Is this satire, or just plain bitterness???
http://media.www.marquettetribune.org/media/storage/paper1130/news/2007/11/08/Sports/Gembballcolumn.Sy1.Rs2.Me3-3079466.shtml
QuoteOver before it begins
By: David Strittmatter
Posted: 11/8/07
New York (April 2, 2008) - Marquette's moderately impressive postseason run came to a screeching halt last night as UNC-Wilmington throttled the Golden Eagles 61-39 in the Final Four in Madison Square Garden.
Tom Crean & Co. fell just short of their quest to bring another NIT championship banner to the Bradley Center a mere 38 years after Al McGuire's Warriors conquered a 16-team bracket in 1970.
After beating the likes of Radford, Hofstra and Arkansas-Pine Bluff in the first three rounds, the Golden Eagles' bid to take home the 2008 NIT hit a brick wall against the Seahawks. Marquette's "live-by-the-three, die-by-the-three" offensive philosophy finally caught up the team that began the 2007-'08 campaign ranked No. 12 in the country.
Led by lackluster performances from juniors Dominic James and Jerel McNeal, who went a combined 3-for-19 from three-point range, Marquette failed to score 40 points for the first time this season. Despite his 29-point output in the quarterfinals just five days ago, James' NBA draft stock continued its slow, painful, Titanic-like descent.
With all the key players from 2006-'07 returning, this season began with much promise with an impressive runner-up finish at the Maui Invitational. Junior Wesley Matthews earned a place on the all-tournament team as he averaged 19 points per game and seven rebounds per game over three contests.
The Golden Eagles won the unofficial state championship with back-to-back victories over Wisconsin-Milwaukee and Wisconsin despite a seemingly absent frontcourt. Thankfully, Marquette found its shooting touch, making 55 percent from beyond the arc in the two wins.
Boasting a 6-1 record and ranked No. 8 in the Associated Press poll, Marquette once again fell to a lesser opponent and left fans shaking their heads. On Dec. 15, a day after the fall semester concluded, Sacramento State came to Milwaukee and beat the Golden Eagles 78-73 in overtime.
Marquette rebounded with easy wins over IPFW and Coppin State but again experienced an unthinkable setback against Savannah State, losing by 13 points in a game less competitive than it appeared.
Entering conference play at No. 23 with an 8-3 record, Marquette's play showed promise early. Picked to finish third in the Big East before the season, the Golden Eagles rose to the top of the conference after starting conference play 4-0.
When the team went to Louisville in mid-January, it appeared as if a fifth consecutive win was in the works. Despite a game rawer than sushi, big man Ousmane Barro dominated the contest's first 35 minutes before fouling out. Making just five of 16 free throws down the stretch, Marquette blew a ten-point lead to the Cardinals and suffered its first conference loss.
Defeats to UConn, DePaul and South Florida followed. The season then reached its low point in a 32-point loss to Cincinnati. The Bearcats slaughtered a Marquette team plagued by foul trouble, shooting woes and a defense less effective than the Munich Agreement.
Marquette emerged victorious in six of the last 10 games of the season behind guard play that ranged from stellar to incompetent. A 9-9 conference record earned the Golden Eagles the ninth seed in the Big East conference tournament. Selection Sunday did not look favorably on Marquette's 18-13 season record, after the Golden Eagles bowed out in the first round of the conference tournament.
One of the bigger names in the NIT, Marquette breezed through the opening rounds until they met their doom. On a positive note, the Golden Eagles' three wins in the NIT doubled the number of postseason wins since the 2003 Final Four run.
On a better note, regardless of the latter half of the season, Marquette will make the preseason Top 25 for 2008-'09.
david.strittmatter@marquette.edu
shows what a history major knows about basketbal
this is a joke..
Wow...what a jacka$$
We ain't going to the KNIT. We may very well lose in the 1st round of the Dance but we ain't going to the KNIT.
Yeah, they handed out a season preview before Saturday's game. I can't say I read much of the paper .. but did read that guy's column, as he'd predicted us as NIT bound, which I would assume wasn't for satirical purposes. So when I read his column .. I didn't think it was a joke.
.. one other comment .. at least half of the images in that preview? Terrible .. blurry, wrong. Don't know if it was the source, or the printing, but it made the paper look worse than high schoolers could put out. (And mind you, that's coming from a guy who used to take pics for the Trib decades ago.) Very disappointed.
Yeah. There's more than a few people on campus who think that article is . . . well total crap.
Our buddy asked him why he felt this and he said "You live and die by the three." Funny he didn't mention the 3-ball once in the article.
