P U thoughts

[Galway Eagle]

jsglow

I think you are making a pretty bold statement in describing the camp that wants to win at a high level. I want MU to win, win big and do it the right way. There are winning programs that do the right way. I have no idea how Xavier has become a top twenty program, but my gut says they have done it the right way. That is what I WANT from our program.

I have said it here many times, for decades Xavier was our whipping boy and I hate when we played they played us because they could not beat us. Now, I want us to be Xavier like. Who knows, maybe even a cozy arena of our own like Xavier.

I do not know who on here you thinks want MU to be a dirty program, but I want MU to win big and do it the right way. Doing the right way and not winning big is acceptable to many and not to others. If it is acceptable, scale back on the ball budget.

Not so sure about X. Remember Tu Holloway saying “we a bunch of thugs” plus there has been a couple players in the least accused of rape in that program. I’m not saying it’s still run that way but when Mac took over he was more than willing to overlook some shady things

[Hards Alumni]

People who liked the wojo hire from the beginning continuously use every possible piece of evidence that they can find to extol his program as long as he's here. They find ways to ignore any negative evidence. Such is life.

Cognitive dissonance.

Absolutely true as well.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

jsglow

I think you are making a pretty bold statement in describing the camp that wants to win at a high level. I want MU to win, win big and do it the right way. There are winning programs that do the right way. I have no idea how Xavier has become a top twenty program, but my gut says they have done it the right way. That is what I WANT from our program.

I have said it here many times, for decades Xavier was our whipping boy and I hate when we played they played us because they could not beat us. Now, I want us to be Xavier like. Who knows, maybe even a cozy arena of our own like Xavier.

I do not know who on here you thinks want MU to be a dirty program, but I want MU to win big and do it the right way. Doing the right way and not winning big is acceptable to many and not to others. If it is acceptable, scale back on the ball budget.

Well, they've also had multiple players accused of sexual assaults, had a player accused of domestic violence last season, and famously had a brawl on court and then their star player defended it by saying "they were gangsters." They also had Macura pull down his pants during a bar fight...but that was more funny than anything. Like your USC example earlier, maybe not the best comparison.

On the second bolded, why would we scale back the budget when according to Scholl we are making $7 for every $1 spent on basketball?

As for Car3no, if I'm reading your posts right, you agree that his last season was his best, but think Matt deserves all the credit and none should go to Wojo. But this isn't a Wojo thing, because you also think the same thing about Buzz and Vander. We'll have to agree to disagree. The players deserve a lot if not most of the credit for putting in the work, but I believe the coaches play a role as well. FWIW, I think most of the people who were criticizing Matt at the beginning of the season were the same people who criticize just about everything when we are losing. Doesn't make them right, some are just that type of fans. I was a huge fan of Car3no from the day he signed to the present day.

[jesmu84]

People who liked the wojo hire from the beginning continuously use every possible piece of evidence that they can find to extol his program as long as he's here. They find ways to ignore any negative evidence. Such is life.

Cognitive dissonance.

I disagree here. Those anti-wojo go quiet when we beat Nova or make the tournament. Those pro-wojo rarely go quiet in any situation. Maybe that's just the perspective I have.

[jesmu84]

If the results were better this would not be an issue...So maybe its not just about 'people'.

Constant improvement season upon season from an "empty cupboard" and a brand new coach isn't good enough?

[jesmu84]

jsglow

I think you are making a pretty bold statement in describing the camp that wants to win at a high level. I want MU to win, win big and do it the right way. There are winning programs that do the right way. I have no idea how Xavier has become a top twenty program, but my gut says they have done it the right way. That is what I WANT from our program.

I have said it here many times, for decades Xavier was our whipping boy and I hate when we played they played us because they could not beat us. Now, I want us to be Xavier like. Who knows, maybe even a cozy arena of our own like Xavier.

I do not know who on here you thinks want MU to be a dirty program, but I want MU to win big and do it the right way. Doing the right way and not winning big is acceptable to many and not to others. If it is acceptable, scale back on the ball budget.

I'm onboard with us matching X. Or Butler. Or Gonzaga. Or (maybe one day) Nova. Heck, maybe even Georgetown a few years ago.

But you've gotta look at those programs. They either built from within their coaching tree or had a long term coach. Look at what's happened to gtown lately - even historic programs can fail (if only temporarily). It took those programs years or decades to achieve high-level, sustained success.

With MU, we hired an outside (crean), in-house (buzz) and outside (wojo). But they all had vastly different personalities/cultures/roster composition.

We agree here, goose.

