I thought Crean never considered leaving...?

[mviale]

Pakuni - it is debatable and since we dont have games to talk about, i bring this up.  If wade doesnt come, what does the crean era look like? A top 10 NBA talent doesnt come along that often - even at a program  like Indiana.

Is there a final four?
Is there a Big East?
Three Amigos?

I think we are ok, but instead of 7 straight 19+ win seasons, maybe we are talking about 3 straight 19 win seasons.  I think the Diener/Novak lead seasons of 03-05 are more of the norm and we dont even get considered by dom James and maybe Matthews goes to UW.  All hypothetical, but have we reached the sweet 16  more than once over the last 10 years?  Is the PR so thick that we cant see the facts?

[MUFan71]

Pakuni - it is debatable and since we dont have games to talk about - i bring this up.  If wade doesnt come, what does the crean era look like?

  Mike Deane five seasons 100-55 post season appearances 4 record 7 and 4. Tom Crean nine seasons 190-96 post season appearances 8 record 7 and 8. Take D. Wade away and the numbers drop more. He had good players and did great things for MU but D. Wade made him millions.

[thatman32]

D-wade was a statistical outlier kind of player.  One hell of a statistical outlier player who made everyone associated with him millions from his divorced wife, TC and MU.

[Pakuni]

Pakuni - it is debatable and since we dont have games to talk about, i bring this up.  If wade doesnt come, what does the crean era look like? A top 10 NBA talent doesnt come along that often - even at a program  like Indiana.

Is there a final four?
Is there a Big East?
Three Amigos?

For starters, this whole debate centers around the specious notion that Crean had nothing to do with Wade a) coming to Marquette and b) developing into the player he is today.
Guess what fellas? No Tom Crean, no Dwyane Wade at Marquette. Simple as that. You can't separate the two. It's akin to arguing that John Thompson accomplished nothing at Georgetown. He just got lucky with Patrick Ewing.
And Ray Meyer accomplished nothing at DePaul. He just got lucky with George Mikan.
It doesn't work that way.

Secondly, plenty of coaches have had superstar players come through their program and not have the ensuing success Crean has had.  Having a star player come through is by no means a guarantee of future success.
Ask Charlie Coles. Or Charlie Spoonhauer. Or Ricardo Patton.

[Daniel]

Yikes!  This continues on.  Bottom line: Crean did good for us and was about as loyal as you will get from any coach on the college ranks anytime.  9 years in today's world is a lot.  Basically, for the time you are anywhere, you want to do the best job you can to build your resume for either a raise and a long-tern contract, or another job.  They all do it, every day.  I hate it but they do it.

We have Buzz now - let's hope that he does us even better over the next number of years, and wants to stick around a while while he's doing it.  I wish there was loyalty - but you don't find it much in the business world - it's all about opportunity.  And college b-ball is a business - for the school and the coaches and hopefully, for the athletes who might get a deal after they graduate.

[mviale]

Guess what fellas? No Tom Crean, no Dwyane Wade at Marquette. Simple as that. You can't separate the two. It's akin to arguing that John Thompson accomplished nothing at Georgetown. He just got lucky with Patrick Ewing.
And Ray Meyer accomplished nothing at DePaul. He just got lucky with George Mikan.
It doesn't work that way.

bad arguments - dude - did you eat your wheaties today?  Ray Meyer had years of success beyond that.  Crean? Thompson was stud before and after?

[wadesworld]

WadesWorld....agree with you 100%. But HOW he left and WHY he left are two totally separate arguments. I think it was garbage HOW left. But as for why? That can't be argued about.

Oh absolutely, I said it from day one, there's no way he can turn down that offer.  Doubling his salary (not that $1.2 million a year is anything that will cause you to have problems feeding your family...), playing in a MUCH easier conference, not having a bigger state school to compete with, BEING that big state school, etc.  I can't blame him for leaving, but I can't stand him for HOW he left.

[Marquette84]

bad arguments - dude - did you eat your wheaties today?  Ray Meyer had years of success beyond that.  Crean? Thompson was stud before and after?

Interesting you cite Meyer's "years of success." 

Following a final four with Mikan, Meyer suffered what can only be described as "years of mediocrity" with two decades of sub-par performance.  It probably would have continued, except that 30 years after Mikan, he got lucky again with Terry Cummings and Mark Aguirre. And once again--after the 1979 final four the record isn't much to speak of: Meyer managed just a single NCAA tournament win over the rest of his career (five seasons).

If you're going to fault Crean for not having a lot of NCAA success after a final four, and credit luck to land one a great player, then you have to accept that Meyer's reputation is based on the same type of luck--he just had it happen twice, separated by 30+ years.  13 NCAAs in 42 years does not compare favorably to Tom Crean's record.

