http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/90796/marquette-desperate-for-nonconference-win (http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/90796/marquette-desperate-for-nonconference-win)
Overstatement of the century:
"Saturday's game might not be a must-win for Marquette. But it's close." Um, no, not even close to a must win for tournament purposes. It would be a massive win, but an acceptable loss.
Not exactly sure how a road game against a top 10 team is a "must win."
Quote from: windyplayer on December 05, 2013, 08:41:42 AM
http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/90796/marquette-desperate-for-nonconference-win (http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/90796/marquette-desperate-for-nonconference-win)
Overstatement of the century:
"Saturday's game might not be a must-win for Marquette. But it's close." Um, no, not even close to a must win for tournament purposes. It would be a massive win, but an acceptable loss.
Talked about this on the Scrambled Eggs podcast, this is as close to a must win in December as you get. If we lose this, the New Mexico is absolutely have to win. We can't go into conference season, not knowing the true quality of the conference yet, without a single RPI top 100 win.
Quote from: mu03eng on December 05, 2013, 08:43:54 AM
Talked about this on the Scrambled Eggs podcast, this is as close to a must win in December as you get. If we lose this, the New Mexico is absolutely have to win. We can't go into conference season, not knowing the true quality of the conference yet, without a single RPI top 100 win.
Define must win. Must win to make the NCAA? The Big East Conference Tournament winner gets an automatic invite to the NCAA. The Wisconsin game has nothing to do with the Big East regular season champion. What is the likelihood that the Big East regular season champ doesn't make the NCAA?
Must win to get a decent seed? Now that's something different, so you can see it's important to define "must win".
You need a scalp or two on the resume.
Quote from: LittleMurs on December 05, 2013, 08:59:46 AM
Define must win. Must win to make the NCAA? The Big East Conference Tournament winner gets an automatic invite to the NCAA. The Wisconsin game has nothing to do with the Big East regular season champion. What is the likelihood that the Big East regular season champ doesn't make the NCAA?
Must win to get a decent seed? Now that's something different, so you can see it's important to define "must win".
Must-win can only be interpreted in one way and that is to get into the tournament. The win will not help us win the BEast regular season championship or the conference tournament.
I always consider this game a "must win", because a win over UW makes Christmas at the in-laws much more tolerable.
Quote from: mu03eng on December 05, 2013, 08:43:54 AM
If we lose this, the New Mexico is absolutely have to win. We can't go into conference season, not knowing the true quality of the conference yet, without a single RPI top 100 win.
Ok then, lets assume they do. If what you say is true, then the conference season is meaningless? We're hoping for an NIT bid? What?
'Must win' may be the most absurd and overused term in all of sports.
Quote from: Litehouse on December 05, 2013, 09:40:03 AM
I always consider this game a "must win", because a win over UW makes Christmas at the in-laws much more tolerable.
This. And my in-laws aren't even Bucky fans.
More seriously, it definitely would be significant if we can take an unbeaten, top-10 team in their building. A loss, particularly an ugly one, would hurt the perception of the team even if it didn't kill our RPI. Those on the NCAA selection committee are subjective humans.
Technically, it isn't a must-win. Even if we also lose to New Mexico (meaning we'll have zero meaningful non-con wins) and even if we don't come close to winning the regular-season Big East title, the only true "must-win" games will be the elimination games in the BET. But do we really want to have to rely on winning the BET to get into the NCAAs?
Yes, it is overstating it to call it a must-win. But it's a big game beyond the emotional aspect of beating Wisconsin. Anybody who says otherwise is just trying to cushion the blow in advance.
Oh, and I'd sure like to be able to trash-talk all my Bucky-loving friends.
Quite simply, a must-win game should be defined as a game that should the team/player not win the game, then they are mathematically elimiated from advancing toward the desired end.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 05, 2013, 09:33:59 AM
You need a scalp or two on the resume.
Exactly! And this would be a huge scalp/pelt. (Can't use scalp-not PC for a warrior) The season is still early but this is a game we desperately need. The way we are playing now, .500 in conference is possible. And .500 in conference gives us about 12 plus losses for the year. 12 losses is likely not dancing material, so we need this game.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on December 05, 2013, 09:57:43 AM
Ok then, lets assume they do. If what you say is true, then the conference season is meaningless? We're hoping for an NIT bid? What?
