Ok seriously WTF is with the polls

[spartan3186]

new poll is out we dropped to #12 in the AP?!?!?! we dominated both opponents since the last poll and we still drop????

EDIT: Upon further review I am a little less pissed. We actually gained 10 votes putting us at our highest vote total of the season. Still irritating but a little less so.

[TallTitan34]

WHAT!

[Murffieus]

Spartan----you call the last 2 games we played "opponents"?

[spartan3186]

Holding steady at 13 in the Coache's gained 2 votes in that one

and yes Murf, they are opponents, they may be cupcakes but we beat Coppin St by 47 and IPFW by 24. I don't want to hear your tempo argument. Tempo gives those teams more posessions as well. We held Coppin St to 42 points... with your fast tempo.

[TallTitan34]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/rankings

Are you for real Murff?  You realize we won by 50.  

[chapman]

Pittsburgh beat Duke on a neutral court.  Tennessee won at Xavier.  They both should jump ahead of us, because their wins were much more impressive than beating Jefferson Grade School by 50 and Washington Middle School by 24.

Texas has won at UCLA and beaten Tennessee.  They shouldn't drop below us for barely losing at MSU.

Georgetown's record isn't any better now.  Still, they had been ranked 5th and they've played 4 road games already.

I think our ranking is right where it should be.

[denverMU]

OK, that was my first response too.  When you analyse the games that were played, I understand why we are 12/13.  Teams #2(Memphis) and #4(G'town) played each other, whoever lost was not going to drop from top 10.  Team #5(Texas) played #10(MSU) and #10 won, they move up and #5 stays in top 10.  Team #9(Pitt) beat #7(Duke), who we lost to, so they both stay above us.  The polls that matter are at the end of year!  Right now it's good to be where we are.

[muhoosier260]

you have to remember that there are other teams out there than just marquette. MU's ranking doesn't just depend on if they win or not. texas, duke and georgetown all lost. those three teams losing will cause some teams farther down the poll to drop.  michigan state deserved to jump up, having beat texas, same with pittsburgh. Tennessee also leapfrogged MU, which is my only complaint.
Yes, MU destroyed two opponents by 40+ twice in a week, however those games undoubtedly were overshadowed by the bigger games involving G'town, Duke, Texas, MSU, etc.

[Henry Sugar]

Polls are useless*







*Except for increasing the amount of media coverage a team receives

[MUCHI814]

Media coverage, I would argue is very important in recruiting and gaining national attention of recruits outside the region.  Therefore I would say rankings are pretty important, although more so in the grand scheme of things

[Murffieus]

Spartan-----sure we held Coppin to 42 points------but we pressured the hell out of marginal guards. Another similarily RANKED team that played a half court game and didn't pressure (low tempo) wouldn't beat them by near as much, but that doesn't mean that they wouldn't line up against us a lot better on a relative basis!

[Pardner]

No biggie as we are just splitting hairs...this early in the season, no writer or coach is going to put three BE teams ahead of most seconds in the other major conferences--it is just a natural regional bias.  This has nothing to do with a "cupcake penalty".  They view MU as third in the BE right now and better than/as good (A&M) as any other third place team in the majors.  Second in the Big 10 and SEC (a traditionally strong b-ball conference).

Random thoughts:  Washington St. is the third best team in the Pac 10, IMO behind UCLA and Arizona.  Not a top NCAA seed.  We are also better than GU (if we can go uptempo) or Pitts (injuries) because of our guard play, but that will unfold in the upcoming weeks.  

[79Warrior]

Holding steady at 13 in the Coache's gained 2 votes in that one

and yes Murf, they are opponents, they may be cupcakes but we beat Coppin St by 47 and IPFW by 24. I don't want to hear your tempo argument. Tempo gives those teams more posessions as well. We held Coppin St to 42 points... with your fast tempo.

Gotta agree with muffin on this. Those types of opponents just do not help out, regardless of how much you beat them by.

[muhoosier260]

Holding steady at 13 in the Coache's gained 2 votes in that one

and yes Murf, they are opponents, they may be cupcakes but we beat Coppin St by 47 and IPFW by 24. I don't want to hear your tempo argument. Tempo gives those teams more posessions as well. We held Coppin St to 42 points... with your fast tempo.

Gotta agree with muffin on this. Those types of opponents just do not help out, regardless of how much you beat them by.

i disagree. they help with situational stuff: inbounds plays, running new sets, etc. these games are a good time to run these kind of new plays, because you can't really recreate a game situation, so might as well do it against those type of opponents to practice before trying it in big game situations for the first time

[Big Papi]

These type of opponents do help us out.  Trend, Hazel and Christopherson all got to play more minutes in a real game that will help them out to ease into some additional playing time.  All of them had various levels of success that they can build upon.  I don't know if they play much if at all against better teams at this point in time.

