The reality as I see it...

[Harrison]

By entering the Big East the challenge has gotten significantly more difficult for Marquette.  A top 1/2 finish in the Big East is far more difficult than was a top half finish, in the old C-USA.  Our talent level and depth has gotten better over the last few years but is that enough going forward?  People continue to be happy that our depth is better but wins and conference finishes are typical more predicated on difference makers not depth.  In 2003 we only had 10 guys on the roster, and a couple who rarely ever played.
My point is in 2001, Tom Crean signed an excellent class with 4 top 100 kids, he followed that up with a top 50 the next year in Diener and then Novak a top 50 too.  That core along with Jackson took MU to a conference title and two great seasons culminating with a FF appearance.  Then as that original core of 4 transferred, left early etc, the talent level dwindled and could not be sustained with the role players Crean was signing.
 We entered two dark seasons that were ear marked by being out talented most nights even by lesser programs, many blow out losses and no real athletic difference makers that could score the basketball or be shut down defenders.   
Then two years later Crean signed 3 difference makers in one class all basically top 75 recruits and off we went again earning a top 4 Big East finish and an NCAA appearnace led by 3 Freshaman and a hold over top 40 recruit in Novak.  These 3 will again lead us this year and two of them at least and probably all three next year too. MU is in good hands for 2008 and 2009. 
My concern is though history will repeat itself.  Recruiting is the lifeblood of any program.  I am the first one to admit that recent recruits such as Christopherson, Cubillan and Acker are far better than Howard, Bell, and Townsend, but that is comparing apples to oranges.  They better be, this aint C-USA.  What concerns me is the teams we need to compete with at the top of the BE are recruiting our socks off.  Georgetown, Syracuse, Villanova, and Louisville are signing 4 and 5 star recruits by the bushel.  Meanwhile we sign "better" players ,  but this will be 3 classes in a row that we have not signed a real difference maker.  Now I beleive that Mbakwe by all acoounts and from what i have seen of Lazar will be fine fine players.  But make no mistake we are where we are this year and next because of our 3 difference makers.  We have not signed one in 3 years.  In 2010 can our solid players... say a lineup of Mbakwe, Lazar, Williams, Acker and Cubi really expect to compete with the lineups of the aforemntioned schools that will consist of multiple McDonalds' AA's and be complemented by 4 star recruits such as Mookie Jones etc. etc. ? 
I hate to say it but I think MU is in for some rough sledding in two years with the type of players MU is signing.  All solid players in their own right but the lack of difference makers, those elite players, will not make for a pretty sight.  See depaul or providence last year...good collection of players and a respectable team but cant get it done against the top 1/3 of the conference.  Unfortunately we have swung and missed on every 4 and 5 star target this year...quite concerning. 

[downtown85]

Good post.  We need two top 100 type recruits and perhaps 1 project.  Every year, year in and year out if we want to compete in the upper echelon of the BE.  Otherwise we will be like Rutgers, SJ, Seaton Hall or the like. 

I had high hopes for 2008.  Now it looks like another year with 1 top-100 recruit and perhaps a couple of projects. 

Frustrating.

[bma725]

My point is in 2001, Tom Crean signed an excellent class with 4 top 100 kids, he followed that up with a top 50 the next year in Diener and then Novak a top 50 too.  That core along with Jackson took MU to a conference title and two great seasons culminating with a FF appearance.  Then as that original core of 4 transferred, left early etc, the talent level dwindled and could not be sustained with the role players Crean was signing.
 

WTF are you smoking, 4 top 100 kids?  There was 1 concensus, Merritt.  Despite what Harv and Roy thought of him Wade was a concensus top 100, Hoopscoop for example had him somewhere between 200-300.  Exactly one ranking service had Blankson as top 100, and they had him at #100, some didn't see him as being among the top 300 players in the country.  Only one ranking had Sanders in the top 100, and while they did think he was top 40, they were the outlier.

If you're going to count guys as top 100 when they get it in one ranking, then Nick Williams is a 4 star top 40 guy.

