Written by: noreply@blogger.com (muwarrior92)
Two strange things happened this week in Marquette hoops. First, the university announced a secondary rules violation. That has been somewhat of a rarity for MU to be in violation of NCAA rules, at least compared to many other DI power programs. The type of rules broken have been largely inadvertent, or honest mistake and they took the proper action in reporting them. Stranger, Marquette, and Larry Williams specifically, have taken some grief for self reporting that secondary violation to the NCAA. The question is why the grief? It is not only common practice to do so, but a common sense approach as well. This is especially true in a world where the NCAA has clearly sent very strong signals the last 6 months that they taking a more focused look at institutional control of their membership. The reporting to the NCAA and the release of that information to the public is not only common, but has been a precedent at Marquette, long before Larry Williams ever became Athletic Director.
Here are some examples of secondary NCAA violations self-reported by Marquette men's basketball over the years.
In 1985, a Marquette assistant coach gave a ride to a recruit that was not permitted and Hank Raymonds (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=hQUqAAAAIBAJ&sjid=hRIEAAAAIBAJ&pg=1307,7675520&dq=marquette+ncaa+violation&hl=en) reported the violation to the NCAA.
In 1986, first year coach Bob Dukiet met with Mike Flory during a dead period which resulted in MU self-reporting that violation. (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=kAUqAAAAIBAJ&sjid=hRIEAAAAIBAJ&pg=1508,3764428&dq=ncaa+violations+marquette&hl=en)
In 1990, several Marquette basketball players were believed to be in violation of NCAA rules for receiving free parking (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=HolQAAAAIBAJ&sjid=5RIEAAAAIBAJ&pg=2153,789927&dq=marquette+ncaa+violation&hl=en). Marquette self reported that secondary rule violation to the NCAA.
In 1999, Tom Crean attended a practice that was off limits to college coaches. Marquette self-reported the secondary violation to the NCAA.
In 2011, Juan Anderson was suspended by the NCAA after MU self-reported a NCAA violation as a result of Anderson receiving free tickets (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/7222013/juan-anderson-marquette-golden-eagles-gets-ban-taking-milwaukee-brewers-tickets) to a Milwaukee Brewers playoff game.
Not to be outdone in our very own city, UW-Milwaukee recently self-reported 6 violations (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/145844505.html#!page=1&pageSize=10&sort=newestfirst)as reported by Don Walker in the Journal Sentinel. It seems Don Walker is the one that handles this type of story for the Journal Sentinel and NCAA related issues.
This is standard practice these days, whether it is Ohio State, Florida, Tennessee, Syracuse, UCLA, Texas, Marquette, or anyone else...all have self-reported secondary NCAA violations in the last few months and rightly so. Once it is reported, it will get picked up by the press and published if it involves a major program or team. It is not worth it for a school to hide something as trivial as some of these secondary violations. Not when the NCAA is looking for scalps to send a message. Report it, get it out in the open, move on.
For those that want to go down memory lane, an interesting article about recruiting violations and the recommendations by Al McGuire and Digger Phelps on how to clean it up. (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=tBYsAAAAIBAJ&sjid=xcgEAAAAIBAJ&pg=1147,2176947&dq=marquette+ncaa+violation&hl=en)
http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2012/08/two-strange-things-happened-this-week.html
Cool to read your stuff again. ;D
How utterly reasonable. Shocking.
Pretty much in complete agreement with this. It shows how much places like WSSP like to stir the pot against Marquette that they gave this any time -- look around the country and even the city and this is clearly a non-story. The only reason it's gotten any play is because there is absolutely nothing else happening in the world of college basketball (nationally) and because some media types like to poke MU with a stick (locally).
Larry Williams didn't take any grief for reprting the secondary violation to the NCAA. He took grief for reporting it to Don Walker, and at least in Walker's account, not poining out the secondary nature of the violation.
Quote from: CrackedSidewalksSays on August 11, 2012, 11:15:08 PM
First, the university announced a secondary rules violation.
Where??
Quote from: Lennys Tap on August 12, 2012, 10:01:38 AM
Larry Williams didn't take any grief for reprting the secondary violation to the NCAA. He took grief for reporting it to Don Walker, and at least in Walker's account, not poining out the secondary nature of the violation.
This. Nobody has ever suggested it wasn't 100% the right and obvious thing to report to the NCAA. It's only the media reporting, the vague content given to the media, and also the media outlet chosen where I've seen any questioning.
Thank you for the facts ... a fact (ahem) which is increasing rare on this and many other boards.
Frankly, people "making-up stuff", or not taking the time to inform themselves, or simply using fractured logic to arrive at illogical conclusions, is unfortunately become the norm and hardly worth the time to even address in a post. However, what is disturbing is the negative hysteria that seems to permeate many bloggers world view. Makes one wonder how some people make it out of bed in the morning.
So, as noted, your facts, Bamama, are most refreshing. But, it is your probability analysis that has made this Warrior fan a believer in your approach and objectivity. You have been spot-on so many times it is rather staggering.
As a post script, is there some source for identifying how many ex-jurnior college players are in the NBA? It is interesting that the last four from Marquette to have a NBA shot are all former junior college players.
Finally, regarding DJO, some of the recent articles state he is a great kid, has a strong work ethic, with fabulous athletic ability, but infer that he does not have great basketball "skills." From this latter criticism one would conclude he does not have NBA basketball "instincts." One would think that your "value added", when it is all said and done, probably measures these basketball "instincts" (Butler, Crowder, et al.).
Again, thank you for all your facts and insights.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on August 12, 2012, 10:01:38 AM
Larry Williams didn't take any grief for reprting the secondary violation to the NCAA. He took grief for reporting it to Don Walker, and at least in Walker's account, not poining out the secondary nature of the violation.
1. How do you know he reported it to Don Walker (as opposed to Walker inquired about it and LW answered the question)?
2. How are LW's actions any different than that of the numerous other universities I cited in another post that publicly confirm incidents of self-reporting?
3. How do you know what he told Don Walker?
4. Outside of an anonymous source cited by Paint Touches, what's your basis for this being a cut-and-dried secondary violation? Maybe LW did or didn't discuss the nature of the incident with Don Walker, but if he didn't, maybe there's a reason.
Once again you've made a boatload of assumptions - some of which are outright wrong - in order to further your predetermined narrative.
In 1985, asst coach voight gives a ride to recruit Chris and another prepster, Buys them hot dogs...then proceeds to state on record: "We're not interested in the kid. He's not that good."
I know he had to say it but wtf?! Lol
Quote from: Pakuni on August 12, 2012, 01:49:00 PM
1. How do you know he reported it to Don Walker (as opposed to Walker inquired about it and LW answered the question)?
2. How are LW's actions any different than that of the numerous other universities I cited in another post that publicly confirm incidents of self-reporting?
3. How do you know what he told Don Walker?
4. Outside of an anonymous source cited by Paint Touches, what's your basis for this being a cut-and-dried secondary violation? Maybe LW did or didn't discuss the nature of the incident with Don Walker, but if he didn't, maybe there's a reason.
Once again you've made a boatload of assumptions - some of which are outright wrong - in order to further your predetermined narrative.
My " boatload of assumptions" are as follows:
1. Marquette committed a secondary violation that they self-reported to the NCAA. Paint Touches, Don Walker in his radio interview on 1250 and several posters on Scout and Scoop are my sources. What's your source that this is wrong?
2. Larry Williams was Don Walker's source for reporting the violation. I assume this because that's what Don Walker says and Larry Williams hasn't denied it. If this was a case of LW merely confirming info Walker had from another source wouldn't Walker have reported it as such?
3. Chicos (author of the above piece) defends LW from those criticizing him for self reporting MU's violation to the NCAA. This is a crock - nobody to my knowledge has said any such thing.
You say some of these are outright wrong. Which ones? And what are your sources?
As for predetermined narratives, you might want to take a peek in the mirror.
Alright, I will be the first to admit I am wrong with Larry Williams if my sources are wrong concerning this issue. Not only this issue, but the issues that have occurred over the past few months.
If this is a secondary violation (like others Marquette has had in the past - posted above) is looked upon as just that, and we move on, fine. However, if Larry dismisses (which I have heard he will) one of our assistant coaches that "unintentionally" was involved in this minor infraction I will go on to say that what I have heard is all true. Also, if this happens, I believe that Larry is going out of his way to make things very difficult for Buzz and the program.
I, for one, will be more than happy to admit I was wrong if I am. If not we are treading water with an outstanding young coach who may want to go where he isn't put under a microscope by someone that doesn't even have his feet wet yet on campus. Maybe it's because I hate Notre Dame, but I don't like the feeling of what is going on at Marquette right now under his so-called "leadership".
I'm hoping for the best, and we will soon see. Go MU!
If there is an assistant coach dismissal for a minor violation then we are in serious trouble regarding MU basketball. Minor infractions are minor - and a coach that just got here? I would be shocked if this happens, but if it does, it has to be part of a bigger, more sinister, plan.
Quote from: hoops12 on August 12, 2012, 02:56:04 PM
Alright, I will be the first to admit I am wrong with Larry Williams if my sources are wrong concerning this issue. Not only this issue, but the issues that have occurred over the past few months.
If this is a secondary violation (like others Marquette has had in the past - posted above) is looked upon as just that, and we move on, fine. However, if Larry dismisses (which I have heard he will) one of our assistant coaches that "unintentionally" was involved in this minor infraction I will go on to say that what I have heard is all true. Also, if this happens, I believe that Larry is going out of his way to make things very difficult for Buzz and the program.
I, for one, will be more than happy to admit I was wrong if I am. If not we are treading water with an outstanding young coach who may want to go where he isn't put under a microscope by someone that doesn't even have his feet wet yet on campus. Maybe it's because I hate Notre Dame, but I don't like the feeling of what is going on at Marquette right now under his so-called "leadership".
I'm hoping for the best, and we will soon see. Go MU!
Quote from: Lennys Tap on August 12, 2012, 02:48:15 PM
My " boatload of assumptions" are as follows:
1. Marquette committed a secondary violation that they self-reported to the NCAA. Paint Touches, Don Walker in his radio interview on 1250 and several posters on Scout and Scoop are my sources. What's your source that this is wrong?
2. Larry Williams was Don Walker's source for reporting the violation. I assume this because that's what Don Walker says and Larry Williams hasn't denied it. If this was a case of LW merely confirming info Walker had from another source wouldn't Walker have reported it as such?
3. Chicos (author of the above piece) defends LW from those criticizing him for self reporting MU's violation to the NCAA. This is a crock - nobody to my knowledge has said any such thing.
You say some of these are outright wrong. Which ones? And what are your sources?
As for predetermined narratives, you might want to take a peek in the mirror.
No, Don Walker never said LW was his source for this information. He reported that Marquette released a statement in which Larry Williams is quoted. Perhaps you misunderstand, but are you under the impression that LW called Don Walker and relayed this to him? No. Marquette released a prepared statement about this. What prompted them to do so? I'd suggest a reporter's inquiry, but that's just a professionally educated guess.
What is there for LW to deny?
And no, Walker would not have reported that "A tipster told me this and Larry Williams confirmed it through a prepared statement released by Marquette University." That's not how these things work.
What's outright wrong is your implication that LW/Marquette did something wrong, unusual or untoward in making its self-reporting public. Schools do it regularly.
Ohio State's AD just a few months back publicly confirmed that the school had self-reported 46 violations, many in the football program. He must be out to get Urban Meyer.
Last year, Alabama made public 16 secondary violations within the football program. They're obviously trying to make life difficult for Nick Saban.
Edit: One more point I'll make. It sounds as if this is nothing too serious and will go away relatively quietly. That's good. What's odd/disconcerting is that people seem
way more troubled with the how this became public (and via whom) than they are by the fact
the basketball program is under investigation for NCAA recruiting violations. Again, the violations don't seem to be all that serious, but for a school (and fan base) that's always prided itself on having a clean program, you would think being under investigation would be the primary cause of concern around here. Guess not.
Quote from: Pakuni on August 12, 2012, 03:39:12 PM
No, Don Walker never said LW was his source for this information. He reported that Marquette released a statement in which Larry Williams is quoted. Perhaps you misunderstand, but are you under the impression that LW called Don Walker and relayed this to him? No. Marquette released a prepared statement about this. What prompted them to do so? I'd suggest a reporter's inquiry, but that's just a professionally educated guess.
What is there for LW to deny?
And no, Walker would not have reported that "A tipster told me this and Larry Williams confirmed it through a prepared statement released by Marquette University." That's not how these things work.
What's outright wrong is your implication that LW/Marquette did something wrong, unusual or untoward in making its self-reporting public. Schools do it regularly.
Ohio State's AD just a few months back publicly confirmed that the school had self-reported 46 violations, many in the football program. He must be out to get Urban Meyer.
Last year, Alabama made public 16 secondary violations within the football program. They're obviously trying to make life difficult for Nick Saban.
The important thing is that they let the public know that it was minor. If Larry came out and said in the statement that this was minor, no one is bashing him. He's let this go a few days now. If we didn't have people online or Don Walker on the radio once, we'd still have no clue the severity. Larry's opened this up for much more speculation. Crean had a minor violation not long ago, but it was said to be minor right away. So there was no wild speculation.
Quote from: cheebs09 on August 12, 2012, 03:45:30 PM
The important thing is that they let the public know that it was minor. If Larry came out and said in the statement that this was minor, no one is bashing him. He's let this go a few days now. If we didn't have people online or Don Walker on the radio once, we'd still have no clue the severity. Larry's opened this up for much more speculation. Crean had a minor violation not long ago, but it was said to be minor right away. So there was no wild speculation.
Why does Larry Williams owe the general public anything? It is not Larry Williams's decision to deem the violation minor, it is the NCAA's, and it is still under investigation. If what I have heard is true and it is just a recruit receiving an article of clothing then it should be found to be minor, but what do we know? Maybe there is a major violation that the NCAA is looking into and nobody else knows about. You don't give details of an investigation until the investigation is done. Larry is doing his job.
Quote from: wadesworld on August 12, 2012, 03:50:52 PM
Why does Larry Williams owe the general public anything? It is not Larry Williams's decision to deem the violation minor, it is the NCAA's, and it is still under investigation. If what I have heard is true and it is just a recruit receiving an article of clothing then it should be found to be minor, but what do we know? Maybe there is a major violation that the NCAA is looking into and nobody else knows about. You don't give details of an investigation until the investigation is done. Larry is doing his job.
If it is minor you report it as such and make sure everone knows it is minor and gets reported as such To do otherwise results in a lot of bad publicity, as we've seen. Basic PR stuff. Bad publicity can't be undone, we should all know that by now given the last two years.
Quote from: GOO on August 12, 2012, 04:54:55 PM
If it is minor you report it as such and make sure everone knows it is minor and gets reported as such To do otherwise results in a lot of bad publicity, as we've seen. Basic PR stuff. Bad publicity can't be undone, we should all know that by now given the last two years.
