There is not an objective observer who could review the last 5 years of MU bball and state that the program isn't in an upward trend. Look where we came from Buzz's last year and wojos first year till today. Look at wins/losses, conference finishes, tourney seeds, roster makeup, etc. By nearly any metric, on an upward trend.
I get that people are upset that it might be non-linear or that it's slow/methodical instead of giant leaps of growth. That would be nice. But it isn't, and, again, overall, the growth is positive.
Some believe they can predict the future and believe wojo isn't the guy to take MU to constant high-level success. And, that's all it is right now, a belief.
For me, until he proves out that belief, he is the answer for MU.
How can he prove it? Again, for me, multiple regressive seasons. Or even multiple plateau seasons. If those situations develop, I'll gladly jump on the "replace wojo" bandwagon.
But until then, I'd like to keep the guy who has the program on the positive (if slightly slow) track. He's earned the right to continue on the trail he's created until he demonstrates negative or no growth.
And, to me, there is never a single game scenario where I would change my stance, even if that is a tourney game.
You must have pretty low standards for the program then..did you know that Wojo is the ONLY coach that has been at MU for 5 years or more, that hasn't won a tournament game. Even Mike Deane won 1. He is also the ONLY Coach in MU history(besides Deane)(that has been there 5 years or more) that hasn't made a Sweet 16 by year 5. Dean was fired about 48 hours after his 5th year. So why should Wojo be let off the hook?? How is that acceptable after year 5. Is that how low the programs standards are now?? If so, that's pathetic.
You must have pretty low standards for the program then..did you know that Wojo is the ONLY coach that has been at MU for 5 years or more, that hasn't won a tournament game. Even Mike Deane won 1. He is also the ONLY Coach in MU history(besides Deane)(that has been there 5 years or more) that hasn't made a Sweet 16 by year 5. Dean was fired about 48 hours after his 5th year. So why should Wojo be let off the hook?? How is that acceptable after year 5. Is that how low the programs standards are now?? If so, that's pathetic.
Guru, I cannot begin to express how little I care about a Round of 64 victory when judging a coach. I mean really. If Wojo had won against South Carolina two years ago or Murray State a few days ago and then lost in the Round of 32 do you really think the program is any better? If no, why the f*ck does it
matter?
Wait........So winning in the tournament doesn’t matter?
Reading your posts, it seems your motivation for firing Wojo is punitive. You want Wojo punished for not living up to your expectations. Thankfully, cooler heads make the decisions. You don't fire a coach to punish them for not meeting expectations (especially not fan expectations). You fire a coach because the best thing for the program is to find a new coach. Firing a guy who just earned the 5th highest seed in the last 40 years of the program is not what is best for the program.
There is not an objective observer who could review the last 5 years of MU bball and state that the program isn't in an upward trend. Look where we came from Buzz's last year and wojos first year till today. Look at wins/losses, conference finishes, tourney seeds, roster makeup, etc. By nearly any metric, on an upward trend.Haha. Trying to rationalize performance, especially recent atrocious performance, with "objective" people on this board is ludicrous
I get that people are upset that it might be non-linear or that it's slow/methodical instead of giant leaps of growth. That would be nice. But it isn't, and, again, overall, the growth is positive.
Some believe they can predict the future and believe wojo isn't the guy to take MU to constant high-level success. And, that's all it is right now, a belief.
For me, until he proves out that belief, he is the answer for MU.
How can he prove it? Again, for me, multiple regressive seasons. Or even multiple plateau seasons. If those situations develop, I'll gladly jump on the "replace wojo" bandwagon.
But until then, I'd like to keep the guy who has the program on the positive (if slightly slow) track. He's earned the right to continue on the trail he's created until he demonstrates negative or no growth.
And, to me, there is never a single game scenario where I would change my stance, even if that is a tourney game.
You must have pretty low standards for the program then..did you know that Wojo is the ONLY coach that has been at MU for 5 years or more, that hasn't won a tournament game. Even Mike Deane won 1. He is also the ONLY Coach in MU history(besides Deane)(that has been there 5 years or more) that hasn't made a Sweet 16 by year 5. Dean was fired about 48 hours after his 5th year. So why should Wojo be let off the hook?? How is that acceptable after year 5. Is that how low the programs standards are now?? If so, that's pathetic.
Guru, I cannot begin to express how little I care about a Round of 64 victory when judging a coach. I mean really. If Wojo had won against South Carolina two years ago or Murray State a few days ago and then lost in the Round of 32 do you really think the program is any better? If no, why the f*ck does it matter?
Reading your posts, it seems your motivation for firing Wojo is punitive. You want Wojo punished for not living up to your expectations. Thankfully, cooler heads make the decisions. You don't fire a coach to punish them for not meeting expectations (especially not fan expectations). You fire a coach because the best thing for the program is to find a new coach. Firing a guy who just earned the 5th highest seed in the last 40 years of the program is not what is best for the program.
Haha. Trying to rationalize performance, especially recent atrocious performance, with "objective" people on this board is ludicrous
Look at the meltdown of the last part of the season in a very down year of the Beast. Objectivity: what about 5 years with 2 one and done in the dance? What about getting our ass kicked repeatedly down the stretch this year? What about the laughing stock game this year in the dance? What about the lack of prep for games, the many turnovers from veteran team? What about the dumb fouls? All of this coming recently, and yet the so called objective Wojo lap dogs keep up the mantra of we are tracking upward and we will be really good next year. And if you bring up this objective analysis, you are called names told you are not a fan because you challenge the spin
HOGWASH!!
Do you really not see how ridiculous a Wojo/Deane comparison is?
Wojo will be back next season and deserves to be. His seat should and will be a little hotter.
Unlike some of the nutjobs that want Markus to go, I hope he stays. But if he does go and Symir reclassifies I'd be extremely curious how Wojo adjusts and the team performs. Could tell us a lot.
Fact is, Wojo lost this team.Hmmm....there are a few references in here that remind one of the old warthog warrior
Anyone who has been the top dog in any reasonably sized organization would see that Marquette was lost for the last half of the season.
Lose to Nova? Identify then implement the fix.
But when the losses continued to pile up it was all on Wojo. The buck landed squarely on his desk.
Unfortunately, Wojo didn't have the talent to correct this season's skid. Nor does he have the intestinal fortitude to address the atmospherics or climate. Leadership is 90% mental. Wojo demonstrated repeatedly that he not only could not turn things around but is too thin-skinned to be a leader at this level.
There is a reason he rode the pine next to K for as long as he did. In the fighter pilot world it's called The Right Stuff. Wojo's Right Stuff canister is pegged hard right.
You could see it on the faces of the crew. Wojo lost them. And for anyone who has ever been asked to lead something you know that is the ultimate failure of command.
Don't talk about trajectory. The real story is how Wojo lost this team in March. I know Spec Op Team Leads who have more leadership talent in their small toe than Wojo possesses in total. Time for Wojo to turn in the keys to the Escalade and slink back to Durham. After 19 years on that bench his butt cheek imprints should still be visible.
Hmmm....there are a few references in here that remind one of the old warthog warrior
MU spends $11.3 million on men's bball. 10th in spending. We are outspent by 1 Bigwhatever school, and it isn't the rodents.
With that kind of spending, for a school our size, should we be happy with this trajectory?
If this is good as it gets, hell no. We should be playing into the second weekend (and beyond) more often than not.
If Wojo isn't that guy, dump him now. If he needs a Jerry Wainwright on the bench (Hank Raymonds) go get him.
If this is as good as it gets, and the BOT is ok with this, I question their stewardship.
For all the Wojo Defenders .. can you just tell us how many more seasons you are willing to go without getting MU to the round of 32?
I've said Wojo has one more season, and then it's time to pull the plug -- especially since he'll have his most talented squad ever -- and the next year will be less so.
What is it for you? 7 seasons? 9 seasons? Never?
(This presumes all the regular stuff, clean program, players and staff are good representatives, yadda yadda.)
Just fill in the blank: Wojo can go ___ seasons without an NCAA win.
ReadingTAMU you hit the nail on the head. After Thursday night part of me wanted Wojo to PAY for putting out a team that embarrassed MU like they did.yourmany of these posts, it seems your motivation for firing Wojo is punitive. You want Wojo punished for not living up to your expectations. Thankfully, cooler heads make the decisions.
Lazer
I have stated many times my belief in having the eye test be part of my evaluation process. This season, I watched more MU ball than I have in the Wojo era, aside from Carlino’s year, and fortunately missed our end of season slide due to travels. From what I saw, it was fun season with some exciting wins. That said, I never saw a performance that I believed the corner had been turned in meaningful way.
Now to my question, in watching the eught games yesterday, do you think we would have beaten any of the teams that won yesterday? From what I saw of our team, I think we would have been knocked around by all eight winners.
Reason I mention this is simple. Having a good record and decent seed can be deceiving. MU was very fortunate to play in a bad BE this year and do not think that can be debated any longer. Records and seeding definitely means something, but being honest about how that came about is equally as important.
I said many times on here that long term success is the goal. Many on here are in belief next year is the year and than a big recruiting class carries us over. I do not see the foundation that has been built for long term success and that is my biggest issue.
Curious on everyone’s thoughts on how MU would have fared in any of the eight games yesterday. Want to add, this is not trying to prove a point, just looking for honest appraisal of where this team sits today.
Lazer
I have stated many times my belief in having the eye test be part of my evaluation process. This season, I watched more MU ball than I have in the Wojo era, aside from Carlino’s year, and fortunately missed our end of season slide due to travels. From what I saw, it was fun season with some exciting wins. That said, I never saw a performance that I believed the corner had been turned in meaningful way.
Now to my question, in watching the eught games yesterday, do you think we would have beaten any of the teams that won yesterday? From what I saw of our team, I think we would have been knocked around by all eight winners.
Reason I mention this is simple. Having a good record and decent seed can be deceiving. MU was very fortunate to play in a bad BE this year and do not think that can be debated any longer. Records and seeding definitely means something, but being honest about how that came about is equally as important.
I said many times on here that long term success is the goal. Many on here are in belief next year is the year and than a big recruiting class carries us over. I do not see the foundation that has been built for long term success and that is my biggest issue.