[Murffieus]

Al used to schedule teams that he figure he'd beat comfortably by (by 20 points or so) who would yet give his team a test. It's hard to find out anything about anything or anybody off a game where you're able to annilate the opposition by 45!

[4everwarriors]

Who gives a rat's ass?

[Secret of the Ouse]

Who gives a rat's ass?

thank you, its only december

[ForstK]

     Hey 4ever, in what class at MU did you learn that to be foul-mouthed was OK, especially on Christmas Eve?

[4everwarriors]

you got a problem with a rodent's behind? I think it was in John Pick's English class when we were discussing "The Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner."
Lighten up bro, even Santa reams out his old lady every once in a while.

[Marquette84]

No biggie as we are just splitting hairs...this early in the season, no writer or coach is going to put three BE teams ahead of most seconds in the other major conferences--it is just a natural regional bias.  This has nothing to do with a "cupcake penalty".  They view MU as third in the BE right now and better than/as good (A&M) as any other third place team in the majors.  Second in the Big 10 and SEC (a traditionally strong b-ball conference).

Random thoughts:  Washington St. is the third best team in the Pac 10, IMO behind UCLA and Arizona.  Not a top NCAA seed.  We are also better than GU (if we can go uptempo) or Pitts (injuries) because of our guard play, but that will unfold in the upcoming weeks.  

Washington State moved up 3 spots to #4 after beating #298 The Citadel and #258 Idaho State.  To have that kind of love!

I understand rewarding Pitt.  But I don't get the reward for beating Xavier--Xavier was an unranked team who barely beat Cincinnati and lost to Arizona State in the last two weeks. 

[wadesworld]

I understand rewarding Pitt.  But I don't get the reward for beating Xavier--Xavier was an unranked team who barely beat Cincinnati and lost to Arizona State in the last two weeks. 

Xavier was ranked #24 at the time and it was played at Xavier.  They are the only team to have beaten Indiana (and yes Eric Gordon was healthy when they played them, and he's, in my opinion, the best freshman, and even player, in the nation) and they are also the only team to have beaten Creighton so far.  I think a win AT a ranked team's home is more impressive than 2 wins at home against terrible teams, no matter how much those wins are by.  I hate Tennessee and don't like Bruce Pearl, but I think they deserve to move up at least 1 spot if the teams above them did as little as we did this week.

[DonCornholeone]

I cannot WAIT to be done with these puffcakes and delve into Big East play... Providence will give us a game.  WVU will be an extremely tough road test, then Seton Hall and Notre Dame at home.  The first 4 against upper-echelon (as of right now) Big East teams.  Our stamina will be tested with the first 3 games happening over a 6 day span, including a trip down to WV in between Providence and Seton Hall.  We should have a real good idea after Notre Dame.

[Final Four or Bust]

I understand rewarding Pitt.  But I don't get the reward for beating Xavier--Xavier was an unranked team who barely beat Cincinnati and lost to Arizona State in the last two weeks. 

Xavier was ranked #24 at the time and it was played at Xavier.  They are the only team to have beaten Indiana (and yes Eric Gordon was healthy when they played them, and he's, in my opinion, the best freshman, and even player, in the nation) and they are also the only team to have beaten Creighton so far.  I think a win AT a ranked team's home is more impressive than 2 wins at home against terrible teams, no matter how much those wins are by.  I hate Tennessee and don't like Bruce Pearl, but I think they deserve to move up at least 1 spot if the teams above them did as little as we did this week.

Agreed -- using that logic we should have had our bump when we beat UW (ranked at the time) at UW.  If I recall, we didn't get any bump for that.  I don't mind not jumping when curshing cupcakes, but I expect movt when we beat supposedly quality teams.

[wadesworld]

Agreed -- using that logic we should have had our bump when we beat UW (ranked at the time) at UW.  If I recall, we didn't get any bump for that.  I don't mind not jumping when curshing cupcakes, but I expect movt when we beat supposedly quality teams.