[jesmu84]

Now, obviously none of us know how many guys he tried to land his first or 2nd year here, but...I feel comfortable saying had he chose to, he could have brought in more grad transfers/traditional transfers his first and 2nd years then he did. If Iowa State can sustain a model like that, Wojo certainly could have done it for a year or two until he got his guys in the program. There was also the Juco ranks he could have explored. Iowa State largely builds their program on transfers, and they are in the tourney almost every year, with very good seeds typically.

No disagreement, I suppose. But I'm glad he chose not to. Look what happened when buzz missed on those types.

Plus, from what I know, the administration put a bit of restriction on what wojo would be able to get with those players.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

Constant improvement season upon season from an "empty cupboard" and a brand new coach isn't good enough?

That was a great story three years ago and no its not enough in 2017 to still have that story.  Wojo's here and he is betting on the '18/19 season.  Eventually the results on an absolute basis matters. 

[jesmu84]

That was a great story three years ago and no its not enough in 2017 to still have that story.  Wojo's here and he is betting on the '18/19 season.  Eventually the results on an absolute basis matters.

Fair enough. For me, constant improvement is good enough. Every year

[Goose]

TAMU

One question, if you are thinking of dirty programs, do you name off Xavier in your dirty program list? Items you stated are all horrible, but not in million years would I put Xavier be on my watch list of dirty programs. Again, I am in idiot for saying this, but much of you noted on Xavier could have been noted in the Buzz era. Few bitched up that until the "Hillbilly" left town. On the other hand, I noted numerous times that I felt the school was concerned by Buzz's way.

As for Carlino, his last season may have been his best in some ways, but I think he one consistent college player from hos 2nd  year until last year at MU. As for those who bashed Matt because we were losing, we lost the whole season. He was bashed for being a journeyman, for being a chucker, for cheating on D and other things. It was stated MU did not need a guy on his third college in four years, that he was trouble. Please try and remember the facts.

[brewcity77]

brewcity

I am going to hate myself for asking, but what the hell? If as you say, Wojo/the system made Carlino better, who else as Wojo/the system made better? I watched Vander Blue get better year over year and never did I feel Buzz was the reason behind it. While I loved Buzz's style of play and players he recruited, I felt he was a bust as a coach. To me his strength was getting players and that chip on the shoulder mentality.

At this point, other than Carlino, who has made big steps year over year? I am asking one favor, do not say Rowsey. From day one on campus many former players stated Rowsey was the real deal, for what type of player he is. I know I am intellectually challenged on ball knowledge, but I cannot think of one player off the top of my head that has had Vander Blue type improvement.

What the hell is pretty much the exact thought I had when you repeated in post after post that Carlino didn't benefit from Marquette's coaching despite there being more than enough statistical evidence to prove otherwise.

First, I do think Buzz and the staff aided greatly in Blue's development. His three-point shot was completely rebuilt. His shot selection became much better. For someone that brags about their "eye test" ability, I can't help but wonder how you can say that Blue's improvement wasn't a result of coaching.

As far as who else without mentioning Rowsey...that's one of my concerns with Wojo! There are five players that can be looked at based on time here with Wojo: Fischer, JJ, Duane, Heldt, and Cheatham.

Luke consistently showed offensive improvement, but his lack of defensive development was concerning. JJ is probably the best case for Wojo as a developer of talent. In the middle of his junior year, he turned a corner. His shot selection improved and defensively he gambled less. Duane is a concern because he seemed to take a step back. He became less assertive on offense and never felt nearly as threatening a player. Heldt has definitely improved on both ends. He will likely never be a dominant offensive player but he is good at picking his spots and is a solid yet not spectacular defender. I'm concerned about the regression of Cheatham in his sophomore year, and I feel his offensive efficiency improvement was largely just a factor of him not playing the point (thus reducing his TO%) and feel his eFG% drop and his inability to develop a right hand are both concerning.

I have concerns about the development of our players. I look at Markus and Sam and feel they both have legitimate potential to be at least All-Conference players. If they do not get there, that is a huge worry. But talking development and talking about having a system that allows players to flourish are two different things.

Henry Ellenson flourished in Wojo's system, and there would be an argument that he did improve significantly if you look at his final third of the season shot selection, three point accuracy, and overall efficiency. Andrew Rowsey and Markus Howard both flourished in this system. Luke Fischer flourished. These are all guys that didn't just put up numbers, but they did so efficiently. Every team has players that put up numbers, but under Wojo we have players that are efficient while doing so.

