Malcom Moore has MU in his final 4

[goodgreatgrand]

That said, I can't understand how you have such moral indignation over recruiting JUCOs, yet seem to be OK with Ben Howland, Bill Self, Roy Williams, etc., recruiting kids who make a mockery of the entire student-athlete concept. These guys know full well that the top 10-type players they are bringing to their universities have no interest in academics or getting a diploma. They're just there to sharpen their basketball skills for a year or two before moving on to the pros.
Why, in your mind, is this OK? But bringing in a kid who actually will attend college for four years and possibly even earn a degree ... this is bad?
Explain that to me.

Whoa... Why is it the fault of Roy Williams or Bill Self or any other coach that recruits a one-and-done kid? Unless the recruit chooses to go to Europe like Brandon Jennings, the top tier recruits need to go somewhere for a year. Fault the NBA for the age limit or the NCAA but the coaches? Really?

[bilsu]

I really do not understand the objections to recruiting Juco's. MU has a long history of recruiting Juco's going back to the McGuire days. Off the top of my head, I do not remember any Juco that actually enrolled in MU being a hugh problem. Sure some of them did not play much, but all 13 players are not going to play.

[NersEllenson]

And I like the trajectory of the B10 more than the BE, especially after hearing Delany's last comments. Without a stable conference, it's tough for a program to even have a trajectory.

Was the debate a question of which conference had a better trajectory?  No.  Buzz will get the MU program built up well enough/develop his own reputation for turning out players to the NBA -  to where conference affiliation won't be a huge crisis..in the event the Big East breaks up and MU ends up in a mid to high major conference...

[Pakuni]

Whoa... Why is it the fault of Roy Williams or Bill Self or any other coach that recruits a one-and-done kid? Unless the recruit chooses to go to Europe like Brandon Jennings, the top tier recruits need to go somewhere for a year. Fault the NBA for the age limit or the NCAA but the coaches? Really?

Whoa ... where did I say it was their fault?
Read again, please.

I'm merely exposing the hypocrisy of complaining that JUCO players are bad for stability, yet holding up coaches who sign one-and-dones as shining examples of how it should be done. And it's just as hypocritical to complain about the academic stigma of JUCO kids while lavishing praise on programs that recruit kids who will attend class for one to three semesters and then drop out without making any serious effort toward a degree.

If Buzz were fortunate enough to land a player with one-and-done talent, that's fine with me.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Sorry dude..but UW has recruited JUCO's - see Zach Morley..several years back 2002-2003.  Top programs use JUCO's.  Get over it.  And you are completely correct that Bo Ryan did a better job at UW during the 1999-2008 timeframe, than did Tom Crean at Marquette.  But, thankfully we are in a new era, with a better coach, that recruits better talent.  I like the trajectory of the MU program more than the UW program...end of story.

It's so hard having a discussion with you because you don't read.  I don't know if it's on purpose, or laziness, or what it is.

What did I say in the very first post on this topic?

I acknowledged that there are one-offs at places like UCLA, Wisconsin, etc.  So for you to bring up as if I was wrong when I already acknowledged it either shows you didn't read it or flat out ignored it. 

Yes, all programs go after Jucos from time to time.

No, I've never said DO NOT RECRUIT Jucos.   I've said there is a time and place but if you load up your roster with them that's a different story.  UW having 1 Juco in 10 years is a bit different than MU have 4X that many is just one year....or nearly 25% of our roster.

It also sets up an issue of a self fulfilling prophecy, which is what I said last year.  If you keep going after JUCOs then you leave yourself no choice but to replace them with JUCOs when they leave, otherwise you have unbalanced classes again.  Your only recourse is to pull off the bandaid at some point.


Upward trajectory...I love it.  Just admit you were wrong, UW has had a better program than us the last decade.  You got all over me for making that statement but you can't prove it wrong because you know it's right.  Now you're coming with upward trajectory? 

[ChicosBailBonds]

Is this evidence of some sort of warped version of Stockholm syndrome?  Any psychologists/psychiatrists out there?

I think it's merely evidence they have had a better program the last decade.  Nothing more.  I'm happy to be proven wrong with that statement...so far just personal attacks and such and nothing to counter the statement.  Wait...Upward Trajectory...there's that.

[ChicosBailBonds]

How can that be? UCLA is a top tier program. They don't dip into the JUCO ranks.  

Yup....which I already posted yesterday....one of 2 JUCO players in a decade to go there.

Remember this quote I had yesterday..."The UCLA Bruins do not spend much time recruiting junior college players."  from JucoJunction.com?


Somehow, with only 2 JUCOs in a decade, they've managed 3 Final Fours....Duke, with zero JUCOs managed a national title...I could go on and on.