Curious on everyone’s thoughts on how MU would have fared in any of the eight games yesterday. Want to add, this is not trying to prove a point, just looking for honest appraisal of where this team sits today.
WillieI agree with this, but there are a number of posters here that feel the shareholders are getting the return they expect, and keep preaching that we are getting there, just be patient. After this years meltdown combined with the prior 4 years, just don't get that perspective. Must be that those people have the objectivity cornerstone that us country bumpkins lack.
In my world command is an honor. Live up to the ideal or get the f#ck out of the way.
But from a business perspective, the question must be, "Are the shareholders getting the return they expect?"
In the case of Marquette basketball the answer is a decided no.
real
I was hoping you would post today because I wanted to hear your take on the situation. Your post is pretty much spot on. Once again, it comes down to how they define program success. Judging by many in here, Wojo has had success and enough to believe he will get better. My gut says, BOT thinks Woj has knocked out of the park.
Very level headed post, jesmu. Unfortunately, those against Wojo won't change their minds. MU could have lost in the Sweet 16, and they would say "See, Wojo can't win during the 2nd weekend."
Now, I am not saying Wojo is some fabulous coach. But he's coming off his best season. He's done enough to keep his job and the arrow is still pointing up. I don't know what Wojo's ceiling is but I know we haven't seen it.
I'm willing to see where things go. I won't set any ultimatums for Wojo (as if me doing so would have any affect on anything). If things crash and burn, then I will support a coaching change. But not before.
MU spends $11.3 million on men's bball. 10th in spending. We are outspent by 1 Bigwhatever school, and it isn't the rodents.
With that kind of spending, for a school our size, should we be happy with this trajectory?
If this is good as it gets, hell no. We should be playing into the second weekend (and beyond) more often than not.
If Wojo isn't that guy, dump him now. If he needs a Jerry Wainwright on the bench (Hank Raymonds) go get him one.
If this is as good as it gets, and the BOT is ok with this, I question their stewardship.
Lazer
I have stated many times my belief in having the eye test be part of my evaluation process. This season, I watched more MU ball than I have in the Wojo era, aside from Carlino’s year, and fortunately missed our end of season slide due to travels. From what I saw, it was fun season with some exciting wins. That said, I never saw a performance that I believed the corner had been turned in meaningful way.
Now to my question, in watching the eught games yesterday, do you think we would have beaten any of the teams that won yesterday? From what I saw of our team, I think we would have been knocked around by all eight winners.
Reason I mention this is simple. Having a good record and decent seed can be deceiving. MU was very fortunate to play in a bad BE this year and do not think that can be debated any longer. Records and seeding definitely means something, but being honest about how that came about is equally as important.
I said many times on here that long term success is the goal. Many on here are in belief next year is the year and than a big recruiting class carries us over. I do not see the foundation that has been built for long term success and that is my biggest issue.
Curious on everyone’s thoughts on how MU would have fared in any of the eight games yesterday. Want to add, this is not trying to prove a point, just looking for honest appraisal of where this team sits today.
Howard
I am asking if anyone thinks MU’scteam this year is on the same class as the eight winners yesterday. Pick the best game MU played this year and then answer the question. I do not think at our best we would beat those teams on a regular basis, by that I mean 50% of the time.
He is coming off his best season record-wise yes. Here is the problem. The Big East was a hot steaming pile of garbage this year, and we didn't win it. Every team from the BEAST in the NCAA tourney won't be playing in the second weekend. We can throw some lipstick on this pig if we want, but post season results matter.
2nd place in the worst field the BEAST has had in a long while
Bounced before the championship game of the BEAST tourney
Absolutely destroyed on the national stage by a mid-major
Now, if you're okay with spending like a top 10 team, and getting results that place MU in the 25-30 range of teams, that great. I'm glad you're happy with being a lovable loser. Wojo is going to get his next year to prove that he isn't the dolt that he clearly is, and then he should be gone if we don't take the BEAST and make it to the 2nd week of the tournament.
Anything else, and we are accepting mediocrity as a program.
The program is trending upwards from where Wojo started. Objectively, that is a fact.
Do you get rid of the him with a positive trendline?
IMO, unless the programs dips or plateaus under his leadership, you keep giving him the reins.
Also, I wonder the national reputation that may be developed if administration fires a coach with a positive trend.
There's a big difference between the program Wojo inherited and the team he inherited. He inherited a sub-par team but a very solid program. Referring to the team in 2014 as indicative of the MU program doesn't work for me. The program at the point was strong despite one less than stellar team.
Like I said before, the pro-Wojo camp downplays the MU program on purpose to make Wojo seem more accomplished. And that's a big reason why I have a hard time buying those arguments.
MU spends $11.3 million on men's bball. 10th in spending. We are outspent by 1 Bigwhatever school, and it isn't the rodents.
With that kind of spending, for a school our size, should we be happy with this trajectory?
If this is good as it gets, hell no. We should be playing into the second weekend (and beyond) more often than not.
If Wojo isn't that guy, dump him now. If he needs a Jerry Wainwright on the bench (Hank Raymonds) go get him one.
If this is as good as it gets, and the BOT is ok with this, I question their stewardship.
There's a big difference between the program Wojo inherited and the team he inherited. He inherited a sub-par team but a very solid program. Referring to the team in 2014 as indicative of the MU program doesn't work for me. The program at the point was strong despite one less than stellar team.
Like I said before, the pro-Wojo camp downplays the MU program on purpose to make Wojo seem more accomplished. And that's a big reason why I have a hard time buying those arguments.
There's a big difference between the program Wojo inherited and the team he inherited. He inherited a sub-par team but a very solid program. Referring to the team in 2014 as indicative of the MU program doesn't work for me. The program at the point was strong despite one less than stellar team.
Like I said before, the pro-Wojo camp downplays the MU program on purpose to make Wojo seem more accomplished. And that's a big reason why I have a hard time buying those arguments.
He earned the 5th highest seed in 40 years, and did what with it exactly?? Getting the 5th highest seed in 40 years is 100% meaningless, if you don't do a thing with it. I mean do you get to hang a banner for something like that?? Do you not even understand that Coaching at any level from college and above is about results, and winning?? Any Coach will tell you that.
Would getting to the Round of 32 mean anything?? Maybe not on the surface, but it at least shows people you can get to the tournament and win when you do get there. Look how much Buzz won when he got to the tournament. I think the biggest problem is now that the administration doesn't really give a F, how good the program is. They really don't. They don't care if they win at the highest level or not. Bring in good kids, that stay out of trouble, produce mid major results on the court..they are fine with that.
2 tournament appearances in 5 years..don't give me this "look what he started with" nonsense. Even if you cut him some slack for the first four years...this was year 5...he had the best team he has ever had..and it's not close. What did that result in?? A monumental collapse at the end of the year, no BE title(when all they had to do was win 1 game out of 4), no Big East tournament title, and a loss to a mid major as a higher seed. The administration is okay with that now?? Apparently so, and that's really really pathetic with the resources they put into the BB program. Nothing like acting mid major ish...at Marquette, the MINIMUM expectation should be going to the tourney every single year..bare minimum. Apparently it's an "honor" now to be chosen for the NCAA tournament. Is this Wofford or something?? There's a place where they should celebrate getting an invite every so often. And...they won a game too! As a higher seed. Imagine that!
You don't think it wouldn't be good for the program?? I assume because you THINK there would be mass transfers?? Well, Sam wouldn't leave(he's a Senior that would make ZERO sense), which means Joey would stay(he'd lose a year of eligibility if he left), and Markus will be back(I'm pretty sure). Keep those 3 and bring in someone that can actually do something with that kind of talent. Someone that can make in game adjustments. That has a bag of tricks for when it's needed. And most of all, someone that doesn't say "well examine that and see if we can figure out what happened", in regards to the late season collapse. That's the one that pushed me over the edge and told me he was absolutely in over his head. You wait until the end of the year to "figure it out"?
No, you damn well should have figured it out and corrected it after the second straight loss. That's what a good Coach does. Yet we saw NOTHING different during that stretch. Not even something as small as a starting line up change. Nothing like showing you have no idea what happened, or how to fix it and not even trying something(anything) to help the team snap out of it.
This is reasonable, but also goes both ways. Some here fail to recognize the challenges of the MU program. Some of these people are stuck in 1977, but more of them view Buzz's three-year run - which if, we're being honest, saw a lot of breaks fall our way - not as a high-water mark, but as a baseline.
That Davidson NCAA games is one of the highlights of my NCAA fandom ... but it's very interesting to think of how much the Buzz narrative changes if Davidson were able to complete a simple pass in the last 10 seconds of that game. Then he's the guy who lost a 3 vs 14 game, and was thoroughly outcoached in doing so.
Guru, I have bigger goals than you do I guess. I don't give a flying f*ck about Round of 32 appearances or even Sweet 16s. No one remembers the teams that made the Sweet 16 and lost a year later. I've seen five Sweet 16s in my life, I'm over them. I want Final Fours and National Championships. Not only that, I want a program where Final Fours and National Championship expectations are the norm. You know what programs make it there? The ones who consistently earn high seeds and have had one coach who has built a program up year after year. You know what programs don't make it there? The ones who churn through coaches every couple years because their fans are whining that they didn't win enough first round NCAA games. The administration knows this and that is what they are trying to build at Marquette.Well, perhaps the administration has the wrong guy.
There's a big difference between the program Wojo inherited and the team he inherited. He inherited a sub-par team but a very solid program. Referring to the team in 2014 as indicative of the MU program doesn't work for me. The program at the point was strong despite one less than stellar team.
Like I said before, the pro-Wojo camp downplays the MU program on purpose to make Wojo seem more accomplished. And that's a big reason why I have a hard time buying those arguments.
Well, perhaps the administration has the wrong guy.
I would say our two best wins were home vs K- State and Buffalo. Howard was hot in both so its very hard to judge. Of the teams that played yesterday I could only see us beating Florida. Everyone else would have out physicaled us.
Perhaps.He does not have near a positive trend as you imagine.
But don't you want to give him the chance to build on his already positive trend to find out?
