Reply to MU Tiger

[SluSignGuy]

>Just curious, Steve, but what exactly is your big beef with

>MU? Do you have some personal issues with MU yourself, or

>are you just picking up on the sentiments of others like

>B-Roy??

I know this was posted a few days ago, and sorry for taking so long to get back to you. But...

A big thing is Mizzou Fans - Not all are bad, but some are way too hard on SLU. I have had people call SLU "a team of little girls." And everyone says that SLU and Mizzou are are not in the same league. I am sorry, but SLU can put quality basketball on the court any day of the week, and has proven every year that they can beat anyone on a given night. And while Mizzou's arguement that they have more to lose than SLU than gain. It has some merit, but not as much as they seem to portray.

The top two programs in this state are Mizzou and SLU. I am sure some SMS fan will get on here and say that SMS has beat SLU x many times, FINE whatever, but SLU is better than SMS, even if we lose saturday. They get up for the games more than us, which is fine, because we get up for the Mizzou games more than Mizzou does I think. It is because we want to beat the top dog, and SMS wants to beat the team that proclaims they are better. It is just how it goes. But anyway...Being the top two programs in the State, with SLU being #2 for the past few years (Mizzou fans have short term Memories of the Pre-Snyder days). And those two programs should play. It would be an excellent game. Mizzou does have the Braggin' Rights game, but another one would not hurt with the #2 in state rival.

Plus, I think the state would love the game. Since as I have learned from other Missourians at college (I already knew it somewhat). In Missouri, there is Missouri, and St. Louis. They are seperate entities. The rest of Missouri hates Stl because our numbers allow us to stop their agenda (for example concealed weapons). Also St. Louis people look down on the the more rural parts of Missouri, therefore they are not big fans of us. Also the paying for the TWA Dome, I would be pissed if I didn't live in St. Louis. So there is that rivalry.

And as much as Mizzou fans hate to admit it, they love the game too. I am sorry, but TWA, Hearnes, and Savviss were ALL packed for each game. And they were not all SLU fans, there were plenty of Tiger Tails flying around. Everyone loved the game, whether they admit it or not. It was college basketball at its finest. Big State School vs. One of the larger Private Universities. Big City vs. Rural Missouri. It was amazing, and for Mizzou fans to say, oh it doesn't mean that much to us is BULL. Hearnes being packed (and it isn't ALWAYS packed to my knowledge) is proof of it.

Do I hate the University of Missouri, no not at all, I have plenty of friends who go there, one being MUFAN2000. But in terms of Sports, I hate the Missouri Tigers in Basketball. They should be playing SLU, but they aren't. And trying to give me any reasons why they shouldn't is just feeding me crap, they were at those games. They put down SLU any moment they get the chance sometimes, we do the same for Mizzou. There could be such a rivalry, but Mizzou needs to get off its high horse and realize that SLU is not out of their league. They just don't want to be beaten by the #2 school.

Steve

[alameda bob]

Are you old enough to remember the ad "We Try Harder"?

[Schasz]

Sounds like Steve doesn't buy into your pompous arse takes that SLU VS SPUMAC is not a worthwhile game for both sides. IMHO, Steve is right on and the game should be an annual event. We'll just have to see if the series is resumed next year.

[MUFAN2000]

Steve was the first person to mention that "argument" to me, so if he's recanted well fine. And believe me, I would love for the game to happen. It would definitely be huge for me, as a resident of st. louis and a student at missouri.

And let me just say that whoever came up with "moo" (i know it wasn't here, it's all over the place) could do much better. Moo? seriously.

[Schasz]

Personally, I really like it MooFan!

[cheeseman]

Here is a flip side arguement - I actually think that the MU/SLU game has more of a downside for SLU than MU. After all, if we lose the game, then we risk loosing local recruits and everybody is always saying that it is important for SLU to keep the local kids here. If MU loses the game, they just say - oh well we don't really get up for the game and we recruit nationally anyway so no big deal. So I think SLU risks more overall than MU by playing the game - that being said both schools should play the game. Also, the MU/IL game - I really do not see what MU gets out of that - you can call it a braggin rights game but for what - you can not say it means that you are the best of both states. I would think DePaul, and SIU-C would argue foul since they do not get a chance to play also - besides, did not MU lose to DePaul a couple of years ago when they beat IL? The same could be said for Missouri schools - SLU and SMS. What would be really cool but won't happen is that each state has the major schools play each other and then the braggin rights game is between who wins from both states.

[Taj79]

.... SLU have a set non-conference schedule each and every year that included the likes of 1) Mizzou, 2) Illinois, 3) SMS, 4) SIU-C, 5) Cregihton, and 6) Bradley. Okay .. maybe at least the first four or five. What do we have now? Like 11 non-conference games? That would leave six openings for "other" teams. Do the home-and-home with Arizona or Georgia Tech. Add in one or two "cupcake" games to start out. Get a Butler or an Evansville or a UMKC to come to town. And get ready for the conference schedule.

Something like that, to me, is way better than playing the EKUs, NC T&As, Savannah Smiles, and Grumblings of the world. Mizzou won't play us but we are not the first at this argument ... remember Kentucky and Lousiville? Virginia and Virginia Tech? Iowa and Iowa State? In some cases, it took legislative leverage. But I would argue that in all cases, it was or is great for the fans. I see Marquette and Wisconsin are on TV this week. The game needs to be played ... even if Mizzou goes 99 and 1 over the next 100 years.