Yeah I agree, but we actually did get about the same sized bump that Tennessee got from beating Xavier last week, it's just we've been bumped back down because of what teams right behind us our doing to teams above us and us playing nobody worth noting.  After we beat Wisconsin we went from #15 in the ESPN/USA Today Poll (which we were that low because ESPN will do anything to show a "good" game, and since that game was on ESPN2 they had us there which was much too low and UW at 24 which was too high for them just because #15 vs. #24 is much more appealing than #12 vs. unranked) up to #13 and from #11 in the AP Top 25 Poll to #10.  After winning at #24 Xavier, Tennessee STAYED at #12 in the ESPN/USA Today Poll (we were already, and still are, 1 spot behind Tennessee in that poll, at #13) and went from #12 (1 spot behind us) to #11 (we switched places with them) this week.  I'd say it's fair, even though I'd say our win was more impressive at Wisconsin seeing as they had a 28-game home winning streak going into that game and Bo Ryan is something like 97-6 at home or something.  But we actually moved up after our win in Madison than Tennessee did after their win at Xavier.

[The Lens]

No biggie as we are just splitting hairs...this early in the season, no writer or coach is going to put three BE teams ahead of most seconds in the other major conferences--it is just a natural regional bias.  This has nothing to do with a "cupcake penalty".  They view MU as third in the BE right now and better than/as good (A&M) as any other third place team in the majors.  Second in the Big 10 and SEC (a traditionally strong b-ball conference).

Random thoughts:  Washington St. is the third best team in the Pac 10, IMO behind UCLA and Arizona.  Not a top NCAA seed.  We are also better than GU (if we can go uptempo) or Pitts (injuries) because of our guard play, but that will unfold in the upcoming weeks.  

Washington State moved up 3 spots to #4 after beating #298 The Citadel and #258 Idaho State.  To have that kind of love!

I understand rewarding Pitt.  But I don't get the reward for beating Xavier--Xavier was an unranked team who barely beat Cincinnati and lost to Arizona State in the last two weeks. 

SJS...maybe the pollsters don't agree with your spot-on assessment that this is the BEST MU schedule ever.  Oh the humanity.

[Marquette84]

SJS...maybe the pollsters don't agree with your spot-on assessment that this is the BEST MU schedule ever.  Oh the humanity.

Great.  Another potshot from a mental midget.  I guess it really bugs you when I pull out facts that disagree with the kool-aid drinking detractors who have decided that nothing about Marquette can be allowed to pass without being criticized.

If you don't think this is the best home schedule ever, then there's a simple way to engage on this:  name one that was better!  I didn't think this was a such a steep intellectual challenge.   

But since evaluating schedules between different seasons is beyond your intellectual capacity, let me ask you an easier question:

Who's non-conference schedule THIS YEAR is tougher:  Washington State or Marquette? 

Dollars to donuts you'll sulk off and pretend you didn't see the question.

[The Lens]

Donuts...where?! Me like donuts!!

Signed,

Mental Midget

FYI..."midget" is a very demeaning and unacceptable word in today's society.  I would have thought a renaissance man like yourself would know that.

Don't have a media guide in front of me but I know the 93-94 sked was better (IMHO) and I bet I could argue '03 maybe even '04, probably 96 or 97.  You seemed to be really excited about the Big East portion well it's not 1989; Seton Hall is no better than Charlotte.

DePaul was always here
So was South Florida
Rutgers excites the masses as much as Southern Miss
Providence is like SLU
ND is ND
Gtown would be like Cinci of old
Pitt would be like Louisville from past years. 

Oh yeah, I forgot about FLA Golf (sic) State...now we'll fool the commitee, our 5-5 just became 6-4! what late season swoon?

[Marquette84]

Don't have a media guide in front of me but I know the 93-94 sked was better (IMHO) and I bet I could argue '03 maybe even '04, probably 96 or 97.  You seemed to be really excited about the Big East portion well it's not 1989; Seton Hall is no better than Charlotte.

DePaul was always here
So was South Florida
Rutgers excites the masses as much as Southern Miss
Providence is like SLU
ND is ND
Gtown would be like Cinci of old
Pitt would be like Louisville from past years. 

Oh yeah, I forgot about FLA Golf (sic) State...now we'll fool the commitee, our 5-5 just became 6-4! what late season swoon?

Congratulations.  You're the first MU fan I've met who has even attempted to make a team-by-team case that there is no difference between Conference USA and the Big East!  As I recall, the argument was that as an urban Catholic/Jesuit school, we would be a lot more interest in teams like Seton Hall, Georgetown, Providence, Villanova, and St. Johns over basketball programs located in various southern NASCAR cities. 

I cannot even begin to fathom how you put forth an argument based largely on fans being equally enamored with both C-USA teams and the Big East.  Since you cannot possibly be serious about that, I'll assume you made that comparison purely in jest.