It can't be undone? So because Larry Williams didn't give details of an ongoing investigation people now look at Marquette as cheaters even though when the investigation is complete it will come out that an article of clothing was given to a recruit and there are no punishments? Nobody is looking at Marquette in the same light as SMU football because Larry Williams did not give details into an ongoing NCAA investigation, and nobody will after the details are released with the finish of the investigation.
Do we honestly believe the NCAA is "conducting an on-going investigation" into a self-reported violation because an assistant gave a kid a clean shirt? Let's get real here and just admit the NCAA is logging this and MU will be docked a recruiting day. If the NCAA is expending any investigative resources on an alleged secondary violation other than writing up a report, no wonder they cannot get anything on Cal. This is over, except for the show.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on August 12, 2012, 05:25:14 PM
Do we honestly believe the NCAA is "conducting an on-going investigation" into a self-reported violation because an assistant gave a kid a clean shirt? Let's get real here and just admit the NCAA is logging this and MU will be docked a recruiting day. If the NCAA is expending any investigative resources on an alleged secondary violation other than writing up a report, no wonder they cannot get anything on Cal. This is over, except for the show.
So you think a school self-reports a minor violation and they just take it at its word, not look into whether there is more to it tan just 1 t-shirt? OK.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on August 12, 2012, 02:48:15 PM
My " boatload of assumptions" are as follows:
1. Marquette committed a secondary violation that they self-reported to the NCAA. Paint Touches, Don Walker in his radio interview on 1250 and several posters on Scout and Scoop are my sources. What's your source that this is wrong?
2. Larry Williams was Don Walker's source for reporting the violation. I assume this because that's what Don Walker says and Larry Williams hasn't denied it. If this was a case of LW merely confirming info Walker had from another source wouldn't Walker have reported it as such?
3. Chicos (author of the above piece) defends LW from those criticizing him for self reporting MU's violation to the NCAA. This is a crock - nobody to my knowledge has said any such thing.
You say some of these are outright wrong. Which ones? And what are your sources?
As for predetermined narratives, you might want to take a peek in the mirror.
My "DERP DERP HERP DERP" are as follows:
1. Derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp. derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp! PROVE ME WRONG!.
2. Derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp
derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp PROVE ME WRONG!
3. derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp NOBODY HAS PROVEN ME WRONG YET!
HERPY DERP DERP DERP HERP DERP! PROVE ME WRONG!
I hate Larry Williams, and I'm a bitter human being, and I won't let facts get in the way of my misguided conspiracy theory that he's out to destroy Marquette basketball.
FIXED!Quote from: hoops12 on August 12, 2012, 02:56:04 PM
Alright, I will be the first to admit I am wrong with Larry Williams if my sources are wrong concerning this issue. Not only this issue, but the issues that have occurred over the past few months.
If this is a secondary violation (like others Marquette has had in the past - posted above) is looked upon as just that, and we move on, fine. However, if Larry dismisses (which I have heard he will) one of our assistant coaches that "unintentionally" was involved in this minor infraction I will go on to say that what I have heard is all true. Also, if this happens, I believe that Larry is going out of his way to make things very difficult for Buzz and the program.
I, for one, will be more than happy to admit I was wrong if I am. If not we are treading water with an outstanding young coach who may want to go where he isn't put under a microscope by someone that doesn't even have his feet wet yet on campus. Maybe it's because I hate Notre Dame, but I don't like the feeling of what is going on at Marquette right now under his so-called "leadership".
I'm hoping for the best, and we will soon see. Go MU!
Assume assume assume, then act indignant that my assumptions are TOTALLY TRUE.
Thanks, Brick Tamland. You can stop talking now. Well, at least let us know how the weather is in the "middle east." Although the rest of your post is high comedy, guffaw-inducing, bulls***, I will agree with you on one point-- GO MU! That, you got correct.
Quote from: wadesworld on August 12, 2012, 05:30:33 PM
So you think a school self-reports a minor violation and they just take it at its word, not look into whether there is more to it tan just 1 t-shirt? OK.
With hundreds of D1 through D3 violations filed in a year, do you honestly believe the NCAA opens a detailed investigation for a t-shirt? OK
The process is the Director of Compliance for MU files a self-report with a proposed penalty with the NCAA, and then it is either agreed to or not or they request more information. If it goes beyond that, it isn't secondary. The NCAA relies on schools to self-police. They don't have the resources otherwise.
When Crean got his secondary violation last year for thinking that there was one more day in the recruiting window when he visited a recruit at his hs, he reported it and the self-imposed penalty was announced at the same time...and IU was still on major probation at the time.
The NCAA is "investigating" this like they investigate all violations of this nature. They receive the report....catalog it...and figure out if they need to push it up the chain. There isn't a bevy of NCAA investigators going through the files at MU right now or anything.
With Crean/Gary Harris & Big Ten.. did it even go to NCAA?
I think Big Ten schools reports to the conference. In certain circumstances it goes to the NCAA. The conference literally averages a couple hundred secondaries every year.
Anyway, WHERE IS THE RELEASE?
I think we need to take this seriously. I hear that a special investigator, whose cover name is Rob, is holding summit with two other investigators over this matter.
Hiroshima will seem like a picnic after agent Rob finishes with Buzz.
Seriously, a t-shirt? All cotton? Poly-blend? Sleeveless?
Quote from: lab_warrior on August 12, 2012, 05:34:00 PM
My "DERP DERP HERP DERP" are as follows:
1. Derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp. derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp! PROVE ME WRONG!.
2. Derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp
derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp PROVE ME WRONG!
3. derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp NOBODY HAS PROVEN ME WRONG YET!
HERPY DERP DERP DERP HERP DERP! PROVE ME WRONG!
I hate Larry Williams, and I'm a bitter human being, and I won't let facts get in the way of my misguided conspiracy theory that he's out to destroy Marquette basketball.
FIXED!
Lab - You are often humorous and occasionally even insightful. You're currently mired in a slump of epic proportion and this post serves as exhibit A.
For the record, I don't hate LW and I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories of any sort, including one that says he's out to destroy Marquette basketball. But I admit that what I've seen and heard from him thus far gives me pause.
Buzz didn't leave for second rate SMU last April and you use that as evidence that he and LW are copasetic. I think it far more logical to conclude that Buzz even speaking to a school several levels below MU suggests otherwise. Those unable to connect simple dots can rail against the tinfoilers, but how much credence does one wearing the dunce cap get?
Unfortunately I do not see two Williams surviving at MU and it will only be a matter of time before Buzz leaves. People will jump all over him, because he said he would be at MU as long as MU wants him, but this was before Larry showed up.
Larry might be part of the problem with Buzz but I think it goes higher up than just Larry. I would be beyond shocked if Buzz and brass can mend the fences. Heard from someone I trust a great deal that he is was not optimistic about Buzz being here long term. That said, he added with Buzz you never know what he will do or say. Buzz probably is too loose of a cannon for MU's comfot zone. I see no way Buzz changes his style because plenty of schools would love to have him the way he is.
Yet MU's greatest known figure - Al McGuire - was a loose cannon and revered. My how the politically correct times have changed our society for the worse. Pretty sure Al McGuire had rough edges that seem to be a concern to Larry Williams with regard to Buzz. Might as well enjoy Buzz while we have him and not worry about when he leaves.
Marquette and college basketball were different then. Not necessarily for the better or worse - just different.
Let's see the past 3 years - along with awesome team performance, recruiting and player development, MU also has had:
- Two sexual assault allegations with high media attention
- Bar fight with high media attention
- Vander blue altercation
- Significant number of players accepted scholarship but never making it to the team (Roseboro, Newbill, Taylor)
- Significant number of transfers (Maymon, Smith, Williams, Jones, Mbao) - yeah I know the national average
- Goofy exchanges with media (Buzz / Mclavine)
- Funny but probably disrespectful display of sportsmanship (WVU)
- Rumors of academic struggles
- Minor reported NCAA infraction
There ARE rough edges with Buzz and the program right now. A few of these by them self are likely fine. All of these together,- I would expect the University wanting some more control and direction setting.
Now - I would expect Larry / Pilarz to do it in a way that Buzz is agreeable to. And if Buzz is true about "developing men not just basketball payers," I would expect Buzz to be able to adapt his ways and with behaviors & results to be more agreeable to the university.
However, if Buzz and LW / FP can't work together, yes Buzz it likely moving on when he can...
MU's only identity as a school other then if you live in WISC or goto a catholic school From Chicago is the basketball team. Donations, and the quality of students goes up as the team gets better. Buzz has a winning record in the NCAA with 4 straight appearances. Things like this get us invited to play on a aircraft. His 2013 class is shaping up to be one of the best in 30 years. His player's have graduated, His player's in the NBA. Wes, Lazar, Butler, Crowder the coachs Rave about them.
I think people should keep letting the Pres and LW know that we support MU and Buzz, but at this point the jury is still out on them. I also Hope Cords and Wild talk some sense into them. We get lucky with a great hire in Buzz but you would be kidding yourself if you thought you could get that lucky again.
all the recruits talk about Buzz you take that away and the recruits go elsewhere.
18 year kids like to be around funny and happy go lucky people. sometime that comes off as rough edges but for the most part all that does is make them good recruiter's and Buzz seems to take mentoring the student athletes seriuosly.
that is tough to hear that LW and the above feel need to put the screws on buzz.
I'm sorry, but I think it is incredibly insulting to MU to say that its "only identity as a school" if you live outside the area is the basketball team. Marquette's basketball team means a lot to its students and alumni, but it can't be defined by it.
Furthermore, as madtownwarrior points out, there are a number of things associated with the basketball team that have drawn negative attention to the University. Some of those aren't their fault nor can it be helped, but they do draw negative attention nevertheless.
I'm not saying that they want to turn MU into SLU, but I am pretty sure this administration would put up with slightly poorer results on the court if it meant cutting down on the negative press associated with the team. IOW, I think they preferred the Crean era to the Buzz era.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 13, 2012, 01:31:28 PM
I'm sorry, but I think it is incredibly insulting to MU to say that its "only identity as a school" if you live outside the area is the basketball team. Marquette's basketball team means a lot to its students and alumni, but it can't be defined by it.
Furthermore, as madtownwarrior points out, there are a number of things associated with the basketball team that have drawn negative attention to the University. Some of those aren't their fault nor can it be helped, but they do draw negative attention nevertheless.
I'm not saying that they want to turn MU into SLU, but I am pretty sure this administration would put up with slightly poorer results on the court if it meant cutting down on the negative press associated with the team. IOW, I think they preferred the Crean era to the Buzz era.
Well said.
Quote from: madtownwarrior on August 13, 2012, 01:19:33 PM
However, if Buzz and LW / FP can't work together, yes Buzz it likely moving on when he can...
You've been quick to ridicule me and others for saying as much. I'll let bygones be bygones...welcome. 7 1/4 or 7 3/8 on your complimentary tinfoil hat?
Sometimes it is easier to accept the disingenuous, smiling Eddie Haskell wannabe than the honest but less polished suitor.
Only might be a stretch. All I can tell you is 10 years ago 1/2 of people that I talked to in the Midwest had no clue where MU was, and the other 1/2 of them thought it was in Marquette Mi. Now almost every person I talk to mentions Milwaukee and how good we are at basketball. It is a fact that Donations and the quality of the student and educational rankings have gone up since or BBALL team has gotten better, no one can argue that.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 13, 2012, 01:31:28 PM
I'm not saying that they want to turn MU into SLU, but I am pretty sure this administration would put up with slightly poorer results on the court if it meant cutting down on the negative press associated with the team. IOW, I think they preferred the Crean era to the Buzz era.
Agree with your analysis, disagree with the administration. Buzz puts a better product on the the floor and for my money is a much better leader/face of the university than TC ever was. TC was better at covering stuff up and keeping it "in house" but that ship sailed when our policy about reporting possible crimes to the MPD changed.
Quote from: connie on August 13, 2012, 01:49:28 PM
Sometimes it is easier to accept the disingenuous, smiling Eddie Haskell wannabe than the honest but less polished suitor.
Perfectly said. Sometimes people are taken in by phonies because they're naive. Other times it's because they're co-conspirators.
Madtown
I completely agree with your points. We have had enough issues even to make me squirm a tad. Stated it in March/April and will say it again, MU does not want program to be a black eye to school. Whole thing comes down to comfort level and how much rope Buzz is given. No way is Buzz is changing and either MU lets him do his thing or he moves on. Buzz has a lot of grey area in him and that is not for everyone.
When all is said and done it will be decided by MU elavuating risk vs. reward with Buzz. I agree with Sultan that less ball success and less troubles might be good choice for them.
Quote from: kmwtrucks on August 13, 2012, 02:00:00 PM
Only might be a stretch. All I can tell you is 10 years ago 1/2 of people that I talked to in the Midwest had no clue where MU was, and the other 1/2 of them thought it was in Marquette Mi. Now almost every person I talk to mentions Milwaukee and how good we are at basketball. It is a fact that Donations and the quality of the student and educational rankings have gone up since or BBALL team has gotten better, no one can argue that.
But making the assumption that basketball is the sole, or even the primary, reason behind those "upgrades" may not be entirely accurate.
Quote from: kmwtrucks on August 13, 2012, 01:23:24 PM
MU's only identity as a school other then if you live in WISC or goto a catholic school From Chicago is the basketball team. Donations, and the quality of students goes up as the team gets better. Buzz has a winning record in the NCAA with 4 straight appearances. Things like this get us invited to play on a aircraft. His 2013 class is shaping up to be one of the best in 30 years. His player's have graduated, His player's in the NBA. Wes, Lazar, Butler, Crowder the coachs Rave about them.
I think people should keep letting the Pres and LW know that we support MU and Buzz, but at this point the jury is still out on them. I also Hope Cords and Wild talk some sense into them. We get lucky with a great hire in Buzz but you would be kidding yourself if you thought you could get that lucky again.
all the recruits talk about Buzz you take that away and the recruits go elsewhere.
18 year kids like to be around funny and happy go lucky people. sometime that comes off as rough edges but for the most part all that does is make them good recruiter's and Buzz seems to take mentoring the student athletes seriuosly.
that is tough to hear that LW and the above feel need to put the screws on buzz.
The basketball program is MU's #1 marketing tool.
Buzz Williams is putting a quality product on the floor.
HOWEVER, we (alumni) and the school need to keep things in perspective. When we start clinging to athletics as the lifeblood of the school, we run a dangerous path where making the right choices becomes increasingly difficult.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on August 13, 2012, 02:00:49 PM
Agree with your analysis, disagree with the administration. Buzz puts a better product on the the floor and for my money is a much better leader/face of the university than TC ever was. TC was better at covering stuff up and keeping it "in house" but that ship sailed when our policy about reporting possible crimes to the MPD changed.
