MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: dgies9156 on April 20, 2016, 09:11:15 AM
-
OK, we had a poster talk about a home-and-home with Alabama. In that light, who would Scoop Nation want us to play regularly in a home-and-home as part of our OOC schedule. In that vein, I'll get it started this way:
Must Plays:
Wisconsin
Notre Dame
Should Play:
Iowa
Vanderbilt
Dayton
Minnesota
Michigan
Indiana
Be Nice If We Played:
North Carolina
Duke (yeah, I know that won't happen)
Iowa State (an intra-squad scrimmage would be nice)
I'd Like Us to Play (for persona reasons)
Tennessee
Southern Illinois-Carbondale
What do you guys think?
-
I wouldn't mind us doing a 3 or 4 for 1 with Loyola Chicago. I know it's not a big draw, but it'd be nice to have a year where there's two games in Chicago. Also selfishly I'd like Northern Illinois because I'm sick of my dad saying no big schools will schedule his alma matter.
I don't ever want to see us play Vanderbilt again, that first game was painful at the end but my a$$ still hurts from the second game. I'd rather have Purdue over them.
-
Notre Dame>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>anyone else.
-
Notre Dame>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>anyone else.
That's certainly what they think!
-
I'd like to see us start a rivarly with Minnesota. Living in MN is part of the reason, but I also think they'd be a good fit for a rival, not too far to travel, lots of fans in both states. It makes sense.
-
OK, we had a poster talk about a home-and-home with Alabama. In that light, who would Scoop Nation want us to play regularly in a home-and-home as part of our OOC schedule. In that vein, I'll get it started this way:
Must Plays:
Wisconsin
Notre Dame
Should Play:
Iowa
Vanderbilt
Dayton
Minnesota
Michigan
Indiana
Be Nice If We Played:
North Carolina
Duke (yeah, I know that won't happen)
Iowa State (an intra-squad scrimmage would be nice)
I'd Like Us to Play (for persona reasons)
Tennessee
Southern Illinois-Carbondale
What do you guys think?
Would like to see Northwestern once in awhile, especially with the Duke connection. As another poster mentioned, would be nice to play Loyola of Chicago or U. of Detroit on occasion as well.
As for higher-profile opponents, why not Gonzaga?
-
I'd like Notre Dame. What I really care about is the buy games, however. Give me Wisconsin, ND, 4 games in an exempt tournament, and any other high major game and that's good enough.
The key is improving the teams that come in for buy games. Find teams that can routinely win 15-20 games per season and play in a decent mid major league and I'm good.
-
I like the idea of home and homes where it's close enough to get a really good contingent of MU fans for the road game, and vice versa. Most have been mentioned, like Minnesota, Iowa, Iowa State, Northwestern.
I'd also like Vandy and Mizzou for personal reasons (I went to Vandy and my daughter currently goes to Mizzou).
And while someone mentioned a 3 or 4 for 1 against Loyola...what about something like that against a school like Northern Iowa? A strong mid-major program that might not go for a straight buy game, but would be close enough for MU fan travel every 4th or 5th year.
-
I'd like to see these guys every year:
Wisconsin
Notre Dame
Louisville
UConn
in that order
-
I'd like Notre Dame. What I really care about is the buy games, however. Give me Wisconsin, ND, 4 games in an exempt tournament, and any other high major game and that's good enough.
The key is improving the teams that come in for buy games. Find teams that can routinely win 15-20 games per season and play in a decent mid major league and I'm good.
Bolded and quoted for emphasis.
-
selfish: home and home with Colorado
-
Bring back the games with UWM and UW-Green Bay. It's stupid to bring in mid-majors from far away that fans have no interest in when we have these little upstarts sitting in our shadow. And it would improve the RPI.
-
Bring back the games with UWM and UW-Green Bay. It's stupid to bring in mid-majors from far away that fans have no interest in when we have these little upstarts sitting in our shadow. And it would improve the RPI.
As buy games, or 3 or 4 for one home and homes?
I'm fine with both as buy games, but if we're going to give a home game to a mid-major, I'd much rather give it to a stronger team like UNI.
-
MU is not giving home games to any mid-major.
