I feel bad for Marquette84

[mugrad99]

Does anyone have any evidence showing where Crean lost a PF/Center Recruit because the recruit thought Crean was going to jump ship?


Of course it would have nothing to do that Crean's offense was guard oriented.

[MR.HAYWARD]

in fact he would probably be at a place like Wagner.  Apart from DWade can you really argue Crean was any better than Deane.  

I will give him the area of marketing himself...but in the area of basketball coaching was Crean really any better than Deane sans Wade maybe just a little.  

Meanwhile MU84 continues to blame guys like Berkowitz, Blackledge, lott, Kinsella, Hazell, etc on our BE confernce affiliation and the Final four.  WOW!!

[MR.HAYWARD]

Does anyone have any evidence showing where Crean lost a PF/Center Recruit because the recruit thought Crean was going to jump ship?


Of course it would have nothing to do that Crean's offense was guard oriented.

Take it one further witht he no DWade scenario,  if rober t JAckson does not have the carpet pulled out from under him and is not from Milwaukee how good are we in that year take away 2002 and 2003 with out a Dwade and rober t Jackson and we are  a 4-6 year NIT program and Crean is probably fired.  Crean got hit by lightning...his inabilities will bear out at Indiana and he will be coaching Western Kentucky within 5 years.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I completely agree with this.

Life is all about timing, no exception with coaching.  Lenny might be dead on right about this.  But with most young coaches who fail or succeed, you can usually tie it back to a great recruit or great break that launches them.  For Crean it was Wade.   For Buzz, it might be taking over a stacked team his first year.

Timing is everything.  I just don't understand why we penalize Crean for "lucking out" or his timing yet we give other guys a free pass?  Seems odd and a double standard to me.  As far as I'm concerned, whomever is the MU coach I hope the luck \ breaks continue. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

Does anyone have any evidence showing where Crean lost a PF/Center Recruit because the recruit thought Crean was going to jump ship?


Of course it would have nothing to do that Crean's offense was guard oriented.

Early in his tenure, his offense was not guard oriented.  He went that direction after failing to land some of the big men that we kept finishing second to in the recruiting battles.   But I don't see how anyone can say we were a guard oriented team that first 4 years...we had size, post up players, etc.

And how would one come up with this evidence?  Is there a website that breaks down the true reasons why a player chooses one school / coach that is unfiltered and has the true reasons?  I don't think so.  It's typically the same standard "I liked all the programs, they're all great schools, I just felt the most comfortable playing for XYZ coach"

Maybe we can start a waterboarding post recruit commitment interrogation seminar to find out why someone went where they went.     Were they negatively recruited, what was really promised to them to come to a certain school, how hot the girls were, etc.   That could be fun. 

[MR.HAYWARD]

not sure what is sadder with chicos his comments or that he actually beleives them?

But with most young coaches who fail or succeed, you can usually tie it back to a great recruit or great break that launches them.  For Crean it was Wade.   For Buzz, it might be taking over a stacked team his first year.


Sorry there Chicos but Buzz as everyone especially you have said Buzz will not be judged by this year.  he will ultimately be judged by more of what he does, he has started by recruiting the #1 class in the nation.  Buzz does not need your back handed complimnts...and by stacked do you mean no BE caliber player over 6'5"? 


or this one....Early in his tenure, his offense was not guard oriented.

Chicos are you really this dumb?   i guess Brian Wardle and John cliff being basically our entire offense constitutes not being guard oreintated early in his tenure.  boy you are a baffoon.

[mugrad99]

Well, you're basically saying MU84 is full of beans, since there is no proof to show that a recruit actually chose another school for this sole reason. There are alot of reasons why a kid chooses a school (just call me Mr Obvious, here). I would argue the negative recruiting by another coach  saying Crean was leaving would be waay down the list of why he did not pick Marquette. After all, Crean would just have to tell the kid "Recruit  X, I am staying at Marquette for a long time, my contract runs thorugh 2015, don't listen to that Grinch looking MF'er"

Other reasons:
Playing Time
Style of Offense
The ability to showcase me, get me to the NBA
Climate
Academics
Signing Bonus

Hey, I like Crean, and still run into him occasionally. He has always treated me nicely. But saying the Final Four/Coaching Carousel rumors was the primary source of recruiting drop is just comical.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

First of all, please read and try to comprehend my posts before you respond. Nowhere do I say that TC "didn't help Wade develop at all".

