How can a team that hasn't lost a game all year (UNC), lose at home to Maryland who came in as an 18 point underdog?
How about UCLA losing at home to 11 point underdag USC?
Tyler Hansbrough and Kevin Love must not be legitimate big men. Either that or they don't have anybody who can shoot.
I guess MU isn't the only team that has disappointing games after all. Wonder if UNC and UCLA fans are starting to talk about being on the bubble, or not being able to win at home.
Bruce Pearl and Tennessee never would have lost those games, I'll tell you that much.
WHAT!?! THESE TEAMS WITH SUCH GREAT VETERANS AREN'T WINNING?
I'll enjoy reading the board again when all 'recent loss' posters leave.
Quote from: marqptm on January 19, 2008, 04:55:28 PM
I'll enjoy reading the board again when all 'recent loss' posters leave.
So we'll see you here about 2:00 tomorrow then.
knock on wood.
You can make fun of me all you want. I really don't care. I asked a simple question and made some comments. I'm entitled to my own opinion as you are. I will not stoop to your level as to make fun of you.
You're right and the rest of the world is wrong.........
Wow. I cant believe you guys are acting like you're 10 years old. The difference between MU and UNC/UCLA is that those teams have won actual basketball games. I know this is hard to believe, but MU is by no means a great team, in fact, they are very average. UNC has wins over Davidson, Clemson, GA Tech, @Kentucky, @ Ohio State. UCLA has wins over Michigan State, Washington State, Davidson, Stanford, Maryland. MU has wins over Coppin State, Savannah State, IPFW, Chaminade, Sacramento State. My god, I think crean can even fit Cardinal-Stritch in on a Tuesday to soften up that tough string of games. Its not uncommon to lose one game a year(the last team to go undefeated was in the 70's). The entire nation would agree that UCLA and UNC are far superior to MU, and they have the records and quality wins to back that up. Just because your still mad, Navin, that MU is just an average team, does not mean you have to go act act like a whining schoolgirl. If your a man, and i assume you are by your name, I suggest you go get some testosterone because Ive seen girls who act more mature than you. What your doing here is something a jealous little girl would do. Just watch tomorrow when MU plays UCONN, their shooters wont show up and they will struggle. Its the same story year after year. Im just wondering if your going to start crying when they lose again? Or will you go into hiding because you have nothing to say. If I may ask a few questions to you Navin...what great shooters do you think MU has? What legitimate big men do they have? Stop getting all defensive when someone rightfully criticizes Mu, its sad and pathetic how immature you are.
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 19, 2008, 08:17:51 PM
The difference between MU and UNC/UCLA is that those teams have won actual basketball games. I know this is hard to believe, but MU is by no means a great team, in fact, they are very average. UNC has wins over Davidson, Clemson, GA Tech, @Kentucky, @ Ohio State. UCLA has wins over Michigan State, Washington State, Davidson, Stanford, Maryland. MU has wins over Coppin State, Savannah State, IPFW, Chaminade, Sacramento State.
Really, are those the only teams they have beaten? I could swear they have more than 5 wins. I could be wrong though.
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 19, 2008, 08:17:51 PM
The entire nation would agree that UCLA and UNC are far superior to MU, and they have the records and quality wins to back that up. Just because your still mad, Navin, that MU is just an average team, does not mean you have to go act act like a whining schoolgirl.
I too would agree that UCLA and UNC are superior to MU (why did you leave out Tennessess?), and I guess we saw today that even they lose games...to heavy underdogs...on their home courts. Yet you would have us believe that a loss to Louisville...a very good Louisville team...helathy for the first time this year...on the road, is somehow an indication that MU is "very average."
MU will spend nearly every week of this season ranked among the top 15 teams in the nation. If that is the definition of very average, then I guess very average will have to do.
Quote from: warriorette on January 19, 2008, 08:07:22 PM
You're right and the rest of the world is wrong.........
Well, I'm not sure about the rest of the world, but yes, I am right.
Your right Navin....they only have 5 wins a piece. I love how you completely ignore the questions I asked you. Is this because you know the answer to both of them is "no one?" The games I referenced were the quality wins of UNC and UCLA, as anyone can tell those are some quality wins. They make up a large portion of their current schedules. MU on the other hand spent the first half of the season playing teams that would lose to most high school teams. Also, I dont know if you happened to follow today's games but that overly awesome Louisville team that is completely unstoppable (its the only possible way they could have beaten the great MU team a few days ago) lost by ten to Seton Hall. If I were you Navin I would start praying because UCONN is one of the best defensive teams in the country (in the top five in blocks per game and defensive field goal percentage). So I would not be surprised if MU is stumped by their defense too. Will you then be able to answer my questions? MU has no great shooter. They have no frontcourt. Just be prepared for a long day tomorrow, and don't walk outside after MU loses, I wouldn't want your tear ducts to freeze.
Also, TN happened to beat Ohio State today and should be in the top 5 this next week. That makes them 16-1 and tops in the rpi. I just wanted to let you know that.
And Im happy that you think top 15 finishes for the season means something. Quick, tell me every team that finished in the top 15 the last 5 years? Cant do it without looking it up online? Winning championships is all that matters. MU is a long way from accomplishing that. Ill call you though when TN makes the final four and challenges for the national championship? BTW you wouldn't happen to like The University of Wisconsin football team, do you?
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 19, 2008, 09:25:26 PM
Winning championships is all that matters.
How many of these championships has Tennessee won?
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 19, 2008, 09:25:26 PM
Ill call you though when TN makes the final four and challenges for the national championship?
Don't you mean when they
win the national championship, since that's all that matters?
FOr the record, if UW-Madison never won another football game again, that's be too soon for me. Nice try though.
I would agree, TN has not won any national championships. We, in fact, do not have a very proud tradition in mens basketball. Even more so, we were a bad, at best, team until Bruce Pearl came here 2 1/2 years ago. See, I can admit that. It kind of lessens my argument that national championships is all that matters and MU has 1, TN has 0. But I can base my arguments in reality, where you can only make blatant biased statements similar to MU is an elite basketball team. It would seem to me, however, that TN is much closer to winning their first national championship then MU is to winning their second. Lets clear one thing up though, I love MU. I attended all their home games when I was younger. I still attend their games when I am in town. I am just saying that in relation to the rest of the country, at this point in time MU is an average team. No Big East Championships, no National Championships in the last 3 decades. They havent won an NCAA tournament game since Wades final four. TN has been building the last 3 yrs into a national power. TN has 3 tourney wins the last 2 yrs, and an SEC East Title. TN plays teams with a pulse in their out-of-conference schedule, Marquette plays teams that couldn't score 100 points if you locked them in a gym for the day. They have a realistic chance at winning a national championship. They have great depth, shooters, a great frontcourt and backcourt. Their defense has improved dramatically as of late. I still concede that they give up a lot of offensive rebounds but it hasn't cost them yet. Marquette will struggle to win the rest of the year because they can't shoot and will play teams that can actually play defense.
MUVOL why did you pick MUs worst losses and UNC and UCLAs best losses... thats not really a fair comparison. I could pick 5 cupcakes for both UNC and UCLA as well...
