LNH:
Made less in 2012-13 than he did in two of the previous three years (http://latenighthoops.com/buzzs-earnings-marquette-peaked-2010/#.U31YjfldVPI)despite Elite Eight and fifth straight tourney appearance...
QuoteIn 2010, Marquette provided Williams with a one-time bonus. Two seasons into the job and Buzz had taken the program to the NCAA tournament both years. At that time, Buzz made the comment that, "I'll be here as long as they'll have me here." All payments included, Buzz made $3.20 million in 2009-10.
What did he make in 2013-14? Shoulda refunded the whole enchilada since he checked outta the season early and sucked ass.
BTW BJ, critique Mallory for us gringos, man.
I cannot believe he made 3.1 in 2010. Granted getting Lazar and Midgets to the Dance should have netted him 8 figures but still, dude was 24 months removed from being an assistant and he's getting 3.1. Unreal.
Ganzer (IWB) has said many times that Buzz had not received a raise since Cottingham and Wild left. This bears that out. Ganzer had said prior to Buzz leaving that this could be a source of Buzz's unrest. So....the guys who hired him are gone, he isn't getting raises, a couple years of adversarial relations with the AD and prez, uncertainty going forward about their replacements.... It isn't the decision I would have made, but there is a certain logic to it.
I believe Buzz got a bonus, so he could pay New Orleans the $500,000 he owed them.
Quote from: The Lens on May 21, 2014, 09:11:57 PM
I cannot believe he made 3.1 in 2010. Granted getting Lazar and Midgets to the Dance should have netted him 8 figures but still, dude was 24 months removed from being an assistant and he's getting 3.1. Unreal.
Baffles my mind. Literally no reason I can think of to pay him that much that soon. No raises since then --- how could you give him a raise from there?
I believe that the bonus was meant to be an increase for five years that was prepaid in one year to get Buzz to accept a big buyout in his contract and probably to allow for the purchase of Castle Williams.
Quote from: TJ on May 22, 2014, 08:29:16 AM
Baffles my mind. Literally no reason I can think of to pay him that much that soon. No raises since then --- how could you give him a raise from there?
No doubt. Kevin Ollie wins a national championship and his contract is short of 3 million. My goodness, Buzz didn't even make a final four.
Year one Scott Pilarz/Larry Williams checklist:
1. Initiate restrictions on recruiting to make the pie smaller.
2. Make living conditions for incoming recruits worse.
3. Lambast head coach in local paper.
4. Reward coach for 3rd Sweet 16 season in 34 years with a 46% pay cut.
Maybe the cut wasn't quite that large - perhaps Buzz got an "advance" on part of his bonus in 2010 or 500,000 of his 2010 bonus paid off UNO but the point remains - the Marquette that Buzz pledged loyalty to changed dramatically in year three of his tenure.
I would guess his take home increased however. With my rudimentary understanding of accounting, I believe that the payments to TBW can be off-set with tax deductions more easily than the W2 income.
Quote from: tower912 on May 22, 2014, 06:33:21 AM
Ganzer (IWB) has said many times that Buzz had not received a raise since Cottingham and Wild left. This bears that out. Ganzer had said prior to Buzz leaving that this could be a source of Buzz's unrest. So....the guys who hired him are gone, he isn't getting raises, a couple years of adversarial relations with the AD and prez, uncertainty going forward about their replacements.... It isn't the decision I would have made, but there is a certain logic to it.
Bumstead should have been professional enough to give his maximum effort throughout this entire past season. Instead, he tanked it. Character revealed, aina?
IWB was taking shots here for some of this reporting but looks like he knew what he was talking about, aina?
Dealin' with snakes in the grass sometimes leads to cow pies,hey?
Quote from: bilsu link= topic=44153.msg628194#msg628194 date=1400764574
I believe Buzz got a bonus, so he could pay New Orleans the $500,000 he owed them.
Why did he have to pay New Orleans?
::)
Buzz was overpaid WILDLY in the first years of his contract and people are upset that he didn't get a "raise" on the back end. Please. There are reasons MU didn't bend over to keep him. He'll do well at vagina tech where he will have zero oversight, can recruit whomever he wants without impunity because no one cares. He will be successful down there, I have no doubts...at least on the basketball court.
What makes you think he will have "zero oversight" at Virginia Tech?
Oh and I think you have been a manager long enough to know that with employees like Buzz, a raise isn't necessarily about the money, and that just because they were "overpaid" on the front end doesn't mean that good performance shouldn't be rewarded on the back end.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on May 22, 2014, 10:16:11 AM
Buzz was overpaid WILDLY in the first years of his contract and people are upset that he didn't get a "raise" on the back end. Please. There are reasons MU didn't bend over to keep him. He'll do well at vagina tech where he will have zero oversight, can recruit whomever he wants without impunity because no one cares. He will be successful down there, I have no doubts...at least on the basketball court.
Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. That's an opinion. Here's what I'd be willing to wager is a fact - no head coach in college basketball history has been rewarded for two Sweet 16s, an Elite 8 and a Big East regular season championship in years 3, 4 and 5 of his tenure with an average 20% pay cut for those 3 years.
As to the second part of your comment, once again you are wrong. He will have oversight. Isn't Virginia Tech in the NCAA? Has their basketball program ever been on probation? Will Buzz be allowed to recruit (ala Tom Crean at MU) players who don't meet NCAA academic requirements? Yes, no and no. You went to Marquette, Indiana and Kansas, for godsakes. Please spare us the elitist bull crap.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on May 22, 2014, 10:00:12 AM
Bumstead should have been professional enough to give his maximum effort throughout this entire past season. Instead, he tanked it. Character revealed, aina?
He didn't tank. Coaching the same way he had the previous 5 years didn't work with the 13-14 team. "He tanked" is purely a scoop thing. The incoming class he had coming in, as well as the shortened rotations, the signs indicating which pick and roll defense the team was supposed to be in, the intensity down the stretch trying to get enough wins to get in or then win the Big East tourney say otherwise. The team did not come together as well as the previous 5 years. That does not equal tanking.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 22, 2014, 09:47:52 AM
4. Reward coach for 3rd Sweet 16 season in 34 years with a 46% pay cut.
Maybe the cut wasn't quite that large - perhaps Buzz got an "advance" on part of his bonus in 2010 or 500,000 of his 2010 bonus paid off UNO but the point remains - the Marquette that Buzz pledged loyalty to changed dramatically in year three of his tenure.
Over this window in the article, Buzz's base salary increased from $813K to $1.6 million, and his outside earnings went from $397K to $916K. Not sure you caclulate that as a 46% pay cut.
2009: As an unproven coach in his first year, makes relatively little.
2010: Signs first big contract, including $3 million signing bonus.
2011: Annual increase of 200K, plus 225K increase in outside earnings. No bonus becuase its only the 2nd year of his new contract, and he received the signing bonus the previous year.
2012: Annual increase of $115K, plus $370K increase in outside inciome. Toys with SMU, gets a new contract leading to 738K sigining bonus this year, pay increases in following years.