[4thAndState]

Thanks, Harrison. I think you've articulated the situation/reality quite well. We are now running with the big (east) dogs and we are, for now, staying ahead of most in the pack because of the 3 amigos and some fine complimentary players. Once the big 3 are gone . . . well, you've said it quite well. This season especially looks very promising, next should be okay but not as good, and beyond that it does not look nearly as competitive in the conference, let alone as a national player. At least for the moment. I'm still numb and frustrated over yesterday's let down; may be that's clouding my thinking but do need to land more of the so-called elite players now. That immediate need seems less likely to be filled.  

[Harrison]

Well BMA great job of absolutely missing the point.  Oh, and since i am working out of the house I grabbed my MU media guide for 2001     Now you are correct ODB was only mentioned by one service as Top 100, my mistake.  But you are dead wrong on Wade and Sanders.  Bob Gibbons had Wade rated #55, Fox sports has him at #48.   Recruiting USA had Sanders rated #22 and the 4th highest rated PF, Hoop Scoop had him rated #7 in the post graduate rankings, Midwest Hoops had him the #24 PF in the nation if you corealate that to Scout etc. that is about Top 100.  So not only did you miss the point but you are dead wrong.  To appease you, i will restate to "3 top 100's". 
Your point? 

[bma725]

Well BMA great job of absolutely missing the point.  Oh, and since i am working out of the house I grabbed my MU media guide for 2001     Now you are correct ODB was only mentioned by one service as Top 100, my mistake.  But you are dead wrong on Wade and Sanders.  Bob Gibbons had Wade rated #55, Fox sports has him at #48.   Recruiting USA had Sanders rated #22 and the 4th highest rated PF, Hoop Scoop had him rated #7 in the post graduate rankings, Midwest Hoops had him the #24 PF in the nation if you corealate that to Scout etc. that is about Top 100.  So not only did you miss the point but you are dead wrong.  To appease you, i will restate to "3 top 100's". 
Your point? 

yes and Scout and Rivals didn't have either one of those guys in the top 100, and HoopScoop had Wade as a 4 star player which for them means he ranks between 100-200.  ODB was 100 in one rankings and according to Hoopscoop he was a 2 star player which puts him between 300-1000. 

The point is rankings are a crapshoot and just going by them to evaluate a class is a terrible idea.  There's no way of knowing who is right without actually watching them play.  It turned out that everyone had Wade rated too low, but they also had Sanders rated far too high.   The same kind of thing is happening with Nick Williams, where the rankings diverge greatly.  ESPN/Gibbons has him as the 35th best player in the class, Scout has him as the 33rd best Shooting Guard in the class which puts him around 165, Rivals has him as 149, HoopScoop had him at #52.   How do you know who is right without actually watching him play?

Large numbers of top 100 guys never pan out, and just basing recruiting on rankings is a terribly stupid idea.

[tonyreeder]

you have a helluva lot better chance of succeeding if you continue to bring in Top 100 players than those ranked lower.

[Pakuni]

Large numbers of top 100 guys never pan out, and just basing recruiting on rankings is a terribly stupid idea.

Correct you are. Rankings are fun to talk about, and a fair guide for discussing the players MU is recruiting (the vast majority of whom none of us has seen), but they are not a completely accurate measure of the college prospects of an individual player or entire class.

Example ... the highest-ranked player of the Tom Crean era at Marquette? Dameon Mason.

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

You guys are right. We shouldn't even care about highly ranked recruits. Just get guys in here who can ride a bike in a hyperbolic chamber and shed tackling dummies in practice.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

You guys are right. We shouldn't even care about highly ranked recruits. Just get guys in here who can ride a bike in a hyperbolic chamber and shed tackling dummies in practice.

I was counting down the minutes until you would make a snide remark about the bicycle thing.

I can now sleep better tonight.

[downtown85]

Large numbers of top 100 guys never pan out, and just basing recruiting on rankings is a terribly stupid idea.

Correct you are. Rankings are fun to talk about, and a fair guide for discussing the players MU is recruiting (the vast majority of whom none of us has seen), but they are not a completely accurate measure of the college prospects of an individual player or entire class.

Example ... the highest-ranked player of the Tom Crean era at Marquette? Dameon Mason.