[MUFAN2000]

I think I'd rather have a MU/SLU game than the MU/Illini game. I think the benefit the winner of that generally gets is that both are top tier programs (at least the past few years both have been) and it's been a huge game, generally on national TV. I have no huge interest in the game. A lot of the guys on my floor are from illinois, so it has bigger meaning for them, but I'd rather watch Mizzou and SLU play.

[MUFAN2000]

I agree. I think that an annual MU/SLU game would be the perfect boost for SLU to finally awaken from its proverbial "sleeping giant" status.

[Quality Is Job 1]

>I agree. I think that an annual MU/SLU game would be the

>perfect boost for SLU to finally awaken from its proverbial

>"sleeping giant" status.

Why would anything that has to do with Mizzou get credit for boosting SLU? I think the "boost for SLU to finally awaken from its... 'sleeping giant'" state has already been realized in the commitment of Fr. Lawrence Biondi, the hiring of Brad Soderberg, the persistent insistence of competing in a high-caliber conference ever since leaving the MCC, and the building of an on-campus facility. But the awakening won't happen instantly without cheating. Marquette's awakeining took time, so let's not be concerned that SLU's will take time.

[MUFAN2000]

I'm not trying to give Mizzou credit for anything SLU does, I'm just saying that right now Mizzou is the premier school in the state, and recruits see that (ie. Kalen Grimes). A Mizzou/SLU yearly matchup would allow recruits to see that SLU can play with anyone, and has a quality system/coach. You don't think a Mizzou/SLU game would be an excellent game to bring the recruits to over at the new SLU arena? I do.

[aj_arete]

he'd say SLU hasn't accomplished anything yet. SLU has not received an at-large bid for the NCAA in how long?? Someone answer that question for me. My guess would be the Highmark/Claggett years, but I'm not sure.

I truly believe Brad has SLU in the right direction, but there's no doubt that MUFAN's label of sleeping giant is very appropriate. We've been sleeping since the 50's.

[davidnark]

1998 was the last at large-bid. After running off the three straight wins in Memphis in 2000, SLU's RPI and record were good enough that it would have probably received an at-large bid even if it had lost the fourth game in Memphis. SLU was only a win or two away from an at-large bid last season. All of that being said, I agree that SLU still hasn't accomplished anything significant in the last three seasons.

[aj_arete]

I was waiting for someone to mention 1998. SLU received an automatic bid that year. Now you can say their RPI was high enough, but if they lose that championship game their RPI drops.

I do know they were not even on the bubble at the eve of that tournament, so it's highly subjective whether they receive an at-large bid if they didn't win the CUSA Tournament.

[davidnark]

You are incorrect. 1998 was the Larry Hughes year. We received an at-large bid. 2000 was the automatic bid year.

[billiken_roy]

moofan said, "recruits see that (ie. Kalen Grimes)"

i think they see dollar signs. becoming a walmart employee is one of the highest paying positions in all of college basketball apparently.

[billiken_roy]

1998 was larry hughes year. it was indeed an at large bid. justin love's 2000 billiken team is the team that won the conference tourney and got the automatic bid. that said, the billikens rpi was in the 30's and the seed they got tells that the billikens were in regardless that year.

[aj_arete]

I stand corrected.

[MUFAN2000]

I'm poison debate? hmmm....

[estiger]

Here is one Tiger fan who loves the game and the matchup, and thinks it should be played every year. SLU would have a slight emotional advantage most years because of its status as an underdog, but so what. I am sure that if the game was played over a long period of time that the underdog bs would go away, and SLU would be the favorite sometimes. It would just be a great college b-ball game every year. It was a game of great interest in both St. Louis and Columbia the three years it was played.

Even though I think MU has the players to go places this year, I think the game this year would have been really good. I like the looks of Reggie Bryant, and some of the other newcomers. I think Soderberg is a good evaluator of talent, and good at piecing a team together. I think MU would handle SLU if the game were in Columbia, but it would have been a war at the Savvis Center. I was very inmpressed with your game against Arizona, and I thought the road game against G-Tech was respectable. The loss I can't figure is the one to West Virginia. I chalked it up to Bryant's first game and a lack of familiarity with the team and system. It looks like he got adjusted pretty damn fast though.

Here is my question. I remember some people posting here last year after a booster club meeting that Coach Soderberg said the MU series would not be resumed this year, but that it was looking like it would be resumed starting next year--as I recall, it would be a 4 year contract (two home and home series). Are you guys still hearing this?

How about this idea: SLU being MU's first opponent in its new arena next year, and MU as the first opponent on SLU's new arena the year after that.

[Schasz]

Sounds like a wiener to me!

[billiken_roy]

e have not been told that anything about even a sniff of a tiger series. my guess is that as long as pretty q is in charge, we wont be resuming. that's fine, i have no problem playing the likes of arizona and georgia tech each year instead.

[MUFAN2000]

...you also enjoy games against grambling, too? We all want the game roy, no need to be catty about it.

[Billiken Rich]

BTW who stole whos mascot and colors. Grambling Stste looked like a smaller, weaker, sort of "double a" version of the MU tigers. They even have the same cat paw logo. What gives?

[Tonka]

MUFAN, the reading from you has gone from upsetting, to annoying, to anger, to laughing, to very much laughing, and then to disbelief. I've now adjusted to your posts. When do you think you will finally come to grips with the fact that you aren't a Bills fan? I mean seriously. I think I saw you bought a shirt. I was totally against that. Why in the world would we let you put your screen name on the back of one of our shirts? By the way, when will I get to meet you? Are you going to the Marquette gathering to pick up your shirt?