Stein & Summers is a rock solid real estate firm with over 46 years of success that can be attributed to our willingness to go the extra mile in service and expertise. With offices in Kansas City and St. Joseph, we provide a full range of services in residential, commercial, multi-family, investment and agricultural real estate. Confidence comes from feeling you’ve been taken care of, so when you see our sign you can rest assured that one of our agents will be ready to provide the best care for any of your real estate needs. Click here for more information.
1) Let's start with virus related stuff because, well, yeah, that's what we do these days.
June 1 is the date everyone is looking at right now. That's the date where we need to have a little (or a lot) better idea what's going on. It's the date that theoretically athletes would report back to campus, that the recruiting ban would be lifted, etc. While we may not be on full lockdown for the next month, May is still going to be significantly different. June 1 is really the next date we'll be looking at that will probably hold some importance. If things start being extended significantly past that, then the fall is much more in question.
2) Eli Drinkwitz is on a bit of a heater in recruiting. In the last ten days, the Tigers added four commits, bringing their total to eight. That included three more in-state players (giving them five total plus one from East St. Louis) and also included the first four-star in the class in Travion Ford. It also saw the first Texan in the class on Saturday. Definitely a nice run and it comes at a time when a lot of kids seem to be making commitments across the country. I'm not really sure why the last couple of weeks seem to be the popular time to get it done, but there has definitely been an uptick in commitments, not just in CoMo, but in a lot of places. I'm a little surprised some of these guys are pulling the trigger now rather than waiting a few weeks to see if they might be able to take some trips prior to football season. I'll be interested to see if it leads to any higher level of decommitments (not for Missouri specifically, but in general) this fall with kids saying "You know, I committed somewhere but there are five other places I'd like to see that I didn't get to see" and looking around. I'm not sure that will be the case, I just think it's possible.
3) Let's talk some basketball. On Friday night, I reported that Michael Porter Sr.'s contract would not be renewed in its current capacity. That capacity last year was $375,000 to be the director of player development, which is the same salary, but a lesser role, as his first two years when he was one of the three full-time assistant coaches. If this news came as a surprise to you, I simply can't comprehend that and would like to play poker or enter into business deals with you because you would be fleeced. Michael Porter Sr. knows far more about basketball than I do or than probably most of this board does. But he was hired for two (really, one) reasons and those two reasons are not at Mizzou anymore. The investment was a smart one and the risk worth it even if it didn't end up working out (I'm big on assessing things knowing what you know at the time they are done rather than using hindsight to say that Missouri wasted 1.125 million bucks because the kids got hurt which no one could have foreseen). But with Jontay and Michael no longer at Missouri, you simply don't continue to pay a director of player development 375K. The information I was given Friday night is that there is conversation about keeping Porter on with the program or in the athletic department in a different role. I don't really expect that to happen, but that's what they said.
4) There was one other bit of "breaking" news in basketball. Apparently the Tigers are talking about playing at Missouri State next season. This came from a Zoom call that Cuonzo Martin did, I'm assuming with the team, that was sent to the Springfield News Leader. I talked to someone last night who told me that is indeed a hope and something that's being worked on, but nothing is finalized. There are two distinct reactions to this and I understand both of them to some degree:
Reaction 1: Good. If we're going to play 13 non-conference games and a lot of them are pretty worthless at least give me an interesting opponent or a game with an angle now and again.
Reaction 2: What the hell is Missouri doing playing a road game at Missouri State?
Like I said, I understand both reactions to some degree. I think you could just eliminate about six non-conference games every year because they're a total waste of everyone's time (and, yes, I understand that now and again something can happen like Charleston Southern beating Missouri but that does not make those games not worthless). But if you're going to play them anyway, I guess I'm not all that opposed to making it against a team that might draw the interest of a few extra fans. Don't get me wrong, I don't personally care about watching a game against Missouri State or SLU any more than I would care about watching one against Middle Tennessee, but some people will. And if you can appeal to those people, cool.
On the second part, I understand those who would be okay with Missouri playing this game but not on the road. My first reaction is to agree. But there are some counter points. Obviously, this isn't going to be a one game series with the only game in Springfield. Mizzou will get at least one home game--and maybe two--out of it. Second, Missouri has been at a deficit the last couple of years and isn't going to be in any better shape this year in all likelihood due to the virus. So rather than paying MSU a couple hundred grand to come here and lose, why not give them a home game and save that money? Every bit helps. Again, I get why people would be upset with this idea, but I'm also trying to present the other side.
I think the people who are upset by this mostly are probably thinking "What the hell, why should we stoop to that level? We're the By God University of Missouri." Well, I don't know if you guys have noticed, but I don't think Missouri basketball should really be thumbing its nose at anyone the last few years. Sure, Missouri should be able to go win that game. If they don't, maybe a couple of Springfield media mouthpieces and a handful of fans would crow about it for a few years. Same thing would happen if Mizzou played and lost to SLU. So is there more downside than upside? Yes. Is this really anything worth being unhappy about? To me, not really. They've got to play 13 non-con games a year, so schedule whoever you want for them. Just starting winning a few more of them so that maybe the program gets back to a place where the attitude of superiority is a little more justified than it is right now.
5) Here's what we should know about the non-conference schedule next year, assuming the MSU game and the Wichita State game mentioned in the same article happen:
Missouri State
Wichita State
Kansas
Illinois
Big 12/SEC Challenge
Three games in the Myrtle Beach Invitational
Utah
That would leave four games. All four would likely be against blood donor mid to low major teams. Missouri would be picked to lose a minimum of three of those games and likely closer to four or five. It's a challenging non-conference slate that should give you an idea where the Tigers stand early in the year.
