MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Detfan23 on January 21, 2009, 09:02:36 AM
-
Let me begin by saying that I am not trying to mock DePaul or start an arguement. My simple questions is "Is it over for DePaul?"
What I mean is that I just don't see them ever really competing in the Big East. They just seem like a lost program. It doesn't seem like the university is that concerned with them, the student body doesn't seem concerned, and they can't protect their own backyard when it comes to recruiting.
There is some solid history at DePaul, but I just don't ever see them coming back until the University gives a darn again. Any thoughts?
-
Agreed. The University remains apathetic to the men's basketball program and if they choose to remain uncommitted it will continue to suffer.
-
It is not over as long as they stay in the BE. However they will have more losing seasons than winning in the near future. We need easy wins in this conference.
We depend on DePaul's demise, however. The last time MU and DePaul were in the NCAA tournament in the same year was 1982, and only six times in our history.
Generally speaking when DePaul is good we are not. When we are good, DePaul is not. Its partly because we played them twice a year, and we used to recruit from the same talent pool
-
Heh, I posted a similar thread in the Superbar barely 1 minute before you. It seems that you got my memo on what our talking points were today :P
Here's what I had to ask:
In C-USA DePaul would always give us a run for our money. Ever since we've moved to the Big East they haven't been able to put together a respectable team.
Do they have problems recruiting? Is their coach a disaster? Have they been decent recruits that just don't produce when they get to University? What's up with them?
The DePaul rivalry should be a pretty big one because we're geographically close to each other and because they're a Catholic University. It seems like that rivalry has started to wane because they can't seem to put together a team. Has anyone been following them enough to give me the quick low-down on why we (MU) are flourishing in the Big East and DePaul seems to be drowning?
-
It is not over as long as they stay in the BE. However they will have more losing seasons than winning in the near future. We need easy wins in this conference.
We depend on DePaul's demise, however. The last time MU and DePaul were in the NCAA tournament in the same year was 1982, and only six times in our history.
I'm glad somebody else recognizes this. Otherwise, it wouldn't be long before we get the slew of "An improved DePaul will be better for us" nonsense.
A better DePaul has NEVER been good for Marquette. It sucks media coverage, recruits, and excitement right out of our program. I don't think its a coincidence that our worst performing period of the modern era came at the very time that DePaul was experiencing its best period. And that our resurgence came as DePaul returned to irrelevance.
The Big East will have its doormat every year, and I'm perfectly happy with DePaul serving that role.
-
Is there any concern though with their not being a football school that the Big East thinks about looking another direction?
I would assume not given the access to the Chicago media market, but ND does that to an extent already.
-
It is a shame at what DePaul currently is in Basketball. They had some great teams in the 80's. Their current state does help us from the standpoint of recruiting the Chicago area.
But it would be better that they were more competitive.
Man, they had some great teams back in the day with guys like Aguirre, Bradshaw, Comegys, etc.
-
DePaul is floundering. It has gone through 3 Coaches in 10 years. Each was able to recruit for 1 year and 1 year only. Each coach also had their own agenda that ruined their stay with the University. Call them "Bad Hires", or what ever. But, we have not recruited the best available Coach, and it has shown.
This Coach, I am sure is gone, and not too soon. The team has given up, and he cannot get it back. He has also recruited less than BE caliper players with the exception of Tucker and Koshwal. He has NO connections with the Chgo Pub Lg, and is largely shut out in recruiting locally.
It's a pretty dismal state. And the unfortunate thing is we have only 1 scholarship in each of the next 2 years. Even with a new Coach, he can't recruit to quickly get back into step.
We will be a doormat for a while. Boy, have we crashed.
-
It's really too bad Depaul has two outstanding players in Tucker and Koshwal, MU would be scary good with Koshwal but with him being 6'10" he was not in Tommy Naismith's recruiting scope.
With them being sophomores you would almost like to see Wainwright be given a chance with them as Juniors but it seems the team has quit on him and that makes that probably pretty unlikely.
-
In C-USA DePaul would always give us a run for our money.
Not quite right .. We've owned DePaul for 20 years. Our CUSA record against DePaul .. 20-5.
And yeah .. the Big East NEEDS 3-4 doormat teams. I agree w/MU84. I'm perfectly happy with DePaul filling that role.
-
DePaul is floundering. It has gone through 3 Coaches in 10 years. Each was able to recruit for 1 year and 1 year only. Each coach also had their own agenda that ruined their stay with the University. Call them "Bad Hires", or what ever. But, we have not recruited the best available Coach, and it has shown.
But were those coaches nice guys, all people you'd want to hang out with? Or were they arrogant dicks, because that is how some people think coaches should be judged, not on winning, or graduating players, or not racking up NCAA violations.
-
It looks like sports writers feel sorry for DePaul too (http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=:ePkh8BM9E2IRYipIhVtSDuKn5sDtS4VbCraqGGbVLzagql9szEWpyQA7lgwe/5-0&fp=497777351c60d006&ei=ZUt3SbiXJ432MeevgJ4M&url=http%3A//bleacherreport.com/articles/113626-depaul-marquette-former-rivals-heading-in-opposite-directions-meet-saturday&cid=1293759298&sig2=r5xQ28YqyyvfVoVJRB3elQ&usg=AFQjCNHYa-B_-K9od9IsasVxhGm7gKjWDA)
-
In a perfect world, it's great if DePaul AND MU are forces, similar to Michigan and Michigan State. But...unlike those two state universities, Marquette and DePaul have many more factors going against them.
- both are private
- both are located in urban areas where there's a huge competiton for players
- both are located in states where there's only one truly dominant D-1, state university (U of I, UW-Madison)
So far, MU has been able to land much better local, midwest talent (the Big Three) than DePaul. And, it appears that MU has done better at becoming a player outside its comfort zone (south, east coast).
Can it happen? Can both MU and DePaul be equally successful? Anything's possible, but for both, I think a ton has to break in - as of today - DePaul's way. They have to out-recruit not only MU, but also the state schools in the region.
Maybe DePaul leaves the BEast and Memphis joins instead? Just a thought.
-
It's really too bad Depaul has two outstanding players in Tucker and Koshwal, MU would be scary good with Koshwal but with him being 6'10" he was not in Tommy Naismith's recruiting scope.
While (somewhat) true, there were some MAJOR academic issues with him and character problems with his "handlers" as to why never got a serious shot with him. I'll leave it at that.
But back to the main topic here, as someone who's Dad was a DePaul alum, and grew up going to DePaul games, they've got some fundamental problems with their program going back DECADES that I don't know if they have the ability or willingness to fix.
Number one is the culture of the university. DePaul is focused on being the biggest Catholic university of the country. They don't see basketball as being a major cog in this. Instead, they've invested substantially in expanding the campus, increasing enrollments, improving their academics, etc.
Two, related to the culture, in so aiming to build the biggest Catholic university in the country, there's no cohesive campus and thus campus community. Very few students are concentrated specifically on the Lincoln Park campus, and the rest are scattered all over the rest of the city and commute in from the suburbs. It's much like UWM in that respect, and when you don't have your students all concentrated in one small geographic area or in dorms (a la Marquette), it's difficult to build a community feel.
Three, facility-wise, they're a disaster, and there's no easy way out of it. They built their practice facility just a few years too early when compared to a place like the Al. Plus, the Allstate Arena is now nearly 30 years old, and is REALLY starting to show it's age. While the United Center is closer to campus for their student body, it's very difficult to get there from the suburbs, plus their lease terms there were awful when they played a few games there in the late '90s. There's no room on campus to build a medium-size arena, a la Pitt, and I believe they turned down an option to buy the Children's Memorial Hospital adjacent to their campus, and soon to be vacated.
Clearly right now, a lot of their problems are just accented further by the awful coaching of Wainwright, but there's talent there, and they can get talent in there from just about anywhere when they're respectable (Sammy Mejia, Draelon Burns, Quemont Greer, Dar Tucker, Wilson Chandler all came there from outside the Chicago area).
We were fortunate that DePaul insisted on dragging us along with them in the late 80s and early 90s into the MCC, Great Midwest, and CUSA. However, we are just as lucky that we have had individuals like Bill Cords and Fr. Wild that have insisted on pulling us to the highest level possible, a great alumni base that has ponied up the tens of millions it has taken to strengthen all our athletic programs and build the Al, and had an NBA arena just blocks from campus. It seems though, that DePaul is going to require an even more herculean effort than that to revive itself, and without a change in leadership and philosophy in the administration of the university, and the financial resources to do that, even being in Chicago, it won't happen.
-
Interstingly, the DePaul alumni I know count on me for updates about their program and don't seem all that interested in my answer after they ask the question. That may capture DePaul's basketball issues in a nutshell.
-
Do they have problems recruiting? Yes - Gary DeCesare believes that Chicago has extremely overrated talent and that the better players are on the East Coast or Europe and are just diamonds in the rough for the most part
Is their coach a disaster? Jerry is a disaster, but the bigger disaster is their complete coaching staff. DeCesare, and Ramon Williams do nothing but sit during the games, and Scott Wainwright would have trouble getting an assistant coaching job at a low major.
Have they been decent recruits that just don't produce when they get to University? They produce, but they have absolutely no structure in their game. Jerry lets his "stars" do as they please and will not get on them as it will bruise their ego
What's up with them? We (DePaul Fans) are waiting for Jerry to get fired and then voice that we expect that the new coach brings DePaul into being competitive in the Big East. An apathetic mindset towards men's basketball will not be accepted by DePaul fans and donations will reflect that if the apathy continues.
You can see how DePaul fans feel by looking at www.bluedemonsnation.com message board or www.firejerrywainwright.com (look at the guestbook).
-
The general's post is right on. However no program wins w/o talent. DuPaul, as to the Chicago Public league has never really recovered form the " Teddy Grubbs" matter. that plus the inability of the Public league kids to qualify.
DuPaul was able to recruit the Northeast but that has dried up. They got bradshaw, strickland, comogys etc from new jersey, Philly area.
-
The general's post is right on. However no program wins w/o talent. DuPaul, as to the Chicago Public league has never really recovered form the " Teddy Grubbs" matter. that plus the inability of the Public league kids to qualify.
DuPaul was able to recruit the Northeast but that has dried up. They got bradshaw, strickland, comogys etc from new jersey, Philly area.
DePaul did seem to make a positive move back to getting in CPL graces with the 1998 class; Lance Williams, Bobby Simmons and Quentin Richardson. However, it was a short rebirth.
-
What's up with them? We (DePaul Fans) are waiting for Jerry to get fired and then voice that we expect that the new coach brings DePaul into being competitive in the Big East. An apathetic mindset towards men's basketball will not be accepted by DePaul fans and donations will reflect that if the apathy continues.
The question I have, though, is whether DePaul has a major donor that will pony up on the athletics side of things and push for changes in the athletic department. MU's always had a few guys floating around the edges (ie Dick Strong), plus a committed alumni base that's willing to donate if called upon (like with The Al). Not a Phil Knight that is going to buy and sell everything within the university, but I'm just curious if there's anyone that's willing to throw some money down to improve the program.
-
The General,
There are two donors that have really stepped forth in the past for athletics, but one of them is really focused on the basketball side. However, I do not think it is an endless stream of money.
-
Once DePaul University makes the necessary commitment to basketball, you'd be surprised how quickly it can turn around especially in a city with talent like Chicago. But yes, it takes money and commitment on the school's part just as it happened at MU.
-
Do they have problems recruiting? Yes - Gary DeCesare believes that Chicago has extremely overrated talent and that the better players are on the East Coast or Europe and are just diamonds in the rough for the most part
As much as I'd like to disagree (since MU needs the Chi-town preps to do well), I can't.
Houston and Texas, in general, (where Buzz likes to pull players from) is THE hoops hotbed, with the D.C. area as a comparable competitor.
-
As much as I'd like to disagree (since MU needs the Chi-town preps to do well), I can't.
Houston and Texas, in general, (where Buzz likes to pull players from) is THE hoops hotbed, with the D.C. area as a comparable competitor.
Kind of funny because of what I am gonna relate; Rumor has it that a former DePaul assistant felt that Jerel McNeal was a garbage type recruit and so long as DePaul landed players like Rashad Woods, things would be good for DePaul. Yea... how did that turn out. Funny because Woods is from Houston and McNeal of course is from Chicago area.
-
Do they have problems recruiting? Is their coach a disaster? Have they been decent recruits that just don't produce when they get to University? What's up with them?