Don't know what you are talking about.  DM was ranked 71st by the final RSCI ranking his senior year.  All 3 Amigos were ranked higher their senior year.

see the link:

http://home.nc.rr.com/rsci/RSCI_100_PostSeason_2003.htm

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

You guys are right. We shouldn't even care about highly ranked recruits. Just get guys in here who can ride a bike in a hyperbolic chamber and shed tackling dummies in practice.

I was counting down the minutes until you would make a snide remark about the bicycle thing.

I can now sleep better tonight.

I don't care about the bicycle chamber. I just think it's great that Crean was so impressed with its cost that he quoted the reporter the exact amount ($41,700) that we paid for it.

I'm curious 2002mualum...do you like guys who go around telling people how much they spend for things? They're a definite "type."

Crean is that type.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

You guys are right. We shouldn't even care about highly ranked recruits. Just get guys in here who can ride a bike in a hyperbolic chamber and shed tackling dummies in practice.

I was counting down the minutes until you would make a snide remark about the bicycle thing.

I can now sleep better tonight.

I don't care about the bicycle chamber. I just think it's great that Crean was so impressed with its cost that he quoted the reporter the exact amount ($41,700) that we paid for it.

I'm curious 2002mualum...do you like guys who go around telling people how much they spend for things? They're a definite "type."

Crean is that type.

hold on.

I don't think Crean is quoted as saying the cost.

Now, I know your response is going to be "How else did the reporter know?"...

But, the reporter could've simply asked the manufacturer or even one of the other franchises that uses one. There is no way of knowing where he found out the cost.

Also, even if Crean did tell the reporter the cost... what's the big deal?

If he didn't tell the reporter, you'd be on here blasting him saying something like "I wonder how much this cost?!, maybe if he'd spend more money on XYZ MU would be more successful".

Dude, you don't like the guy.

WE GET IT.

No need for snide remarks about EVERY SINGLE THING the guy does.

[Pakuni]

Large numbers of top 100 guys never pan out, and just basing recruiting on rankings is a terribly stupid idea.

Correct you are. Rankings are fun to talk about, and a fair guide for discussing the players MU is recruiting (the vast majority of whom none of us has seen), but they are not a completely accurate measure of the college prospects of an individual player or entire class.

Example ... the highest-ranked player of the Tom Crean era at Marquette? Dameon Mason.

Don't know what you are talking about.  DM was ranked 71st by the final RSCI ranking his senior year.  All 3 Amigos were ranked higher their senior year.

see the link:

http://home.nc.rr.com/rsci/RSCI_100_PostSeason_2003.htm

I was going by the Scout.com rankings. Should have been more clear about that.
My overall point, however, remains.

[Henry Sugar]

You guys are right. We shouldn't even care about highly ranked recruits. Just get guys in here who can ride a bike in a hyperbolic chamber and shed tackling dummies in practice.

I was counting down the minutes until you would make a snide remark about the bicycle thing.

I can now sleep better tonight.

I don't care about the bicycle chamber. I just think it's great that Crean was so impressed with its cost that he quoted the reporter the exact amount ($41,700) that we paid for it.

I'm curious 2002mualum...do you like guys who go around telling people how much they spend for thingsare infatuated with object-cathexis on the part of the sexual instincts with a view to direct sexual satisfaction? They're a definite "type." that do not have their narcissistic libido overflow onto the object which they love

Crean is that type.   I'm a psychologist!

Sigmund Freud'd

[rocky_warrior]

For Sale:  Slightly used hypoxic altitude chamber.  Works great but too big for rec room.  Asking price $41700.

LOL

[Marquette84]

I don't care about the bicycle chamber. I just think it's great that Crean was so impressed with its cost that he quoted the reporter the exact amount ($41,700) that we paid for it.

I'm curious 2002mualum...do you like guys who go around telling people how much they spend for things? They're a definite "type."

Crean is that type.

I guess Crean is similar to the staff at Texas, since they just told the Wall Street Journal that they spent $152,585 on Gatorade and Power Bars for athletes last season.  Or Thad Matta, who gets 15 hours on a private jet for personal travel and 11 hours for recruiting trips over 200 miles.