-
They shouldn't schedule a single game with a team who has an expected RPI worse than 150. If you can't consistently beat RPI 150 teams at home you shouldn't be dancing anyway. Beating up on RPIs worse than 200 is a ticket to underseeding or no invite to the Dance.
-
MU is not giving home games to any mid-major.
The only exception to this would be quality mid majors like Gonzaga, Wichita State, UConn, or Dayton that are regulars at large teams in the tourney.
But teams like Milwaukee or Green Bay? We're not playing road games there. Simply not happening.
-
The only exception to this would be quality mid majors like Gonzaga, Wichita State, UConn, or Dayton that are regulars at large teams in the tourney.
But teams like Milwaukee or Green Bay? We're not playing road games there. Simply not happening.
We have played road games against UWGB and UWM though so I'd suggest not being over confident about that
-
I would be cool with home and homes with top teams from the MVC and A10 like UNI, Wichita, Dayton and VCU. If North Carolina can go to Cedar Falls, and Utah can head to Wichita, Marquette certainly can make the same trip.
-
They shouldn't schedule a single game with a team who has an expected RPI worse than 150. If you can't consistently beat RPI 150 teams at home you shouldn't be dancing anyway. Beating up on RPIs worse than 200 is a ticket to underseeding or no invite to the Dance.
There is not a single team that schedules like this. Not one. This isn't close to a reasonable expectation
-
We have played road games against UWGB and UWM though so I'd suggest not being over confident about that
And that's exactly why we won't do it again. The only way that changes is if there's complete turnover in the administration of the athletic department. It's just not happening.
-
I would be cool with home and homes with top teams from the MVC and A10 like UNI, Wichita, Dayton and VCU. If North Carolina can go to Cedar Falls, and Utah can head to Wichita, Marquette certainly can make the same trip.
North Carolina made the trip to UNI because it is in the vicinity of Marcus Paige's hometown. Ol' Roy simply honoring a commitment made during recruitment.
-
1) Wisconsin - done
2) Notre Dame - this needs to happen, even if MU has to agree to a 3-2 deal or play games in Chicago to get it started, and don't give me the Coach K assistants BS, Brey and Wojo are not bigger than this long-standing historical rivalry.
3) Louisville - historic rival with fantastic games the past 15-20 years as well
4) Cincinnati - our biggest rival from the GMC/CUSA days
5) Illinois - neighboring team of interest
6) Minnesota, Michigan, MSU - the same, but I put Illinois higher because of the MU draw from there
7) Indiana - return of Tom Crean would be fun
8) Northwestern - more games in Chicago are always good
-
I'd like to see us start a rivarly with Minnesota. Living in MN is part of the reason, but I also think they'd be a good fit for a rival, not too far to travel, lots of fans in both states. It makes sense.
Same for obvious reasons as well but I think it would be a good thing for MU to play the gophers pretty regularly(at this point i just want 1 game lol). A decent big 10 oppenent that at the same time we should be considerably stronger than in most years. So rather than some stupid cupcake play a real team and still win most of the time.
-
There is not a single team that schedules like this. Not one. This isn't close to a reasonable expectation
There is a strong correlation between games played against RPI sub 200 teams and under seeding. If we can be expected to defeat a team with an RPI of 200, we should be able to beat a team with an RPI of 150. Only one of those two games actively hurts our postseason chances.
The only thing you get by scheduling that soft is cover so at the end of the year you can say "but we got 20 wins!" A garbage win is only marginally better than a loss.
Maybe nobody schedules like this, but they should. Apply game theory to the scheduling. It is a system that can and should be exploited. If there is no value in scheduling an RPI sub 200 team, then you shouldn't schedule them. Period.
-
There is value. You are more likely to win those games. Those games are more likely to be played at home. You can't just create the toughest schedule in the world and hope it works out.
-
There is a strong correlation between games played against RPI sub 200 teams and under seeding. If we can be expected to defeat a team with an RPI of 200, we should be able to beat a team with an RPI of 150. Only one of those two games actively hurts our postseason chances.
The only thing you get by scheduling that soft is cover so at the end of the year you can say "but we got 20 wins!" A garbage win is only marginally better than a loss.
