During behind-the-scenes and post-game shows, Buzz Williams likes to tell everyone that he's not an intelligent man. Some of that is down-home Texas humility. Some of that might be sand-bagging. But, I'll take him for his word. He's a hard-working over-achiever who came up from modest intellectual and educational roots to find the opportunity of a lifetime at Marquette. He's overreached his goals. Now, we're seeing whether he's overmatched game to game.
I think he's drawn to kids with similar histories. So, we have an unusually high number of juco and alternative background kids in the program. They present a trade-off. They present quick answers when roster gaps open up, and they can lessen the blow of losing players to graduation. But, they also come from alternative outlets -- as opposed to major high school programs -- because there was a gap in their games or a lapse in the classroom.
Marquette packing a bunch of such kids is a feel-good."give 'em a chance" story on the face of it. But, we're seeing the results on the court. These kids are energetic and eager. But, they also play sloppy, mentally lazy, low-end hustle basketball with limited gameplay IQ. And the aspects of the game that demand dedication and character -- defense, free throws and finishing off opponents -- are obviously lacking.
If Williams keeps up the juco shuffle to this extent, we'll see the current problems continue. It potentially cheapens Marquette Basketball overall – transforming a school that once prided itself on its four-year graduation rate into more and more of a hoops factory.
And, right now, it's a hoops factory with double digit losses and a punched ticket to the NIT.
h
Quote from: silverback on February 18, 2011, 02:53:39 AM
I think he's drawn to kids with similar histories.
I agree with this and have thought it for a while. There is nothing wrong with it, but I believe Buzz, with his "Life Lessons," etc., prefers the role of father figure...and seems to play it well. That's why I think what we've seen thus far with his recruiting is what we're going to get. I'm just guessing here, but I'm willing to wager he does better on the recruiting trail with the mothers than the fathers.
For the record, last year's team was one of my favorites ever at MU and this year's, although frustrating as hell, isn't far behind. Say what you want, but we're not boring. For whatever reason, if we make the tourney, I have a good feeling.
Do you have any clue whatsoever? We wouldn't have a junior/senior class right now if it wasn't for the JUCO's Buzz brought in. We wouldn't have made the tournament last year if not for Butler's game winners at UConn and St. John's, which were both "character testers" and examples of putting a team away. If Fulce hadn't shattered his knee cap, robbing him of his high-end athleticism, I suspect he would have had a much bigger impact. Instead he transformed his game to maximize all that's left while working hard every day with ZERO cartilage in one knee so people like you can disparage him. Fans like you make me sick. Would you rather Buzz had taked zero JUCO's and had a roster of 7 freshmen and 6 sophomores right now, forever dooming MU into ridiculously unbalanced classes and a probable NIT last year and not even a sniff at the NCAA this year? ..you're stereotyping all JUCO's as dumb as well.
I cannot disagree with the original poster more. MU doesn't have a low basketball IQ. Also, MU has a lot of players with strong father figures. Jae Crowder and Jamil Wilson, who has a single father, are two off the top of my head.
Marquette's problems are two-fold. Their defensive scheme sucks, and the lack of decent point guard play. On the first issue I blame Buzz for installing and sticking with something that obviously doesn't work. On the second issue, I think Buzz realizes this is a problem. Junior was one of the top PG recruits coming out of high school. (Scout had him at the #9 PG in the country.) I don't know if it is the injury, or simply him having trouble adjusting, but clearly this hasn't panned out as we all have hoped so far.
But please, let's stop insulting the intelligence of the players and being armchair psychologists over "father figures" and the like. Last year's team was considered a bunch of overachievers...and low and behold we lost our PG and a power forward who was an NBA first round pick...and we got worse. Who would have thought???
Quote from: silverback on February 18, 2011, 02:53:39 AM
During behind-the-scenes and post-game shows, Buzz Williams likes to tell everyone that he's not an intelligent man. Some of that is down-home Texas humility. Some of that might be sand-bagging. But, I'll take him for his word. He's a hard-working over-achiever who came up from modest intellectual and educational roots to find the opportunity of a lifetime at Marquette. He's overreached his goals. Now, we're seeing whether he's overmatched game to game.
