I hope not, but that's what this article says.
http://www.nola.com/sports/t-p/index.ssf?/base/sports-37/1207979408313930.xml&coll=1
6 years at $7,000,000 which is $1.16 million per year.
If this is true, it's lunacy. Somebody should lose their job.
I'm guessing he would have taken the job at 500K/year. What were his other options?
$7 mill for 6 years sound reasonable as it is probably backloaded.
He probably does make $500k this year and probably doubles in year 3 and again in year 6.
If MU still wants Buzz in year 3, he should be making over $1 million then. If MU still wants him in year 6, he should be making more than Crean when he left.
This way they don't have an urgency to re-work it in two years.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on April 12, 2008, 07:33:50 AM
$7 mill for 6 years sound reasonable as it is probably backloaded.
He probably does make $500k this year and probably doubles in year 3 and again in year 6.
If MU still wants Buzz in year 3, he should be making over $1 million then. If MU still wants him in year 6, he should be making more than Crean when he left.
This way they don't have an urgency to re-work it in two years.
I tend to agree, and I would assume the buyout from MU's perspective increases over time as well. Based on assumptions, mind you, but if this works out, seems like it could work out for all. If it doesn't, probably won't be too bad fro MU (from a contract perspective).
Chicos - thanks for adding to the negativity around the program.
It is, what it is and we are not changing schools. Move on
Are college coaches contract backloaded? I have never heard to that. Either if backloaded or not I think that is a heck of a contract for Buzz. Obviously the guy can sell if he got that deal.
Pay over market price for an underqualified (in terms of resume) coach. Things that make you go, hhhmmmmm? It's almost like they overpaid to add some legitimacy to the hire. Why not get him on the cheap, which still would have been a huge raise for him, and simply extend it for higher value if he proves himself. Coaches pretty much rework their contracts after every good season anyway.
It's not my money, so I guess who cares. It'll be great if he can live up to his contract.
If true, MU is paying way, way too much for an unproven coach. Imagine the pressure he will be under with that contract next year when the Three Amigos leave and we fall to the bottom of the BE pack.
Quote from: THEGYMBAR on April 12, 2008, 11:58:48 AM
Are college coaches contract backloaded? I have never heard to that. Either if backloaded or not I think that is a heck of a contract for Buzz. Obviously the guy can sell if he got that deal.
For a young, inexperienced head coach newly promoted from the assistant position, I don't see why not. Think of the "backloads" as "incentives" and it begins to make more sense. In other words, MU is saying, "Show us what you got, then you'll earn more."
WEll, I choose to look at this on the positive side completely. If we were willing to pay 1.16 m for Buzz - great. Imagine what we would pay for someone with lots of experience. I think the university knows how much basketball means to it now. It is good, and it makes moeny, and brings in new students.
We made a quick decision and went with Buzz. I think it will turn out well.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on April 12, 2008, 07:18:02 AM
If this is true, it's lunacy. Somebody should lose their job.
I'm guessing he would have taken the job at 500K/year. What were his other options?
Keep guessing. Sooner or or later you might be right.
Who the hell was MU negotiating against - themselves? Overpaid!
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on April 12, 2008, 07:18:02 AM
If this is true, it's lunacy. Somebody should lose their job.
I'm guessing he would have taken the job at 500K/year. What were his other options?
This can't be right. What was his leverage? Why would we have to pay him that much? This doesn't make any sense.
I have stated a million times I am against the hire. But, in MU's defense, how pissed would we all of be if they paid him $500K? We would all be saying they have no confidence in the hire. MU at least its showing they have confidence in their gamble.
I am more confident knowing they paid more money than I thought they did. I cannot believe I am happy they paid $1.1 a year.
this has to be the densest string I have ever read. I would be greatly surprised that Buzz'z contract would be for the same amount every year. You rarely see a contract like that. No different than Crean's a t IU it increases over time and is full of in centives. As a previous poster stated it is probaably in the neighbor hood of 500k for 2 years, 1mil for 2, etc. Additionally like the poster said if in 4 years he has done a good job he with be worth a million.
The nay sayers crack me up...i firmly believe in my heart and mind that Buzz will take this program to the next level. And his first week or so on the job and he has done nothing but convince me of that more.
We would have been offering $2 million for Tony Bennett and Sean Miller.
