I certainly didn't come up with this theory, but I've seen it hold up in both college basketball and college football. The third season is often a major indicator of where a coach and a program are headed — or what they already are. This third season will serve that purpose for MU.
It's far from over, but this measuring stick campaign is not promising. As MU moves through Buzz Williams's third go-around, the positives are...
His teams are tough. They don't quit and are difficult to put away. The offense is based on aggressive, high-percentage scoring. He can recruit quick athletes to drive that system.
But, he is not a strong defensive coach. The long-held Marquette tradition of outstanding, shut down defense is dead. No team is made uncomfortable against MU. It is not difficult to score on a Buzz Williams team — nor is it difficult to grab offensive rebounds against MU. The teams are so obsessed with transition and paint touches, they forget to protect their own rim.
When you add in the bizarre recruiting shenanigans we see every year, (speaking as just one fan who's been going to games since 1974) I don't like where this program is headed right now, but I hope all of Buzz's platitudes and his faith prove me very wrong.
From one old fart to another, the lack of Warrior defense troubles me also. Moreover, I wonder about Buzz' evaluation of talent or does he rely too heavily on the assistant's opinions. How well does he know some of these recruits before they're offered?
excellent question. He took EwIll and Jamail and then buries them (deservedly) because they can't play defense. Junior and Gardner are overmatched on D also.
How dare you guys criticize In Buzz we trust? Even if we have a bad year, which nobody wants, it should be chalked up as just that-a bad year. There is not any indicator by that. Remember, Buzz led us to the promised land the last two years, even though he was left with a bare cupboard. And it was not his fault that a few of the recruits did not work out like: Roseboro, Smith, Clark, Mbao, Maymon, Newbill, Cadougan, etc.--after all 40 % of D I men's BB players transfer every year. And it is not his fault that MU missed out on all of its top priorities in the early signing period.
We will perservere this year, because the season is not yet half over, we have about 8 top 25 teams on the schedule with whom we will definitely pick up many quality wins, and our rotation is now permanently set. In Buzz we trust!
Year 3 Verdicts:
>> Coach K: 38-47 for first 3 years and 11-17 in his third. 5th, 6th and 7th place finishes.
>> Calhoun at UCONN (after years at NE where his first 7 years where near .500). 47-46 with Year 3 at 18-13. 8th, 9th and 7th place finishes.
>> Rick Pitino: (51-32 with Year 3 @ 13-14)
Zero NCAA appearances between them.
Now, has Buzz missed on some recruits, are we waiting on some still to develop, is he still very inexperienced as a head coach (he is the youngest on staff), has he made mistakes, is he too hard headed at times? Yes. But, the coaching job he did last season may have been one of the best in MU's history with what talent he had inhereted from Crean filled in with some of his JUCO's. He has made the NCAA's twice. Now he has his own players in place--many new to the BE and the school.
So after losing to four ranked teams, each with multiple players with NBA talent and each with a potential 1st round big, having played the #1 team in the country the best of any team, and losing on the road to the 2nd highest ranked SEC team by one point, and then losing to Wisconsin who just beat the 13th ranked team, and you are ready to have him fired? No one is happy with the close losses or is making excuses, but you guys need to strap it in a bit for your own sanity ;D.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on December 31, 2010, 09:09:53 AM
Year 3 Verdicts:
>> Coach K: 38-47 for first 3 years and 11-17 in his third. 5th, 6th and 7th place finishes.
>> Calhoun at UCONN (after years at NE where his first 7 years where near .500). 47-46 with Year 3 at 18-13. 8th, 9th and 7th place finishes.
>> Rick Pitino: (51-32 with Year 3 @ 13-14)
I'm glad you didn't compare him to coaches that started out well in years 1 and 2 and then collapsed, that would have had people ginned up.
Buzz should be fine, but IMO he needs to get a bit more diverse in his recruiting. Get a guy or two that can shoot the basketball. Learn some patience with his rotations which should instill some confidence in his players. Etc, etc
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 31, 2010, 09:35:58 AM
I'm glad you didn't compare him to coaches that started out well in years 1 and 2 and then collapsed, that would have had people ginned up.
No, I compared him to three active HOF fame coaches who defied the "three year verdict". Maybe I should compare him to the current I4 coach in his third year? ;D
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on December 31, 2010, 09:46:29 AM
No, I compared him to three active HOF fame coaches who defied the "three year verdict". Maybe I should compare him to the current I4 coach in his third year? ;D
You could....I always wondered how Buzz would have done in the same scenario with the same restrictions early on (i.e. JUCOs not an answer).
Yes, the three you did compare to are all HOF coaches. What I would like to see is a comparison of an assistant coach taking over a program that was on a great run (i.e. Bruiser Flint at UMASS, Mike Deane at MU, etc) and had very good players left on the roster...what happens by years 3, 4, 5? That seems the better comparison to me then the guys you originally compared because they were taking over teams that were on the downs, not already top level teams. Just my two cents.
All that being said, I honestly think this will be Buzz's toughest year and things should be brighter in the outlying years, IF he can keep the players on his team and convince others to come.
Yes, Chicos that would be an interesting straw dog if one would have the time. How about Rick since he inhereted a McD's AA and a NCAA team?
1983-1984 Marquette 17–13 NIT Second Round
1984–1985 Marquette 20–11 NIT Third Round
1985–1986 Marquette 19–11 NIT Second Round
Marquette: 56–35
btw, you quote CTC as not able to recruit JUCO's because of "restrictions", yet he has signed one in every year: Dumes, Jobe, Michel.
Quote from: ecompt on December 30, 2010, 11:07:36 PM
excellent question. He took EwIll and Jamail and then buries them (deservedly) because they can't play defense. Junior and Gardner are overmatched on D also.
Any coach would take a Top 100 kid that is willing to sign. You basically are questioning the merits of 3 freshman (Cadougan in effect is a freshman), Gardner and Jamail. Erik Williams has talent, tho he might not ever be a starter in the program..he is just a sophomore.
Last thought - only 5 players can play at a time, most coaches don't go with more than an 8 or 9 man rotation...what does this mean?? There are always going to be about 3-5 kids that don't get PT.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 31, 2010, 09:50:10 AM
You could....I always wondered how Buzz would have done in the same scenario with the same restrictions early on (i.e. JUCOs not an answer).
