Got one tonight that we absolutely needed to have.
Prov is next. We lost to them at home, but that was the "old" lineup. I have been a critic of Wojo on his in-game coaching, but have to admit that his shaking up the lineup has worked, so good for him. If we could beat them in RI last year when they were #8, we can do it Saturday.
Will be at the Dunk for this one, so go Warriors!
Just focus on 1-0.
Big game saturday at Providence, we need this one
Quote from: wadesworld on February 21, 2017, 09:29:26 PM
Just focus on 1-0.
Well, I have focused on winning all of the games since the loss at Georgetown, and we're 2-0 since. So I guess that unequivocally proves that the absolute worst thing anybody can do is take 'em one at a time.
Although I do hope that's what the team does.
Scoopers? We can multi-task!
Providence is a different animal than these two wins...friars like us are on the brink. They may lose to creighton away but I know they are thinking MU DEPAUL and STJ all winnable down the stretch and 9-9 gets them in.
For us we have eight wins but nothing easy about last 3.
We'll especially be in trouble if PV wins at Creighton. They will see daylight and be hungry.
Quote from: MUBigDance on February 21, 2017, 10:33:49 PM
Providence is a different animal than these two wins...friars like us are on the brink. They may lose to creighton away but I know they are thinking MU DEPAUL and STJ all winnable down the stretch and 9-9 gets them in.
For us we have eight wins but nothing easy about last 3.
We'll especially be in trouble if PV wins at Creighton. They will see daylight and be hungry.
Maybe MU will be the shark, they are so close, time to lock this up
Quote from: MUBigDance on February 21, 2017, 10:33:49 PM
Providence is a different animal than these two wins...friars like us are on the brink. They may lose to creighton away but I know they are thinking MU DEPAUL and STJ all winnable down the stretch and 9-9 gets them in.
For us we have eight wins but nothing easy about last 3.
We'll especially be in trouble if PV wins at Creighton. They will see daylight and be hungry.
9-9 ain't getting them in
Quote from: PFsHeroes32 on February 22, 2017, 12:16:23 AM
9-9 ain't getting them in
Agreed. There is only one team with a resume that gets in at 9-9 and that is MU.
Heard this song on the radio while driving back to Chicagoland last night. It's on my running playlist, but I thought it was especially appropriate for Wojo and the Warriors:
https://www.youtube.com/v/F_HoMkkRHv8
PC crowd is tough...I think this their "PC Days"...equivalent of National Marquette Day. They do not like Marquette..Probably due to us never losing to them in the Bradley Center. Huge game...lots of adversity, but the new line up should change things for us.
X on the road...If we lose 1 that is the only 1 I think we can afford. Creighton at home-Last game of the year-Crowd should be good I have faith in winning that one
Quote from: Clam Crowder on February 22, 2017, 08:10:38 AM
PC crowd is tough...I think this their "PC Days"...equivalent of National Marquette Day. They do not like Marquette..Probably due to us never losing to them in the Bradley Center.
Plus there's that one time when we hired a bat to attack Ed Cooley....
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on February 22, 2017, 08:09:17 AM
I bet it does.
[/quote
Wins against DePaul and SJU ain't bumping them up high enough
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on February 22, 2017, 08:09:17 AM
I bet it does.
Providence is interesting. They would have the wins, quality enough wins, and good enough numbers, but also three really bad losses. Boston College, DePaul, and St John's at home are a pretty big trio of blemishes.
I think Marquette has the best chance at 9-9 thanks to the Nova, Creighton, and Xavier wins, but Seton Hall would also likely be in with wins over South Carolina, Creighton, and Butler/Xavier (need to beat one to get to 9). Providence would be interesting, and likely one of those hotly debated teams come Selection Sunday.
Saturday is a must win, IMO. Making the NCAA is obviously the goal and the win is needed. More importantly, it will show the character of the team Wojo has assembled. He was a tough player and we will see Saturday if that toughness carries over to his coaching career. Fingers crossed.
Quote from: Goose on February 22, 2017, 09:06:11 AM
Saturday is a must win, IMO. Making the NCAA is obviously the goal and the win is needed. More importantly, it will show the character of the team Wojo has assembled. He was a tough player and we wil Saturday if that toughness carries over to his coaching career. Fingers crossed.
From a momentum perspective and giving us a cushion, I agree. However, I think we can still lose one and get in no problem now that we beat St. John's. 9-9 could still get us in. Winning at Providence would be huge though.
Quote from: cheebs09 on February 22, 2017, 09:20:53 AM
From a momentum perspective and giving us a cushion, I agree. However, I think we can still lose one and get in no problem now that we beat St. John's. 9-9 could still get us in. Winning at Providence would be huge though.
You're definitely right in that it's not must win in the sense that we can still get in.
But 10-8 is what we need to feel really good. So lose to providence
And that means that we have to win at X as well as the Creighton game.
I'd rather snag this one for some breathing room.
On the upside, I think we are in very good position for a NIT berth. It's not what anyone wants, I realize, but it would still be marked improvement from a year ago despite losing a top-20 NBA pick.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2017, 09:29:44 AM
On the upside, I think we are in very good position for a NIT berth. It's not what anyone wants, I realize, but it would still be marked improvement from a year ago despite losing a top-20 NBA pick.
The NIT is gross.
I'm glad the gophers are finally done being a "make an NIT run" type of team.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2017, 09:29:44 AM
On the upside, I think we are in very good position for a NIT berth. It's not what anyone wants, I realize, but it would still be marked improvement from a year ago despite losing a top-20 NBA pick.
Lol, c'mon man.
Quote from: Goose on February 22, 2017, 09:06:11 AM
Saturday is a must win, IMO. Making the NCAA is obviously the goal and the win is needed. More importantly, it will show the character of the team Wojo has assembled. He was a tough player and we wil Saturday if that toughness carries over to his coaching career. Fingers crossed.
Enthusiasm percolating?
Quote from: PFsHeroes32 on February 22, 2017, 08:53:41 AM
Wins against DePaul and SJU ain't bumping them up high enough
Meh. I have a hard time seeing any .500 team in the ACC, BE, B10 (Nebraska and Iowa maybe, but they have an uphill climb to .500) and B12 not making the dance. Too many hollow wins in the SEC and P12 for that to be the case there.
I suppose its possible if MU, SHU and PC all end up at .500 that one of them misses out, and in that case it would most likely be PC, but I don't see that as a likely scenario.
