Let me know please if I'm forgetting one here

[Eye]

While typing on a friend's computer in Kentucky (sat about 20 rows behind the MU bench yesterday), I've got us down for 17 losses in a row to good teams in tight spots. Like I said, please let me know if I'm missing one on the good side. I'm judging this as a loss to a regular-season or BE tournament opponent that eventually made the tournament (or projected to this year), or an NC2A tourney game against a team from a BCS conference, where I can remember the details of the end of the game. Last one I remember going the right way was Novak against ND in '06.

10-11 - Louisville, Vanderbilt, Wisconsin, Gonzaga
09-10 - Washington, Notre Dame, Villanova, West Virginia, Florida State
08-09 - Missouri, Villanova (BET), Syracuse
07-08 - Stanford, Georgetown
06-07 - Louisville
05-06 - Alabama, Louisville

[geps]

I don't know, last year we did beat GT @ home and Vill(BET) both close at the end plus all those OT wins on the road. Hopefully that starts happening this year.

[NickelDimer]

First question is how do you define tight spot?

[marquette09]

Xavier last year?

[MarquetteDano]

I don't know, last year we did beat GT @ home and Vill(BET) both close at the end plus all those OT wins on the road. Hopefully that starts happening this year.

Yeah, it isn't seventeen in a row unless you are adjusting your criteria to make it seventeen in a row.  We definitely have a losing record but the years you mentioned where we had close wins against tourney teams....

09-10:  Georgetown (62-59),  Villanova (80-76)
08-09:  Wisconsin (61-58)
07-08:  @Wisconsin (81-76)
06-07:  @Pittsburgh (77-74OT), Pittsburgh (75-71)
05-06:  Oral Roberts in Alaska (73-70), Pittsburgh (84-82)

[ecompt]

Buzz has to be kidding with this quote: "Our experience in those close games is beneficial in a lot of ways."
Wouldn't you think 10 kicks to the crotch would make a team learn?

[Niv Berkowitz]

That "experience" buzz talks about only means something if you can start turning the L's into W's. And that time, is now. It's been 18-mos of losing by 5 pts or less.

[willie warrior]

Buzz has to be kidding with this quote: "Our experience in those close games is beneficial in a lot of ways."
Wouldn't you think 10 kicks to the crotch would make a team learn?

Great quote by Coach Buzz. He sure as hell is not referring to coaching experience, however!

[Eye]

After making the same post on the other board, we've added WVU this year, and Gtown and nova last year to the good side of the tally. Up to 3-17.

The OT wins on the road last year, while all certainly exciting, all were against NIT teams, all of whom failed to win 20 games in the regular season and lost at least 12 games in the regular season.

Looking back, Xavier last year is fair. Down 2 with 6 to go, 11-0 run, Xavier never back within less than 7 the rest of the way. Up to 4-17.

Rodents 08-09 I'm not sure about. Down and came back, but also allowed four baskets and iffy foul shooting in the final minutes. Up 7 with 1:20 to go and won by 3. We'll count it, but the next one that's iffy will not count. Up to 5-17.

Rodents 07-08 counts too. Tied with about 4 to go, 7-1 run, Rodents never a shot to get within one possession again. up to 6-17.

Any OT game counts in the tally, so add Pitt in 06-07. Other Pitt game that year MU had a 17-point lead at one point in the 2nd half. Said we'd count the questionable Rodents game from 08-09, so the second Pitt game is out. Up to 7-17.

05-06 Pitt could be argued was similar story, up 10 in 2nd half, if Gray makes those 2 FTs MU very well could lose.

Oral Roberts isn't a BCS opponent, no sale on that one.

Thanks everybody. I was just looking to get an honest count of what we're at since the last one I could remember, which was Novak in '06 against ND. I'll happily admit my parameters were vague so as to generate some conversation. L

[Eye]

Looks like it's more like something along the lines of 7-17. Still obviously not good. Whether it's simply poor luck and the law of averages kicks in at some point to balance this out, or whether there are flaws that need to be corrected is the next question.

[Dr. Blackheart]

In the last two seasons under Buzz and with primarily Buzz's recruits, MU is 1-9 against ranked/NCAA teams when MU scores 70 points or less, only beating Gtown at home last year. When MU cannot outscore a top opponent, they cannot outdefend you.  

2010-11:  Louisville, Wisconsin, Zags

2009-10:  Wisconsin, WVU, Gtown (W), Pitt, ND, Gtown (BET), Edit: forgot FSU (L)

MU was 4-1 when this occurs versus lesser opponents the last two seasons, all from last season:  DePaul (L), UCONN (W), USF (W), SJU (2 W's).

In Buzz's first season, MU was 3-1 vs. top talent (Wisconsin, Tenn (L), NCSU, Utah St.).  And 4-2 overall--add in (IPFW and USF (L).  "Three Amigos + Zar" or Dale Layer on the bench?

