cracking the top 25--and staying there

[cheeseman]

The "Brad" issue will still be with us until he brings in 3 solid recruiting classes in succession and gets to post season play 3 years in a row- this includes NCAA and NIT. Right now, Brad has had one very good recruiting class - TL and KL and one probably good class - AK, HD, DM (time will only tell). His previous recruiting classes where fingers in the dike years - granted he found IV, RB really only gave us one good year along with TF's one good year - I know injuries happen but bottom lines do not give you extra points for what could of been. At this point, Brad seems to be laying the building blocks for future recruiting classes but things could still go either way for him in this regard. This year's recruiting class is key for him. If he can get a solid group this fall and spring and if last year's class actually delivers then he will be safe assuming his coaching and handling of the players actually result in victories and postseason appearances. He needs both to solidify his status.

[Quality Is Job 1]

Don't discount the 2004 class: Danny Brown, Luke Meyer, Dwayne Polk. They're just entering their junior season. I think they will be solid. Give them a chance. I think their impact will be similar to that of Josh Fisher and Chris Sloan.

The 2005 class is Obi Ikeakor, Tommie Liddell, and Kevin Lisch. It has the potential to be more than solid: program-changing!

Though they've yet to play a game for the Bills, I think the players who make up the 2006 class (Horace Dixson, Adam Knollmeyer, Dustin Maguire) ought to be solid. Time will tell.

I think that, slowly, but surely, Brad Soderberg is building a program that will compete year-in and year-out. He needs another solid recruiting class for 2007, even if it consists of just two players who address needs at particular positions (I'd prefer a point guard and a center), and then he needs to procur another potentially-spectacular class in 2008. I believe he'll do it.

[Taj79]

Well, its certainly subjective and open to interpretation, skip, but isn't texas A&M currently Number 11 in the great college hoops preview that we have watched intent;y? Didn't they go to the big dance last year in an at-large capacity? I think that given those two item alone, it is safe to say that they indeed "on an upswing" but far removed from any consideration in those upper two levels that I subjectively created. They were used as an example .... there will be of course varying degrees even in those levels .... so this is not to say that a Washington is on par with a Gonzaga is on par with a Okjie State is on par with a Texas A&M .... but a number 11 ranking?

I recall us peaking at a #17 ranking somewhere in the final year of the great Claggs/Hmark/Waldman teams. I do not recall how high we got in the Hughes aberation year. So we were in my book like Texas A&M is now .... a surprise year, followed by another good to great year, followed by "back to the depths where ye belong ye scurvy varmints." A few years later, the Hughes yeast infection (like yeast in pastries, a quick rise) and then gone. So will A&M be a reload school a few years down the road? Don't know but highly doubt it right now. Gonzaga, as I explained to Cowboy, I have more respect for, and especially more than A&M. But I haven't moved them into the top two tiers just yet.

Make better sense in my non-sensical world?

[Billiken Rich]

Thicks said: "Don't discount the 2004 class: Danny Brown, Luke Meyer, Dwayne Polk. They're just entering their junior season. I think they will be solid. Give them a chance. I think their impact will be similar to that of Josh Fisher and Chris Sloan."

All three are, by all accounts, good guys but they are not yet a "solid" recruiting class. All three have some really big holes that they need to overcome this year and next to be "solid." Polk and Luke need to find their mid to long range shots and Danny needs to hold on to the ball and finish. Till they get it together, that is not a "solid" class.

By the way, I'm not saying I wouldn't have recruited them, just that they aren't working out as well as I'd hoped, to this point.....

[Cowboy]

I now have a better understanding of your view.

Thanks

Here is the kicker to me on your immediacy vs long range point, I also could sacrifice in the immediate for the long range but we don't know about the long range so that leads to me wanting the immediate more.

[slufanskip]

Gonzaga and Ok State have far, far, far more history recent and not so recent than Tex A&M. The 3 programs shouldn't be spoken in the same breath.

Official Billikens.com sponsor of H Waldman

[slufanskip]

I agree Rich with the stipulation that they are just entering their Jr years.

Official Billikens.com sponsor of H Waldman

[Taj79]

Skip .. he stops, he pops, he shoots, he scores ..... I'd agree you are right in the comparison of Gonzaga and okie State over Texas A&M. But my contignecy is that time will tell. Its sort of like the English soccer leagues ... win and you move up, lose and you move down. Gonzaga and Okie State could take definitely take a few more misses and still stay at this level over A&M. No argument. But in the strata that I'm working, they are in the same relative level. Some higher than others, but you get the picture.

Cowboy .... the rich get richer and you've got to crawl before you walk, walk before you run. Cliche-ism at its best. But true in most respects. I guess to me, the question is do I want to be a Bradley or a Butler or a George Mason or a Coppin State or a Richmond? Get this close to the mountain top and then crash in a big fiery spectacle, never to return again? And that's speculaltion of course on my part but Butler was a Cinderella not too long ago (Mike Miller's Florida Gator team) as was Coppin as was Richmond (Spider over Bobby Knight). Or do I want to be a Xavier, a Creighton, a Southern Illinois? temas that are annually more in it than not? I want that one because that is the commitment Biondi made 10 years ago when he said he wanted a Top 50 program.