'Must win' may be the most absurd and overused term in all of sports.
This,
Quote from: windyplayer on December 05, 2013, 10:02:31 AM
Quite simply, a must-win game should be defined as a game that should the team/player not win the game, then they are mathematically elimiated from advancing toward the desired end.
and this.
If the NCAA tournament is the goal, and MU is on the bubble or out at the start of the Big East Tournament,
then the
must win games begin.
The Wisconsin game would be a very
useful scalp to have on the resume when the NCAA committee determines tournament seeding.
Quote from: windyplayer on December 05, 2013, 10:02:31 AM
Quite simply, a must-win game should be defined as a game that should the team/player not win the game, then they are mathematically elimiated from advancing toward the desired end.
That's traditionally not the case. If you are in a 7 game series and lose the first two games, game three is a must win typically despite not being an elimination game.
Is Sat a must win? No. If we don't win it does it put more pressure to win against UNM and to have a killer record in the Big East? Yes
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 05, 2013, 10:15:06 AM
typically
Therein lies the problem of calling a game a must-win.
Are there going to be situations where it will be a hell of a lot more difficult to achieve your desired end if you don't win a particular game? Of course. But that doesn't make that game a must-win.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on December 05, 2013, 09:57:43 AM
Ok then, lets assume they do. If what you say is true, then the conference season is meaningless? We're hoping for an NIT bid? What?
'Must win' may be the most absurd and overused term in all of sports.
I didn't say must win, I said it was very close to must win. If we have no non-conference wins and have to rely on our conference resume to get us into the dance and/or the automatic bid, that is dangerous. Especially going the conference route because what if some of the conference foes we would rely on for a quality win suddenly have injuries or fall apart and they aren't quality wins any more. We have to have quality wins in the non-con or it really hurts the overall resume
Quote from: windyplayer on December 05, 2013, 10:17:46 AM
Therein lies the problem of calling a game a must-win.
Are there going to be situations where it will be a hell of a lot more difficult to achieve your desired end if you don't win a particular game? Of course. But that doesn't make that game a must-win.
You could take that to the extreme and say non of the games are must win until the conference tournament. All depends what level you want to take it. I agree with you that this game is not a must win, but opportunities are dwindling and I just don't see us finishing 15-3 or 14-4 like some people do in conference, at least not with the current product. Many have pointed out we will get better...we should and will need to accomplish that type of conference record.
Marquette must win either @ Wisconsin or vs. New Mexico in order to get an at large birth at this point. I think that's what they mean.
This is because there will not be many scalps (defined as top 50 and top 25 RPI wins) to be gained in BE play. The conference has underachieved to date and currently our only top 50 team is Villanova. OOC wins are more important than ever.
Quote from: hoyasincebirth on December 05, 2013, 12:42:32 PM
Marquette must win either @ Wisconsin or vs. New Mexico in order to get an at large birth at this point. I think that's what they mean.
This is because there will not be many scalps (defined as top 50 and top 25 RPI wins) to be gained in BE play. The conference has underachieved to date and currently our only top 50 team is Villanova. OOC wins are more important than ever.
Yes, I agree this is what they mean. The RPI predictor (with very limited data right now), does expect three teams to finish in the top 50
Nova
GTown
Creighton
Again, very limited data and it will change. Probably not even worth posting, but what the hell.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 05, 2013, 12:06:57 PM
You could take that to the extreme and say non of the games are must win until the conference tournament.
Factually, those games are the only true "must wins", and even then, the term is only accurate for teams without a strong enough tourney resume.
That is why "must win game" is one of the most over-used, eye roll inducing sports clichés. There is no such thing as a must win college bball game in December.
Quote from: MUSF on December 05, 2013, 12:52:17 PM
Factually, those games are the only true "must wins", and even then, the term is only accurate for teams without a strong enough tourney resume.
That is why "must win game" is one of the most over-used, eye roll inducing sports clichés. There is no such thing as a must win college bball game in December.
I think the writer said close to it, but not a must win.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on December 05, 2013, 08:43:48 AM
Not exactly sure how a road game against a top 10 team is a "must win."
"Saturday's game might not be a must-win for Marquette. But it's close." That was the quote. It helps to put the comment in context.
