5-4

[Lennys Tap]

You are not the first to confidently state that MU is better than SDSU.

Based on ... what?

I'm not saying we're better, mind you, but an argument could be made that we lost what was a toss up game with 2 minutes left and a) it was essentially a home game for SD State and b) our number 1 (or 1A) offensive player was rendered useless (or a distinct negative) due to the flu.

[esotericmindguy]

Based on what?

Based on my opinion after watching the game. 15 turnovers, 5 assists, 16-26 FTs, 1-11 behind the arc....horrible numbers.

Again, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a projected conference champion to win tough games at home, road, or neutral. You can whine all you want about people being upset, but it's not entirely unwarranted. If players/coaches want lower expectations go to Ball St. Not sure how you can argue the point that it's been a disappointing start to the season.

[NavinRJohnson]

Based on my opinion after watching the game. 15 turnovers, 5 assists, 16-26 FTs, 1-11 behind the arc....horrible numbers.

Again, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a projected conference champion to win tough games at home, road, or neutral. You can whine all you want about people being upset, but it's not entirely unwarranted. If players/coaches want lower expectations go to Ball St. Not sure how you can argue the point that it's been a disappointing start to the season.

So marquette puts up bad numbers, and that leads you to believe they are the better team. Got it.

[GGGG]

Based on my opinion after watching the game. 15 turnovers, 5 assists, 16-26 FTs, 1-11 behind the arc....horrible numbers.

Again, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a projected conference champion to win tough games at home, road, or neutral. You can whine all you want about people being upset, but it's not entirely unwarranted. If players/coaches want lower expectations go to Ball St. Not sure how you can argue the point that it's been a disappointing start to the season.

Perhaps MU was simply overrated. 

[MU82]

Based on my opinion after watching the game. 15 turnovers, 5 assists, 16-26 FTs, 1-11 behind the arc....horrible numbers.

Again, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a projected conference champion to win tough games at home, road, or neutral. You can whine all you want about people being upset, but it's not entirely unwarranted. If players/coaches want lower expectations go to Ball St. Not sure how you can argue the point that it's been a disappointing start to the season.

I didn't say I wanted lowered expectations. I just wanted some proof that MU is better than SDSU, as so many have claimed with a figurative shrug of the shoulders, as if it should be accepted without a second thought.

Still waiting for the proof. Waiting for proof of WMDs in Iraq, too.

[MUSF]

Have a hard time believing UW is #4.  Granted they are 10-0 but only 1 ranked win.  I just feel like so many teams ranked in the top 15 would destroy them.

No way. Wisconsin is good, really good. I think it is time that we start accepting this.

I don't think there is a team in the country that would "destroy" Wisconsin, if Wisconsin is healthy and plays well. Any team can have an off night, but best against best; UW would hold their own against anyone.

[MUSF]

I wonder how many of the MU fans that seem to think our 5-4 record is terrible, are the same fans that complained when we didn't play enough good teams prior to the conference schedule.

Would we be better off if we substituted buy games for ASU and SDSU, but still lost to UW and OSU? We would probably be top 25 going into conference play, but we might not be as prepared for conference play.

[tower912]

The teams MU has lost to are (or were at a recent point) 33-3.   And it wasn't so long ago that people were whining about the OOC schedule that MU played under Crean, that MU never played anybody any good and that filling up on cupcakes was not helping MU get ready for the conference season.

[Spotcheck Billy]

Patrick Ewing claimed 763,210 times

+1

[ChicosBailBonds]

Perhaps MU was simply overrated. 

+1

Occam's Razor

[NavinRJohnson]

Just taking a look at some schedules, and it sure is starting to look like both UW-Madison and OSU could end up as a 1 or 2 seed in the tournament. Obviously, its a long season, and a lot could happen, but I just don't see many losses on their schedules. UW-Madison conference road schedule in particular is a joke and could give them an advantage. They only play MSU and OSU once each, both at home. That is huge.

[Spotcheck Billy]

Just taking a look at some schedules, and it sure is starting to look like both UW-Madison and OSU could end up as a 1 or 2 seed in the tournament. Obviously, its a long season, and a lot could happen, but I just don't see many losses on their schedules. UW-Madison conference road schedule in particular is a joke and could give them an advantage. They only play MSU and OSU once each, both at home. That is huge.

good point if both teams stay healthy - was it in 2007 that the badgers were ranked #1 and then Butch broke his arm?

[mu03eng]

The teams MU has lost to are (or were at a recent point) 33-3.   And it wasn't so long ago that people were whining about the OOC schedule that MU played under Crean, that MU never played anybody any good and that filling up on cupcakes was not helping MU get ready for the conference season.

Seems relevant information on MU the last 5 years

             SOS        Rank       RPI     Rank    Record
2013:    .5656         61         .558     85          5-4
2012:    .4981         156       .4890   187        9-4
2011:    .5022         198        .5684   64         9-3
2010:    .4885         149        .5825   50        11-2
2009:    .5031         132        .5974   35       10-1

[NavinRJohnson]

Seems relevant information on MU the last 5 years

             SOS        Rank       RPI     Rank    Record
2013:    .5656         61         .558     85          5-4
2012:    .4981         156       .4890   187        9-4
2011:    .5022         198        .5684   64         9-3
2010:    .4885         149        .5825   50        11-2
2009:    .5031         132        .5974   35       10-1

It isn't though, since all the cupcakes aren't in for this year yet. Probably going to look a lot like last year when its all said and done.

