So, jsglow and I were on campus Sunday night for jsglow jr.'s orientation preview, and we went on the obligatory tour of campus. All of the parents are broken up in groups, and it is customary to have a member of campus administration accompany each group. Our person was an employee of the Office of Residence Life whose name I will withhold for now.
As we passed Hmphrey Hall, our student orientation leader mentioned that it was a residence hall for upper-class and graduate students. As we enjoy acting like know-it-alls to the uninitiated on campus, jsglow added, "And also, the men's basketball team." The ORL mucketymuck responded with, "Not the freshman and sophomores any more."
because the muckymuck stated this in a manner that suggested it was not yet public knowledge, we did not ply this person for further details. But that's what we know so far.
Let the speculation commence.
*Edited to correct brain fart when naming hall*
Freshman and Sophomores are going to be in Tower.
A huge overreaction, IMO.
Well unless the basketball players planned on sleeping with teachers over there in Coughlin Hall in the center of our campus I would assume they wouldn't live there...I am also nearly 100% sure that the freshman and sophomore basketball players live there. If they don't then I am sure they have some pretty nice place set up for them.
There is no speculation necessary. Our basketball players are treated well if they are no longer in Humphrey which is pretty far from Coughlin I am sure they have a nice new place to live. This post is pretty pointless IMO.
Interesting that Tower was chosen. I thought they might have two guys share an Abbottsford triple.
Perhaps they are putting them on the Engineering study floor.
And oops, I meant Humphrey. I will correct.
I think that the basketball players should be kept separate from the majority of underclassmen. They are essentially celebrities on campus, God knows what could happen in that situation. Just being honest.
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. I think the collective overreacted to this earlier.
They will be housed in Carpenter Tower from here on out. Frosh from last year will not be moved over. Juniors and Seniors will be in Humphrey.
This is a smart idea. Almost ever major program around the country puts its players in the same resident halls as every other student. One thing MU has working against it is that students here are required to live in halls for 2 years where some colleges allow only one year.
Jhags15: I have to disagree with you. Making special housing arrangements can create extra feelings of separation from the rest of campus and puts them more in a spotlight. I am certain their rooms will be more than acceptable and that their neighbors won't be constantly hounding them for attention
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on June 12, 2012, 02:14:44 PM
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. I think the collective overreacted to this earlier.
Disagree. The alleged assaults and night club situation had nothing to do with where the players live. That could have happened anywhere. Hell, a couple of the players cited at 720 were at a club on North Ave. on Saturday. Doubt Humphrey Hall caused that.
So essentially, they are adding another objection for the staff to overcome when recruiting. Instead of the spacious two bedroom apartments they used to recruit to, now they have to put kids in a cramped, 90 year old dorm with no AC.
Might not seem like a big deal, but when you look at the digs that the schools MU is recruiting against have, it certainly doesn't help.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on June 12, 2012, 02:14:44 PM
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. I think the collective overreacted to this earlier.
Right across the street from the Al, that much closer to the gym, academic support offices, etc. Makes a lot of sense, actually.
Why don't they just add livin' quarters to the Al. Surprised Crean didn't think of this since he's the reason for da season.
Isn't Cobeen closer to the Al?
Quote from: T-Bone on June 12, 2012, 02:26:59 PM
Isn't Cobeen closer to the Al?
Let's put the men's basketball players in Cobeen, what more could they ask for?
Carpenter is not the best option IMO, sure it is closer but it is not very nice and as mentioned has no AC. Why not Straz Tower? AC and big rooms with a recreation center, and barber. Would be good to put the players in one of if not our nicest dorm.
Quote from: Zombie45 on June 12, 2012, 02:21:06 PM
This is a smart idea. Almost ever major program around the country puts its players in the same resident halls as every other student. One thing MU has working against it is that students here are required to live in halls for 2 years where some colleges allow only one year.
False. Look at Kentucky for one. I guarantee many others have similar situations.
Quote from: JWags85 on June 12, 2012, 02:42:01 PM
False. Look at Kentucky for one. I guarantee many others have similar situations.
Thank you. One of the few major holdouts is....
... Notre Dame. Anyone shocked by this?
If I were to look at one event so far this summer that indicates any less of a commitment to our basketball program I would have to look at this. It is an interesting move and somewhat surprising. Pilarz lives with the students, and wants more community on campus...maybe that is all there is to this. Allowing the freshman and sophomore players to be closer is a pretty cool idea, but I don't think Carpenter is the right place.
Mufan12. I really don't think it is tied to the alleged incidents from the year before last. I also don't think it is that big of a deal recruiting wise. Hardly anything to worry about.
Quote from: MUfan12 on June 12, 2012, 02:45:24 PM
Thank you. One of the few major holdouts is....
... Notre Dame. Anyone shocked by this?
"All first-year UCLA student-athletes live on campus in the residence halls. The
number is still over 50% in year two."
http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/ucla/genrel/auto_pdf/SAH_Section3.pdf
Explains UCLA's recruiting woes this year.
Oh, wait ....
USC freshmen also live in regular dorms. No wonder Pete Carroll couldn't land any players.
http://sportsbybrooks.com/usc-football-frosh-to-live-in-the-dorms-like-regular-kids-11822
Should I look for more examples?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on June 12, 2012, 02:51:21 PM
Mufan12. I really don't think it is tied to the alleged incidents from the year before last. I also don't think it is that big of a deal recruiting wise. Hardly anything to worry about.
I lived in Tower for two years. It was cramped for two average white dudes. Look at what UW has planned for their athletes. Tell me that's not an advantage.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on June 12, 2012, 02:51:21 PM
Mufan12. I really don't think it is tied to the alleged incidents from the year before last. I also don't think it is that big of a deal recruiting wise. Hardly anything to worry about.
Agreed. I can't recall any recruit, ever, mentioning Humphrey as an important factor in his decision to commit to MU. The coaches, the support staff, the Bradley Center, the Al -- yes. But not Humphrey.
I thought players there was some reason players had to stay in the dorms as underclassmen and that MU was bending the rules by considering it a residence hall even though it was a campus apartment. That was atleast what I understood on campus any truth to that? Maybe MU just wants them in an actual dorm to be on the safe side? ?-(
Quote from: Rubie Q on June 12, 2012, 02:57:52 PM
Agreed. I can't recall any recruit, ever, mentioning Humphrey as an important factor in his decision to commit to MU. The coaches, the support staff, the Bradley Center, the Al -- yes. But not Humphrey.
That's fair. I guess my thinking is that it's tough enough to recruit to MU as it is, especially at the level Buzz seems to be shooting for. I just don't want it to be any more difficult.
Quote from: MUfan12 on June 12, 2012, 02:54:48 PM
I lived in Tower for two years. It was cramped for two average white dudes. Look at what UW has planned for their athletes. Tell me that's not an advantage.
Who's to say that MU is not throwing some cash into those rooms for improvements over the summer?
