Buzz Williams was named Men's Basketball Coach five years ago today...did he pass the Chicos Five Year test? Undoubtedly, the best hire of any coach of that year's class, including I4 and CTC.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=8439.msg68535#msg68535
This turned out to be a fantastic hire, but when you go by the resume, it's easy to see why so many (myself included) were skeptical at the time. That's definitely a thin resume when it comes to taking a high-major coaching job.
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 08, 2013, 07:11:12 AM
This turned out to be a fantastic hire, but when you go by the resume, it's easy to see why so many (myself included) were skeptical at the time. That's definitely a thin resume when it comes to taking a high-major coaching job.
Agreed, though re-reading the initial press release in retrospect, good recruiting classes had a knack of following Buzz around. Hard to give Buzz credit for them at the time as an assistant, but with the benefit of 5 years it is easy to suspect that he had a big hand in those successful classes.
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 08, 2013, 07:11:12 AM
This turned out to be a fantastic hire, but when you go by the resume, it's easy to see why so many (myself included) were skeptical at the time. That's definitely a thin resume when it comes to taking a high-major coaching job.
At the time, a Scoop poll showed only 22% thought this was a good hire. Pretty funny. Some took longer than others to come around. Just goes to show that crowd sourcing is not always a great decision making process. Congrats to Buzz!
And congrats to Fr. Wild and Steve Cottingham for doing what they believed, not what boobs like me thought we should do!
Still not convinced. Need to see another 5
Btw, I didn't pull this up troll (ok...maybe a bit with Chicos but I was forced to read his 5000 posts on this over the five. . :D. ). But, incredibly, Buzz (and Ollie) are still the second youngest Old Big East coaches behind Willard. Buzz was roughly the same age as Majerus when he took over, made mistakes like Rick, but is maturing through it all. As we read recently, and as you see behind the scenes to smooth Buzz over, major kudos to Broeker too.
As Chicos pointed out the other day, teams that have won National Championships have had long-standing coaches. It is a key success factor.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on April 08, 2013, 07:49:33 AM
At the time, a Scoop poll showed only 22% thought this was a good hire. Pretty funny. Some took longer than others to come around. Just goes to show that crowd sourcing is not always a great decision making process. Congrats to Buzz!
I liked the hire strictly because it meant continuity for the three amigos. I had no idea what to expect long term, but liked the fact Buzz had a year to learn with that much talent on the roster. Been quite a five year run...
Those of us that liked the Buzz choice back in 2008, and those that did not, could never have envisioned what he has accomplished and who he has become as the Marquette head coach.
It really was a a grand slam hire, which is why so many get so worked up about Buzz leaving for any reason. His success has far exceeded anyone's expectations.
Feel free to judge away, Bros.
Quote from: MUCam on April 08, 2013, 09:14:00 AM
Those of us that liked the Buzz choice back in 2008, and those that did not, could never have envisioned what he has accomplished and who he has become as the Marquette head coach.
It really was a a grand slam hire, which is why so many get so worked up about Buzz leaving for any reason. His success has far exceeded anyone's expectations.
yep - even the "I told you so"s are exaggerated. Nobody predicted this level of success, even the most optimistic among us.
Here is a chart of other coaching hires in 2008
http://collegesportsinfo.com/blog/2008/04/2008-college-basketball-coaching.html
Quote from: dwaderoy2004 on April 08, 2013, 08:48:19 AM
I liked the hire strictly because it meant continuity for the three amigos. I had no idea what to expect long term, but liked the fact Buzz had a year to learn with that much talent on the roster. Been quite a five year run...
Totally agree. Overall I was pretty neutral about the hire. There were a lot of unknowns but the fact that it kept Jerel, Wes and Dominic in place felt like a prudent move and helped the continuity of the program.
I was pretty neutral on the hire as well. proud to say I was in the "give him a chance" camp...and he's done great for MU these past 5 years.
Keep building it up Buzz!
Quote from: sixstrings03 on April 08, 2013, 08:13:05 AM
Still not convinced. Need to see another 5
better make it 10... 15 years just to be safe
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 08, 2013, 07:11:12 AM
This turned out to be a fantastic hire, but when you go by the resume, it's easy to see why so many (myself included) were skeptical at the time. That's definitely a thin resume when it comes to taking a high-major coaching job.
And when you "go by the resume" Bob Dukiet or Mike Deane is probably the best hire MU has made in the last 50 years. Buzz would be at the bottom and Al wouldn't be far ahead of him. Resumes are very reliable if you're looking for a lathe operator, but they don't capture the "it" factor that great leaders have. Thanks to Steve Cottingham and Fr Wild for recognizing it in Buzz. They could have taken the safe, CYA route and made a hire that could have been defended if it failed. They didn't. Marquette owes them a great deal for their courage and good judgement.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 08, 2013, 11:20:21 AM
And when you "go by the resume" Bob Dukiet or Mike Deane is probably the best hire MU has made in the last 50 years.
no
Quote from: Warrior's Path on April 08, 2013, 11:28:26 AM
no
Dukiet had 271 wins as a head coach, 135 in D1 (with a .678 winning pct.). Deane was 167-77 in 8 years at Sienna, with a trip to the NCAAs and a third place in the NIT on his résumé. How many D1 wins for Buzz, Crean, KO, Rick, Hank and Al before MU hired them?
I was completely against the hire and process. Have no problem saying I was completely wrong and very thankful Buzz is our guy. I am hoping for five more years of action from him and will enjoy the ride. He has studs playing next year and most excited for a season then I have been in years.
I did a 5 Year Pomeroy Average using some Blackheart Math. MU (and Buzz) rank #16 just behind some lofty names. Missouri is the only school with a newer coach....and their KPom scores were driven by Anderson more than Haith. A lot of national championships and F4's among these teams during this time. Continuity counts! Buzz is on the cusp.
Team 5 Year Avg
Kansas 0.948
Duke 0.938
Ohio St. 0.936
Syracuse 0.936
Louisville 0.923
Wisconsin 0.922
Michigan St. 0.914
Kentucky 0.902
Missouri 0.900
North Carolina 0.900
Florida 0.897
Pittsburgh 0.896
Georgetown 0.895
Gonzaga 0.891
Marquette 0.886
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 08, 2013, 11:48:38 AM
Dukiet had 271 wins as a head coach, 135 in D1 (with a .678 winning pct.). Deane was 167-77 in 8 years at Sienna, with a trip to the NCAAs and a third place in the NIT on his résumé. How many D1 wins for Buzz, Crean, KO, Rick, Hank and Al before MU hired them?
Is it better to be a head coach at a smaller school or an assistant at a larger school? Of our last five coaches, the most three successful have been those who were primarily assistants at larger schools...and the two least successful have come via the smaller school route.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on April 08, 2013, 01:04:19 AM
Buzz Williams was named Men's Basketball Coach five years ago today...did he pass the Chicos Five Year test? Undoubtedly, the best hire of any coach of that year's class, including I4 and CTC.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=8439.msg68535#msg68535
At some point on this board I would hope I'm actually quoted correctly on the 5 year stuff, I'm happy to provide countless links to assist. Yup, I thought we could have waited another few weeks to get Buzz, Buzz wasn't going anywhere. It all worked out. I'm very happy, he was my COY candidate the last two years.
