It is up to Buzz

[Texas Western]

Buzz is playing with fire by sticking with this absurd backcourt rotation.  If he continues to stick with it, we are highly likely to lose all the remaining games. The Big East is tough top to bottom,Even DePaul is going to be tough to beat, especially on the road. 

If Buzz is willing to run with all the freshman, and give more steady minutes to Todd and STj, we can still get on a run.

At this point the season is up to Buzz, The kids are trying their hardest and haven't quit yet. It is time Buzz shows a little respect to the program and the University instead of too his vanity.

[UticaBusBarn]

Coach Williams has, on numerous occasions, justified his starting backcourt, by stating how well they play defense, especially Derrick Wilson (and that Thomas helps spread the floor).

Yet, Villanova's 1, 2 and 3 combined for 70 points! This is not the first time the guards of the opposing team has torched the Warriors.

Thus, one might ask, if the present compliment of guards is out there for defensive purposes, and the opposing guards are often having a field day against the Warriors guards, might one also conclude that these Warrior guards are, in fact, playing rather poor defense?

If the present compliment of Warriors guards, are not what they are suppose to be on defense, would not a coach, after 20 games, do one of two things? This is, either change his starting guards, or switch to a different defense(s) scheme(s) to keep the guards of the opposing team (somewhat) in check?

With Mr. Cotton and company coming into Milwaukee on Thursday. Common sense would dictate to do something to address this weakness at guard. But, then again, as Mark Twain said, "The problem with common sense is that it is not very common."

[murara1994]

Um, no, it's up to the players.

Do people really think that Buzz isn't playing the guys who give us the best chance to win bc he is stubborn or stupid or both?  That is asinine when all evidence gathered over six years suggests Buzz is neither if those things.

[NersEllenson]

Um, no, it's up to the players.

Do people really think that Buzz isn't playing the guys who give us the best chance to win bc he is stubborn or stupid or both?  That is asinine when all evidence gathered over six years suggests Buzz is neither if those things.

You certainly wouldn't think a head coach would be stubborn to the point of costing his team games, yet after seeing the results Dawson got against GTown and Xavier and for Buzz to not be willing to give him more than scrap minutes against Nova - seriously have to ask the question.

Also have to wonder, why was Gardner not playing 33+ minutes per game since the start of the season?  Clearly, he's shown an ability to play 30+..and even if he is fatigued, the pressure he puts on the oppositions defense is still of high value.  Particularly since Buzz continues to choose to run out such an inept backcourt combination for 27+ minutes per game.

[murara1994]

You certainly wouldn't think a head coach would be stubborn to the point of costing his team games, yet after seeing the results Dawson got against GTown and Xavier and for Buzz to not be willing to give him more than scrap minutes against Nova - seriously have to ask the question.

Also have to wonder, why was Gardner not playing 33+ minutes per game since the start of the season?  Clearly, he's shown an ability to play 30+..and even if he is fatigued, the pressure he puts on the oppositions defense is still of high value.  Particularly since Buzz continues to choose to run out such an inept backcourt combination for 27+ minutes per game.

It's a ludicrous question.  You saw snippets in game action.  Buzz watches them every day.  If Dawson can't stop De Wilson in practice, what makes you think he stands a chance against any one of Nova's guards?

[MerrittsMustache]

You certainly wouldn't think a head coach would be stubborn to the point of costing his team games, yet after seeing the results Dawson got against GTown and Xavier and for Buzz to not be willing to give him more than scrap minutes against Nova - seriously have to ask the question.

Also have to wonder, why was Gardner not playing 33+ minutes per game since the start of the season?  Clearly, he's shown an ability to play 30+..and even if he is fatigued, the pressure he puts on the oppositions defense is still of high value.  Particularly since Buzz continues to choose to run out such an inept backcourt combination for 27+ minutes per game.

We should also ask another question: Did Dawson play well because he got more minutes or did he get more minutes because he was playing well?

You seem to be only open to the former while completely disregarding that the latter could be a possibility.

[connie]

Buzz is playing with fire by sticking with this absurd backcourt rotation.  If he continues to stick with it, we are highly likely to lose all the remaining games. The Big East is tough top to bottom,Even DePaul is going to be tough to beat, especially on the road.  