Maybe nobody schedules like this, but they should. Apply game theory to the scheduling. It is a system that can and should be exploited. If there is no value in scheduling an RPI sub 200 team, then you shouldn't schedule them. Period.
Do you have any idea what goes into scheduling non conference games? The schedules that have to line up? The fact that everyone is competing to get the rpi friendly mid majors? The fact that the better mid majors know they are better and therefore cost more? The fact that several conferences like the Missouri valley and horizon require that their members get return games thus increasing their cost?
No one is questioning our ability to beat top 150 teams (though statistically we would lose some). What I'm questioning is your understanding of how the process works and how impossible your standard is. Non conference scheduling isn't a buffet where you can pick the best of everything
-
There is value. You are more likely to win those games. Those games are more likely to be played at home. You can't just create the toughest schedule in the world and hope it works out.
http://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2016/rpi
#150 RPI team at the end of the year was Fairfield. Are you suggesting that isn't an expected win? Do you think they couldn't be a buy game?
You're telling me you couldn't look at that ranking, and sub a few juggernauts like Fairfield in for freaking Grambling (a blistering Rpi #350!) and not still expect wins?
-
Do you have any idea what goes into scheduling non conference games? The schedules that have to line up? The fact that everyone is competing to get the rpi friendly mid majors? The fact that the better mid majors know they are better and therefore cost more? The fact that several conferences like the Missouri valley and horizon require that their members get return games thus increasing their cost?
No one is questioning our ability to beat top 150 teams (though statistically we would lose some). What I'm questioning is your understanding of how the process works and how impossible your standard is. Non conference scheduling isn't a buffet where you can pick the best of everything
Should we just say *f* it and schedule a bunch of games that we KNOW are going to be a net negative when selection sunday comes around?
No, we should aim for a schedule that actually benefits us instead of actively hinders us.
-
http://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2016/rpi
#150 RPI team at the end of the year was Fairfield. Are you suggesting that isn't an expected win? Do you think they couldn't be a buy game?
You're telling me you couldn't look at that ranking, and sub a few juggernauts like Fairfield in for freaking Grambling (a blistering Rpi #350!) and not still expect wins?
Plus they are a Jesuit University.
-
Must Play:
Notre Dame
Would Love to Play:
Louisville
Cincinnati
Syracuse
UConn
Pittsburgh
Boston College
Dayton
Gonzaga
Would Settle For:
Saint Louis
Wichita State
Davidson
St. Mary's
VCU
Northern Iowa
-
Should we just say *f* it and schedule a bunch of games that we KNOW are going to be a net negative when selection sunday comes around?
No, we should aim for a schedule that actually benefits us instead of actively hinders us.
EVERY team has games that are "net negatives" when selection Sunday comes around. As long as you win them (and don't schedule more than 3 300+ rpi teams) they won't have any negative impact on selection Sunday.
Your standard of scheduling ONLY games against RPI top 150 teams is an impossible standard. Not only that, it would likely bankrupt the program at some point.
If you said RPI top 250, great! Probably unrealistic as almost every high major schedules 1 or 2 high fat cupcakes, but its at least theoretically plausible. Top 150, no way in hell.
-
EVERY team has games that are "net negatives" when selection Sunday comes around. As long as you win them (and don't schedule more than 3 300+ rpi teams) they won't have any negative impact on selection Sunday.
Your standard of scheduling ONLY games against RPI top 150 teams is an impossible standard. Not only that, it would likely bankrupt the program at some point.
If you said RPI top 250, great! Probably unrealistic as almost every high major schedules 1 or 2 high fat cupcakes, but its at least theoretically plausible. Top 150, no way in hell.
I'll budge and leave it to 0 sub 300, 0 sub 250, and only as many 200-250 as is absolutely necessary given the tyranny of the schedulemakers. As an objective our schedulemakers should be actively hunting Fairfields. RPI 100-150s that are buyable, expected wins.
Throwing our hands up and saying bring on the fat cupcakes is going to lead to perennial threads complaining about our RPI, SOS, seeding, and quality of the season tickets we are buying, as it should.