I think the writer is correct. MU faces the reasonable probability of have Zero quality non-conference wins in we lose Saturday. That leaves one more opportunity, New Mexico. I get where the writer is going. We will have to be outstanding in conferenceplay because our non conference play could potentially hurt us.
Quote from: 79Warrior on December 05, 2013, 01:33:29 PM
"Saturday's game might is not a must-win for Marquette. But it's close." That was the quote. It helps to put the coment in context.
I think the writer is correct.
Fixed it. Now the writer is correct.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 05, 2013, 12:45:43 PM
Yes, I agree this is what they mean. The RPI predictor (with very limited data right now), does expect three teams to finish in the top 50
Nova
GTown
Creighton
Again, very limited data and it will change. Probably not even worth posting, but what the hell.
And we'll play each of them twice.
Quote from: hoyasincebirth on December 05, 2013, 12:42:32 PM
Marquette must win either @ Wisconsin or vs. New Mexico in order to get an at large birth at this point.
Totally false. We're projected to win the Big East. Are you saying if we do that and lose against UW and UNM that we will not get an at-large birth.
If we lose these next two major non-conference games, then we can kiss good-bye seeds 1-6 or 7, but to say that we need them for an at-large bid is ludicrous. Unless, of course, there's sound analysis to go with your assertion.
Quote from: windyplayer on December 05, 2013, 03:32:30 PM
Totally false. We're projected to win the Big East. Are you saying if we do that and lose against UW and UNM that we will not get an at-large birth.
If we lose these next two major non-conference games, then we can kiss good-bye seeds 1-6 or 7, but to say that we need them for an at-large bid is ludicrous. Unless, of course, there's sound analysis to go with your assertion.
We were picked in the preseason to win the Big East. Preseason rankings mean nothing.
Quote from: windyplayer on December 05, 2013, 03:32:30 PM
Totally false. We're projected to win the Big East. Are you saying if we do that and lose against UW and UNM that we will not get an at-large birth.
If we lose these next two major non-conference games, then we can kiss good-bye seeds 1-6 or 7, but to say that we need them for an at-large bid is ludicrous. Unless, of course, there's sound analysis to go with your assertion.
We were projected to win the Wooden Legacy as well. Pre season projections ain't all that.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 05, 2013, 04:23:45 PM
We were projected to win the Wooden Legacy as well. Pre season projections ain't all that.
Both of you have missed the point. The only point is that it's not outside the realm of possiblity that we could win the Big East and if we do, we would make the Tourney with great ease.
Quote from: windyplayer on December 05, 2013, 03:32:30 PM
Totally false. We're projected to win the Big East. Are you saying if we do that and lose against UW and UNM that we will not get an at-large birth.
If we lose these next two major non-conference games, then we can kiss good-bye seeds 1-6 or 7, but to say that we need them for an at-large bid is ludicrous. Unless, of course, there's sound analysis to go with your assertion.
Agreed that an at-large probably isn't really at stake. However, we lose both those games and we had better make some noise in the BE tourney.
Quote from: windyplayer on December 05, 2013, 04:26:12 PM
Both of you have missed the point. The only point is that it's not outside the realm of possiblity that we could win the Big East and if we do, we would make the Tourney with great ease.
Haven't missed it at all. If we win the Big East, we should make the NCAA tournament. I think what some people are opining is that we finish, say 4th or 5th, with no good out of conference wins. What happens? Winning some of these non-conference bigger games buys you some wiggle room on where you finish in the conference.
It may be that we lose to UNM and UW-madison, but the light goes on, Duane Wilson comes back and we go nuts and finish 15-3 in conference. Certainly we would be in. Its the margin for error stuff that lurks. One can only hope that we respond like we have to most Buzz years here and we play well Jan-March.
Quote from: windyplayer on December 05, 2013, 03:32:30 PM
Totally false. We're projected to win the Big East. Are you saying if we do that and lose against UW and UNM that we will not get an at-large birth.
If we lose these next two major non-conference games, then we can kiss good-bye seeds 1-6 or 7, but to say that we need them for an at-large bid is ludicrous. Unless, of course, there's sound analysis to go with your assertion.
1) on one hand a team that loses all their non conference tests won't win the BE.