On the 5 years comment, what did I actually say? Hmmm. I wonder. ::) I said I would
FULLY judge a coach after 5 years, but during those years also said constantly "so far so good" many times. I never said you don't make a judgement until after 5 years and then suddenly at the end of the 5th year you make your final judgment. For some reason what I actually said is never quoted...weird. Strange. SHOCKING :D
To each their own, I'll stick to 5 years for my compass to
FULLY judge a coach. Mike Deane, after three years...two NCAAs, a NIT runner up. Fired year 5. Bruiser Flint, first two years NCAA tournament...fired year five. Etc. In my view, a coach needs five years because you have to go through one full recruiting cycle where his recruits become seniors. Seems only common sense, you are free to evaluate a coach on any parameter you wish, just as I am free to use my tenure belief. I just wish, good Doctor and others, that you would actually get the quote correct and not imply I said something I didn't say or leave very important parts out of it. Context is everything.
Peace
Quote from: MUCam on April 08, 2013, 09:14:00 AM
Those of us that liked the Buzz choice back in 2008, and those that did not, could never have envisioned what he has accomplished and who he has become as the Marquette head coach.
It really was a a grand slam hire, which is why so many get so worked up about Buzz leaving for any reason. His success has far exceeded anyone's expectations.
Agreed. I definitely was in the "pro" Buzz crowd, but never came close to saying it was a slam dunk.
I did think then - as I do now - that the people whining about "the process" were silly and wrong.
FULL JUDGMENT....funny, even back in April 2009 ;D
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=14672.msg133962#msg133962
According to the search, I said "so far so good" with Buzz more than 100+ different posts (stopped counting)....with many of them also saying I hope he succeeds and is here for many years, even decades. It cracks me up how many people here just make stuff up or don't bother to get their facts straight.
Bring back BMA!
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 08, 2013, 12:36:15 PM
FULL JUDGMENT....funny, even back in April 2009 ;D
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=14672.msg133962#msg133962
According to the search, I said "so far so good" with Buzz more than 100+ different posts (stopped counting)....with many of them also saying I hope he succeeds and is here for many years, even decades. It cracks me up how many people here just make stuff up or don't bother to get their facts straight.
Bring back BMA!
Why didn't you include this in the previous post? Or just edited your post to Dr B. to add the link since you are repeating what you just said?
Or is that how you said "so far so good" 100+ times, by just repeating yourself?
(winky face) (Big smiley face) (Eye roll face)
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 08, 2013, 12:26:48 PM
At some point on this board I would hope I'm actually quoted correctly on the 5 year stuff, I'm happy to provide countless links to assist. Yup, I thought we could have waited another few weeks to get Buzz, Buzz wasn't going anywhere. It all worked out. I'm very happy, he was my COY candidate the last two years.
On the 5 years comment, what did I actually say? Hmmm. I wonder. ::) I said I would FULLY judge a coach after 5 years, but during those years also said constantly "so far so good" many times. I never said you don't make a judgement until after 5 years and then suddenly at the end of the 5th year you make your final judgment. For some reason what I actually said is never quoted...weird. Strange. SHOCKING :D
To each their own, I'll stick to 5 years for my compass to FULLY judge a coach. Mike Deane, after three years...two NCAAs, a NIT runner up. Fired year 5. Bruiser Flint, first two years NCAA tournament...fired year five. Etc. In my view, a coach needs five years because you have to go through one full recruiting cycle where his recruits become seniors. Seems only common sense, you are free to evaluate a coach on any parameter you wish, just as I am free to use my tenure belief. I just wish, good Doctor and others, that you would actually get the quote correct and not imply I said something I didn't say or leave very important parts out of it. Context is everything.
Peace
Rather than making this about
your past posts which is your wont, how about providing your full assessment after Year 5? Where were you right? Where were you wrong? How does he compare to others? What does he need to do to take it to the next level? Not interested in your persecution defense...interested in your valued assessment...which is why I called you out...not that you had an opinion and stuck to it for five years.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on April 08, 2013, 12:43:40 PM
Rather than making this about your past posts which is your wont, how about providing your full assessment after Year 5? Where were you right? Where were you wrong? How does he compare to others? What does he need to do to take it to the next level? Not interested in your persecution defense...interested in your valued assessment...which is why I called you out...not that you had an opinion and stuck to it for five years.
+1
Quote from: Terror Skink on April 08, 2013, 12:24:15 PM
Is it better to be a head coach at a smaller school or an assistant at a larger school? Of our last five coaches, the most three successful have been those who were primarily assistants at larger schools...and the two least successful have come via the smaller school route.
I'm with you, but part of the criticism about Buzz was lack of experience as a head coach and the idea that MU had come far enough that it "shouldn't have to settle for" an assistant.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 08, 2013, 01:27:40 PM
I'm with you, but part of the criticism about Buzz was lack of experience as a head coach and the idea that MU had come far enough that it "shouldn't have to settle for" an assistant.
But I think the sentiment is that we would be able to lure a coach like Tony Bennett or Anthony Grant...not whomever is the head coach at St. Peters.
Quote from: Badgerhater on April 08, 2013, 09:45:11 AM
Here is a chart of other coaching hires in 2008
http://collegesportsinfo.com/blog/2008/04/2008-college-basketball-coaching.html
...and no "Bo Ryan" to be found on the chart at all. Thought he was the greatest coach still coaching today?
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on April 08, 2013, 12:43:40 PM
Rather than making this about your past posts which is your wont, how about providing your full assessment after Year 5? Where were you right? Where were you wrong? How does he compare to others? What does he need to do to take it to the next level? Not interested in your persecution defense...interested in your valued assessment...which is why I called you out...not that you had an opinion and stuck to it for five years.
Well, since you brought up a past post from 5 years ago, that's why I went there, but I appreciate the follow-up and the ability to answer, especially since so many folks here literally make crap up and attribute something that I never said or wanted an outcome that I never did. Nothing infuriates me more than MU fans here claiming someone that is objective or questions something somehow isn't a fan, or less of a fan.
Was I wrong about 5 years ago...I don't see how. I said "so far so good". Never said he would fail, never wanted him to fail....that would be bad for MU. Was I underwhelmed by the hire, didn't like the process. Yup. Go back and look at what the pundits said nationally...all very consistent. Did I ever say he wouldn't succeed or wouldn't do well...nope. In fact, I said if he was able to recruit well (his strong suit) and work hard (he has), he could succeed at MU given the resources we now have.
Was I right 5 years ago...I didn't make a prediction about his success or failure, so I wasn't right or wrong as I made no prediction on his success or failure.
My assessment....after 5 years, I think he's done a very solid job, with a few hiccups. There were issues I was not happy with and neither was the administration. I'm glad those issues were addressed. I'll repeat what I've said over and over again, I hope he is here for the long haul. It's good for us as fans, good for Marquette University (both as an institution and basketball program). I'm not, however, going to grant him messianic powers. He's a coach, and the line of success and failure is razor thin. See Ben Howland after 5 years vs next 5. Coaches come and go, if he goes, MU will hire another coach. He has my support as long as he continues to graduate kids, fields a competitive team, keeps the players in check. When those things start to erode consistently (not just one sub par year), then you take notice, but it's been a solid 5 years...so far so good as we move into the next 5.