Because, I cant name more than maybe 2 decent wins for MU, the wins for UNC and UCLA are much better wins than anything MU has to show. MU has not beaten any team this year that is seen as a dominant team. Wisc was a good win, but that is about it. Every team plays cupcakes, there are too many out of conference games to fill. No team is going to play all top 15 teams when they do not have to. Every team wants at least 4 or 5 games that are essentially automatic wins. The difference is that MU plays more than that, and their "signature wins" are against softer teams like Wisconsin. UNC and UCLA have some great wins, against dominant teams. The reason I point to MU's bad wins is because all they have is bad wins. I have never picked on MUS bad loses here, I think they should have beaten WVU and Louisville, but they couldn't. The played very well against a strong Duke team, but they lost. Whether it was close or not, a loss is a loss, they all hurt in the end. The loses to Louisville and WVU aren't necessarily bad, but they should have won those games. If they want to be seen as an elite team, they HAVE to win those games. They can't because they dont have great shooters. They have streaky shooters. On any given night James, Fitz, McNeal, Cubian, Acker, Matthews and/or Haywood can score. But too few show up on any given night. ON a night like Louisville none of them show up. For the rest of the season they are going to be unpredictable. I can sit here and say they wont score against UCONN, but they could also go out and scorch the nets. I would lean towards the first one because they have proven to not be consistently great at scoring. Great teams score, average teams are streaky. MU is streaky, thats the best they can hope for this year.
VOL, to be fair, and I'm a little down on this team at this moment, we did go into Madison and beat a team that would beat Tennessee 100 of 100 times in that building.
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 19, 2008, 10:25:02 PM
Because, I cant name more than maybe 2 decent wins for MU, the wins for UNC and UCLA are much better wins than anything MU has to show. MU has not beaten any team this year that is seen as a dominant team. Wisc was a good win, but that is about it. Every team plays cupcakes, there are too many out of conference games to fill. No team is going to play all top 15 teams when they do not have to. Every team wants at least 4 or 5 games that are essentially automatic wins. The difference is that MU plays more than that, and their "signature wins" are against softer teams like Wisconsin. UNC and UCLA have some great wins, against dominant teams. The reason I point to MU's bad wins is because all they have is bad wins. I have never picked on MUS bad loses here, I think they should have beaten WVU and Louisville, but they couldn't. The played very well against a strong Duke team, but they lost. Whether it was close or not, a loss is a loss, they all hurt in the end. The loses to Louisville and WVU aren't necessarily bad, but they should have won those games. If they want to be seen as an elite team, they HAVE to win those games. They can't because they dont have great shooters. They have streaky shooters. On any given night James, Fitz, McNeal, Cubian, Acker, Matthews and/or Haywood can score. But too few show up on any given night. ON a night like Louisville none of them show up. For the rest of the season they are going to be unpredictable. I can sit here and say they wont score against UCONN, but they could also go out and scorch the nets. I would lean towards the first one because they have proven to not be consistently great at scoring. Great teams score, average teams are streaky. MU is streaky, thats the best they can hope for this year.
So then why are you here? Isn't their a Bruce Pearl Handjob festival site you should be at?
Scoopers, don't get worked up about this guy. He won't be back after tomorrow until MU loses again.
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 19, 2008, 08:17:51 PM
Wow. I cant believe you guys are acting like you're 10 years old. The difference between MU and UNC/UCLA is that those teams have won actual basketball games. I know this is hard to believe, but MU is by no means a great team, in fact, they are very average. UNC has wins over Davidson, Clemson, GA Tech, @Kentucky, @ Ohio State. UCLA has wins over Michigan State, Washington State, Davidson, Stanford, Maryland. MU has wins over Coppin State, Savannah State, IPFW, Chaminade, Sacramento State.
You're giving UNC credit for beating Kentucky this year? Hell, GARDNER WEBB beat Kentucky this year!
We beat Wisconsin on the road (ranked 4th in the Pomeroy), but you find UCLA's neutral court win over 19th Michigan State or home win over 9th Washington State (not to mention #65 Davidson) far more impressive?
Our three losses are to #3 Duke, #7 West Virgina and #14 Louisville. UCLA lost to #16 Texas and #38 Southern Cal (at home). Not only does MU have a more impressive win than anyone UCLA has beaten, our worst loss is nowhere near as bad.
UNC's best win is over #17 Clemson--and it took them overtime to do it. Clemson happens to be the one and ONLY game they've played against a team in Pomeroy's top 20. Their loss is to #54 Maryland. At Home.
So I certainly don't buy this garbage about how much better UCLA and UNC are because they've played a much more difficult schedule.
UCLA is arguably not as good as MU, based on comparing best wins and worst losses to date. UNC may well be better, but they haven't played anyone that you can point to that would prove it.
MUVOL, you seem to be a Tennessee fan. You should not consider yourself a Marquette fans. You are not a true fan. Please leave this board and go to some Vol bball boards. Muscoop.com is for true Warrior fans that want to talk about Marquette hoops and support our team. Go Warriors!!!
Btw. Tennessee must suck, they haven't beaten anyone besides the likes of Ark Monticello, Prairie View A&M, Middle Tennessee State, North Carolina A&T, and Temple. Come on, get real. Come talk when Tenn. makes the Final 4 or wins the national championship. you can talk all about how "tenn. will make a run for the final four, and contend for the national championship" but they actually have to do it. yes, they have a good team, but don't start questioning the level marquette is on, and saying that they are an "average" team! get real! Marquette is not an "average" team, they are an above average to great team. WARRIORS!!!
This guy is doing nothing to help my street cred. I'm going to have launch a PR campaign to restore my good name. For the record, I do not know MUVOL06 and I do not support his opinions.
Marquette Vol, you are right, I do not know you nor did I even realize someone might have a similar name. For that I am sorry. Now.... For the record, who cares about the Pomeroy rankings, does the NCAA use it? No. IN the NCAA RPI (the one the NCAA uses when seeding teams for the tournament-otherwise known as the most important poll when Tournament time comes around) TN is ranked number 1. This is because they have beaten teams with a pulse, unlike Marq. Who cares what some internet hack with a ranking system thinks, the only one that matters is the NCAA RPI. For marqptm I will be back tomorrow whether or not MU loses, its not like beating UCONN is something special anymore. To Shooter, just because I support TN does not mean I hate MU. I like MU and have always supported them, but I am being realistic here. Everything I have said has had some factual basis. WIsc would not beat TN 100 times out of 100. This is just a statement. Where are you facts to back it up. When I say opinion statements I always start with an "I think" or "I believe" and then provide factual basis for it. Just because some of you cant handle the facts does not mean I am wrong, or I hate MU, The facts are what they are, nothing more, nothing less. I wish Marquette would recruit better shooters and some big men. These are their weaknesses and they ALWAYS get exposed by them. . Wisc is having a down year this year, they have not been a very good team like in years past, but they are still capable of being ranked. To say that TN sucks is your narrowminded bias. If you truly cared about MU and basketball in general you would not make such stupid comments. MU has to learn from teams like TN because they are a school that is getting topnotch recruits. With Pearl there he easily can recruit the Milwaukee area, so not only is Crean battling Bo Ryan, but he is also fighting off Bruce Pearl. I hate seeing MU play these nobody teams early in the season because it does them no good when Big East play begins. It doesn't even help their resume when seeding purposes look at these things. TN plays powderpuffs, just like every other team. The difference, as I have said before is MU plays nothing but powderpuffs, TN played on the road @ Xavier, @ Gonzaga, OSU, and @ Memphis. I made the statement that TN will challenge for a National Championship because I believe they can. They have had a difficult schedule so far and are 16-1 @ this point in the season, they have PROVED they are a good team. Marquette is an average team, they have no signature wins to show of. This is a fact. Beating a Wisconsin team is not good enough to make people say "WOW Marquette is really good this year" They have PROVED nothing this season so far, and no one can disprove me on that. Show me the BIG wins. Show me the clutch performances by the players. All Im saying is that MU may be great...but they have nothing to prove that. They have proved they are average. TN has proved they are a very good team. They have the wins and the performances to back it up. And finally, I am going to have to launch an "educate Marquette fans as to the difference between biased opinions and facts" campaign.