9-9 is super iffy. It might get us in, but I think it is less than 50/50. Will end up depending on the rest of the bubble and how conference tournaments play out. It would also depend on where Seton Hall and Providence finish. If we are 5th place at 9-9 I would feel much better about our chances then if we were 7th place at 9-9. The Big East is probably only getting 5 teams in...MAYBE 6. Definitely not 7. The bottom line is that finishing 9-9 and making the tournament would require some lucky breaks for us.
10-8 probably gets us in with about 90% confidence.
Quote from: Coleman on February 22, 2017, 10:06:50 AM
9-9 is super iffy. It might get us in, but I think it is less than 50/50. Will end up depending on the rest of the bubble and how conference tournaments play out. Would require some lucky breaks for us.
10-8 probably gets us in with about 90% confidence.
99.9% at 10-8.
I'll go 80% at 9-9 with one win in the BET
40% at 9-9 with a first round BET loss.
Quote from: MuEagle1090 on February 22, 2017, 10:08:38 AM
99.9% at 10-8.
I'll go 80% at 9-9 with one win in the BET
40% at 9-9 with a first round BET loss.
I agree with this analysis.
Quote from: MuEagle1090 on February 22, 2017, 10:08:38 AM
99.9% at 10-8.
I'll go 80% at 9-9 with one win in the BET
40% at 9-9 with a first round BET loss.
I also agree with this analysis
Quote from: PFsHeroes32 on February 22, 2017, 09:32:42 AM
The NIT is gross.
I'm glad the gophers are finally done being a "make an NIT run" type of team.
Progress isn't always quick, nor is it always a straight line. A NIT bid would be an improvement on last year, even if it's not the improvement we want.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2017, 09:29:44 AM
On the upside, I think we are in very good position for a NIT berth. It's not what anyone wants, I realize, but it would still be marked improvement from a year ago despite losing a top-20 NBA pick.
Let's not discount this. Baring something crazy, we're not going to be clamoring for a Vegas invite.
As to Saturday. We're the better team. Let's prove that in front of their donut eating fans.
Quote from: MUBigDance on February 21, 2017, 10:33:49 PM
We'll especially be in trouble if PV wins at Creighton. They will see daylight and be hungry.
Or maybe the opposite.
If they beat Creighton. They could look ahead and see MU, STJ, and Depaul as 3 games that they'll likely be favored in on their path to 10 wins - and perhaps lose a bit of fire. Maybe get a little fat and happy.
Motivation is difficult to predict. Can't assume that they'll be an even more difficult matchup for us if they enter the game coming off a win vs. a loss..
Quote from: amen426 on February 22, 2017, 10:31:03 AM
Or maybe the opposite.
If they beat Creighton. They could look ahead and see MU, STJ, and Depaul as 3 games that they'll likely be favored in on their path to 10 wins - and perhaps lose a bit of fire. Maybe get a little fat and happy.
Motivation is difficult to predict. Can't assume that they'll be an even more difficult matchup for us if they enter the game coming off a win vs. a loss..
Cough, Nova, cough.
Quote from: Goose on February 22, 2017, 09:06:11 AM
Saturday is a must win, IMO. Making the NCAA is obviously the goal and the win is needed. More importantly, it will show the character of the team Wojo has assembled. He was a tough player and we wil Saturday if that toughness carries over to his coaching career. Fingers crossed.
By most definitions of a "must win," I don't think this is one. St. John's was. Xavier almost certainly was. But we can lose here and at X, beat Creighton at home and still realistically go dancin'.
Still, I do agree that we have something good going now and it would be nice to keep it going. And I do agree our road to the tourney (and not the NIT) would get significantly easier if we win Sat.
Do remember that the Warriors could play with toughness and "character," and Wojo could coach well ... and we could still lose. It happens.
Not gonna happen Saturday, though. We're gonna kick some Friar fannies!
I agree with brew. My goal this season was a high NIT seed.
So right now this is gravy.
Not saying I don't want NCAA, but looking for progression in year 3 of a rebuild had me thinking NIT.
On the other topic, I feel confident that 9-9 and us at 5th in the BE gets us in.
The bubble last night was kind to us in other teams losses.
Quote from: fjm on February 22, 2017, 10:40:33 AM
I agree with brew. My goal this season was a high NIT seed.
So right now this is gravy.
Goals can tend to change throughout the season. My goal was similar, but my goal was to be in the conversation on Selection Sunday as a legitimate bubble candidate. Barring an 0-3 + 0-1 finish, I think we will reach that goal.
As a Packers fan, I was expecting to lose to Seattle back in 2014 in the playoffs. But 55 minutes into that game the probability of winning was so high that I adjusted my expectations.
At the end of the day, they lost that game. I initially expected them to lose. But it was the manner in which they lost that was worse than the loss itself.
Many of us will be in that same category for Marquette, if they miss the tournament. There was a high probability of us getting into the tournament after the 5-3 start & Creighton/Villanova back to backs. Especially given the remaining schedule in conference play.
And even after our recent skid, we answered the bell with two must wins to put us back in a "more likely than not" scenario.
If we go 0-3 down the stretch and miss the tournament, I'm sure you and I will be playing the "what if" game all offseason -- rather than simply being happy that they met our preseason expectations.
Even if the NIT/bubble was our hope going in - expectations changed. It will be a bitter pill to swallow, given how the season unfolded.
NIT vs NCAA? I surely want the NCAA bid but was thinking what if?? If MU goes NCAA and lays an egg, say the Warriors get beat by 15 or more in the first round. Would an NIT bid be better(assuming we would go very far in NIT)? Fron the perspective of whatever benefits MU the most for next year. Could MU win the he NIT? I think there are a couple of scenarios in which MU is better off in the NIT.
Quote from: manny31 on February 22, 2017, 11:40:16 AM
NIT vs NCAA? I surely want the NCAA bid but was thinking what if?? If MU goes NCAA and lays an egg, say the Warriors get beat by 15 or more in the first round. Would an NIT bid be better(assuming we would go very far in NIT)? Fron the perspective of whatever benefits MU the most for next year. Could MU win the he NIT? I think there are a couple of scenarios in which MU is better off in the NIT.
NIT IS NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER BETTER THAN NCAA. EVER.
Plus, if you want to play the what if game, MU could get bounced in the first round of the NIT. You take the NCAA bid every single time.
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on February 22, 2017, 11:42:35 AM
NIT IS NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER BETTER THAN NCAA. EVER.
