what UCONN fans are saying about the upcoming MU game

[ringout]

I don't think Buzz has proven that yet.  

Crean's issue was that he couldn't attract highly rated guys like Zeller to MU.  


Buzz is getting it done the same way Crean did--second tier recruits, I think everyone is hopeful that Buzz will turn the corner on those top 25 recruits--we're listed with a number of them for 2014 and 2015.  If he can't, he may well reach the same conclusion as Crean.

Buzz has had much more consistent recruiting.  Crean had great years and awful years.

2nd tier recruits??  Buzz has nobody on his roster as bad as the crap that sat on the end of the bench for Crean.

[frozena pizza]

Getting back to original post, does anyone else think it's kind of amazing that UConn fans are saying things like we have two guys currently better than anyone on UConn?  Or saying that UConn "has a chance" to beat Marquette?  UConn is still the defending national champ and a national power who consistently attracts some of the top recruits in the country and many of the guys on our roster wouldn't have gotten a sniff from UConn.  Yet many would view this game as one we should win.

[BrewCity83]

Well, UCONN lost 6 of their last 7 games before last night's win over DePaul...

If that was my team I wouldn't be overly confident either.

[Hoopaloop]

Buzz has had much more consistent recruiting.  Crean had great years and awful years.

2nd tier recruits??  Buzz has nobody on his roster as bad as the crap that sat on the end of the bench for Crean.

+1

I think this captures it well.  Crean's best years are better than Buzz's best years recruiting, but Crean's bad years are much worse than Buzz's worst years.

No one can argue that Crean's cream of the crop players were some of the best in MU history, but we weren't very deep and Buzz has a huge edge there.

[Canadian Dimes]

Crean having any responsibility for "leading" Mu into the Big East is probably the stupidest thing i have ever read on a message board.  Message boards tend to have alot of stupid things written but that could very well be the dumbest. 

I will therefore attempt to list, in order, the reasons Mu was attractive/responsibilitygiven to for being in the Big East.

1-500.  AL MCGUIRE...who made MU basketball and put MU into America's conscience and ever since AL even in it's down years was an NIT type program. 
The Wooden of UCLA, the Smith of UNC, the kryszewski of Duke

501.  Marquette's Administartion, particularly the Jesuits and former ball players that have pushed to make sure Basketball is a core part of who Mu is.

502. Bill Cords.

503.  Kevin Oneill...brought Mu back into the national limelight at a point in time when MU was nearing the point of leaving Americas basketball conciousness.

504. Hank raymonds...maintaining a tradition of excellence after Al left.

505.  the Milwaukee metropolitan area and the tremendous fan support that has in good times and not so good continued to make it one of the top 25 or so attendence programs in the country.  And a major media market.

506.  The Bradley Center...NBA venue in an NBA town also see 505 and 501.

Those are the primary reasons that MU was attractive to the GMC, C-USA, and ultimately the BIG East.  If DWADE And Tommy Crean never happened Mu still would have been invited for the 506 reasons listed above.  Numbnuts is somewhere in the 900's

[frozena pizza]

Well, UCONN lost 6 of their last 7 games before last night's win over DePaul...

If that was my team I wouldn't be overly confident either.

No I wouldn't, BrewCity.  Although ironically you're the one that disagreed with me after the Syracuse game when I said that UConn was overrated.  Your words: "I think that by mid-February, they'll start to play up to their near-limitless potential."  Hopefully that day is not Saturday. 

[tower912]

MU had the chance to to to the Big East back in Al's/Hank's day.   They chose not to, because they thought they had a better chance to make the tourney as an independent and would get more TV exposure on WGN.    Oops.    Give Crean his due.   He shepherded the program through its transition to the Big East and did a nice job.   I agree that he had plateaued at MU and that Buzz can take us farther.   But let's not ignore the good that Crean did.  

[Bocephys]

No I wouldn't, BrewCity.  Although ironically you're the one that disagreed with me after the Syracuse game when I said that UConn was overrated.  Your words: "I think that by mid-February, they'll start to play up to their near-limitless potential."  Hopefully that day is not Saturday. 

I said almost the same thing about Vandy, and that did not turn out well for us.  Hopefully Uconn does not continue their DePaul success against us.