Quote from: MUfan12 on June 12, 2012, 03:01:34 PM
That's fair. I guess my thinking is that it's tough enough to recruit to MU as it is, especially at the level Buzz seems to be shooting for. I just don't want it to be any more difficult.
Agree. We spend more than 340 schools, no reason we can't give better living conditions than nearly as many. When you factor in living in Milwaukee in the winter, the rooms themselves might need to be even nicer. Straz or Abbotsford seem fine, can't see anyone not liking that...would at least think we could do them better than Crapenter.
I have to echo MUFan12 on this.
Other than location to the Al and the majority of buildings they have classes in, Carpenter is a terrible, terrible idea. The rooms are generally small except for a few on the Engineering floors that are larger. They at least have their own bathrooms, but very small.
I haven't been in Abbotsford or McCabe, but I've heard they are very nice. Carpenter is probably the second worst dorm after McCormick. At least Schroeder has it's own dining hall.
Quote from: MUfan12 on June 12, 2012, 03:01:34 PM
That's fair. I guess my thinking is that it's tough enough to recruit to MU as it is, especially at the level Buzz seems to be shooting for. I just don't want it to be any more difficult.
Same here. Not a
major deal, but why make it even 0.1% more of a recruiting challenge? I guess I just don't see the upside of this move, so why do it at all?
On some level it can't just be about making recruiting easier. It has to be about improving the student athlete experience while on campus. Maybe the AD feels that having frosh and sophomores hanging out with nothing but upper classmen players hurts their academic performance or something. There are valid reasons why UCLA and USC have moved away from these type of facilities. At the very least we owe them the benefit of the doubt.
There's always been a rumor that MU would buy Catholic Knights and ditch Carpenter one day. Maybe this is a precursor to that.
To support what someone posted, my sis is at UCLA and during her frosh and soph years, basketball, water polo and track student athletes were either on her floor or in her dorm.
Tower is a terrible idea. Isn't Carpenter still primarily a sophomore dorm (almost certainly their lowest choice) with the only freshman floors being engineering students? If this is true then freshman basketball players will live with sophomores who are angry they didn't get into Schroeder or Straz.
If they are going anywhere it should be into the old Abbottsford.
http://www.housing.wisc.edu/lakeshore
This is where some of the Wisconsin athletes will be housed from what I've been told.
Quote from: TedBaxter on June 12, 2012, 06:46:50 PM
http://www.housing.wisc.edu/lakeshore
This is where some of the Wisconsin athletes will be housed from what I've been told.
COOL!
I'm not an alum of Marquette and just from an outsiders view, I think the next thing the school should try to do is look into some upgraded dorms. The University of Wisconsin has made a real effort to improve their on-campus living facilities and it will sell future students and student athletes. This Marquette decision doesn't do the basketball program any favors whatsoever and it will affect some recruits decisions in the future.
If Buzz thinks they need to stay at Humphrey because it is better for recruiting, then they should be at Humphrey. He knows what we recruit against. There may have been issues but there is certainly a feeling of brotherhood at Humphrey. I think it should be a basketball decision.
Quote from: TedBaxter on June 12, 2012, 06:56:57 PM
I'm not an alum of Marquette and just from an outsiders view, I think the next thing the school should try to do is look into some upgraded dorms. The University of Wisconsin has made a real effort to improve their on-campus living facilities and it will sell future students and student athletes. This Marquette decision doesn't do the basketball program any favors whatsoever and it will affect some recruits decisions in the future.
Yeah the more I think about it the dumber the whole idea sounds. You don't willfully take any arrows like this out of Buzz' recruiting quiver. You just don't.
Welcome to Notre Dame policies.
Think outside the box Larry.
Banning sex will probably be next.
Quote from: TedBaxter on June 12, 2012, 06:46:50 PM
http://www.housing.wisc.edu/lakeshore
This is where some of the Wisconsin athletes will be housed from what I've been told.
This is because UW understands the importance of athletics. Barry Alvarez is a very, very good AD. EVERY university is touting modern living in the best dorms, free wifi, cable, etc. There is a reason for all of that, and the camaraderie that comes with living with other frosh in an old dorm ain't it.
Quote from: Jamailman on June 12, 2012, 03:25:02 PM
Same here. Not a major deal, but why make it even 0.1% more of a recruiting challenge? I guess I just don't see the upside of this move, so why do it at all?
This.
Whatever "gains" you achieve with the change just aren't worth losing any cred with recruits, even if its just as a tiebreaker. Remember when (royal) you were 18 and chose a college? I'm guessing some of your considerations, or at least the way you weighed them would look foolish today. I'm sure no one "cites" Humphrey as to why they chose MU, but its possible that having nice digs at least put that consideration out of their minds and focused on other things. If you have to think about sleeping above Davante every night in a room that's 85 degrees, all things being equal, you would choose to not do that.
You think Buzz gives a sh!t? How often does he talk about JUCOs coming up the same way he did, ordering fast food, riding the bus to road trips, etc.? You think he'll tell a recruit who says "But Buzz, Bo is offering me a modern living arrangement with free Wi-Fi and you're making me live with my underclass teammates with other underclassmen! I can't do that!" that he'll make sure to get that change? I think he'll say, "Have fun getting your ass whooped by me the next 4 years while leading your team in scoring at 12.2 ppg!"
Quote from: wadesworld on June 12, 2012, 07:19:23 PM
You think Buzz gives a sh!t? How often does he talk about JUCOs coming up the same way he did, ordering fast food, riding the bus to road trips, etc.? You think he'll tell a recruit who says "But Buzz, Bo is offering me a modern living arrangement with free Wi-Fi and you're making me live with my underclass teammates with other underclassmen! I can't do that!" that he'll make sure to get that change? I think he'll say, "Have fun getting your ass whooped by me the next 4 years while leading your team in scoring at 12.2 ppg!"
Simply, yes I think Buzz does care about this change and doesn't care for it at all.
Quote from: TedBaxter on June 12, 2012, 07:25:45 PM
Simply, yes I think Buzz does care about this change and doesn't care for it at all.
+ 1
"My major reason for committing to play basketball for Marquette is the sweet digs at Humphrey."
--NO RECRUIT, EVER, IN THE HISTORY OF MARQUETTE UNIVERSITY
I have reason to believe that the new housing situation was discussed even before LW was hired. My sense is that there are multiple reasons behind the policy change one of which is getting to know your non hoops classmates just a bit more.
I think the next thing MU needs to do is create some sham majors to make it easier for Buzz to recruit. How about a major in "basketball coaching?" Hey, if recruiting basketball players is MU's main focus right?
Oh and I love the Notre Dame hate - never actually mentioning that NDs athletic program is better than Marquette's by a significant margin. HOW THE HELL DID THEY LAND ZACH AUGUSTE OVER US WHEN THEY MAKE THEIR ATHLETES LIVE WITH THE UNWASHED MASSES IN REGULAR DORMS????
Seriously, what a bunch of chicken littles.... There are legitimate reasons why athletic residence halls have been dropped at many institutions.