Expectations, fortunately or unfortunately, grow with success. It's part of life in business, athletics, etc. Will a Sweet 16 be "good enough" next year? What if we have "one of those games" where we just don't shoot well and lose in the first round? It happens. If we don't win the conference next year is it a failure? Fans have a funny way at looking at things, fairly or unfairly, but that works both ways. Fans also tend to over exaggerate success as well. Very fine line.
Peace
Quote from: Terror Skink on April 08, 2013, 01:33:57 PM
But I think the sentiment is that we would be able to lure a coach like Tony Bennett or Anthony Grant...not whomever is the head coach at St. Peters.
True, but I think that sentiment was dead wrong.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 08, 2013, 02:14:50 PM
My assessment....after 5 years, I think he's done a very solid job, with a few hiccups. There were issues I was not happy with and neither was the administration. I'm glad those issues were addressed. I'll repeat what I've said over and over again, I hope he is here for the long haul. It's good for us as fans, good for Marquette University (both as an institution and basketball program). I'm not, however, going to grant him messianic powers. He's a coach, and the line of success and failure is razor thin. See Ben Howland after 5 years vs next 5. Coaches come and go, if he goes, MU will hire another coach. He has my support as long as he continues to graduate kids, fields a competitive team, keeps the players in check. When those things start to erode consistently (not just one sub par year), then you take notice, but it's been a solid 5 years...so far so good as we move into the next 5.
Expectations, fortunately or unfortunately, grow with success. It's part of life in business, athletics, etc. Will a Sweet 16 be "good enough" next year? What if we have "one of those games" where we just don't shoot well and lose in the first round? It happens. If we don't win the conference next year is it a failure? Fans have a funny way at looking at things, fairly or unfairly, but that works both ways. Fans also tend to over exaggerate success as well. Very fine line.
Peace
You still seem a bit underwhelmed.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 08, 2013, 02:14:50 PM
Well, since you brought up a past post from 5 years ago, that's why I went there, but I appreciate the follow-up and the ability to answer, especially since so many folks here literally make crap up and attribute something that I never said or wanted an outcome that I never did. Nothing infuriates me more than MU fans here claiming someone that is objective or questions something somehow isn't a fan, or less of a fan.
Was I wrong about 5 years ago...I don't see how. I said "so far so good". Never said he would fail, never wanted him to fail....that would be bad for MU. Was I underwhelmed by the hire, didn't like the process. Yup. Go back and look at what the pundits said nationally...all very consistent. Did I ever say he wouldn't succeed or wouldn't do well...nope. In fact, I said if he was able to recruit well (his strong suit) and work hard (he has), he could succeed at MU given the resources we now have.
Was I right 5 years ago...I didn't make a prediction about his success or failure, so I wasn't right or wrong as I made no prediction on his success or failure.
My assessment....after 5 years, I think he's done a very solid job, with a few hiccups. There were issues I was not happy with and neither was the administration. I'm glad those issues were addressed. I'll repeat what I've said over and over again, I hope he is here for the long haul. It's good for us as fans, good for Marquette University (both as an institution and basketball program). I'm not, however, going to grant him messianic powers. He's a coach, and the line of success and failure is razor thin. See Ben Howland after 5 years vs next 5. Coaches come and go, if he goes, MU will hire another coach. He has my support as long as he continues to graduate kids, fields a competitive team, keeps the players in check. When those things start to erode consistently (not just one sub par year), then you take notice, but it's been a solid 5 years...so far so good as we move into the next 5.
Expectations, fortunately or unfortunately, grow with success. It's part of life in business, athletics, etc. Will a Sweet 16 be "good enough" next year? What if we have "one of those games" where we just don't shoot well and lose in the first round? It happens. If we don't win the conference next year is it a failure? Fans have a funny way at looking at things, fairly or unfairly, but that works both ways. Fans also tend to over exaggerate success as well. Very fine line.
Peace
Just to clarify... "solid job" to you = consistently winning in the best basketball conference over the last 5 years, 5 NCAA appearances with 3 sweet sixteens and 1 elite eight, a shared regular season title (which you stated was more valuable than a conference tournament title) and excellent graduation rates? Sure, like you said, a few hiccups. But you honestly think that Buzz's resume at marquette is mearly a "solid job"?
I want 5 examples of coaches over a 5 year period each that would be, in your opinion, great, speactacular, excellent, etc.
And, do you want Buzz to remain here for the "long haul" because it would simply be good for Marquette and prove MU isn't a stepping-stone job or because you actually like/respect Buzz? There's definitely a difference between the two
Quote from: jesmu84 on April 08, 2013, 07:59:49 PM
Just to clarify... "solid job" to you = consistently winning in the best basketball conference over the last 5 years, 5 NCAA appearances with 3 sweet sixteens and 1 elite eight, a shared regular season title (which you stated was more valuable than a conference tournament title) and excellent graduation rates? Sure, like you said, a few hiccups. But you honestly think that Buzz's resume at marquette is mearly a "solid job"?
I want 5 examples of coaches over a 5 year period each that would be, in your opinion, great, speactacular, excellent, etc.
And, do you want Buzz to remain here for the "long haul" because it would simply be good for Marquette and prove MU isn't a stepping-stone job or because you actually like/respect Buzz? There's definitely a difference between the two
Seems like you, Lenny and a few others want me to put on a dress and grab some pom poms. LOL.
I like Buzz, respect Buzz (if he is willing to understand the university's mission, which I think he is) and want him also to stay at MU to prove it isn't a stepping stone job. So it's both, not one or the the other. And yes, there is a difference between the two.
I've always felt Buzz (or anyone that took the job) was stepping into a wonderful situation. Fantastic club coming back, guaranteed NCAA team for which that coach was going to get some instant street cred. Big East, great facilities, fan base was energized. Let's put it this way, a lot easier to step into that situation then what he stepped into at UNO or any number of other examples we could use. He took it and ran with it, and for that I give him great credit. He didn't just settle and coast, he did a really good job. People will say how there wasn't so much talent coming back the year after, but I disagree. Certainly not as much as year one, but the cupboard was hardly bare either. No need to rehash that, it's been rehashed a million times.
He hit the ground running from a recruiting perspective and that was key. His coaching has improved, he's more seasoned. We've have a few head scratchers and blowouts, but so does every coach. Consistency of hard work by his teams have been there from day one on effort, which I love.
As to your question, there are a lot of coaches that over a 5 year period that have been very good, some great. I'm not sure where you are going with that, but there are many, some in our very own conference. I think Buzz's teams have finished 5th, 5th, 9th, 2nd, 1st. Two great years, two really good years, one so-so year. Overall, really good. Have there been coaches that have done better than that in a 5 year period...of course. In our own conference, but again not sure what that really proves. But if you wish, Boeheim went 6th, 1st, 3rd, 1st, 5th in the last 5, but if you're looking at any 5 year stretch he's done 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 1st, 3rd as just one example. Calhoun once went 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 1st, 1st. Jamie Dixon 2nd, 2nd, 1st, 13th, 4th in the last five. Again, just in our own conference.