I don't see why Buzz getting on average $1.1 million a year would be that surpising, though, if we were willing to pay about twice that to the bigger name candidates. It's still about $700K less than what Crean was getting when he left here.
Hopefully MU will be able to plow that $700K/year into helping Buzz hired a high-quality staff (which perhaps is my biggest worry at the moment than Buzz himself).
Quote from: The General on April 12, 2008, 03:23:55 PM
We would have been offering $2 million for Tony Bennett and Sean Miller.
I don't see why Buzz getting on average $1.1 million a year would be that surpising, though, if we were willing to pay about twice that to the bigger name candidates. It's still about $700K less than what Crean was getting when he left here.
Hopefully MU will be able to plow that $700K/year into helping Buzz hired a high-quality staff (which perhaps is my biggest worry at the moment than Buzz himself).
You find no issue at all with Buzz making over 1m? There are plenty of established coaches who have had very good success that probably don't make 1.1m. And we're giving that to a guy who's under .500 for his entire head coaching career.
It's a tidal wave. Just when you subside your negativity into a controlled feeling another thing pops up in the news about this charade. This could be a monstrous fucking disaster.
I don't know if we know all the details fo the contract - I certainly do not. We do not know how it is structured, what is base, what are incentives, how it is structured over the years. If you look at Tom Crean's new contract, his base pay os $650,000. The rest is incentives, appearances, etc.
So, we have Buzz. We need to have Buzz . . . do well. So GO BUZZ and GO MARQUETTE
Quote from: Daniel on April 12, 2008, 03:43:11 PM
I don't know if we know all the details fo the contract - I certainly do not. We do not know how it is structured, what is base, what are incentives, how it is structured over the years. If you look at Tom Crean's new contract, his base pay os $650,000. The rest is incentives, appearances, etc.
So, we have Buzz. We need to have Buzz . . . do well. So GO BUZZ and GO MARQUETTE
Well said.
But hey, why let minor details -- like the specifics of the deal -- get in the way of complainers? And really, isn't it their job to tell sponsors, etc. how to spend their money? ::)
Quote from: Coobeys Oil Depot on April 12, 2008, 03:30:07 PM
It's a tidal wave. Just when you subside your negativity into a controlled feeling another thing pops up in the news about this charade. This could be a monstrous fracking disaster.
My sentiments exactly.
We hear we hired him for continuity, then we hear of recruits reneging and players transferring.
We hear he's an "up and comer," then we hear he's given a raise of an AVERAGE of more than $800k per year!?!?!
Now we've got this lawsuit situation, seemingly a string of JUCOs heading our way and you have to just continue to wonder if this thing was thought through completely.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on April 12, 2008, 03:54:32 PM
Quote from: Coobeys Oil Depot on April 12, 2008, 03:30:07 PM
It's a tidal wave. Just when you subside your negativity into a controlled feeling another thing pops up in the news about this charade. This could be a monstrous fracking disaster.
My sentiments exactly.
We hear we hired him for continuity, then we hear of recruits reneging and players transferring.
One recruit, who was leaving regardless of who was hired, and one transfer, who was leaving regardless of who was hired.
But why let facts get in the way of your whining?
Quote from: Coobeys Oil Depot on April 12, 2008, 03:30:07 PM
Quote from: The General on April 12, 2008, 03:23:55 PM
We would have been offering $2 million for Tony Bennett and Sean Miller.
I don't see why Buzz getting on average $1.1 million a year would be that surpising, though, if we were willing to pay about twice that to the bigger name candidates. It's still about $700K less than what Crean was getting when he left here.
Hopefully MU will be able to plow that $700K/year into helping Buzz hired a high-quality staff (which perhaps is my biggest worry at the moment than Buzz himself).
You find no issue at all with Buzz making over 1m? There are plenty of established coaches who have had very good success that probably don't make 1.1m. And we're giving that to a guy who's under .500 for his entire head coaching career.
It's a tidal wave. Just when you subside your negativity into a controlled feeling another thing pops up in the news about this charade. This could be a monstrous fracking disaster.