Are you saying Crean couldn't go after JUCO's at IU? If that's what you are implying, you are wrong. He signed Dumes, and Jobe out of the JUCO ranks.
Quote from: silverback on December 30, 2010, 09:28:30 PM
It's far from over, but this measuring stick campaign is not promising. As MU moves through Buzz Williams's third go-around, the positives are...
His teams are tough. They don't quit and are difficult to put away. The offense is based on aggressive, high-percentage scoring. He can recruit quick athletes to drive that system.
But, he is not a strong defensive coach. The long-held Marquette tradition of outstanding, shut down defense is dead. No team is made uncomfortable against MU. It is not difficult to score on a Buzz Williams team — nor is it difficult to grab offensive rebounds against MU. The teams are so obsessed with transition and paint touches, they forget to protect their own rim.
When you add in the bizarre recruiting shenanigans we see every year, (speaking as just one fan who's been going to games since 1974) I don't like where this program is headed right now, but I hope all of Buzz's platitudes and his faith prove me very wrong.
MU is very fortunate Buzz Williams fell into its lap. Period. MU is not a destination job. We couldn't get Virginia Commonwealth's coach to interview here (Anthony Grant), nor Tony Bennet, nor Keno Davis, nor Sean Miller (Xavier coach at the time).
MU's defense is going to be fine under Buzz. He doesn't like stupid fouls, that many times are the result of overaggressive defense (Vander Blue actualy committed a perfect example of one in the Vandy game..45 feet from the basket..compmletely stupid foul..being overagressive..and it put Vandy's point guard on the FT line..where he makes 2 free throws.). Buzzball 101 says you need to MAKE more free throws than the opposition TAKES. Therefore..we do NOT fould a lot..most fouls occur on the defensive end. Though our defensive rating might not be as high..we also aren't in the bottom 1/3rd of NCAA D-1 teams with regard to how much we foul, nor are we in the bottom 1/3rd of teams with regard to free throw margin differential. Tom Crean's MU teams were always in the bottom 1/2, most of the time in the bottom 1/3rd of college teams with regard to how much they fouled, and Free Throw Attempts disparity. Hard to win basketball games when you send the other team to the Free Throw line 10-15 more times per game. Vandy actually out attempted MU at the line..which is an anamoly under Buzz.
Quote from: indeelaw90 on December 31, 2010, 10:09:59 AM
Are you saying Crean couldn't go after JUCO's at IU? If that's what you are implying, you are wrong. He signed Dumes, and Jobe out of the JUCO ranks.
Along with Guy Marc-Michel.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on December 31, 2010, 09:59:52 AM
Yes, Chicos that would be an interesting straw dog if one would have the time. How about Rick since he inhereted a McD's AA and a NCAA team?
1983-1984 Marquette 17–13 NIT Second Round
1984–1985 Marquette 20–11 NIT Third Round
1985–1986 Marquette 19–11 NIT Second Round
Marquette: 56–35
btw, you quote CTC as not able to recruit JUCO's because of "restrictions", yet he has signed one in every year: Dumes, Jobe, Michel.
The restrictions were early on, as I've stated here many times before. They wanted to clear the decks first. This is why Dumes wasn't an issue because he was a DI player first before transferring to a JUCO.
Dumes played year one at Eastern Michigan then transferred to a JUCO...he didn't start as a JUCO.
Michel and Jobe were both foreign players that were at a JUCO for a reason.....the Gonzaga stashing of Michel is a good story on background. They had him stashed in Idaho hoping to have him for this year.
Quote from: indeelaw90 on December 31, 2010, 10:09:59 AM
Are you saying Crean couldn't go after JUCO's at IU?
Early on, that's correct. High scrutiny for every kid they were bringing in, VERY HIGH.
Indee, you a football season ticket holder? They're putting together a nice staff. Great to see Mark Hagen added. Mark and I were at IU together. Great player and did a wonderful job at Purdue as Linebackers coach. Good to see them get the Mallory's kid involved along with the Boise State WR coach.
There were not restrictions put on Crean in terms of JUCO's versus non Juco's. I know this for a fact. Each recruit was scrutinzed by the administration regardless of where they came from. No one knows for sure, but my sources tell me there was not one player that Crean was going after was denied admittance.
As far as Hagen, he and my business partner were roommates, and played at IU at the same time. Good dude. The new coach is getting quite the staff. When you get down to IU next, you need to see the football suite. Largest in the country.
Quote from: indeelaw90 on December 31, 2010, 10:44:25 AM
There were not restrictions put on Crean in terms of JUCO's versus non Juco's. I know this for a fact. Each recruit was scrutinzed by the administration regardless of where they came from. No one knows for sure, but my sources tell me there was not one player that Crean was going after was denied admittance.
Well, then a few IU athletic department people are either incorrect or lying as there were several names floated which they indicate they could not go after and to move on until the ship was righted. Either that, or we're parsing words here because what I was told is there were some players the staff was told not even to think about from day one. As a result, they may not have ever made your sources list of "not one player that Crean was going after was denied admittance." If you're told you cannot go after X, Y, and Z at all, then that would be the case.
I may be getting down there next year, a friend on Senator Lugar's staff has invited me down.
Quote from: silverback on December 30, 2010, 09:28:30 PM
It's far from over, but this measuring stick campaign is not promising.
In a very chicos-esque move, I think I'll wait until it's over before getting out my measuring stick.
Did I just read correctly that ZFFB wants Buzz to recruit more white players?
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on December 31, 2010, 09:09:53 AM
Year 3 Verdicts:
>> Coach K: 38-47 for first 3 years and 11-17 in his third. 5th, 6th and 7th place finishes.
>> Calhoun at UCONN (after years at NE where his first 7 years where near .500). 47-46 with Year 3 at 18-13. 8th, 9th and 7th place finishes.
>> Rick Pitino: (51-32 with Year 3 @ 13-14)
Zero NCAA appearances between them.
I think you're stretching. First, you're citing previous low-major experience. Rick Pitino wasn't 13-14 at Providence or Kentucky--you're using his Boston Univ. record. Ditto with Calhoun at Northeastern and Coach K at Army. When those coaches were hired at a high major, they performed right away.
