re: Just got off the phone with a well connected friend***BOC APPROVES HIRE***

quote:

---

bacon on puppies!

ETA so are you saying Fl success in bball explains why they are sucking at fball?

---

Nah I think it was just cyclical - if you look at 2 years ago in 2012, UF was dominant in hoops but also had a nice BCS run in football.

I do think to truly kick arse in both for Mizzou, rather than just being "good" at both, is more of a challenge for us than a lot of the schools I mention. If you look at them, the best "two sport" schools are usually one of a couple things. First, they are usually HUGE. 50,000 student type places. Florida, Ohio State, Texas, Michigan, UCLA when they have their football shite together, you catch my drift. Second, and kinda tied to that, they are either sun belt places or schools in really big states with big metro areas. Third, and this is key, at least parts of their states are not what you'd call "Deep South" where basketball is just not the religion that football is. Florida and Texas are so massive population wise and have so many different cultural influences in their big cities that there's a lot of basketball lovers and the game still being played at high levels there.

Where I'm going with that is, those kinda schools tend to have being good at both sports just sort of fall into their lap. It takes a lot of effort to NOT sign good football and basketball players to a place like Austin or Gainesville or Columbus just with the sheer volume of kids coming to the school and the plethora of good recruits in the region.

Mizzou is in good region, that produces good football and hoops players, and it can recruit nationally in both, but we have to work at it. Its never gonna fall in our lap like it does those others. STL and KC are big, but not huge. Our enrollment is growing, but its middle of the road for major conference schools. Our national brand in both sports is good, but not a household name in either. On the one hand, the positives I listed there make the goals of kicking arse in both attainable. But it will ALWAYS be challenging. Our resources are more limited across the board, not just budget but due to geography, population, national branding, you name it.

I don't know if it can be done. But I do know the leaps and bounds that BOTH programs have taken in national visibility since when I was growing up in CoMo in the 1980s and 1990s are beyond any of the wildest dreams I had back then. If we continue having our brand name and credibility blow up over the next 20 years like it has the last 20, sky's the limit.

Kilgore still seems confident in his latest tweet. He did mention something about "barring a last second change of heart" so hopefully Marshall is still on board.

quote:

---

Mizzou is in good region, that produces good football and hoops players, and it can recruit nationally in both, but we have to work at it. Its never gonna fall in our lap like it does those others.

---

I totally agree with this. At least now that we are in the SEC we can mostly compete financially, but we will always need coaches that are grinders when it comes to recruiting and player development. Pinkle is amazing at this, and he has really developed as a game coach since he's been here. It scares me to think what he could do at a place like LSU right now, but he seems to have decided mizzou will be his legacy. He will be a very hard man to replace when that day comes.
If this Marshall thing is for real he could be that kind of guy. Wichita state doesn't have many built in advantages but he's done alright there.

Give me Howland and I will be punch drunk happy. I see Howland as someone with a proven track record at winning at the highest level, can recruit good players to fit his system, and at his age, I doubt he would leave us for "greener Pastures". This is a place he could retire from in 8 to 10 yrs. Alot of winning can be done.

I think we would get about 4 years from Marshall before he bolted off to a blueblood. I know he doesn't have a track record of being a suitcase type, but just my gut feeling. Would still be very happy with either one of these coaches.

See I said that the other day, I would be happy with either Marshall or Howland.

quote:

---

See I said that the other day, I would be happy with either Marshall or Howland.

---

I completely agree. I would be thrilled with either. Anyone else would be a bummer at this point.

I truly believe, totally not kidding, that there is less than one percent chance they hire Kim Anderson. I think Alden would get fired before he could do it.

One small concern that give the 1%: is what if Alden is using that meeting to get political support for hiring Anderson? Then he doesn't look as bad if it fails. I don't think that is the case and honestly I think we probably locked up Howland.

Howland makes more sense at this point. 1. Take a week so he can talk to recruits in whatever manner he wants without restrictions. 2. It would explain the silence. No one would know in Howland's camp except he and his agent.

I know Kilgore really believes in Marshall, but if I was betting on this my money would be on Howland.

quote:

---

Those guys over at TB still think I'm Kilgore

---

They are saying you were banned from Shockernet. Did you really go there with coachnapping in your heart?

His hiring would be a nightmare for us, no way he can keep our recruits we have coming in and have to resort back to juco players.

I haven't seen many at all besides old school people who.remember the good ole days, I grew up watching norm but i dont want him.

Kansas paper said Marshall did address the open Missouri job and told his new recruit that he will be coaching him.....so Howland it is?