Given the instiutional importance of the men's basketball program to the success of Marquette University, no, I do not. And I'm really fed up with the notion that the Marquette leadership is a bunch of incompetent fools because of a couple of goofy decisions like the Marquette Gold; much of this same group were the same ones who hired Crean, upgraded other athletic programs, led the major capital campaigns, and revamped the academics over the last decade. All of which have turned out pretty well for Marquette, I must add.
I understand the arguement about paying Buzz based on experience, but how do you fairly assess that? Buzz has about 11-12 years as an assistant and 1 year as a HC; perhaps that alone may warrant a contract of about $600-$700K on the surface. But MU obviously thought enough of him to be willing to pay the $300K UNO buyout in the first place just to get him here as an assistant, which I don't think I've ever heard of another major program ever doing.
Crean made $375K in his first year at MU, which is remarkable considering the status of the program back in 1999, as well as the fact MU was barely paying KO $225K as far back as 1994. I doubt Deane made much more than KO either. So why was Crean paid more than KO and Deane without an iota of being a head coach? POTENTIAL. And that's what MU is paying for here with Buzz as well.
Also, like Crean, Buzz is going to be the most visible employee of the University, and is going to have responsibilities beyond just coaching and recruiting. He's going to have to do PR spots in local/national media, community activities, alumni events, etc. So when I look at that $1.1 million, I also keep in mind that it's going to pay off in other areas of the University as well.
And I don't see how a coach who some on this board said a few days back was hired on the cheap is now all of sudden overpaid.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on April 12, 2008, 03:54:32 PM
Quote from: Coobeys Oil Depot on April 12, 2008, 03:30:07 PM
It's a tidal wave. Just when you subside your negativity into a controlled feeling another thing pops up in the news about this charade. This could be a monstrous fracking disaster.
My sentiments exactly.
We hear we hired him for continuity, then we hear of recruits reneging and players transferring.
We hear he's an "up and comer," then we hear he's given a raise of an AVERAGE of more than $800k per year!?!?!
Now we've got this lawsuit situation, seemingly a string of JUCOs heading our way and you have to just continue to wonder if this thing was thought through completely.
Meanwhile, in other news, Rick Majerus cut four scholarship players...
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/othersports/story/0B79F8C4042B15418625742900113EB2?OpenDocument
Quote from: Pardner on April 12, 2008, 04:01:28 PM
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on April 12, 2008, 03:54:32 PM
Quote from: Coobeys Oil Depot on April 12, 2008, 03:30:07 PM
It's a tidal wave. Just when you subside your negativity into a controlled feeling another thing pops up in the news about this charade. This could be a monstrous fracking disaster.
My sentiments exactly.
We hear we hired him for continuity, then we hear of recruits reneging and players transferring.
We hear he's an "up and comer," then we hear he's given a raise of an AVERAGE of more than $800k per year!?!?!
Now we've got this lawsuit situation, seemingly a string of JUCOs heading our way and you have to just continue to wonder if this thing was thought through completely.
Meanwhile, in other news, Rick Majerus cut four scholarship players...
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/othersports/story/0B79F8C4042B15418625742900113EB2?OpenDocument
There's a certain Crean basher/Majerus fan around here who frequently has accused the former of running off players and questioned his ethics for it.
Wonder what he has to say about this?
Quote from: Pakuni on April 12, 2008, 04:07:02 PM
Quote from: Pardner on April 12, 2008, 04:01:28 PM
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on April 12, 2008, 03:54:32 PM
Quote from: Coobeys Oil Depot on April 12, 2008, 03:30:07 PM
It's a tidal wave. Just when you subside your negativity into a controlled feeling another thing pops up in the news about this charade. This could be a monstrous fracking disaster.
My sentiments exactly.
We hear we hired him for continuity, then we hear of recruits reneging and players transferring.
We hear he's an "up and comer," then we hear he's given a raise of an AVERAGE of more than $800k per year!?!?!
Now we've got this lawsuit situation, seemingly a string of JUCOs heading our way and you have to just continue to wonder if this thing was thought through completely.
Meanwhile, in other news, Rick Majerus cut four scholarship players...
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/othersports/story/0B79F8C4042B15418625742900113EB2?OpenDocument
There's a certain Crean basher/Majerus fan around here who frequently has accused the former of running off players and questioned his ethics for it.
Wonder what he has to say about this?
