UW-GB loses to Valpo in semis on buzzer beater 3...

[wardle2wade]

Pretty wild finish at Valpo... almost Butler-like... Clip below.  It would have been a huge win for uwgb and would have put them in their conference finals for a bid.

http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=330682674

[brewcity77]

Ahh...I remember all the talk about how bad Green Bay was when we lost to them, yet they finish in the top-3 of their league and were a Rotnei Clarke-esque shot away from making it to their conference final and a possible NCAA date...

[muguru]

Ahh...I remember all the talk about how bad Green Bay was when we lost to them, yet they finish in the top-3 of their league and were a Rotnei Clarke-esque shot away from making it to their conference final and a possible NCAA date...

I don't disagree, but it was still an inexcusable loss for MU.

[GGGG]

Ahh...I remember all the talk about how bad Green Bay was when we lost to them, yet they finish in the top-3 of their league and were a Rotnei Clarke-esque shot away from making it to their conference final and a possible NCAA date...

Well, they finished fourth in their league....but yeah.

[tower912]

I don't disagree, but it was still an inexcusable loss for MU.

Has MU ever lost a game that WAS excusable, by your standards?

[GGGG]

I don't really even know what an "excusable loss" is.

[muguru]

Has MU ever lost a game that WAS excusable, by your standards?

Florida(not the margin of victory albeit) & Louisville(again, not margin of victory). Those two were "understandable".

[Tugg Speedman]

Florida(not the margin of victory albeit) & Louisville(again, not margin of victory). Those two were "understandable".

So still inexcusable when considering the margin.

How about at GU?  Was that excusable?  Closer margin. How about Cincy?

This reminds me of something I have posted from time to time ... Has anyone ever beaten MU?  Seems like all the analysis of losses here is we lost.   It is always our fault ... The coach, a player.  It is NEVER that the other team was better.  They do not count when analyzing why we loosen a game.

[wildbill sb]

Has MU ever lost a game that WAS excusable, by your standards?

I was at the UWGB game along with thousands of other MU fans (dang near a sell-out).  GB had only 8 guys dressed for the game.  We had a full roster. Their 8 outhustled our 12 sleepwalkers.  Wardle outcoached Williams. Yeah, I have to agree, it was "an inexcusable loss."

[muguru]

So still inexcusable when considering the margin.

How about at GU?  Was that excusable?  Closer margin. How about Cincy?

This reminds me of something I have posted from time to time ... Has anyone ever beaten MU?  Seems like all the analysis of losses here is we lost.   It is always our fault ... The coach, a player.  It is NEVER that the other team was better.  They do not count when analyzing why we loosen a game.

GU was not, nor was Cincy...MU is better than both those teams IMO. Florida was/is better than MU and so is UL...outside of that?? Cincy is NOT, UWGB sure as hell is NOT, Nova is NOT, GU...to me is NOT(they are Otto Porter), Butler is NOT.

[Tugg Speedman]

GU was not, nor was Cincy...MU is better than both those teams IMO. Florida was/is better than MU and so is UL...outside of that?? Cincy is NOT, UWGB sure as hell is NOT, Nova is NOT, GU...to me is NOT(they are Otto Porter), Butler is NOT.

I assume you think we did not win any games we were suppose to lose.  Correct?

If so, you think we should be 28-2 and the two losses should have been closer margins.  Since we are 23-7 this means you think we have had a disappointing season.  Since you think we are better than GU (#5 this week) I have to conclude you think the reason we are not 28-2 is Buzz is over-rated and hurts the team more than he helps it?

So if we merely did what you think we were suppose to do, and nothing more.  We would be 28-2, and probably ranked no.1 this week as we would have just finished 17-1 in the BE.  Correct?  And if all this happened, you would have given Buzz a C grade this year.

[CTWarrior]

I've used the term in the past, but "inexcusable" for the loss to UWGB is probably not the right word.  Losing a game you should win 95+% of the time is terribly disappointing, but probably not inexcusable.

To me, we had three really bad losses this year.  One (UWGB) for the fact that we lost at all, and two (Louisville and Florida) because we weren't competitive.  But even if we played well on those two nights, we probably lose those two games anyway because our opponents were home and played so well.    So throw in at Cincinnati in OT, at Villanova, at Georgetown and the Butler buzzer beater, 6 of our 7 losses could easily have happened to any school in the country, from Indiana/Duke on down.

On the other side,we balance those with a win at Pittsburgh, and not slipping in home games vs tough teams like Syracuse, Georgetown and ND.  A tremendous season, even with that nagging loss to UWGB.

[MU82]

Are we really getting into a semantics argument about the "excusable-ness" of Marquette's loss to Green Bay? Oy.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Ahh...I remember all the talk about how bad Green Bay was when we lost to them, yet they finish in the top-3 of their league and were a Rotnei Clarke-esque shot away from making it to their conference final and a possible NCAA date...