2013: Annual increase of nearyly 500K. No contract bonus becuase he just renegotiated the prior year. Outside income falls by $84K--probably becuase those who book speakers no longer buy his "aw shucks" act.
At what point is MU treating him poorly? Only if you confuse one-time contract signing bonuses with routine compensation does it look like he's taking a "pay cut."
Quote from: tower912 on May 22, 2014, 10:54:42 AM
He didn't tank. Coaching the same way he had the previous 5 years didn't work with the 13-14 team. "He tanked" is purely a scoop thing. The incoming class he had coming in, as well as the shortened rotations, the signs indicating which pick and roll defense the team was supposed to be in, the intensity down the stretch trying to get enough wins to get in or then win the Big East tourney say otherwise. The team did not come together as well as the previous 5 years. That does not equal tanking.
100% accurate
Bumstead gave up, pure and simple. Knew this was gonna be his last season here. There is no other way to explain some of his irrational moves. Bolted/panicked for the first gig that was willin' to pay him big bucks.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on May 22, 2014, 12:58:17 PM
Bumstead gave up, pure and simple. Knew this was gonna be his last season here. There is no other way to explain some of his irrational moves. Bolted/panicked for the first gig that was willin' to pay him big bucks.
I love ya, Doc, but for whatever his faults I don't think I've ever seen a more competitive, hard working coach than Buzz. The "He gave up" meme is an illogical rant fit for a jilted lover. You're better than that.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 22, 2014, 01:17:32 PM
I love ya, Doc, but for whatever his faults I don't think I've ever seen a more competitive, hard working coach than Buzz. The "He gave up" meme is an illogical rant fit for a jilted lover. You're better than that.
Exactly. Buzz made a bunch of "illogical decisions" during his tenure, many of which worked out just fine.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on May 22, 2014, 12:58:17 PM
Bumstead gave up, pure and simple. Knew this was gonna be his last season here. There is no other way to explain some of his irrational moves. Bolted/panicked for the first gig that was willin' to pay him big bucks.
Could be, but then again could have been as simple as his wife saying "I cannot take another winter in this town"
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on May 22, 2014, 10:16:11 AM
Why did he have to pay New Orleans?
::)
He bailed on his contract with New Orleans or whatever the school was named. It was in New Orleans. I assume it was a buyout clause. I believe they were suing him for it, but they did not have much leverage until he got a head coaching job. Buzz was claiming he did not owe the $500,000, because they did not provide the basketball program with the promised resources. I can see a pattern here.
I'll graciously accept both of y'all's logic and explanations. I stand erected.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on May 22, 2014, 02:02:40 PM
I'll graciously accept both of y'all's logic and explanations. I stand erected.
Good doctor,
We lost our last 2 regular season games in double OT and our BET game by 3. One has to wonder if Buzzard might not be here, had we won those games.
Lenny
I am usually in your camp but I think Doc has very valid point. Buzz seemed to have checked out very early on and appeared to rub in people's faces. I cannot say Buzz is anymore competitive than other coaches or not, but he had a look this year of guy counting down the last two months in a prison term.
Quote from: Goose on May 22, 2014, 02:39:02 PM
Lenny
I am usually in your camp but I think Doc has very valid point. Buzz seemed to have checked out very early on and appeared to rub in people's faces. I cannot say Buzz is anymore competitive than other coaches or not, but he had a look this year of guy counting down the last two months in a prison term.
He definitely got more gruff and belligerent. But he was still trying to win every game. It might have been to make himself more marketable, but he was still trying to win every game.
TAMU
I'm sorry but there is not one coach in D1 that would have stuck with that lineup if the intent was to win. He may have wanted to win but if he knows ANYTHING about basketball it was virtually impossible with the guys who played. He was making a point or he is an idiot. I am betting on he was making a point.
Quote from: Goose on May 22, 2014, 02:51:15 PM
TAMU
I'm sorry but there is not one coach in D1 that would have stuck with that lineup if the intent was to win. He may have wanted to win but if he knows ANYTHING about basketball it was virtually impossible with the guys who played. He was making a point or he is an idiot. I am betting on he was making a point.
Agree. His comments after the DePaul game that he didn't care what anybody else thought was telling. It's one thing to not care when you are 14-4 and cruising to the NCAA Tournament. It's another if you don't make the NIT.
Quote from: Goose on May 22, 2014, 02:39:02 PM
Lenny
I am usually in your camp but I think Doc has very valid point. Buzz seemed to have checked out very early on and appeared to rub in people's faces. I cannot say Buzz is anymore competitive than other coaches or not, but he had a look this year of guy counting down the last two months in a prison term.
Frustrated? Yes. Difficult to deal with? I'm sure. Even more unhappy? Losing will do that. There may even have come a time when he became resigned to the fact that this year's team probably wasn't going to get over the hump. But the guy I was watching was leaving it all on the court every game - just as in the 5 years previous.
Quote from: MUDPT on May 22, 2014, 02:53:39 PM
Agree. His comments after the DePaul game that he didn't care what anybody else thought was telling. It's one thing to not care when you are 14-4 and cruising to the NCAA Tournament. It's another if you don't make the NIT.
Successful coaches ignore the opinions of people on the internet who think they can coach. In good times and bad. To do otherwise or to suggest that they do otherwise is silly.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 22, 2014, 03:05:15 PM
Successful coaches ignore the opinions of people on the internet who think they can coach. In good times and bad. To do otherwise or to suggest that they do otherwise is silly.
Well what we now know is that Buzz and Cory were all over the internet making sure a bad word wasn't said about them and if there was...panic room time
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 22, 2014, 03:05:15 PM
Successful coaches ignore the opinions of people on the internet who think they can coach. In good times and bad. To do otherwise or to suggest that they do otherwise is silly.
I agree. To acknowledge those individuals in a post-game interview, shows you are spending too much time thinking about what others think. I guess I should have clarified my comment. You shouldn't be scouring the internet for new plays to involve your point guard who participates in 15% of your possessions. You also should probably not call out "others" (Mike Hunt was the only one mentioned by name) if they think the thing isn't working.
Quote from: Goose on May 22, 2014, 02:51:15 PM
TAMU
I'm sorry but there is not one coach in D1 that would have stuck with that lineup if the intent was to win. He may have wanted to win but if he knows ANYTHING about basketball it was virtually impossible with the guys who played. He was making a point or he is an idiot. I am betting on he was making a point.
I'm not exactly sure what point you think he was making.
I'm guessing that he felt his rotation gave MU the best option to win. And that his opinion differs from yours.
Sultan
Well stated once again. Then I am definitely happy that Buzz has left town because IMO last year was biggest joke/disappointment of a season in my 40+ plus years as a fan. Would add that I do not ever remember a team/coach that turned fans into disinterested fans either.
But, that is history and hoping the new guy has a different outlook on rotations. If not, another long year awaits.