"He'll likely go down as one of 20 best in NBA history, light years ahead of where he projected based on his play at MU. That's on Wade (and maybe a little Riley) not TC."

I apologize if this wasn't you saying Crean didn't help wade develop, but how else am I supposed to interpret that?

Second, you make up stuff and try to pass it off as "my logic".

Third, for the 1,000th time, I'm not "jumping to conclusions" in an effort to discredit TC. He never rubbed me at all, let alone the wrong way. I just happen to believe that if DWade had never met TC he'd still be an NBA superstar and that if TC had never met DWade he would not be at Indiana (and maybe not at Marquette)

ok, well, I won't get into the semantics of it all, but in a previous post you didn't say "maybe" TC wouldn't be at MU, but that "Without Wade it's still likely that TC would no longer be at Marquette, but it would not be by his choice."[/color]

I don't want to argue about "likely" vs "maybe"... *shrug* but they mean different things to me. We can agree to disagree.

I have no idea if Crean would have been great without Wade, but you've made a bold statement that TC likely would have been fired if he didn't get Wade. I just think that's a HUGE conclusion to jump to given the amount of other talented players Crean had besides Wade.

Fourth, acting in a condescending manner towards opinions you either disagree with or misinterpret is unseemly. It might surprise you to know that I find your postings less than illuminating but I would never call you stupid even if the shoe fit.

Fine.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Well, you're basically saying MU84 is full of beans, since there is no proof to show that a recruit actually chose another school for this sole reason. There are alot of reasons why a kid chooses a school (just call me Mr Obvious, here). I would argue the negative recruiting by another coach  saying Crean was leaving would be waay down the list of why he did not pick Marquette. After all, Crean would just have to tell the kid "Recruit  X, I am staying at Marquette for a long time, my contract runs thorugh 2015, don't listen to that Grinch looking MF'er"

Other reasons:
Playing Time
Style of Offense
The ability to showcase me, get me to the NBA
Climate
Academics
Signing Bonus

Hey, I like Crean, and still run into him occasionally. He has always treated me nicely. But saying the Final Four/Coaching Carousel rumors was the primary source of recruiting drop is just comical.

I didn't say I endorsed his idea, I said I think this is what he's saying.  I do believe the rumors don't help.  The Final Four should help conceptually, but then again that's up for debate as he's shown.  Has George Mason benefitted?  UCLA went to three straight Final Fours and sucked ass this year, shouldn't they have benefitted from the last several?  As you pointed out, there are number of factors one chooses a school or coach just as there are a number of factors into what benefits a school.  He brings up an interesting point, however, that success at a non-BCS school that had clearly become a stepping stone school could lead to thoughts by players that the coach was not long for this locale.

I guess the question back to you would be, if you were a player and wanted to play for a coach but felt the likelihood of him leaving was greater due to his recent success, would it impact your decision?  My guess is that it would, maybe you disagree.

I believe many, if not most, of these kids sign up to play for a specific coach, not the school.  As a result, if the coach is portrayed to have one foot out the door because of the success he had at a "smaller, stepping stone" school (which we clearly were at the time) I don't see how those rumors help in recruiting.  I believe that's what MU84 is trying to say, but I could be wrong.

[mugrad99]

II guess the question back to you would be, if you were a player and wanted to play for a coach but felt the likelihood of him leaving was greater due to his recent success, would it impact your decision?  My guess is that it would, maybe you disagree.

I would ask the Coach point blank, and if I did not get a good feel from his answer, it would give me second thoughts...but then again If I didn't trust the coach, I wouldn't play for him anyway.

I guess neither side is going to convince either side (not saying you are on one side or another). I just feel the reason for Crean not landing a big man had very little to do with the rumors of Crean leaving, and a lot to do with the style of Offense Crean ran.

[Lennys Tap]

2002mualum,

You conveniently omitted the first sentence in my post-"Wades IMPROVEMENT at MU pales IN COMPARISON to the strides he made since he went to the NBA". Tranlation: While Wade improved (developed) under TC at MU, he made a quantum, off the charts leap AFTER he left MU. He (and to a lesser extent, Riley) gets credit for that, not TC.