I haven't even gone out of conference yet, so yes there are guys that have done it before or better. Bo Ryan, Tom Izzo, Pitino, Donovan, Smart, Matta, Miller, Few, etc, etc. What excites me is that in the last 2 years he's had a 2nd and a first with a very good team coming back next year. You might see him put together a 5 year run of a 2nd, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd or something like that. That's when you approach great stuff. The NCAAs, you know how I feel about it. Crapshoot. This year easily (should have been) one and done. We got lucky, but you take it, but that's the point...the line is very very thin on success and failure. Some years we will come out on the wrong side of luck (Washington game), and some years we come out on the right side (Davidson). That's the beauty of the tournament. If G'Town doesn't play FGCU, maybe they go to the Final four if they were the #2 seed in another region with a 2 seed draw. We will never know, it's all matchups and how you play THAT day. The best team doesn't always win and since the coach can't make shots for players, the coach is often overly heralded or overly criticized...players play, not the coaches.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 08, 2013, 08:28:36 PM
Seems like you, Lenny and a few others want me to put on a dress and grab some pom poms. LOL.
I like Buzz, respect Buzz (if he is willing to understand the university's mission, which I think he is) and want him also to stay at MU to prove it isn't a stepping stone job. So it's both, not one or the the other. And yes, there is a difference between the two.
I've always felt Buzz (or anyone that took the job) was stepping into a wonderful situation. Fantastic club coming back, guaranteed NCAA team for which that coach was going to get some instant street cred. Big East, great facilities, fan base was energized. Let's put it this way, a lot easier to step into that situation then what he stepped into at UNO or any number of other examples we could use. He took it and ran with it, and for that I give him great credit. He didn't just settle and coast, he did a really good job. People will say how there wasn't so much talent coming back the year after, but I disagree. Certainly not as much as year one, but the cupboard was hardly bare either. No need to rehash that, it's been rehashed a million times.
He hit the ground running from a recruiting perspective and that was key. His coaching has improved, he's more seasoned. We've have a few head scratchers and blowouts, but so does every coach. Consistency of hard work by his teams have been there from day one on effort, which I love.
As to your question, there are a lot of coaches that over a 5 year period that have been very good, some great. I'm not sure where you are going with that, but there are many, some in our very own conference. I think Buzz's teams have finished 5th, 5th, 9th, 2nd, 1st. Two great years, two really good years, one so-so year. Overall, really good. Have there been coaches that have done better than that in a 5 year period...of course. In our own conference, but again not sure what that really proves. But if you wish, Boeheim went 6th, 1st, 3rd, 1st, 5th in the last 5, but if you're looking at any 5 year stretch he's done 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 1st, 3rd as just one example. Calhoun once went 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 1st, 1st. Jamie Dixon 2nd, 2nd, 1st, 13th, 4th in the last five. Again, just in our own conference.
I haven't even gone out of conference yet, so yes there are guys that have done it before or better. Bo Ryan, Tom Izzo, Pitino, Donovan, Smart, Matta, Miller, Few, etc, etc. What excites me is that in the last 2 years he's had a 2nd and a first with a very good team coming back next year. You might see him put together a 5 year run of a 2nd, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd or something like that. That's when you approach great stuff. The NCAAs, you know how I feel about it. Crapshoot. This year easily (should have been) one and done. We got lucky, but you take it, but that's the point...the line is very very thin on success and failure. Some years we will come out on the wrong side of luck (Washington game), and some years we come out on the right side (Davidson). That's the beauty of the tournament. If G'Town doesn't play FGCU, maybe they go to the Final four if they were the #2 seed in another region with a 2 seed draw. We will never know, it's all matchups and how you play THAT day. The best team doesn't always win and since the coach can't make shots for players, the coach is often overly heralded or overly criticized...players play, not the coaches.
And you are the one that likes to educate the masses on coachspeak. I can't believe this epistle is what took five years to marinate.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 08, 2013, 08:28:36 PM
Seems like you, Lenny and a few others want me to put on a dress and grab some pom poms. LOL.
I like Buzz, respect Buzz (if he is willing to understand the university's mission, which I think he is) and want him also to stay at MU to prove it isn't a stepping stone job. So it's both, not one or the the other. And yes, there is a difference between the two.
I've always felt Buzz (or anyone that took the job) was stepping into a wonderful situation. Fantastic club coming back, guaranteed NCAA team for which that coach was going to get some instant street cred. Big East, great facilities, fan base was energized. Let's put it this way, a lot easier to step into that situation then what he stepped into at UNO or any number of other examples we could use. He took it and ran with it, and for that I give him great credit. He didn't just settle and coast, he did a really good job. People will say how there wasn't so much talent coming back the year after, but I disagree. Certainly not as much as year one, but the cupboard was hardly bare either. No need to rehash that, it's been rehashed a million times.
He hit the ground running from a recruiting perspective and that was key. His coaching has improved, he's more seasoned. We've have a few head scratchers and blowouts, but so does every coach. Consistency of hard work by his teams have been there from day one on effort, which I love.
As to your question, there are a lot of coaches that over a 5 year period that have been very good, some great. I'm not sure where you are going with that, but there are many, some in our very own conference. I think Buzz's teams have finished 5th, 5th, 9th, 2nd, 1st. Two great years, two really good years, one so-so year. Overall, really good. Have there been coaches that have done better than that in a 5 year period...of course. In our own conference, but again not sure what that really proves. But if you wish, Boeheim went 6th, 1st, 3rd, 1st, 5th in the last 5, but if you're looking at any 5 year stretch he's done 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 1st, 3rd as just one example. Calhoun once went 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 1st, 1st. Jamie Dixon 2nd, 2nd, 1st, 13th, 4th in the last five. Again, just in our own conference.
I haven't even gone out of conference yet, so yes there are guys that have done it before or better. Bo Ryan, Tom Izzo, Pitino, Donovan, Smart, Matta, Miller, Few, etc, etc. What excites me is that in the last 2 years he's had a 2nd and a first with a very good team coming back next year. You might see him put together a 5 year run of a 2nd, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd or something like that. That's when you approach great stuff. The NCAAs, you know how I feel about it. Crapshoot. This year easily (should have been) one and done. We got lucky, but you take it, but that's the point...the line is very very thin on success and failure. Some years we will come out on the wrong side of luck (Washington game), and some years we come out on the right side (Davidson). That's the beauty of the tournament. If G'Town doesn't play FGCU, maybe they go to the Final four if they were the #2 seed in another region with a 2 seed draw. We will never know, it's all matchups and how you play THAT day. The best team doesn't always win and since the coach can't make shots for players, the coach is often overly heralded or overly criticized...players play, not the coaches.
OMG
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 08, 2013, 08:28:36 PM
As to your question, there are a lot of coaches that over a 5 year period that have been very good, some great. I'm not sure where you are going with that, but there are many, some in our very own conference. I think Buzz's teams have finished 5th, 5th, 9th, 2nd, 1st. Two great years, two really good years, one so-so year. Overall, really good. Have there been coaches that have done better than that in a 5 year period...of course. In our own conference, but again not sure what that really proves. But if you wish, Boeheim went 6th, 1st, 3rd, 1st, 5th in the last 5, but if you're looking at any 5 year stretch he's done 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 1st, 3rd as just one example. Calhoun once went 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 1st, 1st. Jamie Dixon 2nd, 2nd, 1st, 13th, 4th in the last five. Again, just in our own conference.
