So....What are we ranked on Monday - 11/1/2024?

[Herman Cain]

Bumpin' for fun and profit ...

We won twice, including over #20 SH. Four-game winning streak, including 100-point win over #23 (then #16) The Provi. Winning record in one of the best conferences, 12-6 overall.

Obviously, The Hall will drop out. Others to lose during the week include #21 Texas, #22 Tennessee and #24 Bama (twice).

I'm guessing we'll receive votes, but probably not enough to get in the Top 25.

We'll just have to beat Nova and X!

I agree with this analysis

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Last week there was only one team receiving any votes with 6 losses (#24 Alabama). A lot of pollsters also rely on sites like KP these days and were pretty far out in those. We may pick up some votes but I doubt we're close

[tower912]

Others receiving votes.    But not many.   6 losses is still 6 losses.   

[JakeBarnes]

Others receiving votes.    But not many.   6 losses is still 6 losses.

Early returns say you're likely right. Not on any ballots so far. Loyola is everyone's darling to enter...despite how gross they've looked on the eye test so far.

[TallTitan34]

Seth Davis has us at 33 which wouldn’t receive any votes.

[BM1090]

No votes. Not too surprising. 6 losses is just too many.

[MarquetteMike1977]

No votes. Not too surprising. 6 losses is just too many.

No Votes in the Coaches Poll Either. Although feel we deserved votes.

[🏀]

No Votes in the Coaches Poll Either. Although feel we deserved votes.

Eh.

I think Shaka has the voters curiosity, but the next two weeks will make or break getting their attention for this season.

[Galway Eagle]

Wins over two current top 25 teams and one that's receiving votes seems like it should've been enough to get some respect but I think people are just still scorned by the embarrassing loss to the Bonnies last time we got votes

[1SE]

Win 2 this week and we'll get a vote or two.

[MU82]

Win 1 this week and we'll get a vote or two.

Seems you've been promoted to cult leader!

[1SE]

Seems you've been promoted to cult leader!

Wow, you were really triggered.

[MU82]

Wow, you were really triggered.

If mocking silliness and hypocrisy = being triggered, sure.

Ever since you called out your fellow Scoopers for being part of an alleged "cult of low expectations," you've had at least a half-dozen posts in which you've done exactly what you criticized others for.

But we get it ... when you say 2-5 or 1-4 or 1-1 would be acceptable, it's "being realistic" ... but when somebody else says it, it's "settling for mediocrity."

[Viper]

RED is #8? Really? Walmartsconsin fanbase will be suffocating.

[1SE]

If mocking silliness and hypocrisy = being triggered, sure.

Ever since you called out your fellow Scoopers for being part of an alleged "cult of low expectations," you've had at least a half-dozen posts in which you've done exactly what you criticized others for.

But we get it ... when you say 2-5 or 1-4 or 1-1 would be acceptable, it's "being realistic" ... but when somebody else says it, it's "settling for mediocrity."

Jayzus, it's like I killed your puppy or something.

I think most people agreed that the COLE exists here - maybe some of the members are fluid - but it is there. I wouldn't have really put you in it (and I don't think we've ever really had a beef?) What prompted that post is that, after the CU game, where Shaka clearly blew it, folks were coming out making the same kinds of excuses they had been making for all the Wojo years. I FULLY hope and expect that Shaka is going to be our guy and lead us to great things. I think that the CU game was likely an exception, not a rule. But if one thinks it was "ok" that we lost that game, "regression to the mean", "we're young", "we're inexperienced", yadda yadda yadda then that sounds Wojo-COLE esque to me. Disagree if you want, but IMO that was the one game this year where Shaka failed. In our other losses we were outmatched - in some of those we kept/made it close, in others we didn't. That's what happens when you're outmatched. We were NOT outmatched vs. CU and there were some critical, discrete, coaching decisions that tipped the outcome of that game.

Saying that me thinking/hoping we'd go 2-5 over a 7 game stretch where we were underdogs in each game makes me COLE is bizarre - it was literally the result that was on the (conservative side) of the expected probability. Of course 3-4 would be better. 7-0 would be best. But a 2-5 result would keep us firmly in contention for a bid and that would be my expectation. But, expectations aren't static (that was my point in that original post) and after winning vs SH I'm happy to update them - it's now 50-50 that we go 2-4 over the next 6 and that is my expectation. If we win tomorrow, I'll update them again.