Right now, I feel that Wojo's best traits are his recruiting and his abilities as an offensive coach. He does a good job of getting guys that play well together offensively, space the floor, shoot accurately, and more often than not put us in a position to win games. The most worrisome traits are long-term development of players and defense. But while I have those concerns, I can also see how players have thrived in this system, and Carlino was one of those players.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

With MU, we hired an outside (crean), in-house (buzz) and outside (wojo). But they all had vastly different personalities/cultures/roster composition.

I do think this is a big part of why other programs like X, Butler, and Bucky have success. When they have had a successful coach leave, they have kept hires within the family. Minimizes the need for a rebuild and minimizes the adjustment time for the coach setting up his culture and system. Whether you agreed or not, the Marquette administration felt we needed a clean break from the Crean/Buzz years. Puts us at a disadvantage.

[Goose]

brew

I will stick with my eye test abilities and you can stick with yours. If the guys you noted, five "flourished" on last years team, how do you define flourish? If five guys flourishing makes us a bubble team the program is in big trouble.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

TAMU

One question, if you are thinking of dirty programs, do you name off Xavier in your dirty program list? Items you stated are all horrible, but not in million years would I put Xavier be on my watch list of dirty programs. Again, I am in idiot for saying this, but much of you noted on Xavier could have been noted in the Buzz era. Few bitched up that until the "Hillbilly" left town. On the other hand, I noted numerous times that I felt the school was concerned by Buzz's way.

I do and don't think X is on the dirty program list. From what I can tell, when the players committed violent acts as students, the university responded promptly and appropriately. But the fact that it was a repeated issue makes me wonder if some of these issues were known in advance and the staff turned a blind eye until they couldn't. I don't know. I don't have all the information. And yeah, I consider us under Buzz a dirty program. While I appreciated what he did on the court, I was one of of the few who "bitched" about that before the "Hillbilly" left town.

As for Carlino, his last season may have been his best in some ways, but I think he one consistent college player from hos 2nd  year until last year at MU. As for those who bashed Matt because we were losing, we lost the whole season. He was bashed for being a journeyman, for being a chucker, for cheating on D and other things. It was stated MU did not need a guy on his third college in four years, that he was trouble. Please try and remember the facts.

The numbers tell me that Carlino was head and shoulders better his last season.  That's not a knock on Matt. He was very good at BYU. But he took his game to another level at Marquette.

I don't deny the facts. I remember what people said at the beginning of the season. I remember Ners bitching that Carlino was blocking the development of Magic Dawson. I remember all the chucker comments and criticisms of his D. I also remember most of who was making those comments. They were tearing down anything and everything about the program. Carlino was their favorite whipping boy at the beginning of the season but they couldn't really keep that up because of how great of numbers Matt ended up putting up. Kid was a stud. Some people are willing to look at handful of not great performances at the beginning of a season and declare that a player is no good. Those people are often proven wrong and Matt proved them wrong in a big way.

[brewcity77]

brew

I will stick with my eye test abilities and you can stick with yours. If the guys you noted, five "flourished" on last years team, how do you define flourish? If five guys flourishing makes us a bubble team the program is in big trouble.

At least I'm willing to give Wojo both credit for his successes and blame for his failures. All you are willing to do is throw him under the bus and deny successes. And yes, many guys flourished under our offensive system last year. The reason we were near the bubble is because our defense was atrocious, which is one of the failures I am willing to address.

We had the 8th most efficient offense in the country last year. Even our 2003 team did not score as many points per possession as our offense last year. But apparently you think the coaches had nothing to do with that? Hell, it's harder to NOT give credit to what was almost certainly the most efficient offense in Marquette history. Our defense still sucked, and I can acknowledge that, but I think it's damn near impossible to deny this offense has been showing marked improvement every year and many players, including Carlino, have benefited from it.

[Mr. Sand-Knit]

People who liked the wojo hire from the beginning continuously use every possible piece of evidence that they can find to extol his program as long as he's here. They find ways to ignore any negative evidence. Such is life.

Cognitive dissonance.

This is a little too simple reasoning.  Im not pro wojo or anti wojo, im pro Marquette.  If he does well great, if he does poorly he needs to go.  I do think its irrational to  think we can have and expect  a top 10 team perrenially in the first 3-4 years when the first 2 years were basically an absolute washout with a completely bare cupboard.  Wojo has recruited extremely well and 95% of winning in colloege hoops is recruiting so hes fine by me to this point. 

[Loose Cannon]

Everyone crapping on Haanif needs to cool off. No one could get anything going in the lane other than floaters. Picking out Haanif as our big problem isn't fair or accurate.

Plus Tax.