Is it possible that we need to spend that much to get even to this level? Not saying that Wojo is the best coach in America (he's not). But, unless we get a top 10/5/3 coach, perhaps a school like Marquette is required to commit this many resources to get to the level currently.
There's a big difference between the program Wojo inherited and the team he inherited. He inherited a sub-par team but a very solid program. Referring to the team in 2014 as indicative of the MU program doesn't work for me. The program at the point was strong despite one less than stellar team.
Like I said before, the pro-Wojo camp downplays the MU program on purpose to make Wojo seem more accomplished. And that's a big reason why I have a hard time buying those arguments.
You know what programs don't make it there? The ones who churn through coaches every couple years because their fans are whining that they didn't win enough first round NCAA games. The administration knows this and that is what they are trying to build at Marquette.
He does not have near a positive trend as you imagine.
It also amazes me how quickly we value how strong a program is on sometimes one seconds of an outcome. If Davidson didn’t shat their pants, that would have been us as a 3 seed knocked out in the first round...literally seconds away from changing that entire mantra. Which is why Obsessing over what happens for two weeks in March can be dangerous. Davidson makes their free throws, or doesn’t piss themselves, we have the worst loss in our history in the NCAAs from a seeding perspective and there goes your claim. That’s how fragile, knife’s edge this stuff can be.
He does not have near a positive trend as you imagine.
So you admit it is positive. And you don't want to see how high that trend can go?Reading is fundamental. "Near a positive trend" as I stated does not mean as near a positive trend which you implied. He has not shown a positive trend as evidenced by the late season meltdown including a severe ass kicking in the dsnce.
Reading is fundamental. "Near a positive trend" as I stated does not mean as near a positive trend which you implied. He has not shown a positive trend as evidenced by the late season meltdown including a severe ass kicking in the dsnce.
Not defending, but I remember Davidson making almost all their free throws except one, just Blue & Wilson raining tres.
This is reasonable, but also goes both ways. Some here fail to recognize the challenges of the MU program. Some of these people are stuck in 1977, but more of them view Buzz's three-year run - which if, we're being honest, saw a lot of breaks fall our way - not as a high-water mark, but as a baseline.
That Davidson NCAA games is one of the highlights of my NCAA fandom ... but it's very interesting to think of how much the Buzz narrative changes if Davidson were able to complete a simple pass in the last 10 seconds of that game. Then he's the guy who lost a 3 vs 14 game, and was thoroughly outcoached in doing so.
Why are peeps so willin' ta extend another year. Watt's gonna change? Rip da bandage off and let's get started, hey?
So you admit it is positive. And you don't want to see how high that trend can go?
My apologies for misinterpreting.Did not say that. In my opinion the last 7 games of this season, with the alleged talent we have, demonstrates that the team under Wojo fell flat on their ass, and spinning that we are trending positively is not realistic. It is spin.
So, in your opinion, this team and the results are no better after this season than they were after wojos first season?
I know others will disagree, but to me the horrible collapse rendered this season a huge missed opportunity. Nothing is given in the future.
Reading is fundamental. "Near a positive trend" as I stated does not mean as near a positive trend which you implied. He has not shown a positive trend as evidenced by the late season meltdown including a severe ass kicking in the dsnce.
This. Wojo deserves another three to four years to see if we can get where we want to be.
Yeah, and if Louisville doesn’t miss a wide open layup at the end of regulation, Creighton doesn’t crap their pants on that inbounds play, and Nova actually executes their last possession in MKE, we’d have three more losses this season. And if Uncle Joe had lady parts, he’d be Aunt Josephine.
I agree, but Buzz and his teams took advantage of the breaks. Wojo has not. Programs and coaches don't get endless opportunities.
I know others will disagree, but to me the horrible collapse rendered this season a huge missed opportunity. Nothing is given in the future.
If I were to plot out Wojo's tenure from Day 1 there would be upward slope until this past February when the trend is now decidedly negative.
So, the trend line is negative. This fact is indisputable.
If I were to plot out Wojo's tenure from Day 1 there would be upward slope until this past February when the trend is now decidedly negative.
So, the trend line is negative. This fact is indisputable.
I agree, but Buzz and his teams took advantage of the breaks. Wojo has not. Programs and coaches don't get endless opportunities.
I know others will disagree, but to me the horrible collapse rendered this season a huge missed opportunity. Nothing is given in the future.
I think everyone agrees with this.
Not ready to do that yet. It will just put us back starting all over again in my view.
If I were to plot out Wojo's tenure from Day 1 there would be upward slope until this past February when the trend is now decidedly negative.
So, the trend line is negative. This fact is indisputable.
Why are peeps so willin' ta extend another year. Watt's gonna change? Rip da bandage off and let's get started, hey?
Who was the last coach to get fired after leading a team to a top 5 seed with no off the court issues?
Bob Huggins. He was canned by the new UC Prez who really didn't like the man. There were no crimes committed. There were no NCAA violations. She didn't like Huggins' drinking and the fact that his guys left early to play pro ball. Personality conflict.
Frank Martin. Did he really 'choose to leave' Manhattan, KS?
Larry Brown. He "left" KU after winning a Natty. He landed with the Spurs. But he didn't want to leave KU.
The Panty Dropper can fill in the details.
Bob Huggins. He was canned by the new UC Prez who really didn't like the man. There were no crimes committed. There were no NCAA violations. She didn't like Huggins' drinking and the fact that his guys left early to play pro ball. Personality conflict.
Frank Martin. Did he really 'choose to leave' Manhattan, KS?
Larry Brown. He "left" KU after winning a Natty. He landed with the Spurs. But he didn't want to leave KU.
The Panty Dropper can fill in the details.
Bob Huggins. He was canned by the new UC Prez who really didn't like the man. There were no crimes committed. There were no NCAA violations. She didn't like Huggins' drinking and the fact that his guys left early to play pro ball. Personality conflict.
Frank Martin. Did he really 'choose to leave' Manhattan, KS?
I recognize the program Wojo inherited. Here's the reality, for the past 40 years, getting a 5 seed and losing in the first round has been an above average season for Marquette. We are not a program that regularly grabs high seeds and makes deep tournament runs. Buzz had an improbable sweet 16 run as a team that barely made the tournament, grabbed two three seeds and made two second weekend appearances and then nosedived. Unfortunate truth is that we had an upward trend and then it crashed to Earth during Buzz' last year and departure. That is the program Wojo inherited and need to build back up.I know we got a 5 seed, but that was because the NCAA really has unusual reasoning to say the least this year. By any objective computer measure (including the NCAA's own NET ranking) we deserved a 7 seed or worse. We got the 5 because we were 10-5 in Quad 1 games and had a pretty good road/neutral record (8-6). Swap our splits with Georgetown and Creighton to home wins instead of road wins, and we have a team that is now 8-7 in Quad 1 games and 6-8 in road/neutral games and are probably a 7 seed despite having an identical season. Also it appears that the old late season record test they used to use is out the window as well (although I agree with that, as I believe the NCAA tournament entry and seeding should be based on the totally of your resume without favoring later games over earlier ones) or we may have done even worse using old criteria.
Davidson was 14 of 22 from the free throw line, 64%. As a team they shot 80% that year, they choked hard that game from the line...it was due to our free throw defense apparently. They were the number one free throw shooting team in the country that year.In order to capitalize on that gift we had to hit three consecutive late threes and score inbounding the ball with less than 10 seconds on the clock to win the game. They missed one FT and turned the ball over once (we were pressing, which is trying to get turnovers, BTW) during the end game. Sure they weren't perfect down the stretch, but we were, and that is the point. We played fantastically well at the end of that game, which is what "clutch" teams do.
And they threw the ball away to win the game. It was a gift.
We got damn lucky, which is exactly what Buzzard said. On that day, it was better be lucky than good...thankfully.
In order to capitalize on that gift we had to hit three consecutive late threes and score inbounding the ball with less than 10 seconds on the clock to win the game. They missed one FT and turned the ball over once (we were pressing, which is trying to get turnovers, BTW) during the end game. Sure they weren't perfect down the stretch, but we were, and that is the point. We played fantastically well at the end of that game, which is what "clutch" teams do.
I know we got a 5 seed, but that was because the NCAA really has unusual reasoning to say the least this year. By any objective computer measure (including the NCAA's own NET ranking) we deserved a 7 seed or worse. We got the 5 because we were 10-5 in Quad 1 games and had a pretty good road/neutral record (8-6). Swap our splits with Georgetown and Creighton to home wins instead of road wins, and we have a team that is now 8-7 in Quad 1 games and 6-8 in road/neutral games and are probably a 7 seed despite having an identical season. Also it appears that the old late season record test they used to use is out the window as well (although I agree with that, as I believe the NCAA tournament entry and seeding should be based on the totally of your resume without favoring later games over earlier ones) or we may have done even worse using old criteria.
Does anybody here really think we were the 17th best team in the country on selection Sunday?
I don't know where a 7 seed would rank in the last 40 years, but I expect it would still be really high up there.
17th best team in the country? No. 17th best resume? Yes. To me that either means the team was pretty good or the coach got them to punch above their weight class.I don't think it was the 17th best resume for reasons mentioned in the earlier post. We got wins against teams in the lower portion of the top 75 on the road (Butler, Xavier, Creighton and Georgetown) that made our resume look better than it was. Then we lost to a couple of them at home and they didn't count as Quad 1 losses at home that made our Quad 1 record look better than it really was. I think the NCAA's criteria was different this year than usual and that it went in our favor.
17th best team in the country? No. 17th best resume? Yes. To me that either means the team was pretty good or the coach got them to punch above their weight class.
If I were to plot out Wojo's tenure from Day 1 there would be upward slope until this past February when the trend is now decidedly negative.
So, the trend line is negative. This fact is indisputable.
Judging from all these blowouts...it looks like most of CBB is down this season. Lots of upsets and unexpected blow outs. Very fine lines between good and bad.
I think the gap between the top 4 seed lines and the rest is pretty big.
Jon is correct. A Linear regression line can be used to determine the slope of a line. The trend line is negative.
If a stock is rising in value from Dec to Feb and rolls over late Feb and Mar, would you buy or sell the stock in question?