BTW, John Thompson had 3 final fours with Ewing.  And zero without.

[MR.HAYWARD]

thompson was elite with ewing 3 title games...but he was also very good without him as he had other good players in the program.  onething to be the best team in the country three staright years and then falling to "only" a top 10 program.  not a goog analogy with Mu as Wades team couldhave lost every NCAA game in the 2003 tourny before putting it all together aganst Kentucky , it was a cinderella situation as far as they one one barn burner after another.  GT waltzed to 3 ttle games winnign 0ne, they were stila  great team.  Mu was busy losing to Westrn Michagn and anyone else with a pulse for two years and since then while we have been better we have won 1 tournament game.  John thompson blew those mnumbers away

[Marquette84]

thompson was elite with ewing 3 title games...but he was also very good without him as he had other good players in the program.  onething to be the best team in the country three staright years and then falling to "only" a top 10 program.  not a goog analogy with Mu as Wades team couldhave lost every NCAA game in the 2003 tourny before putting it all together aganst Kentucky , it was a cinderella situation as far as they one one barn burner after another.  GT waltzed to 3 ttle games winnign 0ne, they were stila  great team.  Mu was busy losing to Westrn Michagn and anyone else with a pulse for two years and since then while we have been better we have won 1 tournament game.  John thompson blew those mnumbers away

Regardless, Thompson never reached a final four without Patrick Ewing.  In other words, he's not a final four coach--he got lucky with one player.

You can argue that Thompson is better if you want--but you can't argue that Georgetown reached the final four based on his coaching ability, and at the same time argue that MU only made the final four because of Wade.

If we strip Crean of credit for reaching the final four because he only made it with Wade, then we shouldn't give Thompson credit either, becuase he only made it with Ewing.  In fact, in Thompsons last 9 seasons, he only made it past the first weekend twice.   A far cry from making the final four 3 times out of 4.

[mviale]

crazy talk - Thompson had 24 straight post season appearances vs. only made the sweet 16 1x.

slippery slope with this argument

[79Warrior]

Jesus Christ guys. Get over it already. He's gone. And yes...it IS Indiana. It takes more than nine good years for MU to get to their level. That's just a friggin' fact. Get off the guy for leaving to go to what is arguably one of the top 5-7 highest profile college gigs in the country. Anyone here would have done it in a heartbeat.

All of you people that bitch about Crean breaking his contract are the same ones that wanted another "slimeball" or "used car salesman" to break his existing contract with another school to come to MU.

Totaly agree.

[Murffieus]

Crean was overrated------his teams at MU in conference and postseason were 45-23 in January and 58-50 in February and March (includes the final four year with Wade).

The conclusion one can draw from this is that Crean's teams peaked in December & January and that crean's teams got worse as the season progresses, which is a sign of poor coaching!

[Marquette84]

Crean was overrated------his teams at MU in conference and postseason were 45-23 in January and 58-50 in February and March (includes the final four year with Wade).

The conclusion one can draw from this is that Crean's teams peaked in December & January and that crean's teams got worse as the season progresses, which is a sign of poor coaching!

Not this stupid formula again!

Under your formula, almost nobody improves as the season progresses.  7 of the 8 recent final four teams statistically "faded" according to your formula. 

Of COURSE you include MU's 2003 final four year in your calculation.  Because statistically, MU faded that year!

9-1 in conference prior to the first loss in February
9-3 beginning with the first loss in February

According to you, MU faded in 2003. That should tell you how stupid this formula is.   

[augoman]

For starters, this whole debate centers around the specious notion that Crean had nothing to do with Wade a) coming to Marquette and b) developing into the player he is today.


Interesting.  IMO, Crean is the only one that held Wade under 30 points per game.  Had he been a good coach, who knows how far we could have gone w/ the talent on that team.

[Pakuni]

crazy talk - Thompson had 24 straight post season appearances vs. only made the sweet 16 1x.

slippery slope with this argument

You're complete and utterly missing the point.
The point is not whether Crean is as good or successful a coach as Thompson was.
Rather, it's the foolishness of arguing that all of Crean's success at Marquette is due to him getting "lucky" with one player ... including success that occurred long after that one player was gone.

If one applies the same logic to Thompson that you've applied to Crean, one would have to say that Thompson got lucky with one player (Ewing) and all his subsequent success with guys like Mourning, Mutumbo, Iverson, etc. was merely an extension of his good fortune in landing Ewing.
It's a silly argument, but it's the one some of you are choosing to make.

[jce]

bad arguments - dude - did you eat your wheaties today?  Ray Meyer had years of success beyond that.  Crean? Thompson was stud before and after?

Thompson was a stud before and after?  He never made a Final Four without Ewing.