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 20, 2008, 01:51:40 AM
Marquette Vol, you are right, I do not know you nor did I even realize someone might have a similar name. For that I am sorry. Now.... For the record, who cares about the Pomeroy rankings, does the NCAA use it? No. IN the NCAA RPI (the one the NCAA uses when seeding teams for the tournament-otherwise known as the most important poll when Tournament time comes around) TN is ranked number 1. This is because they have beaten teams with a pulse, unlike Marq. Who cares what some internet hack with a ranking system thinks, the only one that matters is the NCAA RPI. For marqptm I will be back tomorrow whether or not MU loses, its not like beating UCONN is something special anymore. To Shooter, just because I support TN does not mean I hate MU. I like MU and have always supported them, but I am being realistic here. Everything I have said has had some factual basis. WIsc would not beat TN 100 times out of 100. This is just a statement. Where are you facts to back it up. When I say opinion statements I always start with an "I think" or "I believe" and then provide factual basis for it. Just because some of you cant handle the facts does not mean I am wrong, or I hate MU, The facts are what they are, nothing more, nothing less. I wish Marquette would recruit better shooters and some big men. These are their weaknesses and they ALWAYS get exposed by them. . Wisc is having a down year this year, they have not been a very good team like in years past, but they are still capable of being ranked. To say that TN sucks is your narrowminded bias. If you truly cared about MU and basketball in general you would not make such stupid comments. MU has to learn from teams like TN because they are a school that is getting topnotch recruits. With Pearl there he easily can recruit the Milwaukee area, so not only is Crean battling Bo Ryan, but he is also fighting off Bruce Pearl. I hate seeing MU play these nobody teams early in the season because it does them no good when Big East play begins. It doesn't even help their resume when seeding purposes look at these things. TN plays powderpuffs, just like every other team. The difference, as I have said before is MU plays nothing but powderpuffs, TN played on the road @ Xavier, @ Gonzaga, OSU, and @ Memphis. I made the statement that TN will challenge for a National Championship because I believe they can. They have had a difficult schedule so far and are 16-1 @ this point in the season, they have PROVED they are a good team. Marquette is an average team, they have no signature wins to show of. This is a fact. Beating a Wisconsin team is not good enough to make people say "WOW Marquette is really good this year" They have PROVED nothing this season so far, and no one can disprove me on that. Show me the BIG wins. Show me the clutch performances by the players. All Im saying is that MU may be great...but they have nothing to prove that. They have proved they are average. TN has proved they are a very good team. They have the wins and the performances to back it up. And finally, I am going to have to launch an "educate Marquette fans as to the difference between biased opinions and facts" campaign.
Is there any way to insert the editing mark for "start a new f#$*ing paragraph"?
Seconded. MUVOL06, please, please put paragraphs in your posts.
I second the paragraph markers comment. That was incredibly hard to read.
Also, just for the record, since you like facts and data, the average RPI for UCLA, MU, UNC and Tenn are below:
Median
UCLA: 125
Tenn: 96
MU: 124
UNC: 121
Lowest
UCLA: 8
Tenn: 10
MU: 9
UNC: 24
Highest
UCLA: 258
Tenn: 341
MU: 331
UNC: 293
Now, I'm not a numbers guy (I think the games speak for themselves) but clearly MU is hanging with the "big boys."
So my numbers are completely transparent, I had to remove one team from UCLA, Tenn and MUs schedules because I couldn't find them. In MUs case it was the Chaminade game in the Maui Invitational, and they are DII. I didn't care enough to find out if that was also the case with the other teams I couldn't find, I just skipped them. UNC had no un-findable teams.
why do you guys even respond to this guy? don't you think it would piss him off more if he were ignored?
don't fuel his rants
Prevent Offense, I like how you can skew data to make it seem like you are smart. I think you need to define what the hell numbers you are saying up there. And I guess since none of you have an attention span or a even a fourth-grade reading level, I will break my posts into paragraphs.
1st off, I will start and say your numbers are not the individual teams RPI's, it is the average RPI of the opponents those teams have played. SO for the median number, TN has by far played the best opponents, for that I thank you for helping my point. But where are you getting the median RPI? Did you just find every opponent and average it out yourself? The Strength of Schedule that they add to their rankings goes like this:
TN: 4th hardest
UNC: 16th
UCLA:22nd
MU: 31st
SO Marquette has the easiest schedule in the eyes of the NCAA among those teams
As for the lowest RPI, you are completely wrong. the 341st team is Eastern Illinois, a team TN has not played this season. EIU is also the worst team in the RPI. TN worst RPI opponent was Prarie View A&M @ 326. MU is still Sacramento St. @ 331. So MU has played the worst opponent so far.
And my favorite biased numbers are the highest ranked opponents. MU did play the 9th team in the country. That team is Duke, a team MU lost to. So who cares if you played a great team if you lost. The highest ranked victory MU has is against 16th Wisc. TN has wins over 10th Vanderbilt, 14th Ole Miss, 15th Xavier. Thats 3 opponents that are better ranked than MU's best win.
http://kenpom.com/rpi.php
You can check those numbers there.
But since your not a numbers guy, and say the games speak for themselves. Do you really think MU can hang with the big teams. How about that Louisville win the other day? Or wait, that was a 20 point loss to an unranked team that would lose to Seton hall last night. The only win as I have said was a win over wisc. Thats not a GREAT win. It is a good win, but it is their only win. Come on you guys, stop being so biased and become more realistic. MU is just an average team. The numbers speak for themselves. Oh, and the games for those who don't like numbers say MU is not playing too well right now
Bruce clapclap clapclap
Pearl clapclap clapclap
Bruce clapclap clapclap
Pearl clapclap clapclap
Bruce clapclap clapclap
Pearl clapclap clapclap
Bruce clapclap clapclap
Pearl clapclap clapclap
If we are going to do nominations again... I nominate this thread for weirdest new topic.