I think he's drawn to kids with similar histories. So, we have an unusually high number of juco and alternative background kids in the program. They present a trade-off. They present quick answers when roster gaps open up, and they can lessen the blow of losing players to graduation. But, they also come from alternative outlets -- as opposed to major high school programs -- because there was a gap in their games or a lapse in the classroom.
Marquette packing a bunch of such kids is a feel-good."give 'em a chance" story on the face of it. But, we're seeing the results on the court. These kids are energetic and eager. But, they also play sloppy, mentally lazy, low-end hustle basketball with limited gameplay IQ. And the aspects of the game that demand dedication and character -- defense, free throws and finishing off opponents -- are obviously lacking.
If Williams keeps up the juco shuffle to this extent, we'll see the current problems continue. It potentially cheapens Marquette Basketball overall – transforming a school that once prided itself on its four-year graduation rate into more and more of a hoops factory.
And, right now, it's a hoops factory with double digit losses and a punched ticket to the NIT.
Just look at the standings in the Big East and realize coaches like Huggins and Boeheim have lost to Buzz and are struggling to record a better record than MU this year.
Quote from: silverback on February 18, 2011, 02:53:39 AM
During behind-the-scenes and post-game shows, Buzz Williams likes to tell everyone that he's not an intelligent man. Some of that is down-home Texas humility. Some of that might be sand-bagging. But, I'll take him for his word. He's a hard-working over-achiever who came up from modest intellectual and educational roots to find the opportunity of a lifetime at Marquette. He's overreached his goals. Now, we're seeing whether he's overmatched game to game.
I think he's drawn to kids with similar histories. So, we have an unusually high number of juco and alternative background kids in the program. They present a trade-off. They present quick answers when roster gaps open up, and they can lessen the blow of losing players to graduation. But, they also come from alternative outlets -- as opposed to major high school programs -- because there was a gap in their games or a lapse in the classroom.
Marquette packing a bunch of such kids is a feel-good."give 'em a chance" story on the face of it. But, we're seeing the results on the court. These kids are energetic and eager. But, they also play sloppy, mentally lazy, low-end hustle basketball with limited gameplay IQ. And the aspects of the game that demand dedication and character -- defense, free throws and finishing off opponents -- are obviously lacking.
If Williams keeps up the juco shuffle to this extent, we'll see the current problems continue. It potentially cheapens Marquette Basketball overall – transforming a school that once prided itself on its four-year graduation rate into more and more of a hoops factory.
And, right now, it's a hoops factory with double digit losses and a punched ticket to the NIT.
1. Buzz has done an amazing job filling the roster. I converse regualrly with a number of college coaches, including a Big East assistant and they think Buzz has done an austounding job bringing in talent and filling the gapping holes so quickly. If it were not for these "worthless" JUcos we would have missed the NCAA's last year and maybe the year before and you would have graced us with your viotrol and ignorance 24 months earlier.
2. Show me a roster that does not consist of "alternative background" players. Would you prefer the Stanford roster? What type of "alternative background do you disagree with? the color of their skin?, single family homes? inner city public school education? or the fact that they had to go to JUco as a result of the previously listed issues. I would like to see you make these assessment and accusations to Buzz himself or soem of these "alternative background" players. You Silverback are an embarrassment to all things MArquette. Character revealed.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on February 18, 2011, 06:28:38 AM
I agree with this and have thought it for a while. There is nothing wrong with it, but I believe Buzz, with his "Life Lessons," etc., prefers the role of father figure...and seems to play it well.
Let me address this futher. Of the current players on the roster, I *believe* the following are those raised by single mothers: Buycks, Blue and Junior. The rest are all from either two parent homes, or divorced homes with an active father figure.
An absolutely dumb statement.
Enough with the personal attacks. State your case, move on.