I guess it comes down to this fellas.

I'd rather have 4 years of Travis Diener, Wes Matthews, Jerel McNeal, Lazar Hayward, Chris Crawford, Steve Novak, etc, etc than a guy like Dwight Buycks who is already a senior this year after playing middle the of the road minutes last year.  I hope Buycks has a great year, I'm sure he will, but he just got here and now he's about to be gone.

There is a reason the great programs go with high school players.  Pretty simple.  You teach the "program way" from day one, the expectations are known for all four years, the turnover is lower, more stability, etc. 

That's just what I'd rather see.  Don't agree, that's fine.  But don't make up stuff or ignore points altogether. 

The good news is that we are aspiring to be like K-State (a Thuggins stop from two years ago), WVU ( a current Thuggins stop), Baylor, Kentucky, etc....for that I'm relieved. 

[NersEllenson]

What did I say in the very first post on this topic?

I acknowledged that there are one-offs at places like UCLA, Wisconsin, etc.  So for you to bring up as if I was wrong when I already acknowledged it either shows you didn't read it or flat out ignored it. 

Yes, all programs go after Jucos from time to time.

Upward trajectory...I love it.  Just admit you were wrong, UW has had a better program than us the last decade.  You got all over me for making that statement but you can't prove it wrong because you know it's right.  Now you're coming with upward trajectory? 

I have acknowledged that you are correct that in the last decade UW did have better results than MU, which was under the Crean regime.  We are in a new era..and Buzz is proving to be a better coach and better recruiter..which means better talent and most likely better results.  We shall see how UW and MU fare over the next 4 years...my money is on MU...would you really trade MU's position with UW, roster-wise at this point?

[NersEllenson]

Chicos - News flash - MU is not on the same level as Duke or UCLA.  We are trying to get there.  UCLA has used JUCO's..big deal.  You complain about frequent use of using JUCO's leading to unbalanced classes.  Didn't Crean suffer in this department due to all of the transfers from the high school players he signed?

I think you can give it a rest..you continue to go your argument alone.  Just admit that your position has been proven wrong, and you've had to contradict yourself to try to continue to the discussion.  Swallow your pride and for once admit you are wrong.  It won't kill you.

[Pakuni]

Somehow, with only 2 JUCOs in a decade, they've managed 3 Final Fours....Duke, with zero JUCOs managed a national title...I could go on and on.



I guess it comes down to this fellas.

I'd rather have 4 years of Travis Diener, Wes Matthews, Jerel McNeal, Lazar Hayward, Chris Crawford, Steve Novak, etc, etc than a guy like Dwight Buycks who is already a senior this year after playing middle the of the road minutes last year.  

Are those the only options?  I mean, is it not possible to have mostly high school kids with a sprinkling of JUCOs and still succeed?


And while what you state about is swell, the reality is elite programs don't win with a bunch of kids who are there for four years. Certainly not your beloved Bruins, and you know it. Howland isn't winning with four-year players. He's winning with one-and-dones and early entries (Love, Holiday, Westbrook, Thompson, Farmar, Mbah a Moute, etc.).

Again, I ask ... how is that better from a standpoint of stability or academics than having 3-4 JUCO kids on the roster?
I'll eagerly await - though not really expect - your well-thought response.

[tower912]

Chico, as I have stated earlier in this thread, in a perfect world, we get nothing but 5 star high schoolers that stay in school 4 years.    The world ain't perfect.     What I see out of Buzz is that he is out there working the big boys, putting in his time on the Faust's, Tokoto's, Dawsons of the world.   But he isn't putting his eggs all in one basket.    Instead of putting all of his money on a Shumpert/Butch/Nankivil/Johnson and then not having a back up plan and settling for a Blackledge when he can't get a Stemler, he is also working his vast web of JUCO and Texas contacts to get guys who can play ball the way he wants, who have the drive he is looking for.   Instead of sitting back and hoping,  like a shark he is always moving forward, looking for the next big Tuna to grab.     He wants people who want to buy into the Marquette attitude, and he doesn't care where they are from.  

[d6]

There is some disconnect here.  I still don't see where there is some sort of empirical proof that programs like UNC, Kansas, UCLA, Syracuse, etc. are succeeding BECAUSE they recruit high school kids that learn the "program way."  These kids must be exceptional learners because a large number of them sure aren't there for three, let alone four years. 

[jmayer1]

I guess it comes down to this fellas.

I'd rather have 4 years of Travis Diener, Wes Matthews, Jerel McNeal, Lazar Hayward, Chris Crawford, Steve Novak, etc, etc than a guy like Dwight Buycks who is already a senior this year after playing middle the of the road minutes last year.  I hope Buycks has a great year, I'm sure he will, but he just got here and now he's about to be gone.

