Some Thoughts On MU Recruiting

[Archies Bat]

whew, people overthink way too much on here

It took you 35 posts to figure that out?

[NersEllenson]

As I just said in another comment, I loves me some Buzz. And having said that ...

Of course we could do better post-Buzz. I mean, what if the next coach we hire -- whether that's next spring or 15 springs from now -- is as good as or better than Buzz? It's not impossible. Seven years ago, who around these parts even knew who Buzz Williams was? How many folks were certain he'd be as good as or better than Crean?

There are always plenty of good coaches out there. Our administration found three in O'Neill, Crean and Buzz, and also whiffed a few times. The trick is to find the next Buzz and avoid the next Dukiet!

To say that's impossible and ludicrous is shortsighted.

That's a "what if" scenario I really hope we don't have to find out.  Let's face it...at the time of the Buzz hire, MU was rebuffed by:  Tony Bennett, Anthony Grant, Keno Davis.  Proven coaches have never been lining up at the door to come coach at MU...never...Crean, KO, and Buzz had 1 year combined of prior head coaching experience before coming to MU.  

I have great MU pride, yet am a realist, and know that we caught lightning in a bottle with Buzz (and Al) previously.  Crean of course was very good too, yet left MU thinking he'd reached his ceiling, and would have an easier, better go of it at IU - which I certainly can't blame him for, nor disagree with him/his rationale.

Of course nothing is impossible, but I'd be happy to wager any sum of $$$ that MU won't get a better coach, recruiter, representative of the university, than Buzz Williams in my lifetime - which hopefully lasts another 40 years.

[Pakuni]

As I just said in another comment, I loves me some Buzz. And having said that ...

Of course we could do better post-Buzz. I mean, what if the next coach we hire -- whether that's next spring or 15 springs from now -- is as good as or better than Buzz? It's not impossible. Seven years ago, who around these parts even knew who Buzz Williams was? How many folks were certain he'd be as good as or better than Crean?

There are always plenty of good coaches out there. Our administration found three in O'Neill, Crean and Buzz, and also whiffed a few times. The trick is to find the next Buzz and avoid the next Dukiet!

To say that's impossible and ludicrous is shortsighted.

Agree. Love Buzz, hope he never chooses to leave MU, but to assert that this is as good as Marquette could ever do is silly.
Buzz has done a terrific job, but I don't think - given the school's commitment to basketball - a similar performance is beyond the reach of some of the other great young coaches out there.

[melissasmooth]

It took you 35 posts to figure that out?

yeah, i'm a little slow

[Pakuni]

That's a "what if" scenario I really hope we don't have to find out.  Let's face it...at the time of the Buzz hire, MU was rebuffed by:  Tony Bennett, Anthony Grant, Keno Davis.  

Actually, people close to the administration have told me Bennett was somewhat interested. Not sure about Grant. I know for certain that MU never was interested in Keno, much less were "rebuffed" by him.
the administration focused on Buzz as their guy pretty quickly, much to the consternation of some around here.

[only a warrior]

yeah, i'm a little slow

may be slow but you are smooth.......

[Lennys Tap]

Agree. Love Buzz, hope he never chooses to leave MU, but to assert that this is as good as Marquette could ever do is silly.
Buzz has done a terrific job, but I don't think - given the school's commitment to basketball - a similar performance is beyond the reach of some of the other great young coaches out there.

I said:Good, yes. As good, unlikely.

You say that if we're lucky enough to locate and sign one of the great young coaches out there that a similar performance isn't beyond our reach.

Isn't that longhand for unlikely?

[GOO]

Actually, people close to the administration have told me Bennett was somewhat interested. Not sure about Grant. I know for certain that MU never was interested in Keno, much less were "rebuffed" by him.
the administration focused on Buzz as their guy pretty quickly, much to the consternation of some around here.

Kind of goes along with what I heard on Bennett... he would have been interested, but would have had to be pursued.  Not just a yes, I'm interested type of deal.  More of a not really interested in moving, I like it where I'm at... but maybe, tell me more... and then when it was clear MU was moving in a different direction, feelers were put out more intensely from his side towards MU. 