Plus, if you want to play the what if game, MU could get bounced in the first round of the NIT. You take the NCAA bid every single time.
Unless Western Michigan is in the NIT field, I think we're safe.
Quote from: manny31 on February 22, 2017, 11:40:16 AM
NIT vs NCAA? I surely want the NCAA bid but was thinking what if?? If MU goes NCAA and lays an egg, say the Warriors get beat by 15 or more in the first round. Would an NIT bid be better(assuming we would go very far in NIT)? Fron the perspective of whatever benefits MU the most for next year. Could MU win the he NIT? I think there are a couple of scenarios in which MU is better off in the NIT.
Go stand in the corner and think about what you said for awhile.
Quote from: manny31 on February 22, 2017, 11:40:16 AM
NIT vs NCAA? I surely want the NCAA bid but was thinking what if?? If MU goes NCAA and lays an egg, say the Warriors get beat by 15 or more in the first round. Would an NIT bid be better(assuming we would go very far in NIT)? Fron the perspective of whatever benefits MU the most for next year. Could MU win the he NIT? I think there are a couple of scenarios in which MU is better off in the NIT.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/RA8gXeMaTqXIc/giphy.gif)
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Y_ODcECzxGQ/T4sMKffGa8I/AAAAAAAAA88/LnQ8Dvynqbg/s1600/michael-scott-no.gif)
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/gallery/no/754.gif)
(https://media.tenor.co/images/b85de91ee0bc7a329f3a51d9ea90e7ed/raw)
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/gallery/no/workaholics-no.gif)
(https://media.giphy.com/media/2IDMt9e6Dg6A0/giphy.gif) (https://media.giphy.com/media/NvQrY1XGKfJok/giphy.gif)
Quote from: jsglow on February 22, 2017, 11:58:17 AM
Go stand in the corner and think about what you said for awhile.
I know... I think "BREW" first mentioned the three letters that we won't mention again. Ok how about a 15 point loss in round 1 of NCAA vs winning the "_ _ _"? I know we are playing what if and I think in this scenario I would rather win the "_ _ _". I would love to see MU playing on Saturday or Sunday in the NCAA, the other thing, I think, could potentially be more beneficial.
Quote from: manny31 on February 22, 2017, 12:11:52 PM
I know... I think "BREW" first mentioned the three letters that we won't mention again. Ok how about a 15 point loss in round 1 of NCAA vs winning the "_ _ _"? I know we are playing what if and I think in this scenario I would rather win the "_ _ _". I would love to see MU playing on Saturday or Sunday in the NCAA, the other thing, I think, could potentially be more beneficial.
Recruits care most about making the tourney. Snapping this ugly three year drought is far more valuable than the guys playing a few more games together this year. But again, this whole I would trade a 1st round NCAA loss for a NIT championship talk is so silly. Thats not a trade this is possible to make in any realm of reality. YOU TAKE THE NCAA BID EVERY SINGLE TIME.
Quote from: manny31 on February 22, 2017, 12:11:52 PM
I know... I think "BREW" first mentioned the three letters that we won't mention again. Ok how about a 15 point loss in round 1 of NCAA vs winning the "_ _ _"? I know we are playing what if and I think in this scenario I would rather win the "_ _ _". I would love to see MU playing on Saturday or Sunday in the NCAA, the other thing, I think, could potentially be more beneficial.
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/gallery/no/seth-rogan-no.gif)
(http://i.imgur.com/I8kq0uJ.gif)
(https://m.popkey.co/2420c1/mv5a_f-maxage-0.gif)
(http://persephonemagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/leslie-knope-no.gif)
Quote from: manny31 on February 22, 2017, 11:40:16 AM
NIT vs NCAA? I surely want the NCAA bid but was thinking what if?? If MU goes NCAA and lays an egg, say the Warriors get beat by 15 or more in the first round. Would an NIT bid be better(assuming we would go very far in NIT)? Fron the perspective of whatever benefits MU the most for next year. Could MU win the he NIT? I think there are a couple of scenarios in which MU is better off in the NIT.
Please stop
everything revolves on getting to the NCAA. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO nit.
Quote from: manny31 on February 22, 2017, 11:40:16 AM
NIT vs NCAA? I surely want the NCAA bid but was thinking what if?? If MU goes NCAA and lays an egg, say the Warriors get beat by 15 or more in the first round. Would an NIT bid be better(assuming we would go very far in NIT)? Fron the perspective of whatever benefits MU the most for next year. Could MU win the he NIT? I think there are a couple of scenarios in which MU is better off in the NIT.
Congratulations you made Scoop Takes!
Quote from: manny31 on February 22, 2017, 12:11:52 PM
I know... I think "BREW" first mentioned the three letters that we won't mention again. Ok how about a 15 point loss in round 1 of NCAA vs winning the "_ _ _"? I know we are playing what if and I think in this scenario I would rather win the "_ _ _". I would love to see MU playing on Saturday or Sunday in the NCAA, the other thing, I think, could potentially be more beneficial.
I'd rather lose in the NCAA than win the NIT, even though in retrospect the latter might end up more fun, because the goal all season long is to make the NCAAs.
That said, the NIT would be progress on last year no matter the circumstance. We'll all be hoping for a NCAA bid, but if we end up in the NIT, anyone calling that berth a failure is a complete and utter moron. And that's regardless of how expectations may have "changed" over the course of the season. Progress is more than a day-to-day thing.
The Not Invited Tournament hasn't been a better option than the NCAA for, uh, 47 years.
Actually...I might like the NIT more, but only because it would piss off so many people here. The fallout would be hilarious. That's something I could get behind.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2017, 02:50:04 PM
I'd rather lose in the NCAA than win the NIT, even though in retrospect the latter might end up more fun, because the goal all season long is to make the NCAAs.
That said, the NIT would be progress on last year no matter the circumstance. We'll all be hoping for a NCAA bid, but if we end up in the NIT, anyone calling that berth a failure is a complete and utter moron. And that's regardless of how expectations may have "changed" over the course of the season. Progress is more than a day-to-day thing.
Of course. But what was proposed was the 'one and done' scenario vs. 'deep NIT run'. Look, if we fail to take care of business here we're all going to be glued to our TVs for NIT action and hope to hang a banner. But let's not be forced to do that.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2017, 03:01:32 PM
Actually...I might like the NIT more, but only because it would piss off so many people here. The fallout would be hilarious. That's something I could get behind.
