MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: brewcity77 on March 24, 2019, 02:23:33 PM
-
I'm curious what Scoopers would prefer in terms of results. Someone like Tubby Smith or Kevin Ollie that has a national title but minimal other substantial results, or being a constant contender like John Beilein or Tony Bennett that never cuts down the final nets?
For purposes of the poll, these are known quantities. If you knew 100% that you could celebrate that title but other years would be bubble at best, or you knew you would always be amongst the best, but never reach the pinnacle.
-
This is a great poll. I went with the title, because it would be unforgettable, but it’s a tough choice.
-
Define mediocrity because the definition used on Scoop comes from a dictionary only a few seem to have...a special definition only they get to use.
-
Define mediocrity because the definition used on Scoop comes from a dictionary only a few seem to have...a special definition only they get to use.
5 years. Zero conference titles. Zero tourney wins. That qualifies as an example
-
5 years. Zero conference titles. Zero tourney wins. That qualifies as an example
Mediocrity: "means the quality of being average or ordinary"
So you're telling me that the AVERAGE or ORDINARY men's basketball program in Division I goes to the NCAA tournament twice in the last three years, has three straight post season appearances, is ranked top 15 for much of the year, has 10 Q1 wins (only two other programs had more), etc, etc.
That's why I ask, because the definition of the word has changed apparently. Just making the NCAA tournament, is not ordinary or average. Being a top 15 team much of the year, is not average or ordinary. I could go on. Now, if you want to say by "Marquette's standards"....have at it, but even then you are going to run into trouble depending how you slice up the data.
-
Mediocrity: "means the quality of being average or ordinary"
So you're telling me that the AVERAGE or ORDINARY men's basketball program in Division I goes to the NCAA tournament twice in the last three years, has three straight post season appearances, is ranked top 15 for much of the year, has 10 Q1 wins (only two other programs had more), etc, etc.
That's why I ask, because the definition of the word has changed apparently. Just making the NCAA tournament, is not ordinary or average. Being a top 15 team much of the year, is not average or ordinary. I could go on. Now, if you want to say by "Marquette's standards"....have at it, but even then you are going to run into trouble depending how you slice up the data.
In this context it’s a relative term. Based on relativity to the program Wojo took over his results have been mediocre.
-
Pretty easy answer on picking a championship.
-
In this context it’s a relative term. Based on relativity to the program Wojo took over his results have been mediocre.
The program that Buzzard left to go to a WORSE program, the one where he didn't bother his last year, and the one where he crapped on the conference as he went to Tech...that one?
-
If contender means michigan state like success the past 18yrs then I'd take that over a random title amongst a bunch of scattered tournament appearances of first round exits.
-
Pretty easy answer on picking a championship.
Imagine winning the title in 2021, and then being "truly mediocre" and not making the NCAA tournament the next 25 years. Yeah, I'm not sure I would go for that. I like having a relevant team more often than not.
-
Define mediocrity because the definition used on Scoop comes from a dictionary only a few seem to have...a special definition only they get to use.
Did you read the post? Think Tubby Smith/Kevin Ollie.
-
The program that Buzzard left to go to a WORSE program, the one where he didn't bother his last year, and the one where he crapped on the conference as he went to Tech...that one?
Program, not team cheeks. Big difference. You’ve used all the mileage you can from that excuse. How has Buzz done with the team and program he inherited? You know, the one that was a dumpster fire compared to the privileged job Wojo got?
-
Well its unclear what that means. Are we top ten in the polls for 25 years most of the time and just happen to never win it all? Are we a team that sometimes squeaks into the tournament and has a miracle.run for a title one year but mediocre for the other 24 years? Yeah i would take be a contender every year
-
Well its unclear what that means. Are we top ten in the polls for 25 years most of the time and just happen to never win it all? Are we a team that sometimes squeaks into the tournament and has a miracle.run for a title one year but mediocre for the other 24 years? Yeah i would take be a contender every year
Did you read the post? Are the respective careers to date of Tubby Smith, Kevin Ollie, Tony Bennett, & John Beilein not fairly self-explanatory?
-
Did you read the post? Think Tubby Smith/Kevin Ollie.
I read the Kevin Ollie part...1 NCAA bid in the 4 years since winning it. OK, so my 25 years was extreme, I'll correct it to say 6 NCAA bids over 25 years. Yeah, I would rather take being relevant each year.
-
I don’t think there’s any debate. Perrenial contender every year even if you never win it. Are there any examples of a team that fits this bill? At least ones who haven’t won a title in the last 40 years or so. I’d say Bucky is close to that recently.
-
Did you read the post? Are the respective careers to date of Tubby Smith, Kevin Ollie, Tony Bennett, & John Beilein not fairly self-explanatory?
Dont know much about the long term picture of any of them so excuse me sir
-
I don’t think there’s any debate. Perrenial contender every year even if you never win it. Are there any examples of a team that fits this bill? At least ones who haven’t won a title in the last 40 years or so. I’d say Bucky is close to that recently.
Mark Few.
-
Here's what i would take...A National Championship without question, then in the tournament almost every single year after that.