I think there is some nuance with long and short term expectations - the latter of course change more quickly than the former. My long term expectations all year has been that we'd just squeak into the tourney. That was probably a little high as of the start of the season, as of today it's probably a little low, but I think it remains a reasonable overall expectation for the season. Expecting to be dancing in year 1, with a new coach and almost totally new roaster, does not strike me as COLE in any way but if you want to think that somehow makes me silly or a hypocrite be my guest.     

And sorry - I typo-ed in my comment above in this post about winning this week - I meant to put "win 2" and of course that would be teal.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I think most people agreed that the COLE exists here -

Sorry, no.  I don't think that is the case at all.  And the fact that you have to add three paragraphs to justify it shows the weakness of your initial point.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I think there is some nuance with long and short term expectations - the latter of course change more quickly than the former.

Yeah. And that's what happened after the Creighton game for some people. Their short term expectations changed based on the results of the game. That doesn't mean they are part of a cult, they are just doing exactly what you are doing, you just didn't agree with them.

Personally, I don't spend much thought on short term expectations for that exact reason, people tend to overreact after wins and losses, regardless of how the game actually went. Each game is a new data point in a season for 30+ data points.

[1SE]

Sorry, no.  I don't think that is the case at all.  And the fact that you have to add three paragraphs to justify it shows the weakness of your initial point.

That's totally fine if you don't think there is a COLE

[MU82]

That's totally fine if you don't think there is a COLE

You created a thread to label a bunch of people you don't know whose mindset you also don't know based on something you perceived after one very disappointing loss.

When we win a few in a row, everybody's psyched. When we lose a few in a row, with the third being the way that Creighton game ended, emotions run high.

I've got no beef with you. I actually think your 2-5 call was realistic, albeit on the pessimistic side for a team that just had 3 very nice wins ... but I couldn't resist pointing out what seemed an obvious double-standard on your part.

And "cult" is a very charged word, best reserved for those who blindly follow a false god.

[1SE]

You created a thread to label a bunch of people you don't know whose mindset you also don't know based on something you perceived after one very disappointing loss.

When we win a few in a row, everybody's psyched. When we lose a few in a row, with the third being the way that Creighton game ended, emotions run high.

I've got no beef with you. I actually think your 2-5 call was realistic, albeit on the pessimistic side for a team that just had 3 very nice wins ... but I couldn't resist pointing out what seemed an obvious double-standard on your part.

And "cult" is a very charged word, best reserved for those who blindly follow a false god.

Yeah, people really latched onto "cult" - it was meant to be a bit hyperbolistic and tongue in cheek.

I just don't like people letting our coaches off the hook when they screw up. They get paid way too much money for that. That's what people did with Wojo and why some people, 5 and 6 years in, still thought he was going to lead us to the promised land. Shaka had a bad game - it happens to everyone - I don't expect it will be part of a trend and I'm more excited about our program now than at any point since April 4th 2003 (Buzz's success was great, but he was so creepy it always seemed like it was a poisoned chalice). But I'm also not going to blindly worship Shaka irrespective of his results on (and off) the court. He has the tools at his disposal to get us back to national relevance quickly, and, other than CU, I'm very satisfied with the job he's done. We're trending in the right direction and, at least as of today, exceeding expectations. But if we should, say, lay a complete egg in February barring some injury or something (where have I seen that movie before?) that would be cause for concern.

[MU82]

Yeah, people really latched onto "cult" - it was meant to be a bit hyperbolistic and tongue in cheek.

I just don't like people letting our coaches off the hook when they screw up. They get paid way too much money for that. That's what people did with Wojo and why some people, 5 and 6 years in, still thought he was going to lead us to the promised land. Shaka had a bad game - it happens to everyone - I don't expect it will be part of a trend and I'm more excited about our program now than at any point since April 4th 2003 (Buzz's success was great, but he was so creepy it always seemed like it was a poisoned chalice). But I'm also not going to blindly worship Shaka irrespective of his results on (and off) the court. He has the tools at his disposal to get us back to national relevance quickly, and, other than CU, I'm very satisfied with the job he's done. We're trending in the right direction and, at least as of today, exceeding expectations. But if we should, say, lay a complete egg in February barring some injury or something (where have I seen that movie before?) that would be cause for concern.