I agree with you. And I am not talking about Crean himself. What I am saying is that I think they would trade a little of the positive to get rid of most of the negative.
No Lenny, the reason why I may ridicule you is that you insist (over and over) that there ARE serious problems between LW and Buzz and that LW is putting the screws to Buzz based on your interpretation of the Journal Sentinel article after the WVU game.
I, nor really anybody here, have no idea what the actual relationship status is between LW and Buzz.
What I am saying here is that I think MU is entitled to some improvements in behaviors of the program and that LW should be able to find a way to encourage or guide Buzz in a way that is acceptable to Buzz and Buzz should be open to such guidance if it helps him develop a better program and men.
If neither of these are true, then Buzz may be gone. You jump immediately to the LW (the ND ahole) is screwing Buzz and Buzz is gone ASAP.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on August 13, 2012, 01:49:16 PM
You've been quick to ridicule me and others for saying as much. I'll let bygones be bygones...welcome. 7 1/4 or 7 3/8 on your complimentary tinfoil hat?
Madtown
Only problem with your LW and Buzz relationship comment is you assume nobody knows how the relationship between the two are.
Guns n Ammo
Think you are spot on. Penn State allowing a sport to run a school may be biggest mistake in sports history. Every school now has different bar for sports and the role they play at their schools. MU brass may have lowered their bar a great deal since FP and LW arrived.
Given what has been proclaimed "to happen" on this site by posters with "sources" and "insider" knowledge and what has actually happened this past summer - yes, I don't think there is a whole of of factual insights to the program here (other than BigDaddy).... lots of speculation and "people I trust" statements but not a lot of reality as to whole the events actually turned out...
and, yes, where there is smoke there is likely fire (or maybe just LW giving Buzz a "hot foot")
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 13, 2012, 02:15:17 PM
I agree with you. And I am not talking about Crean himself. What I am saying is that I think they would trade a little of the positive to get rid of most of the negative.
Fair and logical analysis.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 13, 2012, 01:31:28 PM
I'm sorry, but I think it is incredibly insulting to MU to say that its "only identity as a school" if you live outside the area is the basketball team. Marquette's basketball team means a lot to its students and alumni, but it can't be defined by it.
Furthermore, as madtownwarrior points out, there are a number of things associated with the basketball team that have drawn negative attention to the University. Some of those aren't their fault nor can it be helped, but they do draw negative attention nevertheless.
I'm not saying that they want to turn MU into SLU, but I am pretty sure this administration would put up with slightly poorer results on the court if it meant cutting down on the negative press associated with the team. IOW, I think they preferred the Crean era to the Buzz era.
maybe not the "only" identity, but it certainly is THE major identity.
Buzz is responsible for the assistants he hires. However, I have to wonder how much or any of the problems can be traced to the assistants. Usually, it is the assistants that make the initial push for a certain recruit. At some point they bring Buzz in to close the deal. How well these assistants vet the recruits is important. For example I really thought TJ Taylor was a Buzz recruit, but it turned out he was recruited by the assistant that took the North Texas job. Taylor lasts two weeks here before he suppossedly does not like how hard Buzz pushes the players and he did not even make it to boot camp. How does a recruit sign and not know what is expected of him. To me the recruiters are not telling him what to expect. Buzz signed Roseboro on the recommendation of one of his assistants and Roseboro also left before the season started. The players involved in improprietaries were also not properly vetted. The current violation that MU self reported appears to have been done by one of the departed assistants. I can only hope that a lot of these problems do not occur now that we have new assistants in charge of recruiting.
We are going to have misses when you recruit 16-17 year olds. For the most part I'm happy with the recruits buzz has gotten. You can only watch them so much, and how many times can they practice with you before the enroll? I would say he has more hits of 2-3 star player's then most coach's. Crowder, DJO, Gardner, Butler, Mayo (not one of those guys was rated in the top 150 on Rivals)
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on August 13, 2012, 02:14:36 PM
The basketball program is MU's #1 marketing tool.
Buzz Williams is putting a quality product on the floor.
HOWEVER, we (alumni) and the school need to keep things in perspective. When we start clinging to athletics as the lifeblood of the school, we run a dangerous path where making the right choices becomes increasingly difficult.
Nailed it.
Quote from: madtownwarrior on August 13, 2012, 01:19:33 PM
Let's see the past 3 years - along with awesome team performance, recruiting and player development, MU also has had:
- Two sexual assault allegations with high media attention
- Bar fight with high media attention
- Vander blue altercation
- Significant number of players accepted scholarship but never making it to the team (Roseboro, Newbill, Taylor)
- Significant number of transfers (Maymon, Smith, Williams, Jones, Mbao) - yeah I know the national average
- Goofy exchanges with media (Buzz / Mclavine)
- Funny but probably disrespectful display of sportsmanship (WVU)
- Rumors of academic struggles
- Minor reported NCAA infraction
There ARE rough edges with Buzz and the program right now. A few of these by them self are likely fine. All of these together,- I would expect the University wanting some more control and direction setting.
Now - I would expect Larry / Pilarz to do it in a way that Buzz is agreeable to. And if Buzz is true about "developing men not just basketball payers," I would expect Buzz to be able to adapt his ways and with behaviors & results to be more agreeable to the university.
However, if Buzz and LW / FP can't work together, yes Buzz it likely moving on when he can...
Let's see...the sexual assault ALLEGATIONS never had enough merit to have any charges pressed...and we know began consensually. The bar fight - not instigated by MU players - but guess what - 18-22 year old men on/off college campuses get into bar fights. The incidence of bar fights/hanging out at bars among non basketball players at MU is exponentially higher than that of basketball players.
So, Vander Blue got into an altercation...so Buzz was wrong for recruiting Vander? Should Buzz live 24x7 with his players? They trying to run off Bielema in Madison due to the Montee Ball mess? If only we had Barry Alvarez as our athletic director - a guy who actually gets what it is like to be a head coach at a high major school.
As for Newbill, Roseboro, TJ Taylor - 2 of the 3 made it to campus and decided MU wasn't the place for them - so that's a rough edge on Buzz? Really questioning the transfers of Maymon and Reggie Smith?? Erik Williams? Jamail Jones? Buzz is to blame because these Top 100 players either had impossible parents, or simply wanted to play rather than ride the bench? Goofy exchange with Mac and the dance at WVU?? Wow. Grasp for straws much? And now the minor NCAA infraction for an assistant apparently giving away a T-shirt to a recruit. Wow. We really need to clean up the act of our head coach, whose former players swear by him, and how much of a positive influence he's been in their life.
Afraid our current admin is of the self righteous ideology that you too seem to have...and self righteousness never leads to good outcomes.
No one is saying that Buzz is to blame for all of these incidents, or that there aren't legitimate reasons why they occurred, but they are negative points. And again, I have no idea why you keep lashing out at LW when he is doing exactly what those above him WANT him to do. Despite what many of you want, my impression is that LW is operating within the full support of FP and the BOT and isn't going anywhere.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 13, 2012, 09:16:09 PM
No one is saying that Buzz is to blame for all of these incidents, or that there aren't legitimate reasons why they occurred, but they are negative points. And again, I have no idea why you keep lashing out at LW when he is doing exactly what those above him WANT him to do. Despite what many of you want, my impression is that LW is operating within the full support of FP and the BOT and isn't going anywhere.
Maybe you're right and he's "just following orders". That will win him support from his bosses but not necessarily from the great unwashed (alumni/fans).
Well, my guess is that we will see. If they don't get along, and one of them leaves, we will surely know who the administration has cast their lot with.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 13, 2012, 09:31:48 PM
Well, my guess is that we will see. If they don't get along, and one of them leaves, we will surely know who the administration has cast their lot with.
All true.
Quote from: Ners on August 13, 2012, 09:05:00 PM
Let's see...the sexual assault ALLEGATIONS never had enough merit to have any charges pressed...and we know began consensually. The bar fight - not instigated by MU players - but guess what - 18-22 year old men on/off college campuses get into bar fights. The incidence of bar fights/hanging out at bars among non basketball players at MU is exponentially higher than that of basketball players.
So, Vander Blue got into an altercation...so Buzz was wrong for recruiting Vander? Should Buzz live 24x7 with his players? They trying to run off Bielema in Madison due to the Montee Ball mess? If only we had Barry Alvarez as our athletic director - a guy who actually gets what it is like to be a head coach at a high major school.
As for Newbill, Roseboro, TJ Taylor - 2 of the 3 made it to campus and decided MU wasn't the place for them - so that's a rough edge on Buzz? Really questioning the transfers of Maymon and Reggie Smith?? Erik Williams? Jamail Jones? Buzz is to blame because these Top 100 players either had impossible parents, or simply wanted to play rather than ride the bench? Goofy exchange with Mac and the dance at WVU?? Wow. Grasp for straws much? And now the minor NCAA infraction for an assistant apparently giving away a T-shirt to a recruit. Wow. We really need to clean up the act of our head coach, whose former players swear by him, and how much of a positive influence he's been in their life.
Afraid our current admin is of the self righteous ideology that you too seem to have...and self righteousness never leads to good outcomes.
So you're OK with all of the recent issues within the basketball program? I am a huge Buzz supporter and would hate to see him go, but to pretend that everything is squeaky clean and perfectly fine within the program is naive at best.
If a new CEO takes over a successful company and the company goes bankrupt because the people he hires don't do a good job under him it doesn't let the CEO off the hook. If a college coach's players are continually acting inappropriately you can't just say "Well, the coach isn't the one acting out."
Quote from: Ners on August 13, 2012, 09:05:00 PM
Let's see...the sexual assault ALLEGATIONS never had enough merit to have any charges pressed...and we know began consensually. The bar fight - not instigated by MU players - but guess what - 18-22 year old men on/off college campuses get into bar fights. The incidence of bar fights/hanging out at bars among non basketball players at MU is exponentially higher than that of basketball players.
So, Vander Blue got into an altercation...so Buzz was wrong for recruiting Vander? Should Buzz live 24x7 with his players? They trying to run off Bielema in Madison due to the Montee Ball mess? If only we had Barry Alvarez as our athletic director - a guy who actually gets what it is like to be a head coach at a high major school.
As for Newbill, Roseboro, TJ Taylor - 2 of the 3 made it to campus and decided MU wasn't the place for them - so that's a rough edge on Buzz? Really questioning the transfers of Maymon and Reggie Smith?? Erik Williams? Jamail Jones? Buzz is to blame because these Top 100 players either had impossible parents, or simply wanted to play rather than ride the bench? Goofy exchange with Mac and the dance at WVU?? Wow. Grasp for straws much? And now the minor NCAA infraction for an assistant apparently giving away a T-shirt to a recruit. Wow. We really need to clean up the act of our head coach, whose former players swear by him, and how much of a positive influence he's been in their life.
Afraid our current admin is of the self righteous ideology that you too seem to have...and self righteousness never leads to good outcomes.
Alone, none of these is really cause for concern (aside from how the alleged sexual harassment was handled by the university and possibly what they players did--we'll never know the true story/exactly what happened), but collectively they give some alumni pause as they don't reflect positively on the university. Some will say that's the price of business for competing in high-major basketball, but I would sooner see that MU avoids so many negative headlines. However, given the choice between finishing 2nd in the BE/going to a sweet 16 and seeing some of these things pop up occasionally or missing the tourney but being a program with nary a negative headlines, I'd choose the former. However, I don't see why those things need to be mutually exclusive.
I am still a big Buzz fan though, but I do agree with LW's alleged statement that program's rough edges could be cleaned up a bit. GO MU!!
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 13, 2012, 09:31:48 PM
Well, my guess is that we will see. If they don't get along, and one of them leaves, we will surely know who the administration has cast their lot with.
I do not want Buzz to leave.
However, I'm ok with the AD and Head Coach not being best friends. They have to be able to work professionally together, but a little separation of church and state helps ensure accountability.
I hope they can find a good balance.
I think it is reasonable for someone to see a disconnect between all the things Buzz preaches and the behavior/actions of some of the players on the team since he's been the head guy. That disconnect could lead some to believe that Buzz is not really who he portrays himself to be.
I personally don't think that disconnect exists. The guys on the team are of an age where judgement is lacking sometimes. We've all been there. Combined with the problems that come with celebrity, I can see that issues such as we've seen could easily arise.
Maybe these types of problems have existed under previous regimes (we've all heard the stories), but they are much more public now. That's cause for concern.
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on August 13, 2012, 10:00:03 PM
I do not want Buzz to leave.
However, I'm ok with the AD and Head Coach not being best friends. They have to be able to work professionally together, but a little separation of church and state helps ensure accountability.
I hope they can find a good balance.
Well said.
In today's world, a little accountability in college athletics is a healthy thing.
I believe that Buzz has high standards for his players. I also believe that he understands, and embraces that he too needs to be held accountable for the outcome of his work product. For me, the key to Buzz and MU is how well the Domer serves Buzz as Buzz's leader. That will be the true measure of how good of an AD LW is.
As stated, any of the issues by themselves are no big deal / warrant a lot less attention.. Collectively, it suggests that some order is needed in the program (or you okay with Chicago media running MU sexual assault stories regularly for the price of winning / getting to the sweet 16 or having the collective "Buzz Cut" during the summer and during the season (as our friends to the West call it)).
I think Buzz is a great coach and love his player development. However, I would prefer the winning and player development without the negative media headlines and constant transfers. He is quirky - the Mclavine incident was just plain weird and the WVU dance (while I loved it to stick to the WVU jag fans) probably was not in his best interest. Quirky is good, but the world has changed since Al to the far politically correct and you never know when one of the incidents gets taken way too far (for the wrong reasons).
I really hope for the best of the program - that there is some more order to the program and that Buzz / LW can work together doing it.
Quote from: Ners on August 13, 2012, 09:05:00 PM
Let's see...the sexual assault ALLEGATIONS never had enough merit to have any charges pressed...and we know began consensually. The bar fight - not instigated by MU players - but guess what - 18-22 year old men on/off college campuses get into bar fights. The incidence of bar fights/hanging out at bars among non basketball players at MU is exponentially higher than that of basketball players.
So, Vander Blue got into an altercation...so Buzz was wrong for recruiting Vander? Should Buzz live 24x7 with his players? They trying to run off Bielema in Madison due to the Montee Ball mess? If only we had Barry Alvarez as our athletic director - a guy who actually gets what it is like to be a head coach at a high major school.
As for Newbill, Roseboro, TJ Taylor - 2 of the 3 made it to campus and decided MU wasn't the place for them - so that's a rough edge on Buzz? Really questioning the transfers of Maymon and Reggie Smith?? Erik Williams? Jamail Jones? Buzz is to blame because these Top 100 players either had impossible parents, or simply wanted to play rather than ride the bench? Goofy exchange with Mac and the dance at WVU?? Wow. Grasp for straws much? And now the minor NCAA infraction for an assistant apparently giving away a T-shirt to a recruit. Wow. We really need to clean up the act of our head coach, whose former players swear by him, and how much of a positive influence he's been in their life.