Can't be surprised though. Seeing something positive about the team from the Tribune is a rare. They seem to focus on why the team won't do well.
After reading the article I have to say I felt sad for the writer.
Somebody should educate him about the Bob Dukiet years so he knows how far this program has come.
Regardless how the season turns out to write that crap about your own school before the season even starts is really sad.
Many writers try to be provocative so then can say I told you so if they turn out to be right.
If they are wrong nobody seems to remember.
Quote from: mosarsour on November 12, 2007, 11:19:54 AM
Wow...what a jacka$$
My thoughts exactly. Isn't the preseason suppose to be all about optimism?
The kid is an idiot. Someone should look up his ND Football predictions and how wrong they are. He's a big Domer.
I actually thought it was funny. If we don't watch out, that fiction could become a reality, though. Maybe it's part of a growing b-ball program, where hanging around near the top isn't good enough anymore and there are expectations of success. The part about "doubling the # of postseason wins since the 2003 final four" did sting a little. Sometimes the truth can hurt. Let's hope that this article is lockerroom motivational material for our final four appearance this year. GO MARQUETTE!!!
What a load of crap.
His point seems to be that the team will live and die by the three. I think we will see some nights when the team is cold from the three, and we will lose as a result--and so I dont disagree that there will be some nights this year when we lose to inferior programs, because the shooting is off and the frontcourt cant step up. It also makes us more vulnerable than a balanced team come tourney time.
He clearly went overboard though.
good satire has the element of wit. That was bad satire, on the level of a 6th grader.
I geuss journalism will not be his ultimate career...? Truly a misguided and misplaced article by an uninformed individual. I was reading this during halftime of the Green Bay game yesterday and i just scratched my head and wondered what the point was to the article.
QuoteOver before it begins
By: David Strittmatter
Posted: 11/8/07
...On a positive note, the Golden Eagles' three wins in the NIT doubled the number of postseason wins since the 2003 Final Four run...
david.strittmatter@marquette.edu
[/quote]
what, did we have 1.5 postseason wins since 2003?
The only thing in that piece that's completely out of the question is being ranked no. 23 after losses to both Sacramento St. and Savannah St.
I had to squint. After reading the article, I went back and checked the byline and could have sworn the "tr" in his last name was an "h". Maybe it should be.
Quote from: tower912 on November 12, 2007, 01:07:36 PM
I had to squint. After reading the article, I went back and checked the byline and could have sworn the "tr" in his last name was an "h". Maybe it should be.
;D
what an idiot. he's serious because in the prediction segment of the basketball preview this guy had them going to the NIT.
If we lose by 32 to Cincinnati I will throw up. I don't think this guy has watched a basketball game ever. I saw his "prediction" in the preview they handed out before the IUPUI game. I turned to my wife and pointed at it and she just laughed. While anything could happen, it would take a monumental collapse for us to be in the NIT. Even in back to back seasons where we lost games to mid majors at home, we made it to the tourney.
The funny/sad thing is, he probably feels vindicated because MU did not win its first game by 30 points. "See, they're not as good as everyone thinks, blah, blah, blah."
hmmm...
I guess if it's just an opinion piece... it's fine... but it's not really a good column.
It's just sensationalist journalism, not news reporting or even an interesting/fresh perspective based upon professional experience and opinion.
If the guy is really trying to prognosticate, he's cracked.
MU may not be as good as a lot of people think... but a 32 point loss to Cincy is stupid (along with a lot of other things in the article).
My guess is that this is a "column" designed to stir things up. I guess it has... but that doesn't mean it's good writing.
The kid clearly exaggerates a bit, and I know this is going to cause me trouble to post, but I think the piece is at least somewhat funny. You may or may not remember that the Trib had a piece last spring with a list of the 69 NCAA D-1 teams to win an NCAA tournament game last year to make a point of contrast of the past four years with 02-03.
As someone who arrived here in the fall of 2003, I do have to say that I was disappointed as a student with our post-season performance. It's fun to hear about the FF run from people who were at MU just 5-6 months before I arrived, and it would have been nice to have at least one minimally interesting post-season while here (I'm now a grad student).
QuoteDespite a game rawer than sushi
What does that even mean?
If the Sun Times is looking for a replacement for Jay Marrioti, they've certainly got their guy.
Note to Racine paper: When Woeful is fired, here's his replacement.
I get the general jist of the aritcle... that Marquette rises early season, non-conference and conference. Then, fails come tournament time. Although he shows his lack of knowledge saying...
1) As PR mentioned in an earlier post, that Marquette could have three losses, including two at home to low RPI teams, and be ranked. I guess the joke is they are still ranked at that point?
