We have such a long way to go it's not funny

[ChicosBailBonds]

Chicos spouts off the Badger talking points almost verbatim. He spends so much time reading those boards in angst worrying about what they think of MU that I think he's got a slight case of Stockholm syndrome.

[Golden Avalanche]

It's all about who is delivering the message with these guys....that's all it is.  See the username and pounce.

This pissing contest isn't for me but this is 100% correct.

Too much posting here is in response to the username rather then the content of their fellow MU fan.

[avid1010]

Well, let me turn the tables on you.  If after 8 more years (10 total under Buzz), MU has not gone back to the Final Four are we merely a good program?

That's the danger of putting all your eggs into the proverbial NCAA Tournament basket.  The tournament is a crap shoot.  It seems you judge greatness by what someone does in the NCAAs.  I treat them separately.  There's a regular season and the NCAA tournament.  Because a team has one bad game or is beat by 1 point by another very good team in the NCAAs should not negate what a team did for 6 months from November to March...in my opinion.  

I think we're a good program right now, and Buzz needs a final four run to be a great coach/run a great program.  The NCAA tourney isn't a crap shoot to the great coaches/programs.  There are coaches that consitently make deep runs in the tourney, and I believe those are the great coaches in college basketball...IMHO.  You don't feel one bad game should negate a great season, and I don't think it does, but every team that makes a deep run has one bad game in the NCAA tourney.  The great teams can overcome that, the good teams lose.  I'm not going to get into how strong the B10 has been since Bo has been at UW, in comparison to the BEAST, but the tourney is the only apples to apples comparison.  I think Izzo sacrifices games early to have his team ready in March.  Like any sport...I think you have to have a ring to be great.  Bo was a great D3 coach...he's a good D1 coach.

[Mutaman]

Your right. It just shows what some people don't know about the game of basketball.

Titles are not won in November. MU will be more than fine this season!

I really hope that come March when such mediocre efforts against the likes of Bucknell, Gonzaga, and UWM are just a distant memory, I will have to conceed that my November feelings were "rediculous" and that I obviously "don't know about the game of basketball". But there will have to be significant improvement for this team to "be more than fine this season!" (Whatever that means).

The bottom line is will this team improve over last year's record? Not from what I've seen so far.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I think we're a good program right now, and Buzz needs a final four run to be a great coach/run a great program.  The NCAA tourney isn't a crap shoot to the great coaches/programs.  There are coaches that consitently make deep runs in the tourney, and I believe those are the great coaches in college basketball...IMHO.  You don't feel one bad game should negate a great season, and I don't think it does, but every team that makes a deep run has one bad game in the NCAA tourney.  The great teams can overcome that, the good teams lose.  I'm not going to get into how strong the B10 has been since Bo has been at UW, in comparison to the BEAST, but the tourney is the only apples to apples comparison.  I think Izzo sacrifices games early to have his team ready in March.  Like any sport...I think you have to have a ring to be great.  Bo was a great D3 coach...he's a good D1 coach.

I see your point, we'll just have to agree to disagree a bit.  Gene Keady was a great coach, but never made the Final Four.  There are others that are great coaches but because of where they coach, will never get to the Final Four (Mt. St. Marys, Utah State, Holy Cross, etc are never going to get Final Four talent), doesn't make them any less a great coach.  Just as there are some coaches that made the Final Four that aren't great coaches.  I'm sure about 200 people on this board can fill in a name quite quickly in that regard.   

I do agree that to be great in most sports you have to have a ring, but the huge difference is every other sport the post season is played on a home turf / court that was earned with the greatness of the regular season.   It's also a small field, not one of 65 teams where you have 4 days to prepare.  Usually, in other sports, the post season is best of series as well (Super Bowl an exception).  There's nothing like the NCAA tournament for randomness, short time to prepare, unexpected travel, etc, etc.  Total crapshoot IMO.  It's what allows a Butler to be within a miracle shot to win the whole thing, or a George Mason to the Final Four, or a #1 UCONN flaming out in the second round.

Right now, I'll settle for Buzz being very good in the next 10 years.  If he accomplishes what the "good" Bo Ryan has in his 10 years at UW, I'll be ecstatic with Buzz.  That's a high bar that Bo has set.

[brewcity77]

Just watching the end of the Badgers game, and I think it pretty much shows that this Bucky team isn't all that good. We may not be at the top of our game, but they're far from being some indomitable force. Horrible job of closing out the game, not very good shooting, and not a lot of options outside of Leuer and Nankivil. From a rebounding perspective, they just haven't been very good. Poor position, give up far too many chances on the offensive end for a Bo Ryan team. Notre Dame's going to win this and they haven't been all that great.