The answer to all those is yes. Wainwright isn't getting many top flight kids, and the highly ranked kids he does get look terribly coached and don't live up to the hype.
-
Once DePaul University makes the necessary commitment to basketball, you'd be surprised how quickly it can turn around especially in a city with talent like Chicago. But yes, it takes money and commitment on the school's part just as it happened at MU.
Imagine the potential reversal of fortunes had DePaul been the school that decided to roll the dice on Dwyane Wade instead of MU.
I'm not saying his presence here was the sole reason for the turnaround that happened. I think there is no doubt that it served to accelerate things, however.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/tourney03/2003-04-03-marquette-bold_x.htm (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/tourney03/2003-04-03-marquette-bold_x.htm)
That article is a good read...as is this one
http://www2.jsonline.com/sports/marq/apr03/136593.asp (http://www2.jsonline.com/sports/marq/apr03/136593.asp)
I don't recall exactly when the "final push" for the Al officially began, but I believe it started right after the game against UK in the Elite Eight and ended shortly after the NCAA tournament was completed. $4.5M in a couple weeks is a lot of money for any program to raise in a short time.
-
let's just hope the players dont have this same feeling and mentality about DePaul goinginto Saturday's game. The two games against DPU are truly must wins and hopefully we have no let downs.
-
In a perfect world, it's great if DePaul AND MU are forces, similar to Michigan and Michigan State. But...unlike those two state universities, Marquette and DePaul have many more factors going against them.
- both are private
- both are located in urban areas where there's a huge competiton for players
- both are located in states where there's only one truly dominant D-1, state university (U of I, UW-Madison)
So far, MU has been able to land much better local, midwest talent (the Big Three) than DePaul. And, it appears that MU has done better at becoming a player outside its comfort zone (south, east coast).
Marquette and DePaul are very different schools though. Marquette is richer, has more on-campus students, has more of a national academic presense, and has a much, much better arena situation. Put it this way, if Georgetown is on one end of the spectrum, and DePaul is on the other, MU is much closer to Georgetown than it is to DePaul.
-
DePaul is floundering. It has gone through 3 Coaches in 10 years. Each was able to recruit for 1 year and 1 year only. Each coach also had their own agenda that ruined their stay with the University. Call them "Bad Hires", or what ever. But, we have not recruited the best available Coach, and it has shown.
What was wrong with Leitao? He was one of the top assistants in the country when hired right? He got them to the NCAAs and an CUSA regular season championship.
-
JW does have a nice front page on his website.
http://www.jerrywainwright.com/
-
Once DePaul University makes the necessary commitment to basketball, you'd be surprised how quickly it can turn around especially in a city with talent like Chicago. But yes, it takes money and commitment on the school's part just as it happened at MU.
For once, you and I agree 100%.
DePaul is a sleeping giant.
There are a lot of infrastructure problems there... but if they get the right people in place, and commit to a good plan, DePaul could be a Big East power in 5 years or less.
The difference in MU from 98 to 2002 was night and day, and even bigger from 98-08.
DePaul could do the same thing if they get the right people in place. (President, AD, Coach, PG, etc.)
-
One thing that could give the DePaul program some temporary lift...a win at the BC on Saturday.
THIS THREAD FEELS LIKE ONE GIANT JINX!!!
-
What was wrong with Leitao? He was one of the top assistants in the country when hired right? He got them to the NCAAs and an CUSA regular season championship.
Leitao succeed with PK's players. Leitao would probably be an upgrade from Wainwright at this point, but a significant one? Nope. Additionally, Leitao recruiting classes were good on paper, but on the court, not as much (see UVA's record).
Of his 2003 class, Mejia was the only one who really succeeded. Wesley Green was a bust, as was Lorenzo Thompson. Tyler Smith was more interested in medicinal pleasure than basketball, and Marcus Heard underachieved in his career. 2004 brought marginal talent and 2005 had Chandler who was a star, Currie who has been average at best, and Rashad Woods who could hardly get off the bench as a freshman at DePaul and now at Kent State, is not even starting there.
-
One thing that could give the DePaul program some temporary lift...a win at the BC on Saturday.
THIS THREAD FEELS LIKE ONE GIANT JINX!!!
A win would lift the spirits of the players, but beyond that, I think the effects of a win on DePaul fans, DePaul administration and DePaul coaches would ultimately be minimal at best.
-
emphasis was on the jinx...not the lift
-
Talk about jinx - every game in the BE is tough. DePaul has some talent and their coach is trying to find a spark. Look what Harvard did to Boston College. We are 5-0 in the BE, because we have played our hearts out and have not run into a serious Big Man team. Depaul will be a good test.
-
This game has trap written all over it with an 0-6 team with nothing to lose coming to the BC after our great road win at PC, a long week, and a possible look ahead to a Big Monday matchup on ESPN with ND....I don't think our Seniors will let up but this game may be a lot closer than some of us think. Koshwal could kill us inside.
-
Depaul has the perfect inside/outside with Koshwal and Tucker. They also have serious size ready to bang with our 6'5" power forwards.
This game will be a challenge and we will be lucky to get a win.
-
For once, you and I agree 100%.
DePaul is a sleeping giant.
There are a lot of infrastructure problems there... but if they get the right people in place, and commit to a good plan, DePaul could be a Big East power in 5 years or less.
The difference in MU from 98 to 2002 was night and day, and even bigger from 98-08.
DePaul could do the same thing if they get the right people in place. (President, AD, Coach, PG, etc.)
Good, glad you've seen the light. Welcome aboard.
-
I don't recall exactly when the "final push" for the Al officially began, but I believe it started right after the game against UK in the Elite Eight and ended shortly after the NCAA tournament was completed. $4.5M in a couple weeks is a lot of money for any program to raise in a short time.
When I was at MU I worked at the phonathon, and I specifically remember the day after the Elite Eight win being the biggest single fundraising day in my 4 years there. I think the university did end up raising a couple million in that week alone. It was ridiculous.
-
Depaul has the perfect inside/outside with Koshwal and Tucker. They also have serious size ready to bang with our 6'5" power forwards.
This game will be a challenge and we will be lucky to get a win.
Was that last sentence supposed to be in teal? I sure hope so.
-
Good, glad you've seen the light. Welcome aboard.
It's your modesty that makes you so special.
-
Let me begin by saying that I am not trying to mock DePaul or start an arguement. My simple questions is "Is it over for DePaul?"
What I mean is that I just don't see them ever really competing in the Big East. They just seem like a lost program. It doesn't seem like the university is that concerned with them, the student body doesn't seem concerned, and they can't protect their own backyard when it comes to recruiting.
There is some solid history at DePaul, but I just don't ever see them coming back until the University gives a darn again. Any thoughts?
Dave Laitao (sp?) did some good things there only a few years ago. He left for Virginia where he's struggling. I think DePaul can do it but it takes the right kind of coach (I'll argue forever that the same thing is in play at Marquette....DePaul is proof positive that the program doesn't just make the coach).
-
Was that last sentence supposed to be in teal? I sure hope so.
No, I think the DePaul game will be tough. They are young, but talented and have size. if they are motivated, we could be in trouble.
-
Depaul has the perfect inside/outside with Koshwal and Tucker. They also have serious size ready to bang with our 6'5" power forwards.
This game will be a challenge and we will be lucky to get a win.
Thank you for visiting the site, Mr. Holtz.
-
It's really too bad Depaul has two outstanding players in Tucker and Koshwal, MU would be scary good with Koshwal but with him being 6'10" he was not in Tommy Naismith's recruiting scope.
There you go confusing facts with opinions. Both Tucker and Koshwal were recruited by MU but Tucker was no better than anyone we already had at that size. For Koshwal, you are simply wrong.
Marquette offered a scholarship to him under Tom Crean (as did USC, LSU, Tennessee, Louisville, DePaul, OSU, Cal and others).
He was most certainly a target, he stayed close to home for a number of reasons which shall remain nameless (not hard to find out).
-
For once, you and I agree 100%.
DePaul is a sleeping giant.
There are a lot of infrastructure problems there... but if they get the right people in place, and commit to a good plan, DePaul could be a Big East power in 5 years or less.
The difference in MU from 98 to 2002 was night and day, and even bigger from 98-08.
DePaul could do the same thing if they get the right people in place. (President, AD, Coach, PG, etc.)
That reminds me of each year when our softball season was over. We'd think .. "man, if we just had a good shortstop, we'd be a great team. Well, and a good 2nd baseman. Our outfield needs to be replaced too, and we need guys who can hit. If we could just replace all of us, we could win the whole thing next year!!!"
-
No, I think the DePaul game will be tough. They are young, but talented and have size. if they are motivated, we could be in trouble.
They're not that young. They start two seniors and a junior to go with two sophomores who have played pretty much every game since they got on campus.
And it's hard to buy the notion that they're talented. They've yet to win a conference game despite a pretty soft schedule that's included two against South Florida (one of which was a 22-point loss at home), have home losses to Morgan State and Cincinnati and were beaten by 26 at Northwestern.
Size they do have, and yet they're one of the worst rebounding teams in the conference (a -2.7 margin on the season).
An MU loss Saturday would be an enormous upset and disappointment.
-
Their leaders are sophomores. I agree, I will not be jumping around if we lose. However, please keep in mind the premise of the original post. These guys are not done and could easily put it together with some motivation Buzz.
-
That reminds me of each year when our softball season was over. We'd think .. "man, if we just had a good shortstop, we'd be a great team. Well, and a good 2nd baseman. Our outfield needs to be replaced too, and we need guys who can hit. If we could just replace all of us, we could win the whole thing next year!!!"
Yea, fair point.
However, in this case I think a domino effect is in play.
If the university president can find the right AD...
then the AD can find the right coach...
who can find the right players...
who can win games and get the alumni excited...
which can generate donations to rebuild the infrastructure (which was/is weak)...
which can attract better players/coaches if the first coach moves on...
Sound familiar? Yes. Gonzaga. Marquette.
Sound easy? Yes. I just wrote this in a minute.
Is it? No.
But, it can happen quickly in basketball.
-
Yea, fair point.
However, in this case I think a domino effect is in play.
If the university president can find the right AD...
then the AD can find the right coach...
who can find the right players...
who can win games and get the alumni excited...
which can generate donations to rebuild the infrastructure (which was/is weak)...
which can attract better players/coaches if the first coach moves on...
Sound familiar? Yes. Gonzaga. Marquette.
Sound easy? Yes. I just wrote this in a minute.
Is it? No.
But, it can happen quickly in basketball.
Or we could do it the MU way:
Hire an interim AD because searching for candidates is too hard.
Hire an existing Assistant Coach because interviewing other candidates is too hard.
End up with your 3rd season in a row breaking the top 10 national rankings and pull in a top 20 recruiting class.
Not that hard, DePaul :-*
-
I'll take their Center
-
No, I think the DePaul game will be tough. They are young, but talented and have size. if they are motivated, we could be in trouble.
If we lose this game mviale, there should be a criminal investigation. No way this team loses to DePaul under any circumstances.
-
It is a shame at what DePaul currently is in Basketball. They had some great teams in the 80's. Their current state does help us from the standpoint of recruiting the Chicago area.
But it would be better that they were more competitive.
Man, they had some great teams back in the day with guys like Aguirre, Bradshaw, Comegys, etc.
You are forgetting about those Pat Kennedy teams from a few year ago that had players like Quentin Richardson, Bobby Simmon, Stephen Hunter and Paul McPherson who all play (or played) in the NBA. Wilson Chandler and Eddy Curry also signed with DePaul but obviously never played there and ended up in the NBA.
The rumors around Chicago is that DePaul knows what is going on, but they don't want to put a lot of money into being competitive because they get the Big East money no matter what. Seems awfully short sighted to me, but that's the rumor.
-
I know the board will see it that way, but I have a different POV. I think we should respect all of the BE teams as our league is loaded. Even St Johns could beat you.
-
I'm glad somebody else recognizes this. Otherwise, it wouldn't be long before we get the slew of "An improved DePaul will be better for us" nonsense.
A better DePaul has NEVER been good for Marquette. It sucks media coverage, recruits, and excitement right out of our program. I don't think its a coincidence that our worst performing period of the modern era came at the very time that DePaul was experiencing its best period. And that our resurgence came as DePaul returned to irrelevance.
The Big East will have its doormat every year, and I'm perfectly happy with DePaul serving that role.
Based on your logic it would beneficial for all for all of the teams in the Big East, with the exception of Marquette, to suck because otherwise it is a drain on Marquette's success. This is a fallacy. If your rivals are strong, you will be strong. A competitive DePaul is good for Marquette and vice versa. Your argument to the contrary is basically just coincidence and has no basis in cause and effect.