I'll take sports fan cliches for $1000
Answer:
- Team leadership
- Program identity
- Chemistry
- "guts", "stones" "balls"
- Continuity
Question:
What are things that are never critiqued when a team is winning?
Quote from: 2002MUalum on February 18, 2011, 11:26:22 AM
I'll take sports fan cliches for $1000
Answer:
- Team leadership
- Program identity
- Chemistry
- "guts", "stones" "balls"
- Continuity
Question:
What are things that are never critiqued when a team is winning?
Well done! Think you might need to add coaching to the list too, however!
This topic is ludicrous. You take away the juco players on this team and we are worse than depaul. And are you actually implying that juco players are not intelligent enough to play defense or shoot a free throw?
You the man, CD, you the man. +1 gazillion!
Quote from: KipsBayEagle on February 18, 2011, 11:49:15 AM
This topic is ludicrous. You take away the juco players on this team and we are worse than depaul. And are you actually implying that juco players are not intelligent enough to play defense or shoot a free throw?
Said as if the options were having JUCOs or having five empty holes in the roster. That, of course, is patently absurd. You're completely ignoring the fact that we had a choice to recruit either a JUCOs or a true frosh for each spot on the roster.
If instead of the JUCOs we had recruited freshmen similar in quality to Polee at St. Johns, Lamb at UConn, Lubick from Georgetown, Kilpatrick from Cincy, or dare I say the any one of the Amigos or Hayward, we might even be better than we are right now.
Why don't we stop calling these kids jucos and start calling them Marquette University student athletes?
Quote from: Marquette84 on February 18, 2011, 01:23:56 PM
Said as if the options were having JUCOs or having five empty holes in the roster. That, of course, is patently absurd. You're completely ignoring the fact that we had a choice to recruit either a JUCOs or a true frosh for each spot on the roster.
If instead of the JUCOs we had recruited freshmen similar in quality to Polee at St. Johns, Lamb at UConn, Lubick from Georgetown, Kilpatrick from Cincy, or dare I say the any one of the Amigos or Hayward, we might even be better than we are right now.
And we'd have 1 junior 6 freshmen and 6 sophmores.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on February 18, 2011, 02:56:51 PM
And we'd have 1 junior 6 freshmen and 6 sophmores.
And? I remember when we had 3 freshmen play major minutes not long ago...they won double digit games in the Big East conference, went to the NCAA tournament, etc,.
Canadian Dimes...in your discussions with these coaches who are saying we are bringing in this great talent (which I agree with by the way), do they express why that talent isn't translating into the wins we had in prior years despite having less talent (and supposedly less talented coaching?)?
I also remember Steve Novak. He was pretty good.
Quote from: Buzzball on February 18, 2011, 02:40:01 PM
Why don't we stop calling these kids jucos and start calling them Marquette University student athletes?
Too many keystrokes.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on February 18, 2011, 03:05:21 PM
And? I remember when we had 3 freshmen play major minutes not long ago...they won double digit games in the Big East conference, went to the NCAA tournament, etc,.
Canadian Dimes...in your discussions with these coaches who are saying we are bringing in this great talent (which I agree with by the way), do they express why that talent isn't translating into the wins we had in prior years despite having less talent (and supposedly less talented coaching?)?
Weren't you telling all of us that the Big East was down last year - so our accomplishments needed to be taken in stride last year? So, I'm going to surmise that due to the Big East being "back" this year and the Number 1 conference - the sledding has been tougher this year - as evidenced by some pretty darn good teams hanging around the .500 level. When a St. Johns can destroy a Duke, or a WVU a Purdue, or a UCONN on the road a Texas - well - there are 3 middle of the pack Big East teams that all beat top rung teams in the ACC, Big 12 and Big East.
Quote from: cheebs09 on February 18, 2011, 03:07:03 PM
I also remember Steve Novak. He was pretty good.
No question about it...then again, I recall seeing on numerous threads here that JFB was going to make the NBA after this year. I laughed then, I still laugh now at that.