Again, we may not be great, we may not be a finished product, but this team isn't one we should be quaking in our boots over. Yes, if they play their game they can beat us, but they simply are not good enough to destroy us. If they want to win at the BC, they'll have to score at least 65 points. I'm honestly not sure Becky is capable of that (short of bringing the football team).

[Lennys Tap]

If the tourney is a total crapshoot John Wooden would have broken every casino in Vegas. Has to be the "luckiest" coach of all time. Coach K must be #2.

[ChicosBailBonds]

My main issue with these comments tonight is that it doesn't take Wisconsin into account at all. Have we struggled some? Sure. Have they struggled some? Hell yes. They won two games in the Old Spice Classic in very non-convincing fashion. They beat Manhattan while shooting like pure crap and scoring only 50 points. They beat a poor Boston College team after struggling through the first half and needing a monster second half run to take control.

Brewcity...I watched the last 5 minutes of the UW-madison vs Notre Dame game and thought Wisconsin was dreadful.  They set up one play for Leuer but that was it.  Taylor was jacking up wild threes, Gasser played like a freshman, Leuer got beat for a rebound off a FT that was a killer.

They looked really bad that last 5 minutes.  Of course, prior to that apparently they were up double digits and I don't know how they got to that point since I didn't see it.

With the way we close out games and Becky....we might set back the game of basketball 50 years in a few weeks.   

[ChicosBailBonds]

If the tourney is a total crapshoot John Wooden would have broken every casino in Vegas. Has to be the "luckiest" coach of all time. Coach K must be #2.

When you have all the cards, you don't have to be lucky.  He had the best talent.  It was also much easier to win the tournament back then...top seeds got a bye, only had to win 4 games to win the title.  Takes 6 wins now, no byes, etc.

[Lennys Tap]

When you have all the cards, you don't have to be lucky.  He had the best talent.  It was also much easier to win the tournament back then...top seeds got a bye, only had to win 4 games to win the title.  Takes 6 wins now, no byes, etc.

The better you are, the higher your seed. And with a high (top4) seed, the easier your path. The easier your path, the less it's a crapshoot.

[ChicosBailBonds]

The better you are, the higher your seed. And with a high (top4) seed, the easier your path. The easier your path, the less it's a crapshoot.

Especially when they didn't seed teams back then like they do today.

[avid1010]

Gene Keady was a great coach, but never made the Final Four.  Not a great coach IMO, his style of play held him backThere are others that are great coaches but because of where they coach, will never get to the Final Four (Mt. St. Marys, Utah State, Holy Cross, etc are never going to get Final Four talent), doesn't make them any less a great coach.Agreed, but they need to have some kind of success out of conference, or IMO they're just great coaches in their conference, not in D1 college hoops as a whole  Just as there are some coaches that made the Final Four that aren't great coaches.  I'm sure about 200 people on this board can fill in a name quite quickly in that regard.   There's more to coaching college bball than just coaching...TC gets the credit for recruiting Wade.  No one can argue that.

I do agree that to be great in most sports you have to have a ring, but the huge difference is every other sport the post season is played on a home turf / court that was earned with the greatness of the regular season.Seeding and location is what you play all year for, and it plays a huge roll in the NCAA tourney.  I do agree it's more of a crap shoot than most, but there are coaches that consistently do well in the tourney.  That's what differentiates them from the Bo Ryan's of the coaching world.   It's also a small field, not one of 65 teams where you have 4 days to prepare.  Usually, in other sports, the post season is best of series as well (Super Bowl an exception). Not sure it's a huge field when you consider the amount of teams eligible. There's nothing like the NCAA tournament for randomness, short time to prepare, unexpected travel, etc, etc.  Total crapshoot IMO.  It's what allows a Butler to be within a miracle shot to win the whole thing, or a George Mason to the Final Four, or a #1 UCONN flaming out in the second round. Butler and GM had good teams.

Right now, I'll settle for Buzz being very good in the next 10 years.  If he accomplishes what the "good" Bo Ryan has in his 10 years at UW, I'll be ecstatic with Buzz.  That's a high bar that Bo has set. I hope for most post season success.

[Earl Tatum]

  :(It's going to be a Loooooooonnnnnnnng season. Hopefully DG will come through. We do need an effective BIG next year. Jerome Whitehead or Mbakwe where are you? Can Diener come back?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Avid, I hope for more post season success as well. 