-
Must Play:
Notre Dame
Would Love to Play:
Louisville
Cincinnati
Syracuse
UConn
Pittsburgh
Boston College
Dayton
Gonzaga
Would Settle For:
Saint Louis
Wichita State
Davidson
St. Mary's
VCU
Northern Iowa
MU is working on Notre Dame. The AD and Provost are both alums. It is in the works. Maybe we get a preview in Maui in 2017.
-
I'll budge and leave it to 0 sub 300, 0 sub 250, and only as many 200-250 as is absolutely necessary given the tyranny of the schedulemakers. As an objective our schedulemakers should be actively hunting Fairfields. RPI 100-150s that are buyable, expected wins.
Throwing our hands up and saying bring on the fat cupcakes is going to lead to perennial threads complaining about our RPI, SOS, seeding, and quality of the season tickets we are buying, as it should.
I can basically agree with this.
-
I knew I was remembering posts by guys that are much smarter than me on this subject:
http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2009/12/rpi-is-killing-mu-schedule-tougher.html
"How risky would playing Top 200 creampuffs be? Since 2005, MU has gone 27-2 when playing a home game against a team ranked between 101st and 200th in the land in Pomeroy, with the only two losses being to St. Louis after Travis Diener broke his hand and we had no point guard, and to a North Dakota State team that went on to go 20-8 and was ranked 127th.
Going 6-0 against Top 200 creampuffs instead of teams ranked from 250th to 347th will typically move us up 30 spots in the RPI each Selection Sunday, and even if we get tripped up and go 5-1 against Top 200 Creampuffs, we will be much higher than being dragged down by six wins against bottom 100 teams."
http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2013/03/does-scheduling-improve-seeding.html
I also feel like I recall either Paint Touches or CS doing an actual analysis of the teams that got left out or got moved down a couple lines in the NCAA and the commonality was # of sub 200 RPI opponents, but I'm coming up snake eyes on finding that one.
-
I'll budge and leave it to 0 sub 300, 0 sub 250, and only as many 200-250 as is absolutely necessary given the tyranny of the schedulemakers. As an objective our schedulemakers should be actively hunting Fairfields. RPI 100-150s that are buyable, expected wins.
Throwing our hands up and saying bring on the fat cupcakes is going to lead to perennial threads complaining about our RPI, SOS, seeding, and quality of the season tickets we are buying, as it should.
This is more reasonable. But I will repeat again, EVERY team schedules RPI 250+ teams and most schedule 300+ teams. If you can find me a team that consistently doesn't, I will amend my statement. Last season was an anomaly with how many bad games were scheduled. If we continue at that level, then definitely complain away. But I'm not going to get the pitchforks out if 1 or 2 of our cupcakes are 300+ and another 1 or 2 are 250+.
-
I'll budge and leave it to 0 sub 300, 0 sub 250, and only as many 200-250 as is absolutely necessary given the tyranny of the schedulemakers. As an objective our schedulemakers should be actively hunting Fairfields. RPI 100-150s that are buyable, expected wins.
Throwing our hands up and saying bring on the fat cupcakes is going to lead to perennial threads complaining about our RPI, SOS, seeding, and quality of the season tickets we are buying, as it should.
BTW, the RPI of your opponents does not impact your RPI.
-
Bring back the games with UWM and UW-Green Bay. It's stupid to bring in mid-majors from far away that fans have no interest in when we have these little upstarts sitting in our shadow. And it would improve the RPI.
I agree with this analysis.
-
That's certainly what they think!
Haha. This deserved more attention. Well done.
-
There is not a single team that schedules like this. Not one. This isn't close to a reasonable expectation
What TAMU said. It simply isn't happening. I'm not even sure MU could make it happen if it wanted to. The key is to schedule 200-250, not 300-350 and even 1-2 of them is fine.
Look, we've been more than nice to Grambling. A couple years ago they couldn't even fill out their non-con dance card but we still played them in the BC. I'd argue that Grambling owes us for any short notice crazy open date we ever need filled.
-
As Jay Bee notes, it's not the RPI of your opponent that impacts your own RPI. However, as a general guideline, I think sticking in the top-250 for most opponents is ideal. If you have 7 dates to fill, I believe that ideally two top-200, two 200-250, and three sub-250 would be best. Ideally, 0-1 sub-300 in any given year. But I'm working on a better evaluation method for this.