Afraid our current admin is of the self righteous ideology that you too seem to have...and self righteousness never leads to good outcomes.
Quote from: wadesworld on August 13, 2012, 09:45:49 PM
If a new CEO takes over a successful company and the company goes bankrupt because the people he hires don't do a good job under him it doesn't let the CEO off the hook. If a college coach's players are continually acting inappropriately you can't just say "Well, the coach isn't the one acting out."
Of course a new CEO who drives a successful company into bankrupcy will be fired. And disgraced as an utter failure. But that's not what's happened here. On the contrary, the company that Buzz took over is more successful than it's been in two generations. All signs point to even greater success (record earnings?) down the road. There have been some incidents of poor choices/bad behavior by the employees outside of the workplace. If you want to deep 6 the best CEO Marquette has seen in 35 years because of it, fine. I disagree.
I think the legal stuff needs to decrease in Frequency and I would be shocked if Buzz did not feel very strongly the same way. I do not know all the details and without that cannot totally comment on them, But I would prefer that to be fewer and farther in between.
If people are complaining about transfer's makes no sense at all. Was EW buzz cut? No was hurt quite a bit and never really progressed to the point that he would ever be a starter. Jones was in the same boat. They left because they were killing them selves working 40 hours a week on basketball and not playing. TJ got homesick and the person he was closet to moved back to where he grew up. Smith wanted to be the starting point Guard from day 1 (?) he is now at Eastern ILL I think.
When you recruit kids that have not grown up around the program and have not been fans of the program for years when things get hard they will look either for a better place.
If you were Jones would you stay at MU, working that hard knowing you are going at best be the 7-8 guy
in the rotation would you stay.
MU is not a blue Blood and is not a Big State school with a football team. We are going to have to fight harder for recruits and will probably have the national Avg for transfer's. Does Buzz want this no. But its the reaility.
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on August 13, 2012, 10:00:03 PM
I do not want Buzz to leave.
However, I'm ok with the AD and Head Coach not being best friends. They have to be able to work professionally together, but a little separation of church and state helps ensure accountability.
I hope they can find a good balance.
Separation of church and state? Please provide some examples of success stemming from a situation in which an AD and coach are on different pages or at loggerheads. I think a spirit of co-operation/having each other's back (Cords/Crean, Alvarez/Bielima (sic), etc,) works better.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on August 14, 2012, 08:51:58 AM
Of course a new CEO who drives a successful company into bankrupcy will be fired. And disgraced as an utter failure. But that's not what's happened here. On the contrary, the company that Buzz took over is more successful than it's been in two generations. All signs point to even greater success (record earnings?) down the road. There have been some incidents of poor choices/bad behavior by the employees outside of the workplace. If you want to deep 6 the best CEO Marquette has seen in 35 years because of it, fine. I disagree.
Actually, it seems that a new CEO that drives a successful company into bankruptcy gets a golden parachute on his way out.
Quote from: tower912 on August 14, 2012, 09:04:13 AM
Actually, it seems that a new CEO that drives a successful company into bankruptcy gets a golden parachute on his way out.
Or union members who drive a successful company into bankrupcy (with management as a co-conspirator) leapfrog stockholders and bondholders and are paid off by the taxpayers. We live in very strange times indeed.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on August 14, 2012, 09:03:36 AM
Separation of church and state? Please provide some examples of success stemming from a situation in which an AD and coach are on different pages or at loggerheads. I think a spirit of co-operation/having each other's back (Cords/Crean, Alvarez/Bielima (sic), etc,) works better.
Professionally, I want them to get along. That's important, you are correct.
I don't want the HC & AD feuding, but I don't want the HC calling the shots either (Penn State).
I like Buzz a lot, so my comments aren't any slight to him, but rather a philosophy that no head coach should carry absolute power. MU doesn't have that, and I feel that is good.
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on August 14, 2012, 09:33:56 AM
Professionally, I want them to get along. That's important, you are correct.
I don't want the HC & AD feuding, but I don't want the HC calling the shots either (Penn State).
I like Buzz a lot, so my comments aren't any slight to him, but rather a philosophy that no head coach should carry absolute power. MU doesn't have that, and I feel that is good.
Yes, exactly. IMO, there needs to be someone in place who's not afraid to say no to Buzz. We didn't have that with Cottingham, and I think that scared the hell out of the BOT.
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on August 14, 2012, 09:33:56 AM
Professionally, I want them to get along. That's important, you are correct.
I don't want the HC & AD feuding, but I don't want the HC calling the shots either (Penn State).
I like Buzz a lot, so my comments aren't any slight to him, but rather a philosophy that no head coach should carry absolute power. MU doesn't have that, and I feel that is good.
Is that what happened at Penn State? I don't think it was a case of Paterno exercising absolute power. Rather, it was a cultural problem in which everyone (coach, AD, President, etc) decided that the reputation of the football program was more important than stopping the abuse of children.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on August 14, 2012, 09:55:53 AM
Is that what happened at Penn State? I don't think it was a case of Paterno exercising absolute power. Rather, it was a cultural problem in which everyone (coach, AD, President, etc) decided that the reputation of the football program was more important than stopping the abuse of children.
"After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe yesterday, I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps."
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/30/justice/penn-state-emails/index.html
Also, from an article on the PSU janitors who witnessed Sandusky assaulting a child, but failed to report it:
"The report claims one of the janitors especially feared head coach Joe Paterno. That janitor told investigators, 'I know Paterno has so much power, if he wanted to get rid of someone, I would have been gone.'"
http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2012/07/12/freeh-report-janitors-didnt-report-abuse-feared-job-loss/
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on August 13, 2012, 02:14:36 PM
The basketball program is MU's #1 marketing tool.
Buzz Williams is putting a quality product on the floor.
HOWEVER, we (alumni) and the school need to keep things in perspective. When we start clinging to athletics as the lifeblood of the school, we run a dangerous path where making the right choices becomes increasingly difficult.
Amen. I love MU Hoops, but it is not what defines MU. It only takes small steps (many of them in MU's case) to the same type of corruption we see in SEC Football.
Quote from: Ners on August 13, 2012, 09:05:00 PM
Afraid our current admin is of the self righteous ideology that you too seem to have...and self righteousness never leads to good outcomes.
As opposed to, say, YOUR self righteous ideology?
Lets face it, you have fewer facts about any of the recent issues at your disposal than do Larry Williams and/or Fr. Pilarz. Despite your lack of knowledge you've made up your mind that Buzz is right and Williams/Pilarz are wrong.
Just
maybe the reason Larry Williams and Fr. Pilarz think Buzz has some rough edges is based on facts that go beyond the limited public knowledge of each of the situations.
Quote from: wadesworld on August 13, 2012, 09:45:49 PM
So you're OK with all of the recent issues within the basketball program? I am a huge Buzz supporter and would hate to see him go, but to pretend that everything is squeaky clean and perfectly fine within the program is naive at best.
I don't expect perfect and squeaky clean in high major athletics - and if you think everything is perfectly fine and squeaky clean within high major athletics - you are naive.
I find it comical that we now have some in our fanbase/this message board who are practically sensationalizing the minor, minor events of transfers, a recruit having been given a T-Shirt by a departed assistant, a dance after the WVU game that national media/recruits largely loved, into a holy sh$t we have a major problem on our hands at MU. The only event under Buzz's time that deserves any scrutiny would be the sexual assault allegations - yet again - Buzz can't be with his players 24x7, and the fact is no charges were pressed, it is known that one of the assaults in question began consensually between 2 people who had a previous sexual relationship.
Quote from: Ners on August 13, 2012, 09:05:00 PM
Goofy exchange with Mac and the dance at WVU??
Believe it or not, the exchange with McIlvaine is the only item on this list that makes me wonder about Buzz. That was just very bizarre.
When you list all of those things one by one it seems bad, but I'm guessing that we're just a lot worse at keeping stuff in house than other schools are. The sexual assault possibility is the only truly disturbing item on that list, IMO.
Quote from: Ners on August 14, 2012, 11:22:18 AM
I find it comical that we now have some in our fanbase/this message board who are practically sensationalizing the minor, minor events of transfers, a recruit having been given a T-Shirt by a departed assistant, a dance after the WVU game that national media/recruits largely loved, into a holy sh$t we have a major problem on our hands at MU.
Could you point out where anyone here said, suggested or implied that any of these things constituted "a major problem?"
I know straw men are easy to knock down, but still ...
Whether you choose to admit it or not, the totality of these incidents (both serious and minor) reveals, as one person suggested, "some rough edges" around the program.
Why is the thought of smoothing those rough edges so repellent to you? Do you believe board of trustees, president and athletic director should be so afraid of offending Buzz Williams that these matters cannot and should not be addressed?
what was this exchange with McIlvaine people are referring to?
Quote from: Red Stripe on August 14, 2012, 12:02:13 PM
what was this exchange with McIlvaine people are referring to?
I do not remember the exact thing Buzz said. However, it was on the MU postgame show with MacIlvanie. I think Buzz was trying to be funny, but it came out making him look like he was attacking or putting MacIlvanie down. MacIlvanie handled it very well, but it made Buzz look bad.
Quote from: bilsu on August 14, 2012, 12:15:14 PM
I do not remember the exact thing Buzz said. However, it was on the MU postgame show with MacIlvanie. I think Buzz was trying to be funny, but it came out making him look like he was attacking or putting MacIlvanie down. MacIlvanie handled it very well, but it made Buzz look bad.
Buzz wasn't trying to be funny. Mac asked a completely reasonable and harmless question, and Buzz jumped all over him and questioned his loyalty to Marquette. It was bizarre, and I think Buzz just got caught up in some postgame stress/adrenaline.
Much to his credit, Buzz went on air with Mac a couple of days later and apologized.
Here's a recap.
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/blog/the_dagger/post/Buzz-Williams-goes-on-weird-rant-says-sorry-?urn=ncaab,138654
Quote from: Pakuni on August 14, 2012, 12:20:06 PM
Buzz wasn't trying to be funny. Mac asked a completely reasonable and harmless question, and Buzz jumped all over him and questioned his loyalty to Marquette. It was bizarre, and I think Buzz just got caught up in some postgame stress/adrenaline.
Much to his credit, Buzz went on air with Mac a couple of days later and apologized.
Here's a recap.
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/blog/the_dagger/post/Buzz-Williams-goes-on-weird-rant-says-sorry-?urn=ncaab,138654
That whole thing was just bizarre. I still have no idea what kind of shot Buzz thought Mac was taking at the program or the kids.
Quote from: CTWarrior on August 14, 2012, 11:42:55 AM
Believe it or not, the exchange with McIlvaine is the only item on this list that makes me wonder about Buzz. That was just very bizarre.
When you list all of those things one by one it seems bad, but I'm guessing that we're just a lot worse at keeping stuff in house than other schools are. The sexual assault possibility is the only truly disturbing item on that list, IMO.
Agree. The Buzz/Mac exchange was bizzare. I assume that Buzz misunderstood where Mac was heading and took offense at something totally unnecessarily. He apologized, Mac accepted and they seem all good now, but it was definitely a head scratcher.
As for the other stuff, also agree that others (and formerly MU) are much better at keeping those things in house or covering them up, depending on your POV.
Quote from: Pakuni on August 14, 2012, 11:54:45 AM
Could you point out where anyone here said, suggested or implied that any of these things constituted "a major problem?"
I know straw men are easy to knock down, but still ...
Whether you choose to admit it or not, the totality of these incidents (both serious and minor) reveals, as one person suggested, "some rough edges" around the program.
Why is the thought of smoothing those rough edges so repellent to you? Do you believe board of trustees, president and athletic director should be so afraid of offending Buzz Williams that these matters cannot and should not be addressed?
If smoothing the "rough edges" results in the Number 1 asset in the Athletic Department, and quite possibly the whole university, leaving - that repulses me. Did Pat Richter go to the Wisconsin State Journal or another media outlet and dis Barry Alvarez over Brent Moss's cocaine bust, the Shoe Box improper benefits scandal, etc.? You don't publicly air your dirty laundry. I'm fine with LW the BOT addressing issues with Buzz, but you don't bring it to the attention of the local media.
The fact we are even having this discussion on this board is evidence enough that some (you included) are making this into a major deal....a mountain out of a molehill. Do you expect perfection? The "totality of these incidents?" Really? And lastly, so the eff what if there are a few rough edges around the program - with transfers, Buzz dancing, a recruit given a T-shirt, 1 radio interview that was maybe bizarre, . Overreact much?? This is a bunch of chicken littles crap.
Quote from: Ners on August 14, 2012, 12:30:38 PM
If smoothing the "rough edges" results in the Number 1 asset in the Athletic Department, and quite possibly the whole university, leaving - that repulses me. Did Pat Richter go to the Wisconsin State Journal or another media outlet and dis Barry Alvarez over Brent Moss's cocaine bust, the Shoe Box improper benefits scandal, etc.? You don't publicly air your dirty laundry. I'm fine with LW the BOT addressing issues with Buzz, but you don't bring it to the attention of the local media.
The fact we are even having this discussion on this board is evidence enough that some (you included) are making this into a major deal....a mountain out of a molehill. Do you expect perfection? The "totality of these incidents?" Really? And lastly, so the eff what if there are a few rough edges around the program - with transfers, Buzz dancing, a recruit given a T-shirt, 1 radio interview that was maybe bizarre, . Overreact much?? This is a bunch of chicken littles crap.
You can't omit the sexual assault allegations (whether you feel they have merit or not) from this discussion. The University was lambasted on the front page of the Chicago Tribune twice last year. Fair or not, the BOT is going to take action when things like that happen.
Quote from: Pakuni on August 14, 2012, 11:54:45 AM
Could you point out where anyone here said, suggested or implied that any of these things constituted "a major problem?"
I know straw men are easy to knock down, but still ...
Whether you choose to admit it or not, the totality of these incidents (both serious and minor) reveals, as one person suggested, "some rough edges" around the program.
Why is the thought of smoothing those rough edges so repellent to you? Do you believe board of trustees, president and athletic director should be so afraid of offending Buzz Williams that these matters cannot and should not be addressed?
Pakuni, I agree with you that there appears to be rough edges around the program right now, but in comparison to what? If you are comparing them to Crean, I know for a fact(I was there for one) some things happened under the Crean administration that we're on the level of the 720 non-escapades but were never reported in the press that I ever saw. So I think these rough edges are visible because of one of two things, increased media attention thanks to the sexual assault stories or the new administration has taken to airing dirty laundry more often/quickly.
I think Buzz has no more or no fewer "issues" than Crean, Crean just did a better job of or had more help "rounding" the edges. IMHO, this administration has decided they are going to put things out there a lot more in the hopes that they can create a squeaky clean image and I think that is rubbing Buzz the wrong way. I also think the administration is wrong, but I don't see anything yet that's got me calling for pitchforks.