This is season long trend from year to year. In this case, trend line down is a good thing because it is tied to the rating of the team. Better than Buzz's last year by a bunch, slightly worse than Buzz's second to last year.
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lHo4MakQ6QU/XIaq7rABL1I/AAAAAAAAAVM/hXd-ozRmgjYH7DoAQQufACNifBOOpG5MgCLcBGAs/s1600/marquette%2Bratings.jpg)
Talk trends all you want...let's talk about the on court results...like the commercial says "just ok...is NOT ok". Or at least it shouldn't be. I think for the admin it is though.
That data is based 100% on the ON COURT results.
Fine, but what i'm telling you is...the 5 years Wojo has been here have NOT by any stretch met MY expectations. I have season tickets(15 years now), I donate every year to the B&G fund..I expect more. That's my right.
Trend lines must be drawn w.r.t., you’re using a 6 year time frame that includes one year of buzz data. Your trend line is just BS!
This is season long trend from year to year. In this case, trend line down is a good thing because it is tied to the rating of the team. Better than Buzz's last year by a bunch, slightly worse than Buzz's second to last year.
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lHo4MakQ6QU/XIaq7rABL1I/AAAAAAAAAVM/hXd-ozRmgjYH7DoAQQufACNifBOOpG5MgCLcBGAs/s1600/marquette%2Bratings.jpg)
W.r.t trend lines, data used must be actual data NOT data from talking heads!
True, I don’t like your data! Your data is just BS, ratings from talking heads!
LOL.
Who is the "talking head" that represents the NCAA Net Rankings? BPI talking head? RPI talking head? This should be good.
Here's the trend line for only Wojo, still trending the right way. Just facts. Trend line even better. Sorry the data doesn't fit your agenda. Apologize when you are ready.
Note: 2019 are not final numbers as tournament still playing. I will post final numbers when the tournament is done.
(http://i67.tinypic.com/2wn68f9.jpg)
They are ONLY facts if YOU want them to be..You are using predictive measures to support your argument. That's bunk. How about you throw those out the window and look at REAL results...
Year 1- Losing record, no tournament
Year 2- No tournament with an NBA draft pick on the roster
Year 3- NCAA's as a 10 seed...got blasted by 20
Year 4- NIT(anytime you go from NCAA to NIT it's a step back)
Year 5- NCAA's as a 5 seed...blasted by 20 to a mid major. When you factor in a 1-6 end to a season, at the time the slide started were no worse than a 3 seed, needed 1 win to win a BE title(with 4 remaining), that is NOT a positive trend line. Your sgarain etc, tell us NOTHING. They are simply numbers. Look at the real results and what has occurred and the trend line is NOT good, especially the way they ended the season...if that isn't trending down..I don't know what is.
Since you want to site numbers(which you seem to love so much), tell me..what were the odds that with 4 games to go, and only needing to win one of those, with two of them at home, that a team(any team) would NOT get at least one of those wins?? I know the answer and i'm pretty sure you do to. If you don't understand how absolutely astronomical the odds were against them not winning at least one of those games to win a ttile, then there is nothing I can say. If you think accomplishing an incredibly rare feat like they did with that, is "trending in the right direction". Then all hope for you is lost...For real.
Uh. Even by your own "data", that's 100% a positive trend.
Okay so they went from NIT to the NCAAS as a 5 seed...you say that's good..you are welcome to that. HOWEVER when you consider the fact that on February 27th, they were absolutely no worse then a 3 seed and finished with a 1-6 ending and DROPPED all the way down to a 5 seed, how is that a positive trend?? I will tell you what..I will say this...from the end of last season until February 27th this year...they were definitely trending up...but from February 27th until the end of this season, they weren't just trending down, they were trending down off a cliff.
Boston
Agreed. What does that say about the data trend? It was a crap year in college ball, outside of 8-12 teams, and we won a bunch of close games against similar talent levels. Not a bad thing, just reality.
Yup. Reality. Just like the positive trend is reality.
jesmu
The data is not lying, just not telling the whole story. College basketball was down this year. Big gap between the really good teams and everyone else. That is not MU’s fault and they did well against similar teams. I am not disputing facts, they are correct.
There are plenty of examples of data being misleading. Golf equipment has changed the game, steroids changed baseball, new D rules in NFL and list goes on. My only point, you still have to use your head in digesting data.
I will concede that MU was on the upper end of about 40 teams that were light years behind the good teams. My concession is based off record, which cannot be disputed by me.
1-6 to end the season from February 27th on and failing to win one of 4 games(two at home), and NOT winning a Big east title when it was essentially a done deal based on probability/odds is a positive trend?? If you were okay with how the season ended, so be it...I would think that would be weird, but whatever.
NIT to NCAA 5 seed. Positive trend. Keep deflecting though
He earned the 5th highest seed in 40 years, and did what with it exactly?? Getting the 5th highest seed in 40 years is 100% meaningless, if you don't do a thing with it. I mean do you get to hang a banner for something like that?? Do you not even understand that Coaching at any level from college and above is about results, and winning?? Any Coach will tell you that.
Would getting to the Round of 32 mean anything?? Maybe not on the surface, but it at least shows people you can get to the tournament and win when you do get there. Look how much Buzz won when he got to the tournament. I think the biggest problem is now that the administration doesn't really give a F, how good the program is. They really don't. They don't care if they win at the highest level or not. Bring in good kids, that stay out of trouble, produce mid major results on the court..they are fine with that.
2 tournament appearances in 5 years..don't give me this "look what he started with" nonsense. Even if you cut him some slack for the first four years...this was year 5...he had the best team he has ever had..and it's not close. What did that result in?? A monumental collapse at the end of the year, no BE title(when all they had to do was win 1 game out of 4), no Big East tournament title, and a loss to a mid major as a higher seed. The administration is okay with that now?? Apparently so, and that's really really pathetic with the resources they put into the BB program. Nothing like acting mid major ish...at Marquette, the MINIMUM expectation should be going to the tourney every single year..bare minimum. Apparently it's an "honor" now to be chosen for the NCAA tournament. Is this Wofford or something?? There's a place where they should celebrate getting an invite every so often. And...they won a game too! As a higher seed. Imagine that!
You don't think it wouldn't be good for the program?? I assume because you THINK there would be mass transfers?? Well, Sam wouldn't leave(he's a Senior that would make ZERO sense), which means Joey would stay(he'd lose a year of eligibility if he left), and Markus will be back(I'm pretty sure). Keep those 3 and bring in someone that can actually do something with that kind of talent. Someone that can make in game adjustments. That has a bag of tricks for when it's needed. And most of all, someone that doesn't say "well examine that and see if we can figure out what happened", in regards to the late season collapse. That's the one that pushed me over the edge and told me he was absolutely in over his head. You wait until the end of the year to "figure it out"?
No, you damn well should have figured it out and corrected it after the second straight loss. That's what a good Coach does. Yet we saw NOTHING different during that stretch. Not even something as small as a starting line up change. Nothing like showing you have no idea what happened, or how to fix it and not even trying something(anything) to help the team snap out of it.
Chico, you don’t know sh!t about data science! You must use true team data NOT some talking head projections!
Again, you don’t know sh!t about data science! Dumb as a box of rocks!
They are ONLY facts if YOU want them to be..You are using predictive measures to support your argument. That's bunk. How about you throw those out the window and look at REAL results...
Year 1- Losing record, no tournament
Year 2- No tournament with an NBA draft pick on the roster
Year 3- NCAA's as a 10 seed...got blasted by 20
Year 4- NIT(anytime you go from NCAA to NIT it's a step back)
Year 5- NCAA's as a 5 seed...blasted by 20 to a mid major. When you factor in a 1-6 end to a season, at the time the slide started were no worse than a 3 seed, needed 1 win to win a BE title(with 4 remaining), that is NOT a positive trend line. Your sgarain etc, tell us NOTHING. They are simply numbers. Look at the real results and what has occurred and the trend line is NOT good, especially the way they ended the season...if that isn't trending down..I don't know what is.
Since you want to site numbers(which you seem to love so much), tell me..what were the odds that with 4 games to go, and only needing to win one of those, with two of them at home, that a team(any team) would NOT get at least one of those wins?? I know the answer and i'm pretty sure you do to. If you don't understand how absolutely astronomical the odds were against them not winning at least one of those games to win a ttile, then there is nothing I can say. If you think accomplishing an incredibly rare feat like they did with that, is "trending in the right direction". Then all hope for you is lost...For real.
Fxxk the data. Watch other teams play and see how we stack up. Frankly, I did and we don’t. In reality, we played a sh1t schedule and the data looks good. Don’t blame MU on sh1t schedule, it just ended up played 30 games against teams were not elite this year.
Boston
Agreed. What does that say about the data trend? It was a crap year in college ball, outside of 8-12 teams, and we won a bunch of close games against similar talent levels. Not a bad thing, just reality.
Still waiting for your data and still waiting for why you are calling it talking head data since that is what the NCAA has been on record using to help sort teams out. But please, continue with your enlightenment.
1-6 to end the season from February 27th on and failing to win one of 4 games(two at home), and NOT winning a Big east title when it was essentially a done deal based on probability/odds is a positive trend?? If you were okay with how the season ended, so be it...I would think that would be weird, but whatever.
You keep moving the goalposts to get an answer you want.
On one hand you complain about what has he done in five YEARS, but then you switch to what did he do the last three weeks...I hope you see how dishonest that is in your analysis. No one is going to say the end of the season was good or positive, but that hasn’t been what we’ve been talking about.
You want to claim the last 3 weeks sucked, I don’t think you will find a man, woman, gender neutral, alien, mushroom, blade of grass, or vat of Crisco that would disagree with you.
NCAA 3 seed to NCAA 5 seed in final three weeks of the season, and then ass kicking in the tournament by a 12 seed. Negative trend.
This is a topic, I thought a bunch about the last couple of days. I kind of view it like WAR in baseball. I still think Wojo is a positive WAR (a random replacement coach, maybe a mid major would be 0 WAR). But he's on the lower scale, a 1.0, where Beilein is a 8 WAR and Coach K is 10 WAR. Can he get better, into the upper echelon, like the other coaches? I'm not sure. The end of the season, especially the blow out and the end of the @ Seton Hall games were weird.