-
Based on your logic it would beneficial for all for all of the teams in the Big East, with the exception of Marquette, to suck because otherwise it is a drain on Marquette's success. This is a fallacy. If your rivals are strong, you will be strong. A competitive DePaul is good for Marquette and vice versa. Your argument to the contrary is basically just coincidence and has no basis in cause and effect.
None of the 14 other Big East programs are 90 miles from Marquette, thus your first sentence really makes no sense. If DePaul is good it will indeed take attention away from MU as far as the Chicago high schools (recruits) and media are concerned.
-
I'd like to know what DePaul fans think of Jim Doyle, who despite not being the AD or President, is essentially the Wizard of Oz in Lincoln Park. I'd argue he has much more power in athletic decisions than Ponsetto. (Disclaimer: I went to school with Doyle's kids.)
-
Based on your logic it would beneficial for all for all of the teams in the Big East, with the exception of Marquette, to suck because otherwise it is a drain on Marquette's success. This is a fallacy. If your rivals are strong, you will be strong. A competitive DePaul is good for Marquette and vice versa. Your argument to the contrary is basically just coincidence and has no basis in cause and effect.
Except that DePaul becomes competitive by taking away players that would have gone to MU, thus weakening MU. For example, look at Mark Aguirre. He was committed to MU until Al retired, when he decided to go to DePaul. That basically turned DePaul into a power team from 1978-82, and ended MU's time as a nationally dominant team. Same with Terry Cummings, who wanted to play with Aguirre in college. He went to DePaul, making them stronger and MU weaker.
It happened later on with Quentin Richardson, who was making his choice between MU and DePaul. MU went after him hard, and if you believed the rumors coming from Wells St. at the time, they got him to verbal on a visit. Then a few weeks later he goes to DePaul and leaves MU scrambling to fill a scholarship, which they didn't do a good job of. In short, DePaul goes up, MU goes down.
There's no evidence that having strong rivals makes you stronger. It hasn't helped teams like Rutgers, Seton Hall and other big conference doormats all over the country.
-
If we lose this game mviale, there should be a criminal investigation. No way this team loses to DePaul under any circumstances.
Lets not overlook DePaul so easily. Last years game was no picnic, and it was only two years ago that they beat us when we were ranked #13 (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=270450305 (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=270450305)
-
Dave Laitao (sp?) did some good things there only a few years ago. He left for Virginia where he's struggling. I think DePaul can do it but it takes the right kind of coach (I'll argue forever that the same thing is in play at Marquette....DePaul is proof positive that the program doesn't just make the coach).
Do you really think the DePaul admin and athletic department has made anywhere near the commitment to hoops that MU has? I do agree that the right coach is very very important (and I think Cords made the right choice in '99), but DePaul has a lot more problems than their coach. A lot.
-
Jerry said tonight on his WSCR Show that DeP has to out possession us as it will be a high scoring game, they need to transition well and have no TO's vs. a quick, experienced MU. Said we have the best three guards in the country with all three "playing for money" next year...two in the NBA. Took most of the show defending himself, saying they are young, they need time and experience, he had a upperclass team when he took over with only a few scholie's and he had a class leave early, etc. Trying to buy time for himself, but the guy is a class act as he answered every question. DeP signed him late into May, so I do think he deserves another year to see if his plan will work. In all fairness, he does have some good young talent on the team.
-
Do you really think the DePaul admin and athletic department has made anywhere near the commitment to hoops that MU has? I do agree that the right coach is very very important (and I think Cords made the right choice in '99), but DePaul has a lot more problems than their coach. A lot.
No, I do not think they have. Yet despite that lack of commitment, the RIGHT kind of coach can have some success there. Proving, in my mind, that many times it's the coach that gets it done, not just the prestige or history of the program as some here have argued.
There's a reason why coaches fail at schools rich in tradition and commitment to winning, because they weren't that great of coaches. Just as there is a reason why some coaches win at places that don't give a damn about hoops or put enough money into the commitment to win...because they are great coaches.
-
Lets not overlook DePaul so easily. Last years game was no picnic, and it was only two years ago that they beat us when we were ranked #13 (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=270450305 (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=270450305)
DePaul is 0-6 this year and has so horrid non-conference losses. MU is 5-0, the game is at home, the last game for McNeal to play against his Chicago guys at home. Two years ago DePaul had some talent and was 20-14. They went three games deep into the NIT.
This year's DePaul team will likely finish 0-18 or no better than 2-16 in the conference and will not make any tournament at all.
We need to compare apples to apples.....this year's apples don't look anything like the apples of two years ago on the DePaul side.
-
Except that DePaul becomes competitive by taking away players that would have gone to MU, thus weakening MU. For example, look at Mark Aguirre. He was committed to MU until Al retired, when he decided to go to DePaul. That basically turned DePaul into a power team from 1978-82, and ended MU's time as a nationally dominant team. Same with Terry Cummings, who wanted to play with Aguirre in college. He went to DePaul, making them stronger and MU weaker.
It happened later on with Quentin Richardson, who was making his choice between MU and DePaul. MU went after him hard, and if you believed the rumors coming from Wells St. at the time, they got him to verbal on a visit. Then a few weeks later he goes to DePaul and leaves MU scrambling to fill a scholarship, which they didn't do a good job of. In short, DePaul goes up, MU goes down.
There's no evidence that having strong rivals makes you stronger. It hasn't helped teams like Rutgers, Seton Hall and other big conference doormats all over the country.
I'd argue they got MU's players from 1978-82 because Hank took over the program and the steady slide was underway.
-
None of the 14 other Big East programs are 90 miles from Marquette, thus your first sentence really makes no sense. If DePaul is good it will indeed take attention away from MU as far as the Chicago high schools (recruits) and media are concerned.
Madison is closer to Marquette than Lincoln Park. On the current Marquette roster, there is exactly two players who came from theN Chicago area. One was reportedly not recruited much by De Paul, and the other was not recruited by either Marquette or De Paul. Next year, Marquette has five recruits coming in, none from Chicago. This year, we have two recruits. both from Texas. We lost two others, one from Alabama and the other from New Jersey. They were replaced by players from Texas and Canada. We have a commitment for one player for 2010, from Florida. By next year, there will be twice as many Canadians on the team as Chicagoans.
OTOH, of five players coming in next year, two are from Wisconsin, and one is from the home of the state's largest public university. We have recruited other players in recent years, and several from Wisconsin have played here. Others have signed with the University of Wisconsin, including at least one McDonald's all-American, and one who went on to marry a member of the Marquette women's team. During that time, the University of Wisconsin, has usually been nationally ranked, has made repeated trips to the NCAA tournament, including a Final Four apperance, and played in the same regional as Marquette in the Sweet Sixteen. Being the largest public university in the state, it has gotten a huge amount of press coverage, even sometimes getting more detailed coverage in the Milwaukee area on days after Marquette won a big game.
What a terrible shame that the success of the University of Wisconsin has lead to a decline in the fortunes of Marquette! We can only hope that Wisconsin returns to its years of mediocrity, as this is the only period of time in which Marquette has had any success.
-
Madison is closer to Marquette than Lincoln Park.
By 3 miles.
-
Took most of the show defending himself, saying they are young, they need time and experience, he had a upperclass team when he took over with only a few scholie's and he had a class leave early, etc. Trying to buy time for himself, but the guy is a class act as he answered every question. DeP signed him late into May, so I do think he deserves another year to see if his plan will work. In all fairness, he does have some good young talent on the team.
Pardner - in the four years Jerry has been here, two consistent things have come from his mouth; 1. This team needs to improve it's strength and conditioning and they have. 2. This team is young.
If his plan is to ride DePaul into a flat line state, then yes... he deserves another year. However, his excuses have gotten extremely tiresome to nearly everyone who follows DePaul.
-
Based on your logic it would beneficial for all for all of the teams in the Big East, with the exception of Marquette, to suck because otherwise it is a drain on Marquette's success. This is a fallacy. If your rivals are strong, you will be strong. A competitive DePaul is good for Marquette and vice versa. Your argument to the contrary is basically just coincidence and has no basis in cause and effect.
Why would MU get stronger with a good DePaul team? I mean, I understand that MU might not necessarily become weaker with a strong De Paul program, but how would MU get stronger?
-
Madison is closer to Marquette than Lincoln Park. On the current Marquette roster, there is exactly two players who came from theN Chicago area. One was reportedly not recruited much by De Paul, and the other was not recruited by either Marquette or De Paul. Next year, Marquette has five recruits coming in, none from Chicago. This year, we have two recruits. both from Texas. We lost two others, one from Alabama and the other from New Jersey. They were replaced by players from Texas and Canada. We have a commitment for one player for 2010, from Florida. By next year, there will be twice as many Canadians on the team as Chicagoans.
OTOH, of five players coming in next year, two are from Wisconsin, and one is from the home of the state's largest public university. We have recruited other players in recent years, and several from Wisconsin have played here. Others have signed with the University of Wisconsin, including at least one McDonald's all-American, and one who went on to marry a member of the Marquette women's team. During that time, the University of Wisconsin, has usually been nationally ranked, has made repeated trips to the NCAA tournament, including a Final Four apperance, and played in the same regional as Marquette in the Sweet Sixteen. Being the largest public university in the state, it has gotten a huge amount of press coverage, even sometimes getting more detailed coverage in the Milwaukee area on days after Marquette won a big game.
What a terrible shame that the success of the University of Wisconsin has lead to a decline in the fortunes of Marquette! We can only hope that Wisconsin returns to its years of mediocrity, as this is the only period of time in which Marquette has had any success.
While I hate the badgers as much (if not more) than the next guy, I'm not sure that the ONLY time MU has had success is with a weak UW. UW has been pretty good over the past 10 years, and so has MU. In fact, the rivalry gets high rankings from ESPN. If one of the programs completely tanks, the rivalry will still exist locally, but not nationally (like it does now) which draw attention to both schools.
There are pluses and minuses to having a good/weak UW.
-
I think Goatherder forgot the teal.
-
If I missed the sarcasm, I apologize.
-
Jerry said tonight on his WSCR Show that DeP has to out possession us as it will be a high scoring game, they need to transition well and have no TO's vs. a quick, experienced MU. Said we have the best three guards in the country with all three "playing for money" next year...two in the NBA. Took most of the show defending himself, saying they are young, they need time and experience, he had a upperclass team when he took over with only a few scholie's and he had a class leave early, etc. Trying to buy time for himself, but the guy is a class act as he answered every question. DeP signed him late into May, so I do think he deserves another year to see if his plan will work. In all fairness, he does have some good young talent on the team.
He is a class act and you can tell he sincerely cares about his kids and the game of basketball. I just don't think he was the right guy for the job. I was surprised when Leitao bolted for Virginia. I think with him DPU could have really been a force to reckon with.
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/couch/1391475,CST-SPT-greg22.article
Looks like a wrong season
Everything about DePaul seems off, but it's not Wainwright's fault
January 22, 2009
BY GREG COUCH Sun-Times Columnist
Jerry Wainwright, DePaul, the Big East Conference. It just doesn't fit.
DePaul is headed straight for a winless conference season. This team is a shrub in a forest.
Remember those great days of the late 1970s and early '80s? Mark Aguirre and Coach Ray and all that. Of course you do, DePaul fans.
That's your problem. Enjoy the memories, but move on. College basketball has morphed into a different animal, of huge, high-stakes dollars, shoe-company control, AAU infiltration and street agents. Besides, DePaul doesn't have a superstation anymore.
Categories have been formed, and you can't expect a mid-major basketball program to play with the biggest of the big time.
It's the wrong team in the wrong place, trying to rebuild with young players at exactly the wrong time, with a budget and an attitude that don't fit.
In a difficult situation
Wrong coach? Well, that's what DePaul fans think. And he has done absolutely nothing to show that they're wrong. You cannot lose twice to South Florida, get thumped by Northwestern and lose at home to Morgan State. Not with a coach in his fourth season.
That said, the only thing Wainwright has shown is that he can fail when put in an impossible situation.
''I don't think I'm dreaming,'' he said. ''I'm positive about our direction. Does that mean it's not painful? No. My wife says I'm losing weight, I'm a little grayer. It takes its toll.''
Wainwright is not used to the boos or the increasingly empty seats. DePaul needs Catholic School week, or whatever they called it, to get people to come to the games? It has to discount tickets for fans to come see the Blue Demons play Pittsburgh, which might be a Final Four team?