Quote from: Ners on February 18, 2011, 03:15:32 PM
Weren't you telling all of us that the Big East was down last year - so our accomplishments needed to be taken in stride last year? So, I'm going to surmise that due to the Big East being "back" this year and the Number 1 conference - the sledding has been tougher this year - as evidenced by some pretty darn good teams hanging around the .500 level. When a St. Johns can destroy a Duke, or a WVU a Purdue, or a UCONN on the road a Texas - well - there are 3 middle of the pack Big East teams that all beat top rung teams in the ACC, Big 12 and Big East.
I said the Big East was down last year AND it was a very soft bubble. Incredibly, the bubble is even softer this year, which is hard to imagine. The Big East is certainly better this year but is ranked between 1 and 2 depending on the rating system. Ken Pom has Big East #2 for example. http://www.kenpom.com/conf.php?c=BE
Of course, what doesn't fall in line for you is how we've done OUT OF CONFERENCE (let's take the Big East out of the equation)....we lost to a Gonzaga team that is hanging on for dear life, barely beat UW-Milwaukee during a stretch when they lost 5 of 7 games and 6 of 9, lost to Vanderbilt, lost to Duke, etc. Are those bad losses? They certainly aren't at all, well maybe the Gonzaga loss. But much like we've done in conference, we've also done the same thing out of conference. That is, not be able to play consistently and win the games we've been accustomed to winning in the past few years.
In almost every other year in the past 5 we've had signature out of conference and conference wins. Duke, Oklahoma State, Wisconsin, Xavier, etc, etc. Its been our bugaboo this year, despite having all this talent.
I only hope it's due to inexperience. My worry is that it's tied to having great talent at certain positions but subpar talent at perhaps the most critical position in the college game. If that's the case, you might as well have a Ferrari in your garage but no fuel anywhere to be able to drive it.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on February 18, 2011, 03:05:21 PM
And? I remember when we had 3 freshmen play major minutes not long ago...they won double digit games in the Big East conference, went to the NCAA tournament, etc,.
And? When you have wildly unbalanced classes like that you ride a constant rollercoaster between no upperclassmen to lead and no underclassmen in the pipeline. St. John's is having a very good year being led by 8 or 9 seniors, but suffered for 3 years getting here. And their 9 man freshman class next year will be awesome, but unless Lavin runs several of them off the same thing will happen again.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on February 18, 2011, 05:43:39 PM
And? When you have wildly unbalanced classes like that you ride a constant rollercoaster between no upperclassmen to lead and no underclassmen in the pipeline. St. John's is having a very good year being led by 8 or 9 seniors, but suffered for 3 years getting here. And their 9 man freshman class next year will be awesome, but unless Lavin runs several of them off the same thing will happen again.
Seems to me we have no problem running off players even when we don't have classes that big, and that includes both the current regime and the previous one. Size of class be damned.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on February 18, 2011, 08:36:51 PM
Seems to me we have no problem running off players even when we don't have classes that big, and that includes both the current regime and the previous one. Size of class be damned.
You're right, I miss the good old days.
This is the face of college basketball, I wouldn't expect it to change.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on February 18, 2011, 05:43:39 PM
And? When you have wildly unbalanced classes like that you ride a constant rollercoaster between no upperclassmen to lead and no underclassmen in the pipeline. St. John's is having a very good year being led by 8 or 9 seniors, but suffered for 3 years getting here. And their 9 man freshman class next year will be awesome, but unless Lavin runs several of them off the same thing will happen again.
Why would you worry about a big freshman class? 40% of freshman transfer. That's what Buzz says, anyway.
So if you bring in 6 frosh last year and 6 more this year, it means you'd have the chance to replace five of them over the next two seasons anyway--only 7 of the 12 would make it to their junior and senior year based on Buzz's cited 40% figure.