Brew, I am worried about you lately.
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on February 22, 2017, 03:06:23 PM
Brew, I am worried about you lately.
The reality is that we probably aren't winning the national championship this year or going to the Final Four. Short of that, not a lot of difference between the NIT and anything in between. I'm in this for the long haul, so anything that is progress is, well, progress.
Quite simply, I don't want to see a NCAA berth before I die. I want to see a national championship. I've seen the NIT berth, NCAA berth, the second round, the Sweet 16, Elite 8, Final Four. Anything other than cutting down the nets the first Monday in April is just a step toward cutting down the nets the first Monday in April.
That's why I really am not that bothered by NIT vs NCAA. I'd prefer the latter, but if we go to the NIT, we're still going in the right direction.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2017, 03:31:16 PM
The reality is that we probably aren't winning the national championship this year or going to the Final Four. Short of that, not a lot of difference between the NIT and anything in between. I'm in this for the long haul, so anything that is progress is, well, progress.
Quite simply, I don't want to see a NCAA berth before I die. I want to see a national championship. I've seen the NIT berth, NCAA berth, the second round, the Sweet 16, Elite 8, Final Four. Anything other than cutting down the nets the first Monday in April is just a step toward cutting down the nets the first Monday in April.
That's why I really am not that bothered by NIT vs NCAA. I'd prefer the latter, but if we go to the NIT, we're still going in the right direction.
I agree with you for the most part. But I really want the NCAA for two reasons.
1. This drought has been painful. It's only been 3 years, but after 8 consecutive tournaments it feels like an eternity. I definitely want a title in the long term, but short term I would just really love to see this team play in the tournament again.
2. I want the seniors to get to experience March Madness. JJJ, as enigmatic as he is, has stuck out a coaching change. He had plenty of opportunities to leave and for the most part has been a good player for us. I want to see him get to play in a tournament game. Same with Luke.
3. I guess there are 3 reasons. The way this team shoots, the way we look when things are going well, we could take down a 1/2 seed in the 2nd round if we can get on the 9/10 line. Of course, we could also get blown out in the first round, but this team's offensive firepower has the chance to deliver us a good memory or two.
Quote from: MuEagle1090 on February 22, 2017, 03:36:33 PM
I agree with you for the most part. But I really want the NCAA for two reasons.
1. This drought has been painful. It's only been 3 years, but after 8 consecutive tournaments it feels like an eternity. I definitely want a title in the long term, but short term I would just really love to see this team play in the tournament again.
2. I want the seniors to get to experience March Madness. JJJ, as enigmatic as he is, has stuck out a coaching change. He had plenty of opportunities to leave and for the most part has been a good player for us. I want to see him get to play in a tournament game. Same with Luke.
3. I guess there are 3 reasons. The way this team shoots, the way we look when things are going well, we could take down a 1/2 seed in the 2nd round if we can get on the 9/10 line. Of course, we could also get blown out in the first round, but this team's offensive firepower has the chance to deliver us a good memory or two.
Yes to all this. Almost all of the 8 straight years in the tournament we knew MU wasn't winning the national championship. But no matter, those few days leading up to the tournament were and are exciting as hell. And I agree this team is capable of striking down a top seed. Plus, getting in the tourney and maybe stealing a game or two is significant in moving closer to the end goal.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2017, 03:31:16 PM
The reality is that we probably aren't winning the national championship this year or going to the Final Four. Short of that, not a lot of difference between the NIT and anything in between. I'm in this for the long haul, so anything that is progress is, well, progress.
Quite simply, I don't want to see a NCAA berth before I die. I want to see a national championship. I've seen the NIT berth, NCAA berth, the second round, the Sweet 16, Elite 8, Final Four. Anything other than cutting down the nets the first Monday in April is just a step toward cutting down the nets the first Monday in April.
That's why I really am not that bothered by NIT vs NCAA. I'd prefer the latter, but if we go to the NIT, we're still going in the right direction.
I get the progress mindset.
But I just don't understand how you can say that losing in he first weekend is the same as the NIT.
Luckily, I know wojo and the players don't agree on that
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2017, 03:31:16 PM
The reality is that we probably aren't winning the national championship this year or going to the Final Four. Short of that, not a lot of difference between the NIT and anything in between. I'm in this for the long haul, so anything that is progress is, well, progress.
Quite simply, I don't want to see a NCAA berth before I die. I want to see a national championship. I've seen the NIT berth, NCAA berth, the second round, the Sweet 16, Elite 8, Final Four. Anything other than cutting down the nets the first Monday in April is just a step toward cutting down the nets the first Monday in April.
That's why I really am not that bothered by NIT vs NCAA. I'd prefer the latter, but if we go to the NIT, we're still going in the right direction.
Yuck. I could not disagree with you more.
Quote from: MuEagle1090 on February 22, 2017, 03:36:33 PM
I agree with you for the most part. But I really want the NCAA for two reasons.
1. This drought has been painful. It's only been 3 years, but after 8 consecutive tournaments it feels like an eternity. I definitely want a title in the long term, but short term I would just really love to see this team play in the tournament again.
2. I want the seniors to get to experience March Madness. JJJ, as enigmatic as he is, has stuck out a coaching change. He had plenty of opportunities to leave and for the most part has been a good player for us. I want to see him get to play in a tournament game. Same with Luke.
3. I guess there are 3 reasons. The way this team shoots, the way we look when things are going well, we could take down a 1/2 seed in the 2nd round if we can get on the 9/10 line. Of course, we could also get blown out in the first round, but this team's offensive firepower has the chance to deliver us a good memory or two.
Agreed here. I mean, I get it Brew. This team isn't winning the tourney, but it could hit 30 3s the first weekend of the tourney and find itself in the S16. Ya just never know.
And this program needs an NCAA bid. Just to break up the past several years. Its not the end of the world if it doesn't come this year - progress was still made - but man, it would be refreshing.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2017, 03:31:16 PM
The reality is that we probably aren't winning the national championship this year or going to the Final Four. Short of that, not a lot of difference between the NIT and anything in between. I'm in this for the long haul, so anything that is progress is, well, progress.
Quite simply, I don't want to see a NCAA berth before I die. I want to see a national championship. I've seen the NIT berth, NCAA berth, the second round, the Sweet 16, Elite 8, Final Four. Anything other than cutting down the nets the first Monday in April is just a step toward cutting down the nets the first Monday in April.