At a recent pregame function, athletic director Jean Lenti Ponsetto, according to one season-ticket holder, all but chewed out a group of boosters for booing players.
''All you need is one kid to get another kid,'' Wainwright said. ''I have long-range goals, and the school has long-range goals. You can't be frustrated by short-term failure.''
I'm inclined to think Wainwright deserves one more year, no matter his substitution patterns. But he has driven DePaul right off the map.
The team is so irrelevant that it took me this long to bother to point it out. Oh, I remember the days. DePaul-UCLA, national TV, the thrill.
Now I'm doing it.
When DePaul hired Wainwright, he was the king of the mid-majors, having had success at North Carolina-Wilmington and Richmond. He was about defense and discipline, a good guy who, at 58, would commit to DePaul for the rest of his career.
DePaul chose this path. It had its hot young coach in Dave Leitao, who was offered big bucks to go to a big-time program. DePaul didn't match.
That was a choice not so much about Leitao, but about DePaul. The school was headed for the Big East to play with the biggest of big boys but didn't want to pay up for a coach.
Stuck in the middle
That half-attitude has put DePaul in this spot. DePaul is a 'tweener, always stuck between big-time and not. Lenti Ponsetto scoured the likes of Western Michigan, Creighton and Dayton for a coach, landing on Wainwright.
He's a good coach, a solid coach. He preaches the fundamentals, though you can't see that in today's team, and can sit in a living room on a recruiting trip and leave mothers knowing their sons will be safe.
He was not a splashy hire, just when DePaul needed to make a statement. But DePaul wasn't going to pay to make a statement.
From there, Wainwright was the right hire. DePaul always has this mom-and-pop family feel and doesn't even have its own arena. Lenti Ponsetto is the queen of this family. It's all so respectable and nice and right.
But it's not going to work in the Big East. Mid-majors pop up every NCAA tournament and win a round or two. But they can't beat these major programs day in, day out.
DePaul is only pretending.
Wainwright disagrees.
''The school has really stepped forward,'' he said. ''Step-by-step, the school has hired a high-level weight staff, upgraded the locker room, added personnel in academics.
''Look at the placement of St. John's, Villanova, Seton Hall, Marquette. In terms of where's the best place for an urban, Catholic school, we're in the right place.''
Wainwright pointed out that the team has access to charter planes. That's not something a Big East coach should need to point out as a benefit.
I don't mean to let Wainwright off that easily. One more year is not meant as a strong endorsement. He has lost to some bad teams, not only to powerhouses. But his best players are sophomores: 6-10 Mac Koshwal and 6-4 Dar Tucker. At times, Koshwal disappears and Tucker plays without discipline.
Other coaches get plenty out of freshmen these days, why not Wainwright? Because he's not going to land the ultimate blue-chip recruits. Not at DePaul.
''It's been very difficult for our sophomores to recognize they're the first two guys on everybody's scouting report,'' Wainwright said. ''But Mac has put on 15 pounds, and Dar can bench-press over 300 pounds. You see all the individual improvement.
''It'll click. At some point, it really will.''
I don't know. The meat of the league season is coming, and the Demons are about to be crushed every night, which doesn't do much for young players' confidence or spirits.
And if DePaul dumps Wainwright, will it pay up for a big-dollar coach? Will it hire another Leitao, who then will leave?
The thing is, nothing fits.
-
Except that DePaul becomes competitive by taking away players that would have gone to MU, thus weakening MU. For example, look at Mark Aguirre. He was committed to MU until Al retired, when he decided to go to DePaul. That basically turned DePaul into a power team from 1978-82, and ended MU's time as a nationally dominant team. Same with Terry Cummings, who wanted to play with Aguirre in college. He went to DePaul, making them stronger and MU weaker.
It happened later on with Quentin Richardson, who was making his choice between MU and DePaul. MU went after him hard, and if you believed the rumors coming from Wells St. at the time, they got him to verbal on a visit. Then a few weeks later he goes to DePaul and leaves MU scrambling to fill a scholarship, which they didn't do a good job of. In short, DePaul goes up, MU goes down.
There's no evidence that having strong rivals makes you stronger. It hasn't helped teams like Rutgers, Seton Hall and other big conference doormats all over the country.
Again, your logic is flawed. You are all operating on the idea that these Chicago kids are either going to A) DePaul or B) Marquette and they pick one or the other. In the grand scheme of things they could go to any number of schools. And if proximity is so bad how come it hasn't hurt North Carolina, Duke, and Wake Forest? They all seem to be doing OK and are right on top of each other.
It's my position that kids are attracted to schools that have strong rivals. Strong rivals also require you to raise your game consistently to remain competitive. For selfish reasons as a fan, its also a lot more fun if the DePaul, Notre Dame and Wisconsin games are competitive.
I've heard the rumors as well, but Q ended up at DePaul so its hard to believe it was ever that close. I never heard that Aguirre committed to MU. Is this true? He was a Chicago kid who wanted to stay in Chicago is what I always thought.
Anyways, DePaul didn't keep us from getting Jerel and D Wade who were both from Chicago. DePaul certainly didn't keep us from gettting DJ (Indiana) and Matthews, Novak and Diener (Wisconsin). MU got those players on their own, not in spite of DePaul.
-
Madison is closer to Marquette than Lincoln Park. On the current Marquette roster, there is exactly two players who came from theN Chicago area. One was reportedly not recruited much by De Paul, and the other was not recruited by either Marquette or De Paul. Next year, Marquette has five recruits coming in, none from Chicago. This year, we have two recruits. both from Texas. We lost two others, one from Alabama and the other from New Jersey. They were replaced by players from Texas and Canada. We have a commitment for one player for 2010, from Florida. By next year, there will be twice as many Canadians on the team as Chicagoans.
OTOH, of five players coming in next year, two are from Wisconsin, and one is from the home of the state's largest public university. We have recruited other players in recent years, and several from Wisconsin have played here. Others have signed with the University of Wisconsin, including at least one McDonald's all-American, and one who went on to marry a member of the Marquette women's team. During that time, the University of Wisconsin, has usually been nationally ranked, has made repeated trips to the NCAA tournament, including a Final Four apperance, and played in the same regional as Marquette in the Sweet Sixteen. Being the largest public university in the state, it has gotten a huge amount of press coverage, even sometimes getting more detailed coverage in the Milwaukee area on days after Marquette won a big game.
What a terrible shame that the success of the University of Wisconsin has lead to a decline in the fortunes of Marquette! We can only hope that Wisconsin returns to its years of mediocrity, as this is the only period of time in which Marquette has had any success.
Bam! Yeah, what he said. Great post. Welcome to the board.
-
You are forgetting about those Pat Kennedy teams from a few year ago that had players like Quentin Richardson, Bobby Simmon, Stephen Hunter and Paul McPherson who all play (or played) in the NBA. Wilson Chandler and Eddy Curry also signed with DePaul but obviously never played there and ended up in the NBA.
The rumors around Chicago is that DePaul knows what is going on, but they don't want to put a lot of money into being competitive because they get the Big East money no matter what. Seems awfully short sighted to me, but that's the rumor.
I believe this rumor. If I'm DePaul, I realize how difficult it will be to turn the program around without spending an enormous amount of cash. To attract a high end coach, DePaul wld need to build a new facility to replace the Allstate and it would need to be near campus. Due to the cost of real estate in the city and the fact that they haven't done so yet, I don't think DePaul will do it anytime soon. Without the facility, no high level coach will go near DePaul especially since DePaul hasn't given anyone the thought that they are committed to the program (this was particularly true when they didn't pony up to keep Leitao). To turn the program around, they'll need to catch lightning in a bottle with a young, unproven head coach and then they'll be need to commit to him once he starts getting offers from other programs. Until they hire the young unproven coach, they'll continue to be down b/c there isn't much of a reason for high-level recruits to go there. When DePaul hired Wainwright, they did so as they they thought he'd keep the program clean (unlike Kennedy), he'd stick around (unlike Leitao) and he wouldn't force them to commit to the program. So DePaul is pretty much where they decided to be. For that reason, Wainwright could get another year or two.
-
Its pretty simple. There are a fair amount of good recruits that come out of Milwaukee and Madison and especially Chicago. I don't know how anyone could think that DePaul and UW having strong programs will not hurt MU's recruiting. Here is a list of 4 or 5 star recruits those two schools (mostly UW since they have been much better than DePaul recently) and Marquette have landed from either WI or IL since 2002.
DePaul
Mac Koshwal
Will Walker
UW
Boo Wade
Ray Nixon
Alando Tucker
Brian Butch
Greg Stiemsma
Marcus Landry
Trevon Hughes
Keaton Nankivil
Evan Anderson
MU
Jeronne Maymon
Wes Matthews
Jerel McNeal
Dameon Mason
Joe Chapman
Steve Novak
Now, MU has obvisously been successful recently, but their success has been in spite of a strong program at UW not because of it. The same will be said if DePaul returns to power. Obviously all of these guys weren't coming to MU if UW was horrible, but the Warriors definitely would have had a better chance at landing some of these guys.
The comparison to Duke, UNC, and Wake is quite a bit different as those teams (especially Duke and UNC) are able to selectively recruit the best players across the nation. MU has begun to do this lately but being able to consistently get the best players from WI and IL definitely wouldn't hurt Marquette.
-
Again, your logic is flawed. You are all operating on the idea that these Chicago kids are either going to A) DePaul or B) Marquette and they pick one or the other. In the grand scheme of things they could go to any number of schools. And if proximity is so bad how come it hasn't hurt North Carolina, Duke, and Wake Forest? They all seem to be doing OK and are right on top of each other.
It's my position that kids are attracted to schools that have strong rivals. Strong rivals also require you to raise your game consistently to remain competitive. For selfish reasons as a fan, its also a lot more fun if the DePaul, Notre Dame and Wisconsin games are competitive.
I've heard the rumors as well, but Q ended up at DePaul so its hard to believe it was ever that close. I never heard that Aguirre committed to MU. Is this true? He was a Chicago kid who wanted to stay in Chicago is what I always thought.
The point is all of the kids we've mentioned are kids that chose between MU and DePaul. Every single one of them. The choice they made greatly strengthened one of the schools and weakened the other.
Aguirre has stated multiple times that he committed to MU, and would have gone to MU if Al was still the coach. He didn't want to play for Hank, so he changed his mind and went to DePaul. That got Terry Cummings who was going to go wherever Aguirre went to go to DePaul as well. Heck, it even made Sports Illustrated back in the late 1970s when DePaul was at their best, talking about how Meyer getting those players was basically luck because if McGuire was still coach he wouldn't have got any of them.
As for Quentin Richardson, it was a lot closer than you think. Go to an alumni outing sometime and if Bo Ellis is there, as him about the Q recruitment. Or ask some of the players about it because they'll have a hell of a story to tell. They'll tell you about how Q used to come up every week and practice at the old gym with the team. They'll tell you how Q told them how much he wanted to come to MU, and at one point even gave a silent verbal to Deane. They'll tell you how he got back to Chicago and was basically told by his AAU handlers that it didn't matter what he wanted to do, he wasn't going to MU, he was going to DePaul.
-
The point is all of the kids we've mentioned are kids that chose between MU and DePaul. Every single one of them. The choice they made greatly strengthened one of the schools and weakened the other.
Granted, but you mentioned 3 kids in the 100 year history of Marquette vs. DePaul basketball. 3. What about kids we lost to Madison? Or the other Big 10 schools? What about Shumpert and Tyshawn Taylor?
The point is that if we want to be in the big time and we want to convince recruits we are in the big time, then we need to play big time teams. Therefore, it is not necessarily a negative to have DePaul, Notre Dame and Madison be strong.
-
Granted, but you mentioned 3 kids in the 100 year history of Marquette vs. DePaul basketball. 3. What about kids we lost to Madison? Or the other Big 10 schools? What about Shumpert and Tyshawn Taylor?
The point is that if we want to be in the big time and we want to convince recruits we are in the big time, then we need to play big time teams. Therefore, it is not necessarily a negative to have DePaul, Notre Dame and Madison be strong.
Here's what we know. Throughout their history, MU and DePaul are rarely good at the same time. You think its mere coincidence, even thought there is some evidence that the teams compete for recruits, most certainly compete for coverage in the Chicago press, and probably nationally as well.
Meanwhile, MU has been extremely successful despite DePaul's futility. It is extremely obvious that our success DOES NOT require DePaul to be successful.
