Missouri basketball...

[fishinwrench]

I never will understand the importance so many people place on ball games.

 So they won't play ball.....WGAF ?

[jtram]

Just now, fishinwrench said:

I never will understand the importance so many people place on ball games.

 So they won't play ball.....WGAF ?

me

 

not about the game, about the why...wrong reasons amigo, wrong reasons.

[fishinwrench]

HEY !    He called me a "migo" !  

Only other migos can call me a migo!

I'll not post on this forum ever again unless he apologizes.

[Al Agnew]

3 hours ago, Jerry Rapp said:

this is a very good read on the ramifications that this fiasco will lead to in the future.....  the players are the boss now.  

 

http://www.campusrush.com/missouri-tigers-strike-ncaa-1446533935.html 

Interesting article.  I think this is the larger picture, which is being overlooked and ignored by all the people on both sides who are screaming right now.  And this larger picture has nothing to do with racism or the perception of such, but with the power of big time college athletics and how the players are going to be realizing they hold a lot of that power.  Maybe without the football players the racial issue would have still come to a head, but when the players decided to participate, it opened up a completely different can of worms.  It had to happen sooner or later, at some uinversity somewhere, given the situation with college athletics.  It just happened to happen at Mizzou.

I don't blame the players.  Nor do I blame Pinkel, or the Board of Curators.  I suspect the players were doing something they thought was right, and I think the others were doing something in their own self-interest while convincing themselves it was also best for the school.  If you look at any other scenario than what happened, everybody concerned stood to lose a lot.  And the bottom line is, it doesn't look like they had any other choice, anyway.  What was Pinkel supposed to do?  He couldn't force those guys to play.  He could suspend them indefinitely, but what would that have accomplished?  Never mind that it's doubtful he could have fielded a real team for this weekend's game without them.  He couldn't revoke their scholarships, as the article pointed out.  And neither could the administration.  And Pinkel had to also be thinking about the future, his and the school's football team, since punishing the black players would have pretty well insured that recruiting black athletes to come to Mizzou would be nearly impossible for the foreseeable future.

And the administration had to worry about the future of the team as well, since it's such a cash cow.

Forget the immediate issue and everybody else that was involved.  It wouldn't have mattered what the football players were protesting, the university had no choice but to do what they did once the players got involved.  As a big fan of college football and basketball, I hate to see all this.  I like things the way they have been, with all the warts, but with the illusion that the players are amateurs and students.  Sooner or later, the players are going to be seen as nothing but professionals loosely afiliated with a college.

[Al Agnew]

Wrench, could I live without the games?  Of course.  As much as I love college sports, I probably wouldn't miss the games after a while.  But I simply enjoy watching them, watching what we sometimes forget are 18-22 year old kids playing their hearts out, never mind that they are probably getting money under the table and the adults involved can be pretty darned sleazy.  If sports don't turn you on, fine.  If you choose to look only at the sleazy side, fine.  Heck, I totally detest auto racing, but I do understand that a whole lot of people love it.

[fishinwrench]

25 minutes ago, Al Agnew said:

Wrench, could I live without the games?  Of course.  As much as I love college sports, I probably wouldn't miss the games after a while.  But I simply enjoy watching them, watching what we sometimes forget are 18-22 year old kids playing their hearts out, never mind that they are probably getting money under the table and the adults involved can be pretty darned sleazy.  If sports don't turn you on, fine.  If you choose to look only at the sleazy side, fine.  Heck, I totally detest auto racing, but I do understand that a whole lot of people love it.

You don't think sometimes that too much importance is put on it ?  Those 18-22 "kids" that are playing their hearts out are doing it for WHAT ?   By 35 y/o a good percentage of them will be technically disabled alcoholics and/,or drug addicts.   I happen to know this because the previous generations of them are all around here. 

It's like watching the "fails" vids on YT.  Sure it's enjoyable but.....

 

I'll agree to the ignorance of all kinds of racing. 

[joeD]

The P-D is correct, unless Mizzou gets Michael Porter Jr, in 2 years, we will suck, and, thankfully, Kim Anderson will be gone. I just don't think he is suited to coach at this level. Hopefully I'm wrong. But, next year will be his last. Basketball reality now is not Gene Hackman in "Hoosiers" building a cohesive unit. Recruiting stud athletes is. Then making sure they stay in school and not in jail.