-
I'd take the title. I think if I had been more cognizant in 1977 I'd say otherwise, but I don't have that memory.
The end of the year always sucks unless you win it all. It doesn't matter if it's a blowout loss to an underdog like Murray State, an overtime loss to a good Stanford team, a loss to a conference rival with the Final Four on the line, or getting destroyed on the biggest stage. Whether the season ends on a close loss, a blowout loss, a buzzer beating loss, or any other loss is irrelevant. The only experience that is different is ending the season with a win.
I would rather get one national title and miss the tourney the next 20 years than have every one of those 20 years end with the same disappointment.
-
Mark Few.
My first thought.
-
Here's what i would take...A National Championship without question, then in the tournament almost every single year after that.
That's not an option. After the title you'll miss more often than make (hence the "bubble at best" comment).
-
I'd take the title. I think if I had been more cognizant in 1977 I'd say otherwise, but I don't have that memory.
The end of the year always sucks unless you win it all. It doesn't matter if it's a blowout loss to an underdog like Murray State, an overtime loss to a good Stanford team, a loss to a conference rival with the Final Four on the line, or getting destroyed on the biggest stage. Whether the season ends on a close loss, a blowout loss, a buzzer beating loss, or any other loss is irrelevant. The only experience that is different is ending the season with a win.
I would rather get one national title and miss the tourney the next 20 years than have every one of those 20 years end with the same disappointment.
This is so perfectly stated. You ALWAYS take the National Championship. I for one, could live with whatever happened after that with the program if they reached the Pinnacle again, once more in my lifetime.
-
Do I get magic forget I made a choice after I made the choice? If not, I would choose not to make a choice, if it was possible. If I knew I made a choice, what would be the point of following the team if I KNEW they weren't going to win conference championships or do much in the tournament after winning the championship, as a mediocre bubble team would. And if we were really good every year but I KNEW we weren't going to win a national title, why am I watching? That would be frustrating beyond measure.
If I made the choice and then got to forgot about it, I would prefer perennial contenders. I'd prefer being a Red Sox fan from 1968 to 2003 than being an Indians fan from 1948 to 1983, for example. Having hope every year would be fun until the end.
-
Program, not team cheeks. Big difference. You’ve used all the mileage you can from that excuse. How has Buzz done with the team and program he inherited? You know, the one that was a dumpster fire compared to the privileged job Wojo got?
New Orleans? Not sure, he bailed on those kids after one year and then settled a lawsuit with UNO later. Is that the one you are talking about?
For the millionth time, Buzz is a very good coach.....that doesn't mean he is good at other things that SOME universities also want.
-
This is so perfectly stated. You ALWAYS take the National Championship. I for one, could live with whatever happened after that with the program if they reached the Pinnacle again, once more in my lifetime.
LOL. No you couldn't. No way in hell you could live with whatever happened next. You especially.
-
I think the Bottom line is why play the lottery if there is No Hope of winning.
-
We played this game a few years ago:
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=54196.0
The rules were a little different, it was a choice between 1 championship and no NCAA appearances for the rest of your life or an NCAA appearance with occasional deep runs and no championships for the rest of your life.
Honestly, I hate either option.
-
Gene Keady.
Lou Henson.
Lou Carnesecca
Rick Barnes.
Dr. Tom Davis
-
Mark Few.
Great example. I would take 25 years of Mark Few (to date) over a one-hit wonder followed by sustained mediocrity.
The benefit of this is that, although you never end up actually winning it all, you always believe you have a legit chance, and you probably have a bunch of Sweet Sixteen/Elite Eights and maybe a couple Final Fours along the way. In other words, you have real hope.
-
We played this game a few years ago:
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=54196.0
The rules were a little different, it was a choice between 1 championship and no NCAA appearances for the rest of your life or an NCAA appearance with occasional deep runs and no championships for the rest of your life.
Honestly, I hate either option.
The thing with option 2 is that you never know you won't win it all, because you're always good enough to have a legit shot. That creates sustained fan interest, which is worth a lot.
-
Option 2 (perennial contender) and it’s not even close. Why would I care to harp on about a championship won 42 years ago vs actually enjoying the team year in and year out?
-
Option 2 (perennial contender) and it’s not even close. Why would I care to harp on about a championship won 42 years ago vs actually enjoying the team year in and year out?
(https://media.giphy.com/media/l41lZxzroU33typuU/giphy.gif)
Now, if I am on my death bed or over the age of 75, I'm going with option 1.
-
LOL. No you couldn't. No way in hell you could live with whatever happened next. You especially.
Yes, I could..that's all i want again is a Natty. I would turn down my passion several notches if that happened again. That's reaching the pinnacle. I am the same way with the Packers...once they won that Superbowl, I still watch the games, but whatever happens happens now. It doesn't affect me nearly like it used to. Why? because they got that Super Bowl title.
-
5 years. Zero conference titles. Zero tourney wins. That qualifies as an example
So you’d rather be SLU over the last 10 years than MU?
-
So you’d rather be SLU over the last 10 years than MU?