I hope you're not talking about me. I don't think I've mentioned Majerus in a single thread in 3 years. And I certainly never claimed our transfers were "ethics" related. I simply used them as evidence that Crean was a horse' ass. And he was a horse's ass.
Quote from: The General on April 12, 2008, 03:59:05 PM
Crean made $375K in his first year at MU, which is remarkable considering the status of the program back in 1999, as well as the fact MU was barely paying KO $225K as far back as 1994. I doubt Deane made much more than KO either. So why was Crean paid more than KO and Deane without an iota of being a head coach? POTENTIAL. And that's what MU is paying for here with Buzz as well.
Deane made over 375K in 1998-1999.
Quote from: Pakuni on April 12, 2008, 04:07:02 PM
Meanwhile, in other news, Rick Majerus cut four scholarship players...
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/othersports/story/0B79F8C4042B15418625742900113EB2?OpenDocument
There's a certain Crean basher/Majerus fan around here who frequently has accused the former of running off players and questioned his ethics for it.
Wonder what he has to say about this?
[/quote]
Rick let go guys he didn't recruit and wasn't going to play. They have the option of keeping theiy scholarship or moving on with his assistance to ANY other University.
I had ZERO problem when TC ran off Krunti.
I did take issue when transfer cost a coach an entire class.
If Dick Strong wants to pay $7 million over 6 years, let him.
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on April 12, 2008, 06:30:03 PM
I did take issue when transfer cost a coach an entire class.
And I find it amazing that people still take issue five years later with the departure of players who, had they stayed, would have ensured that MU would be a much weaker team.
You would think that the facts as they played out would lead to the begrudging admission that, yes, MU was right to let those players go. Nope--let's not let facts get in the way---there's MU bashing to be done.
Quote from: Marquette84 on April 12, 2008, 07:38:14 PM
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on April 12, 2008, 06:30:03 PM
I did take issue when transfer cost a coach an entire class.
And I find it amazing that people still take issue five years later with the departure of players who, had they stayed, would have ensured that MU would be a much weaker team.
You would think that the facts as they played out would lead to the begrudging admission that, yes, MU was right to let those players go. Nope--let's not let facts get in the way---there's MU bashing to be done.
Absolutely right! Marquette is to be commended for losing an entire class of recruits.
Why didn't we all see that?
Losing a recruiting class or players in program with an established coach is not a problem. Losing players and recruits with a gamble coach is borderline suicidal. Rick Majerus is not looking to build a program perse, his MO is he loves to coach. He is vagabond that would lose players at any school he was at. That is why I had Coach Ricky at about 33rd on our hit list. However, he was three spots above Buzz.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on April 12, 2008, 07:48:39 PM
Absolutely right! Marquette is to be commended for losing an entire class of recruits.
Why didn't we all see that?
I really don't know.
It's only a few ignoramuses that continue to harp about the loss of players that everyone knows would have made the team worse.
Quote from: Marquette84 on April 12, 2008, 07:38:14 PM
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on April 12, 2008, 06:30:03 PM
I did take issue when transfer cost a coach an entire class.
And I find it amazing that people still take issue five years later with the departure of players who, had they stayed, would have ensured that MU would be a much weaker team.
You would think that the facts as they played out would lead to the begrudging admission that, yes, MU was right to let those players go. Nope--let's not let facts get in the way---there's MU bashing to be done.
Welcome back Joanie, sorry to hear your Dad lost his job.
PS...it's Saturday night, make sure your brother has a designated driver.
Quote from: Cooby Snacks on April 12, 2008, 07:25:33 PM
If Dick Strong wants to pay $7 million over 6 years, let him.
There is a lot of truth to this. MU probably isn't paying much more than they payed Deane.
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens (paraphrased)link=topic=8655.msg71129#msg71129 date=1208059253
I'm a complete idiot who turns to personal insults when somebody presents me with facts. . .
I'm perfectly happy holding a basketball discussion with you, Lens. Let's stop with the person insults, okay?
As I said, I cannot fathom why you are STILL upset that we "lost" this group:
1. Carlton Christian, who not only played his way out of Marquette, but also out of Central Florida. A head case who's mere presence was a disruption at MU, and apparently not even UCF was willing to put up with it. Career goose eggs after MU.
