Why we can never be Gonzaga

[3star_recruit]

Gonzaga had been a perennial 20 game winner even before their emergence on the national scene. It's the infusion of high major talent in recent years that took the program to the next level. The mismanagement of PAC 10 programs like USC and Cal over the last 5-6 years gave Gonzaga access to recruits that it didn't have before.

Gonzaga has improved its recruiting over time to the point where they're now bringing in top regional recruits on a regular basis. That gives them a clear talent edge over the rest of the WCC which has to rely on mid-major talent or get lucky with a late bloomer. Gonzaga can struggle to 7-4 record in a challenging non-conference schedule, administer a beat down to the undermanned WCC and still secure a good tournament seeding. Another 25 win season, which leads to another round of recruiting top regional talent.

No team has a monopoly on top talent in the A-10. Charlotte, Xavier and to a lesser extent, Dayton, GW and St. Joe's, all have returning players who were recruited at the high-major level. After this season, we will be in that same category. But in order to have a clear talent advantage on the rest of the A-10, Brad would have to recruit at the top 40-60 level not at the top 75-150 level that Gonzaga generally recruits at. If you don't belong to a conference with a big-time TV contract, you're not going to land the elite level recruits on any kind of consistent basis. That's just the way it is.

In terms of distribution of talent, the A-10 is much closer to the MVC than the WCC. You have two teams that are recruiting a slightly higher level than the rest of the conference (Charlotte and Xavier), then you have 3-4 teams that are all pretty similar in talent level. There's so much talent in North Carolina and Ohio that Charlotte and Xavier are always going to have access to high major players. We don't have that luxury in Missouri and southern Illinois. There isn't a single 4 star player in our local 2006 class (Alex Tyus is moving to Ohio) and except for Leon Powell, there isn't really a legit 4 star player in the 2007 class. Thus, the importance of bringing in kids who are good fits for your system.

"System programs" can be very successful relative to their conference but without a clear talent advantage a team isn't going to dominate its conference. If we start winning, we will attract slightly better talent than SIU (sorry SIUSalukis, the A-10 has a better TV deal). However, SLU isn't located in a basketball hotbed and it has to compete against tradition-rich schools that are. That puts a glass ceiling on our success.

[p diddy]

UNLV enjoyed that advantage for years when they dominated the PCAA and WCC (i think). They had tremendous talent and played a great nonconference schedule, then dominated their league and won a bunch of games.

Memphis and UAB are in a position to accomplish the same thing in the new C-USA, especially with Memphis and the talent that Calipari brings in. They can play a national non-conference schedule and dominate the new c-usa.

what carbondale has done in winning the valley so many times is truly remarkable because the talent level is pretty even from top to bottom and the MVC is a very solid league. That is really hard to do.

I would like to see our program become like dayton on a annual basis. Xavier would be nice too, but we haven't been able to recruit the level of talent like X has over the years.

bad boyz for life

[BLIKNS]

Personally I think the WCC is a very underrated conference.Watched the Gaels of St.Mary`s whenever they were on (Fox-Bay Area,Fox-West,etc.)There is alot of talented teams flying under the radar,out west.

We`ll see if Randy Bennett can keep up the success he had this year.I hope so.

[Iggy]

"I would like to see our program become like dayton"

I have significantly higher expectations than that.

[slu72]

Not sure I agree with 3 star about the glass ceiling on our recruiting. Do I think we'll ever compete with Duke, UNC, Kansas, Kentucky's...no...nor do I think we need to. What I am hoping for is the exposure to SLU in the primary A-10 region will hopefully expand our base in the talent rich areas of MD, DC, NJ and Philadelphia. To do this we have to start building a winning tradition and get the arena built. I also have faith that if UB can continue to cherry pick the area's cream of the crop (such as a Powell) we can be fairly successful.

[cheeseman]

3star - if Brad can stay awhile and keep the borders closed for the most part he can do well and perform as a top 50 program each year. If he can land a top 50 player or two every 3 years from outside the area then we can even end up as a consistent top 25 program. If you can do that then anything can happen as far as the NCAA tourney is concerned. I still think that SIUC will be seeing a drop back over the next 2-3 years - no way they can continue to bring in lower tiered players and have them hit grand slams like when Weber was there. We can be a Gonzaga but it will take time and a slow infusion of $ into the program. If the program can be successful in the next 2-3 years, the $ will come. We need the announcement on the arena ASAP.

[3star_recruit]

"What I am hoping for is the exposure to SLU in the primary A-10 region will hopefully expand our base in the talent rich areas of MD, DC, NJ and Philadelphia."