Quote from: Goose on May 22, 2014, 04:56:26 PM
Sultan
Well stated once again. Then I am definitely happy that Buzz has left town because IMO last year was biggest joke/disappointment of a season in my 40+ plus years as a fan. Would add that I do not ever remember a team/coach that turned fans into disinterested fans either.
But, that is history and hoping the new guy has a different outlook on rotations. If not, another long year awaits.
You lived through the Dukiet years and last year was still the worst? Yikes. I wasn't old enough to appreciate how bad those seasons were.
Quote from: Goose on May 22, 2014, 02:51:15 PM
TAMU
I'm sorry but there is not one coach in D1 that would have stuck with that lineup if the intent was to win. He may have wanted to win but if he knows ANYTHING about basketball it was virtually impossible with the guys who played. He was making a point or he is an idiot. I am betting on he was making a point.
When has Buzz ever changed his coaching style midseason? He doubled down on his tried and true methods. The same methods that brought him success the first 5 seasons. Buzz always relied on veterans, Buzz always shortened the rotation come conference play, Buzz always pulled freshmen for making freshman mistakes, Buzz always valued defense over offense, Buzz always determined playing time by practice/playing to the scouting report, Buzz always sat players who he deemed had attitude.
Buzz did all the same things he did in previous seasons, but it didn't work. That happens sometimes. He had to choose between sticking with what he knew or trying something new. I would have tried something new, he didn't. There are merits to both.
The talk of "making a point" is something invented by donors and scoopers to try and justify last season. We would have been good if Buzz wasn't there. The truth is, we just weren't very good, for many reasons. Fortunately, one of the main ones, if not the main one, is now gone to gobbler country.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on May 22, 2014, 06:46:05 PM
The talk of "making a point" is something invented by donors and scoopers
You might be surprised
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on May 22, 2014, 06:38:39 PM
You lived through the Dukiet years and last year was still the worst? Yikes. I wasn't old enough to appreciate how bad those seasons were.
What he said was it was the biggest joke/disappointment, not the worst. Most of the Dukiet years were the worst in a long time.
Last year was a huge disappointment, and the worst year in the last 10. And the man responsible got his ass out of town. Methinks he was hinted to where the door was.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on May 22, 2014, 06:46:05 PM
When has Buzz ever changed his coaching style midseason? He doubled down on his tried and true methods. The same methods that brought him success the first 5 seasons. Buzz always relied on veterans, Buzz always shortened the rotation come conference play, Buzz always pulled freshmen for making freshman mistakes, Buzz always valued defense over offense, Buzz always determined playing time by practice/playing to the scouting report, Buzz always sat players who he deemed had attitude.
Buzz did all the same things he did in previous seasons, but it didn't work. That happens sometimes. He had to choose between sticking with what he knew or trying something new. I would have tried something new, he didn't. There are merits to both.
The talk of "making a point" is something invented by donors and scoopers to try and justify last season. We would have been good if Buzz wasn't there. The truth is, we just weren't very good, for many reasons. Fortunately, one of the main ones, if not the main one, is now gone to gobbler country.
Buzz seemed willing to adapt to the players he had in years past. This year he wasn't willing to, aside from a few token changes here and there. I believe he was making a point. Why would he invest time in developing the younger guys, when he knew he wasn't going to be here? He wanted to play the upperclassmen more because he had loyalty to them and had no reason to try and develop underclassmen. Your defense of his coaching is admirable, but sadly your synopsis on last years job rings hollow.
Quote from: Wojo'sMojo on May 22, 2014, 07:52:23 PM
Buzz seemed willing to adapt to the players he had in years past. This year he wasn't willing to, aside from a few token changes here and there. I believe he was making a point. Why would he invest time in developing the younger guys, when he knew he wasn't going to be here? He wanted to play the upperclassmen more because he had loyalty to them and had no reason to try and develop underclassmen. Your defense of his coaching is admirable, but sadly your synopsis on last years job rings hollow.
Again, what point was he making? I still can't figure out what point you people think he was trying to get across.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on May 22, 2014, 02:02:40 PM
I'll graciously accept both of y'all's logic and explanations. I stand erected.
What Kate Upton's here?
Quote from: keefe on May 22, 2014, 07:01:54 PM
You might be surprised
I am confident I won't be.
Quote from: Goose on May 22, 2014, 04:56:26 PM
Sultan
Well stated once again. Then I am definitely happy that Buzz has left town because IMO last year was biggest joke/disappointment of a season in my 40+ plus years as a fan. Would add that I do not ever remember a team/coach that turned fans into disinterested fans either.
But, that is history and hoping the new guy has a different outlook on rotations. If not, another long year awaits.
Dukiet scored in that department for me.
Quote from: The Equalizer on May 22, 2014, 11:15:27 AM
Over this window in the article, Buzz's base salary increased from $813K to $1.6 million, and his outside earnings went from $397K to $916K. Not sure you caclulate that as a 46% pay cut.
2009: As an unproven coach in his first year, makes relatively little.
2010: Signs first big contract, including $3 million signing bonus.
2011: Annual increase of 200K, plus 225K increase in outside earnings. No bonus becuase its only the 2nd year of his new contract, and he received the signing bonus the previous year.
2012: Annual increase of $115K, plus $370K increase in outside inciome. Toys with SMU, gets a new contract leading to 738K sigining bonus this year, pay increases in following years.
2013: Annual increase of nearyly 500K. No contract bonus becuase he just renegotiated the prior year. Outside income falls by $84K--probably becuase those who book speakers no longer buy his "aw shucks" act.
At what point is MU treating him poorly? Only if you confuse one-time contract signing bonuses with routine compensation does it look like he's taking a "pay cut."
DING DING DING
Quote from: Wojo'sMojo on May 22, 2014, 07:52:23 PM
Buzz seemed willing to adapt to the players he had in years past. This year he wasn't willing to, aside from a few token changes here and there. I believe he was making a point. Why would he invest time in developing the younger guys, when he knew he wasn't going to be here? He wanted to play the upperclassmen more because he had loyalty to them and had no reason to try and develop underclassmen. Your defense of his coaching is admirable, but sadly your synopsis on last years job rings hollow.
Buzz always adapted the team's playing style to match the players. That is absolutely true. But it is not what I said. I said he never adjusted his coaching style. Trust the veterans, pull freshmen for freshmen mistakes, play to the scouting report, defense is more important than offense. All of these things were universal truths of the Buzz Williams coaching style. These were true in all six of Buzz' years.
His style clearly didn't work this season. Some coaches adapt, some double down. Buzz doubled down.
As for defending his coaching, I didn't agree with a lot of his decisions. I would have had more Mayo/Burton/Dawson and less Juan/Derrick/Jamil. I just find it silly that we are trying to justify a turd of a season by saying the coach tanked it on purpose. Think about it, if Buzz was as egotistical as we all think he is and knew he was leaving, why would he tank a season and risk damaging his marketability?
Quote from: The Sultan of Slurpery on May 22, 2014, 08:02:52 PM
Again, what point was he making? I still can't figure out what point you people think he was trying to get across.