[avid1010]

Just watching the end of the Badgers game, and I think it pretty much shows that this Bucky team isn't all that good. We may not be at the top of our game, but they're far from being some indomitable force. Horrible job of closing out the game, not very good shooting, and not a lot of options outside of Leuer and Nankivil. From a rebounding perspective, they just haven't been very good. Poor position, give up far too many chances on the offensive end for a Bo Ryan team. Notre Dame's going to win this and they haven't been all that great.

Again, we may not be great, we may not be a finished product, but this team isn't one we should be quaking in our boots over. Yes, if they play their game they can beat us, but they simply are not good enough to destroy us. If they want to win at the BC, they'll have to score at least 65 points. I'm honestly not sure Becky is capable of that (short of bringing the football team).

It will be interesting to see if they get better as the year goes on, although it looks like the B10 isn't as good as first thought so it may be hard to tell.  I typically feel that Bo's teams have smaller growth targets than others because of his system.  They're typically a pretty finished product pretty early in the season.

[NCMUFan]

The fear is in rebounding.  Jimmy Butler appeared to be the only individual trying to get a defensive rebound.  Sorry, when you have three opponents versus one Marquette player, the majority of times it will go to the opposing player.  I don't know why Buzz is going small ball when he worked so hard to get decent front court players.  If we don't team rebound we will get pounded silly like Gonzaga on the boards.

[turk17]

This pissing contest isn't for me but this is 100% correct.

Too much posting here is in response to the username rather then the content of their fellow MU fan.

I see your point, I don't totally agree.

There is a reason why certain people's "usernames" are being "pounced on" all the time, and I find it hard to believe that it's because they are smarter or more adept than everyone else.

It's because they're usually the first to post a contrarian/cynical/catastrophizing/sensationalized viewpoint.  That's called building a reputation, and makes it harder for people to then deal with those posters from a purely objective standpoint.

[ATL MU Warrior]

I see your point, I don't totally agree.

There is a reason why certain people's "usernames" are being "pounced on" all the time, and I find it hard to believe that it's because they are smarter or more adept than everyone else.

It's because they're usually the first to post a contrarian/cynical/catastrophizing/sensationalized viewpoint.  That's called building a reputation, and makes it harder for people to then deal with those posters from a purely objective standpoint.

Thank you.  I tried several times to express what you did above, but couldn't find the right words.  I agree with you 100%. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

I see your point, I don't totally agree.

There is a reason why certain people's "usernames" are being "pounced on" all the time, and I find it hard to believe that it's because they are smarter or more adept than everyone else.

It's because they're usually the first to post a contrarian/cynical/catastrophizing/sensationalized viewpoint.  That's called building a reputation, and makes it harder for people to then deal with those posters from a purely objective standpoint.

Ironic....did you just read what you wrote?  You have proven the point....what you're saying is you're incapable emotionally, intellectually, or whatever, from reading a post for what it is without separating who wrote it (because of his reputation).    Instead, you kick into overdrive and assume something that isn't in the post, read things that weren't said but attribute them anyway, and attach your bias into your responses to those posts because, as you said it, "its harder for people to then deal with those posters from a purely objective standpoint".  You've absolutely proven the point yet you say you "don't totally agree".  Of course you agree, you just proved it with your own words.  In short, you're saying that people here can't be OBJECTIVE in responding to certain posters.  Exactly what I've been saying for a long time.



BINGO.   That's why I said if I or a few others here changed our username and posted essentially the same thing, no one would get upset.  Instead, you guys have your pounce radar on regardless of what the post says....it's all about WHO said it and the inability of some people here to separate what was said from who said it.

[avid1010]

The fear is in rebounding.  Jimmy Butler appeared to be the only individual trying to get a defensive rebound.  Sorry, when you have three opponents versus one Marquette player, the majority of times it will go to the opposing player.  I don't know why Buzz is going small ball when he worked so hard to get decent front court players.  If we don't team rebound we will get pounded silly like Gonzaga on the boards.

I think teams who are sending 3-4 guys to the offensive rim are going to pay big time IF MU begins to secure those rebounds...should amount to a lot of transition points for MU.  Watching Otule, one elementary improvement would be to simply see him rebound and outlet in a faster manner.  Sounds simple, but watch for it and you'll probably see about a half dozen breaks that don't happpen because he's not confident in throwing a quick outlet pass yet.

[willie warrior]

I think teams who are sending 3-4 guys to the offensive rim are going to pay big time IF MU begins to secure those rebounds...should amount to a lot of transition points for MU.  Watching Otule, one elementary improvement would be to simply see him rebound and outlet in a faster manner.  Sounds simple, but watch for it and you'll probably see about a half dozen breaks that don't happpen because he's not confident in throwing a quick outlet pass yet.

Unfortuntaely, nobody has paid big time yet.