After Maryland, Villanova, St. Joe's, Temple and Georgetown finish taking who they want you're left with mid-major players. We don't have any problems signing mid-major talent, it's the high major players that elude us.

Before outrecruiting Big East and A-10 powers on their home turf can even become a possiblity, the staff has to show that they can sign top players in our own region. Right now it seems like we're limited to a 30 mile radius around campus. We've yet to sign any players from surburban Chicago, Peoria, Indianapolis or Brad's home state of Wisconsin.

[3star_recruit]

"If he can land a top 50 player or two every 3 years from outside the area then we can even end up as a consistent top 25 program."

Baby steps. We haven't even landed a top 150 player from outside the area yet.

[davidnark]

Someone posted the men's basketball and overall athletic department budget figures below. It would be helpful to know the details behind the numbers; however, it is very disturbing to find out that our publicly disclosed budget numbers are below average relative to our competition.

How can we expect to achieve the success of the Gonzaga's and Xavier's of the college basketball world on a half-ass budget? Maybe Bernie and the other harsh SLU critics are right. Maybe the commitment to the program really isn't there. We know that the athletic department's marketing/advertising program is well below par. We also know that the university has settled for a below average local television package because it didn't want to spend money. (We were told that Fox Sports Net was too expensive.) We hear rumors that Brad's and his staffs' cell phones were pulled.

The whole thing is illogical to me. Why is the university raising over $35 million for a new arena and hitting up average joe's for $500 bricks when the university is only willing to make a half-ass commitment to the program? The administration doesn't appear to be holding up its half of the bargain. It is upsetting.

[MU88]

I think its easier for a west coast school to put together a very good program because they have less competition. Think about how many high and mid major schoools that are within 250 miles of St. Louis. West of the Rockies, you have the Big West, WAC, WCC and Pac 10, and to a degree, the Mountain West and Big Sky. Using the 250 miles range, you have maybe Washington, Washington St, EWU, Idaho, ISU and Boise State close to Gonzaga. SLU competes with the Big Ten, CUSA, Big 12, and the SEC. You also have the Valley, MAC, MCC and Sun Belt, close by. Even the Mid-Con and OVC recruit the midwest. The density of conferences on the East Coast is even greater.

You can set yourself apart on the east coast, but you have to have an advatage that the others don't. Creighton has a new arena and a long term coach. X has brand new facilities and a pretty strong history and fan base. UMass had history and Calipari (plus they cheated). Temple has Phily, Cheaney and a long history of success. Dayton has great facilities and fan support. For SLU to makes its mark, they need to upgrade their facilities and coach. When he was hired, I posted my belief that Soderburg would drive the program into the ground. I thought most would be calling for his head after 3 years. I am guessing it will be 4. You guys are way too patient. He coached USD to 2 of its worst years in past 30, he turned a Final Four team at UW that lost 1 role player into a team that lost to Georgia State in the first round of the NCAAs, and he is killing SLU.

[3star_recruit]

Agreed. If the administration was just gonna half ass it, they should have just signed off on a 6000 seat Gonzaga-size arena and construction would be halfway done already. They're erecting unneccessary obstacles in the staff's path.

[slu72]

This is probably why ESPN once wrote SLU was a tough school to be the head coach.

[davidnark]

How can we get this changed? Our we stuck with this level of commitment as long as Biondi is at SLU? Is the problem with the Board of Trustees, not with Biondi? How do we influence a change in attitude?

[billiken_roy]

i think if we get lucky with one or two recruits that either over achieve or are the late bloomer types and those recruits stay for a complete 4 year experience, and lead us to multiple consecutive trips to the tourney, that is the key to opening things up.

first off, it would become a financial windfall for the program as the ncaa tourney money would greatly help the program. second, just being mentioned on national tv on a regular basis will build credibility with the talking heads that have way too much influence but admittedly still do. i.e. dickie v screaming about brad soderberg while the next high school phenom is watching probably goes a long way.

once that happens, then the program has an advantage that will translate to success.

[billiken_roy]

cheeseman, imo, talentwise, siu is not looking to take any step back. hairston and brooks leave, and mike dale and the tatum kid are stepping in. matt shaw will be a sophomore. they have stashed tabb at a prep school and he swears he's coming to siu next year. watch tabb's teamate from last year, manual cass, who might be the best player in southern illinois, will likely follow, same with matt shaw's former teamate at centralia, joey parker (parker isnt a great scorer, but he is as heady and tough of a kid as you will see. reminds me of mike sanbothe of mi$$ouri a few years back or maybe chris sloan, the guy to do the dirty work.) i will be surprised if siu doesnt continue to be a top 2 mvc team for at least the next 3-4 years.

