Blaming Buzz

[willie warrior]

I don't think anyone has called for Buzz to be fired after this season.

If next year is another rancid pile of crap season, however, things could get interesting.  As big as phony as Crean was, the students and alumni just loved the guy.  And nobody worked harder at that PR angle of the job than Crean.  From what I've heard (from a coach of another MU team), Buzz could care less about relationships with alumni and students.  That's fine as long as you win big.

Hmmmm... I have no idea if that rumor is true about relations with alumni and students, but those relationships should be important for a HC. Anybody else have any inside dope about that rumor? Sounds a bit far fetched, but as Tony said to Riff and later sang about "Who knows?"

[keefe]

Erin, Ines and I were discussing Buzz' coaching job this morning before we got out of bed. The consensus was that every coach needs to be assessed for 6 years before judgment can be rendered. 

[4everwarriors]

Good thing Chicos wasn't in the sack with y'all, 'cuz he'd lobby for 5 years.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Erin, Ines and I were discussing Buzz' coaching job this morning before we got out of bed. The consensus was that every coach needs to be assessed for 6 years before judgment can be rendered. 

What are the names of the other three fingers?

[Boozemon Barro]

The worst part of this season is that if he played the freshmen all year I don't think we'd have a worse record than we do now. We might have still been left out of the tourney, but all those freshmen would have a ton of experience and would be able to hit the ground running next year. What a waste of a year.

[Warrior of Law]

The worst part of this season is that if he played the freshmen all year I don't think we'd have a worse record than we do now. We might have still been left out of the tourney, but all those freshmen would have a ton of experience and would be able to hit the ground running next year. What a waste of a year.

Exactly.  This year got us no closer to a Big East title.  If the frosh had played, there would be considerable enthusiasm for playing post-season basketball.  Losing with players with no upside is simply unacceptable for a program like MU.

[Eldon]

The worst part of this season is that if he played the freshmen all year I don't think we'd have a worse record than we do now. We might have still been left out of the tourney, but all those freshmen would have a ton of experience and would be able to hit the ground running next year. What a waste of a year.

It was really the result of being too hopeful.  After the Butler loss, the coaching staff should have seen what we really were: a mediocre team (with that lineup).  The close victories to Hall, DePaul, and others, only amplified our false hopes of making the tourney.

I mostly agree with you.  I'm not so sure about all of the freshmen, but I am certain with respect to Dawson taking Dwil's spot for all of those games--we had nothing to lose and everything to gain, including a no-worse record and a more experienced PG heading in to next season.

[tower912]

4 games ago, MU was talked about as being on the bubble.   Can't scrap the season at that point.   No coach would.   48  hours ago, with Nova losing, there was talk about running the table and winning the conference tourney.    In hindsight, that argument can be made.   In the moment, when the coach is still thinking about making the NCAA tourney, giving up and giving freshmen minutes he doesn't feel they have earned makes zero sense.  

[hairy worthen]

The worst part of this season is that if he played the freshmen all year I don't think we'd have a worse record than we do now. We might have still been left out of the tourney, but all those freshmen would have a ton of experience and would be able to hit the ground running next year. What a waste of a year.

Disagree with your premise that the team would have the same record. If that were true, people here would be bitching that Buzz was playing the freshmen too much. You are saying the year was a waste because of a hypothetical that you have no idea is true.

The individuals improvement from year to year is not directly related to how much game time they get in the prior year.  

[Eldon]

4 games ago, MU was talked about as being on the bubble.   Can't scrap the season at that point.   No coach would.   48  hours ago, with Nova losing, there was talk about running the table and winning the conference tourney.    In hindsight, that argument can be made.   In the moment, when the coach is still thinking about making the NCAA tourney, giving up and giving freshmen minutes he doesn't feel they have earned makes zero sense.  

I can't speak for others, but the only change I really wanted to see all year was Dawson at point.  It was clear to me (and others) as early as November, that we were not going to make the tourney with Dwil at the helm.  Easy to say now, right?  Yes, but the Dawson faction has long been saying as much, in spite of the false hope that beating Hall, DePaul, X on MU day, etc yielded.  Giving Dawson 30 min per game and Dwil 10 is hardly "scrapping the season" or "giving up" IMO.  Putting Favre in for the Majik Man was not throwing the season away; on the contrary, it was an attempt to save it.

I think pretty much everyone here would agree that Dawson has a higher ceiling than Dwil.  I believe that a player's potential is reached only if he gets significant minutes.  To be clear, a necessary condition for a player to reach his full potential is to get playing time, as this is the only way to replicate game-time emotions, the only way to obtain valuable video footage for our coaches to analyze, and the only way for the developing player to see different defensive schemes.  Truly a missed opportunity. 

Instead, I fear that this season's frustrations, especially the principal one of deficiency at the PG position, will be realized next season as well.  I hope I am wrong.  But there has been an abundance of false hope around here this season.

[Stretchdeltsig]

Buzz is to blame.  He is responsible for the program period.  He looked lost during most of the year.  Watching the Michigan State vs. Wisconsin game now, it's a game of two very well coached teams.  Much different than what we saw at MU this year.  Izzo is a great teacher as he talks to the players constantly.  Can our players understand Buzz's raspy, yelling voice at all? 

[Eldon]

Disagree with your premise that the team would have the same record. If that were true, people here would be bitching that Buzz was playing the freshmen too much. You are saying the year was a waste because of a hypothetical that you have no idea is true.

The individuals improvement from year to year is not directly related to how much game time they get in the prior year.  