[Dr. Blackheart]

I am just going add that in these 70 or less games the last two seasons, the only top coach MU has beaten was Thompson (once). Calhoun was out sick vs. MU. Heath is the only other one still employed that Buzz beat.  We can P&M about one play or the other, but it is clear MU is getting outschooled in these games on the bench. Buzz will learn from this burn, but defense can win ugly for you. One stop in these games and MU is no longer one of the "unluckiest" teams in the nation.

[willie warrior]

I am just going add that in these 70 or less games the last two seasons, the only top coach MU has beaten was Thompson (once). Calhoun was out sick vs. MU. Heath is the only other one still employed that Buzz beat.  We can P&M about one play or the other, but it is clear MU is getting outschooled in these games on the bench. Buzz will learn from this burn, but defense can win ugly for you. One stop in these games and MU is no longer one of the "unluckiest" teams in the nation.

Not sure, but I believe Buzz has beaten Pitino and Ryan who I think many would believe are top coaches. Has not Buzz also beat Villanova with Wright and Pitt with Dixon? Again, not sure, but most would agree that those guys are top coaches.

OMG, am I defending Buzz?

[Dr. Blackheart]

Not sure, but I believe Buzz has beaten Pitino and Ryan who I think many would believe are top coaches. Has not Buzz also beat Villanova with Wright and Pitt with Dixon? Again, not sure, but most would agree that those guys are top coaches.

OMG, am I defending Buzz?

I am referencing the 70 points or less grinders...to me, that is where defense and coaching come more into play.  Buzz is excellent overall with his system built on offensive efficiency and the BE coaches give him much props...however, these grinders--not so good.  MU eff'ed up considerably on offense in the last five minutes (if not all game except we were getting to the line) as Pitino kept throwing different defensive looks at MU.  However, what did MU stop in these last five?  That is what I am talking about...and where the biggies earn their scratch.  If it is an ugly game (especially on the road), MU needs stops--not to get broken down again on a switch in the last four seconds.

[NCAARules]

Dr. Blackheart -

The only thing I would point out would be that your criteria <70 points, already puts Marquette at a disadvantage, as that MAY indicate a game style/tempo that MU prefers to not play.

I for one, am not surprised to see the record split when you use that criteria. Against lesser teams/coaches, we can overcome the tempo and win on talent. Against better, when they win the battle of the tempo, we have a tough time overcoming it.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Dr. Blackheart -

The only thing I would point out would be that your criteria <70 points, already puts Marquette at a disadvantage, as that MAY indicate a game style/tempo that MU prefers to not play.

I for one, am not surprised to see the record split when you use that criteria. Against lesser teams/coaches, we can overcome the tempo and win on talent. Against better, when they win the battle of the tempo, we have a tough time overcoming it.

I am not either...but...there are plenty of these "ugly" games that separate teams and coaches.  A team can always rely on defense if it is stressed when the shots or calls are not going your way.  We cannot buy a stop when it matters in these "ugly" games it seems.  For example, in both Vandy and UL games we were beat on a switch for an easy game winning lay-up--basically uncontested.  We normally do not switch on defense--we delay and retreat...but Buzz has stated we always switch in the last four minutes.  Well, the other coaches have figured that out and have broken down MU's defense.  Coming back 18 points in seven minutes--and the D was where? UND was 7 points in the last 1+ minute last year.  Wisky?

[Tugg Speedman]

Dr. Blackheart -

The only thing I would point out would be that your criteria <70 points, already puts Marquette at a disadvantage, as that MAY indicate a game style/tempo that MU prefers to not play.

I for one, am not surprised to see the record split when you use that criteria. Against lesser teams/coaches, we can overcome the tempo and win on talent. Against better, when they win the battle of the tempo, we have a tough time overcoming it.

Blackheart -

To further this point.  You're constructing a criteria that MU does not do well when the style and tempo of the game does not suit this team.  Not surprisingly, their record is poor.

I was talking to a big ND bball fan yesterday and he said that ND does poorly when they are in uptempo high scoring games ... a style that does not fit their style.

I would venture that most teams do poorly when you ask how they did in games that do not suit their style.

What is MU record against ranked/NCAA teams when they score more than 70 points?

If it is good, the answer is not learning how to win less than 70 point games.  The answer is not getting caught in a less than 70 point game at all!

[NCAARules]

Blackheart - That's very interesting on the switching vs. staying defenses. I had wondered that, but had not seen it discussed.

I'll be honest, I did not see the game, as my daughter had her First Reconciliation, and DVR failed at home. (thank you TWC).

It may be morbid, but I'd really like to see the second half to see for myself what changed. (ESPN did not replay the game overnight on any of its networks, so SOL there).

