While typing on a friend's computer in Kentucky (sat about 20 rows behind the MU bench yesterday), I've got us down for 17 losses in a row to good teams in tight spots. Like I said, please let me know if I'm missing one on the good side. I'm judging this as a loss to a regular-season or BE tournament opponent that eventually made the tournament (or projected to this year), or an NC2A tourney game against a team from a BCS conference, where I can remember the details of the end of the game. Last one I remember going the right way was Novak against ND in '06.
10-11 - Louisville, Vanderbilt, Wisconsin, Gonzaga
09-10 - Washington, Notre Dame, Villanova, West Virginia, Florida State
08-09 - Missouri, Villanova (BET), Syracuse
07-08 - Stanford, Georgetown
06-07 - Louisville
05-06 - Alabama, Louisville
I don't know, last year we did beat GT @ home and Vill(BET) both close at the end plus all those OT wins on the road. Hopefully that starts happening this year.
First question is how do you define tight spot?
Xavier last year?
Quote from: gepsguys on January 16, 2011, 10:57:54 AM
I don't know, last year we did beat GT @ home and Vill(BET) both close at the end plus all those OT wins on the road. Hopefully that starts happening this year.
Yeah, it isn't seventeen in a row unless you are adjusting your criteria to make it seventeen in a row. We definitely have a losing record but the years you mentioned where we had close wins against tourney teams....
09-10: Georgetown (62-59), Villanova (80-76)
08-09: Wisconsin (61-58)
07-08: @Wisconsin (81-76)
06-07: @Pittsburgh (77-74OT), Pittsburgh (75-71)
05-06: Oral Roberts in Alaska (73-70), Pittsburgh (84-82)
Buzz has to be kidding with this quote: "Our experience in those close games is beneficial in a lot of ways."
Wouldn't you think 10 kicks to the crotch would make a team learn?
That "experience" buzz talks about only means something if you can start turning the L's into W's. And that time, is now. It's been 18-mos of losing by 5 pts or less.
Quote from: ecompt on January 16, 2011, 11:24:57 AM
Buzz has to be kidding with this quote: "Our experience in those close games is beneficial in a lot of ways."
Wouldn't you think 10 kicks to the crotch would make a team learn?
Great quote by Coach Buzz. He sure as hell is not referring to coaching experience, however!
After making the same post on the other board, we've added WVU this year, and Gtown and nova last year to the good side of the tally. Up to 3-17.
The OT wins on the road last year, while all certainly exciting, all were against NIT teams, all of whom failed to win 20 games in the regular season and lost at least 12 games in the regular season.
Looking back, Xavier last year is fair. Down 2 with 6 to go, 11-0 run, Xavier never back within less than 7 the rest of the way. Up to 4-17.
Rodents 08-09 I'm not sure about. Down and came back, but also allowed four baskets and iffy foul shooting in the final minutes. Up 7 with 1:20 to go and won by 3. We'll count it, but the next one that's iffy will not count. Up to 5-17.
Rodents 07-08 counts too. Tied with about 4 to go, 7-1 run, Rodents never a shot to get within one possession again. up to 6-17.
Any OT game counts in the tally, so add Pitt in 06-07. Other Pitt game that year MU had a 17-point lead at one point in the 2nd half. Said we'd count the questionable Rodents game from 08-09, so the second Pitt game is out. Up to 7-17.
05-06 Pitt could be argued was similar story, up 10 in 2nd half, if Gray makes those 2 FTs MU very well could lose.
Oral Roberts isn't a BCS opponent, no sale on that one.
Thanks everybody. I was just looking to get an honest count of what we're at since the last one I could remember, which was Novak in '06 against ND. I'll happily admit my parameters were vague so as to generate some conversation. L
Looks like it's more like something along the lines of 7-17. Still obviously not good. Whether it's simply poor luck and the law of averages kicks in at some point to balance this out, or whether there are flaws that need to be corrected is the next question.