Quote from: mu03eng on August 14, 2012, 12:49:07 PM
Pakuni, I agree with you that there appears to be rough edges around the program right now, but in comparison to what? If you are comparing them to Crean, I know for a fact(I was there for one) some things happened under the Crean administration that we're on the level of the 720 non-escapades but were never reported in the press that I ever saw. So I think these rough edges are visible because of one of two things, increased media attention thanks to the sexual assault stories or the new administration has taken to airing dirty laundry more often/quickly.
I think Buzz has no more or no fewer "issues" than Crean, Crean just did a better job of or had more help "rounding" the edges. IMHO, this administration has decided they are going to put things out there a lot more in the hopes that they can create a squeaky clean image and I think that is rubbing Buzz the wrong way. I also think the administration is wrong, but I don't see anything yet that's got me calling for pitchforks.
I don't disagree or doubt that
some of these things may have occurred during prior regimes, but to suggest we're hearing about them now because of the new administration is the kind of conspiratorial nonsense that drives me nuts.
Some (if not a majority) of the incidents mentioned - including Vander's scrap and the sex assault claims, along with its fallout - occurred and were revealed long before Larry Williams was hired and Scott Pilarz became president.
The bar fight was revealed months after it occurred - hardly a sign of an administration eager to put this stuff out there - when the players' names started showing up in police reports. How's that the administration's doing?
The only thing the administration "has put out there" is the self-reporting of a violation, and doing that is entirely routine.
Quote from: Pakuni on August 14, 2012, 01:02:32 PM
I don't disagree or doubt that some of these things may have occurred during prior regimes, but to suggest we're hearing about them now because of the new administration is the kind of conspiratorial nonsense that drives me nuts.
Some (if not a majority) of the incidents mentioned - including Vander's scrap and the sex assault claims, along with its fallout - occurred and were revealed long before Larry Williams was hired and Scott Pilarz became president.
The bar fight was revealed months after it occurred - hardly a sign of an administration eager to put this stuff out there - when the players' names started showing up in police reports. How's that the administration's doing?
The only thing the administration "has put out there" is the self-reporting of a violation, and doing that is entirely routine.
I don't think is a conspiracy, I just think the administration has decided they aren't going to sit on things or try and obfuscate in any way. The 2 recruiting violations and the 720 incident were both handled by LW and Pilarz just as an FYI.
Quote from: Rubie Q on August 14, 2012, 12:48:03 PM
You can't omit the sexual assault allegations (whether you feel they have merit or not) from this discussion. The University was lambasted on the front page of the Chicago Tribune twice last year. Fair or not, the BOT is going to take action when things like that happen.
Agree that the sex assault allegations are far and away the most serious of the events in discussion. However, MU had the exact same policy for handling alleged sex assaults for the past decade...for ALL students. There wasn't special treatment due to the fact there were athletes involved. The reality is, is that because there were athletes involved, it elevated the nature/profile, and reporters took a deep dive into MU's standard operating procedure with regard to sex assault. The policy was flawed long before Buzz Williams ever stepped foot on MU's campus - and the policy was one that was crafted I assume by the administration and or BOT at some point in time in MU's history...
Quote from: mu03eng on August 14, 2012, 01:15:46 PM
I don't think is a conspiracy, I just think the administration has decided they aren't going to sit on things or try and obfuscate in any way. The 2 recruiting violations and the 720 incident were both handled by LW and Pilarz just as an FYI.
Define "handled."
And why would we want the administration to sit on or obfuscate things? Obviously nothing MU has done is remotely comparable to the Penn State situation, but if there's one common lesson for all universities out of that, it's that you should not sit on/obfuscate things on behalf of an athletic program.
Quote from: mu03eng on August 14, 2012, 01:15:46 PM
I don't think is a conspiracy, I just think the administration has decided they aren't going to sit on things or try and obfuscate in any way. The 2 recruiting violations and the 720 incident were both handled by LW and Pilarz just as an FYI.
In terms of the 720 incident, that's not true.... The administration did sit on it.
It only came to light, when JS received their standard Freedom of Information Act report. Some staffer recognized the MU players names in one of the citation reports and boom, Don Walker writes up his story. A story which came out over six weeks after the tickets were issued.
If administration was looking to be 100% transparent, they could have release a statement regarding the tickets well before the JS ever received that report.
Quote from: Pakuni on August 14, 2012, 01:33:26 PM
Define "handled."
And why would we want the administration to sit on or obfuscate things? Obviously nothing MU is doing is remotely comparable to the Penn State situation, but if there's one common lesson for all universities out of that, it's that you should sit on/obfuscate things on behalf of an athletic program.
I disagree here. I think as the administration, they need to decide what is relevant in the current media circus and what isn't. Just throwing all cards out there and letting them fall where they may is silly. I think the Penn State story delineates between doing nothing and something when its important but also that the university like anyone else needs to control the message otherwise untrue things become fact, i.e not clarifying that a secondary violation is in fact very minor.
Quote from: Ners on August 14, 2012, 01:32:46 PM
Agree that the sex assault allegations are far and away the most serious of the events in discussion. However, MU had the exact same policy for handling alleged sex assaults for the past decade...for ALL students. There wasn't special treatment due to the fact there were athletes involved. The reality is, is that because there were athletes involved, it elevated the nature/profile, and reporters took a deep dive into MU's standard operating procedure with regard to sex assault. The policy was flawed long before Buzz Williams ever stepped foot on MU's campus - and the policy was one that was crafted I assume by the administration and or BOT at some point in time in MU's history...
If I remember correctly, the women who made the sexual assault allegations said in the Tribune articles that they felt pressured not to report their allegations to MPD because there were athletes involved. The Trib looked at the standard operating procedures for all sex assault allegations, for sure, but I think they were focused specifically on the allegations in the context of big-time college athletics. The stories were part of that series that included reporting on the young lady who made the rape allegations against a Notre Dame football player and later committed suicide, weren't they?
I do not think the University does itself any favors by issuing incomplete reports. When the players were suspended for the West Virginia game they should say why, so there is not speculation. It made me angry when the TV announcers during the West Virginia game were questioning why they were suspended and wondered why they were not suspended for the whole game. Every year you see starters at various universities told they will not start the game, but they come in a few minutes into the game. MU should tell the whole story and let the fans decide if the punishment fits the crime. The same thing with Cadougan and DJO being suspended for games. It should not be open for speculation what it was for. When a player did something wrong during Al McGuire's tenure he did not suspend players. He made them get on the microphone before the start of the game and apologise to the fans. To me this was an effective punishment. When they reported this supposed secondary violation they should of said what it was for. I see no reason to hide what happen, since they have disclosed it the the NCAA. The ambiguity of the report is probably more damaging than the actual infraction. They also should of said why Mayo was suspended. Maybe he was the one that got the free t-shirt.
Quote from: mu03eng on August 14, 2012, 12:49:07 PM
IMHO, this administration has decided they are going to put things out there a lot more in the hopes that they can create a squeaky clean image and I think that is rubbing Buzz the wrong way. I also think the administration is wrong, but I don't see anything yet that's got me calling for pitchforks.
The question is why Buzz seems so ticked off by MU's desire for a clean image?
We're less than a year out from Juan Anderson sitting out three games for an NCAA suspension because he took an improper benefit.
The first time someting like this happens, you can forgive the combniation of a young coach, a lame duck AD, and an incoming freshman who didn't know the rules and mistakenly accepted a ticket to a ballgame.
But you could also argue that Buzz should have used that incident as a teaching opportunity and made damn sure that every coach and every player in the program from that day forward knew the NCAA rules on improprer benefits.
Less than a year later, we have a similar violation.
At this point, does it really matter what the specifics were? It's been rumored here that the issue was over a $7 t-shirt. But in this case, the probem isn't "just" a T-shirt given to a recruit. Its the culture in which the lessons of Juan's suspension have apparently not changed behavior.
Quote from: The Equalizer on August 14, 2012, 02:11:51 PM
The question is why Buzz seems so ticked off by MU's desire for a clean image?
We're less than a year out from Juan Anderson sitting out three games for an NCAA suspension because he took an improper benefit.
The first time someting like this happens, you can forgive the combniation of a young coach, a lame duck AD, and an incoming freshman who didn't know the rules and mistakenly accepted a ticket to a ballgame.
But you could also argue that Buzz should have used that incident as a teaching opportunity and made damn sure that every coach and every player in the program from that day forward knew the NCAA rules on improprer benefits.
Less than a year later, we have a similar violation.
At this point, does it really matter what the specifics were? It's been rumored here that the issue was over a $7 t-shirt. But in this case, the probem isn't "just" a T-shirt given to a recruit. Its the culture in which the lessons of Juan's suspension have apparently not changed behavior.
But the point is these types of violations literally happen all of the time. The NCAA has so many rules and there is no way to eliminate secondary violations. I'm willing to bet there were secondary violations under Crean as well, we just didn't seem them in the press.
Either the administration goes out and puts everything out there in CONTEXT or don't put it out there. If Walker dug this up, fine, but make sure the message is how nothing this is. If Don didn't dig it up on his own, then no need to put it out there.
Quote from: The Equalizer on August 14, 2012, 02:11:51 PM
The question is why Buzz seems so ticked off by MU's desire for a clean image?
I don't think there's any evidence out there that Buzz is ticked off by MU's desire for a clean image. I'm not sure there's evidence he's ticked off about anything. Well, evidence beyond his emails to certain fans, I suppose.
The most cited "evidence" that Buzz is ticked off is that he took SMU's phone call when they came at him with a big money offer. Many, maybe most, coaches would do the same, especially if it's a school from their neck of the woods. Didn't Bill Self almost leave Kansas - Kansas! - for Oklahoma State because T. Boone Pickens brought him a wheelbarrow full of cash?
None of us have the first clue whether Buzz is ticked off or not.
Quote from: The Equalizer on August 14, 2012, 02:11:51 PM
The question is why Buzz seems so ticked off by MU's desire for a clean image?
We're less than a year out from Juan Anderson sitting out three games for an NCAA suspension because he took an improper benefit.
The first time someting like this happens, you can forgive the combniation of a young coach, a lame duck AD, and an incoming freshman who didn't know the rules and mistakenly accepted a ticket to a ballgame.
But you could also argue that Buzz should have used that incident as a teaching opportunity and made damn sure that every coach and every player in the program from that day forward knew the NCAA rules on improprer benefits.
Less than a year later, we have a similar violation.
At this point, does it really matter what the specifics were? It's been rumored here that the issue was over a $7 t-shirt. But in this case, the probem isn't "just" a T-shirt given to a recruit. Its the culture in which the lessons of Juan's suspension have apparently not changed behavior.
A "culture" in which someone gets a free ticket to a ballgame or a $7 t shirt? Are you serious? Congrats, you win the prize for the most ridiculous post in Scoop's storied history. Unreal, even considering the source.
The way I look at Buzz is that he definitely has rough edges and it is both appelaing and troublesome. He does things his own way and can see why he relates well with non traditional ballers of today. As a fan I find the potential of him exposing rough edges, WVU dance, as highly entertaining. However, I can fully understand that being his boss could be very difficult.
Quote from: bilsu on August 14, 2012, 01:58:12 PM
I do not think the University does itself any favors by issuing incomplete reports. When the players were suspended for the West Virginia game they should say why, so there is not speculation. It made me angry when the TV announcers during the West Virginia game were questioning why they were suspended and wondered why they were not suspended for the whole game. Every year you see starters at various universities told they will not start the game, but they come in a few minutes into the game. MU should tell the whole story and let the fans decide if the punishment fits the crime. The same thing with Cadougan and DJO being suspended for games. It should not be open for speculation what it was for. When a player did something wrong during Al McGuire's tenure he did not suspend players. He made them get on the microphone before the start of the game and apologise to the fans. To me this was an effective punishment. When they reported this supposed secondary violation they should of said what it was for. I see no reason to hide what happen, since they have disclosed it the the NCAA. The ambiguity of the report is probably more damaging than the actual infraction. They also should of said why Mayo was suspended. Maybe he was the one that got the free t-shirt.
Yeah, that's a good idea, let's let put every little mistake these 18-22 year old kids make throughout their college years into newspapers for everyone to see. I'm sure that's something that will have recruits excited to be a part of!
Quote from: The Equalizer on August 14, 2012, 02:11:51 PM
The question is why Buzz seems so ticked off by MU's desire for a clean image?
We're less than a year out from Juan Anderson sitting out three games for an NCAA suspension because he took an improper benefit.
The first time someting like this happens, you can forgive the combniation of a young coach, a lame duck AD, and an incoming freshman who didn't know the rules and mistakenly accepted a ticket to a ballgame.
But you could also argue that Buzz should have used that incident as a teaching opportunity and made damn sure that every coach and every player in the program from that day forward knew the NCAA rules on improprer benefits.
Less than a year later, we have a similar violation.
At this point, does it really matter what the specifics were? It's been rumored here that the issue was over a $7 t-shirt. But in this case, the probem isn't "just" a T-shirt given to a recruit. Its the culture in which the lessons of Juan's suspension have apparently not changed behavior.
First of all we do not know when the supposed t-shirt was given out. It could have very well occurred before Juan Anderson got a free ticket. Second of all the t-shirt was given by a coach, who should of known the rules. The ticket was given by a booster and I suspect Buzz did not know about it until after Anderson went to the game. As far as who is responsible MU has a compliance department to try to prevent these things. I believe every player meets with the compliance department to go over rules. When these things happen, unless Buzz did it, it is not his fault. Unless you want to believe he told the coach to hand out t-shirts or knew Juan got a free ticket before hand.
Honestly, these two violations (assuming the shirt is what happened) could be completely innocent. If I had to guess what happened with Juan, a kid from class who has a parent as a booster could have asked Juan if he wanted to tag along to the Brewer game since his dad had an extra ticket. It would have been in October, so enough time for it to be more of a friendship thing than it being due to his status on the team.
Who knows how innocent the t-shirt was? A kid could have been on a visit and got soaked in the rain or bumped into someone at lunch and spilled food all over his shirt. The coach may have just given him a clean shirt. I have no sources, but to act like there may be a culture problem of violating rules is as big of a leap as me going to the most harmless scenarios.
Quote from: bilsu on August 14, 2012, 01:58:12 PM
I do not think the University does itself any favors by issuing incomplete reports. When the players were suspended for the West Virginia game they should say why, so there is not speculation. It made me angry when the TV announcers during the West Virginia game were questioning why they were suspended and wondered why they were not suspended for the whole game. Every year you see starters at various universities told they will not start the game, but they come in a few minutes into the game. MU should tell the whole story and let the fans decide if the punishment fits the crime. The same thing with Cadougan and DJO being suspended for games. It should not be open for speculation what it was for. When a player did something wrong during Al McGuire's tenure he did not suspend players. He made them get on the microphone before the start of the game and apologise to the fans. To me this was an effective punishment. When they reported this supposed secondary violation they should of said what it was for. I see no reason to hide what happen, since they have disclosed it the the NCAA. The ambiguity of the report is probably more damaging than the actual infraction. They also should of said why Mayo was suspended. Maybe he was the one that got the free t-shirt.