[The Equalizer]

Not sure where anybody wrote that he has already proven to be able to land top-25 players.  He said that Crean thought it was too hard to recruit at Marquette.  Buzz has proven that is not true, and he is correct in saying that. 

You're misstating the argument.  Crean didn't say that it was hard to recruit to Marquette--he thought he would not be able to get the type of player (like Zeller) that can consistently take a team to the next level.  

Buzz has decidedly NOT proven him wrong on that count.  He's recruiting at about the same level.

All I'm suggesting here is that if you look objectively, Buzz has brought in roughly the same quality of player that Crean was been able to bring in:

Using RSCI data:

33 Robert Jackson - Crean
36 Dominic James  - Crean
40 Travis Diener - Crean
40 Jamil Wilson - Buzz
47 Junior Cadougan - Buzz
48 Vander Blue - Buzz
55 Jerel McNeal - Crean
57 Steve Novak - Crean
61 Wes Matthews - Crean
67 Erik Williams - Crean/Buzz
71 Dameon Mason - Crean
73 Tyshawn Taylor - Crean
73 Jerone Maymon - Buzz
74 Jamail Jones - Buzz
81 Juan Anderson - Buzz
85 Scott Merritt - Crean
88 Nick Williams - Crean
91 Trevor Mbakwe - Crean

I'm sorry, but I don't see the evidence that constitutes "proof" that Crean was proven wrong about the type of player that will come to Marquette.   Crean's point was that he couldn't get the top 25 players (like Zeller).  Buzz hasn't landed 'em either.

Buzz has not gotten the McDonald's All American, but he has consistently gotten top-100 players in every one of his recruiting class, to go along with JUCOs who if they were ranked would also be in the top-100.  That is something Crean was never able to do.  His biggest problem was that he would get one great class and then follow it up with 2 straight years of all 2-star recruits.  Buzz follows up top-20 recruiting classes with more top-20 recruiting classes, and always has a top-100 player in each class.

On the other hand, I don't think its necessarily a bad thing to bring in a class like the Amigos and have them stay together for 4 years.   Even if the best player you can get the following year is only an unranked 4-star prep.

I'm also confused over your comment about how Crean would typically follow up one good year with "2 straight years of all 2-star recruits".  Specifically, which years are you referring to?  I've listed the top 100 recruits, and there was at least one in 7 of 9 seasons.  In the other two, the best recruit was better than a 2-star.

2000 - Merritt
2001 - Diener, Robert Jackson
2002 - Novak
2003 - Mason
2004 - none (Amoroso was a 3-star)
2005 - McNeal, James, Matthews
2006 - none (Hayward was a 4-star)
2007 - Mbakwe
2008 - Taylor, N Williams
 

[wadesworld]

You're misstating the argument.  Crean didn't say that it was hard to recruit to Marquette--he thought he would not be able to get the type of player (like Zeller) that can consistently take a team to the next level.  

Buzz has decidedly NOT proven him wrong on that count.  He's recruiting at about the same level.

All I'm suggesting here is that if you look objectively, Buzz has brought in roughly the same quality of player that Crean was been able to bring in:

Using RSCI data:

33 Robert Jackson - Crean
36 Dominic James  - Crean
40 Travis Diener - Crean
40 Jamil Wilson - Buzz
47 Junior Cadougan - Buzz
48 Vander Blue - Buzz
55 Jerel McNeal - Crean
57 Steve Novak - Crean
61 Wes Matthews - Crean
67 Erik Williams - Crean/Buzz
71 Dameon Mason - Crean
73 Tyshawn Taylor - Crean
73 Jerone Maymon - Buzz
74 Jamail Jones - Buzz
81 Juan Anderson - Buzz
85 Scott Merritt - Crean
88 Nick Williams - Crean
91 Trevor Mbakwe - Crean

I'm sorry, but I don't see the evidence that constitutes "proof" that Crean was proven wrong about the type of player that will come to Marquette.   Crean's point was that he couldn't get the top 25 players (like Zeller).  Buzz hasn't landed 'em either.

On the other hand, I don't think its necessarily a bad thing to bring in a class like the Amigos and have them stay together for 4 years.   Even if the best player you can get the following year is only an unranked 4-star prep.