Glad we didn't spend a bunch of time going after him, as Buzz was the answer and we are lucky that those in power were willing to stick their necks out and put their reputations (and jobs for some) on the line taking a chance on an unproven commodity in Buzz.  And they did it quickly.

[Lennys Tap]

Suck it up boys, it's all downhill from here.

Why? Last I looked, Buzz is still our coach and we're still trending higher. He leaves,though, the chances that the trend stalls or recedes is likely. That's not doom and gloom, just common sense. Guys like Buzz don't grow on trees. If they did MU would never had seen the likes of Hank, Rick, Dukiet, KO, Deane, and TC between Al and Buzz nor all the guys that came before Al. Home runs are always possible but they're also rare.

[boyonthedock]

If MU keeps getting 3 seeds or better, we'll be fine. Those top 12 teams win, like, all of the championships.

[Lennys Tap]

So last year was Marquette's ceiling in terms of accomplishments?

Not necessarily. I wouldn't sell Buzz short.

[Pakuni]

I said:Good, yes. As good, unlikely.

You say that if we're lucky enough to locate and sign one of the great young coaches out there that a similar performance isn't beyond our reach.

Isn't that longhand for unlikely?

Well, for starters I wasn't responding to you, but agreeing with the response to Ners' post stating "To think MU could (be?) better post Buzz is the most ludicrous thing I've read on here...perhaps ever."

That said, three of the last four times MU went out to hire a coach, they've landed a good young one. We can get into another pointless discussion over who's been better but I'm not trolling for a fight (unlike some), and it's kind of tough to objectively determine, IMO, because they all started at different points with different circumstances. But I think we can  agree that O'Neill, Crean and Buzz all found success at MU.

The argument that Buzz is doing something nearly impossible or unheard of - i.e. winning at a school with a tradition of success, top-notch facilities, solid conference affiliation, great fan support and a massive financial investment in basketball - is a stupid one. It would be more surprising to see a coach fail under those circumstances than succeed.

[Newsdreams]

+1,000 (+10,000, no longer available)

I think +10,000 should be available but only when bigs are being discussed 

[brewcity77]

Okay, while I agree with the bulk of what's been said here, and agree with tower's assessment that a lineup without bigs could contend for a NC (considering what Buzz has done with post players in the 6'4" - 6'7" range), I do get where the critics are coming from.

To the point that Marquette will never be a blue blood...maybe true, maybe not, but what is unquestionably true is that 35-40 years ago, Marquette was a blue blood. We were there with UCLA, UNC, Kentucky, and the other great programs of the day. We went to Final Fours, won major tournaments (yes, the NIT was major way back when), and brought in recruiting classes that were the envy of 99% of the college basketball world.

While it's easy to complain about willie's constant diatribe, the comparative world that Al created is nearly impossible to live up to, and until Buzz gets us to the level of being one of the true "It" programs, some people will be disappointed. I do believe it is attainable. I feel this year's team, given a good draw and consistently smart PG play (not necessarily outstanding, just smart) could go to the Final Four. And as guys like Taylor, DuWil, JJJ, Burton, Cohen, Harris, and Noskowiak develop, the injection of one or two true blue-blood players (Stone and Matthews) or one Wade-like diamond in the rough (maybe Shayok or Pierce) could give us enough talent that Buzz could guide Marquette to a national title.

But for people who live and breathe 1977 and the rest of the Al era, I understand their desire to return to that level. It's been a long 36 years. Hell, I was in Minneapolis when D-Wade had his triple double, and that seems like forever ago now. When you experience great success, you yearn to return to it, and when you get so close you can touch it, you want it even more (especially when the d-bag Orange are the ones that knock you out).

I really think if Buzz stays, we can get there. Maybe we won't recruit like Kentucky, Kansas, or UCLA, but they have advantages this administration isn't willing to offer. But with Buzz as the coach and regular top-15 classes, one or two of the right players buying in could make all the difference.