I haven't even gone out of conference yet, so yes there are guys that have done it before or better. Bo Ryan, Tom Izzo, Pitino, Donovan, Smart, Matta, Miller, Few, etc, etc. What excites me is that in the last 2 years he's had a 2nd and a first with a very good team coming back next year. You might see him put together a 5 year run of a 2nd, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd or something like that. That's when you approach great stuff. The NCAAs, you know how I feel about it. Crapshoot. This year easily (should have been) one and done. We got lucky, but you take it, but that's the point...the line is very very thin on success and failure. Some years we will come out on the wrong side of luck (Washington game), and some years we come out on the right side (Davidson). That's the beauty of the tournament. If G'Town doesn't play FGCU, maybe they go to the Final four if they were the #2 seed in another region with a 2 seed draw. We will never know, it's all matchups and how you play THAT day. The best team doesn't always win and since the coach can't make shots for players, the coach is often overly heralded or overly criticized...players play, not the coaches.
So, you're saying those coaches had better 5 year stretches simply based on where they finished in conference play? You don't take into account the players they recruited or the preseason expectations/rankings? What about some of the "squirminess" of those coaches? They don't get demoted in your book, even though you note Buzz's "hiccups"?
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 08, 2013, 02:14:50 PM
My assessment....after 5 years, I think he's done a very solid job, with a few hiccups.
Yer kidding me...right?? A "solid job?" Sounds like he took a sh1t. By any measure he has done an
outstanding job.
Quote from: jesmu84 on April 08, 2013, 09:41:01 PM
So, you're saying those coaches had better 5 year stretches simply based on where they finished in conference play? You don't take into account the players they recruited or the preseason expectations/rankings? What about some of the "squirminess" of those coaches? They don't get demoted in your book, even though you note Buzz's "hiccups"?
Preseason rankings....are you kidding? I think they are a complete joke. I always have, always will.
Squirminess, I expect more from MU, a school that has NEVER been on NCAA probation. I expect looser behavior from those that have had their hands in the cookie jar.
Players recruited....I worry more about how they do on the basketball court. Plenty of teams win without 5 star players...the object of the game is to win. Buzz has done a great job at that.
Always glad to see Lenny's response.....OMG.
Keefe, Buzz has done a solid job and inherited a great situation which he has done very well at. Like I said, I love the results of the last year...conference championship, deep run in the NCAAs, no off the court BS and dragging the university through the mud. He puts a few more of those together, graduates players, etc, I'll be right there with you. Coaches don't walk on water, if others wish to idolize them in that fashion, they are free to do so, just don't ask me to do it.
Quote from: Frenns Liquor Depot on April 08, 2013, 08:37:39 PM
And you are the one that likes to educate the masses on coachspeak. I can't believe this epistle is what took five years to marinate.
It took about 5 minutes, Frenns, but using the word epistle in a thread earns bonus points for sure.
Been awhile, I miss your stuff. Remember when you wanted Jay Bilas as the head coach and thought Buzz = Pat Kennedy? ;D
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 08, 2013, 11:23:36 PM
Preseason rankings....are you kidding? I think they are a complete joke. I always have, always will.
Squirminess, I expect more from MU, a school that has NEVER been on NCAA probation. I expect looser behavior from those that have had their hands in the cookie jar.
Players recruited....I worry more about how they do on the basketball court. Plenty of teams win without 5 star players...the object of the game is to win. Buzz has done a great job at that.
Always glad to see Lenny's response.....OMG.
Keefe, Buzz has done a solid job and inherited a great situation which he has done very well at. Like I said, I love the results of the last year...conference championship, deep run in the NCAAs, no off the court BS and dragging the university through the mud. He puts a few more of those together, graduates players, etc, I'll be right there with you. Coaches don't walk on water, if others wish to idolize them in that fashion, they are free to do so, just don't ask me to do it.
I guess, from my perspective, you're holding Buzz to the level of HOF coaches or blue blood programs. I don't think MU is there, yet. So, to give Buzz a "solid" rating (on a grade scale, would be like a C+? B-?) is low-balling. I would love for Buzz to have multiple conference championships, multiple deep runs, no off court BS, etc. But is that realistic for Buzz/MU? It might very well be a hope, but looking at what Buzz has done so far, I don't know how you couldn't give him at least an A- (and that minus would simply be due to some off court stuff).
I guess I don't understand how you point to coaches like Boeheim and Calhoun as better 5 year stretches compared to this 5 year stretch for Buzz, when they definitely have tons of shady things going on. That just doesn't logically add-up. If you simply want to compare on court accolades, then yes, that's something Buzz should strive for. But, in your initial post, you brought up the "hiccups", so you have to take that into account when comparing those other coaches and their success.
Quote from: keefe on April 08, 2013, 10:11:36 PM
Yer kidding me...right?? A "solid job?" Sounds like he took a sh1t. By any measure he has done an outstanding job.
He's not kidding. Put him in a room with 99 Marquette fans who know basketball and MU's history and he'll give Buzz the 100th best grade in the room. Because he's "objective". LOL
Quote from: keefe on April 08, 2013, 10:11:36 PM
Yer kidding me...right?? A "solid job?" Sounds like he took a sh1t. By any measure he has done an outstanding job.
Agreed. To do what he did in 09-10, and 10-11 (after TC left the cupboard bare) was nothing short of incredible. Those teams had no business doing what they did. And to take this group, with all their warts, to an Elite 8 and a BE Title? Come on.
Honestly, I try not to get involved in these threads. But this was so outrageous I couldn't resist.
The 2nd, 3rd and 4th best players on Buzz's 2nd team were jucos brought in by Buzz. How in the world can anyone argue that behind the amigos & Lazar that Crean did not leave the cupboard bare?
Quote from: jesmu84 on April 08, 2013, 11:32:54 PM
I guess, from my perspective, you're holding Buzz to the level of HOF coaches or blue blood programs. I don't think MU is there, yet. So, to give Buzz a "solid" rating (on a grade scale, would be like a C+? B-?) is low-balling. I would love for Buzz to have multiple conference championships, multiple deep runs, no off court BS, etc. But is that realistic for Buzz/MU? It might very well be a hope, but looking at what Buzz has done so far, I don't know how you couldn't give him at least an A- (and that minus would simply be due to some off court stuff).
I guess I don't understand how you point to coaches like Boeheim and Calhoun as better 5 year stretches compared to this 5 year stretch for Buzz, when they definitely have tons of shady things going on. That just doesn't logically add-up. If you simply want to compare on court accolades, then yes, that's something Buzz should strive for. But, in your initial post, you brought up the "hiccups", so you have to take that into account when comparing those other coaches and their success.
I barely gave it any thought, but went right to our own conference for examples. I would definitely give him an A-. Problem is, some people will scream OMG and how dare you not give him an A+. That's just how it is here. He's done very well, walked into a fabulous situation and kept it going. I'm glad he's our coach, I hope it continues like this past year.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 09, 2013, 12:45:17 AM
I barely gave it any thought, but went right to our own conference for examples. I would definitely give him an A-. Problem is, some people will scream OMG and how dare you not give him an A+. That's just how it is here. He's done very well, walked into a fabulous situation and kept it going. I'm glad he's our coach, I hope it continues like this past year.
I see. I guess we arrive at the same grade using different language. I agree people would scream at you for not giving him an A+, but I don't think it's warranted either.