You "have no idea if Crean would have been great without Wade". I do. Look at his numbers without Wade. They were anything but great.

I concede your point on the likely/possible issue. I'll restate: Without Wade, there is NO chance TC is at IU. There is a good possibility (50-50 maybe) he would be gone from MU, but not of his own choosing. Just look at his first 4 years at MU without DW and guesstimate what 2001-2 and 2002-3 would have been without DW. At best TC would have entered year 7 on the hot seat - Quite possibly wouldn't have made it.

[ecompt]

Look, I've lost all respect for TC, but we've been the third-most successful team in the Big East since we joined, and it's all been due to Crean recruits.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

2002mualum,

You conveniently omitted the first sentence in my post-"Wades IMPROVEMENT at MU pales IN COMPARISON to the strides he made since he went to the NBA". Tranlation: While Wade improved (developed) under TC at MU, he made a quantum, off the charts leap AFTER he left MU. He (and to a lesser extent, Riley) gets credit for that, not TC.

You "have no idea if Crean would have been great without Wade". I do. Look at his numbers without Wade. They were anything but great.

I concede your point on the likely/possible issue. I'll restate: Without Wade, there is NO chance TC is at IU. There is a good possibility (50-50 maybe) he would be gone from MU, but not of his own choosing. Just look at his first 4 years at MU without DW and guesstimate what 2001-2 and 2002-3 would have been without DW. At best TC would have entered year 7 on the hot seat - Quite possibly wouldn't have made it.

Fair enough on your first point. I still think Crean deserves some credit for helping Wade along, but we can agree to disagree.

As far as Crean without Wade, here is where I'm coming from:

Crean landed the following recruits before Wade ever played a min.:
Blankson
Merrit
Diener
Townsend
Sanders

He was close to signing:
Novak
Chapman
Karon Bradley

Now, I will not say that this is a national championship team. BUT, I will say that even without Wade, this team would have been competitive in 2003 and 2004 especially if Blankson is there (which, without Wade is entirely possible).

I know you are looking at records before and after Wade, but I think you have to look at the projected team in the years when Wade actually played because several of the other players were in their peak years as well (Henry, Harris, Nnamaka, and then you have Blankson as a Jr. and Sr. to go along with Travis as a jr. and Steve as a soph. in 2003-2004

Look, I agree that Tom Crean received a great boost in the arm from landing DW. He has been shrewd enough to capitalize on it in almost every way possible. And, you're right, without DW, Crean isn't at IU. I realize that. 

However, to think that he would have been fired in a few years without Wade is quite a jump in my opinion. There were 2 NBA players coming in and some other decent role players as well. Would MU have gone to the final 4? most likely, no. Would MU have been terrible and Crean been fired? In my opinion, no. MU was still WAY better than anything Deane (just better players, look at it!) had done and MU would have given Crean a significant leash to try and prove himself. Probably would have been a slow building process rather than the rocket ship rise MU had.

Could Crean have landed McNeal, or Matthews james without Wade? Probably not all 3, but it's possible that he would have had a shot with Matthews (somewhat local kid) and McNeal (underrated Chicago kid).

[ChicosBailBonds]

You "have no idea if Crean would have been great without Wade". I do. Look at his numbers without Wade. They were anything but great.

Huh?  I don't recall Dwyane Wade playing 1 minute in the Big East yet I recall those TC teams finishing in the top half of the league all 4 years in the Big East (yes, Buzz coached that last year but they were Crean's players), making the NCAAs all four years and winning the 2nd or 3rd most conference games in that time period...more than UCONN, more than Syracuse, etc, etc.

Am I missing something here?  Anything but great?  Well, what exactly were they?  Anything short of very good would be startling.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Huh?  I don't recall Dwyane Wade playing 1 minute in the Big East yet I recall those TC teams finishing in the top half of the league all 4 years in the Big East (yes, Buzz coached that last year but they were Crean's players), making the NCAAs all four years and winning the 2nd or 3rd most conference games in that time period...more than UCONN, more than Syracuse, etc, etc.

Am I missing something here?  Anything but great?  Well, what exactly were they?  Anything short of very good would be startling.

I agree with you.