If Buzz is willing to run with all the freshman, and give more steady minutes to Todd and STj, we can still get on a run.

At this point the season is up to Buzz, The kids are trying their hardest and haven't quit yet. It is time Buzz shows a little respect to the program and the University instead of too his vanity.

Let's just cut to the chase of all of these disparate threads:  You are claiming that Buzz is stupid because Buzz plays Derrick and Jake over freshmen.  Except what about the last 6 years when by most measures our teams over performed?  Was he stupid then? Hard to defend that, so instead of "stupid" we get "stubborn."  A "nicer" word with the same meaning.  Except what about the Georgetown game?  Was Buzz stubborn then when Dawson played most of the second half and overtime?  Guess not.  So is he selectively stubborn?  Possibly, but if you are willing to change based upon at least one situation then almost by definition you are not stubborn.  So maybe he has a reason for what he does.  Or are you saying that Buzz wants to lose?  After all he must be able to see what you see, and unless he changes what he has been doing we are going to lose every single game we have left, right?  So Buzz wants to lose.  That's the way for any coach to get ahead--lose intentionally.

You may not agree with him, and I admit I don't understand his thinking all of the time,  but I am tired of talking and reading about it, so I'll stop now.  Thanks.

[reinko]

You certainly wouldn't think a head coach would be stubborn to the point of costing his team games, yet after seeing the results Dawson got against GTown and Xavier and for Buzz to not be willing to give him more than scrap minutes against Nova - seriously have to ask the question.

Also have to wonder, why was Gardner not playing 33+ minutes per game since the start of the season?  Clearly, he's shown an ability to play 30+..and even if he is fatigued, the pressure he puts on the oppositions defense is still of high value.  Particularly since Buzz continues to choose to run out such an inept backcourt combination for 27+ minutes per game.

If Buzz is not playing certain players because he is stubborn he should be fired, and never allowed to coach basketball again.

[brandx]

Let's just cut to the chase of all of these disparate threads:  You are claiming that Buzz is stupid because Buzz plays Derrick and Jake over freshmen.  Except what about the last 6 years when by most measures our teams over performed?  Was he stupid then? Hard to defend that, so instead of "stupid" we get "stubborn."  A "nicer" word with the same meaning.  Except what about the Georgetown game?  Was Buzz stubborn then when Dawson played most of the second half and overtime?  Guess not.  So is he selectively stubborn?  Possibly, but if you are willing to change based upon at least one situation then almost by definition you are not stubborn.  So maybe he has a reason for what he does.  Or are you saying that Buzz wants to lose?  After all he must be able to see what you see, and unless he changes what he has been doing we are going to lose every single game we have left, right?  So Buzz wants to lose.  That's the way for any coach to get ahead--lose intentionally.

You may not agree with him, and I admit I don't understand his thinking all of the time,  but I am tired of talking and reading about it, so I'll stop now.  Thanks.

+1

Too many people think because Derrick has struggled - defensively as well as on offense - that replacing him with anyone would be better.

Personally, I don't think we are losing anything with Dawson, but more than anything, Dawson will get better with more PT. I think we all realize that derrick is what he is. Anyone who is already a junior, and can barely shoot 50% from the line is not a good shooter, never has been nor ever will be.
Now, if he had Peyton Siva qualities at PG, the bad shooting can be overlooked, but we also haven't seen any great PG skills. So he can't shoot and isn't a penetrator, and has played very average defense.

So while I can't say categorically that dawson would be better, I don't feel he would be worse and as a freshman playing against top competition for the 1st time, I have no doubt he will improve with more minutes.

[GGGG]

Let's just cut to the chase of all of these disparate threads:  You are claiming that Buzz is stupid because Buzz plays Derrick and Jake over freshmen.  Except what about the last 6 years when by most measures our teams over performed?  Was he stupid then? Hard to defend that, so instead of "stupid" we get "stubborn."  A "nicer" word with the same meaning.  Except what about the Georgetown game?  Was Buzz stubborn then when Dawson played most of the second half and overtime?  Guess not.  So is he selectively stubborn?  Possibly, but if you are willing to change based upon at least one situation then almost by definition you are not stubborn.  So maybe he has a reason for what he does.  Or are you saying that Buzz wants to lose?  After all he must be able to see what you see, and unless he changes what he has been doing we are going to lose every single game we have left, right?  So Buzz wants to lose.  That's the way for any coach to get ahead--lose intentionally.