Attempting to bring in Juco's to "balance" classes means that you're always have to "re-balance" because you have to replace not only the two-year JUCOs every two years, but the 40% of the frosh and sophs who leave.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on February 18, 2011, 03:31:03 PM
No question about it...then again, I recall seeing on numerous threads here that JFB was going to make the NBA after this year. I laughed then, I still laugh now at that.
So, have we got a bet this year or not?
Quote from: 4everwarriors on February 18, 2011, 09:44:07 PM
So, have we got a bet this year or not?
Nah, I only bet on Crean's recruits to the NBA...don't you know that?
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on February 18, 2011, 03:41:48 PM
I said the Big East was down last year AND it was a very soft bubble. Incredibly, the bubble is even softer this year, which is hard to imagine. The Big East is certainly better this year but is ranked between 1 and 2 depending on the rating system. Ken Pom has Big East #2 for example. http://www.kenpom.com/conf.php?c=BE
Of course, what doesn't fall in line for you is how we've done OUT OF CONFERENCE (let's take the Big East out of the equation)....we lost to a Gonzaga team that is hanging on for dear life, barely beat UW-Milwaukee during a stretch when they lost 5 of 7 games and 6 of 9, lost to Vanderbilt, lost to Duke, etc. Are those bad losses? They certainly aren't at all, well maybe the Gonzaga loss. But much like we've done in conference, we've also done the same thing out of conference. That is, not be able to play consistently and win the games we've been accustomed to winning in the past few years.
In almost every other year in the past 5 we've had signature out of conference and conference wins. Duke, Oklahoma State, Wisconsin, Xavier, etc, etc. Its been our bugaboo this year, despite having all this talent.
I only hope it's due to inexperience. My worry is that it's tied to having great talent at certain positions but subpar talent at perhaps the most critical position in the college game. If that's the case, you might as well have a Ferrari in your garage but no fuel anywhere to be able to drive it.
I agree about the lack of quality point guard play on this years team - definitely hurting our results. However, if you want to debate the nonconference results - I'll propose that Duke on a neutral court is a bigger challenge than Xavier or Michigan were last year. Let's keep in mind Duke was the defending national champion (unliike when they were "struggling in the 2004-2008 years - by their standards.) I'd also submit that playin AT Vanderbilt - where Vandy wins roughly 91% of their games - has been one of the stiffest non-conference tests MU has scheduled in awhile.
Also, I believe in years past we've lost to a South dakota State claiber team in the non-conference portion of the season. Just depends on how you want to look at it - as Buzz said - his first team had 18 years D1 experience, 2nd team 12 years D1 experience, this years team had 9 years of D1 experience coming into the season. Clearly experience at the D1 level counts for something - which is why we have some mid-major teams advance to Sweet 16's every year - and beyond. Here's where you want to go interject your JUCO argument..but due to the coaching change - MU was able to sustain a decent level of play - by signing a Jimmy B and DJO and Buycks..
Quote from: Ners on February 19, 2011, 10:05:28 AM
I agree about the lack of quality point guard play on this years team - definitely hurting our results. However, if you want to debate the nonconference results - I'll propose that Duke on a neutral court is a bigger challenge than Xavier or Michigan were last year. Let's keep in mind Duke was the defending national champion (unliike when they were "struggling in the 2004-2008 years - by their standards.) I'd also submit that playin AT Vanderbilt - where Vandy wins roughly 91% of their games - has been one of the stiffest non-conference tests MU has scheduled in awhile.
We play at Wisconsin every other year, and the Kohl is arguably a tougher venue than Vanderbilt.
Quote from: Ners on February 19, 2011, 10:05:28 AM
Also, I believe in years past we've lost to a South dakota State claiber team in the non-conference portion of the season. Just depends on how you want to look at it - as Buzz said - his first team had 18 years D1 experience, 2nd team 12 years D1 experience, this years team had 9 years of D1 experience coming into the season. Clearly experience at the D1 level counts for something - which is why we have some mid-major teams advance to Sweet 16's every year - and beyond. Here's where you want to go interject your JUCO argument..but due to the coaching change - MU was able to sustain a decent level of play - by signing a Jimmy B and DJO and Buycks..