1) Let's start with virus related stuff because, well, yeah, that's what we do these days.
June 1 is the date everyone is looking at right now. That's the date where we need to have a little (or a lot) better idea what's going on. It's the date that theoretically athletes would report back to campus, that the recruiting ban would be lifted, etc. While we may not be on full lockdown for the next month, May is still going to be significantly different. June 1 is really the next date we'll be looking at that will probably hold some importance. If things start being extended significantly past that, then the fall is much more in question.
2) Eli Drinkwitz is on a bit of a heater in recruiting. In the last ten days, the Tigers added four commits, bringing their total to eight. That included three more in-state players (giving them five total plus one from East St. Louis) and also included the first four-star in the class in Travion Ford. It also saw the first Texan in the class on Saturday. Definitely a nice run and it comes at a time when a lot of kids seem to be making commitments across the country. I'm not really sure why the last couple of weeks seem to be the popular time to get it done, but there has definitely been an uptick in commitments, not just in CoMo, but in a lot of places. I'm a little surprised some of these guys are pulling the trigger now rather than waiting a few weeks to see if they might be able to take some trips prior to football season. I'll be interested to see if it leads to any higher level of decommitments (not for Missouri specifically, but in general) this fall with kids saying "You know, I committed somewhere but there are five other places I'd like to see that I didn't get to see" and looking around. I'm not sure that will be the case, I just think it's possible.
3) Let's talk some basketball. On Friday night, I reported that Michael Porter Sr.'s contract would not be renewed in its current capacity. That capacity last year was $375,000 to be the director of player development, which is the same salary, but a lesser role, as his first two years when he was one of the three full-time assistant coaches. If this news came as a surprise to you, I simply can't comprehend that and would like to play poker or enter into business deals with you because you would be fleeced. Michael Porter Sr. knows far more about basketball than I do or than probably most of this board does. But he was hired for two (really, one) reasons and those two reasons are not at Mizzou anymore. The investment was a smart one and the risk worth it even if it didn't end up working out (I'm big on assessing things knowing what you know at the time they are done rather than using hindsight to say that Missouri wasted 1.125 million bucks because the kids got hurt which no one could have foreseen). But with Jontay and Michael no longer at Missouri, you simply don't continue to pay a director of player development 375K. The information I was given Friday night is that there is conversation about keeping Porter on with the program or in the athletic department in a different role. I don't really expect that to happen, but that's what they said.
4) There was one other bit of "breaking" news in basketball. Apparently the Tigers are talking about playing at Missouri State next season. This came from a Zoom call that Cuonzo Martin did, I'm assuming with the team, that was sent to the Springfield News Leader. I talked to someone last night who told me that is indeed a hope and something that's being worked on, but nothing is finalized. There are two distinct reactions to this and I understand both of them to some degree:
Reaction 1: Good. If we're going to play 13 non-conference games and a lot of them are pretty worthless at least give me an interesting opponent or a game with an angle now and again.
Reaction 2: What the hell is Missouri doing playing a road game at Missouri State?
Like I said, I understand both reactions to some degree. I think you could just eliminate about six non-conference games every year because they're a total waste of everyone's time (and, yes, I understand that now and again something can happen like Charleston Southern beating Missouri but that does not make those games not worthless). But if you're going to play them anyway, I guess I'm not all that opposed to making it against a team that might draw the interest of a few extra fans. Don't get me wrong, I don't personally care about watching a game against Missouri State or SLU any more than I would care about watching one against Middle Tennessee, but some people will. And if you can appeal to those people, cool.
On the second part, I understand those who would be okay with Missouri playing this game but not on the road. My first reaction is to agree. But there are some counter points. Obviously, this isn't going to be a one game series with the only game in Springfield. Mizzou will get at least one home game--and maybe two--out of it. Second, Missouri has been at a deficit the last couple of years and isn't going to be in any better shape this year in all likelihood due to the virus. So rather than paying MSU a couple hundred grand to come here and lose, why not give them a home game and save that money? Every bit helps. Again, I get why people would be upset with this idea, but I'm also trying to present the other side.
I think the people who are upset by this mostly are probably thinking "What the hell, why should we stoop to that level? We're the By God University of Missouri." Well, I don't know if you guys have noticed, but I don't think Missouri basketball should really be thumbing its nose at anyone the last few years. Sure, Missouri should be able to go win that game. If they don't, maybe a couple of Springfield media mouthpieces and a handful of fans would crow about it for a few years. Same thing would happen if Mizzou played and lost to SLU. So is there more downside than upside? Yes. Is this really anything worth being unhappy about? To me, not really. They've got to play 13 non-con games a year, so schedule whoever you want for them. Just starting winning a few more of them so that maybe the program gets back to a place where the attitude of superiority is a little more justified than it is right now.
5) Here's what we should know about the non-conference schedule next year, assuming the MSU game and the Wichita State game mentioned in the same article happen:
Missouri State
Wichita State
Kansas
Illinois
Big 12/SEC Challenge
Three games in the Myrtle Beach Invitational
Utah
That would leave four games. All four would likely be against blood donor mid to low major teams. Missouri would be picked to lose a minimum of three of those games and likely closer to four or five. It's a challenging non-conference slate that should give you an idea where the Tigers stand early in the year.