Well, yes they made a nice comeback to their season, but they did finish 4th in the Horizon League. 

GB had also lost to Cal State Fullerton, Idaho, Tennessee Tech, and SIU leading up to the game with us.  That was a bad bad loss.

[Eldon]

Wright state also advanced to the semis on a buzzer beater over Detroit.

[muguru]

I assume you think we did not win any games we were suppose to lose.  Correct?

If so, you think we should be 28-2 and the two losses should have been closer margins.  Since we are 23-7 this means you think we have had a disappointing season.  Since you think we are better than GU (#5 this week) I have to conclude you think the reason we are not 28-2 is Buzz is over-rated and hurts the team more than he helps it?

So if we merely did what you think we were suppose to do, and nothing more.  We would be 28-2, and probably ranked no.1 this week as we would have just finished 17-1 in the BE.  Correct?  And if all this happened, you would have given Buzz a C grade this year.

Not at all, I think Buzz has done a fantastic job, I love Buzz. My point is, I have no clue why so many(including many many many MU fans), thought this was going to be a "rebuilding" year or an NIT year?? The talent in place was obvious. Obviously the BE Coaches didn't see it, but some of us did. MU did what i thought they would do. They were one of those teams, IMO that every year before the season starts(barring a disaster) was IN the NCAAs, it was just a matter of their seeding. I always hate the "overachieveing" tag when it comes to MU, or "they aren't that talented". Bullsh&t!! They ARE talented and to say that they aren't, is a discredit to the players.

[Dawson Rental]

Following college basketball is fun, infuriating, addicting because of the variance.  It's the unpredictability of any one game's result that makes us want to watch.  If we had lost to St. John's, their fans would have been on a high for days after upsetting a top 15 team.  As a Marquette fan, I've been there.  I still remember the thrill of beating Wisconsin at the Kohl last year with Cadougan suspended when Wisconsin was a favorite even if we had Cadougan.  

How crazy was it when we beat West Virginia in West Virginia last year with virtually every player in the regular rotation outside of Jae suspended for one of the halves of the game?  How much sweeter would it have been for St. John's to beat us with Harrison and Pointer suspended for the game?

Sometimes players are feeling it, sometimes they're sick, but playing anyway.  Sometimes they just fell in love, sometimes they just broke up.  Maybe they just aced a test, maybe they're sweating getting a paper done on time.  Maybe they just got good news about their mother's cancer prognosis, maybe they're waiting on the news.  There are infinite number of reasons why players who are very young are going to have uneven performances.  Under Buzz, Marquette shows less of this variance then other teams.  No annual January three game losing streaks like Louisville. How annoyed must Louisville fans be about sharing the regular season title due to an annual (i.e. predictable) letdown?

[Dawson Rental]

Not at all, I think Buzz has done a fantastic job, I love Buzz. My point is, I have no clue why so many(including many many many MU fans), thought this was going to be a "rebuilding" year or an NIT year?? The talent in place was obvious. Obviously the BE Coaches didn't see it, but some of us did. MU did what i thought they would do. They were one of those teams, IMO that every year before the season starts(barring a disaster) was IN the NCAAs, it was just a matter of their seeding. I always hate the "overachieveing" tag when it comes to MU, or "they aren't that talented". Bullsh&t!! They ARE talented and to say that they aren't, is a discredit to the players.

No one says they Marquette has no talented players (i.e. they aren't talented).  The question is does the talent level on the team explain the team's top 15 ranking?  I disagree with you that to say that Marquette doesn't have top 15 talent is a discredit to the players.  I think that most would say that overachieving is considered a compliment compared to "doing what was expected". 

I think that the Big East coaches had it about right when they predicted a 7th place Big East finish for Marquette based on talent.  I believe that they have overachieved to finish tied for first in the regular season, and I think that that is a huge compliment as to who they are as people, rather than a diss on their talent.

[tower912]

The preseason ranking was based on last year's performance, minus the two guys who graduated, adding no impact players.   Based on that, it was accurate.   MU was a team with no proven stars or leaders, a team of role players.    Like 09-10, when Buzz made playing small a virtue, this year Buzz made a perceived weakness into a strength.    Look at the SotG stats.   9 different guys have been the best player on the floor during MU wins this year.  (And I still think DWilson got gypped against Pitt.  ).     Out of necessity, this became a 10 deep team that can hurt you a bunch of different ways, with somebody different stepping up.
         As die-hard followers of the team, we can argue that we saw the potential for the kind of season that MU had.    For somebody who is looking at ALL the teams in ALL the leagues, it isn't surprising that they looked at a team that sent its two best players into the draft, that added no true impact players, and saw a middle-of-the-pack team.    MU didn't get a chance to shine against tOSU and laid eggs against both Florida and GB.   Going into conference play, MU had not shown anything to outsiders that would turn them into believers.   
     This is a good team.    Many here have thought so from day 1.    And it is fun to play the underdog card, the 'nobody-believes-in-us' card.    But MU is now a Big East Champ.  So some here need to savor the moment for the next few days.    It is a rare micro-brew that we are drinking right now.   

