Jump to content

C-USA coaches roundup


kwyjibo

Recommended Posts

A roundup of C-USA Tip-Off day:

Stu view with Soderberg on SLU's fit in new C-USA:

"It would be like the old 'Sesame Street' - one of these things is not like the other," he (Soderberg) said. "That's how we would be. There are two ways it could be negative. You would have 12 football schools that could vote in a meeting and two non-football schools. And if the league wants to add more football schools, they could say 'We like you but you're not like us.'"

Soderberg concerned over Marquette playing away game with S. Miss in Green Bay:

http://tinyurl.com/sjag

Cal says any one of eight teams could win C-USA (including SLU) while Pitino or Lutz do not mention SLU as possible winners:

http://www.gomemphis.com/mca/basketball/ar...2379499,00.html

Huggy and Cal spat (Huggins predicts Calipari will be highest paid "mid-major" coach):

http://www.cincypost.com/2003/10/27/uchoop10-27-2003.html

Cal also mad that Southern Miss will play Marquette "home game" in Green Bay:

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/marq/oct03/180461.asp

More mostly focusing on the "lame-duck" nature of C-USA:

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/sports_s...p?intID=3792179

http://www.courier-journal.com/cjsports/bk...31027forde.html

http://www.al.com/sports/birminghamnews/in...50157174031.xml

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple things from these articles:

First, I was disapointed that the Post article wasn't more emphatic that we are going ot the A-10. I don't like articles discussing multiple options, etc. The sooner we get an invite the better.

Also, I've got to wonder if the shake-up has left some bad-blood. Soderberg and Cal call a meeting to complain about Marquette getting 9 home games? I doubt this would have happened if the conference was still solid. I hope we keep good working relationships with the 4 big-East bound schools as I would enjoy playing each of them once a year for the foreseable future.

I suspect the tensions between the schools will be considerably more noticable then ever the next two years before we all head our separate ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are right to an extent ... I hope we will remain close as the belief seems to be that the Big East will split up in a few years and we may want to be a part of that. I think that this extra "home" game would have been an issue regardless. I can't believe that CUSA lets it happen. One win could be the difference in getting a 1st rd bye in the tourney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marquette had no say in the matter of moving the game. What the hell is Soderberg's problem?

Here's what USM coach James Green had to say:

Southern Mississippi coach James Green was quick to dispel a belief held by some that Marquette came to his school's administration with the idea.

"One of the things I want to make sure everyone knows is Marquette and Tom Crean only agreed, they did not pursue us playing in Green Bay," Green said. "That was a Southern Miss deal. I've heard that a lot of people feel they tried to entice us. That is not correct. That is something that I wouldn't want Tom to even have to deal with."

I think the idea of moving it was to make money and sell more tickets and Green Bay was chosen because of USM's most famous alum, Brett Favre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"what the hell is Soderberg's problem?"

His problem is that Marquette is essencially getting another home game. Many more people in Green Bay will be rooting for MU than southern miss...that's for sure. Why does marquette get this unfair advantage? Because they got to the final four and can afford to spend some money to have a better schedule? The bills road record sucks...we could sure use another neutral game at the Dome. I think he has a legitamate beef considering how close the conference race will be this year...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not like Green Bay is some Marquette hot-bed. It would be like moving a Billiken game to Springfield, IL or Kansas City. Plus, Marquette has never played at this arena so there is no "home court advantage" involved here. Marquette doesn't get another home game, they just get one less "road game" (and besides, they have won the last 4 at USM.

And no, Marquette didn't spend any money to get this game either. This was all USM's doings (again, Green Bay. Brett Favre, USM alum. You figure it out).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i cant fathom how anyone WOULD NOT have a problem with this "sold home game" scenario. as close as conference usa is every year, that one extra home game is monstrous imo. no one is saying that brad is mad at marquette, i am sure everyone is up in arms at so miss for selling the game and for conference usa for allowing it. that all said, there is no doubt that marquette is benefitting greatly from it. i dont blame marquette one bit. if so miss wanted to sell a home game we had to the arena in st charles or the eddydome, i am sure we would be happy to take that. but to just shrug this off as no big deal is not sensible or fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

law you arent being logical. if you think the fans in the stands are going to be rooting for so miss instead of marquette you are naive. i realized it is still a good drive, but a hell of a lot closer to green bay from milwaukee than from hattisburg, ms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you can say Marquette didn't have anything to do with the moving of this game ... of course they did ... they agreed to it. I do believe that it wasn't thier idea ... as I think Marquette is an ethical school and so is Crean but they still get an unfair advantage.

The problem is (as noted by most everyone else) with CUSA ... how can they let it happen ... are they still holding out some kind of crazy hope that Marquette will stay ... so they don't want to piss them off.

Who knows why but it stinks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

again, why would marquette turn it down? they would be fools to say no we would really rather go to hattisburg. any team would have taken that offer.

as to cusa approving it, i dont know the procedure. you apparently think all the schools had to approve it or at least some sort of majority. i tend to believe that wasnt what happened because i cant believe the majority of schools would have went for this. my guess is this joker new commish, who seems bent on trying to make mike slive look like a hall of fame commish, said ok and didnt run it by anyone else. not much else makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to question the logic of Southern Miss for making this deal. I've been in Green Bay a few times, and while I have definitely noticed that the Packers are a religion in that city, I highly doubt that the citizens of Green Bay will care if Brett Favre's alma mater is playing in town, especially when he went to Southern Miss. Brian McBride has been a star for the Columbus Crew, but I doubt that the citizens of Columbus would care if we scheduled a "home" game against Dayton or Xavier.

I can't really blame Crean and Marquette for this because if someone offered them the chance to play a road game within about 1-2 hours of your home base against a team in Mississippi, They'd be nuts not to jump on the opportunity.

Nonetheless, the whole thing sounds fishy, not because I think Marquette is being crooked about this, but that Southern Miss is just being stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What B-Law said totally makes sense: B. Favre + Green Bay Packers + USM connection = USM Basketball Game in Green Bay.

Is that why the MVC tourney is played in STL because Kurt Warner went to Northern Iowa. I heard San Diego St. U. was thinking of moving some home games to STL because of Marshall Faulk. That argument is ridiculous. However, it is not the fault of Marquette but the fault of the league. The purpose of Sport is that no team has an unfair advantage over another team. This game gives Marquette a team in the league an unfair advantage because they are not playing an away game but another game in their home state. USM may make more $ off of the deal but that is not the reason for college athletics and hence it should not hold up. Under scrutiny this choice doesn't meet the ethical standards of fair competition it should be denied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

conference usa should tell southern miss that they cannot have a penny of the gate. all procedes remain with the promoters in green bay or go to the conference to split accordingly. i wonder if southern miss is still all guns to give brett farve a basketball game then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, i did read it right. I'm not sure about the Big10 moving a hoops game, still researching that. Nevertheless, moving a Big 10 football game was pretty shocking at the time - - especially when it was OSU slated to come to Evanston. That game would have sold out in either location (albeit with more seats in Cleveland).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

desmet, not if southern miss was paid a fee that paid their expenses and exceeded their typical gate net. nice payday. that is what this comes down to, a payday for southern miss. they have given a buy game for a conference game. has nothing to do with the conference standings. imo it signals that southern miss must think they are going to suck this year anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...