Also, Lenny was only saying that last year would be as good as it gets IF Buzz left. I don't think in any way he was looking at the Elite 8 as Buzz's ceiling. Though I think depending on the circumstance, Buzz (whom I love and never want to leave) might be more replaceable than most people think.

[GGGG]

Buzz would be very hard to replace....but no one is irreplaceable. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Okay, while I agree with the bulk of what's been said here, and agree with tower's assessment that a lineup without bigs could contend for a NC (considering what Buzz has done with post players in the 6'4" - 6'7" range), I do get where the critics are coming from.

To the point that Marquette will never be a blue blood...maybe true, maybe not, but what is unquestionably true is that 35-40 years ago, Marquette was a blue blood. We were there with UCLA, UNC, Kentucky, and the other great programs of the day. We went to Final Fours, won major tournaments (yes, the NIT was major way back when), and brought in recruiting classes that were the envy of 99% of the college basketball world.

While it's easy to complain about willie's constant diatribe, the comparative world that Al created is nearly impossible to live up to, and until Buzz gets us to the level of being one of the true "It" programs, some people will be disappointed. I do believe it is attain't I dimble. I feel this year's team, given a good draw and consistently smart PG play (not necessarily outstanding, just smart) could go to the Final Four. And as guys like Taylor, DuWil, JJJ, Burton, Cohen, Harris, and Noskowiak develop, the injection of one or two true blue-blood players (Stone and Matthews) or one Wade-like diamond in the rough (maybe Shayok or Pierce) could give us enough talent that Buzz could guide Marquette to a national title.

But for people who live and breathe 1977 and the rest of the Al era, I understand their desire to return to that level. It's been a long 36 years. Hell, I was in Minneapolis when D-Wade had his triple double, and that seems like forever ago now. When you experience great success, you yearn to return to it, and when you get so close you can touch it, you want it even more (especially when the d-bag Orange are the ones that knock you out).

I really think if Buzz stays, we can get there. Maybe we won't recruit like Kentucky, Kansas, or UCLA, but they have advantages this administration isn't willing to offer. But with Buzz as the coach and regular top-15 classes, one or two of the right players buying in could make all the difference.

Also, Lenny was only saying that last year would be as good as it gets IF Buzz left. I don't think in any way he was looking at the Elite 8 as Buzz's ceiling. Though I think depending on the circumstance, Buzz (whom I love and never want to leave) might be more replaceable than most people think.

+100

I grew up on stories of Al and the 1970s. In my lifetime, 2003 is the closest I have ever seen us get to a national championship. To myself and other young alumni, it seems like we are in our prime but still have higher aspirations for future. We know how good we were in the 1970s, but we can't really understand how good we were with Al. If that makes any sense

[Lennys Tap]

Well, for starters I wasn't responding to you, but agreeing with the response to Ners' post stating "To think MU could (be?) better post Buzz is the most ludicrous thing I've read on here...perhaps ever."

That said, three of the last four times MU went out to hire a coach, they've landed a good young one. We can get into another pointless discussion over who's been better but I'm not trolling for a fight (unlike some), and it's kind of tough to objectively determine, IMO, because they all started at different points with different circumstances. But I think we can  agree that O'Neill, Crean and Buzz all found success at MU.

The argument that Buzz is doing something nearly impossible or unheard of - i.e. winning at a school with a tradition of success, top-notch facilities, solid conference affiliation, great fan support and a massive financial investment in basketball - is a stupid one. It would be more surprising to see a coach fail under those circumstances than succeed.

I'm not looking for a fight. It just seemed contradictory to me that you agree with MU82, who said that "of course we could do better post Buzz" but then wrote that if all goes right in a post Buzz era a similar performance to his wouldn't be out of reach, which seems to fit more with a maybe we would be as good but all the stars would have to align (unlikely) scenario.

I guess we just disagree in our assessment of Buzz. If he's on a par with a KO or TC, no doubt he can be replaced and MU can reasonably expect the program to improve after he leaves. I think he's much better than that, a one %er like Shaka Smart or Brad Stevens. To me, those types are few and far between. The odds against a program improving when a guy like that leaves are very, very small.