Put this way .... if we go 22-11 or so this year and make the dance but get none of the so-called local kids to sign up for a four year tour of duty, is it still a successful year? You handled the immediate but the long range is still a looming battle. As far as the prognosticating pundits go.

[Quality Is Job 1]

Why is the jury still out on whether or not Gonzaga is a Top 25 program (or one which reloads more often than it rebuilds) but you list Creighton and Southern Illinois (which you claim are in the Tournament more often than not) as schools SLU should aspire to be like? By my reckoning, Creighton and SIU or more johnny-come-latelys than Gonzaga. Creighton has been solid for a few years, but they haven't been as dominant as Gonzaga, and they haven't done it for as long as Gonzaga. Similarly, SIU's run has been for, what, three or four years? I'll take Gonzaga over SIU and Creighton right now.

Also, you listed Florida as one of the teams which periennally reloads. I don't agree with that. Yes, they won the National Championship last year, but they aren't on the top of the historical mountain with programs like North Carolina, Duke, UConn, Kentucky, Arizona, UCLA, Kansas, and Michigan State.

[3star_recruit]

Taj has his perceptions but I'm not sure where they come from. Lute Olson has averaged nearly 25 victories per year in over 20 years at Arizona, won a championship in 1997 and he lumps them in with Memphis and LSU? Texas A&M at the same level as Gonzaga? The only top 25 ranking Texas A&M has appeared in recently is in pre-season polls for the upcoming season. Taj, no more soup for you! :-)

[slufanskip]

Gonzaga is closer to Duke than Texas A&M is to Gonzaga. So if Tex A&M is in the same stratosphere as Gonzaga, Gonzaga should be listed in the same group as Duke ... and I don't like Gonzaga and think they are overrated, but they are so far ahead of Tex A&M it's laugahable. I get your concept, just not which teams are ranked where.

Obviously you've seen me play

Official Billikens.com sponsor of H Waldman

[Absaluki]

SIU is one of 15 teams to make the NCAAs the last 5 years (just to set the record straight). With this year's team, I will be very amazed if it is not 6 years in a row. In fact, Athlon picks Creighton and SIU, and please, it is not SIUC, the "other" SIU is D2, to go to the Sweet 16. I know that does not mean squat in September, but it is an indication of the relative strength of this year's team.

What is Brad's salary? Altman makes $800k, that is why he is still at Creighton. If he starts winning, and you ain't paying, he ain't staying!

[Cowboy]

my poorly made point about immediacy deals with the huge amount of uncertainty when looking at the long term.

would i miss this yr's ncaa if i could be guaranteed making 8 of the next 10? sure, but you don't know that upfront

[cheeseman]

Thicks, those you mention who will be juniors - have not really delivered up to this point. If you consider just getting 2 years of meaningful play out of a recruiting class then your expections are much lower than mine. I consider a solid/good recruiting class as one that has players that make real contributions all four years. Granted their freshmen year will be less than the others but you must see them getting meaningful minutes and producing. The three you talked about might have gotten meaningful minutes but they have not shown consistent production to this point. Unless they just catch fire their last two years - not very probable since playing time will be in shorter supply for them than in the past - that class is not something to crow about. I forget who brought up Obi's name as part of the KL and TL recruiting class - technically you are correct but honestly you can not really rate him since none of us have seen him play a single minute yet. He may be a great addition but for now that recruiting class has only TL and KL as very good producers.

[tseugnekillib]

cheese said..... "I consider a solid/good recruiting class as one that has players that make a real contribution all four years".

Considering that you have 13 players on scholarship.... for all 13

to "make a real contributions" every year is a serious stretch or it means that your team is having a "good" recruiting class about every three years. There are just 200 minutes per game for 13 scholarship players!

Except for those few teams, like a North Carolina and Tyler Hansbrough (sp?), that get young NBA-ready talent, I believe most teams win big playing basically juniors and seniors and redshirted juniors and seniors. I'm also guessing most teams use a 7-8-9 man rotation late in the season and I'm guessing most highly successful teams are winning with experienced, strong, mature, upperclassmen. What was the 2005-06 roster make-up of George Mason, Gonzaga or Wichita State.....just curious?

I have heard a college coach state (Spoon I believe) that players generally make their biggest improvement in their game between their sophmore and junior years. This season well tell much about DB, LM, DP and BH.

[3star_recruit]

"cheese said..... "I consider a solid/good recruiting class as one that has players that make a real contribution all four years".

Considering that you have 13 players on scholarship.... for all 13

to "make a real contributions" every year is a serious stretch or it means that your team is having a "good" recruiting class about every three years."