I'm also confused over your comment about how Crean would typically follow up one good year with "2 straight years of all 2-star recruits".  Specifically, which years are you referring to?  I've listed the top 100 recruits, and there was at least one in 7 of 9 seasons.  In the other two, the best recruit was better than a 2-star.

2000 - Merritt
2001 - Diener, Robert Jackson
2002 - Novak
2003 - Mason
2004 - none (Amoroso was a 3-star)
2005 - McNeal, James, Matthews
2006 - none (Hayward was a 4-star)
2007 - Mbakwe
2008 - Taylor, N Williams
 

I think you're missing my point.  I am arguing mainly that we have depth at Marquette that we didn't have when Crean was the coach here.  You seem to obsess over recruiting rankings, which to me is pointless.  It seems like you would be happy with 13 Khem Birch types who are "huge" gets that never do anything over a guy like Davante who is not highly ranked by recruiting services but is clearly a much better college basketball player than those same people projected him to be.  To me, I'd rather have the better college player, whether they were ranked 1st or 361st, which is why I also exaggerated on the rankings that Crean brought in during his down years for recruiting.  My bad.  I won't exaggerate anymore.

Anyways, I find it hard to list guys like Maymon, Mason, etc. when pointing out who recruited what guys, because they really didn't contribute too much to the Marquette program as a whole.  Somewhat the same for Robert Jackson, as I'm not sure how transfers are "handled" (do coaches begin recruiting transfers when they hear they will be transferring, or do the transfers go to the coaches and ask if there's room for them?  I would guess it's the latter, but I truly don't know).

Having said that, you list 11 guys that Crean recruited in the top 100, compared to 6 by Buzz.  The difference is Crean was here for 9 years, this is Buzz's 4th year.  Not to mention, again, if JUCOs were ranked, there is no doubt that Fulce (and not Butler, as Fulce was supposed to be the big get, and Butler just the "tag along"), DJO, and Jae (and possibly even Buycks as he was a JUCO All-American and already a 3 star 2 years earlier when he came out of high school) would all be ranked well within the top 100 recruits.  So that would give Buzz 9 or 10 in his 4 years compared to Crean's 11 in 9 years here.  And then beyond that, the guys who Buzz brings in that are not ranked in the top 100 all seem to pan out much better (or will pan out much better) than the guys Crean did.

Crean's 2002 and 2003 top recruits are exactly my point.  You bring in Merritt, Diener, and Novak the 3 years prior to give yourself a solid foundation to build a team around and just need some good players to make a really strong roster, and Crean couldn't do it.  He gets Mason, who was a good but not great get, and can't keep him at Marquette, and then gets Amaroso, who he also cant keep at Marquette.  So you basically get 2 years of nothing, because he was never able to fill those transfer spots with capable players.  I believe we were the first team ever to go to the Final Four and miss the NCAA Tournament the next year (could be wrong on that).  Does that ever happen with Buzz?  When Williams, Smith, Mbao, or Maymonne transfer or Newbill or Roseboro don't show up does anybody ever really doubt that Buzz will fill the spot with someone just as capable as that player, if not more capable?  I know I don't.  With Crean you were guaranteed to get a guy like Trend who had no business playing in the Big East when those things came up.  That is a huge difference between Crean and Buzz.

[Skatastrophy]

... You seem to obsess over recruiting rankings, which to me is pointless.  ...

Exactly. 

[Hoopaloop]

Crean having any responsibility for "leading" Mu into the Big East is probably the stupidest thing i have ever read on a message board.  Message boards tend to have alot of stupid things written but that could very well be the dumbest. 

I will therefore attempt to list, in order, the reasons Mu was attractive/responsibilitygiven to for being in the Big East.

1-500.  AL MCGUIRE...who made MU basketball and put MU into America's conscience and ever since AL even in it's down years was an NIT type program. 
The Wooden of UCLA, the Smith of UNC, the kryszewski of Duke

501.  Marquette's Administartion, particularly the Jesuits and former ball players that have pushed to make sure Basketball is a core part of who Mu is.

502. Bill Cords.

503.  Kevin Oneill...brought Mu back into the national limelight at a point in time when MU was nearing the point of leaving Americas basketball conciousness.