Quote from: jsglow on June 12, 2012, 07:39:16 PM
I have reason to believe that the new housing situation was discussed even before LW was hired. My sense is that there are multiple reasons behind the policy change one of which is getting to know your non hoops classmates just a bit more.
This is an admirable idea but it only reinforces why Carpenter is such a terrible choice given that it is almost exclusively sophomores. Put them in the Abbottsford where they will be with other freshman.
Oliver Lee and McCormick were not a good combo.
Quote from: BME to MD on June 12, 2012, 07:49:04 PM
This is an admirable idea but it only reinforces why Carpenter is such a terrible choice given that it is almost exclusively sophomores. Put them in the Abbottsford where they will be with other freshman.
Not if it costs jsglow jr. his sweeet room! (These kids have it soo good nowadays!)
One other quick bit of history. In the days before MU even owned Abbottsford (remember married students housing?), BBall players frequently lived in Carpenter. The late, great jsglow Sr. worked 40 years in what is now called the 707 building. Often he would see the boys shooting hoops on a rim mounted on the north side of that historic dorm building. If it was good enough for George Thompson....
Quote from: jsglow on June 12, 2012, 07:57:10 PM
Not if it costs jsglow jr. his sweeet room! (These kids have it soo good nowadays!)
One other quick bit of history. In the days before MU even owned Abbottsford (remember married students housing?), BBall players frequently lived in Carpenter. The late, great jsglow Sr. worked 40 years in what is now called the 707 building. Often he would see the boys shooting hoops on a rim mounted on the north side of that historic dorm building. If it was good enough for George Thompson....
So much has changed from the Al McGuire days, it really cannot be a point of comparison--though Jim Chones lived at Catholic Knights, somehow. When Al and Hank recruited to McCormick Hall, there was no issue because every University had a McCormick Hall for frosh. That is no longer the case. Will any recruit ever say he chose MU because of Humphrey Hall? No. Will a tour of housing cause a recruit to think the facilities are better in, say Madison, than at MU? I would not be surprised. Show the recruits a state of the art basketball facility to try to woo them but then second tier housing? One can only hope the player area at Tower will be kick ass. If it isn't.......why bother with the state of the art basketball facility.
Better get Buzz's bat-phone to SMU up and running again, cue up an IWB tweet and article, cue up the MUSCOOP email campaign - we'will get this travesty to MU Basketball fixed....
Quote from: TedBaxter on June 12, 2012, 07:25:45 PM
Simply, yes I think Buzz does care about this change and doesn't care for it at all.
Quote from: wadesworld on June 12, 2012, 07:19:23 PM
You think Buzz gives a sh!t? How often does he talk about JUCOs coming up the same way he did, ordering fast food, riding the bus to road trips, etc.? You think he'll tell a recruit who says "But Buzz, Bo is offering me a modern living arrangement with free Wi-Fi and you're making me live with my underclass teammates with other underclassmen! I can't do that!" that he'll make sure to get that change? I think he'll say, "Have fun getting your ass whooped by me at SMU the next 4 years while leading your team in scoring at 12.2 ppg!"
Fixed!
Quote from: TedBaxter on June 12, 2012, 06:56:57 PM
I'm not an alum of Marquette and just from an outsiders view, I think the next thing the school should try to do is look into some upgraded dorms. The University of Wisconsin has made a real effort to improve their on-campus living facilities and it will sell future students and student athletes. This Marquette decision doesn't do the basketball program any favors whatsoever and it will affect some recruits decisions in the future.
Not being an alum, you may not know that there is heavy political pressure if not a law to insure that Marquette does not acquire any more property in Milwaukee for its campus, thereby taking that property off the property tax rolls. So any property purchased for new dorms would have to be held by a non-tax exempt entity controlled by MU.
Which explains why MU bought Hegarty Arms (and tore it down) and is now purportedly in the process of buying Catholic Knights.
Quote from: LittleMurs on June 12, 2012, 08:29:37 PM
Not being an alum, you may not know that there is heavy political pressure if not a law to insure that Marquette does not acquire any more property in Milwaukee for its campus, thereby taking that property off the property tax rolls. So any property purchased for new dorms would have to be held by a non-tax exempt entity controlled by MU.
Gato wins the speedy prize. And Angelo's, etc.
Quote from: TedBaxter on June 12, 2012, 06:46:50 PM
http://www.housing.wisc.edu/lakeshore
This is where some of the Wisconsin athletes will be housed from what I've been told.
$47 Million. MU will counter by moving its athletes into a decaying dump worth closer to $47. Smooth move. Perhaps they will get more out of the college experience living next to a pimple-faced 19 year old than if they had Lockett or Jamil next door. I guess if schools where players are never in their room because the weather is perfect year round are doing it.
Technically strict athletic dorms have been outlawed since 1996 by the NCAA as well as restrictions on contact with coaches. In February at their meeting the NCAA started reconsidering those positions as it would be easier to set/enforce curfews, know where guys are and also more contact with coaches/dorm supervisors assigned to a lower population would benefit athletes. I know Pilarz loves living among the general pop and LW had the same policy in college but they may want to go that route if the NCAA realizes it made a mistake.
I think mandating an adult to live a certain place is ridiculous to begin with but I don't think this policy is some deal breaker for recruits in 95% of cases. I'm sure living around dorks will rein in our wild pack of athletes.
And ND's archaic policies on dorm life are used against them in recruiting for the big boy sports, most especially football. Their success in secondary, olympic sports has to do with their academic appeal, number 1 business school, etc.
A little off topic, but I find it funny that people complain about tuition increases, but then want the luxurious new dorms places like UW is building.
Going back to the non-air conditioned shoe boxes and having students rough it a bit (don't spoon feed them everything) would go along way to lowering tuitions.
As for MU athlete dorms. It would be nice if the NCAA would get rid of the rule of no athlete only dorms. The idea of a few rooms within/adjacent to the Al would be a nice recruiting tool.
I don't think anyone who is against this idea has been pounding the ground screaming or been overly dramatic as much as some here are claiming. More just asking "why" and countering that the alleged benefits aren't worth the potential cost.
Quick related logic lesson: saying "no recruit has ever come here for Humphrey" is not the same as "recruits might not come here if its Carpenter vs Humphrey". If the other two schools on recruits' lists have comfortable, air conditioned apartments - it might be a consideration. If MU still put them in Humphrey and they came here, its not necessarily because of Humphrey. Its because MU didn't lack a Humphrey-esque complex. Athletes that commit to MU might not do so for Humphrey, but athletes that commit to school x instead of MU might do so because of Carpenter. I would venture that very few schools put their most profitable athletes in dorms without a/c.
Quote from: MUBurrow on June 13, 2012, 12:01:17 AM
I don't think anyone who is against this idea has been pounding the ground screaming or been overly dramatic as much as some here are claiming. More just asking "why" and countering that the alleged benefits aren't worth the potential cost.