Excellent point. How much a class contributes depends largely on how much talent is on the team. Josh Fisher is the best point guard we've had in recent memory but his point guard career never would happened if he had to beat out Tommie Liddell for a starting spot as a sophomore.

[cujaysfan]

gotcha...

i really hope brad pulls it together this year.

he's a good guy - and he works exceptionally hard.

i think he needs to be open minded in terms of style

and he has to CLOSE on some more recruits. the nucleus with what could be the best backcourt in Bills history when it's all said and done is there. the complementary pieces need to be added - and all this getting rid of brad talk can go away.

dick bennett (brad's mentor) retired from WSU last year. i really hope that dick is able to spare some time from tony's first season to come down and do some "consulting" for brad. i think that kind of continuted mentoring and second pair of eyes on the program could pay off.

[Sheltiedave]

AbSaluki, the SIU normally bandied about in St. Louis is SIU-Edwardsville. Not a slam on your fine bball program, but SIU-E advertising is so prevalent, we almost always say SIUC when we are talking in general. Obviously, if we are talking to specific bball fans, SIU suffices.

As far as recruiting, Brad and staff are building a program the classic B10 way - get solid defensive players and have them live in the weight room if possible. Throw in an outstanding offensive player, a couple shooters, a microwave bench shooter, and shake well.

[Taj79]

.. for me! All I tried to do was answer the question that Cowboy asked about how I think. I am not running for office. Its all subjective and open to debate. I am not in any way saying that Texas A&M is at Gonzaga's level, nor am I saying that Gonzaga is at Texas A&Ms level. I am just trying to rationalize how I interpret things. I am not looking for converts. Maybe my bias towards Gonzaga is a part of that East Coast perspective that gets bemoaned on here when discussing the Bills and the eastern bias of the Philly and DC and New York and Bristol, CT, writers and commentators.

The key to me on the whole thought pattern is the constant moving up and down, not only between levels but within the levels themselves. Arguably, there is NCAA basketball royalty. Namely Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, UNC and maybe UCLA, maybe UConn. I throw UConn in there only to point out that they cannot be considered in the top four in my book but might in others. Who's there really is immaterial to the gist of the matter.

What I'm looking at is taking St. Louis University to a certain level. Do we want to be Duke? Damn straight. Will we get there? Probably not and most assuredly not in my lifetime. So, if I take the crawl-walk-run analogythen I think we need to aspire to a crawl level .... and that is the Creighton/Xavier level right now. Do that and we will have the back-to-back-to-back years of winning records that most agree to be out starting point. If we get to that level, then and only then can we aspire to the next level and so on.

Texzs A&M and basketball are not readily connected in anyone's basketball sentences. But they have a recent NCAA tourney bid as an at-large adn a preseaon #11 ranking. Who here wouldn't want that from the Bills? Right now, A&M is ahead of us no matter how you evaluate it. Will they stay there? I for one doubt it but you never know. We were there once, briefly, and plummeted from the heights a million times faster than the plodding trek to those heights. In my opinion, we have never returned .... Hughes and the Memphis Miracle don't count. There was no consistency.

Consistency breeds credibility. Credibility creates trust, improving public perception. With more cred, the program can attract and maybe get and keep top tier talent. Top tier talent should take us to the levels we want. Wihtout talent, hard work has to take over and sometimes, all the hard work in the world will still lose out to talent. How many close-but-no-cigar games have we seen with this program? its a lot like Navy/NotreDame in football. The middies have no right to even be on the field with a program like ND yet year after year, there's a Notre Dame/Navy football game. Who doesn't root for the Middies? Chaminade's SilverSwords in their Hawaiian tournament. What are they doing there? They finish last almost every time but once in a while Ralph Sampson goes down. Its great theater and drama but means little to nothing in the long run.

I just want SLU in the long run and have my definitons as to what that is.

[DoctorB]

It is perfectly fine to get only one or 2 solid years out of recruits. Happens all the time. Getting impact freshmen every year, with every recruit, is not realistic and like someone said, impossible with the minutes in a game. 13 guys every year, but most teams are only playing about 8 deep. Even very deep teams play only 10 players at most.

Impact freshmen are also much more important on teams that get regularly depleted by guys leaving after only 1 or 2 years. That should rarely happen here.

Finally, I agree with the view that the last 3 are solid classes. I think we are all going to like what we see from DB, DP, and LM over the next 2 years. These are solid guys who love to play, and all of them have improved their games.

[billikenmetz]

What are you saying? Altman recruits quality players and is a perennial Valley power. You can't even begin to say that about SLU. Why would have I had a reason to bash Dana Altman? If he came from Creighton to SLU, that would just cancel out the Warming departure.

[brianstl]

I was refering to what people would have said about Altman before he took over at CU. He was run out of KSU after a few less than stellar seasons. If SLU would have hired him then, the ABC would have had a heart attack.