I don't agree with airing dirty laundry and quite frankly would think less of the university for doing so, especially in the case of Mayo. The university needs to establish a guideline for when it distributes information and when it doesn't and then stick to it. To date I've been unable to decipher a pattern other than they seem much more willing to pass info out.
I had forgotten about the Mayo suspension. That did not need to be made public, no one would have noticed in the press. Sure Scoop noticed but jesus are they going to make PRs about team High Five proficiencies based on what Scoop notices???
The standard should be, what do we feel ethically, morally, and legally needs to be out there for public consumption, anything else STFU. Going back to previous statements, basketball isn't the only face of the university, just the majority one, so control that message effectively in the modern media market. Not something I see the current administration being able to do.
Quote from: mu03eng on August 14, 2012, 03:48:50 PM
I don't agree with airing dirty laundry and quite frankly would think less of the university for doing so, especially in the case of Mayo. The university needs to establish a guideline for when it distributes information and when it doesn't and then stick to it. To date I've been unable to decipher a pattern other than they seem much more willing to pass info out.
I had forgotten about the Mayo suspension. That did not need to be made public, no one would have noticed in the press. Sure Scoop noticed but jesus are they going to make PRs about team High Five proficiencies based on what Scoop notices???
The university didn't announce Mayo's suspension. Buzz did. Take it up with him.
Beyond confirming that the school had self reported a possible NCAA violation - again, a common practice by NCAA members - what has the current administration put out there that other administrations have not?
The Club 720 citations? No, that was the MJS doing it's job by reviewing police reports.
Mayo's suspension? No, that was Buzz.
You've repeated it a few times now, but haven't cited a single instance.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on August 14, 2012, 09:55:53 AM
Is that what happened at Penn State? I don't think it was a case of Paterno exercising absolute power. Rather, it was a cultural problem in which everyone (coach, AD, President, etc) decided that the reputation of the football program was more important than stopping the abuse of children.
Right, but that idea wasn't coming from the top-down, but rather from the head coach up to the president.
Joe, due to his reputation and winning a lot of games, carried a TON of weight. Nobody could afford to stop him without fear of repercussions.
Good/bad/indifferent, I think it's good for a college coach to have a boss who is involved, and who's job security isn't directly tied to wins and losses (like a coach's job is).
Now, as far as Buzz vs LW, I think there might be some friction, but it appears like the narrative is overblown. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Quote from: kmwtrucks on August 14, 2012, 09:01:21 AM
I think the legal stuff needs to decrease in Frequency and I would be shocked if Buzz did not feel very strongly the same way. I do not know all the details and without that cannot totally comment on them, But I would prefer that to be fewer and farther in between.
If only more people felt the same way.....
Quote from: Pakuni on August 14, 2012, 02:31:24 PM
The most cited "evidence" that Buzz is ticked off is that he took SMU's phone call when they came at him with a big money offer. Many, maybe most, coaches would do the same, especially if it's a school from their neck of the woods. Didn't Bill Self almost leave Kansas - Kansas! - for Oklahoma State because T. Boone Pickens brought him a wheelbarrow full of cash?
None of us have the first clue whether Buzz is ticked off or not.
I have no idea whether Buzz seriously considered SMU or if he was close to leaving. But, I think it's worth noting that a guy who famously writes thousands of letters to others in his profession, publishes his email address and shares his telephone number is
always going to take a call wherever it comes from. Buzz understands building his network and the value that has. People like Buzz will
always take the call. It's what he says once he's on the line that matters. Personally, I'm happy that he appears to have said, "Thank you, but no."
...for now.
4ever
Anything new on Looney?
Quote from: Ners on August 14, 2012, 12:30:38 PM
If smoothing the "rough edges" results in the Number 1 asset in the Athletic Department, and quite possibly the whole university, leaving - that repulses me. Did Pat Richter go to the Wisconsin State Journal or another media outlet and dis Barry Alvarez over Brent Moss's cocaine bust, the Shoe Box improper benefits scandal, etc.? You don't publicly air your dirty laundry. I'm fine with LW the BOT addressing issues with Buzz, but you don't bring it to the attention of the local media.
You have no proof whatsoever that LW "brought" this to the local media. For all we know, Walker could have found out about it...called LW to confirm...and MU released a statement to him. I think this is a much more likely scenario that LW bringing Walker information to undermine his coach.
Quote from: bilsu on August 14, 2012, 01:58:12 PM
I do not think the University does itself any favors by issuing incomplete reports. When the players were suspended for the West Virginia game they should say why, so there is not speculation.
MU cannot do this...at least in an official capacity.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 15, 2012, 09:23:16 AM
You have no proof whatsoever that LW "brought" this to the local media.
You're lack of proof doesn't support the narrative, therefore it is irrelevant.
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on August 15, 2012, 09:25:14 AM
You're lack of proof doesn't support the narrative, therefore it is irrelevant.
If I had the desire to do a PhD, I would actually consider doing one on internet message boards and how quickly groupthink turns into "truth." If you want to have some fun sometimes, go to the Penn State "Audibles" board, and you will learn the following:
...the Freeh Report was commissioned for the Trustees to cover their own ass.
...the report is full of lies, assumptions and falsified evidence
...the NCAA overreacted and is now shaking in their boots at the hellfire that the courts are going to rain down upon them.
Those will opposing views are quickly shouted down.
It is kind of like the narrative that happens here regarding Larry Williams.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 15, 2012, 09:29:49 AM
If I had the desire to do a PhD, I would actually consider doing one on internet message boards and how quickly groupthink turns into "truth." If you want to have some fun sometimes, go to the Penn State "Audibles" board, and you will learn the following:
...the Freeh Report was commissioned for the Trustees to cover their own ass.
...the report is full of lies, assumptions and falsified evidence
...the NCAA overreacted and is now shaking in their boots at the hellfire that the courts are going to rain down upon them.
Those will opposing views are quickly shouted down.
It is kind of like the narrative that happens here regarding Larry Williams.
+1million
I think the hardest thing for people to type sometimes is simply: "I don't know".
Quote from: Pakuni on August 14, 2012, 03:58:30 PM
The university didn't announce Mayo's suspension. Buzz did. Take it up with him.
Beyond confirming that the school had self reported a possible NCAA violation - again, a common practice by NCAA members - what has the current administration put out there that other administrations have not?
The Club 720 citations? No, that was the MJS doing it's job by reviewing police reports.
Mayo's suspension? No, that was Buzz.
You've repeated it a few times now, but haven't cited a single instance.
Disagree, if you go back and read the JS article on Mayo's suspension, Buzz
confirms Mayo's suspension. Maybe its semantics but to me that is, the Mayo suspension story got out there and the media reached out to Buzz for comment. Which means someone put it out there to begin with and I don't see how the media could have found it out without a leak, either accidental or intentional. The only one that looks like might not have been leaked is the 720 story.
This thread = bunch of hairy wet cats.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 15, 2012, 09:29:49 AM
If I had the desire to do a PhD, I would actually consider doing one on internet message boards and how quickly groupthink turns into "truth." If you want to have some fun sometimes, go to the Penn State "Audibles" board, and you will learn the following:
...the Freeh Report was commissioned for the Trustees to cover their own ass.
...the report is full of lies, assumptions and falsified evidence
...the NCAA overreacted and is now shaking in their boots at the hellfire that the courts are going to rain down upon them.
Those will opposing views are quickly shouted down.
It is kind of like the narrative that happens here regarding Larry Williams.
Timeout, just because its on a message board and it doesn't comply with your narrative, doesn't mean it can't be true. The tinfoil LW narrative may be true, may not be, but neither side has the truth. For instance, in your example above the Freeh report does have assumptions and inaccuracies, that is truth....however it may not be to the extent people are claiming especially to the level you noted.
Also don't think this is new, just a different format. If you walk into Caffery's and start this debate you will get the same group think that you get on the message board, just the message board has records where the bar debate doesn't.
There is a segment of truth at the basis of the LW conspiracy, the question is how far does that truth extend and thats why we debate it and really should be the whole point of the internet
Quote from: mu03eng on August 15, 2012, 09:48:44 AM
Timeout, just because its on a message board and it doesn't comply with your narrative, doesn't mean it can't be true. The tinfoil LW narrative may be true, may not be, but neither side has the truth. For instance, in your example above the Freeh report does have assumptions and inaccuracies, that is truth....however it may not be to the extent people are claiming especially to the level you noted.
Also don't think this is new, just a different format. If you walk into Caffery's and start this debate you will get the same group think that you get on the message board, just the message board has records where the bar debate doesn't.
There is a segment of truth at the basis of the LW conspiracy, the question is how far does that truth extend and thats why we debate it and really should be the whole point of the internet
The point isn't that it might not be true, but that it is considered true regardless of any evidence to suggest that this is the case.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 15, 2012, 09:23:16 AM
You have no proof whatsoever that LW "brought" this to the local media. For all we know, Walker could have found out about it...called LW to confirm...and MU released a statement to him. I think this is a much more likely scenario that LW bringing Walker information to undermine his coach.
MU issued a release about the investigation, and in said release made no mention of the minor/secondary nature of the infractions - which is just sheer stupidity - hey let's let speculation run rampant. In said release there were comments from Larry Williams. Larry Williams knows darn well what the nature of the infractions and investigation center around. He chose to leave the minor details out. Hmm...pretty sure Pat Richter or Barry Alvarez now, wouldn't leave their head coach out to dry on such matters.
Beyond this, Larry Williams, in my opinion, made his own grave in his previous interview with Don Walker when he pretty much trashed Buzz, and in expanding on that interview in the recent radio interview, Don Walker added that Larry Williams indicated Buzz runs his program with "rough edges." If you or others continue to blindly think that there isn't a rift between Buzz and Larry - I don't know what to tell you!!
Quote from: Ners on August 15, 2012, 09:59:38 AM
MU issued a release about the investigation, and in said release made no mention of the minor/secondary nature of the infractions - which is just sheer stupidity - hey let's let speculation run rampant. In said release there were comments from Larry Williams. Larry Williams knows darn well what the nature of the infractions and investigation center around. He chose to leave the minor details out. Hmm...pretty sure Pat Richter or Barry Alvarez now, wouldn't leave their head coach out to dry on such matters.
We don't have the full text of the release so you have no idea what was said and what Walker chose to run with.
Quote from: Ners on August 15, 2012, 09:59:38 AM
Beyond this, Larry Williams, in my opinion, made his own grave in his previous interview with Don Walker when he pretty much trashed Buzz, and in expanding on that interview in the recent radio interview, Don Walker added that Larry Williams indicated Buzz runs his program with "rough edges." If you or others continue to blindly think that there isn't a rift between Buzz and Larry - I don't know what to tell you!!
There very well might be. But don't make stuff up to support your point of view.
Quote from: mu03eng on August 15, 2012, 09:42:43 AM
Disagree, if you go back and read the JS article on Mayo's suspension, Buzz confirms Mayo's suspension. Maybe its semantics but to me that is, the Mayo suspension story got out there and the media reached out to Buzz for comment. Which means someone put it out there to begin with and I don't see how the media could have found it out without a leak, either accidental or intentional. The only one that looks like might not have been leaked is the 720 story.
You do realize, of course, that reports of Mayo's suspension had been posted on this forum and elsewhere for more than a day prior to Walker writing about it, right? And that reports of him being in some sort of trouble had been posted on this forum and elsewhere for weeks before then.
A person using logic might suggest that these reports got to Walker or someone else at the JS, and Walker then contacted Buzz who
confirmed the reports.
A person driving a predetermined narrative might suggest that the administration "leaked" to Walker news
that had already been out there for more than 24 hours in an effort to .... what?
Glad that you're now willing to consider that the 720 news "might" not have been leaked, given that the JS reporting on the matter clearly states that they obtained the information through other means.
Just to clarify, there was no formal press release about the NCAA infractions. I don't know how Don Walker got his info but it was not from an official release. He did say MU put out an official statement, but that was most likely done as an answer to one of his questions.
I am not saying MU should release everything to the press. What I am saying, for what they do release, they should say why. Saying Mayo has been suspended just leads to speculation. Saying he was suspended until he makes a better effort in the classroom (assuming that was the reason) cuts down on speculation on what is about. As long as MU was going to report that they self reported to NCAA they should disclose what the violation was. Frankly, nobody cares (except UW fans) if the violation was actually giving a t-shirt. The speculation of what it actually is probably more damaging than the disclosure of the actual violation. MU suspending players for a national TV game without saying why just leads to bad speculation. The funny thing about it is Buzz's dancing diverted away the attention from the suspensions. The University needs to decide if they need to disclose something. If they decide to disclose, they should not do it half-ass.
Quote from: bilsu on August 15, 2012, 10:38:56 AM
I am not saying MU should release everything to the press. What I am saying, for what they do release, they should say why. Saying Mayo has been suspended just leads to speculation. Saying he was suspended until he makes a better effort in the classroom (assuming that was the reason) cuts down on speculation on what is about.
Again, they CANNOT say this due to privacy....they have to be generic about it.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 15, 2012, 10:41:57 AM
Again, they CANNOT say this due to privacy....they have to be generic about it.
They do not have to be private about everything.
Quote from: bilsu on August 15, 2012, 10:50:43 AM
They do not have to be private about everything.
They do if they want to follow federal privacy laws (FERPA) and stay off the pages of the Chicago Tribune after the ensuing investigation.
Quote from: bilsu on August 15, 2012, 10:38:56 AM
I am not saying MU should release everything to the press. What I am saying, for what they do release, they should say why. Saying Mayo has been suspended just leads to speculation. Saying he was suspended until he makes a better effort in the classroom (assuming that was the reason) cuts down on speculation on what is about. As long as MU was going to report that they self reported to NCAA they should disclose what the violation was. Frankly, nobody cares (except UW fans) if the violation was actually giving a t-shirt. The speculation of what it actually is probably more damaging than the disclosure of the actual violation. MU suspending players for a national TV game without saying why just leads to bad speculation. The funny thing about it is Buzz's dancing diverted away the attention from the suspensions. The University needs to decide if they need to disclose something. If they decide to disclose, they should not do it half-ass.
MU cannot disclose "education records" of any of its students. Saying a kid has been suspended for missing classes, poor grades, skipping tutoring sessions, etc. could easily be interpreted as a release of education records, and thereby is prohibited by federal law.
