OK, I was talking with a friend of mine the other day and we were discussing what graduating classes had the best and worst winning percentages in the "modern era" at Marquette. We defined this "era" as all MU teams since Jack Nagle was hired by MU in 1953-54. We picked that date because he was the first coach to take Marquette to the NCAA tournament. And by class, we mean the 4-year graduating class after a student enrolls as a Freshman.
Anyway, it turns out that people who graduated in 1973 had the highest winning percentage for their MU teams while attending school (assuming they graduated in 4 years), with a .897 winning percentage. Unfortunately for me, my graduating class, the class of 1991, has the dubious honor of having the worst winning percentage of any class in the modern era with a .430 winning percentage.
Here's the 20 best and worst class winning percentages. How does your class rate?
Top 20
1. 1973 - 104-12, .897
2. 1972 - 103-13, .888
3. 1974 - 104-14, .881
4. 1971 - 101-15, .871
4. 1976 - 101-15, .871
6. 1975 - 99-17, .853
6. 1978 - 99-17, .853
8. 1977 - 101-18, .849
9. 1979 - 98-20, .831
10. 1970 - 94-23, .803
11. 1980 - 89-27, .767
12. 1981 - 84-31, .730
13. 1969 - 82-32, .719
14. 2005 - 91-37, .711
15. 1996 - 88-37, .704
16. 1997 - 90-38, .703
17. 1982 - 83-36, .697
18. 2009 - 94-41, .696
18. 2010 - 96-42, .696
20. 2004 - 87-39, .690
Bottom 20
59. 1991 - 49-65, .430
58. 1966 - 47-60, .439
57. 1967 - 48-60, .444
56. 1965 - 48-59, .449
56. 1954 - 44-54, .449
54. 1990 - 54-60, .474
53. 1992 - 55-60, .478
52. 1989 - 58-57, .504
51. 1964 - 56-52, .519
50. 1993 - 62-53, .539
49. 2001 - 64-54, .542
48. 1988 - 65-53, .551
47. 1960 - 57-44, .564
46. 1957 - 58-44, .569
45. 1959 - 57-43, .570
44. 2002 - 70-50, .583
43. 1955 - 60-43, .583
42. 2000 - 71-49, .592
42. 1958 - 58-40, .592
40. 1968 - 66-45, .595
(By the way, the class of 2012 is the 21st best class right now, at 92-42, .687)
As one of your 1991 classmates, you have confirmed what I always suspected...I survived the dark ages of Marquette basketball. I knew it was bad, but didn't know it was the worst. I'm not surprised, though. 10-18...ugh.
When folks post more of those "best team ever?" threads about this year's team, please remember those winning percentages from the 70s.
Many of you might be too young to have ever seen those teams, but that doesn't mean they didn't exist.
If you want to tout this year's team or any in recent memory, you might as well just dismiss the entire decade of the '70s so you can make your point.
Looking ahead, this year's current graduating class has experienced a 93-42 (0.689) record, which would have them at 21, just a hair off the list, but ahead of 2001. Let's hope that gets up over 71% by the end of the year, which would require a parade down Wisconsin Ave 8-)
Quote from: StillAWarrior on February 27, 2012, 04:30:28 PM
As one of your 1991 classmates, you have confirmed what I always suspected...I survived the dark ages of Marquette basketball. I knew it was bad, but didn't know it was the worst. I'm not surprised, though. 10-18...ugh.
Right there with you. We might as well have been D3 until O'Neill arrived.
woo hoo, 1991 also. Had no idea it was #1 in awfulness.
"We're 48!....We're 48!...." Class of 88 rocks!
.803 winning % in 1970 (my graduating class) was the WORST of the 70s! Wow.
Great data...might be worth mentioning, however, the move the Big East certainly changed the competitive landscape for 2005 to present in a big time way...quite sure the strength of schedule has been significantly higher since than, compared to any point in MU basketball history..
Very flawed data. I would suggest re-running the data with every loss to ND being worth 5 losses, and every win over ND being worth 5 wins. Then we'll (see below) take on the class of 91.
Lenny
We played big boy ball back then. It can be repeated and really believe that. If everyone buys in and lets Buzz do his shtick and get players in the sky is the limit. Key is not putting handcuffs on the kids we recruit.
#42. I miss Deane-o.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 27, 2012, 04:58:55 PM
Looking ahead, this year's current graduating class has experienced a 93-42 (0.689) record, which would have them at 21, just a hair off the list, but ahead of 2001. Let's hope that gets up over 71% by the end of the year, which would require a parade down Wisconsin Ave 8-)
If my math is right and this year's media guide is accurate, it would also entail our 1,500th win in the final game. Karma?