I guess it's a nice change of pace from the normal schedule bashing, big-man loving and nickname hating stuff... but why are we comparing UT to MU?
UT is a good team and having a good year.
MU is a good team and having a good year.
NEXT TOPIC!
MU an average team? Seriously? I'm not promising a national title (or even a conference title)... but this year's program certainly isn't average.
Again, what a weird thread.
The majority of teams do not win National Championships or conference titles. That makes a team average. If you can not contend for either title , like Marquette, you are average. Thats it.
Now this last post may be the most ridiculous of all. So if you don't win a conference title or a National Title, you're average? By the way, notice my use of the contraction, VOL - I see you like to use the word your for you're repeatedly. So the winner of the A10 conference (whoever that may be)is not average, but the seond place team in the Big East is??????/
Quote from: 2002mualum on January 20, 2008, 10:33:14 AM
If we are going to do nominations again... I nominate this thread for weirdest new topic.
Even though I am certainly guilty of feeding the troll, I was thinking the same thing. First of all why is there some odd little Tennessee (of all places) fan here pretending to also be an MU fan? Second, why are others (myself included) arguing with him?
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on January 20, 2008, 11:12:01 AM
Quote from: 2002mualum on January 20, 2008, 10:33:14 AM
If we are going to do nominations again... I nominate this thread for weirdest new topic.
Even though I am certainly guilty of feeding the troll, I was thinking the same thing. First of all why is there some odd little Tennessee (of all places) fan here pretending to also be an MU fan? Second, why are others (myself included) arguing with him?
Gee.. let's think about this one.....(now this is tough...) -- maybe it's because YOU were the one that started this thread in mockery of the thread I started???????
I don't know any of you people but I think it's safe to say that you CAN like, and be a fan of, more than one team.
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 20, 2008, 10:36:06 AM
The majority of teams do not win National Championships or conference titles. That makes a team average. If you can not contend for either title , like Marquette, you are average. Thats it.
I think I know what you are trying to say... but you need a different word than "average" because you aren't using it correctly.
Here is the definition of average:
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/average
1 a: a single value (as a mean, mode, or median) that summarizes or represents the general significance of a set of unequal values b: mean 1b2 a: an estimation of or approximation to an arithmetic mean b: a level (as of intelligence) typical of a group, class, or series <above the average>3: a ratio expressing the average performance especially of an athletic team or an athlete computed according to the number of opportunities for successful performance
Your are using the word "average" to represent the vast majority of teams, which just isn't what "average" means.
I know often times it becomes its culturally common for a word's actual meaning to be implied or whatever... but seriously, what you are describing as "average" isn't even close.
I don't want to argue with you about hoops (because at this point its just differing opinions)... but your poor use of punctuation, grammar and syntax are hurting your ability to communicate your ideas accurately.
I think the word "majority" might work better than "average".
There are elite teams... and then there is the majority of others. I think that is what you are trying to say. Right?
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 20, 2008, 09:39:17 AM
Prevent Offense, I like how you can skew data to make it seem like you are smart. I think you need to define what the hell numbers you are saying up there. And I guess since none of you have an attention span or a even a fourth-grade reading level, I will break my posts into paragraphs.
I'm a guilty of feeding :( I was just trying to point out to this guy that he is as guilty of being biased and misinformed as anyone. I might have messed up in my table when I averaged the RPIs of the opposing teams, and that I'll admit. Originally when I couldn't find a team, like
Arkansas Monticello, I was going to award them the lowest (highest) RPI. Then I decided against it, but must have erased the wrong number. Oops. Still proved my point that the average RPI of the teams faced are not drastically different. Heck, looking at the fact that MU is 31st in SOS with nearly the entire BE schedule ahead of us proves my point too.
But, after reading this inflammatory response from an obviously jaded and irrational individual (who apparently is so perfect that even gentle criticism -- like his lacking of paragraph structure -- disturbs him to the core), I too will bow out.
Tenn might be better than MU this year. I'd wager UNC is. That doesn't make MU average -- and there is a such thing as a good season without a title.
I'm outie :)
Am I jaded and irrational because I am right. All I have done is post facts. You can attack my lack of punctuation, and word usage. I could care less, it's not like Im in school being graded for something on a message board. I find it funny though how you are starting to attack the little things about what I am saying because my argument is too fact based to argue. Call me a troll, tell me I don't support MU, I am not going to lose any sleep over it. My goal in my arguments is to provide UNBIASED factual information. Im sorry the facts do not paint a pretty picture for MU. I know its hard for everyone here to distance themselves from their blind love. Marquette is not an elite team. They are in the "MAJORITY."
Quote from: warriorette on January 20, 2008, 11:17:59 AM
I don't know any of you people but I think it's safe to say that you CAN like, and be a fan of, more than one team.
Actually, I wasn't referring to you. That other guy is clearly NOT an MU fan.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on January 20, 2008, 12:54:04 PM
Quote from: warriorette on January 20, 2008, 11:17:59 AM
I don't know any of you people but I think it's safe to say that you CAN like, and be a fan of, more than one team.
Actually, I wasn't referring to you. That other guy is clearly NOT an MU fan.
Ok, fine, I can accept that. I guess I am put off by the fact that you mocked me to begin with. Like I stated, I was only stating my opinion - I never said anything negative about Marquette or any players like some people do here. I was merely stating that it would be great if Marquette had those two types of players.
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 20, 2008, 12:38:00 PM
Am I jaded and irrational because I am right. All I have done is post facts. You can attack my lack of punctuation, and word usage. I could care less, it's not like Im in school being graded for something on a message board. I find it funny though how you are starting to attack the little things about what I am saying because my argument is too fact based to argue. Call me a troll, tell me I don't support MU, I am not going to lose any sleep over it. My goal in my arguments is to provide UNBIASED factual information. Im sorry the facts do not paint a pretty picture for MU. I know its hard for everyone here to distance themselves from their blind love. Marquette is not an elite team. They are in the "MAJORITY."
The correct phrase is "couldn't care less". Not "could care less". (think about what you are actually trying to say).
I'm picking on your writing because you claim to present a factual argument, but it's hard to be factual when you don't even know the definition of the words you are using.
is spot on. UT has one hell of a coach.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on January 20, 2008, 10:35:59 PM
is spot on. UT has one hell of a coach.
You mean the womens' coach?
(okay, okay, that was just thrown in there for a laugh)
2002mualum....stop being bitter after another disappointed loss. MU is not a good team, I know you cant argue me on my facts, so just keep picking on me instead. Either way MU looked pathetic today.
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 21, 2008, 01:44:54 AM
2002mualum....stop being bitter after another disappointed loss. MU is not a good team, I know you cant argue me on my facts, so just keep picking on me instead. Either way MU looked pathetic today.
MU has looked bad the past 2 games, but to say they aren't a good team is just short-sighted.
IF/WHEN UT loses a couple in a row, it won't make them a bad team.
I do think UT is probably better than MU... but that doesn't mean MU is not good. Conversely, when MU wins a couple in a row, they won't be suddenly be "great". Get it? The sports pendulum doesn't swing like that... especially in college hoops.