[El Duderino]

Some need to relax. MU has played 7 games in 16 days with many new players.

Yep

I expected Marquette to be inconsistent this year, especially early in the season given all the roster turnover and so many main contributors seeing their first regular action playing college ball.

Hell, last year North Carolina who gets the elite recruits had to settle for the NIT and that's because they had a young team with lots of roster turnover. There is a reason that young/inexperienced teams can often struggle a lot or be inconsistent, even at the traditionally elite programs. Yet, some here act like Marquette is a program that should be immune to this. Based on what?

MU certainly didn't make the NCAA Tournament every year under Crean and likely won't under Buzz. I have no idea if they'll make it this year either, but anyone who easily dismisses the potential issues that can be caused in college ball by having a young and largely inexperienced team, they must not have followed MU close over the years or college basketball.

A little patience please and let this very inexperienced team gets some games under their belt playing together.

[El Duderino]

Ironic....did you just read what you wrote?  You have proven the point....what you're saying is you're incapable emotionally, intellectually, or whatever, from reading a post for what it is without separating who wrote it (because of his reputation).    Instead, you kick into overdrive and assume something that isn't in the post, read things that weren't said but attribute them anyway, and attach your bias into your responses to those posts because, as you said it, "its harder for people to then deal with those posters from a purely objective standpoint".  You've absolutely proven the point yet you say you "don't totally agree".  Of course you agree, you just proved it with your own words.  In short, you're saying that people here can't be OBJECTIVE in responding to certain posters.  Exactly what I've been saying for a long time.



BINGO.   That's why I said if I or a few others here changed our username and posted essentially the same thing, no one would get upset.  Instead, you guys have your pounce radar on regardless of what the post says....it's all about WHO said it and the inability of some people here to separate what was said from who said it.

To be fair to turk, reputations of some posters on forums are pretty hard to ignore.

I'm a big fan of the Packers and hang out at a Packers forum. Well, for quite awhile, the job being done by Ted Thompson as the Packers GM was a lightning rod at that Packers forum, especially among a handful of very pro-Thompson supporters and a few that seemed to look for any chance to bash him. It would be silly and i could pretty much tell exactly how how both sides of them would post before they did, depending on something which happened with the Packers.  The Thompson nut-huggers would look for any excuse to cover for mistakes Ted made and the Thompson haters constantly looked to pounce on and blame Ted for anything going wrong with the Packers. It was so predictable.

I've been only coming here since last season for the most part and i see the same thing here. While i think some posters look for any reason to rip on you, it was pretty obvious to me that you did and continue to seemingly almost always look for the negative side of things regarding MU basketball, particularly if it involves Buzz Williams. Even when you aren't taking direct shots at him, there is quite often subtle or not so subtle wording in your posts to denigrate the job he's doing. Posts by you in that vein vastly outnumber anything positive about the program under Buzz and thus if a relative newcomer like me can spot this so easily, of course long term members can see the same.

This then leads to Buzz supporters attacking you constantly and sometimes going overboard. Rinse and repeat over and over. This in turn i'd assume makes some posters question your objectivity toward Buzz Williams/the program he's running and to be honest, i do also even though i'm sure you think that you're completely objective.

[NersEllenson]

I see your point, I don't totally agree.

There is a reason why certain people's "usernames" are being "pounced on" all the time, and I find it hard to believe that it's because they are smarter or more adept than everyone else.

It's because they're usually the first to post a contrarian/cynical/catastrophizing/sensationalized viewpoint.  That's called building a reputation, and makes it harder for people to then deal with those posters from a purely objective standpoint.

Ironic....did you just read what you wrote?  You have proven the point....what you're saying is you're incapable emotionally, intellectually, or whatever, from reading a post for what it is without separating who wrote it (because of his reputation).    Instead, you kick into overdrive and assume something that isn't in the post, read things that weren't said but attribute them anyway, and attach your bias into your responses to those posts because, as you said it, "its harder for people to then deal with those posters from a purely objective standpoint".  You've absolutely proven the point yet you say you "don't totally agree".  Of course you agree, you just proved it with your own words.  In short, you're saying that people here can't be OBJECTIVE in responding to certain posters.  Exactly what I've been saying for a long time.



BINGO.   That's why I said if I or a few others here changed our username and posted essentially the same thing, no one would get upset.  Instead, you guys have your pounce radar on regardless of what the post says....it's all about WHO said it and the inability of some people here to separate what was said from who said it.

Funny that you chose to respond to the original poster with this reply....I didn't see where he called you out by name??  A little hyper sensitive and defensive Chicos? 

[SalsaMan]

Chicos Bail Bonds...The Johnny Glaser of the Alternative Board!