-
I came across this gem...
--Look for schools on probation, especially if part of the penalty is a loss of scholarships.
--If you want to play a school with junior college transfers, play them early, before the players are used to the system.
--Book road games when the student body is on Christmas vacation or has exams.
--Schedule a school with a national reputation in football, but none in basketball.
--Book road games in the city arena, not the campus snakepit. In other words, play St. John's at Madison Square Garden, not Alumni Hall.
McGuire said it was all right to play teams from major conferences but added: "Go for the bottom-half teams. Especially go for a team which is normally a basket case, with players who two-hand dribble and have underwear hanging out of their pants."
http://articles.latimes.com/1985-06-16/sports/sp-2822_1_mcguire-schedule-al
-
Would love to see us play Boheim a little more. Maybe eve squash Buzz's dreams at VT every 3 or 4 years.
-
Would love to see us play Boheim a little more. Maybe eve squash Buzz's dreams at VT every 3 or 4 years.
BTW your screen name:
(https://media0.giphy.com/media/MUeQeEQaDCjE4/200.gif)
-
I knew I was remembering posts by guys that are much smarter than me on this subject:
http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2009/12/rpi-is-killing-mu-schedule-tougher.html
"How risky would playing Top 200 creampuffs be? Since 2005, MU has gone 27-2 when playing a home game against a team ranked between 101st and 200th in the land in Pomeroy, with the only two losses being to St. Louis after Travis Diener broke his hand and we had no point guard, and to a North Dakota State team that went on to go 20-8 and was ranked 127th.
Going 6-0 against Top 200 creampuffs instead of teams ranked from 250th to 347th will typically move us up 30 spots in the RPI each Selection Sunday, and even if we get tripped up and go 5-1 against Top 200 Creampuffs, we will be much higher than being dragged down by six wins against bottom 100 teams."
http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2013/03/does-scheduling-improve-seeding.html
I also feel like I recall either Paint Touches or CS doing an actual analysis of the teams that got left out or got moved down a couple lines in the NCAA and the commonality was # of sub 200 RPI opponents, but I'm coming up snake eyes on finding that one.
It is not about the risk but how hard it is to schedule. Finding the open dates at the arena vs dates opponents are available. Plus it was explained why last year's schedule was so soft. Not that we have to agree but there was a purpose.
-
As buy games, or 3 or 4 for one home and homes?
I'm fine with both as buy games, but if we're going to give a home game to a mid-major, I'd much rather give it to a stronger team like UNI.
Am I optimistic that the new AD is 1.) Cheap and 2.) in desperate need to get fans excited about the team. I could see them "bolstering" their schedule with playing Marquette at the BC. Get paid to drive across town is a win-win.
-
I came across this gem...
http://articles.latimes.com/1985-06-16/sports/sp-2822_1_mcguire-schedule-al
So there you have it , Al agrees with me that we should have a home and home with Alabama.
-
I came across this gem...
http://articles.latimes.com/1985-06-16/sports/sp-2822_1_mcguire-schedule-al
This should be posted permanently on the AD's wall. It's perfect, and it would work. Screw RPI... we could schedule only "big name" schools and under these rules walk away undefeated after the non-conferences season.
-
This should be posted permanently on the AD's wall. It's perfect, and it would work. Screw RPI... we could schedule only "big name" schools and under these rules walk away undefeated after the non-conferences season.
Except it wouldn't work at all.
-
I love Al, but treating him as a the oracle for how to run a basketball program nearly 40 years after he retired is silly.
-
I love Al, but treating him as a the oracle for how to run a basketball program nearly 40 years after he retired is silly.
No kidding. Marquette was still an independent when Al was coaching — unheard of for any major men's basketball program today. The Sagarin Ratings and Ratings Percentage Index (RPI) hadn't been invented yet. Ken Pomeroy wasn't even born. Strength of schedule, meanwhile, was a purely subjective criteria applied by the writers who voted in the AP poll.
That said, I do think there's some worth in what he says about name schools.