I also think about something I read on Kirk Ferentz last fall. Basically, the Iowa fanbase and administration are okay with their program when they are good most years, outstanding every once in awhile and terrible every once in a while. Could they do better? Maybe. But the alternative is programs, like Nebraska, Illinois, Minnesota who cycle through coaches as soon as they sniff they might not be good.
Oh. I understand the game now.
I'm gonna go through every NCAA team and point out the negative trend in their season that demonstrates how bad the coach is.
In case you missed the topic of the thread, it's about season over season success.
Oh. I understand the game now.
I'm gonna go through every NCAA team and point out the negative trend in their season that demonstrates how bad the coach is.
In case you missed the topic of the thread, it's about season over season success.
If MU basketball was trending upward and Wojo was fulfilling all expectations then this board would not be in such turmoil!
I know what it's about..and the ONLY reason you Wojo slurpers can say the program is trending positively is because he went to the NCAA'S this year after coming off an NIT season..stop and think about that..the ONLY way it's possible to have an upward trend is to go up from where you were..in this instance..it was NCAA(upward from prior seasons), NIT(DOWN) from previous season..and now NCAA(up from previous season)...
Well..see..here's the problem with your "upward trajectory"..it's 3 letters..NIT...that's sandwiched in between two NCAA'S..and that's the ONLY reason it's on an upward trend now..my point being..you replace those three letters..NIT with 4 letters..NCAA like it should be and there wouldn't be an upward trend for you Wojo slurpers to keep pointing to.
Here is an upward trend..as an example..
Year 1..NCAA appearance
Year 2..NCAA appearance..advance to round of 32.
Year 3..NCAA appearance..Sweet 16
Year 4..NCAA Elite 8
Year 5..NCAA Final Four
That's an upward trend..and how it should look..2 ncaa blowout losses sandwiched around an NIT by any measure is at best stagnant. At a program like Saint Louis or Old Dominion for example im sure theyd be extactic with the "upward" trend that MU is on..that should NEVER be ok at Marquette however.
You must be new here.
You must be new here.
Two trips to the NCAA and both trips ended with a 19 point loss. This is NOT trending upward, it is One-And-Done!
I understand time frames and trends very well, I use them every day. My problem is the data. You’re not using true team data for each game. You are using talking heads predictions/ratings, that is data of opinions not true data.
BTW, I will tell you just as I told Chico. I don’t answer to you and NOT intimidated by you. Enjoy your evening. :)
I don't think it was the 17th best resume for reasons mentioned in the earlier post. We got wins against teams in the lower portion of the top 75 on the road (Butler, Xavier, Creighton and Georgetown) that made our resume look better than it was. Then we lost to a couple of them at home and they didn't count as Quad 1 losses at home that made our Quad 1 record look better than it really was. I think the NCAA's criteria was different this year than usual and that it went in our favor.
But I get what you're saying.
You aren’t the boss of me
Lol. Holy crap that is awesome
Two trips to the NCAA and both trips ended with a 19 point loss! One-And-Done Wojo! You’re wasting your time trying to convince me that Wojo is a good coach.
Considering the inconsistent track record of Duke assistants (see list shown below) Marquette gambled on an assistant with no experience as a head coach. Under Wojo's leadership Marquette basketball is now in complete turmoil! I suppose you could say that "you've got to know when to hold 'em and know when to fold 'em" and it is now time to send Wojo back to Duke and hire an experienced basketball coach!
Well you posted this in your first post on Feb 1, 2015 , so at least you're consistent.
Of course, he's made 2 NCAAs and had a fairly successful NIT since then. But f*ck that, DATA! Or, you just want to be right.
Hah.
I don’t have the right to post my opinion?
I know what it's about..and the ONLY reason you Wojo slurpers can say the program is trending positively is because he went to the NCAA'S this year after coming off an NIT season..stop and think about that..the ONLY way it's possible to have an upward trend is to go up from where you were..in this instance..it was NCAA(upward from prior seasons), NIT(DOWN) from previous season..and now NCAA(up from previous season)...
Well..see..here's the problem with your "upward trajectory"..it's 3 letters..NIT...that's sandwiched in between two NCAA'S..and that's the ONLY reason it's on an upward trend now..my point being..you replace those three letters..NIT with 4 letters..NCAA like it should be and there wouldn't be an upward trend for you Wojo slurpers to keep pointing to.
Here is an upward trend..as an example..
Year 1..NCAA appearance
Year 2..NCAA appearance..advance to round of 32.
Year 3..NCAA appearance..Sweet 16
Year 4..NCAA Elite 8
Year 5..NCAA Final Four
That's an upward trend..and how it should look..2 ncaa blowout losses sandwiched around an NIT by any measure is at best stagnant. At a program like Saint Louis or Old Dominion for example im sure theyd be extactic with the "upward" trend that MU is on..that should NEVER be ok at Marquette however.
A point is made earlier on the thread which is something I've been preaching for years. Whether or not you think the program has been making incremental improvements over the past 5 years, it is completely without argument that we are NOT getting value for money with this trajectory.
Of the 17 programs that spend $10 million or more on MBB, Mizzou, Illinois and TCU are the only other teams without a NCAA win in the past 5 years, and TCU at least has a NIT championship to show for the spend. (G-town is also yikes - 17 million and no NCAA in the past 4).
At least we're still a profitable program - but how long can that last without success? I think we might as well see what this team can do next year (but if we wouldn't lose anyone by firing Wojo and promoting Stan I'd give that a shot). But with no NCAA win next year we need to change course.
To repeat Topper's question (which I didn't see any answer to) how many years without a NCAA win is ok? Chico, Tower?
Duke $19,507,686.00 $34,398,285.00 ACC
Kentucky $19,180,059.00 $27,965,227.00 SEC
Georgetown $17,702,377.00 $17,702,377.00 Big East
Louisville $17,065,364.00 $43,960,492.00 ACC
TCU $15,168,356.00 $12,889,761.00 Big 12
Syracuse $13,260,311.00 $29,322,084.00 ACC
Indiana $12,855,019.00 $24,560,829.00 Big Ten
Marquette $11,803,633.00 $19,327,629.00 Big East
Texas $11,430,591.00 $17,567,914.00 Big 12
Kansas $11,126,047.00 $18,266,319.00 Big 12
Villanova $11,120,378.00 $11,120,378.00 Big East
Florida State $11,029,101.00 $13,252,028.00 ACC
Michigan State $10,975,215.00 $17,548,611.00 Big Ten
Illinois $10,404,451.00 $15,827,099.00 Big Ten
North Carolina $10,293,415.00 $21,408,475.00 ACC
Washington $10,154,262.00 $9,683,868.00 Pac-12
Missouri $10,065,698.00 $10,065,698.00 SEC
https://www.midmajormadness.com/2018/6/11/17441968/ncaa-revenue-expense-statistics-college-basketball-2016-gonzaga-mid-major
As has been explained many times before, the reason we are top 10 in expense is because we rent out our arena from an NBA team. The only other team on that list that has that expense is Georgetown. I believe all the others own their arena. If you take that expense out and replaced it with the normal arena costs that all other schools have to pay we wouldn't be top 10. I'm not sure where we would be, but it would be a very pedestrian number for a high major.
And we are getting bang for our buck. Basketball at the end of the day is a marketing tool for the university and it still has a positive ROI. That's not close to changing. You ask how long can we keep that up? Well we just put up our best numbers in years so I guess its being kept up just fine.
As to your question, you are asking the wrong question. Tournament wins is a meaningless stat. Goal is to build a winning program. Best sign of that is consistently earning high seeds in the tournament. You continue to do that and the tournament wins will come. Is there a theoretical line of "wow we've gotten a high seed X numbers of years in a row but have still haven't won an NCAA tournament game"? Probably, I have no idea what that line is. Luckily, I don't think any coach has ever tested that line. The closest example I could think of is Mick Cronin who has gotten to the tournament 9 years in a row with mostly high seeds but has only made it to the second weekend once.
As has been explained many times before, the reason we are top 10 in expense is because we rent out our arena from an NBA team. The only other team on that list that has that expense is Georgetown. I believe all the others own their arena. If you take that expense out and replaced it with the normal arena costs that all other schools have to pay we wouldn't be top 10. I'm not sure where we would be, but it would be a very pedestrian number for a high major.
And we are getting bang for our buck. Basketball at the end of the day is a marketing tool for the university and it still has a positive ROI. That's not close to changing. You ask how long can we keep that up? Well we just put up our best numbers in years so I guess its being kept up just fine.
As to your question, you are asking the wrong question. Tournament wins is a meaningless stat. Goal is to build a winning program. Best sign of that is consistently earning high seeds in the tournament. You continue to do that and the tournament wins will come. Is there a theoretical line of "wow we've gotten a high seed X numbers of years in a row but have still haven't won an NCAA tournament game"? Probably, I have no idea what that line is. Luckily, I don't think any coach has ever tested that line. The closest example I could think of is Mick Cronin who has gotten to the tournament 9 years in a row with mostly high seeds but has only made it to the second weekend once.
A point is made earlier on the thread which is something I've been preaching for years. Whether or not you think the program has been making incremental improvements over the past 5 years, it is completely without argument that we are NOT getting value for money with this trajectory.
Of the 17 programs that spend $10 million or more on MBB, Mizzou, Illinois and TCU are the only other teams without a NCAA win in the past 5 years, and TCU at least has a NIT championship to show for the spend. (G-town is also yikes - 17 million and no NCAA in the past 4).
At least we're still a profitable program - but how long can that last without success? I think we might as well see what this team can do next year (but if we wouldn't lose anyone by firing Wojo and promoting Stan I'd give that a shot). But with no NCAA win next year we need to change course.
To repeat Topper's question (which I didn't see any answer to) how many years without a NCAA win is ok? Chico, Tower?