So let's look at it pragmatically. Including this season, we have a four-year run on being a top-half Big East team. For DePaul to rise to that level, one of us in the top 8 has to drop. If you pine for DePaul's rise, what guarantee can you offer that Marquette won't replace them in the bottom half of the standings?
-
The point is all of the kids we've mentioned are kids that chose between MU and DePaul. Every single one of them. The choice they made greatly strengthened one of the schools and weakened the other.
Aguirre has stated multiple times that he committed to MU, and would have gone to MU if Al was still the coach. He didn't want to play for Hank, so he changed his mind and went to DePaul. That got Terry Cummings who was going to go wherever Aguirre went to go to DePaul as well. Heck, it even made Sports Illustrated back in the late 1970s when DePaul was at their best, talking about how Meyer getting those players was basically luck because if McGuire was still coach he wouldn't have got any of them.
As for Quentin Richardson, it was a lot closer than you think. Go to an alumni outing sometime and if Bo Ellis is there, as him about the Q recruitment. Or ask some of the players about it because they'll have a hell of a story to tell. They'll tell you about how Q used to come up every week and practice at the old gym with the team. They'll tell you how Q told them how much he wanted to come to MU, and at one point even gave a silent verbal to Deane. They'll tell you how he got back to Chicago and was basically told by his AAU handlers that it didn't matter what he wanted to do, he wasn't going to MU, he was going to DePaul.
wow - Q going to MU would have changed a lot of recent history.
-
Granted, but you mentioned 3 kids in the 100 year history of Marquette vs. DePaul basketball. 3. What about kids we lost to Madison? Or the other Big 10 schools? What about Shumpert and Tyshawn Taylor?
The point is that if we want to be in the big time and we want to convince recruits we are in the big time, then we need to play big time teams. Therefore, it is not necessarily a negative to have DePaul, Notre Dame and Madison be strong.
What about Doc Rivers and Dwyane Wade? Both of them came down to MU and DePaul, and the decisions they made greatly effected the future of each school.
It's certainly not a positive that your rival is strong, especially ones as close as Madison and DePaul. It effects attendance, it effects recruiting, it effects coverage of your team.....and not in a positive way.
-
As for Quentin Richardson, it was a lot closer than you think. Go to an alumni outing sometime and if Bo Ellis is there, as him about the Q recruitment. Or ask some of the players about it because they'll have a hell of a story to tell. They'll tell you about how Q used to come up every week and practice at the old gym with the team. They'll tell you how Q told them how much he wanted to come to MU, and at one point even gave a silent verbal to Deane. They'll tell you how he got back to Chicago and was basically told by his AAU handlers that it didn't matter what he wanted to do, he wasn't going to MU, he was going to DePaul.
What bma has said was told to me almost verbatim by Dennis Gates. DG didn't confirm the AAU handlers part but as a HS teammate of Q who was regularly joining Q & Cordell to pick up games in MKE with Wardle & Co, he was very, very surprised by the decision.
-
What about Doc Rivers and Dwyane Wade? Both of them came down to MU and DePaul, and the decisions they made greatly effected the future of each school.
It's certainly not a positive that your rival is strong, especially ones as close as Madison and DePaul. It effects attendance, it effects recruiting, it effects coverage of your team.....and not in a positive way.
I suppose we'll have to a agree to disagree. But I guess I have more faith in Marquette than you guys do. I want us to play big time competition and for Chicago and Wisconsin and the rest of the Big 10 world to be considered "our territory." DePaul and Notre Dame being strong means we are a part of something big and strong and that reflects well on us and challenges us to always try and getter better and stronger.
I guess you guys would rather we stay in C-USA or go to the A-10 and compete against SLU and Dayton.
-
I guess you guys would rather we stay in C-USA or go to the A-10 and compete against SLU and Dayton.
I don't know how you came to that conclusion at all. If there are 3 teams going after the same recruiting area and one team is clearly better than the other two, how is that not better for the dominant team? MU will have plenty of stiff competition in the Big East and somebody has to be in the bottom half. How is it not advantageous for MU if one of those teams is the school that is closest to them? Or do you think all 16 teams in the Big East should be in the top 25?
-
I suppose we'll have to a agree to disagree. But I guess I have more faith in Marquette than you guys do. I want us to play big time competition and for Chicago and Wisconsin and the rest of the Big 10 world to be considered "our territory." DePaul and Notre Dame being strong means we are a part of something big and strong and that reflects well on us and challenges us to always try and getter better and stronger.
I guess you guys would rather we stay in C-USA or go to the A-10 and compete against SLU and Dayton.
You seem to be getting alittle defensive AC. They aren't saying that MU shouldn't play against good competition. Every one loves that the big east is as strong as it is. They just said in terms of recruiting local players you will hit more often if you are the big fish in your local pond. I don't see anything that anyone posted that indicates they want the entire big east would go down the tube.
Can you tell me which logical step you disagree with?
1) The Big East WILL have a few doormats.
2) We will play a few games against those doormats every year and games against the top teams so either way we will play against good competition regardless of which big east team is a doormat or powerhouse.
3) If one of those happens to be DePaul then they are less of a threat to take a top tier recruit that we want from the chicago land area.
4) if they are less likely then that helps our chances to land a recruit from chicago, more so than if Providence, vill, or WVU sucked because we are less likely to be directly competing with them.
It also helps that North Western is bad and IL doesn't dominate the chicago prospects, because i don't want either of them to beat us out on someone we like. It seems like a minor point to start saying people want us back in the C-USA because of.
-
Its pretty simple. There are a fair amount of good recruits that come out of Milwaukee and Madison and especially Chicago. I don't know how anyone could think that DePaul and UW having strong programs will not hurt MU's recruiting. Here is a list of 4 or 5 star recruits those two schools (mostly UW since they have been much better than DePaul recently) and Marquette have landed from either WI or IL since 2002.
DePaul
Mac Koshwal
Will Walker
UW
Boo Wade
Ray Nixon
Alando Tucker
Brian Butch
Greg Stiemsma
Marcus Landry
Trevon Hughes
Keaton Nankivil
Evan Anderson
MU
Jeronne Maymon
Wes Matthews
Jerel McNeal
Dameon Mason
Joe Chapman
Steve Novak
Now, MU has obvisously been successful recently, but their success has been in spite of a strong program at UW not because of it. The same will be said if DePaul returns to power. Obviously all of these guys weren't coming to MU if UW was horrible, but the Warriors definitely would have had a better chance at landing some of these guys.
The comparison to Duke, UNC, and Wake is quite a bit different as those teams (especially Duke and UNC) are able to selectively recruit the best players across the nation. MU has begun to do this lately but being able to consistently get the best players from WI and IL definitely wouldn't hurt Marquette.
And here is a few you have forgotten for Marquette:
Ousmane Barro
Travis Denier
Brian Wardle
Niv Berkowitz
Ron Howard
Kevin Menard
John Mueller
Dwaine Streeter
Amal Mc Kaskill
Will Gates
Shannon Smith
Walter Downing
There are lots more. You can also add to De Paul's list Drake Diener and that kid from Milwaukee Vincent with the big hair whose name I cannot recall that De Paul signed at the time. At that point, De Paul had more players from Wisconsin than Marquette, and Marquette had more players from Chicago than De Paul.
Take a look at some of those names, and others which have been mentioned. Wade did not go to De Paul because Fat Kennedy did not recruit him. It was either Marquette or some team at about the MAC level. I do not know if De Paul went after Wardle or not, but I do not recall that they did. De Paul did take a shot at Will Gates, at least before he got hurt. They never even looked at McKaskill. Same with Barro. I do not believe De Paul even looked at him. Marquette won a recruiting war for Berkowitz, as De Paul really wanted him. De Paul recruited Howard, and Drake Diener really wanted to attend Marquette with his cousin Travis, who De Paul also wanted. Streeter attracted no attention from anyone.
Closer to home, you forgot another bunch of names. Marquette got an early commitment from a kid from Beloit who later could not qualify academically. Crean recruited both Chapman and Tucker, and gave the last scholarship to Chapman. Tucker immediately committed to Wisconsin. This was similar to when Marquette declined to give a scholarship to Marceattus McGee, and he promptly committed to Wisconsin.
The result of all these is a real mixed bag. Players Marquette got that De Paul didn't want turned out to make significant contributions. (Wade, Barro, McKaskill.) Some players both teams wanted turned out to be busts (Berkowitz, Howard.) Others that both teams wanted turned out to be huge contributors (Rivers, Travis Deiner.) What is more interesting is the cases where one team got the player they wanted, and wished they didn't. I am not sure who Fat Pat recruited instead of Wade, but he regretted it. As for Marquette, Drake Diener really wanted to come to Marquette. In his career, De Paul won either one or two games against Marquette. Whatever the number, Diener was the dominant player for De Paul. But Tom Crean turned him down to sign Howard instead. Howard was gone after a year.
The situation is similar with Marquette and Wisconsin. Marquette would have loved to get Butch. He did not do badly, but had a career far below what his status as a McD AA would have suggested. Mike Kelly had a good, but not great career at Wisconsin. Mc Gee never made it onto the court at Wisconsin, as he got kicked out of school over the summer. Perhaps the biggest flub by Marquette was signing Chapman rather than Tucker. Marquette was recruiting both, chose Chapman, and watched Tucker become a starter for Wisconsin his freshman year, and torment Marquette for five years. Chapman was a complimentary player for Marquette.
The point is, there are plenty of players to go around, few of them are going to single-handedly change the fortune of a team, and of those, it is hard to predict which ones they will be. Wisconsin was terrible for years. During the time when Marquette was at its lowest, Wisconsin was no better. When Wisconsin started to improve, so did Marquette. That's right. The greatest period of success in Wisconsin history happened to coincide with Marquette being as successful as it has been for thirty years, despite the fact that the two programs were frequently competing for the same recruits and for attention in the same media. It would be foolish to claim that Marquette's success is a result of Wisconsins, but clearly, Wisconsin's success had little negative effect on Marquette. If Marquette had signed every player they competed against Wisconsin for, it would mean we did not sign other players instead. Would it have made us better or worse? Who knows? But the fact that Marquette and Wisconsin have played each other over the past fifteen years or so has given each team a quality non-conference opponent engergized its fan base, and created national interest in the series.
Marquette and De Paul and Marquette and Notre Dame have attracted similar attention in the past. While Marquette competes with De Paul for players, it also competes with other teams in the Big East. Providence wanted Lazar. Other teams have battled Marquette for players, and will continue to do so. A good De Paul team does no more harm than a good Notre Dame team, and little more than any other team in the Big East. A good De Paul team would create more excitement around both programs, make the games between them more interesting, and attract more national attention. For the most part, Marquette will succeed or fail regardless of how De Paul fares, but a successful De Paul program is better for Marquette than a weak one.
-
Wade did not go to De Paul because Fat Kennedy did not recruit him. It was either Marquette or some team at about the MAC level.
Not true at all. DePaul was one of three schools to offer Wade a scholarship even after his academic troubles were known, MU and Illinois State were the other two. Further, Wade's favorites were DePaul and Marquette, Illinois State was only a back up. Kennedy only had two scholarships available that year. The first went to McDonald's All American Andre Brown. The second came down to Wade and consensus top 20 recruit Imari Sawyer. Kennedy gave the scholarship to Sawyer, a decision no one in the country would have thought was a bad one back then, because he was ready to commit when Kennedy wanted it, and Wade wasn't. Wade ended up at MU almost by default, as we were the only major program that had a scholarship available and were willing to take the academic risk on him.
-
Imari Sawyer, haven’t heard that name in a while. He was the real deal in HS, and one of several players that got a lot more attention than Wade during that time. It’s kind of difficult to reiterate the point I’m getting at now that all is said in done, because most of Wade’s Chicago contemporaries essentially blew their loads in HS, while Wade is one of the best players on the planet. But from what I remember Wade didn’t get paid much attention compared to the likes of Sawyer, Curry, Matt Lottich, Cedric Banks, even Blankson. It kind of seems like a bold statement now, but I think it’s fair to say Wade was almost looked at as a “2nd fiddle” player in the area back then. (It doesn’t help that there are usually a McDonalds AA or 2, and there’s tons of talent, my point is he seemed like a lot of people didn’t buy into him.)
However, it seemed fairly obvious to anyone from that picked up the Daily Southtown or didn’t focus solely on the Public League that Wade was still a VERY good player. I pretty much view McNeal the same way, though he played on a high profile team and was one of the top players in the state. It seemed like Frasor, Scheyer, Julian Wright, and Minnoy got more attention. Plus you had younger kids like Rose. All he wanted to do was go to U of I, and I don’t even think they looked at him. Someone noted earlier that DePaul didn’t think he was up to their standards either.