I didn’t realize our bar is set by a program like SLU
-
I didn’t realize our bar is set by a program like SLU
Pilarz and Scoop decided that many years ago.
-
I didn’t realize our bar is set by a program like SLU
Coach K just said Duke was lucky and that he's been lucky and unlucky in the tournament before. Weird, since luck doesn't exist. Eh Nickel? ;)
-
Pilarz and Scoop decided that many years ago.
Zzzzziiing!!!
-
Coach K just said Duke was lucky and that he's been lucky and unlucky in the tournament before. Weird, since luck doesn't exist. Eh Nickel? ;)
Yes the ball that’s halfway down coming out was lucky. Had they won by 19 I doubt he’d be saying they were lucky
-
Yes the ball that’s halfway down coming out was lucky. Had they won by 19 I doubt he’d be saying they were lucky
You said no luck existed.....back tracking it would appear.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/a93jwI0wkWTQs/giphy.gif)
And luck had nothing to do with HOW we played the other day, it had to do with WHO we played.
-
I didn’t realize our bar is set by a program like SLU
SLU has 2 regular season and 2 conference tourney titles since 2013, and 2 sex scandals. Is that the standard, feast or famine? Trophies intermingled with 4 losing seasons?
-
SLU has 2 regular season and 2 conference tourney titles since 2013, and 2 sex scandals. Is that the standard, feast or famine? Trophies intermingled with 4 losing seasons?
I could care less what SLU has or hasn't done. I have no idea why you think they’re relevant to this topic. I stand by what I said. By MU standards the last five years have been mediocre. Feel free to disagree.
-
I could care less what SLU has or hasn't done. I have no idea why you think they’re relevant to this topic. I stand by what I said. By MU standards the last five years have been mediocre. Feel free to disagree.
Wouldn't it be the last 6 years, the one where Buzzard was picked to win the Big East but finished 6th and not even a NIT bid. Wouldn't that be part of the clock you speak of?
-
You said no luck existed.....back tracking it would appear.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/a93jwI0wkWTQs/giphy.gif)
And luck had nothing to do with HOW we played the other day, it had to do with WHO we played.
Nah that’s not what I said. I said sports aren’t defined by luck and a lopsided outcome has nothing to do with luck
-
I could care less what SLU has or hasn't done. I have no idea why you think they’re relevant to this topic. I stand by what I said. By MU standards the last five years have been mediocre. Feel free to disagree.
I’m asking if that’s the standard you’d prefer: some conference titles and first round wins with losing seasons mixed in?
-
I’m asking if that’s the standard you’d prefer, siomevconference titles and first round wins with losing seasons mixed in.
I want more than what we’ve gotten the past five years
-
Nah that’s not what I said. I said sports aren’t defined by luck and a lopsided outcome has nothing to do with luck
Nope...this is what you said
Sports isn’t luck. Sorry to break that to you it’s not. And never has getting destroyed in competition been the result of luck. Ever. In the history of sports. Ever. One time.
Facts.
Your boy had his ass handed to him in the biggest game of his career. Again. For the second time he’s appeared in the tourney.
Facts.
THEN you said AND....
Just own it. Luck has plenty to do with sports. Sorry you were wrong.
-
I want more than what we’ve gotten the past five years
You mean the past 6 years, right? That last year Buzzard was coaching MU when we were picked 1st (that's an expectation) and we finished 6th (that's not meeting expectations) and went to no post season tournament (also not meeting expectation).
You do mean past 6 years....or does your calendar only go back 5 years?
-
Nope...this is what you said
THEN you said AND....
Just own it. Luck has plenty to do with sports. Sorry you were wrong.
Sports isn’t luck. Your point that I refuted was suggesting we had our ass handed to us because; crapshoot. You were wrong.
-
As a Cubs fan, winning the World Series in 2016 changed everything. The postseason no longer feels like do or die, I don't worry about them making the playoffs, I feel like I can just enjoy them win or lose. If they never win another playoff series I don't think it will bother me because I'll always have 2016. I want that with Marquette.
-
I’m asking if that’s the standard you’d prefer: some conference titles and first round wins with losing seasons mixed in?
Then start another thread because that's not the effing premise of this one
-
As a Cubs fan, winning the World Series in 2016 changed everything. The postseason no longer feels like do or die, I don't worry about them making the playoffs, I feel like I can just enjoy them win or lose. If they never win another playoff series I don't think it will bother me because I'll always have 2016. I want that with Marquette.
It goes away after a period of time. Give it a decade. I remember being at game 7 when the Angels won it all. Grown men sobbing in the late innings, doing deals with the devil, promising if we win this they'll never care again. Within a decade they wanted everyone fired, blasting ownership, etc. Fandom....
-
As a Cubs fan, winning the World Series in 2016 changed everything. The postseason no longer feels like do or die, I don't worry about them making the playoffs, I feel like I can just enjoy them win or lose. If they never win another playoff series I don't think it will bother me because I'll always have 2016. I want that with Marquette.
Not a Cubs fan, but exactly the same for me with the Packers, and I would be the same with MU if they won a Natty.