That's why I really am not that bothered by NIT vs NCAA. I'd prefer the latter, but if we go to the NIT, we're still going in the right direction.
I disagree, because I think total NCAA appearances/streaks are one measure by which we can judge how successful a program is. Before our streak of 8 years ended in 2014, we were one appearance away from breaking into the Top 10 in terms of NCAA appearances (31). During our three-year skid, we got passed by UConn, Texas, and Temple, and Arizona tied us for 14th overall. I'd like to regain some ground on most of those teams (and Indiana!), and start a new streak going, even if that means losing in the first round.
For more info, see: http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=37147.msg710770#msg710770 (not updated to include last year's tourney--I'll update after this year's bids are announced).
Plus, the benefit of just being mentioned in the bracket conversations around the water cooler has an impact on our national relevance, and the TV announcers love to refer to how long streaks of appearances are in terms of demonstrating the sustained success at different schools. Why not start our next streak of eight (or more) this year?
Quote from: MUMountin on February 22, 2017, 04:24:51 PM
I disagree, because I think total NCAA appearances/streaks are one measure by which we can judge how successful a program is. Before our streak of 8 years ended in 2014, we were one appearance away from breaking into the Top 10 in terms of NCAA appearances (31). During our three-year skid, we got passed by UConn, Texas, and Temple, and Arizona tied us for 14th overall. I'd like to regain some ground on most of those teams (and Indiana!), and start a new streak going, even if that means losing in the first round.
For more info, see: http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=37147.msg710770#msg710770 (not updated to include last year's tourney--I'll update after this year's bids are announced).
Plus, the benefit of just being mentioned in the bracket conversations around the water cooler has an impact on our national relevance, and the TV announcers love to refer to how long streaks of appearances are in terms of demonstrating the sustained success at different schools. Why not start our next streak of eight (or more) this year?
This. It's also why I don't really take pride in AL's turn down the NCAA decision. I'm sure it was cool at the time because it wasn't a massive drop off and we beat dr j and pistol Pete but as years go by and we're fighting for our place amongst the top programs another year of great history would be nice.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2017, 09:29:44 AM
On the upside, I think we are in very good position for a NIT berth. It's not what anyone wants, I realize, but it would still be marked improvement from a year ago despite losing a top-20 NBA pick.
It is progress. Again maybe not the progress people want, but certainly progress.
I prefer participation in the National Collegiate Athletic Association men's Division 1 basketball tournament to other alternatives.
Quote from: MU82 on February 22, 2017, 06:45:36 PM
I prefer participation in the National Collegiate Athletic Association men's Division 1 basketball tournament to other alternatives.
+1
The program gets $$$$ for a tourney berth doesn't it?
We discussed tourney credits and the cash to the program quite extensively when on the old Big East, how does it work in the current day?
Quote from: Dr. Vinnie Boombatz on February 22, 2017, 06:28:13 PM
It is progress. Again maybe not the progress people want, but certainly progress.
It's more like 'progress' - like in the theoretical sense.
I prefer real accomplishments personally.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on February 22, 2017, 06:26:14 PM
This. It's also why I don't really take pride in AL's turn down the NCAA decision. I'm sure it was cool at the time because it wasn't a massive drop off and we beat dr j and pistol Pete but as years go by and we're fighting for our place amongst the top programs another year of great history would be nice.
I disagree. The NIT was a great tournament back then and we made plenty of history that year. We beat Dr J, the Maraviches and Louie Carneseca AND pissed the NCAA off so much they made future participation in their tournament mandatory if invited. Win, win as Al and MU continued on a wild 13 year ride as college basketball's most interesting and iconoclastic program.
Quote from: Frenns Liquor Depot on February 22, 2017, 08:34:37 PM
It's more like 'progress' - like in the theoretical sense.
I prefer real accomplishments personally.
It is. And it's not theoretical.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on February 22, 2017, 08:39:14 PM
I disagree. The NIT was a great tournament back then and we made plenty of history that year. We beat Dr J, the Maraviches and Louie Carneseca AND pissed the NCAA off so much they made future participation in their tournament mandatory if invited. Win, win as Al and MU continued on a wild 13 year ride as college basketball's most interesting and iconoclastic program.
Al's win in '77 makes that decision look a little more positive in hindsight.
Maybe I can simplify my point...
NCAA Bid > NIT Bid > Missing both like last year
Quote from: Lennys Tap on February 22, 2017, 08:39:14 PM
I disagree. The NIT was a great tournament back then and we made plenty of history that year. We beat Dr J, the Maraviches and Louie Carneseca AND pissed the NCAA off so much they made future participation in their tournament mandatory if invited. Win, win as Al and MU continued on a wild 13 year ride as college basketball's most interesting and iconoclastic program.
I already acknowledged that it was cool to beat Pistol and Dr J so that's just needlessly circling back. I'm quite certain if we had beat UCLA or even just made the Final Four you'd feel fine that we didn't beat pistol or Dr J.
By that point the NIT was clearly the lesser of the two, still a great tournament sure but the lesser.
Your point about pissing the tournament committee off has to be the college kid in you still talking because truthfully in this day and age nobody remembers nor cares that that happened, they look at Wikipedia and count NCAA births and say "Jeeze they must've crapped the bed in 1970"
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on February 22, 2017, 06:26:14 PM
This. It's also why I don't really take pride in AL's turn down the NCAA decision. I'm sure it was cool at the time because it wasn't a massive drop off and we beat dr j and pistol Pete but as years go by and we're fighting for our place amongst the top programs another year of great history would be nice.
That decision still pisses me off. The year before we were a Rick Mount shot away from going to final four and Al gets his undies in a bundle and turns down an NCAA bid.
Al had that endearing quality of not being good at taking sh*t.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on February 22, 2017, 08:39:14 PM
I disagree. The NIT was a great tournament back then and we made plenty of history that year. We beat Dr J, the Maraviches and Louie Carneseca AND pissed the NCAA off so much they made future participation in their tournament mandatory if invited. Win, win as Al and MU continued on a wild 13 year ride as college basketball's most interesting and iconoclastic program.
This. And the reason that Al turned it down was more important than any basketball game.
I think the NCAA tournament back then was 32 teams vs. today 64, better field for NIT back then. Still shocked MU really never was on Dr. J and Al did not even
know the kid back then. Winning the NIT back then meant alot more. The years UCLA was great, USC was always as good but not good enough. Never made the
tournament.