504. Hank raymonds...maintaining a tradition of excellence after Al left.

505.  the Milwaukee metropolitan area and the tremendous fan support that has in good times and not so good continued to make it one of the top 25 or so attendence programs in the country.  And a major media market.

506.  The Bradley Center...NBA venue in an NBA town also see 505 and 501.

Those are the primary reasons that MU was attractive to the GMC, C-USA, and ultimately the BIG East.  If DWADE And Tommy Crean never happened Mu still would have been invited for the 506 reasons listed above.  Numbnuts is somewhere in the 900's

This might be one of the saddest posts I have read in a long time because it illustrates just how much hatred some people have.  Not the Marquette University I remember.

You state in your first sentence that "Crean having any responsibility for "leading" Mu into the Big East is probably the stupidest thing" you have heard.

Any responsibility, as in he had absolutely zero impact at all.  I don't think there is a reasonable personable, even his most ardent haters (other than you) that would say this.  Look at the timing of events.

According to this article, the Big East had not yet contacted Marquette in September of 2003.  http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=BS8jAAAAIBAJ&sjid=M0UEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6590,3717250&dq=marquette+university+invited+to+big+east&hl=en

Now think about the timing, it was only 6 months earlier that Tom Crean and his Marquette basketball team made the Final Four and that fresh event was not in the minds of the Big East on expansion of teams would suggest that the Big East conference was in a cave when MU was making major college basketball news under their young coach.

Now, let's take a step back even further.  Do I believe that the Big East hadn't actually contacted MU by September of 2003?  Doubtful.  The first rumors started in April of that year, the same month Tom Crean's Marquette basketball team made the Final Four after knocking off #1 Kentucky.

Around this same time it was widely rumored that Crean was a leading candidate at Pitt when Howland took the UCLA job.  Crean ended up staying and it was reported later that these were the initial discussions of Marquette coming to the Big East.

No doubt many people, athletes, administrators paved the way to get to the Big East.  MU didn't arrive on the scene in 2003, but MU's Final Four appearance in 2003 in April when these discussions started and 6 months prior to an invitation being presented to the university cannot be denied.  Timing is sometimes everything.  He got us Wade, he was the coach for the Final Four run, he was the coach when we got invited to the Big East 6 months later.  He isn't the only reason we got to the Big East, but the team's accomplishments during that window of time made it a slam dunk.  To suggest he had no responsibility makes no sense at all.

[Hoopaloop]

Exactly. 

Let's obsess about winning.  Both have done some solid winning.  Buzz has won more consistently, Crean has achieved the higher highs and the lower lows.  Much like the recruiting comparisons between the two.

We've been blessed to have some stud coaches at MU the last fifty years.

[wadesworld]

Let's obsess about winning.  Both have done some solid winning.  Buzz has won more consistently, Crean has achieved the higher highs and the lower lows.  Much like the recruiting comparisons between the two.

We've been blessed to have some stud coaches at MU the last fifty years.

Good call.  I believe Buzz will get us winning at the highest level and have us in the top 20 every single year.  We will see and I hope I am right.

[Spaniel with a Short Tail]

I hear this Drummond guy is big...

[Lennys Tap]

This might be one of the saddest posts I have read in a long time because it illustrates just how much hatred some people have.  Not the Marquette University I remember.

You state in your first sentence that "Crean having any responsibility for "leading" Mu into the Big East is probably the stupidest thing" you have heard.

Any responsibility, as in he had absolutely zero impact at all.  I don't think there is a reasonable personable, even his most ardent haters (other than you) that would say this.  Look at the timing of events.

According to this article, the Big East had not yet contacted Marquette in September of 2003.  http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=BS8jAAAAIBAJ&sjid=M0UEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6590,3717250&dq=marquette+university+invited+to+big+east&hl=en

Now think about the timing, it was only 6 months earlier that Tom Crean and his Marquette basketball team made the Final Four and that fresh event was not in the minds of the Big East on expansion of teams would suggest that the Big East conference was in a cave when MU was making major college basketball news under their young coach.

Now, let's take a step back even further.  Do I believe that the Big East hadn't actually contacted MU by September of 2003?  Doubtful.  The first rumors started in April of that year, the same month Tom Crean's Marquette basketball team made the Final Four after knocking off #1 Kentucky.