The point I think he was making, was thumbing his nose at everyone that didn't think Derrick and Thomas deserved all the minutes they received. He was obviously aware of the comments made about these players, as he repeatedly referenced them in interviews. I think this made him dig his heels and become even more stubborn in regards to this situation.
That's ridiculous. Look, you may not have agreed with his player rotations, but to try to justify it by saying that a high level college coach was sacrificing victories in order to be stubborn isn't a very clear thought.
Quote from: The Sultan of Slurpery on May 22, 2014, 09:06:41 PM
That's ridiculous. Look, you may not have agreed with his player rotations, but to try to justify it by saying that a high level college coach was sacrificing victories in order to be stubborn isn't a very clear thought.
That's your opinion, just like I stated mine. I never said he was sacrificing victories...I said he was giving playing time to two players that a lot a fans (myself included) didn't think should be getting that amount of time. If there was ever a coach who would be stubborn and roll like that, it would be Buzz. You didn't detect the irritation when he spoke about Derrick's abilities and why anyone would question his choice for playing time?
He wasn't doing it to spite you. He was doing it because he thought it gave the team the best chance to win.
TAMU
This past season was the worst basketball experience I can remember as a fan. The number of people I know (long, long time fans) were disgusted and checked out early in the season out of frustration. I checked out at 10pm on New Year's eve and forced myself to at least pay attention. Going from E8 to check out before New Years is something I could not never imagine. Can only speak for myself, but I can handle losing and not making NCAA without much issue. The check out was caused by decisions and attitude of the coach and not wins or losses.
To compare last season with Dukie era is apples and oranges. We were dead program at the end of his run and I was pulling for losses to force a change. Buzz was on top of the world after E8 and in less than two months of season had lost many fans. That really shocked me because he really was a fan favorite.
For the record, I respect your posts and knowledge of MU ball. I am roughly twice your age and obviously have different perspective of things. IMO Buzz was long gone prior to the March departure and it sure looked like he coached that way. You called the Wojo hire and I am all on board to see how he does. Time to look ahead.
Goose, maybe there was a different vibe in the arena than I got watching on television. I never once got an inkling while watching on TV that Buzz had checked out. I was watching the defensive signs, and thinking that it was a great idea and how said it was that upperclassmen needed that. I was watching close game after close game, the same kind that MU had won the previous 5 years. This year, there was never that defensive stop, never that big play to push the team over the top. I watched Buzz shedding his coat and running on the floor and bouncing all over the place. To my eyes, watching every game with rapt attention on TV, Buzz looked exactly the same as he had the previous 5 years. The substitution patterns were the same, the reliance on upperclassmen was the same, the offensive/defensive schemes were the same. I could predict subs and defensive switches. I knew where the ball was going, I knew what the switches were going to be, I could predict the matchups. The only difference was the results. Maybe things were different in the arena.
Tower
A disclaimer on my posts, I believed and still believe Buzz was gone a year ago without the E8 run. The long run delayed his departure by a year. So, as the season progressed it appeared to me he was making a point. No doubt he worked his ass of at the games and no gripe there. Cannot tell you the number of times I heard from people that know basketball that they could not believe the decisions being made.
Hey, I appreciate all the action and excitement the guy provided. I lean more to Buzz's style of recruiting than I probably will with Wojo's, but time will tell. The exact reason why I liked Buzz is in many ways probably the exact reasons why he is not here anymore. I have different take on things and believe 99% of coaches are slippery and that is part of the game.
This is an interesting debate, but I hardly believe it can be binary.
- Was the team uninspired vs. past years - yes
- Were the rotations frustrating - yes
- Did the players not execute at time - absolutely
For me the season is personified by a couple things - D Wilson walking the ball up the court when time is elapsing in two close games, Gardner's body language - all the time and Jamil passing to D Wilson to take the final shot in the regular season.
Frankly who knows the intent behind anything - conscious or subconscious. The fact is some players didn't progress & the team seemed uninspired. Strategy, execution and personnel were all off.
In many cases a coach recognizes this and starts to play for the future -- ours didn't, doubled down and lost the entire team in the process. At its worst it is malicious intent and at its best it is a mistake to be corrected in the future. Who knows -- He kinda crazy.
Quote from: LittleMurs on May 22, 2014, 08:07:07 PM
Dukiet scored in that department for me.
Dukiet never had a pre-season favorite to win the conference, either. Last year should not have happened. Someone with insight pointed out to me that the truest indication that something was amiss last season was that virtually every player was fed up with the head coach. Had Bert not left there would have been a mass exodus of players.
People watching from afar can make whatever judgments and draw any conclusions. But if the players are in open rebellion I would say that there is a real problem. A squadron full of pissed off pilots tends not to win the war.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on May 22, 2014, 08:05:59 PM
I am confident I won't be.
Misplaced confidence can be a terrible thing. There is a lot more to this story than meets the eye.
Quote from: Wojo'sMojo on May 22, 2014, 10:22:23 PM
That's your opinion, just like I stated mine. I never said he was sacrificing victories...I said he was giving playing time to two players that a lot a fans (myself included) didn't think should be getting that amount of time. If there was ever a coach who would be stubborn and roll like that, it would be Buzz. You didn't detect the irritation when he spoke about Derrick's abilities and why anyone would question his choice for playing time?
If you don't think he was sacrificing victories, then logically you have to admit that Buzz was playing the best lineup possible to win immediately...or at least wouldn't lose any more than any other line up would lose.
Fans are idiots. They shouldn't determine who gets playing time. Do you think Coach K, Bill Self or Tom Izzo bases their playing time decisions based on what "a lot of fans" think? Of course not.
Quote from: The Sultan of Slurpery on May 23, 2014, 08:47:02 AM
If you don't think he was sacrificing victories, then logically you have to admit that Buzz was playing the best lineup possible to win immediately...or at least wouldn't lose any more than any other line up would lose.
Fans are idiots. They shouldn't determine who gets playing time. Do you think Coach K, Bill Self or Tom Izzo bases their playing time decisions based on what "a lot of fans" think? Of course not.
Here goes the Sultan again with his process of "logic". Numbnuts Buzz did sacrifice victories--17-15 playing his idiot game of player minutes. That result is proven. Because somebody does not come out and say he was sacrificing victories, does not mean that Buzz was playing the best players as you continue to defend Buzz on. His blind stubbornness of playing the same fiddle while losing his butt, sacrificed victories. You can give him the benefit of doubt that it was his belief that he was doing the right thing, but that does not mean he was playing the best guys. That does not necessarily follow. But just as Buzz had blind stubbornness, the Sultan has blind slurpiness of Buzz.
Buzz is gone, badmouthing the BEast whenever he can, even though the coaches (who everybody believes know the best) picked MU to win the BEast. Buzz got his ass kicked, and was shown the door. Good riddance. But the Sultan will continue to profess that Buzz knew best by playing the best players. "In Buzz we trust."
The "aw shucks, downhome lonesome cowpoke" continues to be the Sultan's boy, and always will. That is OK--he fooled a bunch of people.