Quote from: jesmu84 on April 09, 2013, 08:07:39 AM
I see. I guess we arrive at the same grade using different language. I agree people would scream at you for not giving him an A+, but I don't think it's warranted either.
I am in the same place on the grade. I think Buzz grew the most, especially as the season progresses, in game management. Having ex-head coaches on the bench helped Buzz exponentially.
I would also come to the same conclusion -- Words are funny; I did not get that from the two earlier posts.
Personally I don't think we could have ended in a much better spot looking back to '08. I am happy with Buzz's recruiting and now that I have seen it very happy with where he is as a coach.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 09, 2013, 12:45:17 AM
I barely gave it any thought, but went right to our own conference for examples. I would definitely give him an A-. Problem is, some people will scream OMG and how dare you not give him an A+. That's just how it is here. He's done very well, walked into a fabulous situation and kept it going. I'm glad he's our coach, I hope it continues like this past year.
I was very happy with Buzz's hiring. It became obvious fairly early in the search that snagging a successful coach from elsewhere wasn't going to happen unless we were willing to take someone with some warts which I think seldom works out well. When you go for an assistant, the key thing to look for (and often the only thing you can get a decent feel for) IMO is their ability to recruit. If you can't recruit, you can't build or even maintain a program. With the expiration date on the three amigos fast approaching and the 2008 recruiting class falling apart that really had to be the emphasis.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 08, 2013, 12:36:15 PM
According to the search, I said "so far so good" with Buzz more than 100+ different posts (stopped counting).
you post way too much if you used over 100 (and stopped counting) to declare "so far so good" ::)
Warts? Most of these retreads, Murray, come with chancres.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on April 09, 2013, 10:20:31 AM
Warts? Most of these retreads, Murray, come with chancres.
Where's that damn dictionary!
Chicos, just curious, what do you have to say about Two Tone Tommy and his job at IU?
Thanks.
Quote from: JD on April 09, 2013, 12:14:38 PM
Chicos, just curious, what do you have to say about Two Tone Tommy and his job at IU?
Thanks.
Why must you poke the bear? Just send him a PM if hearing his argument for 800th time is what gets your jollies.
Quote from: The Lens on April 09, 2013, 12:05:34 AM
The 2nd, 3rd and 4th best players on Buzz's 2nd team were jucos brought in by Buzz. How in the world can anyone argue that behind the amigos & Lazar that Crean did not leave the cupboard bare?
Last I checked, we had an NBA player in Lazar Hayward on that team. We had a guard named Acker that if he didn't play that year, that team was toast...so much so that Buzz basically begged him back on the team. Cubillan was the 5th leading scorer on that team. Mbakwe was also left behind, but quit on Buzz and the team the week before Buzz took over, but Mbakwe would have been a junior on that team.
Acker was the team leader in assists, fourth in scoring. Lazar led the team in scoring, in steals, in rebounds
Bare cupboard...uhm, no.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 09, 2013, 12:28:39 PM
Last I checked, we had an NBA player in Lazar Hayward on that team. We had a guard named Acker that if he didn't play that year, that team was toast...so much so that Buzz basically begged him back on the team. Cubillan was the 5th leading scorer on that team. Mbakwe was also left behind, but quit on Buzz and the team the week before Buzz took over, but Mbakwe would have been a junior on that team.
Acker was the team leader in assists, fourth in scoring. Lazar led the team in scoring, in steals, in rebounds
Bare cupboard...uhm, no.
Mbakwe would have been a sophomore. And he quit.
Mo Acker was only "begged" back because Buzz kicked off earlier in the summer. When you leave behind:
1 NBA Player
2 sub 6' guards (one who transferred in from Ball State)
1 PF Headcase who missed 70% of the previous year and WHO QUIT IN SEPTEMBER
I hardly call that a half filled cupboard. Cubillan was the 5th leading scorer because SOMEBODY had to be. He left 4 guys behind! Let's compare what KO left behind:
Amal (NBA)
Chris Crawford (NBA)
Tony Miller (possibly MU's greatest PG ever)
Roney Eford
Faisal
Peiper
Abel Joseph
Hutchins
Cubillan and Acker are probably better than Abel and that's it. It is amazing Buzz did not starve, that cupboard was bare.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 09, 2013, 12:28:39 PM
Last I checked, we had an NBA player in Lazar Hayward on that team. We had a guard named Acker that if he didn't play that year, that team was toast...so much so that Buzz basically begged him back on the team. Cubillan was the 5th leading scorer on that team. Mbakwe was also left behind, but quit on Buzz and the team the week before Buzz took over, but Mbakwe would have been a junior on that team.
Acker was the team leader in assists, fourth in scoring. Lazar led the team in scoring, in steals, in rebounds
Bare cupboard...uhm, no.
Pretty weak argument even by your standards. You even said it in your own post.
"We had a guard named Acker that if he didn't play that year, that team was toast"
What does that say about the rest of the cupboard, pretty bare.
Quote from: JD on April 09, 2013, 12:14:38 PM
Chicos, just curious, what do you have to say about Two Tone Tommy and his job at IU?
Thanks.
From an IU perspective, I'd give him an A. Walked into a crapstorm, they thought heavy NCAA sanctions were coming, lost almost all their players as a result and hurt recruiting the first few years. More importantly from an alum perspective, we hold the program in high esteem for the off the court stuff. Academics matter. Staying out of trouble matters. Indiana is a very conservative state where that stuff matters to a lot of people. They won the conference title in the best league in the country this year, beat #1 Kentucky last year, got to #1 this year, strong recruiting classes, 6 players on all academic Big Ten (most of any team).
Now, expectations are enormous, he's passed phase 1. Phase 2 will be much harder, and that is getting the rabid IU fans what they want, Final Fours and national championships. Sweet 16's were good from hence they came, but now they will want more. I don't know if he can deliver on that part quite frankly. But in what he was asked to do in phase 1, he accomplished it and with plenty of head winds (Purdue was strong, Butler strong for first time in history, Big Ten finally strong again, NCAA clouds)....he didn't walk into a fabulous situation short term, but was smart enough to know that it is a fabulous situation long term.
My prediction, he will not make it to 10 years, but we'll see.
Quote from: hairyworthen on April 09, 2013, 12:44:05 PM
Pretty weak argument even by your standards. You even said it in your own post.
"We had a guard named Acker that if he didn't play that year, that team was toast"
What does that say about the rest of the cupboard, pretty bare.
Wrong. PG most important position on the team. You can have a lot of good players but if the PG isn't there to get them the ball, doesn't mean squat. See UNC last few years or UCLA as perfect examples.
With Lazar, Butler, etc, plenty of other good players, but there's a reason why Buzz begged Acker back....we had no point guard and he's the straw that mixes the drink. Nothing weak at all about my argument....if it weren't true, Buzz wouldn't have begged him back.
Quote from: hairyworthen on April 09, 2013, 12:44:05 PM
Pretty weak argument even by your standards. You even said it in your own post.
"We had a guard named Acker that if he didn't play that year, that team was toast"
What does that say about the rest of the cupboard, pretty bare.
Good catch Hairy. Show me a team that would be toast without a player of Mo Acker's caliber and I'll show you a team with very limited prospects.
