Coach on the Big 550, Practice starts Sept 29

[billikenfan05]

7 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

The shot Stokes hit at the buzzer (or very close to it) was a long three-pointer.

it was not, thanks for playing.

[Quality Is Job 1]

12 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said:

it was not, thanks for playing.

Oh.  My eyes must have been playing tricks on me when I saw it in person.  But he was clearly a foot inside the arc.

[billiken_roy]

27 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

The shot Stokes hit at the buzzer (or very close to it) was a long three-pointer.

the video shows he was inside the three line

[Quality Is Job 1]

Just now, billiken_roy said:

the video shows he was inside the three line

Roy, are you sure?!

[billiken_roy]

4 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

Roy, are you sure?!

you put the link on your own post to view.  

[cheeseman]

20 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said:

it was not, thanks for playing.

Thanks for posting this - I guess my memory was blurred by my wanting it to be a long three pointer but obviously it was not.

[Billiken Rich]

6 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

Thanks for posting this - I guess my memory was blurred by my wanting it to be a long three pointer but obviously it was not.

Mine too.....

[Quality Is Job 1]

15 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

you put the link on your own post to view.  

So you're trying to tell me that you believe the video evidence over my fallible memory?!

[White Pelican]

They won by TWO. How in the hell could it have been a three pointer, video or not?

More importantly, who was our moderator rooting for in that game?

[VeniceMenace]

On 8/21/2018 at 11:04 PM, billikenfan05 said:

Good thing I had a beach towel in my car 

Going to need that towel again after looking at that picture just tweeted of TFord & crew handing out T-shirts in the cafeteria.

Thatch Shaft looking like a JGood clone, college ready.

Shirts are sharp. Brand new? On sale anywhere?

[Quality Is Job 1]

3 minutes ago, White Pelican said:

They won by TWO. How in the hell could it have been a three pointer, video or not?

More importantly, who was our moderator rooting for in that game?

Fuzzy memory.

When the third game of the series occurred, there was no moderator, if I remember correctly.  I think it was after that season that Steve asked me to help moderate.

As for my rooting interests, I was basically neutral but secretly pulling slightly for the Billikens in all three games of the series.

My dad took me to the game at Savvis; my mom asked him afterward who I was rooting for, and he told her he thought I was pulling for the Tigers, but that's not true.  He was injecting his own anti-SLU bias into his perceptions.

It's partly the local penchant to denigrate SLU while boosting Mizzou (delusionally) that causes me to pull for SLU a little more than Mizzou.  However, I still like Mizzou: I'm not going to hold the attitude of the fans against the team.

[willie]

10 minutes ago, White Pelican said:

They won by TWO. How in the hell could it have been a three pointer, video or not?

More importantly, who was our moderator rooting for in that game?

Just looked at the u-tube video. Foot was on the line. 2 pointer. 

[billiken_roy]

6 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

It's partly the local penchant to denigrate SLU while boosting Mizzou (delusionally) that causes me to pull for SLU a little more than Mizzou.  

this

[kappy96]

38 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

Thanks for posting this - I guess my memory was blurred by my wanting it to be a long three pointer but obviously it was not.

My memory was not blurred as lost a sh!t ton of money on that game having taken Mizzou -5 and thinking it was an absurd line given where both of those teams were coming into that game.  At least if SLU had won I would have been able to hang my hat on the W but Stokes ruined everything. 

[SShoe]

56 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

Fuzzy memory.

When the third game of the series occurred, there was no moderator, if I remember correctly.  I think it was after that season that Steve asked me to help moderate.

As for my rooting interests, I was basically neutral but secretly pulling slightly for the Billikens in all three games of the series.

My dad took me to the game at Savvis; my mom asked him afterward who I was rooting for, and he told her he thought I was pulling for the Tigers, but that's not true.  He was injecting his own anti-SLU bias into his perceptions.

It's partly the local penchant to denigrate SLU while boosting Mizzou (delusionally) that causes me to pull for SLU a little more than Mizzou.  However, I still like Mizzou: I'm not going to hold the attitude of the fans against the team.

Historically, I've disliked Mizzou mostly because their fans suck and they won't play us.  Now, we get the added bonus of competing for the same recruits so it's picked up a notch.  

I'm in the camp that college basketball has a "regular-season" problem with not enough average fan interest in November and December and too many bad games. The sport needs more games like Mizzou/SLU to change that.  And at this point, it's on Mizzou to make that happen.  

[Neighbor Dave]

1 hour ago, kappy96 said:

My memory was not blurred as lost a sh!t ton of money on that game having taken Mizzou -5 and thinking it was an absurd line given where both of those teams were coming into that game.  At least if SLU had won I would have been able to hang my hat on the W but Stokes ruined everything. 

Looking at the respective lineups in that box score, the line STILL seems absurd, even knowing the outcome.

That Mizzou team was loaded with talented players: Paulding, Johnson, Rush, Gilbert, Bryant.  It's unreal in hindsight that the game was close.

And then Wesley *#$%@ Stokes, the one guy you wanted to force to shoot the ball, hits the buzzer-beater. 