2) That Marquette loses by thirty to Cincy or an equivalent team? Perhaps with a lot of injuries? Though he doesn't mention that.
3) That Marquette would reach the NIT final four playing the teams he mentions. Chances are that there would be 1-2 high major programs we would have to beat. They have off years too... or doesn't he understand that?
It just seems like a mean-spirited rant really. There is something lately to our post season "wanes". Couldn't one write about that and provide reasons or concerns?
Quote from: MarquetteDano on November 12, 2007, 02:31:50 PM
It just seems like a mean-spirited rant really. There is something lately to our post season "wanes". Couldn't one write about that and provide reasons or concerns?
I agree.
I don't think there is anything wrong with criticizing the program if he provided some actual insight or a different perspective.
It would be interesting if he really went in depth to find out why MU can have such highs in a season (beating Duke, PITT, etc.) and have such lows (getting blown out by MSU).
Some people blame injuries, coaching, workouts, and all sorts of other stuff. If he thinks MU is going to fizzle out again in 2008, it would be interesting for him to explore why MU has fizzled in the past and why he thinks they will do it again.
Of course, that would take some research, perspective and a good amount of thought to do that...
Normally hatchet jobs come from the sports writers of other schools.
"James' NBA draft stock continued its slow, painful, Titanic-like descent."
I think we can award the 2007 Stephen T. Colbert Award For The Literary Excellence - Stilted Prose Category to Mr. Strittmatter right now.
this guy did exactly what he wanted to do. Just like a Mariotti he just writes to get a rise out of people, hell this is probably the most talked about piece this entire year in the Trib. While it is questionable journalism, its getting notice and a lot of people will be looking for this kid's pieces in the future. I think he's full of crap and doesn't actually believe this, but hey, he's getting some attention, probably the most out of any writer in the Trib
remember it is the TRIB...they hate the school. if u read every issue, you will see they hate us
Since when has anyone expected anything resembling legitimate journalism, intelligent thought, rational analysis, or hell, even serviceable birdcage flooring to come out of the Marquette Tribune?
I have used at birdcage flooring right now as we speak...if I had a camera, I'd supply visual evidence.
Well, the idiots article will be forgotten soon. It may be his journalism highlight of his college career as pathetic as it is.
This guy reminds me of a moron frosh who sat behind me at the MU-SLU game in 2003 and was ripping on Wade the entire game saying he was overrated and terrible....all because he was struggling in one game. My friends and I who were seniors at the time told the kid to shut up and appreciate how good Wade was and how the program would be nowhere near as good without him.
The sense of entitlement and stupidity regarding the basketball program among some in the current student body is ridiculous. MU was 30-28 my first two years and we lost games to notable powerhouses like Baylor and South Alabama.
If we lose by 32 to Cincinatti we should forfeit the rest of the season. I hope this guy is simply a typical hack sportswriter who is trying to build up controversy and not as utterly stupid as he appears to be in this column. Seriously, is this kid Jay Marriotti's love child?
The article is over the top, and shouldn't have been published in the school newspaper (at least MU's newspaper). That being said, there are some points that people here dismiss far too easily:
1) Why are we a lock for the NCAA all of a sudden? Last I checked, the name on our jersey didn't magically become Duke or UNC overnight. Making the tourney will be a struggle, especially in a conference that is as tough as the new Big East. Do people forget that even after we made the Final Four we didn't make it the next few years?
2) Our roster is VERY vunerable. With Mbakwe down, what happens if Burke or Ooze gets hurt? We have no one to fill in right now with any size (even a Kinsella or Grimm type player to log some minutes and be a brusier). If that happens we will struggle even more down low and that would make the tourney even more difficult.
3) We will lose to a small school somewhere along the way -- everybody does.
4) Frankly, we are a very poor shooting team -- if I hear another Villanova comparison I am going to choke. They had lots of shooters on that team, we don't have many at all. That is clearly a weakness, but we have many other strengths that we can take advantage of, including atheticism and pressure D. Let's hope Crean uses that more this year.
5) Overall, the trajectory of the season fits with what we have seen the past few years -- out of the gate hot by taking pre-season tourneys and faltering down the stretch in the conf. tourney and NCAAs. We need to change that trend. Hopefully with more upperclass leaders we can do that, but I for one haven't been pleased the past few years.