[brewcity77]

Well, yes they made a nice comeback to their season, but they did finish 4th in the Horizon League. 

GB had also lost to Cal State Fullerton, Idaho, Tennessee Tech, and SIU leading up to the game with us.  That was a bad bad loss.

I find this laughable. I'm sorry, but it just is. Yes, it will go down as a bad loss, but on the road to a team around 155 is not "bad bad". It's not dire, not catastrophic, even though all the geniuses here sure seemed to think it was at the time. Legitimate #1-2 seed contenders have worse losses.

It was bad. That's it. Let's not make it out like we lost to Centenary at home.

[Dawson Rental]

The preseason ranking was based on last year's performance, minus the two guys who graduated, adding no impact players.   Based on that, it was accurate.   MU was a team with no proven stars or leaders, a team of role players.    Like 09-10, when Buzz made playing small a virtue, this year Buzz made a perceived weakness into a strength.    Look at the SotG stats.   9 different guys have been the best player on the floor during MU wins this year.  (And I still think DWilson got gypped against Pitt.  ).     Out of necessity, this became a 10 deep team that can hurt you a bunch of different ways, with somebody different stepping up.
         As die-hard followers of the team, we can argue that we saw the potential for the kind of season that MU had.    For somebody who is looking at ALL the teams in ALL the leagues, it isn't surprising that they looked at a team that sent its two best players into the draft, that added no true impact players, and saw a middle-of-the-pack team.    MU didn't get a chance to shine against tOSU and laid eggs against both Florida and GB.   Going into conference play, MU had not shown anything to outsiders that would turn them into believers.  
     This is a good team.    Many here have thought so from day 1.    And it is fun to play the underdog card, the 'nobody-believes-in-us' card.    But MU is now a Big East Champ.  So some here need to savor the moment for the next few days.    It is a rare micro-brew that we are drinking right now.  

Who's not savoring?  Going on a discussion board and discussing differences of opinion about what got us here is all a part of getting wrapped up in the moment.

[Pakuni]

I find this laughable. I'm sorry, but it just is. Yes, it will go down as a bad loss, but on the road to a team around 155 is not "bad bad". It's not dire, not catastrophic, even though all the geniuses here sure seemed to think it was at the time. Legitimate #1-2 seed contenders have worse losses.

It was bad. That's it. Let's not make it out like we lost to Centenary at home.

It's pretty easy to put it in perspective. Here are the top 15 RPI teams (using Nolan) and their worst loss:

Duke - @Maryland (79)
New Mexico - vs South Dakota St. (76)
Louisville - @Villanova (52)
Miami - @Wake Forest (179)
Michigan St. - vs UConn (45)
Florida - @Arkansas (80)
Kansas - @TCU (228)
Georgetown - @S.Florida (137)
Indiana - vs Bucky (43)
Gonzaga -vs Illinois (41)
Michigan - @Penn State (180)
Marquette - @UWGB (160)
Arizona - @USC (104)
Ohio St. - @Bucky (43)
Colorado St. - @Illinois-Chicago (173)

So, it's definitely among the worst losses by top RPI teams this year, but it hardly ranks in the realm of all-time bad losses by MU. Probably not in the top 5 of the Big East era.

[MU82]

It's pretty easy to put it in perspective. Here are the top 15 RPI teams (using Nolan) and they're worst loss:

Duke - @Maryland (79)
New Mexico - vs South Dakota St. (76)
Louisville - @Villanova (52)
Miami - @Wake Forest (179)
Michigan St. - vs UConn (45)
Florida - @Arkansas (80)
Kansas - @TCU (228)
Georgetown - @S.Florida (137)
Indiana - vs Bucky (43)
Gonzaga -vs Illinois (41)
Michigan - @Penn State (180)
Marquette - @UWGB (160)
Arizona - @USC (104)
Ohio St. - @Bucky (43)
Colorado St. - @Illinois-Chicago (173)

So, it's definitely among the worst losses by top RPI teams this year, but it hardly ranks in the real of all-time bad losses by MU. Probably not in the top 5 of the Big East era.

Totally forgot that Kansas lost to TCU. That's a remarkably horrible loss. Also interesting: Miami's loss to Florida Gulf Coast wasn't its worst (at least by this RPI measure).

[Mr. Nielsen]

Sometimes you just need to give credit to the other team.

[LloydMooresLegs]

Totally forgot that Kansas lost to TCU. That's a remarkably horrible loss. Also interesting: Miami's loss to Florida Gulf Coast wasn't its worst (at least by this RPI measure).

FGC is NCAA bound after winning its tourney.