Have to admire the Sultan's tenacity on defending the Buzzster.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 23, 2014, 09:12:08 AM
Here goes the Sultan again with his process of "logic". Numbnuts Buzz did sacrifice victories-
Wojo'sMojo doesn't seem to think so. Take it up with him. Or you can continue to slurp me by mentioning me five times in one post. Whatever floats your boat.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 23, 2014, 09:12:08 AM
Here goes the Sultan again with his process of "logic".
You counter Sultan's logic with a long, smug, meandering personal attack of both him and Buzz. Sticking to the high ground.
Quote from: The Sultan of Slurpery on May 23, 2014, 08:47:02 AM
If you don't think he was sacrificing victories, then logically you have to admit that Buzz was playing the best lineup possible to win immediately...or at least wouldn't lose any more than any other line up would lose.
Fans are idiots. They shouldn't determine who gets playing time. Do you think Coach K, Bill Self or Tom Izzo bases their playing time decisions based on what "a lot of fans" think? Of course not.
I was going to stay out of this but Sultan, you are guilty of the fallacy of affirming the consequent.
Quote from: Goose on May 23, 2014, 07:20:01 AM
TAMU
This past season was the worst basketball experience I can remember as a fan. The number of people I know (long, long time fans) were disgusted and checked out early in the season out of frustration. I checked out at 10pm on New Year's eve and forced myself to at least pay attention. Going from E8 to check out before New Years is something I could not never imagine. Can only speak for myself, but I can handle losing and not making NCAA without much issue. The check out was caused by decisions and attitude of the coach and not wins or losses.
Goose
We are both long time fans and I agree that this season was painful. I disagree that Buzz "checked out". You did - and you admit it. You want to blame your checking out on decisions and attitudes of the coach, fine. I heard the same thing from friends in February of 1977. They checked out because they thought Al had. To very loud boos we lost our final 3 home games. Bill Neary (not half the player Derrick Wilson is) was starting over Bernard Toone (3 times the player John Dawson will ever be) and "seashells and balloons" was officially over. But the team had 4 NBA players and the college POY. They rallied to win 3 straight road games and got the LAST at large bid to the tournament at halftime of their final regular season game. Then won the whole thing. This year's team didn't have the horses to come back like the 77 Warriors, but they fought hard down the stretch, losing one heartbreaker after another. Buzz (prophetically) had warned people when MU was on top that the margin between success and failure was razor thin. We were mostly on the right side of that margin for 5 glorious years. Fans got spoiled. The minute that worm turned some fans bailed. Not because they were frontrunners, mind you. Not because we were losing, mind you - but because the COACH had changed. Really? I can't think of anything more self serving than that but I'm not surprised. I saw it in 1977 during AL's last year and he was the greatest.
Quote from: The Sultan of Slurpery on May 23, 2014, 08:47:02 AM
If you don't think he was sacrificing victories, then logically you have to admit that Buzz was playing the best lineup possible to win immediately...or at least wouldn't lose any more than any other line up would lose.
Fans are idiots. They shouldn't determine who gets playing time. Do you think Coach K, Bill Self or Tom Izzo bases their playing time decisions based on what "a lot of fans" think? Of course not.
I do think he was sacrificing potential victories, I just said I haven't said that. Nobody knows what would have happened, had we played Dawson and JJJ more instead of Derrick and Jake. I'm of the opinion that we would have won more games, but nobody knows for certain. When I say Buzz was making a point, it is in reference to him continually sticking to his chosen starters even when the ship was obviously sinking. He was making the decision that he was gonna win with his anointed preferences, or we were going to lose and he was ok with that, because they played to the scouting report or practiced harder. He's the coach and he can do whatever he wanted. He also proved to be very thin skinned and makes me wonder why he was so standoffish and stubborn when asked about playing time.
Quote from: keefe on May 23, 2014, 10:27:39 AM
I was going to stay out of this but Sultan, you are guilty of the fallacy of affirming the consequent.
I don't think so. I said this: "If you don't think he was sacrificing victories, then logically you have to admit that Buzz was playing the best lineup possible to win immediately...or at least wouldn't lose any more than any other line up would lose."
Since there are only two outcomes of a college basketball game (win or loss), if you don't think he was "sacrificing victories," then you must therefore think that he was trying to win.
And if he was trying to win, then he must have either played the line up that he thought was the best option to win, OR he chose to play what he felt was one of two (or more) equal line ups.
Therefore, the line up choices he made were not to "make a point," but to win games. As I see it, the only way the "make a point" suggestion makes sense, is if he was purposely playing players who were inferior (in his mind), and therefore "sacrificing victories."
Quote from: Wojo'sMojo on May 23, 2014, 11:01:11 AM
I do think he was sacrificing potential victories, I just said I haven't said that. Nobody knows what would have happened, had we played Dawson and JJJ more instead of Derrick and Jake. I'm of the opinion that we would have won more games, but nobody knows for certain. When I say Buzz was making a point, it is in reference to him continually sticking to his chosen starters even when the ship was obviously sinking. He was making the decision that he was gonna win with his anointed preferences, or we were going to lose and he was ok with that, because they played to the scouting report or practiced harder. He's the coach and he can do whatever he wanted. He also proved to be very thin skinned and makes me wonder why he was so standoffish and stubborn when asked about playing time.
Well, this is pretty much logically the only stance you have to take. And it goes back to my post from before. I don't think Buzz was intentionally sacrificing victories in order "to make a point." He may have sacrificed victories by making wrong choices, and that's a matter of debate, but that's a different matter entirely.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 23, 2014, 09:52:41 AM
You counter Sultan's logic with a long, smug, meandering personal attack of both him and Buzz. Sticking to the high ground.
Lenny, the personal attack was on Buzz. I even complimented Sultan on his tenacity for the same old defense argument. When it comes to smugness, Lenny, I defer to your's.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 23, 2014, 02:39:41 PM
Lenny, the personal attack was on Buzz. I even complimented Sultan on his tenacity for the same old defense argument. When it comes to smugness, Lenny, I defer to your's.
So when you put his "logic" in quotes and call him a slurper and a fool for falling for the lonesome cowboy it's really a compliment because you say he's tenacious about it. No personal attack or smugness there, Willie.
Buzz was simply really bad last year. I don't disagree with some who say his approach last year was the same as its always been: Limiting freshman, especially after mistakes, focusing playing time on defensive merit, shortening the rotation down the stretch...all of those things are true of last season, and Buzz's first 5...but....the difference between last year, and the previous 5, was that the system wasn't working, and it was quite evident by the end of non-conference play...and he refused to do anything consequentially different - such as radically changing his starting backcourt..which largely proved highly ineffective.
He doubled down....either out of true belief that they were best option...or out of ego...that he was gonna show all the doubters and naysers...that they were wrong. Buzz thrives on that type of motivation/underdog role, me against the world. Additionally, Buzz was at great odds with administration...even with Wild and Cords...likely knew it was his last year at MU...which explains why little care to develop/play freshman..but could also throw it back in face of admin that if they wanted to tighten they reigns on the type of player/recruit he was able to bring in...well...here is what you are going to get with the "character lineup."