In the last two seasons under Buzz and with primarily Buzz's recruits, MU is 1-9 against ranked/NCAA teams when MU scores 70 points or less, only beating Gtown at home last year. When MU cannot outscore a top opponent, they cannot outdefend you.
2010-11: Louisville, Wisconsin, Zags
2009-10: Wisconsin, WVU, Gtown (W), Pitt, ND, Gtown (BET), Edit: forgot FSU (L)
MU was 4-1 when this occurs versus lesser opponents the last two seasons, all from last season: DePaul (L), UCONN (W), USF (W), SJU (2 W's).
In Buzz's first season, MU was 3-1 vs. top talent (Wisconsin, Tenn (L), NCSU, Utah St.). And 4-2 overall--add in (IPFW and USF (L). "Three Amigos + Zar" or Dale Layer on the bench?
I am just going add that in these 70 or less games the last two seasons, the only top coach MU has beaten was Thompson (once). Calhoun was out sick vs. MU. Heath is the only other one still employed that Buzz beat. We can P&M about one play or the other, but it is clear MU is getting outschooled in these games on the bench. Buzz will learn from this burn, but defense can win ugly for you. One stop in these games and MU is no longer one of the "unluckiest" teams in the nation.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 17, 2011, 07:44:03 AM
I am just going add that in these 70 or less games the last two seasons, the only top coach MU has beaten was Thompson (once). Calhoun was out sick vs. MU. Heath is the only other one still employed that Buzz beat. We can P&M about one play or the other, but it is clear MU is getting outschooled in these games on the bench. Buzz will learn from this burn, but defense can win ugly for you. One stop in these games and MU is no longer one of the "unluckiest" teams in the nation.
Not sure, but I believe Buzz has beaten Pitino and Ryan who I think many would believe are top coaches. Has not Buzz also beat Villanova with Wright and Pitt with Dixon? Again, not sure, but most would agree that those guys are top coaches.
OMG, am I defending Buzz?
Quote from: willie warrior on January 17, 2011, 08:20:45 AM
Not sure, but I believe Buzz has beaten Pitino and Ryan who I think many would believe are top coaches. Has not Buzz also beat Villanova with Wright and Pitt with Dixon? Again, not sure, but most would agree that those guys are top coaches.
OMG, am I defending Buzz?
I am referencing the
70 points or less grinders...to me, that is where defense and coaching come
more into play. Buzz is excellent overall with his system built on offensive efficiency and the BE coaches give him much props...however, these grinders--not so good. MU eff'ed up considerably on offense in the last five minutes (if not all game except we were getting to the line) as Pitino kept throwing different defensive looks at MU. However, what did MU stop in these last five? That is what I am talking about...and where the biggies earn their scratch. If it is an ugly game (especially on the road), MU needs stops--not to get broken down
again on a switch in the last four seconds.
Dr. Blackheart -
The only thing I would point out would be that your criteria <70 points, already puts Marquette at a disadvantage, as that MAY indicate a game style/tempo that MU prefers to not play.
I for one, am not surprised to see the record split when you use that criteria. Against lesser teams/coaches, we can overcome the tempo and win on talent. Against better, when they win the battle of the tempo, we have a tough time overcoming it.
Quote from: NCAARules on January 17, 2011, 08:57:58 AM
Dr. Blackheart -
The only thing I would point out would be that your criteria <70 points, already puts Marquette at a disadvantage, as that MAY indicate a game style/tempo that MU prefers to not play.
I for one, am not surprised to see the record split when you use that criteria. Against lesser teams/coaches, we can overcome the tempo and win on talent. Against better, when they win the battle of the tempo, we have a tough time overcoming it.
I am not either...but...there are plenty of these "ugly" games that separate teams and coaches. A team can always rely on defense if it is stressed when the shots or calls are not going your way. We cannot buy a stop when it matters in these "ugly" games it seems. For example, in both Vandy and UL games we were beat on a switch for an easy game winning lay-up--basically uncontested. We normally do not switch on defense--we delay and retreat...but Buzz has stated we always switch in the last four minutes. Well, the other coaches have figured that out and have broken down MU's defense. Coming back 18 points in seven minutes--and the D was where? UND was 7 points in the last 1+ minute last year. Wisky?