Quote from: HoopsterBC on February 23, 2017, 12:40:10 PM
I think the NCAA tournament back then was 32 teams vs. today 64, better field for NIT back then. Still shocked MU really never was on Dr. J and Al did not even
know the kid back then. Winning the NIT back then meant alot more. The years UCLA was great, USC was always as good but not good enough. Never made the
tournament.
In 1970 there were 25 teams in the NCAA tournament. That is why the NIT was, at that time, a solid tournament. Back then all the games were in NYC.
Nobody is arguing the nit wasn't good but by that time the NCAA was clearly better. And are any of you really going to tell me that you'd prefer thet NIT banner over another FF banner?
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on February 23, 2017, 01:08:41 PM
Nobody is arguing the nit wasn't good but by that time the NCAA was clearly better. And are any of you really going to tell me that you'd prefer thet NIT banner over another FF banner?
They were not going to win the NCAA tournament that year, so for MU, a championship was good for there resume at the time. The next year Jim Chones and Bob
Lackey showed up, different story.
Quote from: HoopsterBC on February 23, 2017, 01:41:11 PM
They were not going to win the NCAA tournament that year, so for MU, a championship was good for there resume at the time. The next year Jim Chones and Bob
Lackey showed up, different story.
St Bonaventure, Jacksonville and New Mexico State. You don't think that we could've beaten any of them? I know I wasn't there and I'm sure it was awesome at the time but I'm arguing that from where we are now it was a stupid decision and whether it's another NCAA birth on our all time resume or another sweet 16 or Elite 8 or Final Four from that year it'd make us that much better looking on all time charts.
I think Al turning down the NCAA and winning the NIT is part of his legend. Its endearing because he became the best coach in Marquette history. If he didn't, we would look back at it differently.
I wasn't around, so I don't really have a right to judge one way or another. I also have no idea how the 1970 NCAA tournament would have gone had we entered it...but I would definitely rather have another Final Four than an NIT Championship.
Quote from: HoopsterBC on February 23, 2017, 01:41:11 PM
They were not going to win the NCAA tournament that year, so for MU, a championship was good for there resume at the time. The next year Jim Chones and Bob
Lackey showed up, different story.
There is no way to know that MU would not have won the NCAA. Not sure how you can say that. MU was very good in 1970, good enough to get an at-large. Al was pissed off at the region they were putting us in.
Quote from: jsglow on February 23, 2017, 12:25:00 PM
This. And the reason that Al turned it down was more important than any basketball game.
And that reason was that Al wanted to go to Dayton versus Fort Worth? Was there a reason beyond that?
Quote from: 79Warrior on February 23, 2017, 02:11:45 PM
There is no way to know that MU would not have won the NCAA. Not sure how you can say that. MU was very good in 1970, good enough to get an at-large. Al was pissed off at the region they were putting us in.
I am not sure that Ric Cobb could have taken care of Bill Walton? Nor there forwards Curtis Rowe and Sidney Wicks, Dean might have been able to handle Henry
Bibby, I do not see it. MU was very undersized that year.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on February 23, 2017, 02:03:55 PM
St Bonaventure, Jacksonville and New Mexico State. You don't think that we could've beaten any of them?
Bob Lanier was on that St Bonaventure team (Averaged 29 ppg/16 rpg) and Artis Gilmore (26.5 ppg/22 rpg not a typo) was on that Jacksonville squad. I know they aren't sexy names now, but those were very good teams.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 23, 2017, 07:01:03 PM
Bob Lanier was on that St Bonaventure team (Averaged 29 ppg/16 rpg) and Artis Gilmore (26.5 ppg/22 rpg not a typo) was on that Jacksonville squad. I know they aren't sexy names now, but those were very good teams.
Jimmy Collins was the star on that New Mexico State team coached by Lou Henson. The same Jimmy Collins that fueded with Bruce Pearl when he was the head coach at UIC and Pearl was at UWM.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on February 23, 2017, 07:18:46 AM
Your point about pissing the tournament committee off has to be the college kid in you still talking because truthfully in this day and age nobody remembers nor cares that that happened, they look at Wikipedia and count NCAA births and say "Jeeze they must've crapped the bed in 1970"
Actually it's the basketball fan/historian in me, not the "college kid" As for fans so ignorant/lazy that they don't know or care what happened and don't dig deeper than Wikipedia for their history lessons, I say "Who gives a shyte what those morons think?"
Quote from: Lennys Tap on February 23, 2017, 08:27:25 PM
Actually it's the basketball fan/historian in me, not the "college kid" As for fans so ignorant/lazy that they don't know or care what happened and don't dig deeper than Wikipedia for their history lessons, I say "Who gives a shyte what those morons think?"
Well public perception isn't made up of people who care to investigate minute details about every school's history and actual records don't come with asterisks saying "Marquette would've been top 10 for all time appearances but rejected one". Only obsessive fans of our school know that and between a bunch of old guys getting their jollys off that our school rebelled in 1970 or our school being one step closer to being elite, id take the one step closer every single time.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on February 23, 2017, 02:04:09 PM
I think Al turning down the NCAA and winning the NIT is part of his legend. Its endearing because he became the best coach in Marquette history. If he didn't, we would look back at it differently.
True, true.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on February 23, 2017, 09:52:09 PM
Well public perception isn't made up of people who care to investigate minute details about every school's history and actual records don't come with asterisks saying "Marquette would've been top 10 for all time appearances but rejected one". Only obsessive fans of our school know that and between a bunch of old guys getting their jollys off that our school rebelled in 1970 or our school being one step closer to being elite, id take the one step closer every single time.
I don't care what the average person thinks right now. I prefer the story of Al telling the NCAA to kick rocks to another tournament appearance. As has been said, it adds to the legend of Al and MU history. Probably would have taken a hypothetical final four for me to think differently.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on February 23, 2017, 09:52:09 PM
Well public perception isn't made up of people who care to investigate minute details about every school's history and actual records don't come with asterisks saying "Marquette would've been top 10 for all time appearances but rejected one". Only obsessive fans of our school know that and between a bunch of old guys getting their jollys off that our school rebelled in 1970 or our school being one step closer to being elite, id take the one step closer every single time.
1.It's not a minute detail. It's an important piece of Marquette AND college basketball history.
2. Being knowledgeable is only "obsessive" to the uninformed.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on February 23, 2017, 02:04:09 PM
I think Al turning down the NCAA and winning the NIT is part of his legend. Its endearing because he became the best coach in Marquette history. If he didn't, we would look back at it differently.