2. Brandon Bell--a "point guard" who turned out to be unable to either dribble or pass at a BE level.
3. Dameon Mason--a 2G who's upside after leaving MU was legendary unless one actually looks at his performance at LSU. Peaked his freshman year, and clearly would have struggled for minutes from day 1 behind Jerel McNeal.
4. James Matthews: A player who's D1 career was marked by both academic and discipline problems. Interesting tidbit--the less Matthews played at EMU the more games EMU won. For example, this season EMU was 3-7 in games Matthews played, 11-10 in games he missed.
5. Marcus Jackson: A big who came to MU with this class as a JUCO transfer after originally signing with Georgia. Apparently doesn't count because he graduated thus doesn't fit with the narrative of "lost an entire class". I'm sure you'll say "We meant GRADUATING CLASS". Yes. Of course. So Matthews--the best player from the group and solid performer at MU--is easily ignored because otherwise he'd prove you wrong on facts.
I'll put aside that your basic premise is wrong--we didn't lose an enitire recruiting class--Marcus Jackson completed his eligibility at MU.
But if you'd like to weigh in on why you think MU would have been better off if we hadn't let those players go, I'd like to know your reasoning. I don't see that they would have helped us at all, and I base that on the fact that none of them had meaningful contributions at their future schools. A lack of participation even more striking given the benefit of an extra year of development for each of them.
dude the argument is not about the quality of these players. the point is we had no one that was recruited to come in that year make a contribution. Fine those guys stink, are head cases, can;t dribble, etc. THEN WHY DID WE RECRUIT THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE. MJax was not recruited with those guys, so he doesn;t really count. He was an afterthought, added ONLY BECAUSE the other gys left. if a kid wnts to leave so be it, but we shouldn't be recruiting guys that are obvious problem kids (Matthews and Christian, maybe even Bell). If a guy leaves because of lack of playing time, i.e., mason once the WEs, DJ and McNeal came in, then fine let em go. But in retrospect, that class was a big zero.
Man - that was a bad class. Didnt we just go to the Final four?
Crean - you lout!
Quote from: dwaderoy2004 on April 13, 2008, 02:32:57 PM
dude the argument is not about the quality of these players. the point is we had no one that was recruited to come in that year make a contribution. Fine those guys stink, are head cases, can;t dribble, etc. THEN WHY DID WE RECRUIT THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE. MJax was not recruited with those guys, so he doesn;t really count. He was an afterthought, added ONLY BECAUSE the other gys left. if a kid wnts to leave so be it, but we shouldn't be recruiting guys that are obvious problem kids (Matthews and Christian, maybe even Bell). If a guy leaves because of lack of playing time, i.e., mason once the WEs, DJ and McNeal came in, then fine let em go. But in retrospect, that class was a big zero.
The repeated complaint has NOT been that these players were recruited in the first place. The oft repeated complaint has been that they TRANSFERRED. as if Crean ran off a potential final-four lineup.
If these players had obvious problems, we would not have recruited them nor would Arizona (who recruited Bell), Florida state and ODU (who recruited Christian) and Illinois and Iowa State (who wanted Mason). Sometimes players don't live up to expectations. They move on, and it's better for both sides.
Crean is not being criticized for recruiting players who didn't live up to expectations--he is being criticized for letting those very players transfer!
*** MJax was not recruited with those guys, so he doesn;t really count. He was an afterthought, added ONLY BECAUSE the other gys left
Wrong.
Jackson was recruited with those guys and signed just 10 days after Christian--none of the other players had left at the time Jackson signed. You could have argued that Jackson wasn't signed until Wade declared for the draft, but its not as if it was a surprise that Wade would declare.
Here's the timeline, to help with your recollection:
Nov 13: Bell, Mason JMatthews sign:
http://gomarquette.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/111302aab.html
April 27: Christian signs:
http://gomarquette.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/042703aaa.html
May 7: Jackson signs:
http://gomarquette.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/050703aab.html
December 23: Matthews leaves
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/2003-12-25-matthews-transfers_x.htm
December 23: Barro signs
http://gomarquette.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/122303aaa.html
All five of the incoming recruits arrived on campus in the fall. James Matthews was the first player to leave the team, but not until December. Barro (not Jackson) was the player signed because Matthews left.
SJS, why should I argue straight up, you're always right. Besides, my Joanie comment probably made a few people laugh.