MU is not comparable to BU, Army or Northeastern. We are closer to Louisville, Providence or Duke, and should expect that a coach coming in doesn't have to suffer through a five year learning curve--that should have already taken place.
We chose to elevate a current assistant--similar to what happened at Gonzaga, Syracuse, Xavier, Pitt, and MSU. Each of these five programs elevated a current assistant to the head coaching job. Each excelled out the gate (with the talent inherited from the former head coach). But more importantly, each coach IMPROVED in his 3rd season over his first--even though much of the talent recruited by his predecessor started to leave and the new coach's recruits became an ever increasing part of the program.
>>Jamie Dixon @Pitt: 76-22 over his first three years, and 25-8 in his third, 4th in the Big East.
>>Sean Miller @Xavier: 63-32 overall, 25-9 & NCAA in his 3rd season. Also elevated from assistant, like Buzz.
>>Tom Izzo @MSU 55-36 first three seasons at MSU, 22-8, sweet 16 and 1st place in the Big Ten his third season.
>>Jim Boeheim @Syracuse 74-13 across 3 seasons, 26-4 in his 3rd year. NCAA Sweet 16.
>>Mark Few @Gonzaga 81-20, 29-4 in his 3rd season.
Buzz, with one year of prior D1 head coaching under his belt, had more experience at the time of his hire than any of these five. Hell, than all five combined.
Yet nobody in Pittsburgh, for example, was complaining in Dixon's third season about an NIT bid, or making excuses that he's done pretty good for a new coach and should be excused for a sub-par season, or that Howland left the cupboard bare after Aaron Gray asked out of his LOI and Carl Krauser transferred after his freshman year because of the coaching transition.
Quote from: silverback on December 30, 2010, 09:28:30 PM
But, he is not a strong defensive coach. The long-held Marquette tradition of outstanding, shut down defense is dead. No team is made uncomfortable against MU. It is not difficult to score on a Buzz Williams team — nor is it difficult to grab offensive rebounds against MU. The teams are so obsessed with transition and paint touches, they forget to protect their own rim.
Please DO NOT start a Buzz vs Crean thing here, but there were some years where TCs perimeter defense was horrid, and we were all over it on this board.
Quote from: Marquette84 on December 31, 2010, 11:45:23 AM
I think you're stretching. First, you're citing previous low-major experience. Rick Pitino wasn't 13-14 at Providence or Kentucky--you're using his Boston Univ. record. Ditto with Calhoun at Northeastern and Coach K at Army. When those coaches were hired at a high major, they performed right away.
I am quoting Coach K's record at Duke and Calhoun's at UCONN to clarify from your post in order to match the Buzz comparison (high majors, 2nd gig like Buzz). I could not go to year 3 at Providence for Pitino as he moved on. So, I am not stretching at all but providing an antithesis to "The Third Season Verdict" that was proposed. Some folks here apparently would have fired some of the winningest coaches of all time after Year 3--along with Buzz and Crean in their 2nd head coaching jobs.
btw, I would say that all the assistant coaches you mentioned walked into a pretty sweet spot in terms of what they followed and were long-time assistants in many cases (or longer than nine months). And, yes, Dixon was under the gun in Year 3 by the Pitt fan base.
Quote from: indeelaw90 on December 31, 2010, 10:44:25 AM
There were not restrictions put on Crean in terms of JUCO's versus non Juco's. I know this for a fact. Each recruit was scrutinzed by the administration regardless of where they came from. No one knows for sure, but my sources tell me there was not one player that Crean was going after was denied admittance.
No restrictions on jucos and you know this for a FACT. None of his targets denied admittance. Thank God we can finally put to rest the myths perpetrated by Chicos and his "inside sources" about handcuffs, etc.
From my point of view, Buzz has brought in some very good talent in his tenure so far. Some of the "top" talen, as happens so many times, are playing at a lower level than expected. Is it coaching? Talent? A combination? Who knows? Junior is playing below expectations, Jones we don;t know, but slow on defense, etc etc.
His third year evaluation? We have Otule playing better than everm with lots of need for inmprovement on the baords and defense - but he blocked a bunch of shots early int he season and I think will adjust to the better teams. We have been in every game this year, against some VERY good teams where the naysayers would say we didn't even belong in the game.
How Buzz finishes off the recruiting for next year will be key. The talent he has on the team, and the potential talent on the team, is deeper than we have had. That alone is tough to keep kids happy these days because they all think they are going to the NBA asap. Buzz is not defense focused? I think he is - our team/players have not executed well. Some may be strategy, like double teaming and trapping and leaving a 3 point shooter open; some may be talent not yet developed. We have a YOUNG team. Young. And we do not have a "natural" leader on the team. Given all this, we lost 4 games to very good teams, and we were in every one of them. Had DJO shot better, had this or that happened, hit a few FTs, etc. On and on.
We can only get better this year - we have played marginally so far and we have been in the games agiasnt top teams. So the upside is huge.
My evaluation so far.? Chill out, hang tough. Let's see how the Big East goes over the next few weeks. Yes, we DO need to win some of these close games. And I think we will.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 31, 2010, 10:46:20 AM
Well, then a few IU athletic department people are either incorrect or lying as there were several names floated which they indicate they could not go after and to move on until the ship was righted. Either that, or we're parsing words here because what I was told is there were some players the staff was told not even to think about from day one. As a result, they may not have ever made your sources list of "not one player that Crean was going after was denied admittance." If you're told you cannot go after X, Y, and Z at all, then that would be the case.
I may be getting down there next year, a friend on Senator Lugar's staff has invited me down.
I have a friend with some "inside info" down there as well. I think your right as far as saying TC didn't go after them....in other words they never made his short list (which is never really that short). From what I understand there weren't many denied, and they weren't high level talent (top 100).
Hope you get to meet the Senator....he's a great man. Wish he could have gotten the DREAM Act through.
What you need to understand is that we are the same as Georgetown and Notre Dame two years ago. We are inexperienced and will be taken advantage of. Georgetown and Notre Dame are very good teams now. Players need time to develope. The failure of posters on this board to recognize that these players need to go through a maturation process leads to disappointment and discontent.
not when you're seeing crap defense with no help.
That's systemic.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on December 31, 2010, 11:09:38 AM
Did I just read correctly that ZFFB wants Buzz to recruit more white players?