Quick related logic lesson: saying "no recruit has ever come here for Humphrey" is not the same as "recruits might not come here if its Carpenter vs Humphrey". If the other two schools on recruits' lists have comfortable, air conditioned apartments - it might be a consideration. If MU still put them in Humphrey and they came here, its not necessarily because of Humphrey. Its because MU didn't lack a Humphrey-esque complex. Athletes that commit to MU might not do so for Humphrey, but athletes that commit to school x instead of MU might do so because of Carpenter. I would venture that very few schools put their most profitable athletes in dorms without a/c.
That's the MUscoop way, though.
Quote from: forgetful on June 12, 2012, 11:02:52 PM
A little off topic, but I find it funny that people complain about tuition increases, but then want the luxurious new dorms places like UW is building.
Going back to the non-air conditioned shoe boxes and having students rough it a bit (don't spoon feed them everything) would go along way to lowering tuitions.
As for MU athlete dorms. It would be nice if the NCAA would get rid of the rule of no athlete only dorms. The idea of a few rooms within/adjacent to the Al would be a nice recruiting tool.
No.
At most schools, residence halls are funded by those who live in them. I am 99 percent sure that the Lakefront Residence Hall at UW is debt financed by those who choose to live there. Tuition money will not be used. I bet MU treats it the same way.
I can't believe they actually did this. Looks like I owe someone an apology. I wonder if the scholastic advisory board is really next.
Maybe Buzz wants them closer to the AL and BC? ?-(
Even though you can't have a dorm set aside for athletes, is there any rule that says athlete's rooms can't be nicer than the other rooms in the same dorm?
Maybe Marquette's plan is to spiff up those rooms in Carpenter - put in a/c units, renovate the bathrooms, maybe even take a wall out between two standard rooms and make it a big suite. Carpenter actually has pretty good "bones" - crown moulding in the rooms, lovely Art Deco architecture, etc.
Having said that, I think that for any student, the relative importance of the housing situation is more important at the beginning of the process than when it comes down to making the final decison. When warriorchick, jr began researching colleges in high school, the thing she did when looking at college's website was to check out pictures of the dorms. Later, as she began to thinki about what was truly important in selecting a college, that stuff was secondary. As another example, I ran into many students at Orientation preview this week that were completely bummed that they got assigned to Cobeen or O'Donnell instead of McCormick or Abbottsford. I also saw a lot of groaning on the Class of 2016 Facebook page. I did not hear of anyone wanting to transfer out because of it.
I tend to believe that most recruits will have formed their impression about Marquette's program well before they ever see a dorm room. By that point, they have likely spoken to Buzz and the other coaches at length, seen the Al and the BC, and heard from the other players about how fortunate they feel to be part of that team. If the message is properly conveyed, a recruit would be willing to sleep on a rolled-up towel in the locker room for the privilege of playing for us.
Think about it, fellas. Can you really imagine a prospect saying this?: "I really think that Buzz Williams is an amazing coach, and I have no doubt that he could help me reach my goals in terms of basketball. I also truly believe I would get an outstanding education at Marquette. And the Al - it is the most spectacular facility I have ever seen. However, Bo Ryan has promised me a dorm room with a view of Lake Mendota. And that, my friends, is why I have decided to become a Wisconsin Badger."
Quote from: warriorchick on June 13, 2012, 08:33:21 AM
Think about it, fellas. Can you really imagine a prospect saying this?: "I really think that Buzz Williams is an amazing coach, and I have no doubt that he could help me reach my goals in terms of basketball. I also truly believe I would get an outstanding education at Marquette. And the Al - it is the most spectacular facility I have ever seen. However, Bo Ryan has promised me a dorm room with a view of Lake Mendota. And that, my friends, is why I have decided to become a Wisconsin Badger."
A prospect wouldn't say that. They would say, "I am excited to be a Badger, their facilities are the best I've seen." Hell, prospects pick schools based on jersey colors. http://mrsec.com/2011/07/uks-phillips-says-some-recruits-pick-schools-based-on-color-of-uniform/
Quote from: Hamostradamus on June 13, 2012, 08:40:29 AM
A prospect wouldn't say that. They would say, "I am excited to be a Badger, their facilities are the best I've seen." Hell, prospects pick schools based on jersey colors. http://mrsec.com/2011/07/uks-phillips-says-some-recruits-pick-schools-based-on-color-of-uniform/
Sorry, I wouldn't a moron like that on our team,
Quote from: jsglow on June 12, 2012, 07:39:16 PM
I have reason to believe that the new housing situation was discussed even before LW was hired. My sense is that there are multiple reasons behind the policy change one of which is getting to know your non hoops classmates just a bit more.
Got to know Michael Wilson and Terrell Schlundt because they lived in McCormick Fr year. Made them real, they learned how to interact with the real world. Can only help when you need to interact with the real world later in life (and most of them need to).
I will also bet that any Tower rooms for athletes will be upgraded. Basketball players living in McCormick had 2 guys in a triple room. At that time, it was a better deal than the reat of us received.
Quote from: Pakuni on June 12, 2012, 02:54:17 PM
"All first-year UCLA student-athletes live on campus in the residence halls. The
number is still over 50% in year two."
http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/ucla/genrel/auto_pdf/SAH_Section3.pdf
Explains UCLA's recruiting woes this year.
Oh, wait ....
USC freshmen also live in regular dorms. No wonder Pete Carroll couldn't land any players.
http://sportsbybrooks.com/usc-football-frosh-to-live-in-the-dorms-like-regular-kids-11822
Should I look for more examples?
You're seriously comparing the recruiting landscape at Marquette to UCLA or USC? If the Bruins promise to move out of Westwood and can guarantee at least 6 months of winter in southern California going forward I'd be happy to consider implementing their residence policies. Short of that, why throw away one of the few, small advantages Marquette has?
Quote from: warriorchick on June 13, 2012, 08:33:21 AM
Even though you can't have a dorm set aside for athletes, is there any rule that says athlete's rooms can't be nicer than the other rooms in the same dorm?
Maybe Marquette's plan is to spiff up those rooms in Carpenter - put in a/c units, renovate the bathrooms, maybe even take a wall out between two standard rooms and make it a big suite. Carpenter actually has pretty good "bones" - crown moulding in the rooms, lovely Art Deco architecture, etc.
Having said that, I think that for any student, the relative importance of the housing situation is more important at the beginning of the process than when it comes down to making the final decison. When warriorchick, jr began researching colleges in high school, the thing she did when looking at college's website was to check out pictures of the dorms. Later, as she began to thinki about what was truly important in selecting a college, that stuff was secondary. As another example, I ran into many students at Orientation preview this week that were completely bummed that they got assigned to Cobeen or O'Donnell instead of McCormick or Abbottsford. I also saw a lot of groaning on the Class of 2016 Facebook page. I did not hear of anyone wanting to transfer out because of it.
I tend to believe that most recruits will have formed their impression about Marquette's program well before they ever see a dorm room. By that point, they have likely spoken to Buzz and the other coaches at length, seen the Al and the BC, and heard from the other players about how fortunate they feel to be part of that team. If the message is properly conveyed, a recruit would be willing to sleep on a rolled-up towel in the locker room for the privilege of playing for us.