MU could have sustained that level of play by signing freshmen of equal quality.
Look, Buzz was credited with finding and recruiting Acie Law to A&M and Tyshawn Taylor to MU. So he's clearly capable of identifying and recruiting players who are good enough to start as a frosh at a high-major level.
Quote from: Marquette84 on February 19, 2011, 12:55:03 PM
We play at Wisconsin every other year, and the Kohl is arguably a tougher venue than Vanderbilt.
MU could have sustained that level of play by signing freshmen of equal quality.
Look, Buzz was credited with finding and recruiting Acie Law to A&M and Tyshawn Taylor to MU. So he's clearly capable of identifying and recruiting players who are good enough to start as a frosh at a high-major level.
It really is pointless debating with you. Look - NO coach bats 100% of the recruits they sign. You win some/lose some with regard to Top 100 kids - being immediate contributors. Buzz has had 2 years (basically to recruit high school kids - with this upcoming class being his 3rd) 2009 and 2010. Early returns don't look great on Cadougan and Williams, and maybe even Blue - but let's not jump the gun and conclude Blue, Cadougan, Jones, Blue, Gardner, Otule won't evolve into major contributors.
Quote from: Ners on February 19, 2011, 01:32:17 PM
It really is pointless debating with you. Look - NO coach bats 100% of the recruits they sign. You win some/lose some with regard to Top 100 kids - being immediate contributors. Buzz has had 2 years (basically to recruit high school kids - with this upcoming class being his 3rd) 2009 and 2010. Early returns don't look great on Cadougan and Williams, and maybe even Blue - but let's not jump the gun and conclude Blue, Cadougan, Jones, Blue, Gardner, Otule won't evolve into major contributors.
I understand that no coach bats 100%. But that goes for JUCOs and HS players alike.
In fact, you were one of the biggest supporters of the belief that one can't count on JUCOs in their first year in D1. You're the one who thought that 12th place was a reasonable finish because of the number of JUCOs without much D1 experience.
In my opinion, a top 100 frosh is no less likely to turn in a performance like DJO or Buycks did last year. We've seen it from the Amigos, from Hayward, from Diener, from Mason, from Novak, and from teams across the conference, from guys like Polee at St. Johns or Lubick from Georgetown, or Melvin from DePaul.
So as I see it, your argument that we HAD to recruit JUCOs is flawed from two perspectives:
1. based on historical performance, we could have expected just as much from true freshmen
2. you never expected that the JUCOs would actually help us maintain that level in the first place--you are a firm believer that we overachieved.
Finally, I don't understand your excuses about "only" two or three years. Lavin isn't making excuses about how he can't get good HS players and needs JUCOS--he simply went out and signed great HS players.
Same with Kevin O'Neill. He didn't need a bunch of JUCOs. He took D-1 transfers his first year, and added 4 top 100 HS players his second. Yeah, they didn't all work out and we saw Stewart and Brakes leave--but the core of Key, Mac, Logtermann and Curry were solid for the next 3-4 years.
And I know you don't like Crean comparisons, but he went out and got ODB, Wade, Merritt, and Sanders--not a JUCO in the bunch.
Lavin, O'Neill and Crean didn't NEED jucos--and neither did Buzz. It was a CHOICE.
Quote from: Marquette84 on February 19, 2011, 03:11:05 PM
I understand that no coach bats 100%. But that goes for JUCOs and HS players alike.
In fact, you were one of the biggest supporters of the belief that one can't count on JUCOs in their first year in D1. You're the one who thought that 12th place was a reasonable finish because of the number of JUCOs without much D1 experience.
In my opinion, a top 100 frosh is no less likely to turn in a performance like DJO or Buycks did last year. We've seen it from the Amigos, from Hayward, from Diener, from Mason, from Novak, and from teams across the conference, from guys like Polee at St. Johns or Lubick from Georgetown, or Melvin from DePaul.