MU has not played well on the road (at all), and has some serious work to do... but again, that doesn't mean that they aren't good.
Also, here is a piece of advice: When you go on another team's board to tell them how their team isn't good... make sure your writing is tight, otherwise you look silly and have to ask people to quit picking on you for not being able to write.
Keep a level head, use facts, and understand what you are actually trying to say when you write it.
MUalum...For the thousandth time, tell me what MU has done this season to prove they are a good team?/ use your facts. Where are there solid wins? Where is their difficult schedule? Read all of my posts. I have asked the same questions in every post and no one has responded to them. All MU has shown this year is they are capable of one solid road win (Wisc). They can beat the bad teams in division 1 basketball (the Savannah states, coppin states, IPFW). They lose to just about every team in a major conference. (Duke, WVU, Louisville, UCONN). If Tennessee happens to lose 2 straight this year they still have great wins over Ole Miss, Vanderbilt, @Xavier, @Gonzaga, neutral court vs WVU. So keep calling me names and criticizing some small errors in my writing. At the end of the day you all know I am right and have used facts. All you say is that "MU isn't bad, i dont know why, they just arent. MU is an elite team." For the last time, show me the wins that PROVE this. Its one thing to say stupid things, its another to back them up with facts.
Before someone jumps all over me, in my last posts, I say Savannah States, Coppin States in reference to teams like them, including themselves. I know it is Savannah State and Coppin State.
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 21, 2008, 10:26:02 AM
Before someone jumps all over me, in my last posts, I say Savannah States, Coppin States in reference to teams like them, including themselves. I know it is Savannah State and Coppin State.
Go Vols!
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 21, 2008, 10:21:10 AM
MUalum...For the thousandth time, tell me what MU has done this season to prove they are a good team?/ use your facts. Where are there solid wins? Where is their difficult schedule? Read all of my posts. I have asked the same questions in every post and no one has responded to them. All MU has shown this year is they are capable of one solid road win (Wisc). They can beat the bad teams in division 1 basketball (the Savannah states, coppin states, IPFW). They lose to just about every team in a major conference. (Duke, WVU, Louisville, UCONN). If Tennessee happens to lose 2 straight this year they still have great wins over Ole Miss, Vanderbilt, @Xavier, @Gonzaga, neutral court vs WVU. So keep calling me names and criticizing some small errors in my writing. At the end of the day you all know I am right and have used facts. All you say is that "MU isn't bad, i dont know why, they just arent. MU is an elite team." For the last time, show me the wins that PROVE this. Its one thing to say stupid things, its another to back them up with facts.
OK,
I will be more clear:
Wins over:
Oklahoma St
UW-Madison
UProv
Seton Hall
Notre Dame
A current RPI of 23 with a chance to improve on that as they get more wins at home (it appears like wins on the road will be tough for this team, we will have to see how that goes).
I'm not claiming that MU is elite. I'm not claiming that MU is better than UT.
Your claim before was that they were "average", which isn't true.
Now you claim that they "aren't good", which really isn't true (although its more a matter of opinion than the whole "average" thing).
I think a team in a major conf. with an RPI in the top 25 at this point in the season has proven they are pretty good.
Lastly, I watch MU actually play. So, while I have provided some numbers, I'm also giving you an honest assessment that they are a pretty good basketball team. They have some weaknesses, but they are certainly not as bad as you have portrayed them
Let's see where MU is at the end of the season. My bet is that they will be considered a good team.
I also watch MU play, every game. What I have seen is that Oklahoma State, Seton Hall, and Notre Dame are by no means considered great wins for MU. What I have seen though is a team that can not shoot the ball. I believe that you even say on another thread that MU is streaky shooting at best, something I have said before. The rest of the season will be tough. Every team they play will run the zone and force them to shoot. For a few games they will shoot well. They have proven that every few games they can shoot well, ie ND, Providence. I would not be surprised to see MU lose 6-7 more games(@ Cincy, Louisville, @ Seton Hall, Pitt, G'Town, Nova, @ Syracuse). Trust me, they will struggle to get into the NCAA tournament. When MU is sitting on the bubble later this year, they will have very few games to convince the committee with, saying they deserve a spot. They need some "Quality wins" to make their case. A win over Georgetown, Pitt, or Villanova would greatly help them.
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 21, 2008, 11:37:37 AM
I also watch MU play, every game. What I have seen is that Oklahoma State, Seton Hall, and Notre Dame are by no means considered great wins for MU. What I have seen though is a team that can not shoot the ball. I believe that you even say on another thread that MU is streaky shooting at best, something I have said before. The rest of the season will be tough. Every team they play will run the zone and force them to shoot. For a few games they will shoot well. They have proven that every few games they can shoot well, ie ND, Providence. I would not be surprised to see MU lose 6-7 more games(@ Cincy, Louisville, @ Seton Hall, Pitt, G'Town, Nova, @ Syracuse). Trust me, they will struggle to get into the NCAA tournament. When MU is sitting on the bubble later this year, they will have very few games to convince the committee with, saying they deserve a spot. They need some "Quality wins" to make their case. A win over Georgetown, Pitt, or Villanova would greatly help them.
I can't disagree with what you are saying (that they need to win more games), but that fact that you think they "aren't good" is just a little silly.
You asked for facts, I gave you facts. While I don't think any of those are "great wins" (never said that they were), they are certainly good enough to put MU in the top 25 of RPI.
FACT.
Now the rest of it you are just giving an opinion/prediction. That's not facts.
You just don't think MU is good. That is just your opinion. No big deal, you are entitled to it. But, please don't present conjecture as factual. It isn't. I gave you facts, and you ran off at the mouth/keyboard about where MU will be at the end of the year.
They haven't played well lately. That's factual.
Predicting where they end up at the end of the year is NOT factual.
Again, you may not think that tied for 4th place in the BEAST and top 25 in RPI is "good", but I suspect most programs/experts would consider that a good team.
See this is what I am talking about. I never presented them as losing 6-7 games as fact. Thats a fact. I said I wouldn't be surprised, where does that mean "They will?" I presented that as my opinion, meaning I believe it could happen. I have never tried to play off my opinion as fact, ever. And that is a fact.
Trust me, they will struggle to get into the NCAA tournament. When MU is sitting on the bubble later this year, they will have very few games to convince the committee with, saying they deserve a spot. They need some "Quality wins" to make their case. A win over Georgetown, Pitt, or Villanova would greatly help them.
[/quote]
This is beautiful - come on this board, incite a near riot while attacking the "home" team on this blog, then ask us to "trust you" as if you're the authority on all things college basketball.
Actually, if we hadn't beaten Pitt in the last game of the year last season, it would not have been surprising if we had been left home with Syracuse taking our place.
I think missing the tournament at this point would take a total collapse, but if we don't start playing better it could happen.
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 21, 2008, 12:48:15 PM
See this is what I am talking about. I never presented them as losing 6-7 games as fact. Thats a fact. I said I wouldn't be surprised, where does that mean "They will?" I presented that as my opinion, meaning I believe it could happen. I have never tried to play off my opinion as fact, ever. And that is a fact.