In short, the article is inappropriate in its placement and some of its venom toward the players. That said, some of the points shoulnd't be dismissed. I do think we will make the NCAA's, but don't think it will be as easy as many of you suggest. If you disagree, look at the first two games we've just played.
what a mindnumbingly pathetic article. sure, our team has a lot of kinks to work out, and we're in no way a lock for the tournament...big surprise. however, it's pretty obvious that Strittmatter is starving for controversial attention like some of the other equally-airheaded writers on the MU Tribune staff, and i shake my head in disbelief that the same College of Communications that helped produce Steve Rushin is in some way responsible for educating this moron, too.
oh, if anybody cares, the "defense less effective than the Munich Agreement" comment was plagiarized from last week's issue of The Onion. (in the "Statshot" insert). get your own material, Ambrose, Jr.
Quote from: Final Four or Bust on November 12, 2007, 09:48:39 PM
The article is over the top, and shouldn't have been published in the school newspaper (at least MU's newspaper). That being said, there are some points that people here dismiss far too easily:
1) Why are we a lock for the NCAA all of a sudden? Last I checked, the name on our jersey didn't magically become Duke or UNC overnight. Making the tourney will be a struggle, especially in a conference that is as tough as the new Big East. Do people forget that even after we made the Final Four we didn't make it the next few years?
2) Our roster is VERY vunerable. With Mbakwe down, what happens if Burke or Ooze gets hurt? We have no one to fill in right now with any size (even a Kinsella or Grimm type player to log some minutes and be a brusier). If that happens we will struggle even more down low and that would make the tourney even more difficult.
3) We will lose to a small school somewhere along the way -- everybody does.
4) Frankly, we are a very poor shooting team -- if I hear another Villanova comparison I am going to choke. They had lots of shooters on that team, we don't have many at all. That is clearly a weakness, but we have many other strengths that we can take advantage of, including atheticism and pressure D. Let's hope Crean uses that more this year.
5) Overall, the trajectory of the season fits with what we have seen the past few years -- out of the gate hot by taking pre-season tourneys and faltering down the stretch in the conf. tourney and NCAAs. We need to change that trend. Hopefully with more upperclass leaders we can do that, but I for one haven't been pleased the past few years.
In short, the article is inappropriate in its placement and some of its venom toward the players. That said, some of the points shoulnd't be dismissed. I do think we will make the NCAA's, but don't think it will be as easy as many of you suggest. If you disagree, look at the first two games we've just played.
I'm inclined to agree with you, and this team and this program certainly isn't perfect. However, this kid writing for the MU tribune should have just reported the facts, or if he really wanted to write a column, he should have explored of the the ideas you listed about in depth.
Why has MU faded down the stretch the past 2 years?
He could have come up with all of the rationale and then prognosticated on how this season would go based upon his research and deduction.
Like I said, at this point its just "controversial", but nowhere near "fresh" "informative" or "educational", which are 3 words that I would definitely want a column to be.
Look at the Cincy results so far
11/09 Belmont L 86-75
11/10 W Carolina W 66-64
11/11 BGU L 69-67 (Bowling Green)
Now way in hell is this team beating MU by 32
Quote from: 2002mualum on November 12, 2007, 11:36:41 PM
Quote from: Final Four or Bust on November 12, 2007, 09:48:39 PM
The article is over the top, and shouldn't have been published in the school newspaper (at least MU's newspaper). That being said, there are some points that people here dismiss far too easily:
1) Why are we a lock for the NCAA all of a sudden? Last I checked, the name on our jersey didn't magically become Duke or UNC overnight. Making the tourney will be a struggle, especially in a conference that is as tough as the new Big East. Do people forget that even after we made the Final Four we didn't make it the next few years?
2) Our roster is VERY vunerable. With Mbakwe down, what happens if Burke or Ooze gets hurt? We have no one to fill in right now with any size (even a Kinsella or Grimm type player to log some minutes and be a brusier). If that happens we will struggle even more down low and that would make the tourney even more difficult.
3) We will lose to a small school somewhere along the way -- everybody does.
4) Frankly, we are a very poor shooting team -- if I hear another Villanova comparison I am going to choke. They had lots of shooters on that team, we don't have many at all. That is clearly a weakness, but we have many other strengths that we can take advantage of, including atheticism and pressure D. Let's hope Crean uses that more this year.
5) Overall, the trajectory of the season fits with what we have seen the past few years -- out of the gate hot by taking pre-season tourneys and faltering down the stretch in the conf. tourney and NCAAs. We need to change that trend. Hopefully with more upperclass leaders we can do that, but I for one haven't been pleased the past few years.
In short, the article is inappropriate in its placement and some of its venom toward the players. That said, some of the points shoulnd't be dismissed. I do think we will make the NCAA's, but don't think it will be as easy as many of you suggest. If you disagree, look at the first two games we've just played.
I'm inclined to agree with you, and this team and this program certainly isn't perfect. However, this kid writing for the MU tribune should have just reported the facts, or if he really wanted to write a column, he should have explored any of the the ideas you listed about in depth.
