Marquette's Not Good

[Golden Avalanche]

according to ESPN's new resident blogger. In breaking down the five disappointments this season, he starts with:

Anyway, to the bummers of the year (so far):

Michigan: Oh, Michigan. What happened? Actually, that question's not too hard to answer: The Wolverines can't shoot. That sounds simple, but it's true. The Wolverines have an effective field goal percentage (note: effective field goal percentage weighs the effectiveness of three point shooting more heavily into overall shooting percentage; see here) of 48.6 percent, good for 199th in the nation. John Beilein's offense, if you'll remember, typically thrives on three-point shooting. The good news for the Wolverines is that shooting can turn around in a heartbeat. Teams can get hot quickly. The bad news is that even if this happens, a 6-5 nonconference record with losses to Marquette, Alabama, Boston College, and Utah -- not a single good team among them -- might doom the Wolverines to an NIT before they have a chance to salvage this season. Michigan was probably a little overrated this offseason, but it was never supposed to be this bad.

We're not going to the NCAAs but does that mean we're not even a "good" team? Can you be "good" without an NCAA berth?

Wonder if we didn't choke those 17 and 11 point leads to ACC teams and stood at 10-1 we'd be called a "good" team?

[MUsoxfan]

If you were on the outside looking in, losing to us isn't a a good loss right now. Maybe it will be in a couple months, but right now it's a bad loss

[Daniel]

Part of the consideration in considering if we are a good team are the quality wins we have had so far.  Xavier was nice, Michigan turned out to not be as good as people tought, we lost blowing a 17 point lead to FSU, we lost to NCState blowing an 11 point half time lead, etc.  So, until we beat some of the ranked BEast teams, we will be an after thought this year.  

[MerrittsMustache]

I hate to say it, but a "good" team wouldn't blow 17- and 11-point second half leads in consecutive games (especially when one is at home). If Marquette was a "good" team at this point in the season, they'd be at least 10-1.

That being said, there's still plenty of season remaining and MU will have plenty of chances to prove just how "good" they really are.

[warthog-driver]

with losses to Marquette, Alabama, Boston College, and Utah -- not a single good team among them

If only our coach had listened to Tim and run the offense through JMay..oh, what could have been

[bilsu]

We were predicted to finish 11th or 12th in Big East. We are doing better than I thought we would, but unless we sweep DePaul and Providence we will not finish bettter than 11th. If we go 2-2 aginst DePaul and Providence we will probably finish worst than 12th.

[NavinRJohnson]

We aren't good. Not terrible, but not good.

[Sheriff]

North Florida has won three straight, including a win at Mississippi St, since MU beat them soundly.  MU must have been a trap game for them.

[NersEllenson]

If you look at Seton Hall, St. John's, South Florida, Notre Dame to an extent - none of them have really played ANY type of competition.  If you look at MU's losses to FL State, NC State and Wisconsin - and take a look at those teams records/losses..I think MU will still be a surprise team in the Big East.  NC State just lost back to back road games to Wake Forest and Arizona by less than 3 points.  I'm going to project a best case scenario of a 6th place finish, worst case 11th.

[Hards Alumni]

something I am probably least concerned with is some talking head's opinion of the team.

he has probably seen zero games.

[77champs]

MU looked like the surprise team early but teams that played solid defense were a big problem for us.  Our depth and lack of defense (allowing the 2 combacks) will be an Achilles heal unless the team can advance in those areas.    I think the hard thing for the team is they do not have the players to go up against in practice.   A great second team makes the first team and most of the Big East has some athletic height and inside presence.