Duke $19,507,686.00 $34,398,285.00 ACC
Kentucky $19,180,059.00 $27,965,227.00 SEC
Georgetown $17,702,377.00 $17,702,377.00 Big East
Louisville $17,065,364.00 $43,960,492.00 ACC
TCU $15,168,356.00 $12,889,761.00 Big 12
Syracuse $13,260,311.00 $29,322,084.00 ACC
Indiana $12,855,019.00 $24,560,829.00 Big Ten
Marquette $11,803,633.00 $19,327,629.00 Big East
Texas $11,430,591.00 $17,567,914.00 Big 12
Kansas $11,126,047.00 $18,266,319.00 Big 12
Villanova $11,120,378.00 $11,120,378.00 Big East
Florida State $11,029,101.00 $13,252,028.00 ACC
Michigan State $10,975,215.00 $17,548,611.00 Big Ten
Illinois $10,404,451.00 $15,827,099.00 Big Ten
North Carolina $10,293,415.00 $21,408,475.00 ACC
Washington $10,154,262.00 $9,683,868.00 Pac-12
Missouri $10,065,698.00 $10,065,698.00 SEC
https://www.midmajormadness.com/2018/6/11/17441968/ncaa-revenue-expense-statistics-college-basketball-2016-gonzaga-mid-major
Cheeks
I do not think you have brought your best stuff of late. You can spin, compare and share data all day long and that is fine with me. Fact is, this team/program is light years away from competing day in and day out with the winning teams the last two days.
Sure, we could spring and upset or two, we could have done that any game the last 3-4 years. Big frickin deal, we can spring an occasional upset. If that floats your boat, there are plenty of MU faithful on here that would join that cruise.
How many times are these numbers going to be used incorrectly?
In terms of ROI, how was attendance this year? How was viewership ratings of MU games? How is recruiting going? How was exposure where MU was receiving national attention? All of that has value and in some cases hard dollars, which ROIs are measured.
Our ROI this year was very good. This notion that it was bad this year is laughable. Off the hook laughable. MU sold more tickets, received more media impressions, etc, etc, in years. Now, if attendance suffers down the road, ticket sales are off, etc, you may have a point....but from a pure ROI perspective, this has been the best ROI we have had in 7 years at least.
I posted this in another thread -- but have been following this one as well, and wanted to share my thoughts.
I think everyone here wants the same thing. Namely, Marquette competing for and winning a second national title.
So is Wojo the right coach to get us there?
What winning coaches look like
NCAA appearances and high seeds aren't the end goal. But they are a key measure of progress and success along the way. It's worth considering that only 8 current Division I head coaches have won a national title:
Mike Krzyzewski (1991, 1992, 2001, 2010, 2015)
Roy Williams (2005, 2009, 2017)
Jay Wright (2016, 2018)
Jim Boeheim (2003)
John Calipari (2012)
Tom Izzo (2000)
Bill Self (2008)
Tubby Smith (1998)
On average, they won their first national championship in their 16th season as a head coach. It took Boeheim 27 years. Wright 22 years. Calipari 20 years. And all of them except Williams have had first-round exits from the NCAA tournament. Jay Wright, in fact, has lost in the first round 5 times. What they had in common up to that point was making the tournament often, and earning high seeds.
What winning programs look like
Here are the 11 Division I programs that have earned NCAA bids each of the past 3 seasons, while averaging better than a 5 seed:
North Carolina - 2017 (1 seed), 2018 (2), 2019 (1)
Duke - 2017 (2), 2018 (2), 2019 (1)
Gonzaga - 2017 (1), 2018 (4), 2019 (1)
Kansas - 2017 (1), 2018 (1), 2019 (4)
Virginia - 2017 (5), 2018 (1), 2019 (1)
Villanova - 2017 (1), 2018 (1), 2019 (6)
Kentucky - 2017 (2), 2018 (5), 2019 (2)
Purdue - 2017 (4), 2018 (2), 2019 (3)
Michigan - 2017 (7), 2018 (3), 2019 (2)
Florida St. - 2017 (3), 2018 (9), 2019 (4)
Michigan St. - 2017 (9), 2018 (3), 2019 (2)
Notice anything? Williams at NC, Coach K at Duke, Self at Kansas, Wright at Nova, Calipari at UK, Izzo at MSU. Six of the 8 coaches who've won a national title are on this list. What that tells me is NCAA appearances and seeding count. (And that Mark Few and Tony Bennett are the most likely candidates to celebrate their first national title).
What's that got to do with Wojo?
Obviously, MU isn't there yet. And honestly, chances are Wojo won't be a Half of Fame coach like Coach K. However...
When you look at the records of successful coaches early in their careers -- not just one individual coach, but a broad cross-spectrum of them -- Wojo's first 5 seasons compare favorably. You might believe he should have accomplished more. But history suggests that not many coaches do.
To the argument about winning zero NCAA games, I call bulls**t. Hugely disappointing? Yes. Meaningful? Not likely. No statistician would call 2 NCAA games anything close to a reliable data set. It's 2 data points. How can you judge anything based on that, compared to a season's worth of games? With almost all of this team coming back, the bad loss to Murray State could motivate them even more for next season.
I believe Marquette isn't far from joining the ranks of those 11 programs listed above. Like many here, I have big concerns about how the season ended. But MU has still appeared in 2 of the past 3 NCAA tournaments and earned a better seed each time. If that progress continues next season (winning the Big East and earning a 3 seed or better), I'll feel even more confident that we're on the right path.
I think the return should be based on post season success, not financials.
I think that gets the root of the problem here.
So we agree on the positive trend over the 5 years. Great! Now let's see how high it can go!
As has been explained many times before, the reason we are top 10 in expense is because we rent out our arena from an NBA team. The only other team on that list that has that expense is Georgetown. I believe all the others own their arena. If you take that expense out and replaced it with the normal arena costs that all other schools have to pay we wouldn't be top 10. I'm not sure where we would be, but it would be a very pedestrian number for a high major.
And we are getting bang for our buck. Basketball at the end of the day is a marketing tool for the university and it still has a positive ROI. That's not close to changing. You ask how long can we keep that up? Well we just put up our best numbers in years so I guess its being kept up just fine.
As to your question, you are asking the wrong question. Tournament wins is a meaningless stat. Goal is to build a winning program. Best sign of that is consistently earning high seeds in the tournament. You continue to do that and the tournament wins will come. Is there a theoretical line of "wow we've gotten a high seed X numbers of years in a row but have still haven't won an NCAA tournament game"? Probably, I have no idea what that line is. Luckily, I don't think any coach has ever tested that line. The closest example I could think of is Mick Cronin who has gotten to the tournament 9 years in a row with mostly high seeds but has only made it to the second weekend once.
So what happens when the powers that be at MU worry about selling tickets at Fiserv?? What happens when season ticket holders start to cancel?? You keep going back to this earning a high seed in the tournament. Sure, they were a 5..but have you forgotten that they were a minimum of a 3 before the epic, unprecedented collapse at the end of the season?? It's important to understand how they got to a 5...and where they were before that. It doesn't look that impressive then, all things considered. To me a 5 isn't that high of a seed. a 1,2 or 3...maybe a 4 is a high seed. Look at what's left in the tournament...all the 1,2,3's are still there, 3 of the 4's are still there...one 5 and a 12.
LOL you are a tool...I love how every response you have given me, you conveniently "skim" over the most important parts of my post...Did you see what I posted is a positive trend?? THAT is a positive trend, and how it should be.
So what happens when the powers that be at MU worry about selling tickets at Fiserv?? What happens when season ticket holders start to cancel?? You keep going back to this earning a high seed in the tournament. Sure, they were a 5..but have you forgotten that they were a minimum of a 3 before the epic, unprecedented collapse at the end of the season?? It's important to understand how they got to a 5...and where they were before that. It doesn't look that impressive then, all things considered. To me a 5 isn't that high of a seed. a 1,2 or 3...maybe a 4 is a high seed. Look at what's left in the tournament...all the 1,2,3's are still there, 3 of the 4's are still there...one 5 and a 12.
If that happens, it will be addressed. So far that isn't the case....right?
How about this, what happens if we win the Big East next year and put another good product on the floor....then what?
Then guru will b*tch that we didn't win by enough.
Nope...all I care about is that they win, don't care about margin other than, it's much easier on my ohysical well being if the ywin comfortably. :D
Doubtful. They won this season. A lot. Enough to finish 2nd in conference and get a 5 seed in the tourney.
Yet all you've done is whine since the season ended.
So, somehow I don't believe you now.
Whined plenty DURING the season, quiet when we won, however.
Doubtful. They won this season. A lot. Enough to finish 2nd in conference and get a 5 seed in the tourney.
Yet all you've done is whine since the season ended.
So, somehow I don't believe you now.
They didn't win enough for MY liking. I'm entitled to that. Just because a lot of people here have low expectations for where they THINK MU can get to, doesn't mean we all have to share that same opinion.
I needed something...anything to wipe away the bad taste I had in my mouth from the epic collapse and failure to win the BE, a win of a 12 seeded Mid Major would have gone a long way...but alas.
We don’t have low expectations, we have realistic expectations.
Mine are realistic..MU isnt some mid major like I think a lot of this fan base thinks they are..you think Loyola fans ever thought they'd see a Final Four? Or Butler fans? Let alone back to back final fours. Hell id bet anything Villanova fans never dreamed of winning 2 National Championships in 3 years let alone 1. I guarantee you Wisconsin fans never thought they'd see a Final Four..they played for a Championship.
And you know what Marquette has on every single one of those schools? A much more storied tradition and history..a budget that not many others can speak of..they are FAR AND away on a level that those others could only dream of having from a tradition stand point..so i get tired of people saying MU cant be amongst the elite in CBB regularly..they can be...they CAN win a National Champ again..if not multiple..i wish the administration felt that way however..Marquette is SUPPOSED to be a basketball power..an elite..i wish people involved that make decisions realized that and acted as such.
Mine are realistic..MU isnt some mid major like I think a lot of this fan base thinks they are..you think Loyola fans ever thought they'd see a Final Four? Or Butler fans? Let alone back to back final fours. Hell id bet anything Villanova fans never dreamed of winning 2 National Championships in 3 years let alone 1. I guarantee you Wisconsin fans never thought they'd see a Final Four..they played for a Championship.