I'm gonna go watch the video of the Conklin screen about 33 times to reset my mood.

[LindellWest]

1 hour ago, kappy96 said:

My memory was not blurred as lost a sh!t ton of money on that game having taken Mizzou -5 and thinking it was an absurd line given where both of those teams were coming into that game.  At least if SLU had won I would have been able to hang my hat on the W but Stokes ruined everything. 

Those cut deep. 

[dlarry]

3 hours ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

The shot Stokes hit at the buzzer (or very close to it) was a long three-pointer.

 

2 hours ago, billiken_roy said:

the video shows he was inside the three line

2 pointer 3 pointer I don't really care. Anyway you slice it Wesley Stokes is a D*%$.

I remember thinking at the time I hope that SOB gets Lou Gehrigs disease.  

I've mellowed in my older years and I realize wishing that on anyone is terrible. I'm glad he didn't get Lou Gehrig's disease but Stokes picking up mono or a severe case of herpes would have been OK.

[brianstl]

1 hour ago, dlarry said:

 

2 pointer 3 pointer I don't really care. Anyway you slice it Wesley Stokes is a D*%$.

I remember thinking at the time I hope that SOB gets Lou Gehrigs disease.  

I've mellowed in my older years and I realize wishing that on anyone is terrible. I'm glad he didn't get Lou Gehrig's disease but Stokes picking up mono or a severe case of herpes would have been OK.

Herpes, you keep that sh!t the rest of your life like luggage.

[slu72]

Bottom line the Red Sox have Bucky effing Dent, we got Wesley effing Stokes. 

[White Pelican]

15 hours ago, slu72 said:

Bottom line the Red Sox have Bucky effing Dent, we got Wesley effing Stokes. 

Come on now, THEY have Tyus effing Edney AAAAAND Norfolk effing State.

[Brighton]

It really is unfortunate that Mizzou can't put their petty differences aside.

This series could make basketball the second most favorable sport behind baseball in this state.

[cheeseman]

27 minutes ago, Brighton said:

It really is unfortunate that Mizzou can't put their petty differences aside.

This series could make basketball the second most favorable sport behind baseball in this state.

It is only petty because you think so - to them it is end of the world stuff to lose to SLU so playing us is out of the question.

[Adman]

22 hours ago, SShoe said:

I'm in the camp that college basketball has a "regular-season" problem with not enough average fan interest in November and December and too many bad games. The sport needs more games like Mizzou/SLU to change that.  And at this point, it's on Mizzou to make that happen.  

Completely agree. By the way, the NCAA agrees with you, too. They have reams of data on this issue, recognized it as a problem, and without a lot of fanfare a couple years ago, developed a major marketing program both at national level and in local markets for its 340+ Div 1 members — primarily focused on schools in the 50-250 RPI range.

Schools with perennially lower RPIs don’t face much fan disinterest. Schools with perennially higher RPIs typically are Div 1 in name only, use it as a vanity for general student recruiting, have relatively little built-in fan interest; additional basketball program marketing would be mostly ineffective and a waste of money. 

But scheduling seems to be at least one of the key objectives in separate changes the NCAA has been making to team performance metrics made in the last year — “tiers”, emphasis on road game performance, new rating system announced this week, etc.

As we know, conferences are moving to or exploring 20-game schedule to beef up performance metrics (and drive television$$) as a result.

What I think would be better is for the NCAA to add a metric rewarding performance against non-conference Top 100 teams, and reduce greatly the number of buy games allowed. All equal, this would encourage games like SLU-Mizzou and weed out bottom feeding NCAA Div 1 teams - ultimately driving fan interest.

[cheeseman]

13 hours ago, Adman said:

Completely agree. By the way, the NCAA agrees with you, too. They have reams of data on this issue, recognized it as a problem, and without a lot of fanfare a couple years ago, developed a major marketing program both at national level and in local markets for its 340+ Div 1 members — primarily focused on schools in the 50-250 RPI range.

Schools with perennially lower RPIs don’t face much fan disinterest. Schools with perennially higher RPIs typically are Div 1 in name only, use it as a vanity for general student recruiting, have relatively little built-in fan interest; additional basketball program marketing would be mostly ineffective and a waste of money. 

But scheduling seems to be at least one of the key objectives in separate changes the NCAA has been making to team performance metrics made in the last year — “tiers”, emphasis on road game performance, new rating system announced this week, etc.

As we know, conferences are moving to or exploring 20-game schedule to beef up performance metrics (and drive television$$) as a result.

What I think would be better is for the NCAA to add a metric rewarding performance against non-conference Top 100 teams, and reduce greatly the number of buy games allowed. All equal, this would encourage games like SLU-Mizzou and weed out bottom feeding NCAA Div 1 teams - ultimately driving fan interest.

Good points but what happens to those schools whose entire athletic budget depends on them play a buy game non conf schedule?  I guess you could say well survival of the fittest but they will howl just as we howl when the NCAA comes up with ideas to favor the P5s over conferences like ours.