Think LSU this year. A better-than-average basketball team (top 100), from a major conference, and known nationally for its football program. Marquette-LSU is a far more compelling matchup in the Legends Classic and draws more attention than similarly ranked teams (or even better ones) from lesser conferences. Evansville, Stony Brook or Iona just don't have the same clout.
-
I love Al, but treating him as a the oracle for how to run a basketball program nearly 40 years after he retired is silly.
I agree with everything Al ever said and ever did. I think he is the definitive voice as to how to run a basketball program.
-
I agree with everything Al ever said and ever did. I think he is the definitive voice as to how to run a basketball program.
This doesn't surprise me.
-
I agree with everything Al ever said and ever did. I think he is the definitive voice as to how to run a basketball program.
Especially 40 years after he last coached, because college basketball is exactly the same as it was in 1977.
-
I agree with everything Al ever said and ever did. I think he is the definitive voice as to how to run a basketball program.
Yikes.
-
This doesn't surprise me.
I agree with this analysis.
-
I'd like to see us start a rivarly with Minnesota. Living in MN is part of the reason, but I also think they'd be a good fit for a rival, not too far to travel, lots of fans in both states. It makes sense.
A nit pick. We wouldn't be starting a rivalry with Minnesota, we'd be resuming one. They were once a fixture on the schedule.
-
I agree with everything Al ever said and ever did. I think he is the definitive voice as to how to run a basketball program.
In today's PC world, we couldn't have an Al. Given the way he ran our program and the willingness he had to "not know his place" and say what was on his mind, Marquette would be the king of probation. They would emasculate us today.
That said, the takeaway from this thread is that most of us would like to see Wisconsin, Notre Dame and at least two to three non-Badger BIG schools on our schedule.
We'd also like to see us play one or two other national teams from around the country. Syracuse, Loserville and Cincinnati would be nice. Some of us would also like to see us lay waste to the Hillbilly.
We hate the notion of playing Grambling-like schools. And, please, do not bring up playing UWM again.
-
Some of us would also like to see us lay waste to the Hillbilly.
That hillbilly who has outperformed the much higher budgeted Marquette may not be a good opponent to play. Unless you want to see the apocalypse on scoop. Actually let's play them. Scoop may come to an end.
-
Crean sucks
-
ND sucks
-
Especially 40 years after he last coached, because college basketball is exactly the same as it was in 1977.
I am confident our 1977 team could beat any of the recent national champions.
-
Al was a genius for his time. He left when disco was huge, polyester leisure suits and perms on men were acceptable, we watched 3 channels and read the paper every day. No shot clock, no 3 pt shot, 15 scholarships, no chat rooms or internet. Geniuses can adapt, but he would no longer have a recruiting pipeline and fighting his players would have repercussions.
-
That hillbilly who has outperformed the much higher budgeted Marquette may not be a good opponent to play. Unless you want to see the apocalypse on scoop. Actually let's play them. Scoop may come to an end.
No.
If we lost to the Hillbilly, there would be NO, repeat, NO doubt whatsoever that Coach Wojo would be on the hot seat.
Talk about Hiroshima!
-
I am confident our 1977 team could beat any of the recent national champions.
Which set of basketball rules? The one with the shot clock and the three-point line or the one without?
-
Al was a genius for his time. He left when disco was huge, polyester leisure suits and perms on men were acceptable, we watched 3 channels and read the paper every day. No shot clock, no 3 pt shot, 15 scholarships, no chat rooms or internet. Geniuses can adapt, but he would no longer have a recruiting pipeline and fighting his players would have repercussions.
Bernard Toone was a punk and he deserved it.
-
Which set of basketball rules? The one with the shot clock and the three-point line or the one without?
Either one. Butch was one of the 5 best college point guards ever. I am confident in a shot clock environment with Whitehead patrolling the middle , Butch and Bo would have a field day and we had plenty of good shooters, Rosenberger with a 3 point would have really opened things up for Bo.
-
I am confident our 1977 team could beat any of the recent national champions.
The Anthony Davis Kentucky squad would wipe the floor with our squad.
-
The Anthony Davis Kentucky squad would wipe the floor with our squad.