Around this same time it was widely rumored that Crean was a leading candidate at Pitt when Howland took the UCLA job.  Crean ended up staying and it was reported later that these were the initial discussions of Marquette coming to the Big East.

No doubt many people, athletes, administrators paved the way to get to the Big East.  MU didn't arrive on the scene in 2003, but MU's Final Four appearance in 2003 in April when these discussions started and 6 months prior to an invitation being presented to the university cannot be denied.  Timing is sometimes everything.  He got us Wade, he was the coach for the Final Four run, he was the coach when we got invited to the Big East 6 months later.  He isn't the only reason we got to the Big East, but the team's accomplishments during that window of time made it a slam dunk.  To suggest he had no responsibility makes no sense at all.

I wasn't privy to any of the discussions the Big East AD's had when they decided to add MU, Cincy, Louisville and DePaul, but those programs have a lot in common - solid basketball histories/tradition, good size urban markets, arenas with decent seating capacities. Two were basketball only, two had football. So all were good fits.

How much did our two most recent seasons (2 NCAA appearances and a FF) factor in? Well, DePaul was 25-32 with one 1st round NIT loss over that period and it didn't deter their acceptance.

Even though my opinion of TC the person is low, I'm happy as a clam he got Wade and took us to the FF. He deserves credit for both. That said, I don't see any evidence that he (or Dave Leito or whoever was coaching DePaul at the time) is responsible for the invitation.

[Sir Lawrence]

Let's obsess about winning.  Both have done some solid winning.  Buzz has won more consistently, Crean has achieved the higher highs and the lower lows.  Much like the recruiting comparisons between the two.

We've been blessed to have some stud coaches at MU the last fifty years.

This is your finest post to date.

[Lennys Tap]

Let's obsess about winning. 

With you 100%. Let's put the IU coach in our collective rear view mirrors and worry about our present and future Warriors. I'll drop him from any and all discussions if you will. What do you say?

[The Equalizer]

I think you're missing my point.  I am arguing mainly that we have depth at Marquette that we didn't have when Crean was the coach here.  You seem to obsess over recruiting rankings, which to me is pointless.  It seems like you would be happy with 13 Khem Birch types who are "huge" gets that never do anything over a guy like Davante who is not highly ranked by recruiting services but is clearly a much better college basketball player than those same people projected him to be.  To me, I'd rather have the better college player, whether they were ranked 1st or 361st, which is why I also exaggerated on the rankings that Crean brought in during his down years for recruiting.  My bad.  I won't exaggerate anymore.

Anyways, I find it hard to list guys like Maymon, Mason, etc. when pointing out who recruited what guys, because they really didn't contribute too much to the Marquette program as a whole.  Somewhat the same for Robert Jackson, as I'm not sure how transfers are "handled" (do coaches begin recruiting transfers when they hear they will be transferring, or do the transfers go to the coaches and ask if there's room for them?  I would guess it's the latter, but I truly don't know).

Having said that, you list 11 guys that Crean recruited in the top 100, compared to 6 by Buzz.  The difference is Crean was here for 9 years, this is Buzz's 4th year.  Not to mention, again, if JUCOs were ranked, there is no doubt that Fulce (and not Butler, as Fulce was supposed to be the big get, and Butler just the "tag along"), DJO, and Jae (and possibly even Buycks as he was a JUCO All-American and already a 3 star 2 years earlier when he came out of high school) would all be ranked well within the top 100 recruits.  So that would give Buzz 9 or 10 in his 4 years compared to Crean's 11 in 9 years here.  And then beyond that, the guys who Buzz brings in that are not ranked in the top 100 all seem to pan out much better (or will pan out much better) than the guys Crean did.

Crean's 2002 and 2003 top recruits are exactly my point.  You bring in Merritt, Diener, and Novak the 3 years prior to give yourself a solid foundation to build a team around and just need some good players to make a really strong roster, and Crean couldn't do it.  He gets Mason, who was a good but not great get, and can't keep him at Marquette, and then gets Amaroso, who he also cant keep at Marquette.  So you basically get 2 years of nothing, because he was never able to fill those transfer spots with capable players.  I believe we were the first team ever to go to the Final Four and miss the NCAA Tournament the next year (could be wrong on that).  Does that ever happen with Buzz?  When Williams, Smith, Mbao, or Maymonne transfer or Newbill or Roseboro don't show up does anybody ever really doubt that Buzz will fill the spot with someone just as capable as that player, if not more capable?  I know I don't.  With Crean you were guaranteed to get a guy like Trend who had no business playing in the Big East when those things came up.  That is a huge difference between Crean and Buzz.