It’s interesting that 2 of the cornerstones of MU over the last few years were “overlooked” players of this nature. You can even make the same argument for Alando Tucker at Wisconsin, another south suburban player that I don’t recall getting too much hype or attention from the “traditional power houses.” This leads me to my point about DePaul. There’s so much talent in the area that you would think they could at least find some serviceable depth from the Chi. You don’t always need to get McDonald’s players to be successful as MU has shown. I’d take Chicago’s scraps over most players, plus they tend to play for 3/4 years and not bolt after a year. I’d rater have a tough, hardnosed player than some big stiff. Throw in the fact that DePaul has had recruiting success in Milwaukee and they play in the Big East and can get exposure (so they should be able to land national talent once in a while). While they have issues with the campus, it’s still in Chicago, which beats a lot of places. It seems DePaul has the potential to turn it around if they get a coach that has a little heart or isn’t a moron. It might even appeal to a young up and coming coach that has no qualms with busting his ass, even with the lack of resources. Plus there's some history there. Maybe I’m oversimplifying, but it doesn't seem like an impossible task to at least them to return to respectability.
-
Hey guys, good talk.
Couple of items. Have you seen the DePaul campus recently? It is not what I hear you saying. New buildings, open quads, new dorms, pretty good on campus practice and work out facilities.
http://www.depaul.edu/maps/lpc/
The Downtown campus has really grown as well, as most students are Downtown. Colleges of Business, Computer Sciences, Law, and Grad School are Downtown.
http://www.depaul.edu/maps/loop/
There are 24,000 students, with 4000 in dorms and another 10,000 in rented appts nearby.
The School has no problem with funding, however, the Basketball program has not been their priority, choosing new Science and technology buildings instead. The other Sports at DePaul have flourished in the Big East, especially women's Softball and Basketball, and men's Soccer.
Recently, the AD was asked that very question, and gave the indication that donations have increased for athletics, despite the Men's record. She also indicated that there may be a change in philosophy and direction in spending. Oh, no on campus arena, but the purse strings may be loosened for a coach.
Still, a 14 mile bus ride to the Allstate Arena seems to be a big negative to students. If there was another option closer, I am sure it would have been acceptable. But, it's tough to compete for fans with so many other professional sports available in this town.
Our biggest problem has been that we have lost our attractiveness to the Hometown kids. The last recruiting efforts were by Kennedy. Leitao signed more kids from Wisconsin then Illinois, Wainright has signed none from the Public League in his 4 years.
I seriously question the talent evaluation of Wainright. We have a roster full of 200+ ranked players, and that is just not competitive enough in this league. And, I see no development in the ranks. Player fundamentals are weak, and worsening the longer they stay here.
DePaul desperately needs another Coach. Finally, the press is turning negative in Chicago, and it stated with an article in the School paper.
My guess is that we will have our 4th coach in the past 11 years. How's that for stability?
-
Not true at all. DePaul was one of three schools to offer Wade a scholarship even after his academic troubles were known, MU and Illinois State were the other two. Further, Wade's favorites were DePaul and Marquette, Illinois State was only a back up. Kennedy only had two scholarships available that year. The first went to McDonald's All American Andre Brown. The second came down to Wade and consensus top 20 recruit Imari Sawyer. Kennedy gave the scholarship to Sawyer, a decision no one in the country would have thought was a bad one back then, because he was ready to commit when Kennedy wanted it, and Wade wasn't. Wade ended up at MU almost by default, as we were the only major program that had a scholarship available and were willing to take the academic risk on him.
Bradley also was interested in Wade.
Pat Kennedy said that the biggest recruiting mistake he made was Imari Sawyer over Cordell Henry.
-
Marquette and De Paul and Marquette and Notre Dame have attracted similar attention in the past. While Marquette competes with De Paul for players, it also competes with other teams in the Big East. Providence wanted Lazar. Other teams have battled Marquette for players, and will continue to do so. A good De Paul team does no more harm than a good Notre Dame team, and little more than any other team in the Big East. A good De Paul team would create more excitement around both programs, make the games between them more interesting, and attract more national attention. For the most part, Marquette will succeed or fail regardless of how De Paul fares, but a successful De Paul program is better for Marquette than a weak one.
Goatherder and I are on the same page. The relative success/failure of DePaul and Marquette are determined by mutually exclusive factors. We do not need DePaul to fail for us to succeed, and vice versa. My position is that we can succeed even in the face of a successful DePaul program (and Notre Dame for that matter). My point extends that if our main historic and geographic rival, DePaul, is strong then that makes for a more competitive schedule and a more exciting and interesting season. A competitive schedule comprised of challenging games with historic significance is undeniably good for any program, especially one like ours where we rely on our history and traditions as a part of our recruiting. It is for this reason that I feel that a strong DePaul is actually good for Marquette. I don't think anyone would argue that the Marquette vs. Wisconsin rivalry has been much more interesting and intense over the last few years when both teams were very, very good.
While I understand the circumstantial "evidence" of the DePaul and Marquette programs rarely being strong at the same time, I don't think that it is anything more than coincidence and either team's success was not at the expense of the other. Players will always pick one team over the other. Also, I may be mistaken but weren't MU and DPU ranked consistently through the late 70's into the 80's?
I'm 33 and I grew up in the 80's when the Midwestern Catholic independent schools like MU, DPU and ND were national powers. Our games against each other drew national interest and had an intense rivalry that was a heck of a lot more fun than it is now. I want that to return as I feel it is good for Marquette.
-
Streeter attracted no attention from anyone.
Dwayne Streator (who used to post on the old Rivals board at times) is a great guy. A friend of mine had athletic study hall with him and they were talking about their lack of playing time in their respective sports. When my friend asked Dwayne if not playing a lot bothered him he said, "Are you kidding? I'm from East St. Louis. I go to school and live here for free. They pay for school, books and food. What do I care if I don't play a lot?" It's good to know there are kids who don't take their Marquette education for granted and use basketball for them and not let basketball use them.
-
Wade signed with MU after his junior year. It was not until his senior year that he exploded on the HS scene in Chicago. Years ago, Wade was quoted as saying that his first choice was DePaul, but they did not show interest in him until much after Marquette did. While it was obviously great for MU that he signed with us, it was also beneficial for Wade. Say what you will about Crean, Wade developed under Crean much more than he would have under Pat Kennedy. Kennedy's teams consisting of Q Richardson, Bobby Simmons, Lance Williams, and Steven Hunter were among the most underachieving teams I've witnessed. Three of those guys played in the NBA for 1+ seasons and yet they only made the NCAA one time and were fortunate to win one game.
-
Goatherder and I are on the same page. The relative success/failure of DePaul and Marquette are determined by mutually exclusive factors. We do not need DePaul to fail for us to succeed, and vice versa. My position is that we can succeed even in the face of a successful DePaul program (and Notre Dame for that matter). My point extends that if our main historic and geographic rival, DePaul, is strong then that makes for a more competitive schedule and a more exciting and interesting season. A competitive schedule comprised of challenging games with historic significance is undeniably good for any program, especially one like ours where we rely on our history and traditions as a part of our recruiting. It is for this reason that I feel that a strong DePaul is actually good for Marquette. I don't think anyone would argue that the Marquette vs. Wisconsin rivalry has been much more interesting and intense over the last few years when both teams were very, very good.
While I understand the circumstantial "evidence" of the DePaul and Marquette programs rarely being strong at the same time, I don't think that it is anything more than coincidence and either team's success was not at the expense of the other. Players will always pick one team over the other. Also, I may be mistaken but weren't MU and DPU ranked consistently through the late 70's into the 80's?
Agreed. I tend to think some are confusing coincidence for causation.
While things may have been different 20-30 years ago, over the past 6-7 years in particular, Marquette has not succeeded because DePaul has failed.
Very rarely, in fact, have the two schools gone head-to-head over players. Both had a strong interest in Mac Koshwal and, I believe, MU may have been involved with Will Walker for a time. With the exception of Wade, most of MU's best players since 2000 - Diener, Novak, the Amigos - were not even on DePaul's radar. And even Wade, as has been noted, was a backup plan for DePaul, not a priority. Certainly MU has battled for recruits more often with the likes of Wisconsin and even Purdue, yet those programs' success over that time frame has not seemed to impede Marquette's.
-
Goatherder and I are on the same page. The relative success/failure of DePaul and Marquette are determined by mutually exclusive factors. We do not need DePaul to fail for us to succeed, and vice versa. My position is that we can succeed even in the face of a successful DePaul program (and Notre Dame for that matter).
Did I miss the post where someone claimed that it would be IMPOSSIBLE for depaul and MU to have successful programs at the same time?
-
Did I miss the post where someone claimed that it would be IMPOSSIBLE for depaul and MU to have successful programs at the same time?
No one said that it was impossible, but many essentially argued that it was unlikely and has never occurred over the two teams' histories.
-
No one said that it was impossible, but many essentially argued that it was unlikely and has never occurred over the two teams' histories.
OK, well I'm not going to look at the two teams histories at all.
All I'm going to say is that if Depaul(or NW) becomes a powerhouse and starts dominating the chicago recruits it will be harder for us to recruit in Chicago than if depaul is a doormat. I don't see how you can argue with that.
If they get to the point where they have the pick of the litter, then we have less of a shot at a top tier player they want. Not saying that we will go in the crapper if they turn it around, but we may lose out on an occasional recruit that could help the team.
There is plenty of top notch competition, i don't see any reason to cross my fingers for depaul to become one of the bazillion ranked teams we play every year.
-
Bradley also was interested in Wade.
Pat Kennedy said that the biggest recruiting mistake he made was Imari Sawyer over Cordell Henry.
Bradley was interested, but didn't offer.
Kennedy did say that not getting Cordell was his biggest mistake, but it was Rashon Burno he chose over Cordell, not Imari Sawyer. Burno had verbally committed, so even though Cordell wanted to go to DePaul Kennedy wouldn't take him. Sawyer was a few years later.
-
Did I miss the post where someone claimed that it would be IMPOSSIBLE for depaul and MU to have successful programs at the same time?
I don't think the word "impossible" has been used, but the strong implication from some is that when DePaul succeeds, Marquette falters, and vice-versa. Or, in other words, MU's success is dependent upon DePaul's failure.
A few quotes from this thread:
"We depend on DePaul's demise"
"DePaul becomes competitive by taking away players that would have gone to MU, thus weakening MU"
"(A better DePaul) sucks media coverage, recruits, and excitement right out of our program."
One's success does not depend on the other's failure. Whether MU is good or bad depends not one iota what DePaul does. Especially now when both schools so rarely go head-to-head for players. I mean, if that last impact player the two schools battled hard over was Quentin Richardson more than a decade ago ... that pretty much says it all. As has been stated earlier, MU and UW are closer geographically than MU and DePaul, share more potential media outlets for coverage, share more of a fan base and compete more often for recruits. Yet both have managed to remain relatively strong this decade. What makes DePaul any different? And please don't tell me the Catholic thing. This isn't 1963. Stud recruits don't choose schools on the basis of their Catholicism.
And, no offense to the poster who mentioned it, but the notion that MU's attendance is impacted by DePaul's success is a silly one. I find it extremely unlikely that there are a notable amount of former DePaul ticket holders now coming to MU games because the Blue Demons are struggling. Nor are there MU ticket holders ready to rush off to the Allstate Arena if/when DePaul starts winning again.
-
There won't be any impact on either school, DPU or MU based on their success. There is a notable impact between DPU and Northwestern for the same College Basketball fan in Chicago. Even though many graduated from DPU, they are easily found at NW games over the games at Allstate. Fans are fickel, and will follow a successful program.
The only impact DePaul will have on MU is to lower their RPI. Win or lose.
-
A few things:
Goatherder - I didn't forget anyone, reread my post. I said 4 or 5 star recruits since 2002. All of those players were either recruited before then or weren't 4 or 5 star recruits (based on Scout).
Pakuni - Not sure what map you're looking at but MU is the same distance from DePaul as it is from UW (within a few miles) so I'm not sure what you mean when you say "MU and UW are closer geographically than MU and DePaul."
Nobody is saying MU can't be successful with DePaul and UW (or Northwestern for that matter) being good. However, there is no denying that the more good programs there are in the local area, the harder it is to get some of the recruits. If you dispute this, I don't know what to tell ya.
