collapse

Resources

2024-2025 SOTG Tally


2024-25 Season SoG Tally
Jones, K.10
Mitchell6
Joplin4
Ross2
Gold1

'23-24 '22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

Big East Standings

Recent Posts

Recruiting as of 5/15/25 by MuMark
[Today at 03:28:42 PM]


Psyched about the future of Marquette hoops by NCMUFan
[Today at 11:14:25 AM]


2025-26 Schedule by MUDPT
[June 22, 2025, 09:44:45 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address. We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or signup NOW!

Next up: A long offseason

Marquette
66
Marquette
Scrimmage
Date/Time: Oct 4, 2025
TV: NA
Schedule for 2024-25
New Mexico
75

Marquette_g

I am quite excited that over the next few seasons we will have size and more importantly, athletic size.

We have played very well with the team we have, and the Big 3 have been great, but Nova's size tonight certainly caused us trouble and gave them a lot of second shots (especially in the 1st half). 

Every time I read a thread about recruiting on this board it seems someone mentions how we have an abundance of bigs coming in.  Well I for one am delighted to have that luxury.  The more athletic guys between 6'5" - 6'10" we can add to this team, the better.



NavinRJohnson

Quote from: Marquette_g on February 11, 2009, 08:25:26 AM
We have played very well with the team we have, and the Big 3 have been great, but Nova's size tonight certainly caused us trouble and gave them a lot of second shots (especially in the 1st half). 


Personally, I don't think size had all that much to do with it. Poor positioning, failure to go strong after the ball, yes. Size? Nah. not really. Last night was just more or less a poor effort by MU.

Marquette_g

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on February 11, 2009, 08:31:01 AM
Personally, I don't think size had all that much to do with it. Poor positioning, failure to go strong after the ball, yes. Size? Nah. not really. Last night was just more or less a poor effort by MU.

Maybe not entirely, but 9 offensive rebounds that were all converted into baskets was a huge factor in the first half.  Size certainly wouldn't have hurt in either getting the ball or the prevention of the next shot from going in.

Hards Alumni

time for you to go back through 'Nova's roster and actually look at the size of their players.

then make a comment.

nyg

Cunnigham 6 ft 8
Clark 6 ft 7
Pena 6 ft 8
Anderson 6 ft 6

FYI

Marquette_g

#5
All of whom are at least as big, if not bigger, than the players MU had covering them.  The size of their players is exactly the type of player I'm excited we are getting.

The purpose of this thread has more to do with having excitement over the future than dwelling on last night. However, I believe having more height would have helped in the first half.



nyg

With Burke an automatic foul out machine last night, that left Lazar at 6ft 6 and Hazel who some might say is not BE material, played 9 minutes last night and ZERO minutes the last two games, against that PF/C rotation.   

lab_warrior

Looking at that list, besides Lazar (and maybe Wes, it's a stretch) we do not have a player like Cunningham, Pena, Clark or Anderson.  We've got plenty of that type of player coming in next year with Williams and Maymon.

WarriorHal

Quote from: nyg on February 11, 2009, 09:16:41 AM
With Burke an automatic foul out machine last night, that left Lazar at 6ft 6 and Hazel who some might say is not BE material, played 9 minutes last night and ZERO minutes the last two games, against that PF/C rotation.   

On postgame radio interviews earlier this season, Buzz stated that Burke is actually 6.6 1/2 and Lazar is either 6.4 1/2 or 6.5. So our not very big big guys are even smaller than listed.

Shack

Aren't we 2-1 against Nova the past two years? 

bilsu

It is hard to beat a team that is on a roll. Villanova is on a roll. If we play them again it will be in Madison Square Garden. Teams do not stay on a roll forever.

77ncaachamps

Quote from: lab_warrior on February 11, 2009, 09:20:26 AM
Looking at that list, besides Lazar (and maybe Wes, it's a stretch) we do not have a player like Cunningham, Pena, Clark or Anderson.  We've got plenty of that type of player coming in next year with Williams and Maymon.

Those 4 guys are almost interchangeable...

Not to point out the obvious, but they're really good offensive threats.

Look at their season FG%s: Cunningham 57%, Clark 51%, Pena 51%, Anderson 46%.
Moreover, Cunningham averages 7 rpg, while Anderson averages 6 rpg and Pena averages 5 rpg.

We do NOT have the talent on the bench to compete with a team like Nova. I guess that is why Buzz realizes that recruiting talent at ALL spots is more important than his predecessor did.

SS Marquette

mug644

Quote from: bilsu on February 11, 2009, 07:40:28 PM
It is hard to beat a team that is on a roll. Villanova is on a roll. If we play them again it will be in Madison Square Garden. Teams do not stay on a roll forever.

See University, Marquette.

ChicosBailBonds

Quote from: nyg on February 11, 2009, 09:08:26 AM
Cunnigham 6 ft 8
Clark 6 ft 7
Pena 6 ft 8
Anderson 6 ft 6

FYI

How did we possibly beat them the first time they are so big?   ;)

lurch91

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on February 12, 2009, 08:19:01 AM
How did we possibly beat them the first time they are so big?   ;)

1)  We played at home.

2)  Coaches knew very little about Buzz and Marquette, the 1-3-1 Buzz utilizes was able to confuse several teams the beginning of this year (see Marquette vs. Wisconsin).

nola03

Quote from: lurch91 on February 12, 2009, 09:06:29 AM
1)  We played at home.

2)  Coaches knew very little about Buzz and Marquette, the 1-3-1 Buzz utilizes was able to confuse several teams the beginning of this year (see Marquette vs. Wisconsin).


Jay Wright Everyone knows Marquette very, very well. We've been the same exact team running on three seasons. And we didn't see the 1-3-1 versus Villanova more then one token possession. No surprises.

MU and Nova are similar teams this year. The only difference is home court. Meeting them in the Garden would be a lot of fun.

Previous topic - Next topic