[Dr. Blackheart]

Let's look at the last 7 minutes of UL's improbabale climb back from destruction, down 18 at home

• UL made 8-10 FG's
• Five of these were lay-up attempts. UL made four of these
• Five of these we three point attempts, UL made four
• On the two misses, Jennings grabbed the offensive rebound and was immediately fouled, making four free throws

So, UL had 10 possessions in the last seven minutes, shot 80% on lay-ups and threes, and scored on the two misses. MU had zero stops defensively in the last seven minutes of the game. Damning.  Let me repeat that: Zero, zip and none.  

We have had the worst defensive effort in at least 15 years vs. Pitt and one of the biggest come backs in NCAA history if not MU's pulled out of the hat.  Start playing team defense, it is as simple as that. You don't always get to control the tempo in a game--you are going against great coaches who know our offensive strengths and try to control that.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Blackheart -


What is MU record against ranked/NCAA teams when they score more than 70 points?

If it is good, the answer is not learning how to win less than 70 point games.  The answer is not getting caught in a less than 70 point game at all!

By my count, we were 6-7 when MU scores over 70 points in the past two seasons against quality opponents (ranked at the time or NCAA bound).  I might add, I edited my above post on "70 or under" games as I missed the Florida State loss...which makes us 1-9 against quality teams. Yikes!

[Tugg Speedman]

By my count, we were 6-7 when MU scores over 70 points in the past two seasons against quality opponents (ranked at the time or NCAA bound).  I might add, I edited my above post on "70 or under" games as I missed the Florida State loss...which makes us 1-9 against quality teams. Yikes!

MU is is 100 and 150 (or something like that) all-time against ranked teams.  You're saying that the we are 6 and 7 when scoring more than 70 points against ranked/NCAA teams.  So, we are about a .500 team against ranked teams when we score more than 70 points.  Restated, we are a ranked team, or play like we should be ranked, when we score more than 70 points against good competition.

If you thought we should be 12 and 1 against ranked teams when we score more than 70 points, then just change our name to Duke.

I guess I'm still struggling as to the point here ... when we narrowly define the criteria being games we do not play well in against ranked/NCAA teams, we lose.  What is the surprise here?

[Tugg Speedman]

Let's look at the last 7 minutes of UL's improbabale climb back from destruction, down 18 at home

• UL made 8-10 FG's
• Five of these were lay-up attempts. UL made four of these
• Five of these we three point attempts, UL made four
• On the two misses, Jennings grabbed the offensive rebound and was immediately fouled, making four free throws

So, UL had 10 possessions in the last seven minutes, shot 80% on lay-ups and threes, and scored on the two misses. MU had zero stops defensively in the last seven minutes of the game. Damning.  Let me repeat that: Zero, zip and none.  

We have had the worst defensive effort in at least 15 years vs. Pitt and one of the biggest come backs in NCAA history if not MU's pulled out of the hat.  Start playing team defense, it is as simple as that. You don't always get to control the tempo in a game--you are going against great coaches who know our offensive strengths and try to control that.

I'm not trying to be "Mr. Smartass" but we were outscored 24 to 5 over this stretch.  What did we think the stats would look like?

And again, Pitt could very well win the national championship and was 47 ans 1 on their home court.  If we played good defense and won the game, in their house, then move us into the top 10!  It takes that kind of effort to beat Pitt this year.  So, we are we surprised we struggle against that quality competition?

[Dr. Blackheart]

MU is is 100 and 150 (or something like that) all-time against ranked teams.  You're saying that the we are 6 and 7 when scoring more than 70 points against ranked/NCAA teams.  So, we are about a .500 team against ranked teams when we score more than 70 points.  Restated, we are a ranked team, or play like we should be ranked, when we score more than 70 points against good competition.

If you thought we should be 12 and 1 against ranked teams when we score more than 70 points, then just change our name to Duke.

I guess I'm still struggling as to the point here ... when we narrowly define the criteria being games we do not play well in against ranked/NCAA teams, we lose.  What is the surprise here?

I am not narrowly defining anything--these great coaches are...I expect to be .500 (5-5)....I don't expect to be 1-9 against them when we are .500 if we score more than 70 points.  Back to my original point, we lose games when great coaches take us away from our strengths--offensive efficiency and tempo.  Why?  Buzz's teams don't win these ugly games because they don't play great team defense. That is the only thing a team can rely on when the other team limits you. Ten straight scoring possessions, and all you needed was one stop. These coaches share notes: limit MU's tempo and you win because you can break down their defense.  Can Buzz win when the game slows?  I don't see that evidence yet.  

[Dr. Blackheart]

I'm not trying to be "Mr. Smartass" but we were outscored 24 to 5 over this stretch.  What did we think the stats would look like?

I just would hope for one stop. Please show us evidence that Buzz's teams play great defense?

[Tugg Speedman]

 

I just would hope for one stop. Please show us evidence that Buzz's teams play great defense?

How about the first 34 minutes of the Louisville game and the 40 minutes of the ND game before that?