The arguement that having DePaul or UW be good is better for fan interest is only slightly true. If MU is good they will always have good rivalries and plenty of fan interest.
-
A few things:
Goatherder - I didn't forget anyone, reread my post. I said 4 or 5 star recruits since 2002. All of those players were either recruited before then or weren't 4 or 5 star recruits (based on Scout).
Pakuni - Not sure what map you're looking at but MU is the same distance from DePaul as it is from UW (within a few miles) so I'm not sure what you mean when you say "MU and UW are closer geographically than MU and DePaul."
Nobody is saying MU can't be successful with DePaul and UW (or Northwestern for that matter) being good. However, there is no denying that the more good programs there are in the local area, the harder it is to get some of the recruits. If you dispute this, I don't know what to tell ya.
The arguement that having DePaul or UW be good is better for fan interest is only slightly true. If MU is good they will always have good rivalries and plenty of fan interest.
And the argument that more good programs in the local area makes it harder to recruit is also only slightly true. There are plenty of players out there, and nobody, least of all Marquette, is going to corner the market on all the good ones in Chicago. Nor is there a need to, as our recruiting becomes ever wider nationally. Having strong natural rivals is good for a program. If you dispute this, I don't know what to tell ya.
-
Pakuni - Not sure what map you're looking at but MU is the same distance from DePaul as it is from UW (within a few miles) so I'm not sure what you mean when you say "MU and UW are closer geographically than MU and DePaul."
MU campus to DePaul campus = 89.6 miles
MU campus to UW campus = 79.8 miles
Yes, the difference is negligible. But mileage isn't the point. The point is that a quality basketball program geographically near Marquette will not cause MU to fail or even significantly impede the program. Will a competitive DePaul create some additional recruiting challenges for MU? Sure. As does a competitive Wisconsin. Or competitive Illinois. Or competitive Minnesota, Notre Dame, Purdue, etc., etc.
Fact is that over the past decade, MU has competed against those other schools for recruits as frequently, and in most cases more frequently, than they have with DePaul. And yet MU somehow survives.
Heck, last time I checked Duke, Wake Forest, UNC and NC State sit within 25 miles of one another and three of those four are in the top 5 right now. Impossible as it seems, they're succeeding despite having local competition for recruits, fans, media attention and the all-important excitement.
-
Nobody is saying MU can't be successful with DePaul and UW (or Northwestern for that matter) being good. However, there is no denying that the more good programs there are in the local area, the harder it is to get some of the recruits. If you dispute this, I don't know what to tell ya.
Of course, but that goes to the whole idea that instead of wanting to be a big fish in a big pond, that you want to be a big fish in a small pond. If we're going to do that maybe we should just go dominate in C-USA or perenially challenge for the A-10 title. I want Marquette to be big time in its own right, and not even consider what the other midwestern schools are doing or not doing. That's a recipe for long term, consistent success. Go big or go home. Some of you people sound like Mike Deane who said that blue chip recruits didn't want to come to Marquette. He was wrong.
Also, think about these situations:
1. North Carolina, NC State, Wake Forest and Duke.
2. Villanova, Temple, St. Joseph's, Penn, Drexel and LaSalle.
-
Some of you people sound like Mike Deane who said that blue chip recruits didn't want to come to Marquette. He was wrong.
Or like people who think we have to fear MU losing its coach after half a season.
-
MU campus to DePaul campus = 89.6 miles
MU campus to UW campus = 79.8 miles
MU to Northwestern = 69 miles. Check and Mate. Not that i have any idea what people are talking about anymore.
-
Not that i have any idea what people are talking about anymore.
This thread now has 105 posts and has been viewed 2232 times.
And to think people say the rivalry with DePaul is dead..........................
(http://www.replayphotos.com/images/MAR/sm/Marquette-University-Traditions-Golden-Eagle-Golden-Eagle-Pumps-Up-Crowd-Against-DePaul-MAR-T-GE-00009sm.jpg) VS. (http://assets.espn.go.com/espnradiostations/i/chicago/images/mascot_depaul180.jpg)
-
This thread now has 105 posts and has been viewed 2232 times.
And to think people say the rivalry with DePaul is dead..........................
I've really appreciated the DePaul fans coming here and posting helpful, knowledgable and constructive feedback. I've been proud that the MU fans here haven't been derisive towards our DePaul guests in any way.
While we'll always have some semblance of a rivalry, I think that the fact that this continues to be an active thread is the fact that it hasn't turned into a flame-war between zealots of either program :)
-
Agree to disagree I guess guys.
-
And this comment comes from one of our most notable alums.
http://www.theheckler.com/news/templates/?a=2683&z=25
-
And this comment comes from one of our most notable alums.
http://www.theheckler.com/news/templates/?a=2683&z=25
Wow, that really stinks. That hurts *my* feelings and I didn't even go to DePaul :(
-
Somehow, I think we just lost another Alum Doner.
-
MU to Northwestern = 80.93 miles. Check and Mate. Not that i have any idea what people are talking about anymore.
Corrected.
-
For all the power Daley has, and the fact that he lets no one stand in his way when it comes to a project he wants to get done, you'd think Daley could get his old school a plot of land somewhere in the actual city for nice and cheap. That would probably go a pretty far way in putting fans in the seats, at least from the student perspective.
-
It's got be rough waking up Saturday morning half in the bag and scamming a ride out to Rosemont.
-
And this comment comes from one of our most notable alums.
http://www.theheckler.com/news/templates/?a=2683&z=25
The Heckler is a satirical sports paper, a la The Onion. I don't think Da Mayor actually said that about the college team. He did open the discussion on a second NFL team, which I think Chicago could support but that's another discussion for another day.
-
I was going to put it in teal, but I didn't want that to be mistaken as a misrepresentation of how much power Daley truely has.
-
The Heckler is a satirical sports paper, a la The Onion. I don't think Da Mayor actually said that about the college team. He did open the discussion on a second NFL team, which I think Chicago could support but that's another discussion for another day.
Very accurate. The Heckler is a very funny publication. You should all pick up a copy if you are in the area of Wrigley, and read it online regularly. (Oh, all right. I know the guys who run it.)
-
Actually, we can look at the Up-Down argument between the two schools statistically by looking at winning % (see attached file). It is a pretty fair comparison considering the history of the two schools, both were independents, then in the same conferences, had HOF coaches, etc.
- Since 1924, the ups and downs between the two schools have gone hand in hand 92% of the time (correlation). When MU went up, DU went up. When MU went down. DU went down
- Main exception was when Al arrived--and he started to recruit nationally. Ray had to adjust his recruiting to compete nationally and DU eventually caught up--and passed MU. I remember Ray talking about this. A few recruits here and there swung who was up or down
- There are other anomalies spread out--like NCAA troubles--but generally competition is a good thing
- DU was better earlier, MU better since 1960--but generally as MU goes, so goes DU...and vice versa. This history suggests DePaul will be back.
-
Actually, we can look at the Up-Down argument between the two schools statistically by looking at winning % (see attached file). It is a pretty fair comparison considering the history of the two schools, both were independents, then in the same conferences, had HOF coaches, etc.
- Since 1924, the ups and downs between the two schools have gone hand in hand 92% of the time (correlation). When MU went up, DU went up. When MU went down. DU went down
- Main exception was when Al arrived--and he started to recruit nationally. Ray had to adjust his recruiting to compete nationally and DU eventually caught up--and passed MU. I remember Ray talking about this. A few recruits here and there swung who was up or down
- There are other anomalies spread out--like NCAA troubles--but generally competition is a good thing
- DU was better earlier, MU better since 1960--but generally as MU goes, so goes DU...and vice versa. This history suggests DePaul will be back.
Thanks for providing some empirical evidence on the subject. Based on what you've shown, its pretty clear that a good Marquette and a good DePaul not only CAN happen, but HAS happened.
-
AC i don't get why this is such a sticking point for you. one recruit can be the difference between a sweet 16 team and a final four team. ONE.
Can you garuntee with 100% cetanty that if depaul went back in time and made an amazing coaching choice that they wouldn't have gotten JM? YOu can't. If they would have made a better hire they MAY have gone after him and very well could have gotten him. But they suck, so they didn't. And I'm glad, apperently you want to wish JM went to depaul. (i know you don't but it's about the same as you saying that anyone who doesn't want depaul to be a powerhouse wants to go back to CUSA)
-
AC i don't get why this is such a sticking point for you. one recruit can be the difference between a sweet 16 team and a final four team. ONE.
That's true, but ...
1. How likely is it that recruit's decision would come to MU or DePaul? Given recent history - in which the two programs battled hard over one significant player - not very likely at all. An impact player is just as likely, if not more likely, to decide between MU and Wisconsin (Diener, Matthews). Or MU and Illinois (Novak). Or MU and Notre Dame and Purdue (James). Or MU and Pitt (Hayward). The fact remains that over the last 10-15 years, MU and DePaul very rarely have gone toe-to-toe over priority recruits. So for MU to succeed, do UW, Notre Dame, Purdue, Illinois and Pitt all have to be terrible? Apparently not. Someone, again, please explain to me what makes DePaul's struggles a necessary ingredient for MU's success, but not all those other programs.
2. What you're saying now - that one player can have a huge impact on a program - is a far cry from the proposition that started this long (probably too long, apologies for that) discussion: that MU succeeds (and can succeed) only when DePaul fails.
-
Thanks for providing some empirical evidence on the subject. Based on what you've shown, its pretty clear that a good Marquette and a good DePaul not only CAN happen, but HAS happened.
I don't think this shows empirical evidence at all. It's a demonstration of how to lie with statistics.
For example, according to the chart the 1986-87 season was good for both teams.
MU, under first year coach Bob Dukiet, finished 16-13.
Meanwhile, DePaul was 28-3 and reached the Sweet 16.
See--both had winning records! Both good!
I, for one, DO NOT consider 86-87 a successful year for MU--certainly not equal to DePaul's success that season. You and Pardner apparently do. You and I are occupying different universes.
I'll take a minimum standard of making the NCAA tournament in the same year. In the 69 years of the NCAA tournament, MU and DePaul have been participants the same year only 6 times--the last occurring 26 years ago.
-
That's true, but ...
How likely is it that recruit's decision would come to MU or DePaul? Given recent history - in which the two programs battled hard over one significant player - not very likely at all. Richardson, Wade
Someone, again, please explain to me what makes DePaul's struggles a necessary ingredient for MU's success, but not all those other programs. Please show me where anybody has said this. Nobody did, but it definitely helps MU to recruit Chicago if DePaul isn't a force.
What you're saying now - that one player can have a huge impact on a program - is a far cry from the proposition that started this long (probably too long, apologies for that) discussion: that MU succeeds (and can succeed) only when DePaul fails. Again, please show me where anybody has said this.
-
jmayer ... here's the direct quote that started this whole rigrmarole:
Judge for yourself.
"We depend on DePaul's demise"
Not "It helps recruiting in Chicago when DePaul is bad." We depend on DePaul's demise.
-
I don't think this shows empirical evidence at all. It's a demonstration of how to lie with statistics.
For example, according to the chart the 1986-87 season was good for both teams.
MU, under first year coach Bob Dukiet, finished 16-13.
Meanwhile, DePaul was 28-3 and reached the Sweet 16.
See--both had winning records! Both good!
I, for one, DO NOT consider 86-87 a successful year for MU--certainly not equal to DePaul's success that season. You and Pardner apparently do. You and I are occupying different universes.
I'll take a minimum standard of making the NCAA tournament in the same year. In the 69 years of the NCAA tournament, MU and DePaul have been participants the same year only 6 times--the last occurring 26 years ago.
MU84--I provide data since 1924 that incorporates long-term trends and you pick one season to make your point that I am a liar. Interesting...that is your typical MO. Fact is, in their history, recruiting just Chicago has never been the make or break for either program--but the upper hand was gained when either school decided to recruit nationally. First it was Al, then Joey and Molinari edged DU into the national scene helping Ray, then back to MU with KO and TC, with Kennedy and Leito interspersed. Did you work in the Nixon White House?
-
It might as well be over for DePaul... embarrasing display by their students in the upper deck today. Chanting "Overrated" up 3-0 a minute in, and booing during the playing of the Alma Mater before the game.
After going to Allstate though, can't say I'm surprised.