Quote from: Pakuni on August 15, 2012, 10:03:49 AM
You do realize, of course, that reports of Mayo's suspension had been posted on this forum and elsewhere for more than a day prior to Walker writing about it, right? And that reports of him being in some sort of trouble had been posted on this forum and elsewhere for weeks before then.
A person using logic might suggest that these reports got to Walker or someone else at the JS, and Walker then contacted Buzz who confirmed the reports.
A person driving a predetermined narrative might suggest that the administration "leaked" to Walker news that had already been out there for more than 24 hours in an effort to .... what?
Glad that you're now willing to consider that the 720 news "might" not have been leaked, given that the JS reporting on the matter clearly states that they obtained the information through other means.
First I don't believe I ever said 720 was leaked, if fact I thought I said it was the one thing that didn't seem leaked.
Second, the Mayo story leaked, whether it leaked to Don Walker or to Scoop, it leaked. Also there is definitely a gap between when a story is found out and a story is reported on. Don Walker may have known about the Mayo thing 4 or 5 days before it was published and was waiting to get a hold of Buzz. Either way, we know the story leaked because Scoop knew about it.
At the end of the day all this is is I look at a set of facts and say I think the administration is being less "accommodating" to the present coach then previous administrations were and were to previous coaches. You look at the same facts and say, nope everything is normal here move on. Fine, unless facts change or additional facts are brought to light, we have formed different opinions and thats how its gonna be.
Quote from: mu03eng on August 15, 2012, 11:21:50 AM
Second, the Mayo story leaked, whether it leaked to Don Walker or to Scoop, it leaked. Also there is definitely a gap between when a story is found out and a story is reported on. Don Walker may have known about the Mayo thing 4 or 5 days before it was published and was waiting to get a hold of Buzz. Either way, we know the story leaked because Scoop knew about it.
One last thing and I'll let this part of the thread die ... are you suggesting it's possible Larry Williams or someone else within the Marquette administration is leaking damaging information about players or others associated with the program to random posters at MU Scoop and other fan sites?
p.s. There is rarely a gap of 4-5 days between when a story is found out and when it is published. A 4-5
hour gap is considered an eternity these days.
Quote from: mu03eng on August 15, 2012, 11:21:50 AM
First I don't believe I ever said 720 was leaked, if fact I thought I said it was the one thing that didn't seem leaked.
Second, the Mayo story leaked, whether it leaked to Don Walker or to Scoop, it leaked. Also there is definitely a gap between when a story is found out and a story is reported on. Don Walker may have known about the Mayo thing 4 or 5 days before it was published and was waiting to get a hold of Buzz. Either way, we know the story leaked because Scoop knew about it.
At the end of the day all this is is I look at a set of facts and say I think the administration is being less "accommodating" to the present coach then previous administrations were and were to previous coaches. You look at the same facts and say, nope everything is normal here move on. Fine, unless facts change or additional facts are brought to light, we have formed different opinions and thats how its gonna be.
Or maybe our current coach is being less "accommodating" to the indiscretions of his players and is fine with the punishments handed out as part of, you know, molding these guys into young men.
Nah, that couldn't possibly be true, LW is out to get him!
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on August 15, 2012, 11:46:48 AM
Or maybe our current coach is being less "accommodating" to the indiscretions of his players and is fine with the punishments handed out as part of, you know, molding these guys into young men.
Nah, that couldn't possibly be true, LW is out to get him!
Or you took what I said and went all internet hyperbole tough guy. I never said LW was out to get anyone.
I think the administration has decided to be less tolerant of the men's bb program than in the past. That is my interpretation of the facts I know, and if that is what is going on I don't agree with it. I will also grant I could be wrong and if facts become available to the contrary I will change my stance.
My apologizes if I don't fit neatly into your conspiracy theory box.
Quote from: mu03eng on August 15, 2012, 11:21:50 AM
Second, the Mayo story leaked, whether it leaked to Don Walker or to Scoop, it leaked. Also there is definitely a gap between when a story is found out and a story is reported on. Don Walker may have known about the Mayo thing 4 or 5 days before it was published and was waiting to get a hold of Buzz. Either way, we know the story leaked because Scoop knew about it.
But there were many people that likely knew about it. That doesn't mean that it was officially leaked.
I mean, I know that Mayo was in trouble way back in April. I'm not going to tell you how I knew about it, but I can tell you that Larry Williams didn't directly or indirectly let me know about it. There are a lot of people associated with the basketball program. And a lot of those people have friends they talk to.
Just because Scoop knew something doesn't mean that the AD let it slip out to us.
Quote from: Pakuni on August 15, 2012, 11:32:18 AM
One last thing and I'll let this part of the thread die ... are you suggesting it's possible Larry Williams or someone else within the Marquette administration is leaking damaging information about players or others associated with the program to random posters at MU Scoop and other fan sites?
p.s. There is rarely a gap of 4-5 days between when a story is found out and when it is published. A 4-5 hour gap is considered an eternity these days.
I'm saying it is possible someone within the athletic department and/or administration is getting information out into the public domain as a means of "damage control", ie getting in front of the story. I don't think the information is being leaked to Scoop as "the" path, that's just stupid. I think the information is going out via some channel that as a side effect puts it into scoop....the more people you tell the more people will know....etc.
As far as 4-5 days.....talk to Ted Edlund about merely hours to report stories on MUBB
Quote from: mu03eng on August 15, 2012, 11:56:54 AM
Or you took what I said and went all internet hyperbole tough guy. I never said LW was out to get anyone.
I think the administration has decided to be less tolerant of the men's bb program than in the past. That is my interpretation of the facts I know, and if that is what is going on I don't agree with it. I will also grant I could be wrong and if facts become available to the contrary I will change my stance.
My apologizes if I don't fit neatly into your conspiracy theory box.
I don't care about putting you in some box. You keep blaming the adminstration, repeatedly, in post after post. Inherent in those statements is that the administration and Buzz are at odds over what's being done. I'm only suggesting that maybe Buzz is ok with what's happening...he should be, unless his entire shtick is a charade.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 15, 2012, 11:58:30 AM
But there were many people that likely knew about it. That doesn't mean that it was officially leaked.
I mean, I know that Mayo was in trouble way back in April. I'm not going to tell you how I knew about it, but I can tell you that Larry Williams didn't directly or indirectly let me know about it. There are a lot of people associated with the basketball program. And a lot of those people have friends they talk to.
Just because Scoop knew something doesn't mean that the AD let it slip out to us.
I think the number of people that would officially know things like that are relatively small. And we know things are leaking officially or unofficially....based on what I see, I think it tends toward the official but I very much could be wrong.
Based on the internet furor over the SMU thing and LW being a smart guy by all accounts, that he wouldn't want information getting out there slowly to prepare the masses? Providing information on other things like the violation to Walker also earns his trust if he needs it later for some other issue that might pop up to try and control the message.
I don't think there is any evil intent to what I think LW and the admin are doing....I just wouldn't handle it that way and as a side effect it is potentially rubbing Buzz the wrong way.
Quote from: mu03eng on August 15, 2012, 12:01:21 PM
I'm saying it is possible someone within the athletic department and/or administration is getting information out into the public domain as a means of "damage control", ie getting in front of the story. I don't think the information is being leaked to Scoop as "the" path, that's just stupid. I think the information is going out via some channel that as a side effect puts it into scoop....the more people you tell the more people will know....etc.
As far as 4-5 days.....talk to Ted Edlund about merely hours to report stories on MUBB
Your theory seems reasonable, but I'm not sure these (alleged) leaks are not really accomplishing the "let's get out in front of this" stance.
If they want to get out in front, just use the AD at a podium and issue a press release with some quotes from the head coach. Go through the normal reporters/beat writers, and maybe even do an interview or 2. That's getting out in front.
Weird leaks don't indicate that they are "trying to get out in front".
In all honesty, I wonder if some of this increased scrutiny is just from A. Increased sustained success B. An uptick in "incidents" which leads the media to search, and run with more MU player behavior stories.
For all we know, in 2008, Rosiak knew about some minor incidents, but those weren't news. Fast forward to 2012, and MU has had enough recent issues that all of the little stuff makes news.
The spotlight (fortunate or unfortunate) has been turned up, and that might be what is causing the increased frequency of these stories.
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on August 15, 2012, 12:10:02 PM
I don't care about putting you in some box. You keep blaming the adminstration, repeatedly, in post after post. Inherent in those statements is that the administration and Buzz are at odds over what's being done. I'm only suggesting that maybe Buzz is ok with what's happening...he should be, unless his entire shtick is a charade.
I'm not blaming the administration for anything. I believe the admin is behaving in a certain way for reasons I just laid out and as a side effect I believe it is rubbing Buzz the wrong way. If it turns out I'm right, I don't agree with what/how they are doing things.
Buzz may be ok with everything, but I see more evidence that he is not then evidence that he is.
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on August 15, 2012, 12:12:26 PM
Your theory seems reasonable, but I'm not sure these (alleged) leaks are not really accomplishing the "let's get out in front of this" stance.
If they want to get out in front, just use the AD at a podium and issue a press release with some quotes from the head coach. Go through the normal reporters/beat writers, and maybe even do an interview or 2. That's getting out in front.
Weird leaks don't indicate that they are "trying to get out in front".
In all honesty, I wonder if some of this increased scrutiny is just from A. Increased sustained success B. An uptick in "incidents" which leads the media to search, and run with more MU player behavior stories.
For all we know, in 2008, Rosiak knew about some minor incidents, but those weren't news. Fast forward to 2012, and MU has had enough recent issues that all of the little stuff makes news.
The spotlight (fortunate or unfortunate) has been turned up, and that might be what is causing the increased frequency of these stories.
I think being that overt doesn't accomplish what you want. If they just want info out and see what happens I agree with you. I think this is more about shaping the narrative with the media over the long run. I think its about currying favor with the media and getting info out in a less "explosive" manner. I think LW and the admin are concerned with the MUBB image and are trying to proactively shape that image. At the end of the day, I am actually giving LW and the admin a lot of credit for trying to be sophisticated in the new media market.
Quote from: mu03eng on August 15, 2012, 12:19:55 PM
I think being that overt doesn't accomplish what you want. If they just want info out and see what happens I agree with you. I think this is more about shaping the narrative with the media over the long run. I think its about currying favor with the media and getting info out in a less "explosive" manner. I think LW and the admin are concerned with the MUBB image and are trying to proactively shape that image. At the end of the day, I am actually giving LW and the admin a lot of credit for trying to be sophisticated in the new media market.
But how would leaking this information to Walker help the administration in the long run? He's not the Marquette beat reporter. Hell, he's not even doing that sports business beat he was before; he said a month ago that he'd be doing mostly urban affairs, with a "dollop" of sports business sprinkled in.
I think the more reasonable explanation is the one shaqilvaine mentioned a while ago: Walker has a source inside MU that's feeding him this information. He learned about the violation, called Larry Williams to confirm, and LW sent him -- and only him -- that "official release" in response.
Quote from: Rubie Q on August 15, 2012, 12:27:17 PM
But how would leaking this information to Walker help the administration in the long run? He's not the Marquette beat reporter. Hell, he's not even doing that sports business beat he was before; he said a month ago that he'd be doing mostly urban affairs, with a "dollop" of sports business sprinkled in.
I think the more reasonable explanation is the one shaqilvaine mentioned a while ago: Walker has a source inside MU that's feeding him this information. He learned about the violation, called Larry Williams to confirm, and LW sent him -- and only him -- that "official release" in response.
Who really is MU's beat writer.....Walker's covered almost all of MU stories with the exception of the TJ Taylor story by MU favorite Jeff P. Walker's also been the one to write ALL of the "breaking" MU news going back through the last year, IIRC
Quote from: Rubie Q on August 15, 2012, 12:27:17 PM
But how would leaking this information to Walker help the administration in the long run? He's not the Marquette beat reporter. Hell, he's not even doing that sports business beat he was before; he said a month ago that he'd be doing mostly urban affairs, with a "dollop" of sports business sprinkled in.
I think the more reasonable explanation is the one shaqilvaine mentioned a while ago: Walker has a source inside MU that's feeding him this information. He learned about the violation, called Larry Williams to confirm, and LW sent him -- and only him -- that "official release" in response.
Right.
In fact, Walker might have heard about other things in his career as well, but they weren't "news".
An underage player from an NIT team wasn't really breaking news.
In 2012, MU is under the spotlight due to their success, and some prior off the court issues. Stuff (behavior, transfers, suspensions) is going to get reported.
This may piss off Larry and Buzz, but this is D1 hoops, and media scrutiny comes with the gig.
Quote from: mu03eng on August 15, 2012, 12:16:14 PM
I'm not blaming the administration for anything. I believe the admin is behaving in a certain way for reasons I just laid out and as a side effect I believe it is rubbing Buzz the wrong way. If it turns out I'm right, I don't agree with what/how they are doing things.
Buzz may be ok with everything, but I see more evidence that he is not then evidence that he is.
Can you outline this evidence?
I don't think I've seen anything from Buzz since this story broke.
Quote from: mu03eng on August 15, 2012, 12:36:13 PM
Who really is MU's beat writer.....Walker's covered almost all of MU stories with the exception of the TJ Taylor story by MU favorite Jeff P. Walker's also been the one to write ALL of the "breaking" MU news going back through the last year, IIRC
Enlund wrote the Journal's story on Mayo getting suspended, on Durley withdrawing, on Jamail Jones transferring, and on MU hiring Isaac Chew. Potrykus wrote the story on TJ Taylor transferring.
The only things that Walker has covered involved Apt 720 -- which I think we all agree was not leaked by Larry Williams -- and the secondary violation.
EDIT: And the infamous "Larry h8s Buzz" interview from earlier this year. Can't leave that one out.
Quote from: The Equalizer on August 15, 2012, 01:12:52 PM
Can you outline this evidence?
I don't think I've seen anything from Buzz since this story broke.
Off the top of my head we have the SMU flirtation(biggest flag for me), the email response to a poster, seemed to have a chip on his shoulder when speaking at BBQ, and a general keeping his head down the last 9 months. I am interpreting things to a large degree but short of a statement from Buzz that he is either happy or unhappy with the current direction of the admin, all we have is some info and interpretation on top of it
Quote from: Rubie Q on August 15, 2012, 01:17:41 PM
Enlund wrote the Journal's story on Mayo getting suspended, on Durley withdrawing, on Jamail Jones transferring, and on MU hiring Isaac Chew. Potrykus wrote the story on TJ Taylor transferring.
The only things that Walker has covered involved Apt 720 -- which I think we all agree was not leaked by Larry Williams -- and the secondary violation.
EDIT: And the infamous "Larry h8s Buzz" interview from earlier this year. Can't leave that one out.
I haven't been able to dig through JSOnline, but if that is the case then my memory is faulty, I thought I remembered more Don Walker/MU stories than 2.