So as I see it, your argument that we HAD to recruit JUCOs is flawed from two perspectives:
1. based on historical performance, we could have expected just as much from true freshmen
2. you never expected that the JUCOs would actually help us maintain that level in the first place--you are a firm believer that we overachieved.
Finally, I don't understand your excuses about "only" two or three years. Lavin isn't making excuses about how he can't get good HS players and needs JUCOS--he simply went out and signed great HS players.
Same with Kevin O'Neill. He didn't need a bunch of JUCOs. He took D-1 transfers his first year, and added 4 top 100 HS players his second. Yeah, they didn't all work out and we saw Stewart and Brakes leave--but the core of Key, Mac, Logtermann and Curry were solid for the next 3-4 years.
And I know you don't like Crean comparisons, but he went out and got ODB, Wade, Merritt, and Sanders--not a JUCO in the bunch.
Lavin, O'Neill and Crean didn't NEED jucos--and neither did Buzz. It was a CHOICE.
So you are saying the situations Lavin, Crean and O'Neill walked into exactly mirroed what was going on at MU when Buzz arrived? I'm going to disagree.I'v eneversupported the notion that one can't count on a JUCO in their first year - but yes, i didn't think last year's team would perform roughly the same as The Big 3's senior year - thought losing 3 of the Top 10 scorers in program history (with very little talent behind them recruited by TC on the roster when Buzz took over) - would result in a drop off from a 4th place Big East finish - maybe to 8th or 9th or 10th.
Let's not forget O'Neill and Crean weren't competing in anything CLOSE to the Big East at the time of their arrivals. I have a strong feeling that if MU were currently in a conference like the Great Midwest or even C-USA, their record would be significantly better and by virttue of that - most fans would be pleased.
Quote from: Ners on February 19, 2011, 03:56:24 PM
So you are saying the situations Lavin, Crean and O'Neill walked into exactly mirroed what was going on at MU when Buzz arrived?
Buzz arguably had significant advantages over all three.
First off, he had a year of head coaching experience--something that O'Neill and Crean both lacked. I know you love to point out how little experience Buzz has--but lets be honest here, the day that Crean and O'Neill took over, they had less experience than Buzz.
Lavin's prior head coaching experience at UCLA was characterized by consistent underperformance, and his stint ended poorly. Furthermore, he hadn't coached at any level for seven years before taking the St. Johns job.
And none of the three were already recruiting for the program they took over (as Buzz was).
Quote from: Ners on February 19, 2011, 03:56:24 PM
I'm going to disagree.I'v eneversupported the notion that one can't count on a JUCO in their first year - but yes, i didn't think last year's team would perform roughly the same as The Big 3's senior year - thought losing 3 of the Top 10 scorers in program history (with very little talent behind them recruited by TC on the roster when Buzz took over) - would result in a drop off from a 4th place Big East finish - maybe to 8th or 9th or 10th.
Earlier in the thread you said "- MU was able to sustain a decent level of play - by signing a Jimmy B and DJO and Buycks.."
Now you're saying that you expected us to fall to 8th, 9th or 10th?
If you really expected a drop to 8th, 9th or 10th, we could have done that with Freshmen, and then have them for three more years.
Quote from: Ners on February 19, 2011, 03:56:24 PM
Let's not forget O'Neill and Crean weren't competing in anything CLOSE to the Big East at the time of their arrivals. I have a strong feeling that if MU were currently in a conference like the Great Midwest or even C-USA, their record would be significantly better and by virttue of that - most fans would be pleased.
Yes. Thank you for reminding me. Yet ANOTHER recruiting advantage for Buzz.
The JUCO kids on the roster aren't anywhere near the problem with this team, it's the clear strength.
The problem is that highly ranked high school recruits like Junior, Vander, and E.Williams haven't been productive this season. If these guys were being productive like their recruiting rankings, the team would be better than 16-11.
For whatever reason, Buzz has done a fabulous job finding JUCO kids who have been very productive, but his best high school recruits have disappointed so far on the court at least.