What depth?  We're playing essentially six or seven deep right now.

For all your ranting about how terrible Trend Blackledge was, his stats are comparable to what Juan Anderson, Jamail Jones and Derrick Wilson are putting up this year.  http://bit.ly/yi6Gza

Saying that you don't care about rankings reminds me of the days when Mike Deane arguing the same, suggesting that unranked David Diggs was a poor-man's 9th ranked Quentin Richardson.  Rankings don't matter, right?  

Actually, you might get by for a few years if a Jarrod Lovette Davante Gardner falls in your lap.  But eventually those unranked players will live up to (or down to) their rank.

Finally, I'm not sure the number of recruits is a valid argument in this discussion. Not much difference in my mind between having Steve Novak for a 4 year stretch versus Jerone Maymon for one year, replaced by Jae Crowder for the next 2, followed by Steve Taylor for a 4th year.  Sure, Buzz recruited MORE players over that four year period. But that is partly because he had to.          
 
As I said at the outset, I hope Buzz can turn the corner and get some of those elite-level players he's going after--guys like Kevon Looney or Tyus Jones.  But he hasn't done it yet.  

[wadesworld]

What depth?  We're playing essentially six or seven deep right now.

For all your ranting about how terrible Trend Blackledge was, his stats are comparable to what Juan Anderson, Jamail Jones and Derrick Wilson are putting up this year.  http://bit.ly/yi6Gza

Saying that you don't care about rankings reminds me of the days when Mike Deane arguing the same, suggesting that unranked David Diggs was a poor-man's 9th ranked Quentin Richardson.  Rankings don't matter, right?  

Actually, you might get by for a few years if a Jarrod Lovette Davante Gardner falls in your lap.  But eventually those unranked players will live up to (or down to) their rank.

Finally, I'm not sure the number of recruits is a valid argument in this discussion. Not much difference in my mind between having Steve Novak for a 4 year stretch versus Jerone Maymon for one year, replaced by Jae Crowder for the next 2, followed by Steve Taylor for a 4th year.  Sure, Buzz recruited MORE players over that four year period. But that is partly because he had to.          
 
As I said at the outset, I hope Buzz can turn the corner and get some of those elite-level players he's going after--guys like Kevon Looney or Tyus Jones.  But he hasn't done it yet.  

We are playing 7-8 right now with 2 big men hurt and only 11 scholarship players.  The fact that when our starting point guard is suspended for one of our biggest games of the year and our freshman backup point guard is making his first start and steps up and helps us get our biggest road victory over a top-15 opponent shows that while Derrick may not get much playing time, he is more than capable of stepping in when needed.  The same goes for Jamail Jones, as he has since stepped up in Gardner's absence and given us some very productive minutes.  On an undersized team, we have lost our 2 biggest guys for a significant amount of time and yet we are still ranked 12th in the country and tied for 2nd in the Big East conference.  Our backup 3/4 is now our starting 5 because our starting and backup 5 are out, yet we have won 9 out of 10, all conference games.  Having depth does not mean playing 10 guys for 20 minutes each.  Having depth means having 10 guys who, although not all of them will see significant minutes, can hold their own when called upon, which everyone on Marquette besides MAYBE Juan, who has missed important time as a freshman due to injury and suspension, has proven they can do.  For the first time in a very long time, there are 10 guys on this team the belong in the Big East.  If you want to argue that we have no depth despite winning at Wisconsin without Cadougan and continuing to win without both OTule and Gardner, then go right ahead, but I think you're crazy if you truly believe that.  You're trying to use the fact that we're playing 7 or 8 guys right now on a team with 9 healthy guys to show that we only play 7 or 8 guys so we can't be deep, when that is 78%-89% of our healthy roster.  But whatever fits your agenda.