[MaymonsPops]

How many RPI top 50 wins would you say it would take to get Marquette into the tournament? 3 or 4 maybe with a 10+ loss team? So far they are 0-4 against teams projected to be there at the end of the year and have only ~8 such games likely remaining (lobos, nova 2x, creighton 2x, gtown 2x, big east tourney(?)). I'm not saying the sky is falling, but if Marquette drops the game to New Mexico next Saturday, Marquette would certainly be in less than an ideal position heading into a weaker conference slate than usual.

[mu03eng]

It isn't though, since all the cupcakes aren't in for this year yet. Probably going to look a lot like last year when its all said and done.

We have 3 cupcakes and New Mexico left.  Assuming we win, I bet the cupcakes balance New Mexico on SOS and obviously our RPI goes up(though I don't know if a New Mexico win counts as a road win in RPI).

I bet SOS finishes around .53 and RPI(with wins) finishes around a .54

[Coleman]

If we win out the OOC (obviously not a guaranteed, NM will be very very very tough, but let's just say IF)....we will be 9-4 heading into league play.

All things considered, that's not the end of the world.

[ChicosBailBonds]

We have 3 cupcakes and New Mexico left.  Assuming we win, I bet the cupcakes balance New Mexico on SOS and obviously our RPI goes up(though I don't know if a New Mexico win counts as a road win in RPI).

I bet SOS finishes around .53 and RPI(with wins) finishes around a .54

Our expected out of conference SOS is 75

http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/Marquette.html

[NotAnAlum]

The teams MU has lost to are (or were at a recent point) 33-3.   And it wasn't so long ago that people were whining about the OOC schedule that MU played under Crean, that MU never played anybody any good and that filling up on cupcakes was not helping MU get ready for the conference season.

The thing that furstrates me is that this schedule was probably set when Buzz thought his returning backcourt would be anchored by Vander as a Senior.  Buzz would not have opted for a tough schedule particularly as front loaded as this one if he knew he would have a basically untested backcourt.  Put Vander on this team and they are probably 8-1 maybe even 9-0.  

[willie warrior]

How many RPI top 50 wins would you say it would take to get Marquette into the tournament? 3 or 4 maybe with a 10+ loss team? So far they are 0-4 against teams projected to be there at the end of the year and have only ~8 such games likely remaining (lobos, nova 2x, creighton 2x, gtown 2x, big east tourney(?)). I'm not saying the sky is falling, but if Marquette drops the game to New Mexico next Saturday, Marquette would certainly be in less than an ideal position heading into a weaker conference slate than usual.

If MU loses to New Mexico, and beats the cupcakes, they will need to at least win regular season BEast with 12-6 or better to make the Dance. 20-11 will be bubble. That is tall order the way we are playing now.

[raul]

Granted MU has played a strong schedule but when was the last time MU started with a worse record? 5 losses by Jan. 1 is possible. We are not used to this.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Granted MU has played a strong schedule but when was the last time MU started with a worse record? 5 losses by Jan. 1 is possible. We are not used to this.

We were 7-3 last year (could have been 7-4 if we played OSU) with a much worse loss (UWGB) but a better win (an unranked Bucky)

Three years ago we had four non-con losses and no wins even remotely close to quality (UWM? UWGB? Bucknell?)

[The Equalizer]

The teams MU has lost to are (or were at a recent point) 33-3.   And it wasn't so long ago that people were whining about the OOC schedule that MU played under Crean, that MU never played anybody any good and that filling up on cupcakes was not helping MU get ready for the conference season.

Just so you don't accuse me of being insufficeintly positive about Buzz, let's just use his figures:

2009: 5th 
2010: Tie for 5th
2011: 9th
2012: 2nd
2013: Tie for 1st.

I don't think there was much difference in strength of non-conference schedule between 2011 and 2013.  2011 we played Duke, Gonzaga, Vanderbilt and Wiscsonsin in non-conference and wound up with the worst record we had since joining the Big East. 2013 we played Butler, Florida and Wisconsin and had the best finish. 

Not a lot of difference in non-coference schedule.  Big difference in conference standing.

I suspect that conference standing has more to do with a) our players and b) the opposition than non-conference scheduleing. 

Despite four very challenging NCAA-calibre teams in 2011, we still finished in a tie for 9th.  Despite only two tournament worthy teams in 2012, we finsished 2nd. 

I'm not making any statment about Buzz or Crean or comparing the two--I'm merely questioning the premise that the type of teams played in non-conference has any bearing on how you play in conference. 

[Lighthouse 84]

5-4....I thought that was what happened when Derrick was on the floor....

[patso]

This team makes the NCAA probably  a # 9. Enjoy basketball or it can produce anxiety. I like Marquette even in a bad year because there is always some moments of wonder.