[Dawson Rental]

Post Buzz, we could still be good, if not better.

We could still be good. As good? Unlikely. Better? Nearly impossible.

So last year was Marquette's ceiling in terms of accomplishments?

Golden Avalanche,
You evidently don't realize that your question presupposes that last year was Buzz's last year.  News flash, he's still here.

[Pakuni]

I guess we just disagree in our assessment of Buzz. If he's on a par with a KO or TC, no doubt he can be replaced and MU can reasonably expect the program to improve after he leaves. I think he's much better than that, a one %er like Shaka Smart or Brad Stevens. To me, those types are few and far between. The odds against a program improving when a guy like that leaves are very, very small.

I don't think we disagree at all in our assessment of Buzz. We both think he's done a terrific job and would be tough for MU to replace.
I think we disagree with our assessment of Marquette.
You seem to think MU's an otherwise decent program that caught lightning in a bottle with Buzz and shouldn't (couldn't?) hope to replicate his success with another coach should he leave.
I think MU's more of a Xavier-type program, perennially good with the ability to make trips to the Sweet 16s and Elite 8s under different coaches.

Bottom line: I don't want Buzz to leave. It would suck. But if he does, Marquette will survive and, if they make the right hire, continue to have a successful basketball program.

[Dawson Rental]

I don't think we disagree at all in our assessment of Buzz. We both think he's done a terrific job and would be tough for MU to replace.
I think we disagree with our assessment of Marquette.
You think MU's an otherwise decent program that caught lightning in a bottle with Buzz and shouldn't (couldn't?) hope to replicate his success with another coach should he leave.
I think MU's more of a Xavier-type program, perennially good with the ability to make trips to the Sweet 16s and Elite 8s under different coaches.

Bottom line: I don't want Buzz to leave. It would suck. But if he does, Marquette will survive and, if they make the right hire, continue to have a successful basketball program.

Here's where I (and maybe Lenny, too) come out.  If Buzz moves on, Marquette will be fine, but not quite as good as it would have been had Buzz stayed.  Personally, I think that the duplicating Crean's performance would be right around the upper limit for the next hire.

[NersEllenson]

I don't think we disagree at all in our assessment of Buzz. We both think he's done a terrific job and would be tough for MU to replace.
I think we disagree with our assessment of Marquette.
You think MU's an otherwise decent program that caught lightning in a bottle with Buzz and shouldn't (couldn't?) hope to replicate his success with another coach should he leave.
I think MU's more of a Xavier-type program, perennially good with the ability to make trips to the Sweet 16s and Elite 8s under different coaches.

Bottom line: I don't want Buzz to leave. It would suck. But if he does, Marquette will survive and, if they make the right hire, continue to have a successful basketball program.

Generally agree with a lot of your takes Pakuni - yet disagree with your feelings on a "program."  A program is simply an extension of the Head Coach - it has virtually nothing to do with the university...great facilities, an NBA arena and an administration that invests heavily on athletics...is still not formula for success.  Lots of schools have all the above yet don't perform.

Xavier was GREAT under Sean Miller...and guess what, since Sean Miller's gone to Arizona - Arizona once again has become really good.  Arizona was great under Lute Olson, yet faltered after he left....Miller comes in..and once again they are bordering elite.  Xavier, on the other hand, has been trending downward since Miller left - Mack's recruits haven't been to the level of Miller.  Xavier and Arizona are still the same "program" with regard to facilities, admin commitment - yet why the drop in performance at Xavier once Miller left and Arizona once Lute Olson?  Just  don't see Xavier being a perennially good program capable of Sweet 16 and Elite 8's with just anybody as a head coach...takes a special talent.

[brandx]

+100

I grew up on stories of Al and the 1970s. In my lifetime, 2003 is the closest I have ever seen us get to a national championship. To myself and other young alumni, it seems like we are in our prime but still have higher aspirations for future. We know how good we were in the 1970s, but we can't really understand how good we were with Al. If that makes any sense

I grew up during the Al era and many of my favorite all-time MU players are from back then (Tatum, Ellis, Chones, Walton, etc.). But the landscape was completely different back then.