Quote from: NCAARules on January 17, 2011, 08:57:58 AM
Dr. Blackheart -
The only thing I would point out would be that your criteria <70 points, already puts Marquette at a disadvantage, as that MAY indicate a game style/tempo that MU prefers to not play.
I for one, am not surprised to see the record split when you use that criteria. Against lesser teams/coaches, we can overcome the tempo and win on talent. Against better, when they win the battle of the tempo, we have a tough time overcoming it.
Blackheart -
To further this point. You're constructing a criteria that MU does not do well when the style and tempo of the game does not suit this team. Not surprisingly, their record is poor.
I was talking to a big ND bball fan yesterday and he said that ND does poorly when they are in uptempo high scoring games ... a style that does not fit their style.
I would venture that most teams do poorly when you ask how they did in games that do not suit their style.
What is MU record against ranked/NCAA teams when they score more than 70 points?
If it is good, the answer is not learning how to win less than 70 point games. The answer is not getting caught in a less than 70 point game at all!
Blackheart - That's very interesting on the switching vs. staying defenses. I had wondered that, but had not seen it discussed.
I'll be honest, I did not see the game, as my daughter had her First Reconciliation, and DVR failed at home. (thank you TWC).
It may be morbid, but I'd really like to see the second half to see for myself what changed. (ESPN did not replay the game overnight on any of its networks, so SOL there).
Let's look at the last 7 minutes of UL's improbabale climb back from destruction, down 18 at home
- UL made 8-10 FG's
- Five of these were lay-up attempts. UL made four of these
- Five of these we three point attempts, UL made four
- On the two misses, Jennings grabbed the offensive rebound and was immediately fouled, making four free throws
So, UL had 10 possessions in the last seven minutes, shot 80% on lay-ups
and threes, and scored on the two misses. MU had
zero stops defensively in the last seven minutes of the game. Damning. Let me repeat that: Zero, zip and none.
We have had the worst defensive effort in at least 15 years vs. Pitt and one of the biggest come backs in NCAA history if not MU's pulled out of the hat. Start playing team defense, it is as simple as that. You don't always get to control the tempo in a game--you are going against great coaches who know our offensive strengths and try to control that.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on January 17, 2011, 09:53:03 AM
Blackheart -
What is MU record against ranked/NCAA teams when they score more than 70 points?
If it is good, the answer is not learning how to win less than 70 point games. The answer is not getting caught in a less than 70 point game at all!
By my count, we were 6-7 when MU scores over 70 points in the past two seasons against quality opponents (ranked at the time or NCAA bound). I might add, I edited my above post on "70 or under" games as I missed the Florida State loss...which makes us 1-9 against quality teams. Yikes!
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 17, 2011, 10:36:49 AM
By my count, we were 6-7 when MU scores over 70 points in the past two seasons against quality opponents (ranked at the time or NCAA bound). I might add, I edited my above post on "70 or under" games as I missed the Florida State loss...which makes us 1-9 against quality teams. Yikes!
MU is is 100 and 150 (or something like that) all-time against ranked teams. You're saying that the we are 6 and 7 when scoring more than 70 points against ranked/NCAA teams. So, we are about a .500 team against ranked teams when we score more than 70 points. Restated, we
are a ranked team, or play like we should be ranked, when we score more than 70 points against good competition.
If you thought we should be 12 and 1 against ranked teams when we score more than 70 points, then just change our name to Duke.
I guess I'm still struggling as to the point here ... when we narrowly define the criteria being games we do not play well in against ranked/NCAA teams, we lose. What is the surprise here?
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 17, 2011, 10:01:12 AM
Let's look at the last 7 minutes of UL's improbabale climb back from destruction, down 18 at home
- UL made 8-10 FG's
- Five of these were lay-up attempts. UL made four of these
- Five of these we three point attempts, UL made four
- On the two misses, Jennings grabbed the offensive rebound and was immediately fouled, making four free throws
So, UL had 10 possessions in the last seven minutes, shot 80% on lay-ups and threes, and scored on the two misses. MU had zero stops defensively in the last seven minutes of the game. Damning. Let me repeat that: Zero, zip and none.