[BuzzSucksSucks]

Michael Jordan didn't do squat without Scottie Pippen, Joe Montana and Jerry Rice: ditto, Costello/Abbott, Chet Huntley/David Brinkley, Bill Russell/Red Auerbach, Secretariat/Ron Turcotte, Lucille Ball/Desi Arnaz, Johnny Carson/Ed McMahon, Tiger Woods/Earl Woods, The Apostle Paul /Barnabas....yada yada..  This could go on for days. Hey, and while we're at it, let's compare things that can't be compared, apples and oranges. Why don't we compare the number of guys who went through Tark's program, who ended up broke and maybe in jail, yeah.. and then compare that to, oh I don't know, Denny Crum's guys?  And we'll come up with algorithms to determine the crappier program.  So anyway, who's comparing Crean to John Thompson anyway?  Who cares about that one? What's the point with this anyway?  And another thing: does anyone ever convince anyone of anything?  No. Take this post, for instance: Am I entertaining anyone but myself?  No. Have I really made a point?  Not really. Does it really bother me that you guys are making detailed points over diddly?  Actually no. Carry on... My bad.

[ChicosBailBonds]

This thread has so many fallacies it's hard where to know where to start, though the original poster gets it going nicely with an absurd statement that Crean (or anyone else) never thought about leaving or pursuing other jobs.

I have a copy of a letter that Joe Paterno sent out to Yale as he was interested in being their head coach in the 1960's.  All coaches look, you're kidding yourself if they don't.

As for the Wade comments.  Wow.  Wade said point blank why he came to Marquette.  I'd suggest some of you buy the book Tales from the Hardwood...or is Wade lying?   No Crean = No Wade.  PERIOD.  Wade's words, not mine.



The statement on Crean keeping Wade down or we would have gone farther...farther then what...the Final Four?  Teams that rely on one great player are largely failures.  Whether it was the Lakers with Kobe when he didn't share the ball, LSU with Pete, the Bulls with Jordan, etc.  When great players have balanced teams and play with balance, they are lethal.  Otherwise it's too easy on the defense.  MU had 3 NBA players on that team plus a NBA Development League player...Wade along with those players led that team.  If you let Wade go off any more, then somewhere else suffers and they aren't as balanced.

John Thompson....the same guy that lost our first Olympic Gold medal not based on the fix (the 1972 games)...that John Thompson?  The closest 1 vs 16 seed game in NCAA history....that John Thompson?  Thompson was a very nice coach but let's not get overboard.

I love Hayward's comments about how MU could have lost every game in 2003 in the NCAAs.  Yup...I guess he forgot to look at Georgetown's runs...like beating SMU 37 to 36 (even though G'Town had a bye back in those days and SMU had to play 2 days earlier).  Or G'Town struggling with Wyoming in 1982, barely beating Alcorn State 68-63 in the NCAAs, or getting hammered by Memphis in the 2nd round in '83.

And to MOWarrior's excellent point, who the hell is comparing Crean to Thompson anyway?  First of all, shouldn't you wait until Crean is done as well with his career? 

As a little comparison, in Crean's first 9 years = 5 NCAAs, 3 NITs and 1 Final Four.  Thompson's first 9 years = 5 NCAAs, 2 NITs, 0 Final Fours.  Both Crean and Thompson had 1st round NIT home losses in that time period.

Did you know in Thompson's 20 NCAA appearances his team bowed out in the first or 2nd round TWELVE TIMES!  Is this not the same complaint of Crean...bowing out early at an alarming rate?  Including a 5 year stretch after his Final Four run where he couldn't get to the Sweet 16...hmm, sounds familiar.  Oh, and I can just imagine MU being a number one seed under Crean and winning by 1 point against a 16 seed, the love he would have received here?   

Compare Crean to Thompson all you like but do it on an apples to apples basis.  In Thompson's first 9 years vs Crean's...Crean wins.  If you want to compare the overall record, then I'd suggest you wait until Crean is done in 20 or 30 years so that apples to apples can be compared.

[Avenue Commons]

Buckley's energy produced 143 wins in six seasons at Ball State before he moved to Marquette last season as a Crean assistant, then followed him to IU. “We had always talked about coaching a top-5 to -10 program, and (IU) was one of those opportunities,” Buckley said. “To have the privilege to come with him is great.”

You don't give MU enough credit. Maybe what they were talking about was getting Marquette the point of being a top 5 to top 10 program on a regular basis and coaching that team.

[Avenue Commons]

One recruit? That's just crazy.

Perhaps you've heard of:

Travis Diener
Steve Novak
The Big East
Zero losing seasons
The Al
Jerel McNeal
2003 Final Four
Dominic James
Record attendance
Wes Matthews
Five NCAA tourneys the last seven seasons

Need I continue?
Tom Crean did and/or had a key role in a lot of great things at Marquette University. Those of you doing your darndest to minimize his successes, or ignore them altogether, are acting like jilted lovers.
"She was ugly and I never liked her anyways."