Think about it, fellas. Can you really imagine a prospect saying this?: "I really think that Buzz Williams is an amazing coach, and I have no doubt that he could help me reach my goals in terms of basketball. I also truly believe I would get an outstanding education at Marquette. And the Al - it is the most spectacular facility I have ever seen. However, Bo Ryan has promised me a dorm room with a view of Lake Mendota. And that, my friends, is why I have decided to become a Wisconsin Badger."
When I toured MU I was told there was a Men's only dorm (OD) and a coed dorm (McCormick).
I hated both places, but grew to love OD when I moved in.
Quote from: MUBurrow on June 13, 2012, 12:01:17 AM
I don't think anyone who is against this idea has been pounding the ground screaming or been overly dramatic as much as some here are claiming. More just asking "why" and countering that the alleged benefits aren't worth the potential cost.
Quick related logic lesson: saying "no recruit has ever come here for Humphrey" is not the same as "recruits might not come here if its Carpenter vs Humphrey". If the other two schools on recruits' lists have comfortable, air conditioned apartments - it might be a consideration. If MU still put them in Humphrey and they came here, its not necessarily because of Humphrey. Its because MU didn't lack a Humphrey-esque complex. Athletes that commit to MU might not do so for Humphrey, but athletes that commit to school x instead of MU might do so because of Carpenter. I would venture that very few schools put their most profitable athletes in dorms without a/c.
Very well said, Burrow. Recruits may not come here because of Humphrey. Or because of Todd Smith and the great strength training staff. Or because of the terrific academic support staff. Or because of the AL. Or because of any number of other reasons that the coaches can use to sell MU. But what's the compelling reason to eliminate one of your selling points and advantages over competitors? Why mess with happy?
Quote from: warriorchick on June 13, 2012, 08:47:20 AM
Sorry, I wouldn't a moron like that on our team,
5 years ago, I would have agreed with you. But the concept of "Our recruits don't care about X, and if they do, we don't want them anyway" is a step toward mediocrity (Badger posters are famous for this thought process. Duke, NC and Indiana will get the top shelf recruits regardless of dorms. We have to fight for every inch. If Diamond Stone of Kevon Looney factor Carpenter Hall in their decision-making, would we really say "Well, that proves they're shallow and wouldn't have been a good fit anyway"?
Quote from: warriorchick on June 13, 2012, 08:33:21 AM
Think about it, fellas. Can you really imagine a prospect saying this?: "I really think that Buzz Williams is an amazing coach, and I have no doubt that he could help me reach my goals in terms of basketball. I also truly believe I would get an outstanding education at Marquette. And the Al - it is the most spectacular facility I have ever seen. However, Bo Ryan has promised me a dorm room with a view of Lake Mendota. And that, my friends, is why I have decided to become a Wisconsin Badger."
I wish I could agree with this, but I think we underestimate not only the "variety" of considerations that lead recruits to a given school, but also how razor-thin that margin of commitment can be. A devotion like Juan Anderson is the exception, not the rule, and is why we took particular notice of his immediate MU love. Even a Midwestern recruit that wants to stay close to home and doesn't have offers from Indiana or Mich State might be choosing between MU, UW, ND, Minnesota etc etc. Kid would think that he would get a fantastic education at any of those places, all have good facilities, all have well known and respected coaches. When calls are so close, normally minor considerations get magnified and tiebreakers become important.
Quote from: Hamostradamus on June 13, 2012, 09:42:05 AM
5 years ago, I would have agreed with you. But the concept of "Our recruits don't care about X, and if they do, we don't want them anyway" is a step toward mediocrity (Badger posters are famous for this thought process. Duke, NC and Indiana will get the top shelf recruits regardless of dorms. We have to fight for every inch. If Diamond Stone of Kevon Looney factor Carpenter Hall in their decision-making, would we really say "Well, that proves they're shallow and wouldn't have been a good fit anyway"?
I agree. Duke, UNC, etc., can afford that kind of arrogance. If MU wants to challenge the elites - not so much.
Double speak here again by the same guys that always do it.
For several years you guys have been saying that Buzz wants tough guys, those with a chip on their shoulder, those that didn't have anything and had to bus to games and have two cheeseburgers for their meal. Similar to Al McGuire who didn't want players that had a lawn in their front yard, but kids from the streets.
Now all of a sudden we're going to lose these same guys Buzz wants and recruits best because they aren't pampered enough in a dorm? Way to have it both ways again. Which is it?
The arguments about what schools have athletic residences and which do not is ridiculous. There are schools that have great athletic residence living conditions and do not have great basketball programs (Oklahoma anyone?). There are those with no student athletic residences that also do just fine, one of them kicked our butts this year. Of course there are examples on the other side as well where great student living arrangements and great teams and poor living arrangements and poor teams. Find a school to fit the argument and it is there.
One final thought, the NCAA got rid of dedicated athletic dorms for a reason, it was absolutely out of control at schools like Oklahoma, down in the SEC and elsewhere. They did revisit the decision this year and chose not to change it, probably because common sense prevailed. For those saying this is a sign of less commitment by the administration, I don't view it as any less commitment at all. More than anything, it forces some of these student athletes to be part of the student population, which is not a bad thing. One of the common themes among the students is the behavior of some of the basketball players and the fact they are so isolated from the general student population that they are out of touch. You can deny this all you want, but that theme permeates among many students and has come up a number of times in the last year with the various off the court incidents. Pliarz and the administration are forcing these guys to be amongst their peers more than they were and this should not be considered as some kind of knock on commitment to the program. It is pure common sense. They are basketball players, they do have a higher visibility than other students, but they are still students and should be associating with them. This is especially true when you see some of these kids that come through high school treated as idols and primmadonnas a little sense of reality isn't a bad thing.
Since this only impacts Freshman and Sophomores, Buzz can get a roster of 13 JUCO players then and it won't impact his team at all.
You guys continue to not believe in Buzz and his abilities to get players to play at Marquette. You make it sound like we're putting these guys in a cardboard box and Wisconsin Ave and the poor old cold is going to get them. Have some faith for once in your coach.
Quote from: MUBurrow on June 13, 2012, 09:53:52 AM
I wish I could agree with this, but I think we underestimate not only the "variety" of considerations that lead recruits to a given school, but also how razor-thin that margin of commitment can be. A devotion like Juan Anderson is the exception, not the rule, and is why we took particular notice of his immediate MU love. Even a Midwestern recruit that wants to stay close to home and doesn't have offers from Indiana or Mich State might be choosing between MU, UW, ND, Minnesota etc etc. Kid would think that he would get a fantastic education at any of those places, all have good facilities, all have well known and respected coaches. When calls are so close, normally minor considerations get magnified and tiebreakers become important.
A kid choosing UW over MU is choosing UW over MU for something other than a dorm. The styles are so different, the philosophies so different, the living arrangements do not mean a thing in the equation.