We have had the worst defensive effort in at least 15 years vs. Pitt and one of the biggest come backs in NCAA history if not MU's pulled out of the hat. Start playing team defense, it is as simple as that. You don't always get to control the tempo in a game--you are going against great coaches who know our offensive strengths and try to control that.
I'm not trying to be "Mr. Smartass" but we were outscored 24 to 5 over this stretch. What did we think the stats would look like?
And again, Pitt could very well win the national championship and was 47 ans 1 on their home court. If we played good defense and won the game, in their house, then move us into the top 10! It takes that kind of effort to beat Pitt this year. So, we are we surprised we struggle against that quality competition?
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on January 17, 2011, 11:01:04 AM
MU is is 100 and 150 (or something like that) all-time against ranked teams. You're saying that the we are 6 and 7 when scoring more than 70 points against ranked/NCAA teams. So, we are about a .500 team against ranked teams when we score more than 70 points. Restated, we are a ranked team, or play like we should be ranked, when we score more than 70 points against good competition.
If you thought we should be 12 and 1 against ranked teams when we score more than 70 points, then just change our name to Duke.
I guess I'm still struggling as to the point here ... when we narrowly define the criteria being games we do not play well in against ranked/NCAA teams, we lose. What is the surprise here?
I am not narrowly defining anything--these great coaches are...I expect to be .500 (5-5)....I don't expect to be 1-9 against them when we are .500 if we score more than 70 points. Back to my original point, we lose games when great coaches take us away from our strengths--offensive efficiency and tempo. Why? Buzz's teams don't win these ugly games because
they don't play great team defense. That is the only thing a team can rely on when the other team limits you. Ten straight scoring possessions, and all you needed was one stop. These coaches share notes: limit MU's tempo and you win because you can break down their defense. Can Buzz win when the game slows? I don't see that evidence yet.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on January 17, 2011, 11:05:15 AM
I'm not trying to be "Mr. Smartass" but we were outscored 24 to 5 over this stretch. What did we think the stats would look like?
I just would hope for one stop. Please show us evidence that Buzz's teams play great defense?
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 17, 2011, 11:17:21 AM
I just would hope for one stop. Please show us evidence that Buzz's teams play great defense?
How about the first 34 minutes of the Louisville game and the 40 minutes of the ND game before that?
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on January 17, 2011, 11:18:27 AM
How about the first 34 minutes of the Louisville game and the 40 minutes of the ND game before that?
Laughable...got news for you, 1-9 gets coaches fired. Close games are won at the end...and this team was AGAIN broken down at the end of one of these close games when one stop matters. Not a blow out win where we controlled the tempo to our favor like UND and had Frozena in there at the end.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 17, 2011, 11:13:22 AM
I expect to be .500 (5-5)....I don't expect to be 1-9 against them when we are .500 if we score more than 70 points.
IF MU was .500 less than 70 points, and .500 more than 70 points. We would be a ranked team now.
I agree our defense is lacking. That said, we are an elite level offense. Maybe it was our offense that let us down the last 5:44? We only scored 5 points. Even with the defensive collapse, we should have been able to score more than 5 points down the stretch and keep Louisville out of reach.
Lastly, what is easier to teach ... offense or defense? I would argue it is defense.
Buzz has recruited high quality offensive players and it shows in the stats. None of these guys have had to play defense before, and certainly not with each other. Give it time and they will figure it out. Defense has been steadily getting better all year.
Maybe we should look at the defensive stats of the players we are recruiting? What are Wilson and Anderson's defensive abilities? We certainly do not need more offense.