But, for the sake of argument I'm trying to paint the picture like Wade never arrived. I hesitate to use the 3 amigos as examples because it will inevitably get the response of "Crean wouldn't have gotten them without Wade".

I'm looking at players MU had already signed or was close to signing before Wade even played 1 game.

With just those players, I'm think MU would have been competitive and Crean would have been able to keep his job.

[Lennys Tap]

Huh?  I don't recall Dwyane Wade playing 1 minute in the Big East yet I recall those TC teams finishing in the top half of the league all 4 years in the Big East (yes, Buzz coached that last year but they were Crean's players), making the NCAAs all four years and winning the 2nd or 3rd most conference games in that time period...more than UCONN, more than Syracuse, etc, etc.

Am I missing something here?  Anything but great?  Well, what exactly were they?  Anything short of very good would be startling.

Tom Crean's record at Marquette without DWade was 137-83 (.622). He was 1-3 (.250) in the NCAA tournament and 2-3 (.400) in the NIT. "Greatness" is a somewhat subjective term and I guess you're entitled to your opinion of what constitutes it. A little worse than Mike Deane (100-55, .655 with a better postseason record) is anything but great to me.

I do confess that I wish my old teachers' definition of greatness was similar to yours.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Tom Crean's record at Marquette without DWade was 137-83 (.622). He was 1-3 (.250) in the NCAA tournament and 2-3 (.400) in the NIT. "Greatness" is a somewhat subjective term and I guess you're entitled to your opinion of what constitutes it. A little worse than Mike Deane (100-55, .655 with a better postseason record) is anything but great to me.

I do confess that I wish my old teachers' definition of greatness was similar to yours.

I think if you asked a DePaul fan if they thought going to 4 straight NCAA's would be great, they would say "yes!".

So, from where MU started (obviously not as bad as DePaul, but pretty bad), Crean's tenure was successful. Very successful in fact.

If Buzz has those same numbers, I might be a little more critical because he inherited more.

[Lennys Tap]

I think if you asked a DePaul fan if they thought going to 4 straight NCAA's would be great, they would say "yes!".

So, from where MU started (obviously not as bad as DePaul, but pretty bad), Crean's tenure was successful. Very successful in fact.

If Buzz has those same numbers, I might be a little more critical because he inherited more.

Deane's last year at MU was bad (14-15) but his overall record (100-55, 2 NCAAs and 2 NITs) was hardly the disaster that has been DePaul. In fact, it's better than TC's without Wade.

By the way, I never suggested TC wasn't "successful". For me, it's a cross country journey from successful to greatness and TC falls far short of that.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Tom Crean's record at Marquette without DWade was 137-83 (.622). He was 1-3 (.250) in the NCAA tournament and 2-3 (.400) in the NIT. "Greatness" is a somewhat subjective term and I guess you're entitled to your opinion of what constitutes it. A little worse than Mike Deane (100-55, .655 with a better postseason record) is anything but great to me.

I do confess that I wish my old teachers' definition of greatness was similar to yours.

I've stated here many times that I break the season into segments.  The NCAAs I break out from the regular season because it's a crapshoot of who you play, what your seed is, where you play, etc.  Our NCAA records have not been great for the last 25 years with only two exceptions.  1994 when we were 2-1.  And 2003 when we were 4-1.  Every other year was .500 or less.

But there were many very good regular seasons (some even great).  I guess it comes down to how much you value you put on each portion of the season.


But I think you're also not factoring who we played.  You mentioned that Deane's overall record was better than Crean's without Wade.  Well, ok, but it's like comparing oranges to garden hoses.  Deane was in CUSA and not even the good version of CUSA (typically sent 3 teams to the dance in those years)  Crean was in the mature CUSA that sent more teams than even the Big Ten to the dance, plus he coached those years in the Big East (which Deane never did).  Shouldn't that be factored in?  Are all records created equal?

And just to be clear, I don't think Crean is a great coach....though some of his former players have used those words.  But he is the 2nd best coach we've had at Marquette based on results.   By your comments, what you're really saying is that in all the years of MU coaches, there's only been one great coach.  That's the only conclusion I can get from your comments.  That may be the case.  Let's assume it is, I'd argue we've had several very good coaches and would put Crean in there for a number of reasons (Final Four, Big East, NBA players, etc). 