Have some faith in your coach and his abilities.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 13, 2012, 09:09:49 AM
You're seriously comparing the recruiting landscape at Marrquette to UCLA or USC? If the Bruins promise to move out of Westwood and can guarantee at least 6 months of winter in southern California going forward I'd be happy to consider implementing their residence policies. Short of that, why throw away one of the few, small advantages Marquette has?
Oh, geez. Are you reading imaginary posts?
I'm pointing out that, contrary to the claim of the poster to which I responded, Notre Dame is not the only major program that has athletes living amongst the apparent riff-raff and untouchables that make up the rest of the student body.
But since it all comes down to weather for you:
14. Don't student athletes have special dorms and food plans that are not available to other students?
There are no special dorms for student athletes at UConn. They are fully integrated into the array of dorms available at UConn.http://web.uconn.edu/paac/faq.html
Interesting that some are so convinced Buzz is opposed to this. For all we know, this is Buzz's idea. But maybe he's sent some of you emails stating otherwise.
Quote from: Hamostradamus on June 13, 2012, 09:42:05 AM
5 years ago, I would have agreed with you. But the concept of "Our recruits don't care about X, and if they do, we don't want them anyway" is a step toward mediocrity (Badger posters are famous for this thought process. Duke, NC and Indiana will get the top shelf recruits regardless of dorms. We have to fight for every inch. If Diamond Stone of Kevon Looney factor Carpenter Hall in their decision-making, would we really say "Well, that proves they're shallow and wouldn't have been a good fit anyway"?
I stand by my statement. Seriously, if Diamond Stone picks Indiana over Marquette because red is his favorite color, TC can have him. Who's to say his on-court decisions won't be as stupid?
"I didn't pass the ball to Davante, even though he was open under the basket, because he took the last jelly doughnut this morning at breakfast. Dude, he knows those are my favorite!"
Quote from: Hoopaloop on June 13, 2012, 10:01:26 AM
A kid choosing UW over MU is choosing UW over MU for something other than a dorm. The styles are so different, the philosophies so different, the living arrangements do not mean a thing in the equation.
Have some faith in your coach and his abilities.
I have total faith in MY coach (your own words). What he has done thus far at Marquette is remarkable. I believe that on a level playing field he could hold his own against the heavyweights and recruit/coach circles around YOUR coaches (TC, Painter, Bo). The fact that you celebrate anything the administration can do to make his job more difficult cuts through the passive aggressive BS and makes it clear where you stand. I want no part of that place.
Quote from: warriorchick on June 13, 2012, 10:15:50 AM
I stand by my statement. Seriously, if Diamond Stone picks Indiana over Marquette because red is his favorite color, TC can have him. Who's to say his on-court decisions won't be as stupid?
"I didn't pass the ball to Davante, even though he was open under the basket, because he took the last jelly doughnut this morning at breakfast. Dude, he knows those are my favorite!"
But what if everything else is equal in the kid's mind? Then ties can be broken by stuff that seems irrelevant to grownups, like the uniforms or the living arrangements. We should have every advantage that we can think of. You all remember when the current uniforms were unveiled? I know there at least a few comments along the lines of "these will help in recruiting". The little things do add up.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on June 13, 2012, 10:01:26 AM
A kid choosing UW over MU is choosing UW over MU for something other than a dorm. The styles are so different, the philosophies so different, the living arrangements do not mean a thing in the equation.
Have some faith in your coach and his abilities.
I agree with the UW/MU styles, was just giving examples that when it comes to most schools, on paper they are very similar.
As for your sudden dramatic call to have faith in the coach and his abilities, thats a pure bullcrap argument and a red herring. You could say that about anything. Why do we need the Al? Lets practice in the old gym and it shouldn't affect the team because I have faith in my coach. Why give him a huge budget? I have faith in my coach to find diamonds in the rough on the cheap. Saying that we should give him the fullest deck possible and help eliminate obstacles with recruits, no matter how minor to us, doesnt imply a lack of faith.
Quote from: BrewCity BallCrusher on June 13, 2012, 10:30:38 AM
But what if everything else is equal in the kid's mind? Then ties can be broken by stuff that seems irrelevant to grownups, like the uniforms or the living arrangements. We should have every advantage that we can think of. You all remember when the current uniforms were unveiled? I know there at least a few comments along the lines of "these will help in recruiting". The little things do add up.
Any kid who would think that any two basketball programs are completely equal except for uniform color is a moron. Just sayin'. I'd just as soon have a recruit choose Marquette because he lost to Biuzz in rock, paper, scissors.
Quote from: warriorchick on June 13, 2012, 10:57:05 AM
Any kid who would think that any two basketball programs are completely equal except for uniform color is a moron. Just sayin'. I'd just as soon have a recruit choose Marquette because he lost to Biuzz in rock, paper, scissors.
Fair enough, but where a kid is going to live for 2 years is a slightly more important "little thing" than uniform color, aina?
Quote from: Hoopaloop on June 13, 2012, 09:58:35 AM
For those saying this is a sign of less commitment by the administration, I don't view it as any less commitment at all. More than anything, it forces some of these student athletes to be part of the student population, which is not a bad thing. One of the common themes among the students is the behavior of some of the basketball players and the fact they are so isolated from the general student population that they are out of touch. You can deny this all you want, but that theme permeates among many students and has come up a number of times in the last year with the various off the court incidents. Pliarz and the administration are forcing these guys to be amongst their peers more than they were and this should not be considered as some kind of knock on commitment to the program. It is pure common sense. They are basketball players, they do have a higher visibility than other students, but they are still students and should be associating with them. This is especially true when you see some of these kids that come through high school treated as idols and primmadonnas a little sense of reality isn't a bad thing.
Since this only impacts Freshman and Sophomores, Buzz can get a roster of 13 JUCO players then and it won't impact his team at all.
Hoopy -
I don't buy your "trust your coach argument at all", but I would be interested in your opinion on why this affects only freshman/sophomore basketball players. Basketball players are "isolated" and "out of touch" as freshmen/sophomores, then we move them out of the general student population as juniors/seniors because by then they would be, what, "separate but equal" but not "isolated" or "out of touch"? They need to hang out with the real students for two years before they are raised above? Where is the line on special treatment for student athletes?
Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 13, 2012, 11:02:28 AM
Fair enough, but where a kid is going to live for 2 years is a slightly more important "little thing" than uniform color, aina?
I agree. But I was responding to the folks who took issue with my statement that I wouldn't want a moron who chose a team based on uniform color.
Just don't room the players with pot head rich dorks from Brookfield with the $$ to pass around the blunts.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on June 13, 2012, 09:58:35 AM
For several years you guys have been saying that Buzz wants tough guys,
how long have you been here now?
<ducks>
Quote from: Red Stripe on June 13, 2012, 11:51:24 AM
how long have you been here now?
<ducks>
Hoop signed up just over a year ago. Must have been a lurker for a while before finally committing.
I don't know if this is a good idea or not.