?-( ?-( ?-( ?-(
Quote from: Daniel on December 31, 2010, 12:37:16 PM
From my point of view, Buzz has brought in some very good talent in his tenure so far. Some of the "top" talen, as happens so many times, are playing at a lower level than expected. Is it coaching? Talent? A combination? Who knows? Junior is playing below expectations, Jones we don;t know, but slow on defense, etc etc.
His third year evaluation? We have Otule playing better than everm with lots of need for inmprovement on the baords and defense - but he blocked a bunch of shots early int he season and I think will adjust to the better teams. We have been in every game this year, against some VERY good teams where the naysayers would say we didn't even belong in the game.
How Buzz finishes off the recruiting for next year will be key. The talent he has on the team, and the potential talent on the team, is deeper than we have had. That alone is tough to keep kids happy these days because they all think they are going to the NBA asap. Buzz is not defense focused? I think he is - our team/players have not executed well. Some may be strategy, like double teaming and trapping and leaving a 3 point shooter open; some may be talent not yet developed. We have a YOUNG team. Young. And we do not have a "natural" leader on the team. Given all this, we lost 4 games to very good teams, and we were in every one of them. Had DJO shot better, had this or that happened, hit a few FTs, etc. On and on.
We can only get better this year - we have played marginally so far and we have been in the games agiasnt top teams. So the upside is huge.
My evaluation so far.? Chill out, hang tough. Let's see how the Big East goes over the next few weeks. Yes, we DO need to win some of these close games. And I think we will.
Thanks for this, totally agree.
I didn't know Buzz was on trial. If he was I would say he was aquited.
I hope none of you negative nabobs have responsibility for developing or mentoring young talent, or developing long term strategy for your employers.
If you have the same perspective in business as you do for the Warriors (you can see about three inches into the future) God help you.
There is time for a "we need to win now mentality". MU is in a development phase. I expect to make the NCAA tournament, but I expect that based on how we play after Feb. 1.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 31, 2010, 12:36:37 PM
No restrictions on jucos and you know this for a FACT. None of his targets denied admittance. Thank God we can finally put to rest the myths perpetrated by Chicos and his "inside sources" about handcuffs, etc.
Here's what I know FOR A FACT. Before he coached one single game his contract was extended multiple years and multiple millions...why? Because they were not going to be allowed to go for the quick fix and some of the players they wanted to go after (JUCOS, etc) were off limits. That's what I know FOR A FACT.
From IU sources, IU athletic department sources, people in the industry (i.e. President of Fox Sports who just happens to be an IU grad and just happened to be a colleague), from people associated with his agent, etc,
Lenny, I realize you had tremendous wood and I'm sorry to deflate it for you with reality, but that's the deal. They got Dumes, a former DI player that was at Juco for one year AFTER playing DI. That's it initially.
There's A REASON WHY HE GOT EXTRA YEARS AND EXTRA MONEY before coaching a single game or practice. Why don't you ask yourself WHY? Was the school in just a giving mood? Or did the school put conditions on how the rebuilding was going to go and once it was determined the quick fix (JUCO, etc) was essentially off limits early on, they added years and money to the contract. Hmmm.
Now back to your little blue pills.....PS Otule was born with two eyes, one was not developed fully. Gottfried was wrong.
Quote from: mu-rara on December 31, 2010, 01:59:48 PM
I hope none of you negative nabobs have responsibility for developing or mentoring young talent, or developing long term strategy for your employers.
If you have the same perspective in business as you do for the Warriors (you can see about three inches into the future) God help you.
There is time for a "we need to win now mentality". MU is in a development phase. I expect to make the NCAA tournament, but I expect that based on how we play after Feb. 1.
Unfortunately in the real world many businesses are based on what you do each quarter. It makes life hard, chaotic and downright unpleasant at times, but that's the reality that many people live with. Other businesses not so much, but if you're at a Fortune 500 company that's reality. I'd equate MU with a similar type basketball program (meaning FORTUNE 500esque). That means people will be critical at times. It comes with the territory.
Quote from: NCMUFan on December 31, 2010, 01:40:05 PM
I didn't know Buzz was on trial. If he was I would say he was aquited.
Buzz is on trial here 24/7, 365 days a year. Every transfer, recruiting miss, time out, substitution, etc. is scrutinized, investigated and usually results in an indictment. Those who generally vote to acquit are demeaned as fanboys. That's life on the internet.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 31, 2010, 02:08:30 PM
Unfortunately in the real world many businesses are based on what you do each quarter. It makes life hard, chaotic and downright unpleasant at times, but that's the reality that many people live with. Other businesses not so much, but if you're at a Fortune 500 company that's reality. I'd equate MU with a similar type basketball program (meaning FORTUNE 500esque). That means people will be critical at times. It comes with the territory.
BS. The F500 analogy is ridiculous...I'm just going to leave that one alone.
On to you then claiming Buzz should expect to deal with critical people....absolutely, but if important people within the program are critical, they better have a good plan in place prior to going too far in that direction.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 31, 2010, 02:08:30 PM
Unfortunately in the real world many businesses are based on what you do each quarter. It makes life hard, chaotic and downright unpleasant at times, but that's the reality that many people live with. Other businesses not so much, but if you're at a Fortune 500 company that's reality. I'd equate MU with a similar type basketball program (meaning FORTUNE 500esque). That means people will be critical at times. It comes with the territory.
Good thing coaches should be evaluated only after five years, and not on this quarterly nonsense.
Right?
Quote from: Pakuni on December 31, 2010, 03:57:57 PM
Good thing coaches should be evaluated only after five years, and not on this quarterly nonsense.
Right?
You shouldn't suck a coach's johnson for at least 5 years, something a lot of people here have yet to figure out...thus all the chapped lips.
Quote from: avid1010 on December 31, 2010, 03:37:46 PM
BS. The F500 analogy is ridiculous...I'm just going to leave that one alone.
On to you then claiming Buzz should expect to deal with critical people....absolutely, but if important people within the program are critical, they better have a good plan in place prior to going too far in that direction.
No one is suggesting firing the guy, good grief.
I'm sorry you disagree with the analogy. I'm open to a better one. Big time sports with big time money, people are going to be public about a lot of things. That includes irrational praise and irrational criticism. As stated, I'm open to a better analogy.