Why would the leak not be Mayo himself? Anyone could have asked him a question that he responded that Buzz suspended him. It would be very easy for someone to notice he is not practicing with other players. Besides that it is the other things that Buzz does that tips people off that something is going on. I remember people questioning why Buzz did not mention Mayo when he was talking about next season. Mayo was not at Buzz's BQ. Those things get noticed by us diehards and lead to questions.
Quote from: mu03eng on August 15, 2012, 01:23:19 PM
Off the top of my head we have the SMU flirtation(biggest flag for me), the email response to a poster, seemed to have a chip on his shoulder when speaking at BBQ, and a general keeping his head down the last 9 months. I am interpreting things to a large degree but short of a statement from Buzz that he is either happy or unhappy with the current direction of the admin, all we have is some info and interpretation on top of it
You forgot that Buzz didn't give Larry credit for the aircraft carrier game, a clear shot across LW bow.
AND I didn't see Buzz and Larry sharing a rack of ribs, just sayin'.
Quote from: Pakuni on August 15, 2012, 11:01:36 AM
MU cannot disclose "education records" of any of its students. Saying a kid has been suspended for missing classes, poor grades, skipping tutoring sessions, etc. could easily be interpreted as a release of education records, and thereby is prohibited by federal law.
Spot on! For those of you that do not have any kids in college (I have three – ouch!) know that privacy laws have become so ridiculous that once your kids are over 18 they have to give school permission to allow parents (yes even if parents are paying the bills!!) access to anything. This includes bills and obviously grades. So if that is required for parents imagine how careful the school has to be to put information in the public domain about any student.
Quote from: newsdrms on August 15, 2012, 03:54:55 PM
Spot on! For those of you that do not have any kids in college (I have three – ouch!) know that privacy laws have become so ridiculous that once your kids are over 18 they have to give school permission to allow parents (yes even if parents are paying the bills!!) access to anything. This includes bills and obviously grades. So if that is required for parents imagine how careful the school has to be to put information in the public domain about any student.
Not sure why you think this is "ridiculous." They are adults. (And I have one in college as well.)
Quote from: mu03eng on August 15, 2012, 01:29:44 PM
I haven't been able to dig through JSOnline, but if that is the case then my memory is faulty, I thought I remembered more Don Walker/MU stories than 2.
Walker also reported that the Dept of Education was looking into the sexual assaults (it was 3 other reporters who re-reported the initial story from the Trib):
http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/us-reviewing-marquette-response-to-sex-assault-reports-4e30gub-133656848.html
Self reporting is best approach in my opinion, especially if infractions can be sold down thru self reporting. From what I hear it was smart move by MU. Suspensions are not out of the question from what I heard and actually may be in place. This has nothing to do Todd Mayo.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 15, 2012, 04:11:10 PM
Not sure why you think this is "ridiculous." They are adults. (And I have one in college as well.)
I understand they are adults and trust all mi kids. They are way more responsible and mature than me at their current age. But being that they are still considered "dependents" my belief is that the parents paying the bills and being ultimately responsible for the "dependent" students should get access to the information. Just feel that the "dependent" student having to give his consent for parents to get access to the information is "ridiculous". But the point I was really making is if schools can't openly give information to parents, well obviously they have to be extra careful when they are reporting on student athlete issues such as suspensions.
Quote from: Goose on August 15, 2012, 05:57:24 PM
Self reporting is best approach in my opinion, especially if infractions can be sold down thru self reporting. From what I hear it was smart move by MU. Suspensions are not out of the question from what I heard and actually may be in place. This has nothing to do Todd Mayo.
Goose...suspensions in place? What are you referring to? Suspensions for the alleged behavior related to the NCAA violation, or suspensions for some other behavior? Would you mind clarifying?
I heard yesterday that incoming freshman is going to have similar situation that we saw with Juan last year.
Quote from: Goose on August 16, 2012, 06:32:03 AM
I heard yesterday that incoming freshman is going to have similar situation that we saw with Juan last year.
Won't be self imposed, but heard this as well.
Just hope the staff is allowed to remain together this late in the offseason.
Agreed MUfan12. That might be another issue.
So is that the punishment for this whole violation incident? From what I've gathered just reading the board, the story is that a recruit who is now on the team got a t-shirt from a former ass't coach. So is this rumored suspension of an incoming freshman a result of that violation? If so, at least it would be nice to put this whole thing to bed and move on.
Quote from: Litehouse on August 16, 2012, 07:37:57 AM
So is that the punishment for this whole violation incident? From what I've gathered just reading the board, the story is that a recruit who is now on the team got a t-shirt from a former ass't coach. So is this rumored suspension of an incoming freshman a result of that violation? If so, at least it would be nice to put this whole thing to bed and move on.
Well that can't be it (or all of it) if what MUfan12 or Goose have heard is accurate.
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on August 16, 2012, 07:40:05 AM
Well that can't be it (or all of it) if what MUfan12 or Goose have heard is accurate.
I cannot believe that this is it. An assistant coach gives a player a t-shirt and the player gets suspended. Why would the player even think he is doing something wrong? The coach needs to know the rules. This is even worse, if the coach is now at another university and receives no punishment. If it is like Juan's situation then it is more likely that a booster gave a player something and maybe it was reported by one of the departing coaches. Even so, I think Juan's suspension for three games last year for getting invited to a Brewer game was over the top. How about taking away the boosters season tickets? How else are you going to control boosters?
My understanding is that Juan went to a Brewer game when invited by a fellow student...whose dad happened to be a booster and provided the tickets. I doubt anyone realized the error until afterwards.
Welcome to the NCAA...where they spend oodles of resources to determine if Shabazz Muhammed got support from a family friend, but allows athletes who have gotten $$$ in one sport to retain eligibility in another. Makes no sense.
Just curious....what is the NCAA's definition of a "booster".
Quote from: real chili 83 on August 16, 2012, 09:09:42 AM
Just curious....what is the NCAA's definition of a "booster".
In short: it's broad.
http://issuu.com/marquettesid/docs/compliance_brocure_reader_spreads_compliance_broch
Quote from: bilsu on August 16, 2012, 08:42:22 AM
I cannot believe that this is it. An assistant coach gives a player a t-shirt and the player gets suspended. Why would the player even think he is doing something wrong? The coach needs to know the rules.
Generally speaking, these kids know the rules. I have had some experience with kids who are being recruited to play college sports (not nearly at the high major DI basketball level, but still DI sports), and the rules are drilled into them from a pretty early age. Once a kid gets on that recruiting radar (and often before they're on the radar), they know when coaches can call them; when they can't; what they can send in the mail and when they can send it; when they can text; what they can do on an unofficial visit; what they can do on an official visit; etc. I suspect most recruits would know that it's a violation of the NCAA rule to receive a t-shirt from an assistant coach, but would figure that if the coach was offering the shirt, "what the heck." Even if they know it is a violation, I think a lot of the kids (if not most) will follow the lead of the adult in the situation.
I honestly think Juan's case is different. If, as many on this board have said, he simply went to a Brewers game with a friend who's parent provided the ticket, it may well have never occurred to him that it was a violation. The "booster" rule is so ridiculously broad, it's easy to understand how a kid might not realize that a friend's parent was a booster. But, the kids know who the coaches are, and know that they cannot accept "extra benefits" from coaches.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 16, 2012, 08:47:21 AM
My understanding is that Juan went to a Brewer game when invited by a fellow student...whose dad happened to be a booster and provided the tickets. I doubt anyone realized the error until afterwards.
Welcome to the NCAA...where they spend oodles of resources to determine if Shabazz Muhammed got support from a family friend, but allows athletes who have gotten $$$ in one sport to retain eligibility in another. Makes no sense.
I think you're understating the Shabazz Muhammed case.
That's about him receiving "support" from family friend who just happens to be a New York-based financial planner and wannabe sports agent. What a coincidence.
And then there's the matter of Shabazz's sister, who - despite being the 553rd ranked women's professional player -landed a sponsorship with adidas. Which also happens to be the sponsor or Muhammed's AAU team. And also happens to be the sponsor of the school which Muhammed chose to attend. Again, more coincidences.
Quote from: Rubie Q on August 16, 2012, 09:16:46 AM
In short: it's broad.
http://issuu.com/marquettesid/docs/compliance_brocure_reader_spreads_compliance_broch
Thanks for the link. Bottom line is that we are all boosters. Even Chicos. ::)
After reading the definition of a booster, it brought to mind an experience one of my neighbors had with NCAA rules.
The neighbor's daughter has a D1 scholarship at a school that is out of town. The kid and her team was back in town last year, playing the local D1 team. After the game, my neighbors invited the whole team over for dinner, including the coaches. The family said they had to be very careful with the dinner.....some of the players paid the family (a nominal sum) for the meal, to give the appearance that they were not receiving a free benefit, a "benefit" coming technically from a booster.
Quote from: lab_warrior on August 12, 2012, 05:34:00 PM
My "DERP DERP HERP DERP" are as follows:
1. Derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp. derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp! PROVE ME WRONG!.
2. Derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp
derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp PROVE ME WRONG!
3. derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp derp derp derp herp derp NOBODY HAS PROVEN ME WRONG YET!
HERPY DERP DERP DERP HERP DERP! PROVE ME WRONG!
I hate Larry Williams, and I'm a bitter human being, and I won't let facts get in the way of my misguided conspiracy theory that he's out to destroy Marquette basketball.
FIXED!
Epic post.
none of my Badger friends have even mentioned this 'minor violation' - not sure why it's such a big deal here on 'scoop
Quote from: Red Stripe on August 16, 2012, 11:47:03 AM
none of my Badger friends have even mentioned this 'minor violation' - not sure why it's such a big deal here on 'scoop
Little brother syndrome.
Quote from: StillAWarrior on August 16, 2012, 09:27:14 AM
I honestly think Juan's case is different. If, as many on this board have said, he simply went to a Brewers game with a friend who's parent provided the ticket, it may well have never occurred to him that it was a violation. The "booster" rule is so ridiculously broad, it's easy to understand how a kid might not realize that a friend's parent was a booster. But, the kids know who the coaches are, and know that they cannot accept "extra benefits" from coaches.
Hypothetical tangent... is the friend/student considered to be a booster too? What if he paid for the ticket (or beer or slice of pizza...) with money out of his wallet? Does he have to prove where he got the money to pay for the ticket? What if he paid for it with his allowance from his father the booster?
I am only have serious about the last question. Long live the NCAA!
Quote from: MUEng92 on August 16, 2012, 12:14:42 PM
Hypothetical tangent... is the friend/student considered to be a booster too? What if he paid for the ticket (or beer or slice of pizza...) with money out of his wallet? Does he have to prove where he got the money to pay for the ticket? What if he paid for it with his allowance from his father the booster?
I am only have serious about the last question. Long live the NCAA!
I think the NCAA pulls into the definition any household members of a booster. That part makes sense to me. However, I think there should be an exclusion for insignificant items. The reason for this is it is almost impossible to control or police by the athletic department or the NCAA. I am pretty sure that if you are a donor you are a booster. MU recently started a student donation program to the Blue and Gold Fund. I am going to assume that any student that donates to this to get credit for donation points would be classified as a booster. Assuming this, would the student/donor buying a donut for his friend who is a player be a violation? What if he is driving to the mall and invites his player friend along? After all it is a violation to provide free transportation. MU was probably crazy to start the student Blue and Gold fund donation program. Now it has a campus full of boosters to screw things up.
I have read this whole thread, and have no idea how I should feel about any of this. I just got more confused.
We are all boosters!!! Darn my son was having a couple of beers with Otule last Friday. I'm not even going to ask him if he paid for any of Otule's beers!!
This is like 9/11 times a million.
I think people have twisted themselves into bunches trying to convince themselves that the rules are too hard to undersand and/or are subject to some minium threshold at which point they change from optional to meaninful.
Perhaps the D1 manual would be helpful:
http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D112.pdf
Contrary to the multiple comments on how difficult these rules are to get right, I found the relevant passages quite easily, and neither strike me as particularly ambiguous:
With respect to the alleged T-shirt issue:
13.2.1.1 Specific Prohibitions. Specifically prohibited financial aid,benefits and arrangements include,but are not limited to, the following:
(a) An employment arrangement for a prospective student-athlete's relatives;
(b) Gift of clothing or equipment;
(c) Cosigning of loans;
(d) Providing loans to a prospective student-athlete's relatives or friends;
(e) Cash or like items;
(f) Any tangible items, including merchandise;
(g) Free or reduced-cost services, rentals or purchases of any type;
(h) Free or reduced-cost housing;
(i) Use of an institution's athletics equipment (e.g., for a high school all-star game);
(j) Sponsorship of or arrangement for an awards banquet for high school, preparatory school or two-year- college athletes by an institution, representatives of its athletics interests or its alumni groups or booster clubs; and
(k) Expenses for academic services (e.g., tutoring, test preparation) to assist in the completion of initial-eli- gibility or transfer-eligibility requirements or improvement of the prospective student-athlete's academic profile in conjunction with a waiver request. (Adopted: 4/23/08)
Next on the baseball ticket:
16.2.2.5 Professional Sports Tickets. An institution or any representative of its athletics interests may not purchase or otherwise obtain tickets to a professional sports event and make these tickets available to student- athletes enrolled in an NCAA member institution. Such a gift of tickets would represent an unacceptable extra benefit. (See Bylaw 16.7.1.1 for permissible provision of professional sports tickets as team entertainment related to an away-from-home contest.)
The tricky part of the second one is the phrase "representatives of its athletic interests".
Quote from: tower912 on August 16, 2012, 04:48:16 PM
The tricky part of the second one is the phrase "representatives of its athletic interests".
Actually, that's outlined pretty clearly as well.
DEFINITIONS
Representative of Athletics Interests
A "representative of the institution's athletics interests" (athletics representative), or booster, is an individual who is known (or who should have been known) by the institution's staff to:
a) Have participated in or is a member of an agency or organization promoting the institution's intercollegiate athletics program (e.g., a booster club, athletic foundation, university club);
b) Have made financial contributions to the athletics department or to an athletics booster organization of that institution;
c) Be assisting or to have been requested (by the athletics department staff) to assist in the recruitment of prospects;
d) Be assisting or to have assisted in providing benefits to enrolled student-athletes or their families (e.g., helping to arrange summer and/or vacation employment); or
e) Have been involved otherwise in promoting the institution's athletics program.http://www.bigeast.org/AbouttheBIGEAST/NCAAGuidelines.aspx
Quote from: newsdrms on August 16, 2012, 03:12:54 PM
We are all boosters!!! Darn my son was having a couple of beers with Otule last Friday. I'm not even going to ask him if he paid for any of Otule's beers!!
Then we are going to charge you with lack of institutional control over your son, since you failed to monitor him.
Quote from: bilsu on August 16, 2012, 07:56:35 PM
Then we are going to charge you with lack of institutional control over your son, since you failed to monitor him.
Don't tell me I'm going to be banned from my son's garduation this year!!