Quote from: LloydMooresLegs on February 27, 2012, 06:15:47 PM
Very flawed data. I would suggest re-running the data with every loss to ND Or Bucky being worth 5 losses, and every win over ND or Bucky being worth 5 wins. Then we'll (see below) take on the class of 91.
FIXED!!
Point taken!
Quote from: wiscwarrior on February 27, 2012, 08:26:22 PM
If my math is right and this year's media guide is accurate, it would also entail our 1,500th win in the final game. Karma?
That is amazing and cool!
Karma? No, Kismet.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 27, 2012, 04:58:55 PM
Looking ahead, this year's current graduating class has experienced a 93-42 (0.689) record, which would have them at 21, just a hair off the list, but ahead of 2001. Let's hope that gets up over 71% by the end of the year, which would require a parade down Wisconsin Ave 8-)
I just spent the last 5 minutes calculating this, just to scroll down and find your post. Damn.
So every "4 year class" that either started or ended in the 70's is in the top twenty. 13 of 20 teams. Class of 82 here - woo hoo!
Quote from: StillAWarrior on February 27, 2012, 04:30:28 PM
I'm not surprised, though. 10-18...ugh.
That 10-18 team was dreadful. After watching them get spanked against Iona, I ate my tickets to the Fordham game a couple weeks later because I couldn't face watching them again. I sympathize with you guys.
Quote from: romey on February 27, 2012, 09:00:36 PM
So every "4 year class" that either started or ended in the 70's is in the top twenty. 13 of 20 teams. Class of 82 here - woo hoo!
Me too. Terrell Schlundt forever!
My year was 1983 (80-39 .672). Somewhere in the middle. 3 NCAA tournaments in 4 years plus 1 NIT and one total postseason win.
1996 #15
To be honest I'm shocked it's that high. 2 Mike Deane years there.
I was in grad school and teaching there at MU from 72-78 - Good years!!
Class of 2006: Somewhere in the middle! Final Four Year and Three Amigos first year; two NIT seasons; it was the best of times, it was the worst of times...
Class of 73 played against 16 ranked teams out of 126 opponents over four years.
After the Georgetown game, Class of 2012 will have played against 44 ranked teams out of 137 opponents over four years.
Marquette in the 70's is like today's Gonzaga in the WCC, except they made Final Fours and won.
22 throws down, onslaught coming. I'll just start by asking how did MU do from 70 to 73 against those 16 ranked teams? Pretty damn good.
class of 73 was 9-7 vs. ranked opps.
Winning % is overrated.
Quote from: marqfan22 on February 27, 2012, 10:48:14 PM
Class of 73 played against 16 ranked teams out of 126 opponents over four years.
After the Georgetown game, Class of 2012 will have played against 44 ranked teams out of 137 opponents over four years.
Marquette in the 70's is like today's Gonzaga in the WCC, except they made Final Fours and won.
One thing to remember, back in the '70's, it was the top 20. Now, top 25.
2009 #18, Inaugural Big East Season in 05, 3 amigos, first year of Buzz, what could have been with a healthy DJ........I'll take it
Pretty incredible any way you slice it that it takes to No 14 on the list to find a team without a player recruited by AL
Quote from: Norm on February 27, 2012, 04:27:57 PM
Bottom 20
59. 1991 - 49-65, .430
58. 1966 - 47-60, .439
57. 1967 - 48-60, .444
56. 1965 - 48-59, .449
56. 1954 - 44-54, .449
54. 1990 - 54-60, .474
53. 1992 - 55-60, .478
52. 1989 - 58-57, .504
51. 1964 - 56-52, .519
50. 1993 - 62-53, .539
49. 2001 - 64-54, .542
48. 1988 - 65-53, .551
47. 1960 - 57-44, .564
46. 1957 - 58-44, .569
45. 1959 - 57-43, .570
44. 2002 - 70-50, .583
43. 1955 - 60-43, .583
42. 2000 - 71-49, .592
42. 1958 - 58-40, .592
40. 1968 - 66-45, .595
(By the way, the class of 2001 is the 21st best class right now, at 92-42, .687)
Am I just dense or is something amiss here?
Quote from: 2TimeWarrior on February 28, 2012, 08:26:41 AM
Am I just dense or is something amiss here?
I assume he means class of 2012.
Okay...that makes sense now. I was just hoping that my Class of '01 numbers were somehow improved ;)
Quote from: DoubleMU0609 on February 28, 2012, 09:09:49 AM
I assume he means class of 2012.
Oops. Yep, I meant 2012. I'll go back and fix that.
69 through 82 all in the top 20.