Trend was a senior.  Juan and Derrick are freshman, apples to oranges.  Derrick definitely brings more to the table than Trend ever did even as a senior (defense and doesn't turn the ball over).  Jamail has been somewhat of a disappointment, but he is still a sophomore with time to grow and has definitely shown some flashes of what his potential could be over the past few games since he has been forced into action.  By the time they are done with their careers, all 3 of those guys will have provided much more to Marquette's basketball program than Trend ever came close to.  You know it, but it doesn't fit your agenda, so let's pretend Trend was as effective as...a couple of freshman.  Congratulations.

No, rankings don't matter.  Not to me, and I would hope not to Buzz.  If a kid can play and fits the program, then I would hope Buzz would go out and get him regardless of if he is ranked in the top 100 or not.  If he's ranked 1st in the country, that's great too.  Did it matter that Wes Matthews wasn't drafted 1st overall?  Can he not have success in the NBA because he wasn't a can't-miss prospect out of college?  I think if you ask anybody in the Blazers or Jazz organization they would agree that he has been a good player for him and they'd rather have him over some guy who was drafted 2nd but was a bust.  Maybe I'm wrong about that.  Same goes for recruiting rankings out of high school, in my opinion.

So far the guys Buzz has recruited have either been highly rated or have exceeded their rating.  Until Buzz's unranked players "live down to their ranking" (again, rankings mean nothing, so I'm not sure why you keep bringing this up...rankings do not make a player good or bad, a player's abilities do), then I am going to go ahead and continue to think rankings mean nothing and trust that Buzz will continue to bring in the depth that Crean wasn't able to do consistently.

And once again, yes Buzz has had to replace high-major players with high-major players because some have transferred out or not shown up.  And therein lies a major difference between Buzz's recruiting and Crean's recruiting.  Crean also had guys transfer out, but unlike Buzz, he never replaced them with high-major players.  Which is where the biggest holes in his recruiting came from.  So I guess if you are saying Buzz has more top-100 recruits because he needs to because guys transfer out so he has more opportunities to recruit players, Crean had guys transfer out as well.  And if you're arguing that Buzz has more top-100 guys because his are here for a shorter amount of time, that's not true either.  Jackson was here for 1 year, Mason for 2 years, Mbakwe 1 year, Taylor and Williams 0 years.  Maymon and E Will transferred out for Buzz.  So I'm not sure what direction you are going in, as both guys had transfers, both in and out (Jamil will be here and playing for 3 years).  Buzz fills the exiting transfers with much better talent than Crean did.  If you're saying you'd rather have a guy who stays 4 years like Novak, me too, but you can't compare that situation to Maymon.  That's apples to oranges and you know that.  Not every Buzz recruit transfers out, and not ever Crean recruit stayed for 4 years.  If you want to compare 4 year players (Novak), then compare 4 year players (or, since Buzz needed to balance the roster and we have no seniors who will have been here for 4 years, to guys who most likely will be here for 4 years, like Junior and Vander).  If you want to compare transfers and how those were filled (Maymon), then compare transfers (Mason or Amo for Crean).

Now I'm fairly certain this argument will continue to go in circles.  You believe Crean recruits just as good or better than Buzz, and I believe that not only do the rankings of the players Buzz recruits prove that to be wrong (I get it, Crean recruited more top 100 players, but he also had 5 extra years to do so and if you include the JUCOs Buzz has gotten the numbers would be almost the exact same), but the guys that weren't ranked highly have been better and developed better for Buzz than they did for Crean.  So it's been a fun argument, but you do far too many apples-to-oranges comparisons and rely on recruiting rankings as the marking of a good college basketball player/recruit far too much, which tells me everything I need to know, as recruiting rankings are as far away from a perfect science as you can get, and truthfully mean very, very little in terms of how a player will turn out at the college level.

[🏀]

What depth?  We're playing essentially six or seven deep right now.

For all your ranting about how terrible Trend Blackledge was, his stats are comparable to what Juan Anderson, Jamail Jones and Derrick Wilson are putting up this year.

This is where your credibility in the argument is lost.

1. We have two big men in street clothes and still second in the Big East, big testament to our depth.

2. Freshman Wilson has made more impact this season thus far than Trend ever had. Jones and Juan aren't far behind.

wadesworld wins.

[ringout]

+1

I think this captures it well.  Crean's best years are better than Buzz's best years recruiting, but Crean's bad years are much worse than Buzz's worst years.

