall that we had the money in that RM had long already been making over a $1 million per year (we even paid Crews $850,000 per year) so I am sure we could have hired someone really good -- not some no-name, up and coming guy. Crews may have looked good compared to the likes of then "up and coming" assistant coaches like Soderberg and Gregory but not compared to Ford, Drew or Stallings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 Again, which is what we should have done. There was nothing on Jim Crews' resume which gave anyone - even those who supported the hiring of Crews - any indication that Jim Crews was the best guy for our job. The politics of SLU being perceived as "loyal", "nice" and speculative fear about SLU firing such a "great guy" who filled in for deceased friend (RM) and after receivng "National Coach of the Year" honors was all bs. Had we hired a proven head coach (Travis Ford, Bryce Drew or Kevin Stallings type guy) there would have been no problems -- especially with a good PR firm spinning stories about Crews' advancing age, his having previously been retired and out of coaching but for RM and Alex Jensen, his not really wanting to be a coach again (whether true or not) and about SLU's need for the program to have a young/high energy guy who is not old or in bad health... Recall that we had the money in that RM had long already been making over a $1 million per year (we even paid Crews $850,000 per year) so I am sure we could have hired someone really good -- not some no-name, up and coming guy. Crews may have looked good compared to the likes of then "up and coming" assistant coaches like Soderberg and Gregory but not compared to Ford, Drew or Stallings. I get your point and agree but I am not sure they could have said we did not hire Crews because he is old - lawsuit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgeldmacher Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 Again, which is what we should have done. There was nothing on Jim Crews' resume which gave anyone - even those who supported the hiring of Crews - any indication that Jim Crews was the best guy for our job. The politics of SLU being perceived as "loyal", "nice" and speculative fear about SLU firing such a "great guy" who filled in for deceased friend (RM) and after receivng "National Coach of the Year" honors was all bs. Had we hired a proven head coach (Travis Ford, Bryce Drew or Kevin Stallings type guy) there would have been no problems -- especially with a good PR firm spinning stories about Crews' advancing age, his having previously been retired and out of coaching but for RM and Alex Jensen, his not really wanting to be a coach again (whether true or not) and about SLU's need for the program to have a young/high energy guy who is not old or in bad health... Recall that we had the money in that RM had long already been making over a $1 million per year (we even paid Crews $850,000 per year) so I am sure we could have hired someone really good -- not some no-name, up and coming guy. Crews may have looked good compared to the likes of then "up and coming" assistant coaches like Soderberg and Gregory but not compared to Ford, Drew or Stallings. One interview by Crews where he says "no, I wanted to coach that team next year and into the future, but they didn't give me the chance," and any PR you did is worthless. Then the new coach would have been measured by the success Crews had in that first year. Comparing the new coach to that year would have already, by now, resulted in the new coach being fired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 One interview by Crews where he says "no, I wanted to coach that team next year and into the future, but they didn't give me the chance," and any PR you did is worthless. Then the new coach would have been measured by the success Crews had in that first year. Comparing the new coach to that year would have already, by now, resulted in the new coach being fired. I still don't agree. We should not have cared what the so called "PR" issue. You hire the coach you want not the coach you feel trapped in hiring because of what others might think. He was a bad hire and there is no reason I have heard yet to prove that wrong. You can not be in charge if you are going to be bullied by what others from outside your group think about you. 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.