cracking the top 25--and staying there

[DoctorB]

I am re-posting this question so it is not buried in another thread:

Name a team or 2 or 3 in the past 10-15 years that has broken into the top 25 and remained there, year in and year out?

It rarely happens. Some feel we should be there, or should get there, or might. But outside of Gonzaga-- who else? Marquette? Memphis? (neither is really there every year. . . . )

And really, how long should that take to achieve, realistically?

Heck, even well know programs like Iowa, Indiana, Michigan, Alabama, Wake, Syracuse, Georgetown, etc. are not in the top 25 every year for the past 10. They are all in the top 40 every year.

I am bullish on our chances to move in that direction. But realistically, who is our model program or 2, that has actually done it?

[Box and Won]

That really is extremely difficult to do. Even in 93-94, 94-95 and 97-98 we weren't able to stay in the Top 25 for the whole season.

I'd be perfectly happy with "Also receiving votes" at this point.

[SShoe]

honestly there aren't very many teams who've done that if any. I'd say of the recently, a teamthat has come on lately to build a strong program and I'd really like emulate would be Pitt. The last five years or so they've consistantly beeen considered top 25. I don't ever recall them being much until about five years ago. It kind of happened after their new stadium was built...

[slu72]

Doc, top 25 is "mythical" in that while it may influence the dance committee it's not cast in stone. I'd guess very few programs over the last 10-15 years have made it every year. Duke, Connecticut, AZ, KS come to mind but am not sure even they did this. UNC didn't make it a couple of years, UCLA had a dry spell, same w/ Louisville. I don't think Gonzaga made it until their recent success in the NCAA. Granted, it was a thrill seeing us in there under Spoon, even as a team worthy of others receiving votes, but I'd rather see our name on a bracket line every year.

[3star_recruit]

Given the up and down nature of the local talent base and our mid-major conference affiliation, I think UAB would be a reasonable program to emulate. We play a different style, but Mike Anderson's success was all about recruiting the right kids for his system and execution.

[brianstl]

I agree with you dr b it is a building process.

To answer your question: Gonzaga. It was a slow building process there. But they have now kept the same system in place thru three head coaches. The last two were promoted from within the system. That is the way you build a consistent top 20 program. I believe that SIUC is at the level now. I think Crieghton is also at the level too.

Could you imagine if Altman, before his time at CU, would have been hired here? The same people that whine about Brad, would have had a field day complaining about what a mistake it was hiring

[3star_recruit]

Gonzaga is definitely a top notch program but the fact that they are a threat to go 14-0 in a questionable conference every year inflates their win totals and makes them seem better than they really are. Last year, when Adam Morrison was just en fuego and they were actually knocking off top teams out of conference, was an exception. The other years I think Xavier and Creighton could have put up similar win totals playing in that conference.

[DoctorB]

lots of good thoughts so far. I think the consensus is that it is very tough sledding to crack the top 25 and stay there consistently--and yes, that is so, I agree.

I do think cracking that top 40 is doable -- and we are near that goal even now.

And if the A10 redoes its schedules over this year and next, and then some teams (like us) knock off a few tough guys out of conference--that will help us all. The conference itself is on the rise.

The reason I bring this all up-- realize how extremely difficult it is to do what several people are complaining that we have not done-- i.e. cement our status as a top tier program, that can hypnotize recruits into slobbering all over us on a campus visit.

[Box and Won]

I think Creighton is a great model to follow. CU and SLU share an awful lot of similarities, except for consistent basketball success.

Here is Altman's track record since arriving at CU:

05-06 - 20-10 NIT

04-05 - 23-11 NCAA

03-04 - 20-9 NIT

02-03 - 29-5 NCAA

01-02 - 23-9 NCAA

00-01 - 24-8 NCAA

99-00 - 23-10 NCAA

98-99 - 22-9 NCAA

97-98 - 18-10 NIT

96-97 - 15-15

95-96 - 14-15

94-95 - 7-19

[billiken_roy]

anyone else notice the 3 subpar seasons on the front end of altman's stay at creighton. he should have been fired.

[nostatic]

CU: 54-59 after 4 years, 1 NIT berth

BS just a notch better

Everybody realizes what a big year this is

And then next year you try to keep the momentum you built this year

And so on . . .

IV will be better -- he saw the handwriting on the NBA wall

KL will be better because he knows what it takes

I think TL might be the big ?? If he adds 10% to his shooting percentage, it will just give everyone else more open looks -- that's worth 3-4 more wins

And I think we will see a very good year from LM (if he plays the #3)

And don't be surprised by JJ -- senior year (there's no tomorrows) can do wonderful things to players

[Sheltiedave]

Wisconsin.