He didn't just go to the NIT, he gave the NCAA the finger and then WON the NIT. If we don't win those 4 games people look at it much differently.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on February 23, 2017, 09:52:09 PM
Well public perception isn't made up of people who care to investigate minute details about every school's history and actual records don't come with asterisks saying "Marquette would've been top 10 for all time appearances but rejected one". Only obsessive fans of our school know that and between a bunch of old guys getting their jollys off that our school rebelled in 1970 or our school being one step closer to being elite, id take the one step closer every single time.
So are you saying that a potential Final Four 47 years ago would have made Marquette more elite in the public's eyes?
Then the public is stupid. And like drew said, I don't give a flying f*ck what the public thinks about Al's decision back then and how it impacts their perceptions now.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on February 24, 2017, 08:46:29 AM
He didn't just go to the NIT, he gave the NCAA the finger and then WON the NIT. If we don't win those 4 games people look at it much differently.
You say that as if it carries weight... it doesn't. Think of it like this, if we recieved an invite to the NCAA tournament now and gave it the finger then went to the NIT and won people would say "well that was supposed to happen" it's no different back then except the NIT teams were a lot better, but they still weren't good enough to make the NCAA tournament so it should have been expected to win. High risk, extremely low reward.
Quote from: Dr. Vinnie Boombatz on February 24, 2017, 08:59:10 AM
So are you saying that a potential Final Four 47 years ago would have made Marquette more elite in the public's eyes?
Then the public is stupid. And like drew said, I don't give a flying f*ck what the public thinks about Al's decision back then and how it impacts their perceptions now.
Being top 10 in NCAA appearances would've made us elite in the public's eyes. Another FF would've made us more elite in the public's eyes (and made Al a cement his legacy as the second or third best coach of that era).
That's fine if you don't care what the public thinks, I do. Personally I was over on Holyland of Hoops and a guy said 'yes I know Marquette was good in the 70s but so was Providence and Villanova, they both made the Final Four and Providence were monsters in the 70s' now I'd personally like to have the public perception be hands down that they weren't even remotely near our level and not have to deal with that argument So another bid or FF or S16 or E8 would help that.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on February 24, 2017, 10:46:51 AM
Being top 10 in NCAA appearances would've made us elite in the public's eyes. Another FF would've made us more elite in the public's eyes (and made Al a cement his legacy as the second or third best coach of that era).
I don't think another Final Four in 1970 would have any relevance to how people view the program today. I follow the program and had no idea that accepting a bid then would have made us top ten in appearances. And even if it had, it is simply trivial.
Help us youngsters out. We weren't even alive so we are lacking a lot of context. Was there more to the story of Al turning down the NCAA bid? What I've always been told is that he was unhappy with the region we were placed in...on its face, that always seemed like a silly thing to get so upset that you would turn down an NCAA bid. I knew Al and the NCAA had an adversarial history and I assumed that had something to do with it.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on February 24, 2017, 11:24:06 AM
Help us youngsters out. We weren't even alive so we are lacking a lot of context. Was there more to the story of Al turning down the NCAA bid? What I've always been told is that he was unhappy with the region we were placed in...on its face, that always seemed like a silly thing to get so upset that you would turn down an NCAA bid. I knew Al and the NCAA had an adversarial history and I assumed that had something to do with it.
This much IS known. There was personal animosity between Adolph Rupp and Al McGuire stemming from the year before when MU beat a highly ranked Kentucky in the NCAA. Both George and Dean were members of that 68-69 team. Seeding for the 1969-70 team allowed for the 3rd of 3 midwest 'at large' independents to be shipped out of region, in this case from Dayton (where Kentucky would be) to Ft. Worth.
The committee, some believe under pressure from Rupp, designated us 3rd and shipped us out leaving Notre Dame and Jacksonville to play in Dayton. And it's alleged, although not confirmed that I know, that Rupp's incentive wasn't so much that he feared Marquette but that losing to a team in the Tourney that included minority players the prior year was more than he could handle. It's well known that Rupp was a devout racist. So it's possible that he simply didn't want to lose to us again. But it's also possible that the committee buckled to pressure for an inappropriate reason. And if Coach Al believed that in his heart (we'll never really know) then his not so quiet defiance was yet another reason that statue entering the McGuire center stands for something important.
Quote from: jsglow on February 24, 2017, 12:03:59 PM
This much IS known. There was personal animosity between Adolph Rupp and Al McGuire stemming from the year before when MU beat a highly ranked Kentucky in the NCAA. Both George and Dean were members of that 68-69 team. Seeding for the 1969-70 team allowed for the 3rd of 3 midwest 'at large' independents to be shipped out of region, in this case from Dayton (where Kentucky would be) to Ft. Worth.
The committee, some believe under pressure from Rupp, designated us 3rd and shipped us out leaving Notre Dame and Jacksonville to play in Dayton. And it's alleged, although not confirmed that I know, that Rupp's incentive wasn't so much that he feared Marquette but that losing to a team in the Tourney that included minority players the prior year was more than he could handle. It's well known that Rupp was a devout racist. So it's possible that he simply didn't want to lose to us again. But it's also possible that the committee buckled to pressure for an inappropriate reason. And if Coach Al believed that in his heart (we'll never really know) then his not so quiet defiance was yet another reason that statue entering the McGuire center stands for something important.
But to be fair to the Committee, Jacksonville was the AP#4 team in the last poll before the tournament. They ended up beating Kentucky to get to the Final Four and lost in the championship game to UCLA.
Marquette was #8. Notre Dame was #9, but beat Marquette by one point in double overtime in South Bend.
So the Committee's decision to send Marquette to Texas was most definitely understandable.
Quote from: Dr. Vinnie Boombatz on February 24, 2017, 12:15:54 PM
But to be fair to the Committee, Jacksonville was the AP#4 team in the last poll before the tournament. They ended up beating Kentucky to get to the Final Four and lost in the championship game to UCLA.
Marquette was #8. Notre Dame was #9, but beat Marquette by one point in double overtime in South Bend.
So the Committee's decision to send Marquette to Texas was most definitely understandable.