Truth be told, Chicos knows this and has admitted as much. He originally said that if Buzz could just get that team into the tournament he should be COY. He blew that high bar away and got a 6 seed (21-24 ranking) with his midgets and misfits. Now, of course, leaving behind guys like Acker and Cubillan constitutes a juggernaut. No one with any basketball knowledge would deny that Buzz inherited a bare cupboard after year one. But if it boosts Crean's legacy and diminishes Buzz's accomplishments then Mo Acker and David Cubillan, 2 star guys who had never started a game at MU except due to injury before their senior year, suddenly morph into Peyton Siva and Russ Smith.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 09, 2013, 01:27:10 PM
With Lazar, Butler, etc, plenty of other good players, but there's a reason why Buzz begged Acker back....we had no point guard and he's the straw that mixes the drink. Nothing weak at all about my argument....if it weren't true, Buzz wouldn't have begged him back.
You keep repeating that Buzz "begged" Acker to come back. Why do you make that type of stuff up? Anything, and I do mean anything, to make Buzz look bad. Pathetic.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 09, 2013, 01:48:12 PM
You keep repeating that Buzz "begged" Acker to come back. Why do you make that type of stuff up? Anything, and I do mean anything, to make Buzz look bad. Pathetic.
Lennys...he is just being "objective." Give him a break.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 09, 2013, 01:48:12 PM
You keep repeating that Buzz "begged" Acker to come back. Why do you make that type of stuff up? Anything, and I do mean anything, to make Buzz look bad. Pathetic.
How does it make him look bad....it makes him look smart. Always a perceived slight in everything you see....pretty amazing.
BW: Mo...you're off the team!
Mo: F you!
------
BW: Mo, want to come back?
Mo: F yeah!
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 09, 2013, 01:44:14 PM
Good catch Hairy. Show me a team that would be toast without a player of Mo Acker's caliber and I'll show you a team with very limited prospects.
Truth be told, Chicos knows this and has admitted as much. He originally said that if Buzz could just get that team into the tournament he should be COY. He blew that high bar away and got a 6 seed (21-24 ranking) with his midgets and misfits. Now, of course, leaving behind guys like Acker and Cubillan constitutes a juggernaut. No one with any basketball knowledge would deny that Buzz inherited a bare cupboard after year one. But if it boosts Crean's legacy and diminishes Buzz's accomplishments then Mo Acker and David Cubillan, 2 star guys who had never started a game at MU except due to injury before their senior year, suddenly morph into Peyton Siva and Russ Smith.
Nice straw man....Russ Smith and Peyton Siva...good one. Why didn't you say Magic Johnson or Oscar Robertson, you would have gained just as much respect in your hyperbolic argument.
I would think after this weekends games one would get through their thick head what stars in rating services mean, but you continue to clutch at them to justify talent level of players. The MOP, a 0 star player. Erik Williams, a 4 star player. Players can either play or they can't. Buzz knew Acker could play, so did Crean when he brought him on board.
Since when is a cupboard bare when you have a 1st round future NBA draft choice on your roster, your leading assist man on your roster, and your best 3 point shooter on your roster PLUS supposedly a top 75 recruit in Erik Williams (you love those recruiting services, that's what they said), plus others. You make it sound like it was a CYO roster. Hardly. The cupboard wasn't bare. Buzz did a very nice job, as I acknowledged many times with that team, but it was hardly bare.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 09, 2013, 02:12:28 PM
Buzz knew Acker could play, so did Crean when he brought him on board.
Since when is a cupboard bare when you have a 1st round future NBA draft choice on your roster, your leading assist man on your roster, and your best 3 point shooter on your roster PLUS supposedly a top 75 recruit in Erik Williams (you love those recruiting services, that's what they said), plus others. You make it sound like it was a CYO roster. Hardly. The cupboard wasn't bare. Buzz did a very nice job, as I acknowledged many times with that team, but it was hardly bare.
1. I thought Acker got on the team when we had an extra scholarship (or somethign like that) and Acker and McNeal were friends and McNeal told Crean Acker would be a good fit, but Crean had never seen Acker play... Am I remembering incorrectly?
2. To be fair, the original poster said the cupboard was bare beyond the Amigos and Lazar.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 09, 2013, 02:06:52 PM
How does it make him look bad....it makes him look smart. Always a perceived slight in everything you see....pretty amazing.
First of all, you made it up. You have NO facts that can support saying Buzz "begged" Acker to come back and you know it. Stating it multiple times as if it's an accepted fact is a lie pure and simple.
Secondly, if you don't think that a coach "begging" a player to do anything is a negative reflection on the coach you have no concept about what the role of a coach should be.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 09, 2013, 02:12:28 PM
Nice straw man....Russ Smith and Peyton Siva...good one. Why didn't you say Magic Johnson or Oscar Robertson, you would have gained just as much respect in your hyperbolic argument.
I would think after this weekends games one would get through their thick head what stars in rating services mean, but you continue to clutch at them to justify talent level of players. The MOP, a 0 star player. Erik Williams, a 4 star player. Players can either play or they can't. Buzz knew Acker could play, so did Crean when he brought him on board.
Since when is a cupboard bare when you have a 1st round future NBA draft choice on your roster, your leading assist man on your roster, and your best 3 point shooter on your roster PLUS supposedly a top 75 recruit in Erik Williams (you love those recruiting services, that's what they said), plus others. You make it sound like it was a CYO roster. Hardly. The cupboard wasn't bare. Buzz did a very nice job, as I acknowledged many times with that team, but it was hardly bare.
If there was so much talent left behind for Buzz's 2nd year, why did you think MU would very much struggle to make the tourney?
There was Lazar, a very good player that nobody has ever said otherwese, and then a few guys, that really had no business starting on a top 5 Big East team, left from the prior coach's regime.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 09, 2013, 02:12:28 PM
PLUS supposedly a top 75 recruit in Erik Williams (you love those recruiting services, that's what they said), plus others. You make it sound like it was a CYO roster. Hardly. The cupboard wasn't bare. Buzz did a very nice job, as I acknowledged many times with that team, but it was hardly bare.
Buzz recruited Erik Williams! He doesn't come to MU without Buzz. And besides...Acker is the most forgettable MU PG since Anthony Candelino.
Quote from: The Lens on April 09, 2013, 12:40:01 PM
Mbakwe would have been a sophomore. And he quit.
Mo Acker was only "begged" back because Buzz kicked off earlier in the summer. When you leave behind:
1 NBA Player
2 sub 6' guards (one who transferred in from Ball State)
1 PF Headcase who missed 70% of the previous year and WHO QUIT IN SEPTEMBER
I hardly call that a half filled cupboard. Cubillan was the 5th leading scorer because SOMEBODY had to be. He left 4 guys behind! Let's compare what KO left behind:
Amal (NBA)
Chris Crawford (NBA)
Tony Miller (possibly MU's greatest PG ever)
Roney Eford
Faisal
Peiper
Abel Joseph
Hutchins
Cubillan and Acker are probably better than Abel and that's it. It is amazing Buzz did not starve, that cupboard was bare.
Correct, Mo was kicked off the team and then when we realized the Oh Crap moment that we needed a PG, he was begged back on. I appreciate you being honest and calling it like it is.