Nailed it,84. If MU simply runs its offense the last 5 minutes, this discussion isn't happening. I don't know if the offense ground to a halt because that is what Buzz called or if the guys out there looked at the clock and thought they could milk it. I've seen enough and coached enough to know that it could be either. Although it does seem with MU it is more on Buzz. But if the guys on the floor simply made better decisions (Bucks layup and dumb pass ahead to Butler, Cadougan with a bad throw away) and run the offense to score rather than take time off of the clock, MU wins.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 17, 2011, 11:27:10 AM
Laughable...got news for you, 1-9 gets coaches fired. Close games are won at the end...and this team was AGAIN broken down at the end of one of these close games when one stop matters. Not a blow out win where we controlled the tempo to our favor like UND and had Frozena in there at the end.
I think you'll find that when most BE teams play a style that does not suit them, they do not do well. (With MU that is slowdown to prevent us from scoring less than 70 points a game as our offense is so good) I'll bet 10 to 12 BE coaches would get axed per your criteria (off the top of my head, Georgetown, ND, Prov, WVU, Cincy, 'ville and Uconn will probably fit your criteria to be fired).
This morning on ESPN radio some New England fans are noting that Brady is o-3 in his last three playoff games. They are asking if he "is done" and if they should move on. Yes, please Pats, cut Brady!
Not sure who demands a more impossible standard, Pats fan or you demanding MU be able to win against ranked teams in all styles right now.
Be patient. Buzz has the offense going and the defense is coming around. Too many prima donna offense scoring machines that never thought about defense and too many guys that have never played with each other before this year (like Jae, VB, Junior, Outle, DG and JJ). This is why we have such a high ceiling. Offense is a natural talent and team defense can be taught.
I am not irrational on this to be clear which is hard to convey on the internet. The hard fact is, Buzz's teams are great offensively--if not elite, but this is a tough league with great, long-standing coaches. Failure to play great team defense is a pattern with Buzz...not good, not very good, but great. BE coaches will take away what a team does well--great teams overcome this by playing tough defense as it is the one thing they can rely on in these ugly games.
Ten straight possessions without a stop to finish a game when all you needed was one to win it. One stop. And folks are blaming Buzz for going to the spread offense when MU was already in the double bonus. Got news, Coach K did the same thing against Maryland and won it. One defensive stop and Pitino is fouling -- game, set, match MU.
It's a half-dozen of one, six of the other. If we get one stop against Louisville we win. If we score one more basket we win. We ran into the absolute perfect storm of a collapse. That's the only possible way we lose that game. Arguing which was more of screw-up, the offense or the defense, is about as rational as trying to legitimately argue the chicken or the egg.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 17, 2011, 09:11:04 PM
It's a half-dozen of one, six of the other. If we get one stop against Louisville we win. If we score one more basket we win. We ran into the absolute perfect storm of a collapse. That's the only possible way we lose that game. Arguing which was more of screw-up, the offense or the defense, is about as rational as trying to legitimately argue the chicken or the egg.
Disagree on many levels. I'd agree that this was the absolute perfect storm if this was the first time MU had either failed to get stops or given up a big lead.
Further, I've found the back and forth about defense and offense in the final five minutes to be really interesting. At least then it's an attempt to understand why the breakdown occurred instead of just chalking it up to bad luck.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on January 17, 2011, 09:29:26 PMDisagree on many levels. I'd agree that this was the absolute perfect storm if this was the first time MU had either failed to get stops or given up a big lead.
Further, I've found the back and forth about defense and offense in the final five minutes to be really interesting. At least then it's an attempt to understand why the breakdown occurred instead of just chalking it up to bad luck.
I've said it's endemic of Buzz's tenure, and I stick by that. Once is chance, twice is coincidence, this is the third time, which makes it a trend. And I'm not saying it's bad luck, but I do think that we were peeing the bed on offense at the same time as we were throwing up in our mouths on defense. And I think that the two work together.
Maybe it's defense first. We give up a bucket, Louisville can set up the press. It lets them get back to their game, and of course the combination of confidence and the crowd allows them to keep scoring. Because of our flagging defense, our offense can't get into rhythm because they have shifted the style back to their own.