[billiken_roy]

no other slu coach has dominated the local recruiting scene as coach soderberg has. to expect him to be a top 25 team in three years is stupid. to do that he would have had to have had the greatest luck in the world, or cheated. the fact he won the first two seasons here was astounding imo. and after frericks and bryant were injured, to have expected much would have been stupid. name me a team that made it to the ncaa tourney the same year their top two returning players were injured? sorry, unlike some schools, slu isnt going to cheat, and brad is doing what he has to do to build long term. it is frustrating and hard to be patient, but if you look back to grawer's last year and spoon's first, surely you can see comparison's to last year and realize that likely brad is ahead of the curve actually. if not, then you obviously arent billiken fan material.

i assume by "MU" in your moniker that stands for good ole mi$$ouri. see what cheating did for your program. you dont appear to be too much further along right now than what slu is at plus your school now carries a reputation that previously was reserved for renegade programs like unlv and cincy. if that is the company you want to keep bully for you. i dont want that at saint louis university.

[3star_recruit]

This year I think Northern Iowa is the best team in the Valley followed by Creighton. They've got practically everybody back.

[billiken_roy]

be very careful of what you wish for. remember the pre-biondi days.

[StLouBlue]

I thought MU88 might be a disgruntled Marquette fan since it sounds like he has a history of Brad. Now don't get me wrong I think there are things we can critize Brad about that we would like to see done differently, but overall I think most fans have to be pleased with what he has accomplished on the floor and recruiting wise.

MU88's post was probably the first time I had seen Creighton mentioned as an east coast team, maybe MU88 is a Mizz grad.

As far as recruiting top 50 or top 150 type players, every school is looking for them. I certainly want to see SLU get our share of them as well, but I think what is more important is developing the talent we do get in. Ian continuing to improve as much as he has in his first two years, that to me is more important than if a recruiting site says one of our incoming players is top 50. There are a lot of reasons why kids washout, even your top recruits. The mark of a good coach is taking what you have and getting the most out of it. Brad was really able to do this his first two years. We will have to see as far as some players on the current roster.

[billiken_roy]

you are probably right. i bet mu is a marquette fan. that makes sense considering the long hatred between marquette and wisconsin.

[davidnark]

Yes, things are better under Biondi than they have been in nearly 50 years. However, Biondi really dropped the ball on the momentum that was built up in the early 1990's. You may remember Spoon complaining about the program nickel and diming items ten years ago. When we had the momentum of back-to-back NCAA tournament appearances and 17,000+ fans per game, why didn't we increase the budget and resources? Why didn't we use the extra revenue and exposure to enhance the facilities, increase the recruiting resources, improve the coaching salaries, and drastically improve the marketing and advetising budget? Why, nearly a decade later, do we find out that our budget and the commitment from the administration is still well below what is acceptable? Why does Biondi announce that he will break ground for an arena in two months and then still not have the funding over 2 and half years later? Why does Biondi announce a commitment to creating a perennial top 50 program and then provide the program with a bottom 50 budget? Why are the fans forced to defend the program to the media because the administration can't (or won't) effectively do so? Why has the program alienated or pissed off 2/3 of the local sports media? Why is the program operating all summer with a shell of an athletic administration? Why are we building a 13,000 seat arena without practice facilities when we are lucky if we get 8,000 fans at games?

These are the questions that we as fans seem to always ask and yet the powers-to-be never have the inclination or smarts to answer.

[kevinfootes]

That's one of my favorite questions for St. Spoon. I guess it was hard to do that from Busch Stadium and Tom's. Heine was the only one.

Otherwise I agree with your points about Biondi.

[billiken_roy]

the biggest biondi question concerning the basketball operations imo is why did he announce this basketball arena dream without it being a done deal. imo it really makes us look like idiots.

the only rational explanation is that his bigfish got off the hook. maybe he had a slu bill laurie and then that benefactor backed out. otherwise, it makes no sense.

i do agree with not capitalizing on the claggett team. imo, that rests solely on spoon being a lazy recruiter. of course hughes leaving early didnt help stopping the rock slide either.

[cheeseman]

3star - I understand he has not landed one yet - I said "if". I thought we were talking about what it would take and why we could be like Gonzaga.

[davidnark]

Spoon not effectively recruiting is a separate issue.

The administration--Spoon aside--failed to capitalize on the Claggett/Highmark/Waldman success. The athletic coffers had to have been flush with cash during those years. Why wasn't it reinvested in the program for the long-term?