Taking the five seasons you listed seriously, I think in one of them you have a possible contender, one close but no cigar, and the other three, no way.

93-94 might be close.  The GMC conference gave us a lot of scheduling flexibility.  Still, #23 SLU and #17 UAB were the only two ranked conference opponents--both Memphis and Cincy were having down years.  We did have #16 Illinois on the non-conference side--the only ranked team there.  We did get more name teams in down years.  Ohio State was still reeling from Randy Ayers.  San Francisco was still rebulding from when they shut down their basketball program.  Big names, but not necessarily good teams.  Other teams look good only in hindsight.  There were complaints then about UWGB--they were a surprise team in the NCAA.  UWM was much weaker back then.

95-96 is clearly a step down--perhaps a slightly better non-conference slate, but a worse conference schedule.  Putting aside your attempt to equate CUSA with the BE, the non-conference slate included UWM, Columbia, UW-GB, Coppin State, LaSalle, Santa Clara, Vermont, and Morgan State.  Not a lot of power there.   Santa Clara was respectable and ranked 22nd, and UWGB made the tournament.  Memphis #9 and Cincy #8 were the two ranked conference opponents.   

96-97 isn't close.  Again, it requires the suspension of common sense that CUSA-and the Big East are equivalent.  In non-conference we had Wisconsin that year with UWM, Prairie View, Princeton, UWGB, Coastal Carolina, App State, LaSalle, and Maine.  Two ranked home opponents all season--#9 Cinci and #15 Louisville.

02-03 is also not close.  Coppin State, UT-SA, Eastern Illinois, App State, Elon, Grambling, Wisconsin and Wake Forest.  Plus a conference slate that included USF, East Carolina, DePaul, SLU, Charlotte, Louisville, UAB and Cincinnati.  Two ranked opponents--Wake Forest and Louisville. 

03-04 is again not close.  Savannah State, Northern Michigan, Valpo, #23 Notre Dame, Grambling, Canisius, Florida A&M, Sacred Heart, plus SLU #10 Cincy, DePaul, TCU, Memphis, Tulane, ECU, #25 Louisville. 



Did you forget to answer the question on the comparison of Washington State and Marquette's non-conference schedules?

[WhereisGeraldPosey]

I come in peace; are we seriously agruing about which home schedule was better?  Some of MU's schedule's in the 70's and 80's had to be pretty decent considering they were an independent (UNC when they were #1 comes to mind in 85 or 86)
How about other topics like (1) Which Herb Harrison sweater was your favorite? (2) Was Anthony Candelino the only player to fall from the track @ the old gym?  (3) Who could outdrink Mike Deane?     

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

SJS...maybe the pollsters don't agree with your spot-on assessment that this is the BEST MU schedule ever.  Oh the humanity.

Great.  Another potshot from a mental midget. 

Hold on a cotton-picking minute! Didn't you tearfully (and inaccurately, mind you) accuse me of attacking you personally yesterday? And here you are calling people names?!?

The humanity!! 

[The Lens]

Don't have a media guide in front of me but I know the 93-94 sked was better (IMHO) and I bet I could argue '03 maybe even '04, probably 96 or 97.  You seemed to be really excited about the Big East portion well it's not 1989; Seton Hall is no better than Charlotte.

DePaul was always here
So was South Florida
Rutgers excites the masses as much as Southern Miss
Providence is like SLU
ND is ND
Gtown would be like Cinci of old
Pitt would be like Louisville from past years. 

Oh yeah, I forgot about FLA Golf (sic) State...now we'll fool the commitee, our 5-5 just became 6-4! what late season swoon?

Congratulations.  You're the first MU fan I've met who has even attempted to make a team-by-team case that there is no difference between Conference USA and the Big East!  As I recall, the argument was that as an urban Catholic/Jesuit school, we would be a lot more interest in teams like Seton Hall, Georgetown, Providence, Villanova, and St. Johns over basketball programs located in various southern NASCAR cities. 

I cannot even begin to fathom how you put forth an argument based largely on fans being equally enamored with both C-USA teams and the Big East.  Since you cannot possibly be serious about that, I'll assume you made that comparison purely in jest.

Taking the five seasons you listed seriously, I think in one of them you have a possible contender, one close but no cigar, and the other three, no way.

93-94 might be close.  The GMC conference gave us a lot of scheduling flexibility.  Still, #23 SLU and #17 UAB were the only two ranked conference opponents--both Memphis and Cincy were having down years.  We did have #16 Illinois on the non-conference side--the only ranked team there.  We did get more name teams in down years.  Ohio State was still reeling from Randy Ayers.  San Francisco was still rebulding from when they shut down their basketball program.  Big names, but not necessarily good teams.  Other teams look good only in hindsight.  There were complaints then about UWGB--they were a surprise team in the NCAA.  UWM was much weaker back then.