I'll settle for more very good coaches since we've only had one "great" coach in our history.   

[Murffieus]

Didn't Wade, himself, say Crean was a great coach?  Diener as well?   So if those guys are saying that, then it's an endorsement for additional recruiting.  In other words, certainly he's selling Wade's abilities, but Wade is selling Crean's as well.  Wade was a better player when he left then when he came.  So was Diener, Novak and many others.

Wouldn't you expect Wade and Diener to say that----i wouldn't look at that as a valid endorsement. Knowing him, Crean probably had letters and videos from/of former star players that he shoved down recruit's throats-----of course all very positive about him. The media guide was filled with Crean glorifications.

The way to handle the Wade factor IMO was to use the indirect approach only answering questions about him not offering anything about him unless asked------Crean didn't do that----he wore Wade on his sleeve.


BTW-----Endorsements from current players are always better than from former players because they are in the present.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Wouldn't you expect Wade and Diener to say that----i wouldn't look at that as a valid endorsement. Knowing him, Crean probably had letters and videos from/of former star players that he shoved down recruit's throats-----of course all very positive about him. The media guide was filled with Crean glorifications.

The way to handle the Wade factor IMO was to use the indirect approach only answering questions about him not offering anything about him unless asked------Crean didn't do that----he wore Wade on his sleeve.


BTW-----Endorsements from current players are always better than from former players because they are in the present.

I don't agree with your last comment necessarily.  There were plenty of bosses or teachers that I had who "in the present" I didn't care for or felt weren't up to snuff.  It was years later that I look back and understand now what they were trying to accomplish, why they made me do what I did, etc.

Every media guide of recent vintage I've seen is a ringing endorsement of the coach, whether it's MU, Syracuse, Illinois, Wisconsin-Madison, etc.  That's how it's done these days.

As for Wade and Diener's comments....I don't know what to expect from them.  I suspect Crean won't use any Todd Townsend remarks....not all players like their coach, respect him, etc.   It seems to me that those that stuck around and worked their tails off, more often than not benefitted.  Those that left, almost all of them burned out and didn't play that well at their other institutions.  That's a broad statement, I realize, but it does seem interesting to me that some of the big time transfers went to other schools and didn't do much (or had their stats slightly inflated by the weaker competition they were playing). 

[4everwarriors]

JD, we've only had one legendary coach, however.

[ChicosBailBonds]

JD, we've only had one legendary coach, however.

Actually, I'd say more than that.

Tex Winter is a legendary coach (only thing is that we didn't have him during his legendary days)

Al for sure

Type in "legendary" with Rick Majerus and see how often that comes back....maybe Legendary is just over used for coaches that lived in the state of Utah.   

We'll see years from now where Crean, Buzz, etc. shake out

[bma725]

JD, we've only had one legendary coach, however.

Given that Eddie Hickey is in the Basketball Hall of Fame, I'd say we had more than one legendary coach.

[Murffieus]

I don't agree with your last comment necessarily.  There were plenty of bosses or teachers that I had who "in the present" I didn't care for or felt weren't up to snuff.  It was years later that I look back and understand now what they were trying to accomplish, why they made me do what I did, etc.

Every media guide of recent vintage I've seen is a ringing endorsement of the coach, whether it's MU, Syracuse, Illinois, Wisconsin-Madison, etc.  That's how it's done these days.

As for Wade and Diener's comments....I don't know what to expect from them.  I suspect Crean won't use any Todd Townsend remarks....not all players like their coach, respect him, etc.   It seems to me that those that stuck around and worked their tails off, more often than not benefitted.  Those that left, almost all of them burned out and didn't play that well at their other institutions.  That's a broad statement, I realize, but it does seem interesting to me that some of the big time transfers went to other schools and didn't do much (or had their stats slightly inflated by the weaker competition they were playing). 

I believe it would be important for media guides to build up coaches who haven't accomplished anything----but for someone who has had success let the success speak for you not hype. I have always been under the persuasion that in order to be successful one should talke a different route than the crowd.

There's a difference between Diener/Wade and Townsend------the former were very successful so we know what they are going to say about their coach----in Townsends case, he left a lot on the table and won't be very enthusiastic about endorsing Crean.

BTW-----I didn't think Crean did a good job with Townsend who IMO had outstanding ability.