Interesting observation. By and large, I think sports "progress." Players, coaching, etc. gets better as time progresses. OTOH, college basketball was a much different beast 20-30 years ago. Players didn't leave for the pros until they ran out of eligibility, so the quality of the game was much better IMO. Put it this way, an NCAA game looked more like an NBA game back then than it does now. The college game now is way behind the quality of the NBA because a great deal of the talent has left.
That Marquette team was very experienced and very talented. I don't think Kentucky would have wiped the floor with them. Marquette's back court would have been too good to let that happen.
-
Interesting observation. By and large, I think sports "progress." Players, coaching, etc. gets better as time progresses. OTOH, college basketball was a much different beast 20-30 years ago. Players didn't leave for the pros until they ran out of eligibility, so the quality of the game was much better IMO. Put it this way, an NCAA game looked more like an NBA game back then than it does now. The college game now is way behind the quality of the NBA because a great deal of the talent has left.
That Marquette team was very experienced and very talented. I don't think Kentucky would have wiped the floor with them. Marquette's back court would have been too good to let that happen.
Remembering that team, the late Jerome Whitehead was and would still be a beast. Great player that could stand the test of any period. Bo Ellis probably would have spent his life in a weight room and had a physique more like the late Maurice Lucas by the time he was finished. Bernard Toone -- immensely talented and not sure what happened but something upstairs wasn't working.
Ulice Payne could have played now or then. Bill Neary would be a role player today as he was then. Craig Butrym probably needed some weight room work, and given what his son became as a UW football player, one could only imagine the kind of enforcer he would have been.
Our guards could win national title today! Butch was as good as anyone I've seen before or since. Jim Boylan was a perfect complement and I wonder whether the late Gary Rosenberger might have started if we had a three point line in 1977. A case could be made today that Rosenberger's shot was so good that there was no way Al could have kept him out of the line-up.
That said, the 1975-1976 team with Dr. Lloyd Walton and Earl Tatum might have fit today's environment even better. Both were incredible!
-
I agree with everything Al ever said and ever did. I think he is the definitive voice as to how to run a basketball program.
?-(
-
In today's PC world, we couldn't have an Al. Given the way he ran our program and the willingness he had to "not know his place" and say what was on his mind, Marquette would be the king of probation. They would emasculate us today.
I can only imagine Al dealing with "bosses" like Scott Pilarz and Larry Williams while MU fans like Chico decried his "just win, baby!" philosophy and whined about him disrespecting his superiors. How fun would that have been?!
-
I agree with everything Al ever said and ever did. I think he is the definitive voice as to how to run a basketball program.
As one who disdains the use of teal, I thought you were being sarcastic here ... until I scrolled down and read your later comments.
All's I can say is, "Oy."
Even Al wouldn't agree with everything he ever said and did!
-
As one who disdains the use of teal, I thought you were being sarcastic here ... until I scrolled down and read your later comments.
All's I can say is, "Oy."
Even Al wouldn't agree with everything he ever said and did!
So are you saying Al would disagree with Al or are you disdaining the use of teal?
-
I can only imagine Al dealing with "bosses" like Scott Pilarz and Larry Williams while MU fans like Chico decried his "just win, baby!" philosophy and whined about him disrespecting his superiors. How fun would that have been?!
Al apparently dealt directly with the late Father John P. Raynor, then President of Marquette University.
Can you imagine Al going into Father Pilarz and telling him, "Father, you took the vow of poverty. I didn't" in response to Marquette compensation offer?
Father DiUilio would have chased Al off and been as effective in operating the basketball team as he was in closing Wisconsin Avenue. Yikes!
-
Al apparently dealt directly with the late Father John P. Raynor, then President of Marquette University.
Can you imagine Al going into Father Pilarz and telling him, "Father, you took the vow of poverty. I didn't" in response to Marquette compensation offer?
Father DiUilio would have chased Al off and been as effective in operating the basketball team as he was in closing Wisconsin Avenue. Yikes!
Al would have been fine with Fr Wild (as he was with Fr Raynor). Those other "bosses"? Not so much.
-
So are you saying Al would disagree with Al or are you disdaining the use of teal?
Nicely played, Lenny.
Or was it ... ?
-
Nicely played, Lenny.
