It is good that everyone is staying h on top of how the season is going and staying diligent in their criticisms.

You never want to get caught with your pans down.

Quote from: panda on Today at 03:28:16 PMThe question should be why are we getting so many good open looks. Are we very easy to defend because of our low talent level? Are we easy to scheme against because our offense only takes shots at the rim and behind the arc?

Hey panda first time long time - is it also possible our team is so bereft of any talent that it's remarkably easy for teams to stop one of our only players with a pulse? I'll hang up and listen thanks !

Quote from: dgies9156 on Today at 03:49:55 PMNot to break anyone's bubble, but here's the likely reality at Marquette as we speak.

1) Shaka Smart is everything Marquette wants in a head coach. He's low-key, caring about his players, focused on good citizens and involved in both the university and greater Milwaukee communities. Plus, he's won in his first four years.The FiServ has been full and Marquette has been, until this year, consistently near the the Top 3 in the Big East. From a personal standpoint, Shaka is "cool" and the "anthesis-Al" and certainly the "anthesis-Kevin O'Neill!"

2) For those of you who want Shaka gone: from where will the money for Shaka's buyout  come? I'm sure the buyout is huge! If a rich donor steps up and does a Coach Wojo v2.0, what's that going to do to program-related contributory resources necessary to maintain a Top 20 program? Under these circumstances, who other than a speculative hire looking to build a name will come to Marquette?

3) For those of you puking at RGV (me included), could the need for RGV be more than just Shaka being stubborn? Could the university be going "cheap" on the basketball program again? While I think we have the resources to do whatever we want with basketball, I also believe Marquette's leadership is telling AD Broeker what it expects in contribution to the general fund from basketball net profits. That vision is likely based on historical rather than current or predictive trends. Managing for a contribution margin may mean Marquette can't pay "big-time" recruits and our portal capability is limited.

4) What's unknown is the importance President Kimo Ah Yun places on basketball. We benefitted from Father Wild's and the late President Lovell's passion for our Warriors. I'm yet to be convinced President Yun shares the passion for it, but I could be wrong.

Of these issues, Item 3 is the one most feared, for many reasons. The biggest is defining basketball's role in the greater university. Is it strictly a cash cow, or is it being used to raise the university's profile. If it's a cash cow and the bean counters get at it, we'll be Depaul faster than anyone can say, "Blue Demons North!"

Ultimately, Shaka will be given the opportunity to right the ship. Whether that's two, three or four years is a function of the financial impact losing has on basketball net contribution and possibly, what it does to Marquette's ability to capture potential student interest.

2. Money is not an issue. Donors have been willing and able to spend but have been rebuffed by Shaka in lieu of RGV, from what I know.

3. No, it's not Marquette being cheap. It's Shaka actively choosing RGV and it proving to be a huge mistake when coupled with his lousy recruiting.

4. Totally agree with you on this. No idea what his personal priorities are, but hard to imagine it's anything close to the passion and dedication Lovell had.

Quote from: wadesworld on Today at 03:31:44 PMDoesn't take much to get you. Just about everyone does.

"You're right, I was wrong" would be a great 2026 resolution for you.

Quote from: Heisenberg on Today at 04:05:58 PMAs I said, everything is the coach's fault.

Who assembled the gang that couldn't shoot straight?

Quote from: Pakuni on Today at 01:11:47 PMSeeing whether they can cut it now against Big East competition is only useful if:

1. You believe it's fair and useful to judge players who've played zero competitive minutes for nearly a year by throwing them in the deep end against older opponents who've been playing for 3+ months.
2. You believe Shaka believes that's a fair and useful way to judge players.
3. You believe Shaka would cut a player who fails to prove he can cut it against Big East competition by being inserted into the lineup midseason with no prior game experience.

If you believe any of the above, you haven't been paying attention.

On the other hand, we knew almost instantly that Niv Berkowitz wasn't going to be a high-major D1 player--and not just the first year because he started playing mid-season against older and more experienced opponents.

I trust Shaka would be able to judge a player's future in that context, just like Crean was able to judge Berkowitz (correctly, I believe).

Whether I think it's fair or if I believe Shaka would do so is irrelevant. The question was whether there is any value in playing these guys now, and if a coach can expose another Berkowitz, then yes, there is some value.

He simply cannot. This is how we are viewed across college basketball right now. Maybe it can be a turning point for an era of Marquette Basketball, but it won't be saved this year.

https://x.com/i/status/2007126043472371856

Quote from: Pakuni on Today at 03:27:58 PMShaka should be pissed at the guy who recruited and developed all these players who can't make layups.

Quote from: Silkk the Shaka on Today at 03:23:29 PMI think you could also argue that they can't finish because their fundamentals are trash which is on coaching/development. Footwork, getting square, focus through contact, etc. that comes with maturity through coaching IMO

As I said, everything is the coach's fault.

Quote from: Heisenberg on Today at 03:57:29 PMBetter is the 20+ -year with a good driving record.

These are not hapless children.

20+ year-olds with good driving records don't crash every time they hit the road.

Quote from: panda on Today at 07:37:17 AMIn most other cases, yes. Give him another season as he's earned it through his previous body of work.

However - this performance is so egregious, and about two years of horrendous decision making that it is unforgivable. Marquette should never, ever have a season like this and it is completely within bounds to terminate him following the ineptitude.

He ignored a major roster building opportunity which led to a collapse last year and the worst season in modern Marquette basketball history this year. Next year doesn't look much better *barring major roster overhaul.

I don't disagree with your last paragraph, but I still think you give him a shot. The best way at becoming a really good program and a destination job is to have someone be here for 15-20 years. Yes, he could tank. But I think if we want to get to where we all hope we can be consistently long term, letting him have a shot to fix it is the best course of action.

Plus, the guy did bring us the most regular season success we've had since Al.