As for 4never's contentions ... he can claimit all he wants, but the facts prove otherwise.
Doesn't it stink when the facts get in the way of a good argument?

+1. 'Nuff said. TC did an amazing job at MU. It really sucks how and why he left, but that doesn't mean his accomplishments are any less remarkable.

[Avenue Commons]

This thread has so many fallacies it's hard where to know where to start, though the original poster gets it going nicely with an absurd statement that Crean (or anyone else) never thought about leaving or pursuing other jobs.

I have a copy of a letter that Joe Paterno sent out to Yale as he was interested in being their head coach in the 1960's.  All coaches look, you're kidding yourself if they don't.

As for the Wade comments.  Wow.  Wade said point blank why he came to Marquette.  I'd suggest some of you buy the book Tales from the Hardwood...or is Wade lying?   No Crean = No Wade.  PERIOD.  Wade's words, not mine.



The statement on Crean keeping Wade down or we would have gone farther...farther then what...the Final Four?  Teams that rely on one great player are largely failures.  Whether it was the Lakers with Kobe when he didn't share the ball, LSU with Pete, the Bulls with Jordan, etc.  When great players have balanced teams and play with balance, they are lethal.  Otherwise it's too easy on the defense.  MU had 3 NBA players on that team plus a NBA Development League player...Wade along with those players led that team.  If you let Wade go off any more, then somewhere else suffers and they aren't as balanced.

John Thompson....the same guy that lost our first Olympic Gold medal not based on the fix (the 1972 games)...that John Thompson?  The closest 1 vs 16 seed game in NCAA history....that John Thompson?  Thompson was a very nice coach but let's not get overboard.

I love Hayward's comments about how MU could have lost every game in 2003 in the NCAAs.  Yup...I guess he forgot to look at Georgetown's runs...like beating SMU 37 to 36 (even though G'Town had a bye back in those days and SMU had to play 2 days earlier).  Or G'Town struggling with Wyoming in 1982, barely beating Alcorn State 68-63 in the NCAAs, or getting hammered by Memphis in the 2nd round in '83.

And to MOWarrior's excellent point, who the hell is comparing Crean to Thompson anyway?  First of all, shouldn't you wait until Crean is done as well with his career? 

As a little comparison, in Crean's first 9 years = 5 NCAAs, 3 NITs and 1 Final Four.  Thompson's first 9 years = 5 NCAAs, 2 NITs, 0 Final Fours.  Both Crean and Thompson had 1st round NIT home losses in that time period.

Did you know in Thompson's 20 NCAA appearances his team bowed out in the first or 2nd round TWELVE TIMES!  Is this not the same complaint of Crean...bowing out early at an alarming rate?  Including a 5 year stretch after his Final Four run where he couldn't get to the Sweet 16...hmm, sounds familiar.  Oh, and I can just imagine MU being a number one seed under Crean and winning by 1 point against a 16 seed, the love he would have received here?   

Compare Crean to Thompson all you like but do it on an apples to apples basis.  In Thompson's first 9 years vs Crean's...Crean wins.  If you want to compare the overall record, then I'd suggest you wait until Crean is done in 20 or 30 years so that apples to apples can be compared.

Maybe Chico's best post ever. And that's saying a lot.

[BrewCity83]

+1

[PJDunn]

Crean caught lightening in a bottle with Wade.  No one knew what type of a player he was going to develop into when he was at Richards.  Decent D1 prospect - YES, Superstar - NO.

I know that the resident apologist will disagree, but I believe that the best way to evaluate Crean are the post-Wade years.  He had a fantastic platform to recruit from (a final four) and a solid group of players to build upon.  Bottom line is that he was OK.  Lousy in the post-season but did well in a tough BE. 

Let's hope Buzz outperforms his predecessor!

[ChicosBailBonds]

Crean caught lightening in a bottle with Wade.  No one knew what type of a player he was going to develop into when he was at Richards.  Decent D1 prospect - YES, Superstar - NO.

I know that the resident apologist will disagree, but I believe that the best way to evaluate Crean are the post-Wade years.  He had a fantastic platform to recruit from (a final four) and a solid group of players to build upon.  Bottom line is that he was OK.  Lousy in the post-season but did well in a tough BE. 

Let's hope Buzz outperforms his predecessor!

Funny...there's not much I disagree with in that statement with the exception of "decent D1 prospect".  Totally depends who you ask.  Two services had him top 50ish, but many outside of the top 100.  If Buzz can do as well as "ok" that we had in the last 7 years, I'll be a happy camper.  If he exceeds "ok", then even better.  As for the fantastic platform, Buzz has one as good as any that Crean ever had so let's see how he does with it.