Or was it ... ?
Yet another example of why I love Scoop.
-
Al would have been fine with Fr Wild (as he was with Fr Raynor). Those other "bosses"? Not so much.
I suspect Al may have known Father Wild, since Father Wild had been on campus as a Philosophy professor back in the 1970s.
But I absolutely agree. Father Wild is an incredible gentleman and a fine leader.
-
Al would have been fine with Fr Wild (as he was with Fr Raynor). Those other "bosses"? Not so much.
I agree with this analysis.
-
In today's PC world, we couldn't have an Al. Given the way he ran our program and the willingness he had to "not know his place" and say what was on his mind, Marquette would be the king of probation. They would emasculate us today.
Well, if Al were the coach of Marquette today ... he wouldn't be the coach of Marquette today.
He would have gotten HUGE money from the Bucks, and Marquette wouldn't have stopped him from leaving because that's not what universities do any more. They would have accepted whatever buyout $ Al's contract would have called for and gone out and hired a new coach.
Many of us would have spent years ripping Al as a traitor and making fun of him. Woulda called him a snake-oil salesman, for sure. Others would have been happy such a "squirmy" character was gone. Simultaneously, many would have spent years bitching that the new coach wasn't good enough.
Yep, woulda been fun to have a world in which Al and Scoop collided.
-
Well, if Al were the coach of Marquette today ... he wouldn't be the coach of Marquette today.
He would have gotten HUGE money from the Bucks, and Marquette wouldn't have stopped him from leaving because that's not what universities do any more. They would have accepted whatever buyout $ Al's contract would have called for and gone out and hired a new coach.
Many of us would have spent years ripping Al as a traitor and making fun of him. Woulda called him a snake-oil salesman, for sure. Others would have been happy such a "squirmy" character was gone. Simultaneously, many would have spent years bitching that the new coach wasn't good enough.
Yep, woulda been fun to have a world in which Al and Scoop collided.
All true.
-
Well, if Al were the coach of Marquette today ... he wouldn't be the coach of Marquette today.
He would have gotten HUGE money from the Bucks, and Marquette wouldn't have stopped him from leaving because that's not what universities do any more. They would have accepted whatever buyout $ Al's contract would have called for and gone out and hired a new coach.
Many of us would have spent years ripping Al as a traitor and making fun of him. Woulda called him a snake-oil salesman, for sure. Others would have been happy such a "squirmy" character was gone. Simultaneously, many would have spent years bitching that the new coach wasn't good enough.
Yep, woulda been fun to have a world in which Al and Scoop collided.
I have no idea what was in Al's contract circa 1969-1970, but I'm almost willing to bet there was NO buyout clause in the contract. Or, if there was, the Milwaukee Bucks probably made it clear they would not pay it.
Sometimes things happen for the best. Al later admitted, he would not be suited to coach guys who made more than he did. And, Kareem coming down the pike a year or two later, there was no way Al would make more than Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. I also could never see Al duking it out with professional athletes who didn't buy in or got in his way.
Also would wonder how Al would have handled the pervasive drug use that was going on in the NBA by the late 1970s.
Al was a personality and a great teacher at Marquette. He was a perfect fit for the 1970s era college game. I'm glad we had him as her personified what Marquette was and is all about.
-
I have no idea what was in Al's contract circa 1969-1970, but I'm almost willing to bet there was NO buyout clause in the contract. Or, if there was, the Milwaukee Bucks probably made it clear they would not pay it.
Sometimes things happen for the best. Al later admitted, he would not be suited to coach guys who made more than he did. And, Kareem coming down the pike a year or two later, there was no way Al would make more than Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. I also could never see Al duking it out with professional athletes who didn't buy in or got in his way.
Also would wonder how Al would have handled the pervasive drug use that was going on in the NBA by the late 1970s.
Al was a personality and a great teacher at Marquette. He was a perfect fit for the 1970s era college game. I'm glad we had him as her personified what Marquette was and is all about.
No argument.
There were no buyout clauses in 1970. There also were no big-money, multi-year contracts.
All's I said was that if this were today, Al would have had a huge contract with MU and that if he wanted to leave, MU wouldn't have stopped him as the school did way back when.