[GGGG]

brew

I will stick with my eye test abilities and you can stick with yours. If the guys you noted, five "flourished" on last years team, how do you define flourish? If five guys flourishing makes us a bubble team the program is in big trouble.

Most eye tests, unless validated through statistics, are pretty much sh*t.

[Goose]

brew

You crack me up. If you ever took the time to read my posts you would realize that I have not said ONE negative thing about Wojo. In past 24 hours I did not give him credit for Carlino's season, but have not said one negative thing about him. In addition, I have complimented him several times for swinging for the fences on Grimes. Not once, have I thrown him under the bus on anything.

I have stated that progress is frustrating slow. I have stated that success of program does not match money spent. I have said I am not sure that the University wants, or feels it needs, to be a top 20 program. I have said that I would takes Rick's SLU program over current state of program. To be honest, all the previous statements I would say again today.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Goose,

Saying Wojo "didn't coach Matt up one bit" is saying something negative about Wojo. You want to see Matt deserves most of the credit, sure. But to say Wojo had Matt in the program for an entire season and didn't do one thing to help develop him...that's about the most damning thing you can say about a coach.

Progress is frustratingly slow. Absolutely agree.

Matching money spent? Disagree. We make $7 for every $1 spent on basketball. I'd be more concerned if basketball was a drag on the rest of the university but it's not.

I can promise you that the university desperately wants to be a top 10 program again. They don't just want to be top 10, they want to be top 10 and stay there.

I might take Rick's 11-12 SLU team over the one we have this season. But not the program. That program was a house of cards built on rotting foundation and Rick was the one thing holding it together.

[Goose]

TAMU

I don't want to give Matt the credit. I think he was the best player on a horrible team. Wojo did not bring him here to develop him and Matt did not come here to be developed. I did happen see Matt play basketball quite a bit more than most on here the decade or so prior to his arrival. I WOULD think I have a better baseline to judge him off. But, tired of the topic...I agree Wojo coached him up beginning with game #6.

Progress actually sucks.

If it is $7 made for every dollar spent, double the budget. Helluva of an investment.

I flat out believe they say certain things. I have heard of quite a few heated discussions of the BOT on the top 20 program debate. IMO, 99% of it is lip service. If it is not, they do not have people capable of making it happen.

[brewcity77]

brew

You crack me up. If you ever took the time to read my posts you would realize that I have not said ONE negative thing about Wojo. In past 24 hours I did not give him credit for Carlino's season, but have not said one negative thing about him. In addition, I have complimented him several times for swinging for the fences on Grimes. Not once, have I thrown him under the bus on anything.

I don't think you realize how loudly your omissions can speak.

[Lennys Tap]

I disagree here. Those anti-wojo go quiet when we beat Nova or make the tournament. Those pro-wojo rarely go quiet in any situation. Maybe that's just the perspective I have.

Of course it's the perspective you have. The true believers (you're in this group) think any criticism is out of line. And they think that's reasonable. I don't. I'm not a Wojo hater - he was my second choice (after Shaka) to get the job and based on what we know so far maybe he should have been my first. I give him an A for bringing in nice kids and for being a solid face of the program. The rest is a mixed bag that I won't make the board favorite "cupboard bare" excuse for because it's BS. Wojo was still staring 2 of Buzz's players in year three of his tenure. In Buzz's year three there were no Crean players on the team! I still think Wojo can be successful here - and I really hope that he is. But I'm not knocked out by the roster he's put together in year 4.

[Goose]

Lenny

You read my mind.

[jesmu84]

Of course it's the perspective you have. The true believers (you're in this group) think any criticism is out of line. And they think that's reasonable. I don't. I'm not a Wojo hater - he was my second choice (after Shaka) to get the job and based on what we know so far maybe he should have been my first. I give him an A for bringing in nice kids and for being a solid face of the program. The rest is a mixed bag that I won't make the board favorite "cupboard bare" excuse for because it's BS. Wojo was still staring 2 of Buzz's players in year three of his tenure. In Buzz's year three there were no Crean players on the team! I still think Wojo can be successful here - and I really hope that he is. But I'm not knocked out by the roster he's put together in year 4.

I don't believe that "any criticism" is out of line. What I notice, is the same people come out and criticize the program - or more likely the coach - when things aren't 100% winning and bringing in 5 stars. When things are going well, they're nowhere to be seen.

Criticism on a players performance? Valid. Criticism on a coaching decision (win or lose)? Valid. Etc.

Criticism is valid when warranted.

When we aren't performing to the levels of "elites"? Not warranted because that's not who we are or who we will be.