-
I think they had more students at the BC than they get at the allstate. ::)
-
MU84--I provide data since 1924 that incorporates long-term trends and you pick one season to make your point that I am a liar. Interesting...that is your typical MO. Fact is, in their history, recruiting just Chicago has never been the make or break for either program--but the upper hand was gained when either school decided to recruit nationally. First it was Al, then Joey and Molinari edged DU into the national scene helping Ray, then back to MU with KO and TC, with Kennedy and Leito interspersed. Did you work in the Nixon White House?
Jeesh--what happened to guys who admit that they were caught red handed trying to manipulate data?
You clearly stated:
"Since 1924, the ups and downs between the two schools have gone hand in hand 92% of the time (correlation). When MU went up, DU went up. When MU went down. DU went down"
Don't you think there's a bit of difference between a 16-13 season and a Sweet 16 run?
Apparently not--instead you take me on, suggesting I only have one example? Do you honestly think I only have one example to expose you as a fool?
I could have easily used any of Rick Majerus' 3 seasons--1984, 1985 and 1986. Three NITs for MU. Three NCAAs for DePaul.
How about 1974? MU made the championship game while DePaul was marginally over .500. In my mind, we had wildly different levels of success--but to you, DePaul's 16-9 season with no NCAA and no NIT is "hand in hand" with a Final Four appearance and contribute to 92% similar results.
In 1977 MU won the championship, and DePaul was 15-12. Again, you claim this is part of the 92% of the time when MU and DePaul were equally successful.
We can go the opposite direction as well. In 2004 MU missed the NCAA in the year follwing a final four run, while DePaul made it for only the second time in years.
1981 MU missed the NCAA for the first time in over a decade while DePaul was a top 10 team and wound up 27-2.
1968 MU started their long run of NCAA appearances, while DePaul goes 13-12.
1968 MU is 24-5, DePaul is 14-11
1972 MU is 25-4, DePaul is 12-11
1973 MU is 25-4, DePaul is 14-11
1975 MU is 23-4. DePaul is 15-10
1981 DePaul lost only 2 games all season, MU missed the NCAAs completely.
Need I go on?
Suggesting that any year that MU and DePaul both finished above .500 shows that they are "hand in hand" in succes is complete and utter BS.
In fact, there were only SIX times when both MU and DePaul made the NCAA at the same time:
1959
1976
1978
1979
1980
1982
That's it.
Hardly equates to walking hand-in-hand in success 92% of the time.
You want something to ponder--not a single one of those yellow-clad students at todays game were even ALIVE the last time MU and DePaul appeared in the same NCAA tournament.
-
Ladies, ladies, please... grow up
-
Ladies, ladies, please... grow up
Didn't Marinelli recently apologize for saying just that. Ladies.
http://www.freep.com/article/20090122/SPORTS01/901220418
-
Well, now that you saw us play, do you agree that our program is dying?
Did you see our 7'2 project on the floor?
Did you see us try to match up with you by starting 4 guards?
Did you see our Center play 10 mins and foul out?
Did you see all of your steals, cause we can't protect the ball?
Did you see Hayward own the boards, while we sat our 2 freshmen bigs?
Did you see our lack of a Point guard?
There are too many negatives to list them all.
Nice game. Good luck the rest of the way.
-
It might as well be over for DePaul... embarrasing display by their students in the upper deck today. Chanting "Overrated" up 3-0 a minute in, and booing during the playing of the Alma Mater before the game.
After going to Allstate though, can't say I'm surprised.
If you were offended by that, I think maybe you didn't get the joke.
-
That's just sad then if the students who travel to see thier team are crapping on their team one possesion into the game.
-
Marquette and Louisiana State University have appeared in the same NCAA tournament only FIVE times.
Proof positive that Marquette succeeds when LSU struggles. ;)
-
If you were offended by that, I think maybe you didn't get the joke.
I have my season tix next to MUFan12, and we were rather amused by the display the entire game. Like when they chanted "scoreboard" when DePaul were up 7-5. Or when they started trash-talking our fans in section 427 (where they were seated), and they got drilled with an "0-7" chant by the entire student section and a third of the upper deck.
I don't have a problem with opposing fans generally, particularly ones that know the game and are truly passionate about their program (like I know plenty of DePaul fans are). But that crew up there yesterday was just a joke, and deserved most every one of the chants/insults hurled at them. They gave DePaul fans everywhere a bad name, and looked more like they were interested in coming up to get drunk and practice their dancing for a night out in Lincoln Park than actually watching the ballgame.
-
The one thing that those DePaul fans at the game and rest of the MU fans agreed on was when the old dude kissed that old dudette.
Old people pda makes the world happy. Instead of the military, let's deploy old people and just have them make out in public.
-
I think they had more students at the BC than they get at the allstate. ::)
I said the same thing when I noticed the size of that group.
-
Marquette and Louisiana State University have appeared in the same NCAA tournament only FIVE times.
Proof positive that Marquette succeeds when LSU struggles. ;)
Your comment is almost as more ignorant than those who claim that if DePaul were good it would help Marquette.
LSU is a complete and utter nonfactor when it comes to mindshare for MU and DePaul the Chicago/Milwaukee region. We don't compete for students. We don't compete for recruits. We don't compete for press coverage in the Chicago media. Or the national media covering the hot midwest teams. It's just a non-factor.
Meanwhile, MU and DePaul are similar programs (Urban, Catholic, midwestern) that compete for mindshare, press, recruits, students, etc. in adjacent/overalapping markets. LSU simply isn't a factor in this region.
-
Your comment is almost as more ignorant than those who claim that if DePaul were good it would help Marquette.
LSU is a complete and utter nonfactor when it comes to mindshare for MU and DePaul the Chicago/Milwaukee region. We don't compete for students. We don't compete for recruits. We don't compete for press coverage in the Chicago media. Or the national media covering the hot midwest teams. It's just a non-factor.
Meanwhile, MU and DePaul are similar programs (Urban, Catholic, midwestern) that compete for mindshare, press, recruits, students, etc. in adjacent/overalapping markets. LSU simply isn't a factor in this region.
Sigh ... first, the wink ( ;)) means it's mean to be taken toungue-in-cheek. Though I suppose it was bit much to expect understanding of that from an insufferable pedant who takes himself as seriously as you.
Secondly, please explain what makes DePaul any different in this realm than Wisconsin, Illinois, Notre Dame, Purdue, etc.
Does MU not compete for students with those universities?
Does the Chicago media not also cover those programs?
Do those schools not comb the Chicago area for recruits?
Last I checked, their success has not prevented Marquette's success. What exactly makes DePaul so darn unique in this regard?
-
If you were offended by that, I think maybe you didn't get the joke.
Wasn't offended in the least... just thought it was pathetic that they were basically ripping on their own team.
I can't wait to take over their arena in a couple weeks.
-
Sigh ... first, the wink ( ;)) means it's mean to be taken toungue-in-cheek. Though I suppose it was bit much to expect understanding of that from an insufferable pedant who takes himself as seriously as you.
Really? I don't think your post was tongue in cheek at all. I think you were dead serious about the point you were trying to make.
Otherwise, you wouldn't have posted this:
Secondly, please explain what makes DePaul any different in this realm than Wisconsin, Illinois, Notre Dame, Purdue, etc.
Does MU not compete for students with those universities?
Does the Chicago media not also cover those programs?
Do those schools not comb the Chicago area for recruits?
Last I checked, their success has not prevented Marquette's success. What exactly makes DePaul so darn unique in this regard?
Lets both be honest: There was nothing tongue in cheek about your prior post--you were trying to be "cute" by equating DePaul with LSU. So please, dispense with the mock outrage and namecalling. You're upset that I didn't just go along with your joke.
You were trying to suggest that since there is no tradeoff of success between MU and LSU, there can be no tradeoff of success between MU and DePaul. Isn't that EXACTLY what you were implying?
And now you're just pissed because I didn't play your game. So now you call me names and say that I didn't appreciate the "tongue in cheek" nature of your post.
But yet, you repeat the same message substituting Purdue, Notre Dame, Wisconsin, etc. for LSU in essentially the same message. No ;) this time. I'd say you're serious.
So my reply is largely the same: MU and DePaul are similar programs (Urban, Catholic, midwestern) that compete for mindshare, press, recruits, students, etc. in adjacent/overalapping markets. The schools you cite are different enough that they don't factor into the DePaul/Marquette tradeoff.
-
Really? I don't think your post was tongue in cheek at all. I think you were dead serious about the point you were trying to make.
Otherwise, you wouldn't have posted this:
Lets both be honest: There was nothing tongue in cheek about your prior post--you were trying to be "cute" by equating DePaul with LSU. So please, dispense with the mock outrage and namecalling. You're upset that I didn't just go along with your joke.
You were trying to suggest that since there is no tradeoff of success between MU and LSU, there can be no tradeoff of success between MU and DePaul. Isn't that EXACTLY what you were implying?
And now you're just pissed because I didn't play your game. So now you call me names and say that I didn't appreciate the "tongue in cheek" nature of your post.
But yet, you repeat the same message substituting Purdue, Notre Dame, Wisconsin, etc. for LSU in essentially the same message. No ;) this time. I'd say you're serious.
So my reply is largely the same: MU and DePaul are similar programs (Urban, Catholic, midwestern) that compete for mindshare, press, recruits, students, etc. in adjacent/overalapping markets. The schools you cite are different enough that they don't factor into the DePaul/Marquette tradeoff.
Your brilliant powers of perception via Internet connection aside, whether you think I was joking or being dead serious is entirely irrelevant. I thought the wink was a pretty obvious clue, but perhaps next time I'll put it in teal and add some LOLs on the end to make sure everyone catches on.
Pissed? Oh come on. Quite the contrary. I find great humor in your lack of, um ... humor.
But I disgress.
If I understand correctly, your argument is that MU competes for media attention, recruits and "mindshare" because they are similar urban, Catholic universities.
I'll ignore mindshare for now. First I have to figure out how exactly "mindshare" contributes to the success of a college basketball program. Does this mean the Marquette basketball team wins more games if my neighbor is aware of them? Hmmm. I tend to believe mindshare would be a byproduct of winning, not the other way around. But let me ponder that one a while.
Media attention? That's just laughable. Are you under the mistaken impression the Tribune and Sun-Times sports desks allot a certain amount of coverage each year to "Urban, Catholic, midwestern" programs and when DePaul is down, MU benefits?
Silly. As if media outlets decide which teams to cover, and to what degree, based on religious affiliation and campus environment.
MU is no more likely to benefit from DePaul's struggles than Northwestern, Loyola, UIC, Purdue, Wisconsin or any other school in the region. We can agree that if DePaul is struggling coverage will go elsewhere. But to suggest that coverage will go to Marquette because they are similar programs? Like I said, just laughable.
The reason MU gets so much coverage in the Tribune has nothing to do with DePaul. It's because Dan McGrath, the Trib's sports editor, is an MU grad. The other media outlets in Chicago give MU less attention than Big 10 programs, and much, much less than Notre Dame.
Recruits? That's provably false on any number of levels.
The fact that MU and DePaul both are "Urban, Catholic, midwestern" doens't make them any more of competitors for recruits than MU and Wisconsin, or MU and Illinois or anyone else. Kids don't decide they're going to an "Urban, Catholic, midwestern" school and then pick one. Quite the opposite, they choose from a range of schools of all types.
Dominic James' finalists were Marquette, Notre Dame and Purdue. Three very different campuses and types of schools.
Steve Novak decided between MU, Illinois and Florida. Can you get three more different schools?
Wes Matthews chose between MU (urban, private), Wisconsin (college town, public) and Georgia Tech (urban, public).
Lazar Hayward's other finalists included UConn, Virginia and Seton Hall. Not a "Urban, Catholic, midwestern" among them.
Travis Diener came down to MU, UW and Utah.
Same goes for the priority recruits MU lost out on in recent years, i.e Brian Butch, Bobby Frasor, Iman Shumpert ... none of those guys were considering DePaul or any other "Urban, Catholic, midwestern" schools among their finalists.
Who are all these recruits that choose among "Urban, Catholic, midwestern" programs?
I'll tell you ... they don't exist. Maybe they did in 1972. Not anymore.
But there's even further evidence your argument is bogus. Despite your continuing assertion that MU and DePaul compete uniquely for recruits, the reality is two schools very rarely have competed for recruits over the past 10-15 years.
Both schools were hot and heavy for Q. Richardson. Both went hard after Mac Koshwal. MU had interest in Dar Tucker (as did most schools). That's three in a decade. MU's gone to battle with Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Notre Dame, Michigan State, North Carolina and probably a half dozen other schools on the same number or more occasions in that time. And none of them are "Urban, Catholic, midwestern"
Enjoy your last word.