Hold on.
Let me be be more concise.
You asked for factual evidence that MU was a good team.
I supplied you with a number of decent wins (some better than others) and MU's current RPI rating.
Those are the facts.
That's it.
Let ME be more concise then. MU has 2 good wins, Wisconsin and Providence. That is it. 2 quality wins will not get a team in the tournament. MU has had the chance to pick up solid victories (Duke and WVU) and could not get them. The selection committee is not concerned with losses (close, big, whatever....a loss is a loss). If MU would play a tougher out of conference schedule they would have a chance to pick up some more appealing wins, but they don't. This means they have to win the big games in their conference, and so far they have not.
*Opinion alert* (not to be confused with as fact)
If MU beats the teams that they are higher ranked than, and lose to those who are higher than MU, then they are going to have a tough time making the tournament. There are so many teams with 2 quality wins (ands even more will be around at the end of the season), that MU could very well get lost in the shuffle.
With the way MU is playing I do not think it is unrealistic for them to struggle the rest of the season, they have showed nothing to prove otherwise. They have played 17 games so far, and only have 2 quality wins to show for it.
(http://www.drewflaherty.com/images/boring!!!.jpg)
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 21, 2008, 03:36:21 PM
Let ME be more concise then. MU has 2 good wins, Wisconsin and Providence. That is it. 2 quality wins will not get a team in the tournament. MU has had the chance to pick up solid victories (Duke and WVU) and could not get them. The selection committee is not concerned with losses (close, big, whatever....a loss is a loss). If MU would play a tougher out of conference schedule they would have a chance to pick up some more appealing wins, but they don't. This means they have to win the big games in their conference, and so far they have not.
*Opinion alert* (not to be confused with as fact)
If MU beats the teams that they are higher ranked than, and lose to those who are higher than MU, then they are going to have a tough time making the tournament. There are so many teams with 2 quality wins (ands even more will be around at the end of the season), that MU could very well get lost in the shuffle.
With the way MU is playing I do not think it is unrealistic for them to struggle the rest of the season, they have showed nothing to prove otherwise. They have played 17 games so far, and only have 2 quality wins to show for it.
If MU only has 2 quality wins, how are they ranked in the polls and be in the top 25 in RPI?
How does that work? Is the system that flawed?
I understand we have differing opinions at this point, and that's aok... no problem with that.
I'm only debating the fact that you called MU "average", and now you claim that they "aren't good".
The facts (which you asked for) don't really support your current claim, regardless of what MU does the rest of the year.
At the end of the day, we have different opinions. MU is going to play the rest of the games, so I guess we will see at the end of the year how "good" or "bad" MU really is.
Marquette is still ranked in both polls because they started the season highly ranked and only have 4 losses. After having played such a weak non conference schedule, this comes as no surprise. The voters still think MU has a chance to be ranked in the top 20 if they can get a quality win. The last two losses hurt MU, but not as bad as people would think. Louisville and UCONN are decent teams. Had MU started the season outside of the top 25, I think that they wouldn't be ranked right now. The only win that could have moved them into the polls, in this case, would have been Wisconsin. After the last two games however, they Would have fallen out (If it hadn't occurred after the WVU loss). Again, this is pure speculation as I do not know what the voters are thinking. Unfortunately, the voters do not put teams into the NCAA tournament. The NCAA does. As for your comment that the facts do not support my claim, you are wrong. Let me clear this up for you. Currently MU has 2 wins that mean something in the eyes of the selection committee (Wisconsin and Providence). 2 wins is not enough to get you into the tournament. If MU does not make the tournament that means that they are not a good team. Nobody considers NIT teams good. Unless MU gets a win against a team like G'Town, Pitt or Villanova (at this point in the season that seems kind of difficult) they will most likely not make the tournament. The losses will add up, and they will fall from the rankings. Also, they just won't have the quality wins to convince someone they deserve a spot in the tournament. I agree that we have differing opinions. You obviously see something in MU that I don't. You seem to be hanging on to the preseason hype of the big 3. I'm relying on what MU has proven, that they severely lack in quality wins. If they can't pick up at least one more big win in conference,the NIT could become a real possibility.
ND isn't a quality win? It has to be a better win than Providence, doesn't it?
I know what this guy is trying to say, but he's nuts if he doesn't think we're going to beat a couple of these "quality teams" at home the rest of the year.
I think we'll make the tourney, but I don't think it's a foregone conclusion. We could easily lose 7 or 8 games in the Big East.
I am not going to bet money because I think MU will make the tournament. I have never said that they won't, but I do believe that they need at least 1 more significant victory to strengthen their resume. Without another big win it will be tough, and I think with their current resume is not strong enough to validate them making the tournament. In the coming weeks I hope MU succeeds and develops a jump shot. If this happens, MU will be able to run down teams because the zone will not defeat them. I wish MU luck this week against DePaul. I will not be posting on this thread again because it is just two sides (albeit my side is much smaller) arguing over the same points. I really hope I am proved wrong and MU makes a deep tourney run. I will still post my thoughts on this site, because I feel as though I provide an unbiased factual view of MU basketball. Although some of you may find me a bit harsh on the Eagles, I have used a fact-based argument which can not be ignored, even by the most die-hard fans. We will all have to see how this season turns out, and I believe with some small changes that MU can be a difficult team to face. When this season is over, I want to be able to say "Wow, MU really had a great season." These are my hopes.
In regards to certain people who have tried ever-so-hard to discredit me, going so far as to call me names and ridicule the smallest of errors in my writing, I really enjoyed the spirited discussions. I hope you have learned as much from me, as I have learned from you. Go Golden Eagles! But we will always be Warriors!
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 21, 2008, 05:14:58 PM
I am not going to bet money because I think MU will make the tournament. I have never said that they won't, but I do believe that they need at least 1 more significant victory to strengthen their resume. Without another big win it will be tough, and I think with their current resume is not strong enough to validate them making the tournament. In the coming weeks I hope MU succeeds and develops a jump shot. If this happens, MU will be able to run down teams because the zone will not defeat them. I wish MU luck this week against DePaul. I will not be posting on this thread again because it is just two sides (albeit my side is much smaller) arguing over the same points. I really hope I am proved wrong and MU makes a deep tourney run. I will still post my thoughts on this site, because I feel as though I provide an unbiased factual view of MU basketball. Although some of you may find me a bit harsh on the Eagles, I have used a fact-based argument which can not be ignored, even by the most die-hard fans. We will all have to see how this season turns out, and I believe with some small changes that MU can be a difficult team to face. When this season is over, I want to be able to say "Wow, MU really had a great season." These are my hopes.
In regards to certain people who have tried ever-so-hard to discredit me, going so far as to call me names and ridicule the smallest of errors in my writing, I really enjoyed the spirited discussions. I hope you have learned as much from me, as I have learned from you. Go Golden Eagles! But we will always be Warriors!
Just so you know, I'm not angry or trying to pick on your writing. But, I do believe when you use terms like "average" to describe any team that doesn't win their conference, it's hard to understand where you are coming from.