[slu72]

Year 5 Altmann cracks the NCAA bubble and stays there for like 5 straight years. UB does that ,we'll all be dancing in the street naked like a certain Detroit Lions coach. Billiphan can bring the depends for us old guys.

[Billiphan]

>

>I am re-posting this question so it is not buried in another

>thread:

>

>Name a team or 2 or 3 in the past 10-15 years that has

>broken into the top 25 and remained there, year in and year

>out?

>

>It rarely happens. Some feel we should be there, or should

>get there, or might. But outside of Gonzaga-- who else?

>Marquette? Memphis? (neither is really there every year. .

>. . )

>

>And really, how long should that take to achieve,

>realistically?

>

>Heck, even well know programs like Iowa, Indiana, Michigan,

>Alabama, Wake, Syracuse, Georgetown, etc. are not in the top

>25 every year for the past 10. They are all in the top 40

>every year.

>

>I am bullish on our chances to move in that direction. But

>realistically, who is our model program or 2, that has

>actually done it?

I'm not sure what you're looking for here. Are there people on this board who expect us to be top 25 EVERY year? I would be happy with a tourney appearance once every 3 years or so. I'd be happy happy if they were able to compete for the tourney just about every year. Even that is a stretch at this point. I don't think we're asking for the moon or stars. At this point I'll take the top of the roof.

[cujaysfan]

hardly

altman was rebuilding the program the right way - and took over for the worst coach in creighton history.

the program had been decimated by rick johnson - and absolutely no one was calling for DA to be fired after his first few seasons.

his teams were showing improvement every single year as well.

[slufanskip]

that was sarcasm intended for the win the Nat'l championship last year or he's fired crew regarding Brad on this board

Official Billikens.com sponsor of H Waldman

[Taj79]

How are you going to go from literaly no current tradition, to staking a yearly place in the Top 25? I recall Biondi, to my face at a reception in Cincinnati at the CUSA tournament, saying in the Hughes year, "we expect to be a Top 50 program." How this jumped to Top 40 and now to Top 25 tends to demonstrate some unrealistic expectations here.

I'd be happy to achieve Biondi's goal. With 65 teams making the tournament, minus what (?) 34 automatic bids, figuring that half those automatic slots go to top 50 teams, that means about 33 teams shooting for 31 available dance slots. That's like a one-in-one chance of getting an at-large. Now, do I think the Billikens are going to be a lock for an at-large bid every year? No. But without an automatic bid locked up, it makes viewing on Selection Sunday more exciting, yes?

I believe Top 25 year-in and year-out is unrealistic. In my graduation year, Indiana State was in the Final Four with some geeky kid named Bird from some geeky town called French Lick, Indiana. Has Indiana State ever done that since? And they are a state school. Probably with some PE, art history, and other "more attractable" majors.

So, to be like Mike so to speak, who would I want to emulate? Creighton is a good call. Xavier isn't bad. Southern Illinois is on a nice run. Gonzaga has had a nice run but let's see how well they maintain. UAB. Nevada and Utah State have had nice success runs lately.

The jury is still out on the last two but they could continue or they could fail. Who I don't want to be is Indiana State --- sacrificing my entire lifetime for one shot at glory. Butler --- were the "in" school there for a while and faded/might never return. George Mason --- unlikely they will carry anything from last year on. Richmond. Coppin State. Anyone else who had a one-and-done-and-gone-forever in the tourney (one game or one run, doesn't matter).

Top 25 schools: Duke, Kansas, UNC, Kentucky, Michigan State, UCLA, Maryland, Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, Indiana, Arizona, Florida, LSU, Texas, Louisville, Cincinnati, Ohio State, Washington, UConn, Michigan, Gonzaga, Illinois, Memphis, Georgetwon. Schools that have a tendency to reload as to rebuild. Those near the top reload at will; those nearer the bottom reload more often then rebuild. The list is debatable. If we were to be Top 25, who on THIS list would we replace? Add another 15 teams and see who'd fall out for us as well. Add 25 to get to Top 50.

With no history, no tradition, no major conference, no legacy of pro players (even a crappy football progrma like Maryland has placed a ridiculous number of quarterbacks in the NFL), one just does not make the quantum leap. A Top 25 is an admirable goal but lets learn to crawl before we walk. Its nice to have dreamers and high-end optimists but for a program that has made four NCAA appearances in the past, what, 50 years.....Hoo- boy!

Its been 10 years since Hughes and Biondi's statement. I'd be happy to get to the Top 50 level right now.

[Taj79]

P.S. ... where do we even rank in our own conference? Dayton has had much more success and fills its home-owned arena more often than not. St. Joe's just had an overall #1 ranking with West adn Nelson. Umass went to the Final Four in the Camby/Calipari illegal ages. Xavier has had Sweet Sixteen runs. Charlotte has a Final Four in its past and has been much more consistent in getting to the Dance than we have. Temple would seem to rank above us. In our own conference, we are somewhere near the middle of the pack of what some would call a less-than-major conference.