And you know what Marquette has on every single one of those schools? A much more storied tradition and history..a budget that not many others can speak of..they are FAR AND away on a level that those others could only dream of having from a tradition stand point..so i get tired of people saying MU cant be amongst the elite in CBB regularly..they can be...they CAN win a National Champ again..if not multiple..i wish the administration felt that way however..Marquette is SUPPOSED to be a basketball power..an elite..i wish people involved that make decisions realized that and acted as such.
Mine are realistic..MU isnt some mid major like I think a lot of this fan base thinks they are..you think Loyola fans ever thought they'd see a Final Four? Or Butler fans? Let alone back to back final fours. Hell id bet anything Villanova fans never dreamed of winning 2 National Championships in 3 years let alone 1. I guarantee you Wisconsin fans never thought they'd see a Final Four..they played for a Championship.
And you know what Marquette has on every single one of those schools? A much more storied tradition and history..a budget that not many others can speak of..they are FAR AND away on a level that those others could only dream of having from a tradition stand point..so i get tired of people saying MU cant be amongst the elite in CBB regularly..they can be...they CAN win a National Champ again..if not multiple..i wish the administration felt that way however..Marquette is SUPPOSED to be a basketball power..an elite..i wish people involved that make decisions realized that and acted as such.
Mine are realistic..MU isnt some mid major like I think a lot of this fan base thinks they are..you think Loyola fans ever thought they'd see a Final Four? Or Butler fans? Let alone back to back final fours. Hell id bet anything Villanova fans never dreamed of winning 2 National Championships in 3 years let alone 1. I guarantee you Wisconsin fans never thought they'd see a Final Four..they played for a Championship.
And you know what Marquette has on every single one of those schools? A much more storied tradition and history..a budget that not many others can speak of..they are FAR AND away on a level that those others could only dream of having from a tradition stand point..so i get tired of people saying MU cant be amongst the elite in CBB regularly..they can be...they CAN win a National Champ again..if not multiple..i wish the administration felt that way however..Marquette is SUPPOSED to be a basketball power..an elite..i wish people involved that make decisions realized that and acted as such.
Mine are realistic..MU isnt some mid major like I think a lot of this fan base thinks they are..you think Loyola fans ever thought they'd see a Final Four? Or Butler fans? Let alone back to back final fours. Hell id bet anything Villanova fans never dreamed of winning 2 National Championships in 3 years let alone 1. I guarantee you Wisconsin fans never thought they'd see a Final Four..they played for a Championship.
And you know what Marquette has on every single one of those schools? A much more storied tradition and history..a budget that not many others can speak of..they are FAR AND away on a level that those others could only dream of having from a tradition stand point..so i get tired of people saying MU cant be amongst the elite in CBB regularly..they can be...they CAN win a National Champ again..if not multiple..i wish the administration felt that way however..Marquette is SUPPOSED to be a basketball power..an elite..i wish people involved that make decisions realized that and acted as such.
I think the Villanova program trumps ours, no shame in that I think they are top 10 all time. I think we are more like top 20 top 25.
Unfortunately, the reason we are in the top 20-25 of programs is because of what we did over 40 years ago. We were a blue blood and a series of bad hires and decisions slowly led us to the crater that was the Dukiet years. KO started the resurgence, Deane took us a step back, Crean rebounded from Deane's mistakes, Buzz built on what Crean started until he didn't. Now Wojo is tasked with bringing us back to the level we were at during Buzz' peak. I think we are getting there. Once he does, he will need to build on it.
Programs can tumble very quickly. The fall from Blue Blood to Dukiet only took 12 years. The closest we've been to blue blood status since was Buzz' 4th and 5th years. It took us 24 years and 4 coaches to get to that point and frankly Buzz' peak was nothing compared to what we were. Building a program takes time, patience, and features many missteps along the way. One day, we are going to find the coach that views Marquette as a destination job, sees that being a blue blood is possible here, and has the chops to pull it off. I don't know if Wojo is that guy or if he's just another Crean, a guy who can rebuild a program from a temporary setback but take it no higher. If that's the case, he will eventually be let go or encouraged to move on and we will need to find a coach like Buzz, who can take what a previous coach did and build on it...but hopefully with more stability and permanency.
Don't set your goals too small. Knocking off a 12 seed in the first round is meaningless when it comes to building a program. A final four is just a fart in the wind if not supported by consistent success. You mention Loyola and Butler. Would you really be satisfied as a fan if the peak of your program's success was an appearance or two and you never reached those heights again? I want blue blood status again, not a couple of Round of 32 and Sweet 16 appearances.
It sounds like you want blue blood status back too. That's good. That's what the administration wants as well. We should not be content until we are there (though let's be real, we won't be, we will always want more). But to get there, you need to play the long game and see the big picture. Don't throw away progress because you want to throw a temper tanturm over not winning enough first round tournament games for your liking. It's a long road, do you have the stomach for it?
Prior to our slide and novas jump our traditions were a wash at best or slight edge to them. Know your history before jumping to conclusions.
I was referring more towards UW, Loyola and Butler. I know about Nova's tradition.
Mine are realistic..MU isnt some mid major like I think a lot of this fan base thinks they are
Many folks on here, myself included, very much enjoyed the Buzz style of play, type of player and the on court success they had, but MU admin/BOT did not have the stomach to continue in the manner Buzz was building his program. I have said many times over, that is their right, I get it an do not completely disagree with their thought process. Possibly the complete change of program style has taken away folks wanting to stomach a long overhaul.
Years ago I said MU should have made it perfectly clear they type of program they were going to run and expectations of that program. Basically, they continue to sell the premise they want to be elite. That is great, how long did they that would take? Has that time table changed? What do they consider elite? I think MU continues to live with their head in the sand hoping the alumni will continue to have the stomach for waiting for success.
Lastly, I do not think there is a consensus of what an elite program looks like on here. MU should provide an outline on how they determine program success and share with the faithful that support the program. At that point, some might have the stomach for it and some might not.
What's tradition doing for Indiana and Connecticut these days? If tradition was all-important, the Hoosiers and Huskies would still be dominating -- instead of missing 3 straight NCAA tournaments. Neither program has yet to find a head coach who can build on what Bobby Knight and Jim Calhoun accomplished.
sanctions sanctions sanctions sanctions sanctions sanctions
I think the Villanova program trumps ours, no shame in that I think they are top 10 all time. I think we are more like top 20 top 25.
Unfortunately, the reason we are in the top 20-25 of programs is because of what we did over 40 years ago. We were a blue blood and a series of bad hires and decisions slowly led us to the crater that was the Dukiet years. KO started the resurgence, Deane took us a step back, Crean rebounded from Deane's mistakes, Buzz built on what Crean started until he didn't. Now Wojo is tasked with bringing us back to the level we were at during Buzz' peak. I think we are getting there. Once he does, he will need to build on it.
Programs can tumble very quickly. The fall from Blue Blood to Dukiet only took 12 years. The closest we've been to blue blood status since was Buzz' 4th and 5th years. It took us 24 years and 4 coaches to get to that point and frankly Buzz' peak was nothing compared to what we were. Building a program takes time, patience, and features many missteps along the way. One day, we are going to find the coach that views Marquette as a destination job, sees that being a blue blood is possible here, and has the chops to pull it off. I don't know if Wojo is that guy or if he's just another Crean, a guy who can rebuild a program from a temporary setback but take it no higher. If that's the case, he will eventually be let go or encouraged to move on and we will need to find a coach like Buzz, who can take what a previous coach did and build on it...but hopefully with more stability and permanency.
Don't set your goals too small. Knocking off a 12 seed in the first round is meaningless when it comes to building a program. A final four is just a fart in the wind if not supported by consistent success. You mention Loyola and Butler. Would you really be satisfied as a fan if the peak of your program's success was an appearance or two and you never reached those heights again? I want blue blood status again, not a couple of Round of 32 and Sweet 16 appearances.
It sounds like you want blue blood status back too. That's good. That's what the administration wants as well. We should not be content until we are there (though let's be real, we won't be, we will always want more). But to get there, you need to play the long game and see the big picture. Don't throw away progress because you want to throw a temper tanturm over not winning enough first round tournament games for your liking. It's a long road, do you have the stomach for it?
Indiana has been off probation for eight years. Can't really use the "sanctions" excuse for them anymore.
I mean, Oregon currently is on probation and they're in better shape than IU. Louisville made the tournament this year while on probation. Syracuse made a Final Four while on probation a few years ago.
I agree its probably getting a little stale, but the post-Sampson penalties absolutely crippled that program. In addition to the probate, it was the loss of scholarships IIRC. Crean was running walkons out there for a number of years. If you threw those at a top program like Duke or UNC, they would take a decade to recover too. (Heck, we may get the chance to see how all that plays out with KU).
Things definitely got ugly for a couple of years, but after all that happened, Crean was able to bring in some top-ranked kids like Watford, Zeller, Farrell, Vonleh, Blackmon, etc. His 2012 and 13 classes were ranked 7th and 4th in the country, respectively.
Love love love this post. TAMU, you are on fire.
I think the Villanova program trumps ours, no shame in that I think they are top 10 all time. I think we are more like top 20 top 25.
Unfortunately, the reason we are in the top 20-25 of programs is because of what we did over 40 years ago. We were a blue blood and a series of bad hires and decisions slowly led us to the crater that was the Dukiet years. KO started the resurgence, Deane took us a step back, Crean rebounded from Deane's mistakes, Buzz built on what Crean started until he didn't. Now Wojo is tasked with bringing us back to the level we were at during Buzz' peak. I think we are getting there. Once he does, he will need to build on it.
Programs can tumble very quickly. The fall from Blue Blood to Dukiet only took 12 years. The closest we've been to blue blood status since was Buzz' 4th and 5th years. It took us 24 years and 4 coaches to get to that point and frankly Buzz' peak was nothing compared to what we were. Building a program takes time, patience, and features many missteps along the way. One day, we are going to find the coach that views Marquette as a destination job, sees that being a blue blood is possible here, and has the chops to pull it off. I don't know if Wojo is that guy or if he's just another Crean, a guy who can rebuild a program from a temporary setback but take it no higher. If that's the case, he will eventually be let go or encouraged to move on and we will need to find a coach like Buzz, who can take what a previous coach did and build on it...but hopefully with more stability and permanency.