1. Guys stayed 4 years. Al's system was senior based. He wanted his seniors to be the stars. Other guys had to fill their role. The only exceptions were the true superstars like Butch Lee who was a junior in 1977) - although Al considered Bo Ellis, a senior, as the team leader. As a sophomore. Lee was just 4th on the team in minutes played He also always had role players. Bill Neary played more minutes at forward than either Bernard Toone or Ulice Payne in '77 despite averaging less than 2 points and 3 rebounds a game.

2. No conference affiliation. In 1977 when we won it all, we played ONE team that was ranked in the top 10 during the regular season. Quite a difference from the years in the Big East. I really think those team's records would have been not nearly as good with a schedule like we play now.

3. While we look back fondly on the old players, there were probably only 3 that were thought of as good players in the NBA - Chones, Lucas, and Thompson.

While things have changed greatly, Buzz' accomplishments deserve to be ranked even with Al's - the one big difference being the National championship. We forget that Al's teams won more than 2 games in the NCAA tournament only twice in his career

[MUMountin]

Generally agree with a lot of your takes Pakuni - yet disagree with your feelings on a "program."  A program is simply an extension of the Head Coach - it has virtually nothing to do with the university...great facilities, an NBA arena and an administration that invests heavily on athletics...is still not formula for success.  Lots of schools have all the above yet don't perform.

Xavier was GREAT under Sean Miller...and guess what, since Sean Miller's gone to Arizona - Arizona once again has become really good.  Arizona was great under Lute Olson, yet faltered after he left....Miller comes in..and once again they are bordering elite.  Xavier, on the other hand, has been trending downward since Miller left - Mack's recruits haven't been to the level of Miller.  Xavier and Arizona are still the same "program" with regard to facilities, admin commitment - yet why the drop in performance at Xavier once Miller left and Arizona once Lute Olson?  Just  don't see Xavier being a perennially good program capable of Sweet 16 and Elite 8's with just anybody as a head coach...takes a special talent.

I think this is certainly true--we've seen plenty of examples in the last decade of blue blood programs that have faltered under the wrong coach--despite great facilities, support, etc. 

However, I think the important point is that those aspects of the program can be important aspect for attracting (and keeping) the right coach(es).  Marquette has done a lot in the last decade of improving (or rehabilitating) its status as a legit basketball program, which should help it to weather the storm if Buzz ever leaves--hopefully it gives us some sort of leg up on being able to attract the next new coaching star--whether someone that already found success somewhere else or one that is ready to burst onto the scene. 

This doesn't mean that MU will necessarily make the "right" choice (there will always be coaches that seem to have potential that might not work out), but at least we'll hopefully have the chance to pursue someone we are interested in--much like recruiting.

[tower912]

I can't think of a current coach that would come to MU that I would prefer to Buzz.      And I suspect that the succession plan is in place. 

[Lennys Tap]

+100

I grew up on stories of Al and the 1970s. In my lifetime, 2003 is the closest I have ever seen us get to a national championship. To myself and other young alumni, it seems like we are in our prime but still have higher aspirations for future. We know how good we were in the 1970s, but we can't really understand how good we were with Al. If that makes any sense

We were a top 5 program (not team, program) under Al. The money and the competition are much greater today, making a return to that status nearly impossible IMO. Kentucky, Kansas, Duke, UNC and UCLA would be very difficult to dislodge. Off the top of my head, Michigan St.,Syracuse, Louisville, Indiana and Arizona are probably 6-10. Right now we're in that next group that includes Ohio St, Michigan, Georgetown, UConn, Florida, Nova and others. Top 20, closing in on the top 15. As hard as it was to go from maybe 60 to 30 under TC it's even harder to go from 30 to 15. A move into the bottom of the top 10 is probably our ceiling even with a top young coach like Buzz - lose him and expectations, for me anyway, slide a little.