All true. But we're dealing with perceptions here. And stories from 50 years ago that haven't gone away. Who knows what was in Al's mind or what was happening behind the scenes. TAMU was simply asking why a plane ride might have been so objectionable. If Al believed it true, it was important enough to take a dramatic stand.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on February 24, 2017, 10:46:51 AM
You say that as if it carries weight... it doesn't. Think of it like this, if we recieved an invite to the NCAA tournament now and gave it the finger then went to the NIT and won people would say "well that was supposed to happen" it's no different back then except the NIT teams were a lot better, but they still weren't good enough to make the NCAA tournament so it should have been expected to win. High risk, extremely low reward.
Being top 10 in NCAA appearances would've made us elite in the public's eyes. Another FF would've made us more elite in the public's eyes (and made Al a cement his legacy as the second or third best coach of that era).
That's fine if you don't care what the public thinks, I do. Personally I was over on Holyland of Hoops and a guy said 'yes I know Marquette was good in the 70s but so was Providence and Villanova, they both made the Final Four and Providence were monsters in the 70s' now I'd personally like to have the public perception be hands down that they weren't even remotely near our level and not have to deal with that argument So another bid or FF or S16 or E8 would help that.
One big difference back then was that IIRC only 1 team per conference was allowed in the NCAA. In today's world that would be like not allowing Duke in because UNC was higher ranked. There were plenty of top caliber teams in the NIT unlike today where they are all 2nd tier or worse with todays auto-qualifiers making the NIT.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch
"Marquette [17-10 (8-7), RPI: 67, SOS: 70] Marquette handled St. John's at home Tuesday, a nice respite in the midst of a particularly challenging closing slate to the regular season. The Golden Eagles finish with trips to Providence and Xavier, followed by a visit from Creighton. Marquette has more quality wins than most of the bubble at this point, but its jagged RPI and strength-of-schedule numbers -- especially its sub-250 noncon-SOS mark -- could become a disproportionate drag on its resume."
Quote from: Waldo Jeffers on February 24, 2017, 12:26:04 PM
One big difference back then was that IIRC only 1 team per conference was allowed in the NCAA. In today's world that would be like not allowing Duke in because UNC was higher ranked. There were plenty of top caliber teams in the NIT unlike today where they are all 2nd tier or worse with todays auto-qualifiers making the NIT.
The NCAA was only 24 teams back then. 3 conference champs and 3 'at large' in each region. Can't recall when they went to 32.
Quote from: Dr. Vinnie Boombatz on February 24, 2017, 12:15:54 PM
Marquette was #8. Notre Dame was #9, but beat Marquette by one point in double overtime in South Bend.
I was at the game. We led by 2 and had the ball with maybe 5 seconds left. Inbounded it, our guy was knocked to the ground (no call) and they scored at the buzzer to tie. Only game in my 50 years as a fan where I think we were robbed.
Two of my friends were so pissed they drove back to Milwaukee immediately after the game. My roommate and I stayed and had to hitch hike home, pissed and hungover, the next morning.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on February 22, 2017, 08:39:14 PM
I disagree. The NIT was a great tournament back then and we made plenty of history that year. We beat Dr J, the Maraviches and Louie Carneseca AND pissed the NCAA off so much they made future participation in their tournament mandatory if invited. Win, win as Al and MU continued on a wild 13 year ride as college basketball's most interesting and iconoclastic program.
Not to mention those NY metro area recruits he got in the ensuing years. Not sure how many recruits he would have gotten by playing in New Mexico that year.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 23, 2017, 07:01:03 PM
Bob Lanier was on that St Bonaventure team (Averaged 29 ppg/16 rpg) and Artis Gilmore (26.5 ppg/22 rpg not a typo) was on that Jacksonville squad. I know they aren't sexy names now, but those were very good teams.
Bob Lanier played for the Bucks for awhile. He had biggest shoe size on an NBA court at the time.
That Jacksonville team not only had 7'3"Gilmore but another 7 footer named Pembrook Burrows. That may have been the only team to ever start two seven footers.
Quote from: warriorchick on February 22, 2017, 08:46:45 AM
Plus there's that one time when we hired a bat to attack Ed Cooley....
I had understood it was actually an advanced, prototype drone. A "Bat-drone", if you will.
Quote from: HoopsterBC on February 23, 2017, 02:25:18 PM
I am not sure that Ric Cobb could have taken care of Bill Walton? Nor there forwards Curtis Rowe and Sidney Wicks, Dean might have been able to handle Henry
Bibby, I do not see it. MU was very undersized that year.
Pretty sure it wasn't Bill Walton that year. Might have been Kareem (Lou Alcindor?)?
Quote from: Marqevans on February 24, 2017, 04:18:09 PM
Pretty sure it wasn't Bill Walton that year. Might have been Kareem (Lou Alcindor?)?
Sidney Wicks
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 22, 2017, 09:29:44 AM
On the upside, I think we are in very good position for a NIT berth. It's not what anyone wants, I realize, but it would still be marked improvement from a year ago despite losing a top-20 NBA pick.
The NIT is not erection worthy.
Quote from: DoggyDaddy on February 24, 2017, 04:04:28 PM
Bob Lanier played for the Bucks for awhile. He had biggest shoe size on an NBA court at the time.
That Jacksonville team not only had 7'3"Gilmore but another 7 footer named Pembrook Burrows. That may have been the only team to ever start two seven footers.
Not just shoe size. The Bucks used to practice in the Old Gym, and several of my NROTC friends who also drilled in the gym used to tells stories.
Quote from: Marquette Fan In NY on February 24, 2017, 05:50:16 PM
The NIT is not erection worthy.
After not gettin' any for all these years?
Quote from: jsglow on February 24, 2017, 06:41:50 PM
After not gettin' any for all these years?
"Blue Balls Out", aI-na?
Quote from: jsglow on February 24, 2017, 06:41:50 PM
After not gettin' any for all these years?
At 5 minutes before the close of the bars a lot of noble ideas are compromised. It is still early in the evening.
Quote from: DoggyDaddy on February 24, 2017, 04:04:28 PM
Bob Lanier played for the Bucks for awhile. He had biggest shoe size on an NBA court at the time.
That Jacksonville team not only had 7'3"Gilmore but another 7 footer named Pembrook Burrows. That may have been the only team to ever start two seven footers.
Really ? Stanley Roberts and Shaquille Oneal, both played in the NBA
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on February 24, 2017, 04:26:51 PM
Sidney Wicks
I was wrong, it was Steve Patterson with Wicks and Rowe, still would have been a challenge for MU, more so against Bob Lanier who MU played and killed MU, no
size but Lew Alcindor (not Lou) was drafted by the Bucks in 1969.