Quote from: bilsu on December 31, 2010, 12:50:01 PM
What you need to understand is that we are the same as Georgetown and Notre Dame two years ago. We are inexperienced and will be taken advantage of. Georgetown and Notre Dame are very good teams now. Players need time to develope. The failure of posters on this board to recognize that these players need to go through a maturation process leads to disappointment and discontent.
Not sure the Notre Dame analogy holds up - for one thing, I don't think the 08-09 season is what you're talking about, since they started 2 juniors and 3 seniors that year. Also, Nash is really the only contributor this year that saw any playing time at all prior to last season, since Hansborough and Martin were transfers, and Abromaitis and Scott were redshirts/end-of-bench players.
On the other hand, Georgetown is a bit more on point since nearly all of their current lineup played some minutes two years ago. Of course, that still leaves the question of whether our players will develop to replace the talent we lose like they've done with Monroe and Summers leaving. Four the six players that have played more than 1/3 of our minutes so far will graduate over the next couple seasons. Still, an experienced Junior, Blue, Wilson/Jones, EWill, Gardner/Otule lineup is intriguing.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 31, 2010, 02:08:47 PM
Buzz is on trial here 24/7, 365 days a year. Every transfer, recruiting miss, time out, substitution, etc. is scrutinized, investigated and usually results in an indictment. Those who generally vote to acquit are demeaned as fanboys. That's life on the internet.
To be fair, this went on with the last guy as well.
Every transfer was further proof he was a dick. Every blown lead further proof he overburdened his players with scouts. Every missed big was further proof he was a crash or burn recruiter. Etc.
The only difference is that the actors of the dialogue have switched sides.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 31, 2010, 04:06:05 PM
You shouldn't suck a coach's johnson for at least 5 years, something a lot of people here have yet to figure out...thus all the chapped lips.
Little blue pills? Tremendous wood? Sucking Johnsons?
Seems someone is a tad bit phallically obsessed today.
What exactly are you trying to tell us, Chico's?
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on December 31, 2010, 12:28:17 PM
I am quoting Coach K's record at Duke and Calhoun's at UCONN to clarify from your post in order to match the Buzz comparison (high majors, 2nd gig like Buzz). I could not go to year 3 at Providence for Pitino as he moved on. So, I am not stretching at all but providing an antithesis to "The Third Season Verdict" that was proposed. Some folks here apparently would have fired some of the winningest coaches of all time after Year 3--along with Buzz and Crean in their 2nd head coaching jobs.
Oh, I know exactly why you chose the coaches you did.
I'm calling it a stretch because BU, Army or Northeastern are not comparable to MU.
Based on your logic, you would have to argue that we simply didn't give Bob Dukiet enough time because his 20-9 record in his 3rd season at St. Peters was significantly better than that of Coach K, Jim Calhoun or Rick Pitino.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on December 31, 2010, 12:28:17 PM
btw, I would say that all the assistant coaches you mentioned walked into a pretty sweet spot in terms of what they followed and were long-time assistants in many cases (or longer than nine months). And, yes, Dixon was under the gun in Year 3 by the Pitt fan base.
I would say Buzz walked into a pretty sweet spot at Marquette. Big East affiliation. One of the highest basketball budgets in the country. NBA arena with the 11th largest capacity in D1. A roster with two future NBA players plus four of the top 10 all-time leading scorers. Strong heritage to sell.
And Buzz actually had
more overall assistant coaching experience than any of the five I mentioned (in addition to the head coaching experience that none of the others had).
Buzz: 17 years as an assistant + 1 year as a head coach.
Izzo: 15 years as an assistant + 0 years as a head coach.
Dixon: 14 years + 0
Miller: 12 years + 0
Few: 10 years + 0
Boeheim: 7 years +0
I suppose you'll try to argue that all of Boeheim's 7 years were at Syracuse. Well so what? Pete Gaudet was an assistant for 12 years at Duke under Coach K. That didn't make him an outstanding head coach coach.
Finally, I guess Dixon was as much under the gun in the middle of his third year at Pitt as any coach who leads a team to a 15-0 start and a top 10 ranking can be.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 31, 2010, 02:08:47 PM
Buzz is on trial here 24/7, 365 days a year. Every transfer, recruiting miss, time out, substitution, etc. is scrutinized, investigated and usually results in an indictment. Those who generally vote to acquit are demeaned as fanboys. That's life on the internet.
I guess I am a fan boy. Sometimes good things take time. I don't need to make the guy walk on egg shells.
Quote from: Marquette84 on December 31, 2010, 04:48:25 PM.
I'm calling it a stretch because BU, Army or Northeastern are not comparable to MU.
Based on your logic, you would have to argue that we simply didn't give Bob Dukiet enough time because his 20-9 record in his 3rd season at St. Peters was significantly better than that of Coach K, Jim Calhoun or Rick Pitino.
I am confused--you say it is unfair and then I clarify that the numbers I quoted matched your challenge and now you disagree? I quoted Coach K #'s at
Duke, Calhoun at
UCONN, and Pitino at BU as comparable to Buzz. Isn't that a fairer comparison per your challenge (perhaps ex, Pitino because of the three year?). Fact is, you would have fired 3 HOF coaches (which I assume you do since you are challenging my defense of Buzz vs. the OP).
And yes, Dixon was under fire as he was left with a loaded roster and the fans felt his team finishing 10-8 after that 15-0 start was a choke job after an early exit in his second year. That he was left with talent but couldn't do anything with it.
Bob Dukiet? lol...he didn't pass the one year test as Plan D. But, let's play your game: Who is this after three years? Should he have been given an extension?
1994–95 21–12 7–5 T-3rd NIT Finals
1995–96 23–8 10–4 2nd (Blue) NCAA Second Round
1996–97 22–9 9–5 2nd (Blue) NCAA First Round
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 31, 2010, 04:08:14 PM
No one is suggesting firing the guy, good grief.
I'm sorry you disagree with the analogy. I'm open to a better one. Big time sports with big time money, people are going to be public about a lot of things. That includes irrational praise and irrational criticism. As stated, I'm open to a better analogy.