Maybe it's offense first, we slow the game down, struggle to get it across the timeline, and lose our rhythm because we're used to attack-attack-attack and instead we're in bleed-bleed-bleed mode. That lack of rhythm carries over to the defensive end, we get slower on switches (just as we're slower attacking)
One thing I will say is while the circumstances are similar, this loss is significantly different from the others. This happened in the blink of an eye. The other times we lost a double-digit second-half lead it happened over the course of 12-15 minutes. This was under 6 minutes. That doesn't happen without a complete breakdown. Someone else pointed out that we were 44 seconds away from a record collapse. So maybe it's not the
absolute perfect storm, but it's about as close as college basketball has ever seen. I think that this is most likely one of the five biggest collapses in college basketball history. That doesn't happen without some pretty-close-to-perfect storming.
Buzz mentioned the 12 straight possessions tonight on his radio show (the 10 shots + 2 Jennings offensive rebounds with fouls) among other things. While this is a perfect storm (at our high water mark lead, Pomeroy had us at a 98% chance to win), the defensive break-downs are consistent in these close games where we score below our average in quality games (70 or less). We are 11th in the BE in defense.
The spread offense was the right strategy with UL in the double bonus (see Pomeroy's 98%). Execution was horrible but attrition was the name of the game. Take it to the hoop and get fouled, use most of the time clock, don't launch threes too early. Buycks shot when he should have dribbled is without mention. Great teams finish, especially for an elite offensively efficient team. Could Buzz have used timeouts more effectively? Perhaps, but there were plenty of stops between media and Pitino (want him to burn them) to settle the troops and that didn't work.
I keep going back to team defense--10 offensive sets (12 technical possessions) and the 2% odds become a "perfect tornado". Mind boggling but time to climb back on the "Buycks" tomorrow night.
Yeah, Buycks is certainly due for a breakout game--maybe he can reduce his TO's from 5 to 4.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 17, 2011, 06:46:14 AM
In the last two seasons under Buzz and with primarily Buzz's recruits, MU is 1-9 against ranked/NCAA teams when MU scores 70 points or less, only beating Gtown at home last year. When MU cannot outscore a top opponent, they cannot outdefend you.
2010-11: Louisville, Wisconsin, Zags
2009-10: Wisconsin, WVU, Gtown (W), Pitt, ND, Gtown (BET), Edit: forgot FSU (L)
MU was 4-1 when this occurs versus lesser opponents the last two seasons, all from last season: DePaul (L), UCONN (W), USF (W), SJU (2 W's).
In Buzz's first season, MU was 3-1 vs. top talent (Wisconsin, Tenn (L), NCSU, Utah St.). And 4-2 overall--add in (IPFW and USF (L). "Three Amigos + Zar" or Dale Layer on the bench?
Updating this, to add the Connecticut and Nova losses this season in these grinder games vs. "ranked/NCAA teams" when MU scores 70 or less points a game:
1-11 over the past two season now in these. Again, this is related to our tempo discussion I flushed out in the CS post. The 70 points came about as our BE average per game last season was 70.5.
Dr. Blackheart...I agree with you completely. And MU84 is wrong that it is the "style of play." The UL loss had nothing to do with pace. The Vandy loss had nothing to do with pace. They lost both because of fundamental defensive problems. Duke runs at a high tempo...kempom has them 26th in adjusted tempo. And they are still the 12th best defensive team in the country.
It isn't too much to ask for to have them be an "elite" offensive team and at least average defensively. Right now, they are 13th in defense in the BE - behind Providence, South Florida and DePaul. (They have the #2 offense behind Pitt.) This is simply a coaching weakness by Buzz.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on February 02, 2011, 09:44:20 PM
Updating this, to add the Connecticut and Nova losses this season in these grinder games vs. "ranked/NCAA teams" when MU scores 70 or less points a game: 1-11 over the past two season now in these. Again, this is related to our tempo discussion I flushed out in the CS post. The 70 points came about as our BE average per game last season was 70.5.
Now
1-12 in these "grinder" games against these top teams. Can MU win in the half court?