Here are facts:
We LOST an entire class (4 guys).
We recruited an entire class of non contributors.
Our famed 24 / 7 work ethic turned up NO recruits for the class of 2006
Every evaluation we made was wrong
Yeah we rip TC for transfers, but it's not just b/c we hate to see kids leave it's also b/c we feel our great recruiter should have been held to a higher standard. When you lose a recruit you lose all the time he was putting in. Traditionally you need to have juniors and seniors in leadership positions to win. We have had a blackhole thanks to TC's famed recruiting. When you have a coach who is so good at player development, you need to have some consistency so kids can be in the program for a few years and benefit from his great coaching.
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on April 13, 2008, 04:46:53 PM
SJS, why should I argue straight up, you're always right. Besides, my Joanie comment probably made a few people laugh.
Here are facts:
We LOST an entire class (4 guys).
I acutually link the press releases for you, listing the the five guys we recruited, and you can't even get THAT right!
We didn't LOSE an entire class--that ENTIRE class included Marcus Jackson! I don't think I'm always right, but when I can name the five guys in the class, and give you the links to the damn press releases, I think that probably passes as being correct in this case.
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on April 13, 2008, 04:46:53 PM
We recruited an entire class of non contributors.
Our famed 24 / 7 work ethic turned up NO recruits for the class of 2006
Every evaluation we made was wrong
Hmm. The class of 2006 included Chris Grimm, Joe Champan and Steve Novak.
Okay--another mistake on your part. You probably meant 2007. We had NO seniors in 2007. But we did graduate Jamil Lott and Mike Kinsella. Again, the "NO recruits" comment is overblown. Just because they weren't recruited as incoming freshmen in 2003 doesn't mean we had NO senior leadership.
What you meant to say is that in 2003 we recruited four incoming freshmen that didn't work out.
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on April 13, 2008, 04:46:53 PM
Yeah we rip TC for transfers, but it's not just b/c we hate to see kids leave it's also b/c we feel our great recruiter should have been held to a higher standard. When you lose a recruit you lose all the time he was putting in. Traditionally you need to have juniors and seniors in leadership positions to win. We have had a blackhole thanks to TC's famed recruiting. When you have a coach who is so good at player development, you need to have some consistency so kids can be in the program for a few years and benefit from his great coaching.
The problem is that you rip Crean for both recruiting non-contributors, AND because those non-contributors transfered!
If you don't think those players were worth recruiting, why in the world are you still upset about them LEAVING five years later? I could see complaining about their recruitment--but I don't get why you're upset they left and were replaced.
In fact, I can see having a bigger problem with holding onto recruiting mistakes for a full four years. I really don't think we win 10 BE games in 2006 and 11 in 2007 with Bell as our PG, James Matthews as our C, Dameon Mason as our 2G and Carlton Christian as our WF/WG. Despite the fact that James, Wes Matthews, Ooze and Jerel were a class or two younger, I think they outperformed the guys who would have been juniors and seniors.
--If you want to argue that you think Brandon Bell as a junior/senior would have outperformed Dominic James as a Frosh/Soph, then have at it.
--If you want to argue that Carlton Christian would have outperformed Wes Mattews, then do so.
--If you believe that James Matthews is better than Ooze, explain why.
--If you think that Dameon Mason played better at LSU than Jerel McNeal did at MU, share your reasoning.
Here's my position--yeah we lost those four recruits that came in as freshmen in 2003--and it's a DAMN GOOD THING because we would have sucked had they stayed.
In a perfect world, we would have had better recruits 2003--but we didn't. The question is why you continue to rip on Crean because they left. Sure sounds to me like you WANTED MU to suck, since you could blame it on Crean. Sounds to me like you're upset that Crean went out and replaced those guys with better players and wound up with a better team and better record than he would have. Cost you a chance to rip Crean for his losing record in the Big East.
I don't consider Marcus Jackson part of the incoming freshman class. That's why I say 4.
I like class balance and he added to the Juniors and the 2005 graduating class.
You're right I meant 2007, my bad.
At the end of the day, having players in the program for 3-4 years is a good thing, it's just too bad that Crean was at times such a bad evaluator that we often did not.
As for my fanship of MU, I think I'm Marquette's biggest fan, but every fan probably does.