I just think Buzz is accountable to a lot more than quarterly numbers (wins/loses). I see the comparison to the public sectore more fitting than to the private...very political in many ways. He's accountable to being the face of MU, he's accountable to every person that pays tuitions, buys season tickets, in public school cases - taxpayers, alum, and most importantly to the kids/parents that trust he will see to it that their kids get better as bball players, students and in life. I don't think Buzz would be happy doing what Huggins does and that's because he says he holds himself accountable for more than numbers/wins. You and I differ on Bobby Knight...while I agree he was a great coach, and his players were solid people/graduated, I thought his actions were an embarassment to IU. He could handle the pressures of numbers, he couldn't handle the pressures of being accountable for the other things that led to his fall.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on December 31, 2010, 05:09:19 PM
Bob Dukiet? lol...he didn't pass the one year test as Plan D. But, let's play your game: Who is this after three years? Should he have been given an extension?
1994–95 21–12 7–5 T-3rd NIT Finals
1995–96 23–8 10–4 2nd (Blue) NCAA Second Round
1996–97 22–9 9–5 2nd (Blue) NCAA First Round
Only if his contract had a provision that he would always buckle up!
Quote from: The Golden Avalanche on December 31, 2010, 04:23:46 PM
To be fair, this went on with the last guy as well.
Every transfer was further proof he was a dick. Every blown lead further proof he overburdened his players with scouts. Every missed big was further proof he was a crash or burn recruiter. Etc.
The only difference is that the actors of the dialogue have switched sides.
Speaking only for myself, I was a bit of a Crean fan for the first five years or so. Even late in his tenure when it had become clear he was a douche I didn't second guess his every move. I took deep breaths and tried to overlook his shortcomings even as I rooted for the team.
I get every bit as frustrated during games as the most negative of the posters around here, but I just don't understand fans that aren't capable of adding any context or perspective to those frustrations after the final whistle. Criticism is one thing, but some of this over the top ultra-negatism says more about these posters than it does about our players or coaches.
Quote from: Pakuni on December 31, 2010, 04:25:52 PM
Little blue pills? Tremendous wood? Sucking Johnsons?
Seems someone is a tad bit phallically obsessed today.
What exactly are you trying to tell us, Chico's?
I must have Richard Nixon on the brain
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 31, 2010, 06:08:19 PM
Speaking only for myself, I was a bit of a Crean fan for the first five years or so. Even late in his tenure when it had become clear he was a douche I didn't second guess his every move. I took deep breaths and tried to overlook his shortcomings even as I rooted for the team.
I get every bit as frustrated during games as the most negative of the posters around here, but I just don't understand fans that aren't capable of adding any context or perspective to those frustrations after the final whistle. Criticism is one thing, but some of this over the top ultra-negatism says more about these posters than it does about our players or coaches.
Especially when in your mind you categorize "the vast majority" (your words) of comments by some posters as negative which is comical and categorically false. I'd love to know what isn't negative the way you paint so many posts as having negative intent.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 31, 2010, 02:04:07 PM
Here's what I know FOR A FACT. Before he coached one single game his contract was extended multiple years and multiple millions...why? Because they were not going to be allowed to go for the quick fix and some of the players they wanted to go after (JUCOS, etc) were off limits. That's what I know FOR A FACT.
From IU sources, IU athletic department sources, people in the industry (i.e. President of Fox Sports who just happens to be an IU grad and just happened to be a colleague), from people associated with his agent, etc,
Lenny, I realize you had tremendous wood and I'm sorry to deflate it for you with reality, but that's the deal. They got Dumes, a former DI player that was at Juco for one year AFTER playing DI. That's it initially.
There's A REASON WHY HE GOT EXTRA YEARS AND EXTRA MONEY before coaching a single game or practice. Why don't you ask yourself WHY? Was the school in just a giving mood? Or did the school put conditions on how the rebuilding was going to go and once it was determined the quick fix (JUCO, etc) was essentially off limits early on, they added years and money to the contract. Hmmm.
Name drop all you want, the fact is that Crean was recruiting jucos and signing them right from the start. This jibes with indee's inside sources' "facts" but not with yours.
As for Crean getting extra money and years color me unsurprised. He was and I guess remains the undisputed champ of using phony leverage to extort years and money out of institutions run by people thought to smart enough to know better.
As for my tremendous wood, I guess I should feel complimented, but your fixation with it and with "sucking johnsons" just creeps me out.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 31, 2010, 06:15:18 PM
Especially when in your mind you categorize "the vast majority" (your words) of comments by some posters as negative which is comical and categorically false. I'd love to know what isn't negative the way you paint so many posts as having negative intent.
As explained in a post to which you never replied to, my words were and are accurate.
Quote from: silverback on December 30, 2010, 09:28:30 PM
I certainly didn't come up with this theory, but I've seen it hold up in both college basketball and college football. The third season is often a major indicator of where a coach and a program are headed — or what they already are. This third season will serve that purpose for MU.
It's far from over, but this measuring stick campaign is not promising. As MU moves through Buzz Williams's third go-around, the positives are...
His teams are tough. They don't quit and are difficult to put away. The offense is based on aggressive, high-percentage scoring. He can recruit quick athletes to drive that system.
But, he is not a strong defensive coach. The long-held Marquette tradition of outstanding, shut down defense is dead. No team is made uncomfortable against MU. It is not difficult to score on a Buzz Williams team — nor is it difficult to grab offensive rebounds against MU. The teams are so obsessed with transition and paint touches, they forget to protect their own rim.
When you add in the bizarre recruiting shenanigans we see every year, (speaking as just one fan who's been going to games since 1974) I don't like where this program is headed right now, but I hope all of Buzz's platitudes and his faith prove me very wrong.
How is Mr Crean doing so far into his 3rd season? Based on last nights performance, I am seeing good progress at MU.
Quote from: mviale on December 31, 2010, 07:36:41 PM
How is Mr Crean doing so far into his 3rd season? Based on last nights performance, I am seeing good progress at MU.
I don't buy much into this third year verdict theory for any college coach because context needs to be used when evaluating the job that any coach is doing, not just randomly picking the third season. Crean being an example of that and i'm not big fan of his after how he left MU.
When any college coach takes over the head coaching job of a program, that coach is taking over his own unique situation. The tradition of that school. What the roster looks like that the new coach is taking over. What the scholarship grid looks like.
Various factors can play a big role in why a new coach wins or loses during the first year or two, but then does better or worse in year three.