There is a reason the great programs go with high school players.  Pretty simple.  You teach the "program way" from day one, the expectations are known for all four years, the turnover is lower, more stability, etc. 

That's just what I'd rather see.  Don't agree, that's fine.  But don't make up stuff or ignore points altogether. 

I guess it comes down to this little fella.

I'd rather have 2 years of Wade, 1 year of Carmello, 1 year of Wall, 1 year of Oden, 1 year of Beasely, 1 year of Conley...etc. (if they were all on the up and up coming into MU) than 4 years of Travis Diener, Wes Matthews, Jerel McNeal, Lazar Hayward, Chris Crawford, Steve Novak, etc, etc

There is a reason the great programs go with high school players great talent.  Pretty simple.  You teach the "program way" from day one, the expectations are known for all four years as long as the players are there, the turnover is lower, more stability, etc.  

That's just what I'd rather see.  Don't agree, that's fine.  But don't make up stuff or ignore points altogether. 

Coach K, Roy Williams, Self, Boeheim, Howland, Billy Donovan..etc are all on my side.

[tower912]

How about this Chico....Buzz doesn't belong to any party when it comes to who he recruits.   He chooses the candidates to play for Marquette that most closely matches his principles, regardless of affiliation.    Or this....he goes to war with the players he has, not the ones he wishes he has.   

[ATL MU Warrior]

It also sets up an issue of a self fulfilling prophecy, which is what I said last year.  If you keep going after JUCOs then you leave yourself no choice but to replace them with JUCOs when they leave, otherwise you have unbalanced classes again.  Your only recourse is to pull off the bandaid at some point

What?!?!?  This is so wrong it's not even funny.  In fact, with our current roster the exact opposite is true.

We currently have 3 seniors on this years squad (according to the Wiki), ALL of which are Juco transfers.  You are saying we'd NEED to replace them with Jucos to rebalance classes?

Did you even think about this before you typed it?  

[NotAnAlum]

Did I miss something???  Did we accept a verbal from this Moore kid??  Or is he just one of 25 - 30 guys we're recruiting.  A guy who's strength is rebounding.  A need that we have found difficult to recruit to in the past typically having our 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th choices go elsewhere.  A need we are currently hoping can be filled by a redshirt Soph coming off his second season ending injury and a freshman who is somewhat of a project.  Sounds to me like having some recruiting options at this point isn't the worst thing we could do.

[what the fulce?]

I love how Chicos is getting torn a new one, I don't think I've ever seen Scoop so united.

[GGGG]

There is some disconnect here.  I still don't see where there is some sort of empirical proof that programs like UNC, Kansas, UCLA, Syracuse, etc. are succeeding BECAUSE they recruit high school kids that learn the "program way."  These kids must be exceptional learners because a large number of them sure aren't there for three, let alone four years. 

Not to mention exceptional basketball players coached by exceptional coaches.

Correlation does not mean it's a cause.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I really do not understand the objections to recruiting Juco's. MU has a long history of recruiting Juco's going back to the McGuire days. Off the top of my head, I do not remember any Juco that actually enrolled in MU being a hugh problem. Sure some of them did not play much, but all 13 players are not going to play.

It's not an objection to recruiting Jucos.  I don't think anyone here has ever said don't recruit Jucos.  The concern is how many, what that does to your team stability, constant turnover, etc

25% of our team right now is Jucos, you are correct we have recruited them since Al.  Have we ever had 25% of our team as Jucos and looking to add more?  Maybe we have, I don't recall it.  Would be happy to hear where we have had that much of a tilt.

And maybe Pakuni can show me where UCLA, Duke, UNC, Wisconsin, etc have had 25% of their roster as Jucos.  I know teams like Baylor, UNLV, Tennessee have, but I was hoping those weren't programs we were looking to model after.

[ChicosBailBonds]

There is some disconnect here.  I still don't see where there is some sort of empirical proof that programs like UNC, Kansas, UCLA, Syracuse, etc. are succeeding BECAUSE they recruit high school kids that learn the "program way."  These kids must be exceptional learners because a large number of them sure aren't there for three, let alone four years. 

Maybe you should just ask Williams, Coach K, Howland, etc why they go after high school kids.  As Howland has told me in the past, if you have a choice, you always take the high school kid.  Jucos have a time and a place, but they are a short term answer only.  You can't sustain a program on Jucos, but you build a foundation on high school players. 

High school kids are program builders.

[NavinRJohnson]

And maybe Pakuni can show me where UCLA, Duke, UNC, Wisconsin, etc have had 25% of their roster as Jucos.  I know teams like Baylor, UNLV, Tennessee have, but I was hoping those weren't programs we were looking to model after.