I think it's positive to get the players more interaction with the "regular" students, but obviously the accommodations aren't as nice as Humphrey.
We'll see what happens. Players/posters might not realize it right away, but it might end up being a positive. Change is always scary.
One thing is for sure, this is just like Notre Dame, and I'll be watching you, Larry!
Quote from: Red Stripe on June 13, 2012, 11:51:24 AM
how long have you been here now?
<ducks>
We went over this in depth last week. Visiting (lurking) for several years like my good friend Lenny and so many others before signing up.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=32609.msg395382#msg395382
Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 13, 2012, 10:20:21 AM
I have total faith in MY coach (your own words). What he has done thus far at Marquette is remarkable. I believe that on a level playing field he could hold his own against the heavyweights and recruit/coach circles around YOUR coaches (TC, Painter, Bo). The fact that you celebrate anything the administration can do to make his job more difficult cuts through the passive aggressive BS and makes it clear where you stand. I want no part of that place.
First off, Buzz is MY coach. I'm merely not blinded to think he is the only one that can get it done and that seems to bother you. TC did a great job here but if you dare say that you get slammed by a select group here that are children when acknowleding what he, KO, and others did for the program.
I'm sorry you want no part of that place, your alma mater, for choosing to put the school in a good light and demand some accountability by its coach and its athletes. How dare they demand some personal accountability. What are we coming to.
Quote from: MUBurrow on June 13, 2012, 10:39:39 AM
I agree with the UW/MU styles, was just giving examples that when it comes to most schools, on paper they are very similar.
As for your sudden dramatic call to have faith in the coach and his abilities, thats a pure bullcrap argument and a red herring. You could say that about anything. Why do we need the Al? Lets practice in the old gym and it shouldn't affect the team because I have faith in my coach. Why give him a huge budget? I have faith in my coach to find diamonds in the rough on the cheap. Saying that we should give him the fullest deck possible and help eliminate obstacles with recruits, no matter how minor to us, doesnt imply a lack of faith.
It does imply a lack of faith. You guys see things as a negative rather than an opportunity. How is it that some of the top programs in this country are having student athlete living arrangements just like those proposed by MU? How is it that MU in the middle of the frozen hell whole is able to be relevant? How is it that a small, private school without football in a city and state that doesn't particularly care for us still do well? Because we are good, because we have history and tradition, because we see opportunities when others see negativity.
I noticed no one answered the question that Buzz wants kids with a chip on their shoulder, ballers, guys used to taking the bus and somehow being forced to live in a dorm with regular students is going to derail his program. I have complete faith in my coach that he will get this done. I have faith it can be done because it has at other universities. There are too many doubters here and too many people latching on for any excuse they can. Stop the negativity, MU will be fine. Believe in your coach and it is ok to demand a bit more from our players that they represent the university better than they did the last year off the court. That is what Pilarz, Williams and many alumni are demanding. Good for them. This is not a professional sports team, it is a university with a very good basketball program. We should all remember that because it is clear that many posters here forget the student part or the fact they represent MARQUETTE UNIVERSITY.
Quote from: leever on June 13, 2012, 11:05:28 AM
Hoopy -
I don't buy your "trust your coach argument at all", but I would be interested in your opinion on why this affects only freshman/sophomore basketball players. Basketball players are "isolated" and "out of touch" as freshmen/sophomores, then we move them out of the general student population as juniors/seniors because by then they would be, what, "separate but equal" but not "isolated" or "out of touch"? They need to hang out with the real students for two years before they are raised above? Where is the line on special treatment for student athletes?
Didn't the policy say only Freshmen and sophomores would have to live in the dorms? There is a reason why MU forces freshmen, all freshmen, to live in residence halls. There is a reason why a car is not allowed on campus as a freshman. MU, and other universities, have learned long ago that the transition period from 12th grade to freshman is a big one and they need to be with their peers. The out of touch comments are from the students themselves. When you promote a behavior that you are a better class of person than your peers that is going to cause resentment with your peers. Some of you will argue that they are a better class, or a special segment of the university. They are special, because they are basketball players, but if you are going to go down the path of putting them on a pedestal then that works both ways. When the blow that privilege and put the university in a bad light, there will be repercussions.
We have student athletes from every other sport living in the dorms with regular students. Other universities with high profile teams do the same, many universities do not. It seems to be that Pilarz, Williams, the administration are trying something new to make sure the news MU basketball makes is on the court, not off the court. Without MU player transgressions this past year, unlikely this is happening. They forced the administration to look out for the university, which is what they should be doing. Seems like a good compromise that has worked elsewhere while still allowing Buzz to recruit JUCO players, keep a fantastic budget, etc. The idea may not work, but it may work as it has elsewhere. Let us see how this plays out and actually give it some serious time to see what happens. Will the basketball players become more in tune with the student population, will the regular students reciprocate? Will things quiet down off the court? Will recruiting be hurt or not impacted at all? Let's see.
Quote from: warriorchick on June 13, 2012, 10:57:05 AM
I'd just as soon have a recruit choose Marquette because he lost to Biuzz in rock, paper, scissors.
Soon to go down in history as one of the great Buzz quotes:
"Crap. Jabari, how bout 2 outta 3?"
nt
.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on June 14, 2012, 08:55:12 AM
Without MU player transgressions this past year, unlikely this is happening. They forced the administration to look out for the university, which is what they should be doing.
Seems like a good compromise that has worked elsewhere while still allowing Buzz to recruit JUCO players, keep a fantastic budget, etc.
So, the "player transgressions this past year" involved solely freshmen and sophomores? Or do you think that the upper-class leadership of the team would have behaved better if they had lived in dorms for their freshman/sophomore years? Or do the players just need to commit their "transgressions" with the general student population (rather than with their basketball playing peers) so that they will not be "isolated" and "out of touch"?
Do you seriously think this was a "compromise"? Did Buzz sit down with Williams #2 and say "Well, if you make my freshman recruits live in a dorm,the only way I won't take the SMU job is if you let me recruit JUCOs and overpay for a really good assistant."?
Personally, I don't think this will have any impact on behavior. There may be a few students who interact more with basketball players and find them to be less "out of touch". In the whole scheme of things, I imagine that there are some Journalism majors who find some Engineering majors "isolated" and "out of touch".
Quote from: Hoopaloop on June 14, 2012, 08:55:12 AM
There is a reason why MU forces freshmen, all freshmen, to live in residence halls.
That is not true. Marquette still has a healthy number of commuters, including freshmen and sophomores.
The policy is:
All single first- and second-year students, regardless of academic classification, are required to live in residence halls.
Exceptions are made for students residing with a parent or legal guardian within a 30-mile radius of campus, students
who are at least 21 years of age or those who have been out of high school for two full years or longer.
Quote from: Sir Lawrence on June 14, 2012, 02:20:31 PM
That is not true. Marquette still has a healthy number of commuters, including freshmen and sophomores.
The policy is:
All single first- and second-year students, regardless of academic classification, are required to live in residence halls.