So I guess guys like Thad Matta and Rick Barnes are the "type."

My question:  Why don't you want Crean to be more like other final four coaches such as Matta and Barnes?  Or do their personalites rub you the wrong way as well.

[79Warrior]

I completely agree with you Harrison. Recruiting is crucial, and a couple of weak classes can kill you. Crean has had difficulty on a year over year basis. The top guys in the conference you mentioned have had and continue to have monster recruiting classes on a fairly consistent basis.   

[4everwarriors]

on Ebay for that cycling thing.

[Harrison]

every single consensus top 100 kid Tom Crean has signed sored 1000 points in his career.  They are Wade, Merritt, ODB, Diener and Novak.  The others MAson, the 3 amigos and LAzar, mbakwe most likely will.

Tom Crean has never signed a player that scored 1000 points that was not in the top 100. 
- Yeah OK rankings dont mean anything. 

[jaygall31]

anyone else excited for Nick Williams? I sure as hell am

[Pakuni]

every single consensus top 100 kid Tom Crean has signed sored 1000 points in his career.  They are Wade, Merritt, ODB, Diener and Novak.  The others MAson, the 3 amigos and LAzar, mbakwe most likely will.

Tom Crean has never signed a player that scored 1000 points that was not in the top 100. 
- Yeah OK rankings dont mean anything. 

Please point out the post where anyone said "rankings don't mean anything."

I guess it's easier to invent points to argue against than deal with the points people actually are making.

[77ncaachamps]

What we really need is Wade, Diener and Novak to blow it up and DJ to get drafted (maybe with McNeal) so it really shows the recruits that we can produce NBA players.

Dangerous is the drought that hits programs who have NBAers in bunches but is unable to parlay their success into reeling in big-time recruits. Look at St. Joe's: Jameer Nelson and Delonte West get drafted but they've not hooked the bigger fish to help their program sustain their success.

You will have down years, but in the Big East, you really can't afford them. Fortunately, we do play in the BE which is what most hoop recruits would love to play in...but how do you sell the program over those who have consistently produced NBAers? How do you sell a university which lies near the heart of an undistinguishable city and lacks the big school atmosphere.

Since the latter questions really are uncontrollable from a program standpoint, the former is the only factor they can improve on.

Not getting Iman hurts more than it helps. Let's hope we can hook some more big names and continue to dig for some gold as well.

[Pardner]

With a program like MU, we NEED one Top 100 per year...and 2-3 one other year can get us into the top of the BE.  We are not Duke, UNC or Kansas, and TC is not yet Coach K. or Williams where he can jump in late and sign a hot guy...and non one can recruit like Self (although he cannot coach a lick).  Players go to these programs to leave, thus they can absorb three-four Top 100 per year.  Playing time is what recruits want because of the promise of early entry and $$ into the NBA.  I think the Duke program has actually suffered recently because of the early exits as their program is built on continuity.  CT has for sure.

Realistically, we cannot go there right now.  We lost IS because of a backlog of guard depth.  TC has to get a headstart in recruiting....three years ago when he started going heavy on IS we all thought DJ would be gone and Acker wasn't even in the picture.  Our guards may still be in school when IS is playing pro.  Our F4 year got us the three amigos a couple of years later...but could get us anyone lasting that next year (Mason)...Entering the BE is opening other parts of the country to TC.  Talk of TC leaving every year doesn't help matters.  This is a critical year for TC and the program.

[downtown85]

How do you sell a university which lies near the heart of an undistinguishable city and lacks the big school atmosphere.

Like Louisville? With the coach. 

Not to knock TC because I like what he has accomplished, I really do, but Rick Pitino, JT3 (and I predict that Rick Majerus if his ticker holds out) have the ability to transform schools into final four contenders regularly.  I think MU is and will be a threat to be a top-25 team under TC for the forseable future but without getting the "difference makers" on a regular basis it will not lead to more regular visits to elite-8 or final 4. 

Yes, regarding my Majerus comment, I am predicting here and now that SLU in a couple of years will be a sort of Gonzaga in their conference.  It will be a strong, regular top-25 team which makes a run in the tourney now and then.