Sorry, if a team returns a 1st round NBA player alone, the cupboard isn't bare. I guess it all comes down to defining what a bare cupboard is. NBA first rounder, your team leader in assists, your best 3 point shooter, supposedly a top 75 recruit in Erik Williams, etc, etc. That isn't bare to me. I said that if Buzz gets them into the dance, he should be COY. I stand by that. That doesn't mean the cupboard was bare, it means a lot of those guys played very well their senior seasons, much of that goes to Mr. Buzz Williams.
I don't see what the argument is about. Buzz did a great job with that team, I said it then and say it now. So what's the issue? We just have a different opinion on bare cupboards...bare cupboard is having one returning player that averaged 1.8 points per game and played less than 40 minutes total. I can give you an example of that. Having a first round NBA player on your team, plus Acker, plus Fulce, plus Williams, plus Cubillan, etc, etc is not bare.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 09, 2013, 01:44:14 PM
Good catch Hairy. Show me a team that would be toast without a player of Mo Acker's caliber and I'll show you a team with very limited prospects.
Truth be told, Chicos knows this and has admitted as much. He originally said that if Buzz could just get that team into the tournament he should be COY. He blew that high bar away and got a 6 seed (21-24 ranking) with his midgets and misfits. Now, of course, leaving behind guys like Acker and Cubillan constitutes a juggernaut. No one with any basketball knowledge would deny that Buzz inherited a bare cupboard after year one. But if it boosts Crean's legacy and diminishes Buzz's accomplishments then Mo Acker and David Cubillan, 2 star guys who had never started a game at MU except due to injury before their senior year, suddenly morph into Peyton Siva and Russ Smith.
The irony of this post by you is incredible. You, of the same ilk that literally wouldn't recognize Jerel McNeal in the NBA when the NBA does, because it diminishes the prior coach's accomplishments. Character. Revealed.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 09, 2013, 02:51:06 PM
Sorry, if a team returns a 1st round NBA player alone, the cupboard isn't bare. I guess it all comes down to defining what a bare cupboard is. NBA first rounder, your team leader in assists, your best 3 point shooter, supposedly a top 75 recruit in Erik Williams, etc, etc. That isn't bare to me. I said that if Buzz gets them into the dance, he should be COY. I stand by that. That doesn't mean the cupboard was bare, it means a lot of those guys played very well their senior seasons, much of that goes to Mr. Buzz Williams.
I don't see what the argument is about. Buzz did a great job with that team, I said it then and say it now. So what's the issue? We just have a different opinion on bare cupboards...bare cupboard is having one returning player that averaged 1.8 points per game and played less than 40 minutes total. I can give you an example of that. Having a first round NBA player on your team, plus Acker, plus Fulce, plus Williams, plus Cubillan, etc, etc is not bare.
I think it was bare in the sense that it was bare for a supposedly top 5 team in the Big East that hadn't just gone through horrendous NCAA sanctions/cleaning house.
Fulce, and Cubillan......
I wouldn't use them in your arguement to make it seem like the team was stacked.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 09, 2013, 02:52:25 PM
The irony of this post by you is incredible. You, of the same ilk that literally wouldn't recognize Jerel McNeal in the NBA when the NBA does, because it diminishes the prior coach's accomplishments. Character. Revealed.
In my book, a guy has to actually PLAY in a league to be a player. I'd feel that way no matter who the player. That the league looks at it differently (for pension purposes mainly) doesn't change my view. It has NOTHING to do with Jerel or Tom Crean. I wish Jerel only the best, hope he plays a ton this year and gets a regular gig next year. His success or lack thereof in the NBA has nothing to do with how I view Tom Crean and his legacy. Nothing.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on April 09, 2013, 02:12:28 PMBuzz knew Acker could play, so did Crean when he brought him on board.
I'm assuming you've never heard Buzz talk about his feelings regarding Acker and Cubillan. When Buzz took over the program, his first thought regarding them was he wanted them gone. He felt they were too small to play high-major D1 ball. That's why Cooby didn't play during the Big East portion of the 2008-09 season, and why Acker only saw significant minutes once James went down with injury.
Buzz did everything he could to run Cooby off. Tried to make him feel unwanted, was harder on him than the rest of the team, he did similar things with Acker. That's why Acker was effectively kicked off the team, but when Tyshawn Taylor and the rest of that recruiting class went elsewhere, he suddenly simply needed bodies for practice. In 2009-10, there were times when we didn't have enough guys to go 5-on-5 in practice.
Anyway...Cooby just stuck it out. He took all Buzz could dish and kept coming back for more. Acker was kicked off the team and was going to just continue as a student before Buzz asked him back so the team could have full practices and because he simply needed bodies. Had Buzz had his way, neither Cooby nor Acker would have ever played a minute for him at Marquette, but he just didn't have the options without them. Obviously it worked out for the best and we got a 6-seed that year, but it wasn't out of Buzz's desire to have those guys on the team or because he thought they were any good. He specifically thought the opposite but had no other options.
Buzz relayed that at last year's Haunted Hoops.
Quote from: The Lens on April 09, 2013, 02:09:39 PM
BW: Mo...you're off the team!
Mo: F you!
------
BW: Mo, want to come back?
Mo: F yeah!
LOL. I enjoy your humor, you know that. I think you are very close to the program to know why he was kicked off as well, no need to rehash it here. ;)
Worked out for everyone, Mo was a pretty good player for MU. I think many of us just have a much different definition of a bare cupboard. To each their own....Buzz did a great job that year and he also had some good players (one great one).
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 09, 2013, 03:29:31 PM
I'm assuming you've never heard Buzz talk about his feelings regarding Acker and Cubillan. When Buzz took over the program, his first thought regarding them was he wanted them gone. He felt they were too small to play high-major D1 ball. That's why Cooby didn't play during the Big East portion of the 2008-09 season, and why Acker only saw significant minutes once James went down with injury.
Buzz did everything he could to run Cooby off. Tried to make him feel unwanted, was harder on him than the rest of the team, he did similar things with Acker. That's why Acker was effectively kicked off the team, but when Tyshawn Taylor and the rest of that recruiting class went elsewhere, he suddenly simply needed bodies for practice. In 2009-10, there were times when we didn't have enough guys to go 5-on-5 in practice.
Anyway...Cooby just stuck it out. He took all Buzz could dish and kept coming back for more. Acker was kicked off the team and was going to just continue as a student before Buzz asked him back so the team could have full practices and because he simply needed bodies. Had Buzz had his way, neither Cooby nor Acker would have ever played a minute for him at Marquette, but he just didn't have the options without them. Obviously it worked out for the best and we got a 6-seed that year, but it wasn't out of Buzz's desire to have those guys on the team or because he thought they were any good. He specifically thought the opposite but had no other options.
Buzz relayed that at last year's Haunted Hoops.
I'm very well aware.....those two proved Buzz wrong in my opinion, and good for Buzz to own up to it.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 09, 2013, 03:11:20 PM
In my book, a guy has to actually PLAY in a league to be a player. I'd feel that way no matter who the player. That the league looks at it differently (for pension purposes mainly) doesn't change my view. It has NOTHING to do with Jerel or Tom Crean. I wish Jerel only the best, hope he plays a ton this year and gets a regular gig next year. His success or lack thereof in the NBA has nothing to do with how I view Tom Crean and his legacy. Nothing.
Your book doesn't matter.