Exceptions are made for students residing with a parent or legal guardian within a 30-mile radius of campus, students
who are at least 21 years of age or those who have been out of high school for two full years or longer.
Maybe that's the reason Buzz is only recruiting Milwaukee County. Wilson and Burton are going to live at home.
Quote from: mu-rara on June 13, 2012, 09:09:33 AM
Got to know Michael Wilson and Terrell Schlundt because they lived in McCormick Fr year. Made them real, they learned how to interact with the real world. Can only help when you need to interact with the real world later in life (and most of them need to).
I will also bet that any Tower rooms for athletes will be upgraded. Basketball players living in McCormick had 2 guys in a triple room. At that time, it was a better deal than the reat of us received.
so much easier to smoke weed in a triple than a regular room. especially the ones with the inner door.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on June 14, 2012, 08:55:12 AM
Didn't the policy say only Freshmen and sophomores would have to live in the dorms? There is a reason why MU forces freshmen, all freshmen, to live in residence halls. There is a reason why a car is not allowed on campus as a freshman. MU, and other universities, have learned long ago that the transition period from 12th grade to freshman is a big one and they need to be with their peers. The out of touch comments are from the students themselves. When you promote a behavior that you are a better class of person than your peers that is going to cause resentment with your peers. Some of you will argue that they are a better class, or a special segment of the university. They are special, because they are basketball players, but if you are going to go down the path of putting them on a pedestal then that works both ways. When the blow that privilege and put the university in a bad light, there will be repercussions.
We have student athletes from every other sport living in the dorms with regular students. Other universities with high profile teams do the same, many universities do not. It seems to be that Pilarz, Williams, the administration are trying something new to make sure the news MU basketball makes is on the court, not off the court. Without MU player transgressions this past year, unlikely this is happening. They forced the administration to look out for the university, which is what they should be doing. Seems like a good compromise that has worked elsewhere while still allowing Buzz to recruit JUCO players, keep a fantastic budget, etc. The idea may not work, but it may work as it has elsewhere. Let us see how this plays out and actually give it some serious time to see what happens. Will the basketball players become more in tune with the student population, will the regular students reciprocate? Will things quiet down off the court? Will recruiting be hurt or not impacted at all? Let's see.
Your right, we should prepare student for the real world, by showing them that all things in life are fair, and that they will all be treated equally when the graduate and enter the work force.
Putting freshman ball players in the dorms will have no effect on how other students view them. It isn't going to stop the media from looking for ways to put them in a negative light and it isn't going to stop them from making stupid mistakes.
I admittedly haven't read this whole thread, but has anyone mentioned how, just because the freshmen and sophomores will be living in the dorms, it doesn't mean they won't be spending all their time with the team, whether it be on the court, in the lounge at the Al, or hanging out (even sleeping on a couch) in Humphrey?
EDIT: Read the thread, and I'm glad the conversation has gotten away from this having anything to do with repercussions from last year's incident. Move along.
Personally, I think it's a move that won't change anything...so I'd have to agree with those who don't care for the change. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. And "the closer to the Al" comments, I think the MU vans that pick the players up when they don't want to walk should work just fine from Humphrey to the Al.
Quote from: strotty on June 15, 2012, 01:24:07 AM
I admittedly haven't read this whole thread, but has anyone mentioned how, just because the freshmen and sophomores will be living in the dorms, it doesn't mean they won't be spending all their time with the team, whether it be on the court, in the lounge at the Al, or hanging out (even sleeping on a couch) in Humphrey?
EDIT: Read the thread, and I'm glad the conversation has gotten away from this having anything to do with repercussions from last year's incident,except for Hoopaloop who continues to insist that "Without MU player transgressions this past year, unlikely this is happening.".. Move along.
Personally, I think it's a move that won't change anything...so I'd have to agree with those who don't care for the change. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. And "the closer to the Al" comments, I think the MU vans that pick the players up when they don't want to walk should work just fine from Humphrey to the Al.
Strotty - made a small correction for you.
Quote from: ZiggysFryBoy on June 14, 2012, 11:05:59 PM
so much easier to smoke weed in a triple than a regular room. especially the ones with the inner door.
That was Artie Green and O Lee we were smelling.
Quote from: Sir Lawrence on June 14, 2012, 02:20:31 PM
That is not true. Marquette still has a healthy number of commuters, including freshmen and sophomores.
The policy is:
All single first- and second-year students, regardless of academic classification, are required to live in residence halls.
Exceptions are made for students residing with a parent or legal guardian within a 30-mile radius of campus, students
who are at least 21 years of age or those who have been out of high school for two full years or longer.
Of course, did not realize I had to point out that commuters can still live at home. I am talking about non-commuters.
Quote from: leever on June 14, 2012, 01:45:11 PM
So, the "player transgressions this past year" involved solely freshmen and sophomores? Or do you think that the upper-class leadership of the team would have behaved better if they had lived in dorms for their freshman/sophomore years? Or do the players just need to commit their "transgressions" with the general student population (rather than with their basketball playing peers) so that they will not be "isolated" and "out of touch"?
Do you seriously think this was a "compromise"? Did Buzz sit down with Williams #2 and say "Well, if you make my freshman recruits live in a dorm,the only way I won't take the SMU job is if you let me recruit JUCOs and overpay for a really good assistant."?
Personally, I don't think this will have any impact on behavior. There may be a few students who interact more with basketball players and find them to be less "out of touch". In the whole scheme of things, I imagine that there are some Journalism majors who find some Engineering majors "isolated" and "out of touch".
Believe what you want to believe among the student population and how they view members of the basketball team. A little homework on that subject will open your eyes a bit in my opinion. It didn't used to be that way back in the day, but has been more the norm in the last decade under TC and BW.
I believe and from what my rich alumni well connected friends are telling me is that the administration, high ranking alumni, etc were very embarrassed by the continuous headlines and distraught over the continuous Chicago Tribune coverage (clearly planted by DePaul alumni to bring down the program). As is the course for many individuals, institutions and corporations, they go in to fix it mode. Often this is reactionary, but normal behavior. Your wife might be able to lend a psychological insight there.
They tried suspensions, tried other behind the scenes tactics, but also wanted to fundamentally look at how things are handled, how the athletes interact, whom they are exposed to. They chose to go down this path after studying what other programs have done with some success. It may not work, but it certainly will not destroy the program or even hurt it if the people here that continue to say Buzz wants chip on the shoulder type kids - it will have no negative recruiting impact at all. Have some faith in Buzz and while we are at it, this might just pay some dividends where the students start to care about their fellow student athletes, show up more for the games and the players might be a little smarter and wiser to realize they are high profile people in which their actions can put their university and coach on the front pages of the news.
Then again, it may not make a difference at all. My worry then is that you may actually see the administration really do some real draconian things that truly are worthy of nervousness. My advice to the players would be to respect their coach, their AD and the school they represent, be cognizant of their surroundings and act more diligently. Sucks for them, but the reactions taken are based on the behaviors. MU stays off the front pages, none of the changes (minor as they are) happen.