Don't set your goals too small. Knocking off a 12 seed in the first round is meaningless when it comes to building a program. A final four is just a fart in the wind if not supported by consistent success. You mention Loyola and Butler. Would you really be satisfied as a fan if the peak of your program's success was an appearance or two and you never reached those heights again? I want blue blood status again, not a couple of Round of 32 and Sweet 16 appearances.
It sounds like you want blue blood status back too. That's good. That's what the administration wants as well. We should not be content until we are there (though let's be real, we won't be, we will always want more). But to get there, you need to play the long game and see the big picture. Don't throw away progress because you want to throw a temper tanturm over not winning enough first round tournament games for your liking. It's a long road, do you have the stomach for it?
Dodds, why aren't you on your own board?
Is Kentucky elite? They have won ONE title the last 20 years...but you think we can win a couple.
Is Kansas elite? They have won ONE title the last 30 years. Is Indiana? One title 30+ years.
Is UCLA elite? They have won ONE title the last 40+ years.
I think my case is rested. I’m being pragmatic and anything can happen
UCLA last won in 1994 with Jim Harrick
Dodds, why aren't you on your own board?
Years ago I said MU should have made it perfectly clear they type of program they were going to run and expectations of that program. Basically, they continue to sell the premise they want to be elite. That is great, how long did they that would take? Has that time table changed? What do they consider elite? I think MU continues to live with their head in the sand hoping the alumni will continue to have the stomach for waiting for success.
Lastly, I do not think there is a consensus of what an elite program looks like on here. MU should provide an outline on how they determine program success and share with the faithful that support the program. At that point, some might have the stomach for it and some might not.
Years ago I said MU should have made it perfectly clear they type of program they were going to run and expectations of that program. Basically, they continue to sell the premise they want to be elite. That is great, how long did they that would take? Has that time table changed? What do they consider elite? I think MU continues to live with their head in the sand hoping the alumni will continue to have the stomach for waiting for success.
Lastly, I do not think there is a consensus of what an elite program looks like on here. MU should provide an outline on how they determine program success and share with the faithful that support the program. At that point, some might have the stomach for it and some might not.
I don't understand this perspective. Why does different people's definitions of elite matter? The goal is to build the program, not be elite. Because if you continue to build the program, eventually the program will be elite by whatever definition you choose to use. There will never be a point where anyone associated with the program, not the coaches, not the players, not the BOT, not the administration, not the donors, not the fans, where any of them will stop and say "You know what, this is enough. We don't need to win more."
If Wojo gets us back to Buzz level success, we will want more. If he gets us above Buzz level success, we will want more. If he gets us to the level of programs like Louisville/Arizona/Syracuse/etc, we will want to be blue bloods. If he gets us to blue blood status, we will want to pass the other blue bloods to become the top blue blood. If he gets us to the the top program in college basketball, we will want to extend our lead.
The goal of a coach is to grow the program. Leave it better than the way they found it. If at any point the program starts to regress or plateaus for a significant amount of time (and the amount of acceptable time grows as each new level is achieved), the coach should be fired so a new one who can get it to the next level can take over.
Probably semantics or interpretation, but what does ELITE mean?
I believe MU sells themselves as a product that can compete with anyone on a given day, which has been proven. By compete, I mean win. Compete for conference titles, go to the post season, etc. When you say ELITE, I think top 5 or 6 programs which in all honesty I do not see MU pitching themselves as. It may be a fine line, but I believe we strive to be an excellent program worthy of any fan base who will bring significant resources to bear (facilities, training, academic support, competition, etc), but I don't see where we have said we are the next Duke, UNC, etc in that positioning. My opinion only.
They haven't said it...but that is EXACTLY what they should be striving for...no less. That to me is the definition of Elite.
vogue65I agree with this analysis
Big fan of yours, but Al did not leave because he could no longer get recruits. At the time of his departure he had a slew of AA's waiting to join the party. They would come from Mt. Vernon, Jersey City and Chicago. If Al had stayed, the next years would have been his deepest pool of talent.
Again, I enjoy reading your comments.
We should. Now tell me the programs that have gotten to that level in the shortest amount of time.
Many folks on here, myself included, very much enjoyed the Buzz style of play, type of player and the on court success they had, but MU admin/BOT did not have the stomach to continue in the manner Buzz was building his program. I have said many times over, that is their right, I get it an do not completely disagree with their thought process. Possibly the complete change of program style has taken away folks wanting to stomach a long overhaul.
Years ago I said MU should have made it perfectly clear they type of program they were going to run and expectations of that program. Basically, they continue to sell the premise they want to be elite. That is great, how long did they that would take? Has that time table changed? What do they consider elite? I think MU continues to live with their head in the sand hoping the alumni will continue to have the stomach for waiting for success.
Lastly, I do not think there is a consensus of what an elite program looks like on here. MU should provide an outline on how they determine program success and share with the faithful that support the program. At that point, some might have the stomach for it and some might not.
I agree with this analysis
I would argue had they not made life so uncomfortable for Buzz, that he felt the need to leave...MU would be there already...That's what pisses me off more than anything...they were knocking on the door...and the admin slammed it shut.Mr. Guru:
They haven't said it...but that is EXACTLY what they should be striving for...no less. That to me is the definition of Elite.
I would argue had they not made life so uncomfortable for Buzz, that he felt the need to leave...MU would be there already...That's what pisses me off more than anything...they were knocking on the door...and the admin slammed it shut.
I would argue had they not made life so uncomfortable for Buzz, that he felt the need to leave...MU would be there already...That's what pisses me off more than anything...they were knocking on the door...and the admin slammed it shut.
Guru, we were nowhere near the levels of Duke, UNC, etc when Buzz left. Even after his Elite Eight year we weren't close. You know what Duke fans call a three year stretch of 11 seed, 3 seed, 3 seed? A really bad three years. All it took for Buzz was one surprise draft decision from Vander and it sent us tumbling from "on our way to elite" to "needing to rebuild." The Dukes of the world deal with 3-5 NBA draft decisions a year and they simply reload. We weren't anywhere close to being able to do that.
I posted about this on the "alternate history" page but I don't think Buzz staying would have made 14-15 go that much better. It likely would have been another year out of the postseason. Now I think hanging onto Shayok and Hill plus Buzz being a better coach would have led to a quicker rebuild, but I don't think we would have been even close to sniffing blue blood status. That is built over time.
guru, quick question:
What was your opinion when MU hired Buzz as coach? Were you thrilled about it?
Vander's decision killed that team you're right, but I do believe had all these restrictions not been placed on Buzz, he'd have had them right back in the tourney the following year, had he still been allowed to go after ANY Juco he wanted. That's a way of "reloading". Even if you say we weren't close(which is probably true), they were heading that direction..the talk lately here has been "trend lines"...well if you throw out Buzz's last year, the three seasons prior were "sweet 16, sweet 16, Elite 8. If that isn't a positive trend I don't know what is?? I truly believe if Buzz were still at MU and he had no restrictions as far as the type of kids he could bring in..MU would have been in a final Four again recently. The man could coach, and his teams had an identity, something Wojo's teams lack. WQhat is their identity anyway?? Does anyone know??When the new President and AD came in the bloom came off the Rose with Buzz. The final straw was the Williams stabbing Buzz in the back after the WV win and dancing to Country Roads (something that would have celebrated in the media in Al's day). Everything went down hill internally from there. That last season Buzz was just mailing it in. So unfortunately, the divorce had to happen as Buzz couldn't be the Buzz that was successful . It was in the best interest of both parties to move on. Administration hired exactly the type of guy they wanted and we have seen now for the past five years how that played out for MU and Buzz.
Vander's decision killed that team you're right, but I do believe had all these restrictions not been placed on Buzz, he'd have had them right back in the tourney the following year, had he still been allowed to go after ANY Juco he wanted. That's a way of "reloading". Even if you say we weren't close(which is probably true), they were heading that direction..the talk lately here has been "trend lines"...well if you throw out Buzz's last year, the three seasons prior were "sweet 16, sweet 16, Elite 8. If that isn't a positive trend I don't know what is?? I truly believe if Buzz were still at MU and he had no restrictions as far as the type of kids he could bring in..MU would have been in a final Four again recently. The man could coach, and his teams had an identity, something Wojo's teams lack. WQhat is their identity anyway?? Does anyone know??
Buzz' trend line was great until his last year. That's why other than Chicos and Willie, no one was on the fire Buzz train. I have yet to see anyone claim that Wojo is a better coach than Buzz
This is some Jussie level bullshyte right here Show me one post where I said Buzz should be fired. I didn't. Use the search function
This is more like what I said
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=25197.msg280687#msg280687
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=14181.msg127421#msg127421
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=13376.msg486194#msg486194
Weird. I just assumed with the outrage about his off the court behaviors that you would have nobly been calling for him to be let go.
Can we please bring back Floorslapper/Ners
Weird. I just assumed with the outrage about his off the court behaviors that you would have nobly been calling for him to be let go.
amazingly hypocritical isn't it TAMU? here's a guy that continually take shots at him.... and anyone that tries to defend him he tries to rip to shreds and yet he pulls up an old thread... trying to show and basically call out ppl that wanted Buzz fired and he leads the charge in ripping the guy to shreads..smhNot at all, you are missing the point.
So...let's get this straight...you assault his character repeatedly, say you didn't want him gone for X's and O's stuff...and DIDN'T want him fired... Yet...I didn't want him fired, or to leave, and yet..I'm a horrible person for thinking that, and wanting him to stay?? Even you have to see how absolutely hypocritical that is, right?? It's okay for you to assault his character after he's gone...someone who you claim you DIDN'T want gone, then repeatedly bash him, how he quit his last year etc. But you didn't want him to leave?? I didn't want him to leave and you try to throw all the allegations, quitting his last year etc stuff in my face to show WHY he should have left/been let go etc, the same Coach you didn't want to leave??
Have you had enough of me taking you behind the woodshed yet?? Or do you have more to bring??