Well, I guess if we are going to limit ourselves to only one or two Juco's and have to fill the remaining roster spots with the HS kids that are left over after UCLA, Duke, UNC, Kentucky, etc. get done taking their pick, then if Buzz does a really good job, our results will hopefully be in line with Baylor, UNLV, Tennessee, etc.

Perhaps augmenting the roster with the best Juco talent available, is a way to build the program, achieve better results, and put yourself on position to compete with the aforementioned teams to get one or two of the top kids available.

BTW, Mr. Science, if 25% is too high, but having some Jucos is ok, what exactly is the right number? Where is the line between stability and instability? Would one less be ok? Two less? If you hit that magical barrier, is getting Crean quality, marginally talented 4 year college player, really better than a more talented Juco who will only be around 2 or 3 years? If so, why?

[NavinRJohnson]

As Howland has told me in the past, if you have a choice, you always take the high school kid.  

Sooooo...given a choice between say DJO and DJ Newbill, you would take Newbill because he's coming out of HS, even though he is an inferior player, seemingly had some questions about grades, etc. You would rather have Patrick Hazel over Jimmy Butler? Is that really your position?

[NavinRJohnson]

BTW Chicos, what the hell are you talking about anyway? MU has 5 incoming players this year, and a grand total of 1 of them is coming from a junior college, bringing the current team total to 5. Buzz was obviously Juco heavy early to make up for the recruiting mess left by Crean (and if you can point to a single problem that has come as a result, I'd love to know what it is). Are you seriously trying to suggest that the great Ben Howland would not sign 1 out of 5 Juco's? There will be 3 openings we know of next year, and all 3 of those are JC players. If one of the 3 replacements is a JC player, will that offend your sensibilities as well?

You are so full of crap on this topic its ridiculous, and the reason why could not be more transparent.

[MUBasketball]

Chicos, you drive me f*cking nuts. I am pulling my hair out reading this thread.

You hate that Buzz was hired, you miss Tom Crean like hell, rip on Buzz for getting too many JUCO's, assume the worst anytime a kid leaves...should I go on?

I couldn't give a crap less if Buzz brings in a kid who is a JUCO or a HS senior. Doesn't matter to me at all. Ya know what does matter to me? Winning.

You afraid JUCO's are "bad guys"? DJO, Butler, Fulce, and Buycks are all good kids and represent the university and the program very well. They are also all at the least very good players.

Did it ever cross your mind that Buzz has worked at many different JUCO's in his career and has a ton of contacts? Why does he recruit JUCO's? Why does he recruit Texas so hard? You recruit the area you know the best and the area you have the most contacts. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Your whole thing is beyond tired. Why not support the program and stop bitching about everything?

EDIT: Why don't you answer Pakuni's question? How is it any different if MU cycles through good JUCO players who are here 2 or 3 years, as opposed to the "elite" programs having the same number of HS players leave early after 2 years?

[Pakuni]

It's not an objection to recruiting Jucos.  I don't think anyone here has ever said don't recruit Jucos.  The concern is how many, what that does to your team stability, constant turnover, etc

25% of our team right now is Jucos, you are correct we have recruited them since Al.  Have we ever had 25% of our team as Jucos and looking to add more?  Maybe we have, I don't recall it.  Would be happy to hear where we have had that much of a tilt.

And maybe Pakuni can show me where UCLA, Duke, UNC, Wisconsin, etc have had 25% of their roster as Jucos.  I know teams like Baylor, UNLV, Tennessee have, but I was hoping those weren't programs we were looking to model after.

Chico's, do you believe JUCOs are inherently lesser people? By their very nature less worthy of the Marquette uniform?  Untouchables whose presence in very small numbers may be tolerable, but any more than a few simply too much to bear?

It seems you could not care less with whether they're good kids, who go to class. work toward a degree and represent MU well on and off the court. What matters is that they're JUCOs.
Me, I'd rather have a roster full of JUCOs like Jimmy Butler and DJO than high schoolers like Jeronne Maymon, but perhaps I lack your keen insight into the dangerous mind of a junior college athlete.
So, explain to me your bias. don't tell me what Duke and North Carolina does. Marquette isn't Duke and North Carolina. Tell me what Chico's Bail Bonds has against kids who attend junior college.

And, once again, you continue to avoid my question ... likely because you have no good answer. Still, I'll try again:

How is having a few JUCOs on one's roster create more instability, or a indicator of less attention to academics, than recruiting several kids every year who have no intention of attending classes for more than three semesters (at best) and no interest in obtaining a college diploma?
Why is the latter acceptable in your world, but the former  a big no-no?