Well this is the nature of all argumentation in sports, and even politics and other areas as well.  In many cases, it is very difficult to measure the counterfactual.  The Derrick clan says that without Derrick's stellar defense, Cotton drops 65 on us.  The Dawson clan says that without Derrick's average defense, Cotton only drops 28 on us (instead of 25).  Who is right?  As you say, we'll never know.  Or, to say the very least, it is very difficult to measure.

I also disagree about improvement not being related to in-game playing time.  You have to play.  You can practice all you want, but you need to play.  Imagine someone who merely reads about the ACT, studies isolated questions over and over, reads up on strategies on how to answer and spot tricks in the questions, etc.  These things are fine and will probably help the person get a higher score on the test.  However, this person cannot do well on the test unless he actually sits down and takes an old test under the same conditions that the actual test will be administered (eg, timed).

[brandx]

4 games ago, MU was talked about as being on the bubble.   Can't scrap the season at that point.   No coach would.   48  hours ago, with Nova losing, there was talk about running the table and winning the conference tourney.    In hindsight, that argument can be made.   In the moment, when the coach is still thinking about making the NCAA tourney, giving up and giving freshmen minutes he doesn't feel they have earned makes zero sense.  

Only here - nowhere else. I see being on the bubble as being one of the teams that is close to being in or out. We were never one of those. We were almost always 10-15 teams away. As far as talk or running the table, I don't know where you get that. Just fanboy talk with no reasoning behind it. Even if we beat X, we stood very little chance against Creighton and everyone knew it. Two blowouts do not mean MU has a great chance in the 3rd meeting. It means they are way better than MU.

[hairy worthen]

Well this is the nature of all argumentation in sports, and even politics and other areas as well.  In many cases, it is very difficult to measure the counterfactual.  The Derrick clan says that without Derrick's stellar defense, Cotton drops 65 on us.  The Dawson clan says that without Derrick's average defense, Cotton only drops 28 on us (instead of 25).  Who is right?  As you say, we'll never know.  Or, to say the very least, it is very difficult to measure.

I also disagree about improvement not being related to in-game playing time.  You have to play.  You can practice all you want, but you need to play.  Imagine someone who merely reads about the ACT, studies isolated questions over and over, reads up on strategies on how to answer and spot tricks in the questions, etc.  These things are fine and will probably help the person get a higher score on the test.  However, this person cannot do well on the test unless he actually sits down and takes an old test under the same conditions that the actual test will be administered (eg, timed).

Of course you improve in some aspects by getting in game experience but that's not they only reason players improve. They mature physically and mentally, they are familiar with routines and other arenas, they know what the coaches expect from day 1, they have a whole offseason to train and get better. Playing in games is a small part of it. 

I don't even know what the hell you are talking about with the ACT test analogy, not even close to the same. These kids have played basketball most of their lives. Very different than taking an ACT for the first time.

Tower is correct. What coach thinks, with a tournament bid still on the line, "well the hell with it we suck, I am going to give up and play the freshmen to salvage the season"

[BallBoy]

Well this is the nature of all argumentation in sports, and even politics and other areas as well.  In many cases, it is very difficult to measure the counterfactual.  The Derrick clan says that without Derrick's stellar defense, Cotton drops 65 on us.  The Dawson clan says that without Derrick's average defense, Cotton only drops 28 on us (instead of 25).  Who is right?  As you say, we'll never know.  Or, to say the very least, it is very difficult to measure.

I also disagree about improvement not being related to in-game playing time.  You have to play.  You can practice all you want, but you need to play.  Imagine someone who merely reads about the ACT, studies isolated questions over and over, reads up on strategies on how to answer and spot tricks in the questions, etc.  These things are fine and will probably help the person get a higher score on the test.  However, this person cannot do well on the test unless he actually sits down and takes an old test under the same conditions that the actual test will be administered (eg, timed).

I believe that is still called practice. Maybe you are looking for a better comparison like going in and taking the test to see what it is like so you know how hard is and you can practice harder for the next time. 

[willie warrior]

Buzz is to blame.  He is responsible for the program period.  He looked lost during most of the year.  Watching the Michigan State vs. Wisconsin game now, it's a game of two very well coached teams.  Much different than what we saw at MU this year.  Izzo is a great teacher as he talks to the players constantly.  Can our players understand Buzz's raspy, yelling voice at all? 

Oh, Oh, Stretch. You are implying that Bo is a better coach than Buzz. You are probably right, but on this board that is blasphemy.

[brandx]

Buzz is to blame.  He is responsible for the program period.  He looked lost during most of the year.  Watching the Michigan State vs. Wisconsin game now, it's a game of two very well coached teams.  Much different than what we saw at MU this year.  Izzo is a great teacher as he talks to the players constantly.  Can our players understand Buzz's raspy, yelling voice at all? 

Having at least a couple of NBA players helps a bit too. But I don't think there is any argument about Izzo being a better coach. But, he's been there a lot longer - Buzz has a chance to get there.

[NCMUFan]

Buzz is still learning.  He stuck with what worked for him in the past.  That being to rely on players who had been acclimated to his system.  Crean recognized that he need the three amigos ASAP if Marquette was going to make any type of splash in the Big East.  Buzz relied on what worked for him in the past. Oh well, we will see what next season brings.

[keefe]

What are the names of the other three fingers?

Touche, JD

[statnik]

Exactly.  This year got us no closer to a Big East title.  If the frosh had played, there would be considerable enthusiasm for playing post-season basketball.  Losing with players with no upside is simply unacceptable for a program like MU.

Yes, and amazingly this is exactly the same boat Milwaukee Buck fans have been in for years, apparently those coaching principles of pampering veteran players with PT is the case at both the college and pro levels.