We could never dominate the CUSA. Lousiville, Cincinnati, Memphis, UAB, Charlotte. We could never dominate the old Great Midwest for many of the same reasons. We couldn't even dominate the MCC going up against Xavier, Loyola of Chicago and Evansville. Let's see if we can dominate the A10 and let the accolades rise liekthe Phoenixz then.

For 37 years now, I've felt this program was existing on an infrastructure built by Lego. I seen the heights of Gray/Douglas/Bonner and Claggett/Wladman/Hmark and Hughes come and go with no sustainable or maintainable amount of progress. I am happy with the job Brad has done but this is a huge, huge year for him and the program as far as I'm concerned.

Maybe in ten years, when we do achieve Top 25 status, we'll all look back on these discussions and do the old "remember when."

[billiken_roy]

bluejay, i was being sarcastic for those on our board that want to fire coach soderberg because we arent in the final four yet.

i love altman. the way the likes of CU, Gonzaga, even Duke were built by staying the course even after numerous years of subpar results is what i want at slu. i am tired of a new coach and starting over every 4 - 5 years.

[DoctorB]

yes I agree being a top 25 program every year is not in the cards, and is unrealistic.

I do think we are approaching being a consistent top 40 program. That is doable.

I was mainly responding to certain folks who are completely deceived about the realities of recruiting. My point is that if we are just barely approaching top 40, on what basis are we going to be able to compete with the Iowas and Indianas of the world, who snagged two of our latest coveted recruits.

We just are not there yet--consistently. But that does not mean we cannot get a couple of coveted recruits.

[GOSLU68]

A year ago our only celebration was our wing IO who turned into a slasher and graduated; last year we had three kids who showed up night after night; at seasons end-everyone agreed we needed a power forward or

at least rebounding help for IV. Now we are so loaded that recruits like DM or good steady players like LM may be fighting for time on the court; life is wonderful when you have 5 or 6

guards and 4 forwards to choose from and a proven center who may go on to bigger things

after graduation. Life is wonderful when the season is within a couple of weeks and people are rating you 100 clicks below last year. Does this mean the current BS controversy is over?

[Cowboy]

I am just curious where you place Gonzaga.

You mention them "having a nice run but let's see how well they maintain" and later list them in the Top 25 schools.

I would contend their 7 consecutive trips is more than maintaining, more than a fluke recruiting class or shooting star that pops in (see Larry).

I totally agree that getting into that Top 25 and staying there is way more than difficult.

But realistic goals and benchmarks need to be set and to me this yr for SLU is critical to seeing where we are versus at least my expectations, not that they count for anything.

[tseugnekillib]

what controversy...........?

[Taj79]

I am not sold on Gonzaga just yet. Old habits are hard to break and a seven-year run just does not move them up into an elite status as far as I'm concerned. Being a weak conference deducts some points in my book; they have played well recently out of conference (thinking Maui last year) but I admit that I have no reservoir of knowledge in reserve to quote what they did even two years ago out of conference. But Maui last year adds points.

I have about ten or so teams that, based on history both recent and past (but longer than seven years) are those proverbial reloaders year after year ..... Duke, North Carolina, Kentucky, UConn, UCLA, Kansas, Louisville, Florida maybe some others and then those programs that seem to reload more times than not ... Maryland, Illinois, Michigan State, Cincinnati, Arizona, Memphis, LSU, Indiana, Syracuse, Pitt, Texas, maybe NC State and so on, and then those teams that are currently on an upswing, teams that are certainly Top 25 now, but need more time in my book to get to the aforementioned two levels. Those teams would be Washington, Gonzaga, Texas A&M, Oklahoma State and so on. Most of thsoe are major, BCS-type conference schools.

Sure, there are also levels that we debate ad nauseum, the so-called mid-majors, where one and done might make it for a few years, schools like Xavier, Charlotte, Valpo, Miami of Ohio or Kent State, Murray State and so on. I think that is the level we are striving to achieve right now.

I am on record as agreeing that this is a critical year to see where this program is going. I think that given this is yar five ro so of BS's reign, a 20-win season, a trip to the post season, beatinga top ranked team, a nice early signing recruiting class .... all can be realistic goals and benchmarks for 2006-07. I don't necessarily think we need to hit all of them to be rated as successful, that depends on whther or not the gratification is immediate (20 wins) or long range (recruiting). Whiel I think we all want it all as soon as possible, I could sacrifice the immediacy for the long range much easier than th eother way around.

My thoughts .....

[slufanskip]

How did you list Texas A&M on that list in any spot.

Official Billikens.com sponsor of H Waldman