Why has MU faded down the stretch the past 2 years?
He could have come up with all of the rationale and then prognosticated on how this season would go based upon his research and deduction.
Like I said, at this point its just "controversial", but nowhere near "fresh" "informative" or "educational", which are 3 words that I would definitely want a column to be.
Tribby is sad about poor Trib quality nowadays. :(
The top journalists in the journalism department generally do not write for it. Last year's graduates none of the Summa Cum Laudes were Trib writers. Only about 1/3 of the Magna Cum Laudes were writers.
Quote from: bs4173 on November 12, 2007, 10:16:35 PM
what a mindnumbingly pathetic article. sure, our team has a lot of kinks to work out, and we're in no way a lock for the tournament...big surprise. however, it's pretty obvious that Strittmatter is starving for controversial attention like some of the other equally-airheaded writers on the MU Tribune staff, and i shake my head in disbelief that the same College of Communications that helped produce Steve Rushin is in some way responsible for educating this moron, too.
oh, if anybody cares, the "defense less effective than the Munich Agreement" comment was plagiarized from last week's issue of The Onion. (in the "Statshot" insert). get your own material, Ambrose, Jr.
Wow, was that honestly stolen from The Onion? Blatant rip-offs like that are grounds for immediate termination. The article itself was bad enough, but this takes the cake.
Quote from: marqptm on November 14, 2007, 11:56:04 AM
The top journalists in the journalism department generally do not write for it. Last year's graduates none of the Summa Cum Laudes were Trib writers. Only about 1/3 of the Magna Cum Laudes were writers.
Let's be fair here. The top editors at the Trib put in crazy hours (40-50 a week in the case of the EIC and managing editor) in addition to being full-time students. Not many people can do that and still get straight A's. The real test is whether objective awards, like the College of Communications' Journalism Student of the Year, are going to Trib writers.
A professional newspaper editor doesn't care what a journalism student's grades were, but rather what his/her clips look like. Those Summa Cum Laudes won't be getting a professional journalism job if they don't have clips, I promise.
Yeah, but the majority of them work for Chicagoland papers. While the Trib writers are working the Watertown Press.
Quote from: dwaderoy2004 on November 12, 2007, 01:00:35 PM
QuoteOver before it begins
By: David Strittmatter
Posted: 11/8/07
...On a positive note, the Golden Eagles' three wins in the NIT doubled the number of postseason wins since the 2003 Final Four run...
david.strittmatter@marquette.edu
what, did we have 1.5 postseason wins since 2003?
[/quote]
You must've been a business major. Three wins would double our win total if we had three wins over the span (from 3 to 6), not 1.5. Three wins for a theoretical team with 1.5 (I know 1.5 wins is not possible) wins would triple their win total from 1.5 to 4.5.
The rest of the article was not the best thing I've read, but it wasn't horrible and it made a point. I could see this team struggling and slipping to the NIT due to our lack of inside game, but I'd say its 85% we're in the NCAAs and better than 50% with a top 8 seed.
Even though I am on the fast track to becoming a grumpy old man, I would advise you to let kids like the author of this piece try and find their voice. That's what college is all about, experimentation and improvement, right? Why the same people thinks it's horrible to criticize a college player but would have no problem criticizing a college newspaper writer is inconsistent.
Quote from: CTWarrior on November 15, 2007, 11:41:31 AM
Even though I am on the fast track to becoming a grumpy old man, I would advise you to let kids like the author of this piece try and find their voice. That's what college is all about, experimentation and improvement, right? Why the same people thinks it's horrible to criticize a college player but would have no problem criticizing a college newspaper writer is inconsistent.
This is easily the best post I've read on this board.
Quote from: CTWarrior on November 15, 2007, 11:41:31 AM
Even though I am on the fast track to becoming a grumpy old man, I would advise you to let kids like the author of this piece try and find their voice. That's what college is all about, experimentation and improvement, right? Why the same people thinks it's horrible to criticize a college player but would have no problem criticizing a college newspaper writer is inconsistent.
I think it's fine to hold him up to higher scrutiny because he is lambasting college athletes by name. If he was only talking about the team's play, that's one thing, but he makes special note of James' NBA stock falling precipitously and throws in a pot shot at Barro for good measure.
To summarize, if he was just a random college kid who wrote a random crappy article, I wouldn't say anything. But he is a college writer criticizing other college kids specifically, and that's why I apply different rules to him.
There was no reason for him to throw in those bits about Ousmane's game or Dominic's draft prospects. They were cheap shots that didn't advance the article.