Sorry, I don't want to see "growth" or "improvement" or "maturity."  I want to win NOW. And don't give me that nonsense about "building a program."  Please.

[Al Agnew]

15 minutes ago, joeD said:

The P-D is correct, unless Mizzou gets Michael Porter Jr, in 2 years, we will suck, and, thankfully, Kim Anderson will be gone. I just don't think he is suited to coach at this level. Hopefully I'm wrong. But, next year will be his last. Basketball reality now is not Gene Hackman in "Hoosiers" building a cohesive unit. Recruiting stud athletes is. Then making sure they stay in school and not in jail.

Sorry, I don't want to see "growth" or "improvement" or "maturity."  I want to win NOW. And don't give me that nonsense about "building a program."  Please.

Yeah, yeah, you want to win now.  Don't you think Anderson does, too?  Don't you think Norm and Mike and Frank wanted to, too?  You can't just wave a magic wand and automatically get 5 McDonalds All-Americans next year.  Not if you're Missouri, who hasn't ever made the Final Four, has the reputation of having a good but not great program, hasn't got a huge state base to recruit from, etc.  Heck, even Kansas with all its tradition and usual blue chip players doesn't make the Final Four every year.  And even Kentucky screws up now and then.

You win one of two ways if you're Mizzou.  Either you do a lot of sleazy stuff and get a few studs, who play for you one year and go on to the NBA so you better hope they're good enough to get you far in the tournament that year (and then you worry every year when are you gonna get caught).  Or you build a program with good but not great recruits who are going to develop over four years and be a great TEAM by the time they are juniors and seniors, with more kids coming up to replace them by that time.  I don't know whether Anderson is the one to do that, but you don't do it by switching coaches every two or three years.

Patience, grasshopper.

[joeD]

When you land a prize recruit, it energizes the program and the fan base. Look what Larry Hughes did to SLU. Could you imagine if Bradley Beals went to Mizzou? I don't care if he leaves for the NBA. Studs make a difference to your program. I get it Al, Mizzou is no big whup and will have to win through development , since they are no longer seen as a destination for local athletes. I don't like the coaching turnstile anymore than you do, but, at some point, we need a stud player in which to rally around. My point is, coaching kids from freshmen to seniors is a thing of the past. Steve Stipanovich and Jon Sunvold (speaking of Norm) wouldn't be playing for 4 years in this day and age. 

So, I changed my mind Al. I don't want to win now. I want to win YESTERDAY! 

Regardless, Ill still watch. I love college basketball.

 

[Al Agnew]

22 hours ago, joeD said:

When you land a prize recruit, it energizes the program and the fan base. Look what Larry Hughes did to SLU. Could you imagine if Bradley Beals went to Mizzou? I don't care if he leaves for the NBA. Studs make a difference to your program. I get it Al, Mizzou is no big whup and will have to win through development , since they are no longer seen as a destination for local athletes. I don't like the coaching turnstile anymore than you do, but, at some point, we need a stud player in which to rally around. My point is, coaching kids from freshmen to seniors is a thing of the past. Steve Stipanovich and Jon Sunvold (speaking of Norm) wouldn't be playing for 4 years in this day and age. 

So, I changed my mind Al. I don't want to win now. I want to win YESTERDAY! 

Regardless, Ill still watch. I love college basketball.

 

Seems to me that's a little revisionist history about Larry Hughes and SLU.  As I remember, Spoon started winning when he had Claggett, Highmark, and a couple other lightly recruited, undersized players who turned out to be overachievers (sound familiar) which got everybody excited and ended up resulting in him being able to recruit Hughes.  Who got hurt in the first game and never produced very well that first year and then left for the NBA anyway...and soon after, Spoon retired and SLU wasn't all that great until Majerus made a couple decent runs in the tournament with...players hardly anybody else recruited but who stayed for four years and became pretty darned good.

And the usual underdogs who make the Final Four almost every year do so because they are senior heavy with players that the big boys didn't want, meanwhile a lot of big boys with blue chip recruits all over the place lose in the first or second round.

I too want a stud now and then, even if they only stay for a year or two.  But you don't absolutely HAVE to get them every year if you've got a stable, well-run program, and you don't depend upon them to carry the program.  And you can't put the cart before the horse...Mizzou doesn't have much chance of attracting the studs until they start winning again (with what they got).