95-96 is clearly a step down--perhaps a slightly better non-conference slate, but a worse conference schedule.  Putting aside your attempt to equate CUSA with the BE, the non-conference slate included UWM, Columbia, UW-GB, Coppin State, LaSalle, Santa Clara, Vermont, and Morgan State.  Not a lot of power there.   Santa Clara was respectable and ranked 22nd, and UWGB made the tournament.  Memphis #9 and Cincy #8 were the two ranked conference opponents.   

96-97 isn't close.  Again, it requires the suspension of common sense that CUSA-and the Big East are equivalent.  In non-conference we had Wisconsin that year with UWM, Prairie View, Princeton, UWGB, Coastal Carolina, App State, LaSalle, and Maine.  Two ranked home opponents all season--#9 Cinci and #15 Louisville.

02-03 is also not close.  Coppin State, UT-SA, Eastern Illinois, App State, Elon, Grambling, Wisconsin and Wake Forest.  Plus a conference slate that included USF, East Carolina, DePaul, SLU, Charlotte, Louisville, UAB and Cincinnati.  Two ranked opponents--Wake Forest and Louisville. 

03-04 is again not close.  Savannah State, Northern Michigan, Valpo, #23 Notre Dame, Grambling, Canisius, Florida A&M, Sacred Heart, plus SLU #10 Cincy, DePaul, TCU, Memphis, Tulane, ECU, #25 Louisville. 



Did you forget to answer the question on the comparison of Washington State and Marquette's non-conference schedules?

I'm not really sure what WSU's sked has to do with ours.  But if your so insistent upon including teams once coached by Dick Bennett, how about Wisconsin's...

UGA, @ Texas, Colorado, Valpo, UWGB, UWM, MAR-KETT, @ Duke

PS...where are my donuts!!!!!!

[spartan3186]

Marquette84- I found a season for you with a better home schedule
1963-1964

N Dakota
W Michigan
Iowa State
Georgia Tech
Dartmouth
UWM
#3 Loyola
Xavier
Wisconsin
Bradley
Louisville
#10 DePaul
Air Force
Valpo
#8 Villanova

3 top ten teams.... on the home slate

Or 1976-1977 Ill only give highlights of the home schedule
#17 Louisville, #20 Minnesota, #11 Clemson, Wiscon, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, #19 Notre Dame, Xavier, #15 Detroit

Or 1981-1982
#6 Iowa, Wake Forest, #8 Minnesota, Arizona State, Creighton, #4 DePaul, Virginia Tech, Wisconsin

[Marquette84]

I'm not really sure what WSU's sked has to do with ours.  But if your so insistent upon including teams once coached by Dick Bennett, how about Wisconsin's...

PS...where are my donuts!!!!!!

Well, you did respond a post in which I said this:

"Washington State moved up 3 spots to #4 after beating #298 The Citadel and #258 Idaho State.  To have that kind of love!"

But you deserve donuts--you stepped up to the challenge.

Hope this suffices until we meet in person 

[ChicosBailBonds]

As some have mentioned before, if internet message boards were around back when McGuire coached you would wonder what would be said.  Whether it was a critical T that some argue cost us the championship in 1974, or very soft schedules, or wanting to get out of his contract to coach the Bucks, etc.


Al was a terrific coach and person and I enjoyed profoundly my limited interactions with him, so please I hope no one is thinking I'm attacking the guy.  But rest assured, I have no doubt that many people would have attacked him harshly (actually many did attack him then) and would harp on the silliest of items.

Enjoy the ride.  If the schedule doesn't suit you, then buy tickets to only the games you want, or donate the tickets you don't want, or drive 2 hours south to DePaul.

[Mayor McCheese]

alright, I just watched #1 UNC blow out another cupcake by 40ish... no way they should be #1 after how many cupcakes they play....

who cares, its December, every top 15 school plays usually a cupcake non-conference schedule with 1 or 2 good teams in the mix.. for us it was Bucky and Duke...  sorry that neither were home...

all you guys do is bitch about what games you pay for and HAVE to see... when you should realize that there are plenty of fans who beg to see one game.... like myself, be thankful for having the means and money to get season tickets...

ho ho ho merry christmas and a happy new year... can we please stop the complaining on how many cupcakes we HAVE to watch Marquette beat, lets be thankful that we aren't the cupcake.