Unless a coach is just flat out terrible for say his first three years and his recruiting classes show little reason to have hope that the future can get significantly better, i think five years is a better evaluation point. By then, that coach will have coached both players he initially inherited and many of his recruits will have had time to develop and play under that coaches system.
So if by year five the program under a coach hasn't had much success on the court and the recruiting has also been mediocre to poor, then it's time to either get rid of that coach or inform him that he's now on paper thin ice. None of that fits Buzz for me so far to then believe that he's in way over his head, thus i have no problem with showing him some patience with this year unless it becomes a trend going forward into year 4 and 5.
I agree with 5 years. If Buzz cannot make the NCAAs in 2011 and 2012, he will be asked to move on.
Quote from: avid1010 on December 31, 2010, 03:37:46 PM
BS. The F500 analogy is ridiculous...I'm just going to leave that one alone.
On to you then claiming Buzz should expect to deal with critical people....absolutely, but if important people within the program are critical, they better have a good plan in place prior to going too far in that direction.
In a bit of irony, tonight on ESPN radio they were talking about coaching performances in college football and the NFL. They were interviewing Patterson of TCU and the question came up who is accountable for a team...the players, the coaches, etc? Here was the answer
"It all falls on the coach, no different than a CEO of a Fortune 500 company"
Loved it. Wish they had TiVo radio so I could have saved it. LOL
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 31, 2010, 06:38:22 PM
Name drop all you want, the fact is that Crean was recruiting jucos and signing them right from the start. This jibes with indee's inside sources' "facts" but not with yours.
As for Crean getting extra money and years color me unsurprised. He was and I guess remains the undisputed champ of using phony leverage to extort years and money out of institutions run by people thought to smart enough to know better.
As for my tremendous wood, I guess I should feel complimented, but your fixation with it and with "sucking johnsons" just creeps me out.
You would be wrong, but then that's a natural patter for you. Perhaps a New Year's resolution you could work on...trying to be more right.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 31, 2010, 06:42:00 PM
As explained in a post to which you never replied to, my words were and are accurate.
Nope, and this will be revealed in a few days that not only were your words not accurate, they aren't even remotely CLOSE to being accurate. LOL. You'll see why and the joke will be on you. I asked if there were any auditors on this board (on the superbar) because I was sick of your ridiculous comments and outright lies. As somewhat of a joke I asked if they could do what they do in their normal, everyday jobs, and validate your ridiculous claims. Several PM'd me and one volunteered to take up the mantle of seeing if your statement was true. Of course it wasn't, which I knew. It wasn't even close. Of course, that's also where it comes into "what is negative" which is why I laughed at your earlier post tonight. One guy could say cherry ice cream and depending who the poster is, you would label it negative. That's why it's good to have someone independent on this.
So sorry Lenny, your posts on that subject were ridiculous, dead wrong (or in your terms...definitely INACCURATE). The best part about it, I didn't have to do any of the work to prove it. LOL. I believe he is posting the finalized results tomorrow or Sunday. Happy New Year...it's always fun to deal with someone like you. It really is. :D
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 31, 2010, 08:27:15 PM
In a bit of irony, tonight on ESPN radio they were talking about coaching performances in college football and the NFL. They were interviewing Patterson of TCU and the question came up who is accountable for a team...the players, the coaches, etc? Here was the answer
"It all falls on the coach, no different than a CEO of a Fortune 500 company"
Loved it. Wish they had TiVo radio so I could have saved it. LOL
I didn't see it as you talking CEO's...the way you made it sound you were comparing the pressures you have at work to the pressures Buzz faces.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 31, 2010, 06:15:18 PM
Especially when in your mind you categorize "the vast majority" (your words) of comments by some posters as negative which is comical and categorically false. I'd love to know what isn't negative the way you paint so many posts as having negative intent.
Pretty ironic as usual Chicos - when you make the above post..and then make this below post (less than 4 hours after posting the above) in the Poor Maymon and Tenn thread - you just make yourself look like a complete tool.
"Can you imagine any coaching staff buying into Tim Maymon and signing his kid....oh wait."
No negative intent here Chicos?? Please spare all of us yet another feeble attempt to backtrack from stupid comments you make, and your continued hypocrisy. I really was hoping you'd change your ways for 2011, but it looks like more of the same.
Quote from: avid1010 on December 31, 2010, 09:03:19 PM
Yeah, we wouldn't want kids who were brought into this country by their parents to be able to earn citizenship by completing two years of college or serving in our military for two years. Happy New Year.
I'm ok with that part, it's the other parts of the legislation like rewarding someone for breaking the law I have problems with. Or pushing these kids to the head of the line over people that didn't break the law from the start. But generally speaking, I'm not against it...you can't pick your parents.
Until they secure the borders, however, no dice. Let the folks in charge show they are actually going to, ahem, FOLLOW THE LAW and ENFORCE IT. Then we can talk about more goodies and giveaways.
Quote from: Ners on December 31, 2010, 08:58:57 PM
Pretty ironic as usual Chicos - when you make the above post..and then make this below post (less than 4 hours after posting the above) in the Poor Maymon and Tenn thread - you just make yourself look like a complete tool.
"Can you imagine any coaching staff buying into Tim Maymon and signing his kid....oh wait."
No negative intent here Chicos?? Please spare all of us yet another feeble attempt to backtrack from stupid comments you make, and your continued hypocrisy. I really was hoping you'd change your ways for 2011, but it looks like more of the same.
Not really....I fully admit that post was negative toward Buzz and we never should have signed the kid in the first place. Here's the problem Ners, Lenny will take that one post and extrapolate it to mean VAST majority. The evidence is overwhelmingly contrary to what he's saying. Thus the irony.
The search function is there for anyone else to do the checking. The problem is that in Lenny's mind if you're not ringing praised in every post about Buzz, it's automatically deemed negative in his mind. Of course most posts are neither negative or positive but that little factoid escapes him. Or, better yer, in some posts there is both praise and criticism and he will focus on ONLY one part, and we all know which part that is.
But rest assured Ners, that post about Buzz recruiting Maymon WAS negative and absolutely intentional. One of the very FEW negative posts I've had toward Buzz and the data proves it out.