I've never been so disappointed in a Marquette season 25 years as a hardcore fan...and never more disappointed in a coach....who I thought was GREAT...but ultimately proved Chicos right in that he's like the rest - an egomaniac, but even worse, one with a very thin skin...and yet hypocritically expects so much toughness out of his players.
Quote from: The Sultan of Slurpery on May 23, 2014, 11:07:59 AM
I don't think so. I said this: "If you don't think he was sacrificing victories, then logically you have to admit that Buzz was playing the best lineup possible to win immediately...or at least wouldn't lose any more than any other line up would lose."
Since there are only two outcomes of a college basketball game (win or loss), if you don't think he was "sacrificing victories," then you must therefore think that he was trying to win.
And if he was trying to win, then he must have either played the line up that he thought was the best option to win, OR he chose to play what he felt was one of two (or more) equal line ups.
Therefore, the line up choices he made were not to "make a point," but to win games. As I see it, the only way the "make a point" suggestion makes sense, is if he was purposely playing players who were inferior (in his mind), and therefore "sacrificing victories."
The fallacy is in your premises and the conclusion you draw from that syllogism. In any event, Bert's rotation confounded a number of people - most damningly those who cut his checks as well as the men who suited up for him. The fact he lost his two core constituencies speaks volumes and offers insight to things which no one on Scoop has any visibility.
Quote from: Ners on May 23, 2014, 03:05:45 PM
Buzz was simply really bad last year. I don't disagree with some who say his approach last year was the same as its always been: Limiting freshman, especially after mistakes, focusing playing time on defensive merit, shortening the rotation down the stretch...all of those things are true of last season, and Buzz's first 5...but....the difference between last year, and the previous 5, was that the system wasn't working, and it was quite evident by the end of non-conference play...and he refused to do anything consequentially different - such as radically changing his starting backcourt..which largely proved highly ineffective.
He doubled down....either out of true belief that they were best option...or out of ego...that he was gonna show all the doubters and naysers...that they were wrong. Buzz thrives on that type of motivation/underdog role, me against the world. Additionally, Buzz was at great odds with administration...even with Wild and Cords...likely knew it was his last year at MU...which explains why little care to develop/play freshman..but could also throw it back in face of admin that if they wanted to tighten they reigns on the type of player/recruit he was able to bring in...well...here is what you are going to get with the "character lineup."
I don't necessarily disagree with you that when Plan A wasn't effective, Buzz simply didn't have a Plan B, or had one and didn't think it would work. (Considering he was successful with Plan A in previous years.)
I just don't think your last point makes any sense. JJJ, Duane, and Dawson seem to all be character guys. That really wasn't the reason why they didn't play.
If Buzz knew going in that it was his last year, why the (what would have been if it had all stayed together) great recruiting class? Why NN? Why Flory? He did what had worked in the past. It didn't work this time.
Quote from: Ners on May 23, 2014, 03:05:45 PM
Buzz was simply really bad last year. I don't disagree with some who say his approach last year was the same as its always been: Limiting freshman, especially after mistakes, focusing playing time on defensive merit, shortening the rotation down the stretch...all of those things are true of last season, and Buzz's first 5...but....the difference between last year, and the previous 5, was that the system wasn't working, and it was quite evident by the end of non-conference play...and he refused to do anything consequentially different - such as radically changing his starting backcourt..which largely proved highly ineffective.
He doubled down....either out of true belief that they were best option...or out of ego...that he was gonna show all the doubters and naysers...that they were wrong. Buzz thrives on that type of motivation/underdog role, me against the world. Additionally, Buzz was at great odds with administration...even with Wild and Cords...likely knew it was his last year at MU...which explains why little care to develop/play freshman..but could also throw it back in face of admin that if they wanted to tighten they reigns on the type of player/recruit he was able to bring in...well...here is what you are going to get with the "character lineup."
I've never been so disappointed in a Marquette season 25 years as a hardcore fan...and never more disappointed in a coach....who I thought was GREAT...but ultimately proved Chicos right in that he's like the rest - an egomaniac, but even worse, one with a very thin skin...and yet hypocritically expects so much toughness out of his players.
I'll sum up your thoughts. Buzz used the same approach in all six of his years at Marquette. In the first five years, which produced 5 NCAA tournament appearances, two Sweet 16s, an Elite 8, back to back 14-4 Big East Conference records and a regular season Big East championship, this approach made you think he hung the moon - great coach, great guy, great character. In years six, when the players weren't quite as good (that WAS his fault) and the close wins often became close losses, this EXACT SAME approach led you to do a 180 - now he's a bad coach, bad guy with bad character. Time for some soul searching, Ners. Don't be that guy.
Quote from: tower912 on May 23, 2014, 03:19:38 PM
If Buzz knew going in that it was his last year, why the (what would have been if it had all stayed together) great recruiting class? Why NN? Why Flory? He did what had worked in the past. It didn't work this time.
I wouldn't say that leaving was entirely Bert's idea...
Quote from: tower912 on May 23, 2014, 03:19:38 PM
If Buzz knew going in that it was his last year, why the (what would have been if it had all stayed together) great recruiting class? Why NN? Why Flory? He did what had worked in the past. It didn't work this time.
Exactly. I don't know why we have to dream up ulterior motives here. He didn't do anything appreciably different.
Maybe it's just that some people bought into him too much, and when they were let down, they don't want to admit that maybe they were misguided. Ners and Wojo's Mojo (who was "mubuzz") were two of the biggest Buzz "slurpers" on this board prior to last year.
And now both can't seem to come to grips with the fact that he wasn't as good as they thought. So instead they insist he was being "stubborn," and "making points," instead of coaching to win.
What's ironic is that now *I* am labelled as a "slurper" when during the whole SMU thing, I was saying that Marquette would be fine with its resources and tradition if Buzz left, while half the board was running around like a bunch of chicken-littles.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 23, 2014, 03:31:03 PM
I'll sum up your thoughts. Buzz used the same approach in all six of his years at Marquette. In the first five years, which produced 5 NCAA tournament appearances, two Sweet 16s, an Elite 8, back to back 14-4 Big East Conference records and a regular season Big East championship, this approach made you think he hung the moon - great coach, great guy, great character. In years six, when the players weren't quite as good (that WAS his fault) and the close wins often became close losses, this EXACT SAME approach led you to do a 180 - now he's a bad coach, bad guy with bad character. Time for some soul searching, Ners. Don't be that guy.
I'd also say you could do some soul searching and admit that he was quite flawed last year. If his character were truly good - he wouldn't have bolted at the first time of adversity. Going gets tough...the tough get going...they don't bail.
I'm not a fair weather fan, and have no problem with a coach having a bad year...and see it as no reason to do a 180 on the bad year alone....but....when the coach stubbornly refused to make the 2 EVIDENT changes necessary for the entire year..while the losses racked up...note the difference between last season and his first 5...the losses weren't racking up...other than the midget year...where he virtually had NO other options as to whom he could have played...but refusing to radically change his backcourt...when it was totally and completely clear that it was overmatched all season...that to me is where it became unforgivable/egregious. What made it unforgivable...is that he not only did he REFUSE to do it...but instead played Derrick and Jake MORE minutes than any other two players on the team...