Except for maybe 2 or 3 Scoopers -- and I can only really remember 1 -- everybody who posted after the Creighton game said Shaka blew it.

I don't know how many Scoopers "blindly worship" Shaka, but one who has been extremely high on him from Day 1, Goose, also was very disappointed with him after that game. IIRC, Goose even blamed Shaka, at least in part, for one of the earlier defeats.

Many of us took the stance that a coach in his first year with a down program and a roster of largely unproven players probably wouldn't have a great Year 1, record-wise. That seems pretty reasonable to me, but I can see how others might say those expectations were too low. It's a difference of opinion.

I am thrilled that Shaka's first Marquette team has exceeded expectations -- apparently even yours!

[Galway Eagle]

Except for maybe 2 or 3 Scoopers -- and I can only really remember 1 -- everybody who posted after the Creighton game said Shaka blew it.

I don't know how many Scoopers "blindly worship" Shaka, but one who has been extremely high on him from Day 1, Goose, also was very disappointed with him after that game. IIRC, Goose even blamed Shaka, at least in part, for one of the earlier defeats.

Many of us took the stance that a coach in his first year with a down program and a roster of largely unproven players probably wouldn't have a great Year 1, record-wise. That seems pretty reasonable to me, but I can see how others might say those expectations were too low. It's a difference of opinion.

I am thrilled that Shaka's first Marquette team has exceeded expectations -- apparently even yours!

**throws blanket over my shrine to Shaka**

[Goose]

If this team laid an egg in February, I would have zero concern moving forward. I would be very disappointed, but hardly concerned. This team/program has passed my eye test with flying colors. I have said from day one that Shaka gets no wiggle room from me. This season has already shown me enough of the system, type of player Shaka likes and his coaching chops to call the campaign a success. Again, I would be disappointed and pissed if this team does not get in the tournament, but I would no concern about the future of the program.

I would be the first guy bashing a collapse, if it happened, but only because they put themselves in position to play in March. Overall future of the program is the best it has been in a long, long time. I think Shaka is here 10+ years and that puts us in an even better position. Buzz and Crean did a very good and good job, but they were not going to be here for the long haul.

[MU82]

If this team laid an egg in February, I would have zero concern moving forward. I would be very disappointed, but hardly concerned. This team/program has passed my eye test with flying colors. I have said from day one that Shaka gets no wiggle room from me. This season has already shown me enough of the system, type of player Shaka likes and his coaching chops to call the campaign a success. Again, I would be disappointed and pissed if this team does not get in the tournament, but I would no concern about the future of the program.

I would be the first guy bashing a collapse, if it happened, but only because they put themselves in position to play in March. Overall future of the program is the best it has been in a long, long time. I think Shaka is here 10+ years and that puts us in an even better position. Buzz and Crean did a very good and good job, but they were not going to be here for the long haul.

There's nuance in this comment, Goose, which often is troublesome on Scoop.

Like you, I'm excited about the future of Marquette basketball.

[brewcity77]

Again, I would be disappointed and pissed if this team does not get in the tournament, but I would no concern about the future of the program.

I keep thinking back to that comment from the preseason about "All culture for the first 2 years." What we're seeing now is still installing the culture, the "how" to play, the foundations for going forward. I get giddy thinking about what guys like Kolek, Oso, Kam, Joplin, and O-Max will look like once they are fully acclimated to what the staff wants from them. And that's not to mention guys like Ellis and Itejere who we've barely seen but seem to have all the physical tools the staff wants.

We're better than I expected now (and I had some of the loftier expectations) and I think we could be really good next year and even better in 2022-23, when all these kids will be upperclassmen. I am so wildly optimistic about what this team will be once the staff really gets this team doing what they want and once all these young guys start to play like extensions of the coaching staff.

The future is the reason I'm wearing these shades.