2) Depending on how the rest of the BE teams do in their remaining OOC games yes a team with no quality OOC wins that wins the BE could get left out of the tournament if the rest of the conference proves to be incredibly weak. Washington got left out after winning the Pac 12 regular season title.
3) You guys are being way to anal and literal about the phrase Must Win Game. For all extents a purposes it just means this is a game a team needs to win if they don't want to make things very difficult on themselves going forward. Just because you want to define it in the most literal terms doesn't mean others are wrong to use it in a different context.
Quote from: hoyasincebirth on December 05, 2013, 07:51:55 PM
1) on one hand a team that loses all their non conference tests won't win the BE.
2) Depending on how the rest of the BE teams do in their remaining OOC games yes a team with no quality OOC wins that wins the BE could get left out of the tournament if the rest of the conference proves to be incredibly weak. Washington got left out after winning the Pac 12 regular season title.
3) You guys are being way to anal and literal about the phrase Must Win Game. For all extents a purposes it just means this is a game a team needs to win if they don't want to make things very difficult on themselves going forward. Just because you want to define it in the most literal terms doesn't mean others are wrong to use it in a different context.
This
Quote from: hoyasincebirth on December 05, 2013, 07:51:55 PM
3) Just because you want to define it in the most literal terms doesn't mean others are wrong to use it in a different context.
I think it does. Sportswriters and fans get everyone spun up by throwing around the term "must-win" during a season, then months later we typically look back and realize that many of the alleged "must-win" games were in fact not that critical.
I think the issue is that people have strayed too far from the literal meaning of must-win. I'm OK with its use in situations where it is extremely unlikely a team will advance to its desired end if they lose--as in you lose, now another team has to lose 4 in a row and you have to win 4 in a row. Also, i realize in some instances, it is impossible to mathematically determine if a game is a must-win. For instance, with a bubble team, it is impossible to say whether they are mathematically eliminated because we're dealing with a committee of humans rather than computers to determine who's in or out. But of course, we know that some teams will not be dancing and are pretty damn sure of other teams not getting in if they lose certain games.
So there is obvious wiggle room from mathematical must-wins, but this wiggle room has been used and abused.
Why not call it a must win? I don't see Marquette rolling through conference play (at least given our recent performances). If we are sitting on the bubble we are going to look back say if we only beat Wisconsin on the road. If we only. This is a signature win we may need. A UNM beat down will be nice but they've dropped a bit and it's a neutral court.
I don't post often, but read a lot of your posts. Let's expect greatness, let's expect better. If we truly are the eventual Big East Champion then we should go in and win.
Subscribing to the notion it's not a must win leads me to believe we are setting ourselves up for a loss and if it isn't a must win we'll feel just a little better after a loss.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 05, 2013, 09:33:59 AM
You need a scalp or two on the resume.
Exactly the advice my Dad gave me when I went off to college.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 05, 2013, 09:33:59 AM
You need a scalp or two on the resume.
Yep. It's not "must win" in the sense that elimination games are the only games that need to be won to continue your season. Our goals are higher than "just getting in", and to be realistic you're not going to get earn respect, get in the tournament, get a good seed and set yourself up for success by losing every game you play against opponents that are worth a damn, even if it is in non-conference play.
Quote from: Mumichfan06 on December 06, 2013, 05:24:59 PM
Why not call it a must win?
Because what happens if we don't? Season over? No shot at tourney? No, we keep getting after it and set our sights on a conference championship. What possible benefit is there to calling a game must win when it isn't?
This is certainly a big game for many reasons, but nothing about it makes it a must win.
This is the 2nd top 10 team we play this year and even if we lose both its not a big deal. Losing to ASU and SDSU looks worse in the resume. A win on the other hand would be big.
Quote from: MUSF on December 06, 2013, 09:24:23 PM
Because what happens if we don't? Season over? No shot at tourney? No, we keep getting after it and set our sights on a conference championship. What possible benefit is there to calling a game must win when it isn't?
This is certainly a big game for many reasons, but nothing about it makes it a must win.
We'll see where we sit Selection Sunday - I hope we don't have to look back and say, "That Wisconsin came really was a must win."
Go Marquette! Let's just win and the discussion is irrelevant.