And to Keefe's point - there were going to be numerous transfers if he remained here as coach...he lost his team. The Senior Day speeches said it all.....other than Otule...Jamil, Davante...neither one of them thanked Buzz....thanked everyone else..academic advisors, trainers, believe even assistant coaches mentioned....yet not Buzz. He lost Jamil and Davante as well last year...as they knew their senior season could have and should have been so much better...
Quote from: tower912 on May 23, 2014, 03:19:38 PM
If Buzz knew going in that it was his last year, why the (what would have been if it had all stayed together) great recruiting class? Why NN? Why Flory? He did what had worked in the past. It didn't work this time.
So you think he planned on staying past this year? It was the all mighty lure of the prestigious Va Tech coaching job that he just couldn't turn down? He knew he was outta here before the year started I believe. Is it possible that he secured last years class before he decided he wanted to leave? I think Burton and Duane were likely to come here even if Buzz wasn't gonna be around...don't think he had to sell them too hard. McKay was a MKE kid who seemed excited to return home. Dawson was kind of a sleeper type recruit and I think Chew was mainly responsible for landing JJJ. I think these guys all could have been on board before Buzz checked out. He kept recruiting because he possibly hoped he could bully people around like he had previously, this time it just didn't work out.
Quote from: Wojo'sMojo on May 23, 2014, 04:10:00 PM
So you think he planned on staying past this year? It was the all mighty lure of the prestigious Va Tech coaching job that he just couldn't turn down? He knew he was outta here before the year started I believe. Is it possible that he secured last years class before he decided he wanted to leave? I think Burton and Duane were likely to come here even if Buzz wasn't gonna be around...don't think he had to sell them too hard. McKay was a MKE kid who seemed excited to return home. Dawson was kind of a sleeper type recruit and I think Chew was mainly responsible for landing JJJ. I think these guys all could have been on board before Buzz checked out. He kept recruiting because he possibly hoped he could bully people around like he had previously, this time it just didn't work out.
Duane and Deonte did a lot of the heavy lifting to get JJJ. They worked JJJ pretty hard. They were buds from AAU ball.
I do not think Buzz gave up on the season. We fought to the end losing our last two conference games in overtime. However, I do think Buzz lost a significant portion of the team. Perhaps the reason why he always started Thomas and Derrick is that they were the only players he did not lose. I also think Buzz was heading towards a mental breakdown and leaving for Virgina Tech will delay this breakdown maybe three years.
Quote from: keefe on May 23, 2014, 03:34:48 PM
I wouldn't say that leaving was entirely Bert's idea...
Exactly. He was told where the door was and not to let it hit his keester as he exited.
Quote from: keefe on May 23, 2014, 08:12:30 AM
Misplaced confidence can be a terrible thing. There is a lot more to this story than meets the eye.
Absolutely true. But I have yet to see anyone on scoop who has posted true information about it. cbb keeps hinting that he knows something. He may know it,not sure.
There is more to the story. Buzz tanking the season is not it.
Quote from: bilsu on May 23, 2014, 04:26:57 PM
However, I do think Buzz lost a significant portion of the team.
He said as much at the media day in October, when he announced the lack of leadership on the team.
Quote from: tower912 on May 23, 2014, 06:12:15 PM
He said as much at the media day in October, when he announced the lack of leadership on the team.
He got paid nearly 3 million a year to be the leader of the team. If nobody on the team stepped up, then he needed to step up even more. He knows what type of personalities these kids have when he recruits them.
Quote from: Wojo'sMojo on May 23, 2014, 04:10:00 PM
So you think he planned on staying past this year? It was the all mighty lure of the prestigious Va Tech coaching job that he just couldn't turn down? He knew he was outta here before the year started I believe. Is it possible that he secured last years class before he decided he wanted to leave? I think Burton and Duane were likely to come here even if Buzz wasn't gonna be around...don't think he had to sell them too hard. McKay was a MKE kid who seemed excited to return home. Dawson was kind of a sleeper type recruit and I think Chew was mainly responsible for landing JJJ. I think these guys all could have been on board before Buzz checked out. He kept recruiting because he possibly hoped he could bully people around like he had previously, this time it just didn't work out.
I can guarantee that Buzz didn't know he was leaving until after senior night.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on May 23, 2014, 06:35:32 PM
I can guarantee that Buzz didn't know he was leaving until after senior night.
What was significant about Senior night?
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on May 23, 2014, 05:53:09 PM
Absolutely true. But I have yet to see anyone on scoop who has posted true information about it. cbb keeps hinting that he knows something. He may know it,not sure.
There is more to the story. Buzz tanking the season is not it.
I don't think Buzz was pushed out. I don't think Buzz tanked the season.
I *do* think that the administration grew tired of him and wasn't going to bend over backward to make him happy. (Even Wild and Cords) He's a high maintenance guy, and sometimes those types just aren't worth the effort no matter how successful they may be.
:)
Quote from: The Sultan of Slurpery on May 24, 2014, 07:52:37 AM
I don't think Buzz was pushed out. I don't think Buzz tanked the season.
I *do* think that the administration grew tired of him and wasn't going to bend over backward to make him happy. (Even Wild and Cords) He's a high maintenance guy, and sometimes those types just aren't worth the effort no matter how successful they may be.
Depends on your donation of pushed out but you are mostly correct
Quote from: esotericmindguy on May 22, 2014, 08:38:24 AM
No doubt. Kevin Ollie wins a national championship and his contract is short of 3 million. My goodness, Buzz didn't even make a final four.
UConn is winning a national title every few years.
Marquette had made 2,sweet 16s in 3,decades before buzz and he made 3,in 3,years. He was paid fairly based on what he did with a program that was in serious trouble when crean left.
Quote from: bamamarquettefan on May 27, 2014, 12:39:38 AM
UConn is winning a national title every few years.
Marquette had made 2,sweet 16s in 3,decades before buzz and he made 3,in 3,years. He was paid fairly based on what he did with a program that was in serious trouble when crean left.
How was MU "in serious trouble" as a program when Crean left? We were in the Big East, which was the best conference in the history of college basketball. We had the Al McGuire Center, which was as nice of a practice facility as you will find. We had the 3 Amigos going into their senior season (in fact, while Dominic James's broken foot may have factored into the results, I'd say the 2nd round loss that we had that year would've been the absolute minimum we should've done in the NCAA Tournament that year. That team had FF potential until the injury). We had a giant budget to work with. We could've definitely gotten a "bigger name" than Brent Williams to run our program, but thankfully Brent worked out well for us and was the right guy to take over.