No one can argue that Crean's cream of the crop players were some of the best in MU history, but we weren't very deep and Buzz has a huge edge there.

Not exactly where I was going, but I would expect HoopaChic to twist my words.

It may be that Crean's best year (3 Amigos?) is better, but Buzz rosters are stronger (top player to the end of the bench) and more consistent.  This is the reason his teams perform better.

[wadesworld]

Not exactly where I was going, but I would expect HoopaChic to twist my words.

It may be that Crean's best year (3 Amigos?) is better, but Buzz rosters are stronger (top player to the end of the bench) and more consistent.  This is the reason his teams perform better.

I don't think he meant to knock Buzz or praise Crean.  I agree 100% with what he said.  Up to now, Crean's best recruiting class was better than Buzz's best recruiting class.  Crean's best year was also better than Buzz's best year (a Final Four compared to a Sweet Sixteen).  Buzz is being more consistent and seems to be moving the program towards a consistent top 15-20 program, which Crean never did.  The consistency is there with Buzz, but the BIG TIME results haven't been yet.

[MUMac]

Not exactly where I was going, but I would expect HoopaChic to twist my words.

It may be that Crean's best year (3 Amigos?) is better, but Buzz rosters are stronger (top player to the end of the bench) and more consistent.  This is the reason his teams perform better.

I'm confused.  I thought hoopaloop shared similar thoughts in nearly all regards to chico's.  Wasn't it chico's that said you cannot judge a coach until after 5 years of results?  We have only 3 full years to go on. 

The comparisons being used are a 10 year run to a 3 year run.  If you used three years as a comparative barometer, Buzz would be favorably compared to Crean in both recruiting classes and best year.

[Canadian Dimes]

This might be one of the saddest posts I have read in a long time because it illustrates just how much hatred some people have.  Not the Marquette University I remember.

You state in your first sentence that "Crean having any responsibility for "leading" Mu into the Big East is probably the stupidest thing" you have heard.

Any responsibility, as in he had absolutely zero impact at all.  I don't think there is a reasonable personable, even his most ardent haters (other than you) that would say this.  Look at the timing of events.

According to this article, the Big East had not yet contacted Marquette in September of 2003.  http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=BS8jAAAAIBAJ&sjid=M0UEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6590,3717250&dq=marquette+university+invited+to+big+east&hl=en

Now think about the timing, it was only 6 months earlier that Tom Crean and his Marquette basketball team made the Final Four and that fresh event was not in the minds of the Big East on expansion of teams would suggest that the Big East conference was in a cave when MU was making major college basketball news under their young coach.

Now, let's take a step back even further.  Do I believe that the Big East hadn't actually contacted MU by September of 2003?  Doubtful.  The first rumors started in April of that year, the same month Tom Crean's Marquette basketball team made the Final Four after knocking off #1 Kentucky.

Around this same time it was widely rumored that Crean was a leading candidate at Pitt when Howland took the UCLA job.  Crean ended up staying and it was reported later that these were the initial discussions of Marquette coming to the Big East.

No doubt many people, athletes, administrators paved the way to get to the Big East.  MU didn't arrive on the scene in 2003, but MU's Final Four appearance in 2003 in April when these discussions started and 6 months prior to an invitation being presented to the university cannot be denied.  Timing is sometimes everything.  He got us Wade, he was the coach for the Final Four run, he was the coach when we got invited to the Big East 6 months later.  He isn't the only reason we got to the Big East, but the team's accomplishments during that window of time made it a slam dunk.  To suggest he had no responsibility makes no sense at all.

That most might be dumber than ur last....and why would the Big east contact MU prior to 2003?   That is as intelligent as saying the Big 12 had not contacted West virginia pror to 2008!??   really really dumb.

Also others using the deapul analogy is dead on!!  I typically use it as well but did not in this case because people always stae, "well depaul go in because of the chicago media market"  . 

Crean deserves as much credit for Mu being invited as Dave Leitao deserves for Depaul getting invited.  I will say it again.  If Crean and DWade never happened MU is still invited. period.

Just becuase u and chico agree does not mean you are not dead wrong, dead wrong.

you now may resume your love for Tom Crean and giving him credit for every thing good in the world.