I don't disagree that MU is going to win more games to get in the tourny (duh)... it just seems like you are trying to knock down MU fans and make us realize that our team isn't that good.
Trust me, I'm well aware of how good/not good MU actually is.
I would hate to see it come down to our game against Gtown as to whether or not we make the tournament. Hopefully we can win two or three on the road so that isn't the case.
Just so you know, I'm not angry or trying to pick on your writing. But, I do believe when you use terms like "average" to describe any team that doesn't win their conference, it's hard to understand where you are coming from.
That's the part I found peculiar. A team that doesn't win their conference is "average". So, by season's end, he would have us believe that either UNC or Duke is average since one of them will NOT win the ACC.
Here's a fact-based argument for you. The wondrous Tennessee Volunteers are about to lose to the #179 RPI team in the nation. How about 'dem apples?
Heres a fact based argument for you too. MU 3 losses. TN 2 loses. MU 20th ranked. TN 5th ranked. MU- 2 quality wins. TN 7 quality wins. No team has gone undefeated in a season since the 70's. Teams lose games. Id take a 6 point loss to UK @ Rupp over being embarrassed by Louisville and UCONN.
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 22, 2008, 10:25:38 PM
Heres a fact based argument for you too. MU 3 losses. TN 2 loses. MU 20th ranked. TN 5th ranked. MU- 2 quality wins. TN 7 quality wins. No team has gone undefeated in a season since the 70's. Teams lose games. Id take a 6 point loss to UK @ Rupp over being embarrassed by Louisville and UCONN.
Ok, let me spell this out for you. Losing to RPI #179 = BAD LOSS.
Now, since you're a king of stats as the NCAA committee sees them, how many of those does MU have?
Seriously, if you're really a fan of both teams, why you gotta knock MU all the time?
VOL, our road win at Wisconsin will greatly surpass ANYTHING the Volunteers do all year.
Kentucky blows. There are 178 teams ahead of them in the RPI and they beat a team which you seem to paint as the second-coming of UCLA in the Wooden era. This loss really hurts Tennessee, especially if UK is as bad as they seem to be. You have to look past the names on the jerseys and the logo at center court, and recognize that Kentucky sucks this year and this an extremely embarrassing loss. Losing to sub-150 teams in the RPI,l particularly this late in the season will drop you a line in the bracket. Right now, the Vols lost a #2 seed and are looking at a #3. That's only spot higher than Joe Lunardi has Marquette. Seems the difference between great teams and below average teams can be as minimal as a one-seed difference.
I will make this statement and then leave. These are my thoughts. The stats have shown that MU is not as good as TN this year (even with the loss to UK). I know most of you will come back with "they have one more bad loss than MU" haha. Fine, your right. TN is still higher ranked, they still have better wins, they still have fewer loses. TN in my opinion is on a higher level than MU, the stats have proven that. I feel like TN is a final four caliber team, and they have the wins and stats to back that up. If they don't go that far, then oh well. They do have the talent though. I feel MU has the talent to make the tournament. I don't think they will go far. They have no proven scorers or proven interior men. If they go father than TN in the tourney than so be it. I won't be mad. You can all harass me for that, but I will say good for MU. They exceeded my opinion of them. I just don't see them as a very good team this year. They have proved to me nothing (yet). The rest of the season should be fun. MU still needs to pick up a quality win, TN has a great game on Feb 23rd against Memphis. This could easily be a battle of top 5 teams. I encourage everyone to watch. Not only for TN, but I think Memphis, even with their number 1 ranking, is being over looked. They are a fun team to watch. MU has a hell of a game when G'town and Gameday come to town. I hope MU wins that. It is a great lasting impression on the selection committee. I hope James gets healthy. That was a horrible foul by Seton Hall. No matter how arrogant he is, he never deserved that. Also, it would be a shame if MU did not play the rest of their season at full strength. Then we will never know how good they could have been. Tn is my alma mater, I will always bleed orange. This does not make me any less of an MU fan. I grew up going to their games and I will always support them. Ironically it looks like MU will be coming down to TN next year, this will be a good game, especially since Lofton is gone from UT and Mbakwe comes in for MU. I will root for TN knowing that no matter the outcome I really can't lose. Good Luck to MU always. But as the song goes, Rocky Top youll always be home sweet home to me... GO VOLS!!!!!!!
MUVOL - what's your connection to MU?
QuoteThis does not make me any less of an MU fan. I grew up going to their games and I will always support them.
Nevermind. Answered my own question.
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 22, 2008, 11:20:34 PM
Ironically it looks like MU will be coming down to TN next year, this will be a good game, especially since Lofton is gone from UT and Mbakwe comes in for MU.
There seem to be numerous hints at this situation. What does everyone else seem to know and how do they know it. This is the very first I've heard mention of this situation and frankly, it seems far-fetched based on Crean and Pearl's history here in Milwaukee.
The game will be part of the Big East/SEC challenge and the information was released back in November.
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 22, 2008, 11:20:34 PM
The stats have shown that MU is not as good as TN this year (even with the loss to UK).
Which makes the entire exchange as well as your presence here very odd. Nobody ever said they were. You are he one who brought up UT and the Great Bruce Pearl, dude. You said MU is average, etc., so please don't turn this into a case of you merely defending UT. You're the one who came here (after a loss ironically enough) to espouse the virtues of Tennessee basketball.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on January 23, 2008, 07:38:10 AM
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 22, 2008, 11:20:34 PM
The stats have shown that MU is not as good as TN this year (even with the loss to UK).
Which makes the entire exchange as well as your presence here very odd. Nobody ever said they were. You are he one who brought up UT and the Great Bruce Pearl, dude. You said MU is average, etc., so please don't turn this into a case of you merely defending UT. You're the one who came here (after a loss ironically enough) to espouse the virtues of Tennessee basketball.
I completely agree with you Navin.
I don't know how this turned into UT vs MU.
Previously, I was responding to the idea that MU was "average", when they are clearly not average... and now it's twisted into this.
Also, here is the most telling quote of the whole thread:
"I won't be mad. You can all harass me for that, but I will say good for MU. They exceeded my
opinion of them. I just don't see them as a very good team this year. They have proved to me nothing (yet). The rest of the season should be fun. "
MUVOL06... I don't think anybody has a problem with you stating an opinion and using some evidence to project that MU might not be as good as the numbers. To be honest, your perspective probably isn't far off.
BUT, please don't act like its factual that that MU "isn't a good team" as previously stated. That's just not accurate. The facts (RPI, POM, Polls, etc.) show MU is having a pretty good season.
MU isn't suddenly a bad team after a couple of bad road losses.
UT isn't suddenly a average team after 1 bad road loss.
Conversely, if MU wins 4 or 5 in a row, I'm not going to be calling them "great".
Let's keep some perspective here.
The season is 25+ games. A loss here and there is going to happen (especially in Jan./Feb) and it doesn't necessarily mean that "X team is suddenly bad". It just means they got beat (in MU's case they got beat by a lot)
This isn't college football. 1 loss doesn't mean the season is down the tubes. This is hoops. It's a long season and even the elite teams are going to drop 3-5 games. The very good teams will drop 5-8 games.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on January 23, 2008, 07:38:10 AM
Quote from: MUVOL06 on January 22, 2008, 11:20:34 PM
The stats have shown that MU is not as good as TN this year (even with the loss to UK).