I'd definitely say we as a program are in much more trouble following Bert's departure than we were following Crean's. We are in the New Big East, which is nowhere near what the Old Big East was. We still have the Al which is still a big positive. We send our players into a crappy form for 2 years. We didn't have a president or an AD when we were going through the coaching search. We're coming off of a 19-17 season in which we entirely missed the post season and we lost our 2 leading scorers to graduation. We still have a giant budget to use. But there is definitely much more uncertainty this time around than there was with Bert coming in, as both coaches are more or less just assistants taking their first real head coaching job.
If you don't know why something is working when it's working, you won't know how to fix it when it breaks. Pay attention to everything
Quote from: bamamarquettefan on May 27, 2014, 12:39:38 AM
He was paid fairly based on what he did with a program that was in serious trouble when crean left.
Really? If we were in serious trouble when the Bronzed Beast departed I am curious how you would characterize the program today. Bert inherited a gold mine but is leaving the program in worse shape than what he found. So if he took over a program in serious trouble then Wojo must be taking responsibility for a disaster.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on May 24, 2014, 01:15:08 PM
Depends on your donation of pushed out but you are mostly correct
Your Freudian Slip is showing. One should always be cognizant of which cow gives you the milk. Bert pissed off old Bessie and realized too late those teats were drying up.
By the way, do women even wear slips anymore?
Nah, most of 'em don't even wear underwear.
Quote from: keefe on May 27, 2014, 03:08:27 AM
Really? If we were in serious trouble when the Bronzed Beast departed I am curious how you would characterize the program today. Bert inherited a gold mine but is leaving the program in worse shape than what he found. So if he took over a program in serious trouble then Wojo must be taking responsibility for a disaster.
Buzz inherited great seniors, one very good junior and no underclassmen.
Wojo inherits not so great seniors, one questionable junior and 5 top 100 underclassmen (plus Magic Dawson).
Short term, advantage Buzz. Medium term, advantage Wojo.
No Humphrey for freshmen and sophomores and lesser conference affiliation make it tougher for Wojo. Playing a less challenging schedule will make it easier.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 27, 2014, 10:26:57 AM
Buzz inherited great seniors, one very good junior and no underclassmen.
Couple of errors:
1. Buzz inherited six underclassmen. He ran three off (Christopherson, Mbakwe and Hazel). He had three incoming recruits that still made it to campus (Fulce, Otule and Erik Williams).
2.Not sure where you get your "one very good junior" comment--we had two--Acker and Cubillan. Plus you're leaving out an absolute stud in Hayward.
Quote from: The Equalizer on May 28, 2014, 03:21:37 PM
Couple of errors:
1. Buzz inherited six underclassmen. He ran three off (Christopherson, Mbakwe and Hazel). He had three incoming recruits that still made it to campus (Fulce, Otule and Erik Williams).
2.Not sure where you get your "one very good junior" comment--we had two--Acker and Cubillan. Plus you're leaving out an absolute stud in Hayward.
Several errors:
1.Mbakwe was gone if Crean stayed. Briefly reconsidered due to Crean's departure. Was not run off.
2.Hazel (Crean recruit) was caught stealing. Buzz benched him and he left before the door hit him in the ass.
3.The one very good junior was Hayward. Acker and Cubillan were juniors but not very good.
If your habits don't line up with your dreams, then you need to either change your habits or change your dreams.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 28, 2014, 03:38:56 PM
1.Mbakwe was gone if Crean stayed. Briefly reconsidered due to Crean's departure. Was not run off.
Nope.
That was a rumor that Mbakwe himself denied. April 16th, 2008:
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/31869619.html (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/31869619.html)
"I've been reading the papers and they're saying all this stuff about me transferring for family reasons before Coach (Tom Crean) even left," he said. "I just want to let everyone know that isn't true.
"It was news to me. It was a shock. I didn't know where it was coming from,
and that's never been an idea in my head."You stand corrected.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 28, 2014, 03:38:56 PM
2.Hazel (Crean recruit) was caught stealing. Buzz benched him and he left before the door hit him in the ass.
In other words, Buzz inhereted him. Then Buzz played him for the better part of a year. Then Buzz benched him (reason irrelevant).
What part of "played him for the better part of a year" confuses you?
You stand corrected. Again.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 28, 2014, 03:38:56 PM
3.The one very good junior was Hayward. Acker and Cubillan were juniors but not very good.
So you're going to stick with trashing our players again to carry water for Buzz Williams?
And keep the mock outrage to yourself, this time.
If you're not willing to admit Hayward was a stud or you want to maintain the pretense that Acker and Cubillan were "not very good" their senior seasons, then you're simply trashing them to sandbag for Buzz.
Equalizer and Lenny,
Let's just all agree you're both wrong in various parts of your previous posts and move on.
Buzz inherited underclassmen.
The use of the phrase "running them off" to describe transfers after the head coach leaves is beyond egregious.
Neither of these things are that big of a deal to be worrying about.
Quote from: g0lden3agle on May 29, 2014, 06:42:53 AM
The use of the phrase "running them off" to describe transfers after the head coach leaves is beyond egregious.
The reality ranges from Buzz telling the player to leave (Christopherson confirmed it was the outcome of his first meeting with Buzz), benching a player mid-season (Hazel) and alienating a player (Mbakwe confirmed he was not planing to leave in April, and left in late August after experiencing Buzz's coaching over the summer--bootcamp drove him away perhaps?).
None of these fit the normal coaching transition departures that Lenny is trying to lump them in with (situations like Tyshawn Taylor or Ahmed Hill).
At best, I'll give you that using the term "ran him off" with Mbakwe is debatable--Buzz's actions arguably had the effect of running him off, but I'll agree it wasn't his intent. However, Hazel and Christopherson both meet the traditional defintion of a coach running off a player--nothing at all egregious about using the description with either of those cases.
Quote from: The Equalizer on May 29, 2014, 01:34:23 PM
The reality ranges from Buzz telling the player to leave (Christopherson confirmed it was the outcome of his first meeting with Buzz), benching a player mid-season (Hazel) and alienating a player (Mbakwe confirmed he was not planing to leave in April, and left in late August after experiencing Buzz's coaching over the summer--bootcamp drove him away perhaps?).
None of these fit the normal coaching transition departures that Lenny is trying to lump them in with (situations like Tyshawn Taylor or Ahmed Hill).
At best, I'll give you that using the term "ran him off" with Mbakwe is debatable--Buzz's actions arguably had the effect of running him off, but I'll agree it wasn't his intent. However, Hazel and Christopherson both meet the traditional defintion of a coach running off a player--nothing at all egregious about using the description with either of those cases.
Do you have a link to the Chistopherson confirmation? I had never heard that before.
Quote from: g0lden3agle on May 29, 2014, 01:40:09 PM
Do you have a link to the Chistopherson confirmation? I had never heard that before.
I'll confirm it.
As always, choice of language is key. There is a big difference between Buzz telling Christopherson to get lost and a frank conversation where Buzz says that Chris will not get playing time unless he sees a vast improvement.
Hazel had off the court issues which warranted benching.
Mbakwe did not like Buzz' coaching style and left because of it.
"Running off" implies something shady occurs ed. Nothing shady happened here.