Happy New Year.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 31, 2010, 08:35:06 PM
Nope, and this will be revealed in a few days that not only were your words not accurate, they aren't even remotely CLOSE to being accurate. LOL. You'll see why and the joke will be on you. I asked if there were any auditors on this board (on the superbar) because I was sick of your ridiculous comments and outright lies. As somewhat of a joke I asked if they could do what they do in their normal, everyday jobs, and validate your ridiculous claims. Several PM'd me and one volunteered to take up the mantle of seeing if your statement was true. Of course it wasn't, which I knew. It wasn't even close. Of course, that's also where it comes into "what is negative" which is why I laughed at your earlier post tonight. One guy could say cherry ice cream and depending who the poster is, you would label it negative. That's why it's good to have someone independent on this.
So sorry Lenny, your posts on that subject were ridiculous, dead wrong (or in your terms...definitely INACCURATE). The best part about it, I didn't have to do any of the work to prove it. LOL. I believe he is posting the finalized results tomorrow or Sunday. Happy New Year...it's always fun to deal with someone like you. It really is. :D
For the absolute last possible time. I don't count neutral posts. If you say you liked or didn't like his tie, for example, I don't care. I only care about the ones that are POSITIVE or NEGATIVE. Every squirming post, every DJ Newbill post, every post about his hiring, every post from disgruntled UNO fans or obscure Milwaukee bloggers, etc, etc, etc. You may have even ripped him more often for one loss last year (DePaul) than you've praised him for all of his wins. You've been more negative than positive from the jump, though I have noticed you posting what could be construed as vaguely positive (though tepid at best) items lately. Now that I understand you've assigned one of your toadies to tally up the pro/con posts I understand why.
Quote from: willie warrior on December 31, 2010, 06:53:13 AM
How dare you guys criticize In Buzz we trust? Even if we have a bad year, which nobody wants, it should be chalked up as just that-a bad year. There is not any indicator by that. Remember, Buzz led us to the promised land the last two years, even though he was left with a bare cupboard. And it was not his fault that a few of the recruits did not work out like: Roseboro, Smith, Clark, Mbao, Maymon, Newbill, Cadougan, etc.--after all 40 % of D I men's BB players transfer every year. And it is not his fault that MU missed out on all of its top priorities in the early signing period.
We will perservere this year, because the season is not yet half over, we have about 8 top 25 teams on the schedule with whom we will definitely pick up many quality wins, and our rotation is now permanently set. In Buzz we trust!
Do you ever have a point with your sarcastically negative aggressive posts? We get it, you think Buzz should be openly criticized more. Guess what? He is.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 31, 2010, 08:35:06 PM
Nope, and this will be revealed in a few days that not only were your words not accurate, they aren't even remotely CLOSE to being accurate. LOL. You'll see why and the joke will be on you. I asked if there were any auditors on this board (on the superbar) because I was sick of your ridiculous comments and outright lies. As somewhat of a joke I asked if they could do what they do in their normal, everyday jobs, and validate your ridiculous claims. Several PM'd me and one volunteered to take up the mantle of seeing if your statement was true. Of course it wasn't, which I knew. It wasn't even close. Of course, that's also where it comes into "what is negative" which is why I laughed at your earlier post tonight. One guy could say cherry ice cream and depending who the poster is, you would label it negative. That's why it's good to have someone independent on this.
So sorry Lenny, your posts on that subject were ridiculous, dead wrong (or in your terms...definitely INACCURATE). The best part about it, I didn't have to do any of the work to prove it. LOL. I believe he is posting the finalized results tomorrow or Sunday. Happy New Year...it's always fun to deal with someone like you. It really is. :D
Oh my GOD. you are the most annoying person in the world! Nobody gives a
s**t about this and you actually are going to have someone do an analysis and start a thread about it? Talk about arrogance. Talk about narcissism! Using a board that's supposed to be about MU basdketball to score some petty victory in an argument nobody cares about except you? GET A LIFE!
I for one hope whatever BS thread gets started is removed immediately. This has NOTHING to do with MU basketball and everything to do with your super-inflated ego.
Quote from: Aughnanure on January 01, 2011, 02:18:04 AM
Do you ever have a point with your sarcastically negative aggressive posts? We get it, you think Buzz should be openly criticized more. Guess what? He is.
Wow--thanks for the tutorial. I did not know "sarcastically" was a word.
Interesting thread, but back to the point of discussion, you can judge a coach and the direction of the program after three years. We'll have a good idea during the heart of the Big East season.
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on January 01, 2011, 06:40:18 AM
Oh my GOD. you are the most annoying person in the world! Nobody gives a s**t about this and you actually are going to have someone do an analysis and start a thread about it? Talk about arrogance. Talk about narcissism! Using a board that's supposed to be about MU basdketball to score some petty victory in an argument nobody cares about except you? GET A LIFE!
I for one hope whatever BS thread gets started is removed immediately. This has NOTHING to do with MU basketball and everything to do with your super-inflated ego.
Not really, it has everything to do with correcting a complete liar. I've let it go for months and months and finally had it. You can't keep stating a lie for months and months and let it go unanswered. Nothing to do with ego, everything to do with proving a liar wrong. Happy New Year.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 01, 2011, 12:01:07 PM
Not really, it has everything to do with correcting a complete liar. I've let it go for months and months and finally had it. You can't keep stating a lie for months and months and let it go unanswered. Nothing to do with ego, everything to do with proving a liar wrong. Happy New Year.
Happy New Year to you too.
Whatever it's about, NOBODY cares except you so please just let it go and let's talk about MU hoops.
Happy with the win today. let's hope it's the first of many.
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on January 01, 2011, 12:08:18 PM
Happy New Year to you too.
Whatever it's about, NOBODY cares except you so please just let it go and let's talk about MU hoops.
Happy with the win today. let's hope it's the first of many.
I'm happy to drop...have him apologize or rescind his lie and it's over. Pretty simple.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 01, 2011, 12:20:01 PM
I'm happy to drop...have him apologize or rescind his lie and it's over. Pretty simple.
Now you're just being childish
Back to the topic...didn't somebody once say that you shouldn't judge a coach until his 5th year?
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on January 01, 2011, 12:27:08 PM
Now you're just being childish
So is he, but I don't see you attacking him for making ridiculous claims that are false on every level.......