Which makes the entire exchange as well as your presence here very odd. Nobody ever said they were. You are he one who brought up UT and the Great Bruce Pearl, dude. You said MU is average, etc., so please don't turn this into a case of you merely defending UT. You're the one who came here (after a loss ironically enough) to espouse the virtues of Tennessee basketball.
No MUVOL06 was not the one who brought this up. I was the one that brought them (UT) up in my original post of January 17. Here it is:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please answer this for me: how can the same team that dominated Notre Dame on Saturday come out and play so horrendous that it would appear that they never played the game of basketball before??? I don't know if anyone else did this but I found myself flipping between this game and the Tennessee?Vanderbilt game on ESPN. Marquette needs a player the size of Wayne Chism and a shooter like Chris Lofton. While Tennessee came out flat in the beginning, as Marquette did, they at least found their tempo and proceeded to go on to another impressive win. You have to hand it to Pearl - he plays a run and gun type of game; he is getting great recruits and he's a motivator - and he's only in this third year there.
The bottom line is where are Marquette's shooters?? All a team has to do is go to a zone because they know Marquette can't shoot....
Very disappointing loss..... I expected a much better showing than this.
I don't know who MUVOL06 is but, again, I made the statement in another post that you can like and root for more than one basketball team. You mean to tell me that all the posters here only love Marquette and no other teams???? You mean to tell me that you can't have ties to Wisconsin and another state's team?? I think not.......
I know. You made a rather innocuous post. MUVOL however took it to a whole new level, and went out of his way to turn this into an MU vs. UT debate for whatever reason.
Quote from: MarquetteVol on January 23, 2008, 12:06:01 AM
The game will be part of the Big East/SEC challenge and the information was released back in November.
Thanks, I must have let that slip through the cracks.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on January 23, 2008, 09:40:21 AM
I know. You made a rather innocuous post. MUVOL however took it to a whole new level, and went out of his way to turn this into an MU vs. UT debate for whatever reason.
well he obviously has ties to both MU and UT because I believe he said that he was an alum of UT -- so maybe he at one time lived in Wisconsin and now lives in Tennessee???or maybe he moved to Wisconsin from Tenn????? Who knows.....although it was kind of a spirited conversation for awhile .....
He may have lived in Milwaukee but I strongly suspect he has ties to Shorewood State and not Marquette. If the guy didn't post so quickly after the UT/UK game last night, I would have guessed MUVOL06 was none other than Bruce Pearl himself.
Yea, this whole thread was weird.
On a somewhat related note:
Has anybody ever tracked the average number of posts after a win vs. after a loss?
After the couple of big wins, the board seems silent... but after a loss is seems like everybody comes out of the woodwork.
Is that the state of fans today? Are they just looking to gripe?
I love some of the critical insight offered here, but the gripes (especially after losses) are just too much sometimes.
Quote from: 2002mualum on January 23, 2008, 05:17:24 PM
Has anybody ever tracked the average number of posts after a win vs. after a loss?
Well, the good news is that the site tracks it for us here:
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?action=stats
I'll just recap some of the big games (and the day after too...) for a total of 4 wins and 4 losses.
Duke - lose
Nov 21 - 248 new posts
Nov 22 - 71 new posts
Wiscy - win
Dec 8 - 210
Dec 9 - 179
Prov - win
Jan 3 - 165
Jan 4 - 180
WV - loss
Jan 6 - 208
Jan 7 - 162
Seton Hall - "bad" win
Jan 8 - 246
Jan 9 - 314
ND - win
Jan 12 - 147
Jan 13 - 113
Louisville - loss
Jan 17 - 245
Jan 18 - 168
UConn - loss
Jan 20 - 237
Jan 21 - 204
So...when we lose, we average 234.5 posts the day of the loss and 151.25 the day after.
When we win, we average 192 posts the day of the win and 196.5 posts the day after.
Now, the Seton Hall game seems a bit off, because we won but most people weren't that happy about the way we won. If I conveniently remove that game from the equation...
We average 174 posts the day of the win and 157.3 posts the day after.
So...it appears that when we lose, there are significantly more posts the actual day of the loss, but if we win, there are slightly more posts the day after the win.
Ok...I'll let some real statistics person do more number crunching form there....
Quote from: rocky_warrior on January 23, 2008, 06:06:58 PM
Quote from: 2002mualum on January 23, 2008, 05:17:24 PM
Has anybody ever tracked the average number of posts after a win vs. after a loss?
Well, the good news is that the site tracks it for us here:
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?action=stats
I'll just recap some of the big games (and the day after too...) for a total of 4 wins and 4 losses.
Duke - lose
Nov 21 - 248 new posts
Nov 22 - 71 new posts
Wiscy - win
Dec 8 - 210
Dec 9 - 179
Prov - win
Jan 3 - 165
Jan 4 - 180
WV - loss
Jan 6 - 208
Jan 7 - 162
Seton Hall - "bad" win
Jan 8 - 246
Jan 9 - 314
ND - win
Jan 12 - 147
Jan 13 - 113
Louisville - loss
Jan 17 - 245
Jan 18 - 168
UConn - loss
Jan 20 - 237
Jan 21 - 204
So...when we lose, we average 234.5 posts the day of the loss and 151.25 the day after.
When we win, we average 192 posts the day of the win and 196.5 posts the day after.
Now, the Seton Hall game seems a bit off, because we won but most people weren't that happy about the way we won. If I conveniently remove that game from the equation...
We average 174 posts the day of the win and 157.3 posts the day after.
So...it appears that when we lose, there are significantly more posts the actual day of the loss, but if we win, there are slightly more posts the day after the win.
Ok...I'll let some real statistics person do more number crunching form there....
Wow. Those are some fast results. Thanks!
As far as analysis... H. Sugar... paging... H. Sugar (kidding, but he does run the best stats around).
Another interesting way to break it down might be new/separate topics or average length of membership of the posters after wins or losses.
I don't really have the stats to prove it, but it feels like there are some "drive-by" posters who come in after losses and pound on a topic or topics and then disappear.
I know I'm not saying anything new, but it's interesting given the stats that Rocky provided.
Is it easier to be critical than positive?
Are people just blowing off steam?
Could be a little of everything I guess.
Too many variables for me to put any stock in those (no offense. I apreciate the effort). However, I would say significant consideration needs to be given to factors like weekend, vs. weekday, what else may be going on (Packer game, holidays. etc.), home vs. road - many more people will be around to comment on a road game as a huge % of posters are obviously attending home games, and clearly we win most of those. A larger sample may be better, but I think the home/road factor will still be a big one.
I'm also thinking total post count may not be the way to measure, as there is likely to be a bit mor eback and forth after a loss which would make for a greater total post count. Users online might be a better way to measure if people do in fact come out of the woodwork after losses as opposed to after a win. I'm assuming that information would be hard to come by though.