You may not agree with him, and I admit I don't understand his thinking all of the time,  but I am tired of talking and reading about it, so I'll stop now.  Thanks.

Thank you.  This is spot on. 

[NersEllenson]

We should also ask another question: Did Dawson play well because he got more minutes or did he get more minutes because he was playing well?

You seem to be only open to the former while completely disregarding that the latter could be a possibility.

I think you hit the nail on the head - if Dawson comes in and makes so much as one screw up, and perhaps 1 missed shot on top of a screw up (such as a turnover, or bad defensive rotation), he's out the game, no ifs and buts about it thus far.  It's hard to play well and relaxed when you know you are on such a short leash.  So, perhaps Dawson has only gotten additional run when he's played virtually perfectly - or as in Georgetown - when Derrick told Buzz to keep playing John...

Best thing Buzz could do would be to say to John - I'm turning it over to you, your getting 30 minutes of run from here on out.  Play your ass off.  I'll ride with you through the bumps along the way - just as he's done for Derrick now through 20 games but has yet to be paid off on that loyalty.  I feel quite confident Buzz would be rewarded with some very good play and some additional wins.  Not to mention a freshman getting valuable game experience for next season to build off of..

[Lennys Tap]

You certainly wouldn't think a head coach would be stubborn to the point of costing his team games, yet after seeing the results Dawson got against GTown and Xavier and for Buzz to not be willing to give him more than scrap minutes against Nova - seriously have to ask the question.

Also have to wonder, why was Gardner not playing 33+ minutes per game since the start of the season?  Clearly, he's shown an ability to play 30+..and even if he is fatigued, the pressure he puts on the oppositions defense is still of high value.  Particularly since Buzz continues to choose to run out such an inept backcourt combination for 27+ minutes per game.

So in your assessment there are 2 possibilities:

1.Buzz is a smart guy and a good coach. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that
Derrick is a piece of crap and that Marquette can't win with him at the point. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that he has a much better player on the bench who could have won MU a boatload of games that they've lost. He doesn't care. His loyalty to Derrick trumps winning, his loyalty to Marquette, etc. He's tanking the season because of it.

Or:
2. Buzz is a basketball idiot who couldn't pass basketball 101. He's got stars on the bench ready to win games but is too dumb to see it. Anybody who has played intramural basketball can see in 5 minutes what he hasn't seen in 5 months.

Given the two scenarios that you paint, isn't it about time to call for his head? Do you really want a coach who tanks games out of stubbornness or knows less about his team than you do?

[madtownwarrior]

nah, sometimes Buzz gets it - like when he played Dawson extended time and they actually won a game...

there is hope...

So in your assessment there are 2 possibilities:

1.Buzz is a smart guy and a good coach. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that
Derrick is a piece of crap and that Marquette can't win with him at the point. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that he has a much better player on the bench who could have won MU a boatload of games that they've lost. He doesn't care. His loyalty to Derrick trumps winning, his loyalty to Marquette, etc. He's tanking the season because of it.

Or:
2. Buzz is a basketball idiot who couldn't pass basketball 101. He's got stars on the bench ready to win games but is too dumb to see it. Anybody who has played intramural basketball can see in 5 minutes what he hasn't seen in 5 months.

Given the two scenarios that you paint, isn't it about time to call for his head? Do you really want a coach who tanks games out of stubbornness or knows less about his team than you do?

[Aughnanure]

So in your assessment there are 2 possibilities:

1.Buzz is a smart guy and a good coach. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that
Derrick is a piece of crap and that Marquette can't win with him at the point. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that he has a much better player on the bench who could have won MU a boatload of games that they've lost. He doesn't care. His loyalty to Derrick trumps winning, his loyalty to Marquette, etc. He's tanking the season because of it.

Or:
2. Buzz is a basketball idiot who couldn't pass basketball 101. He's got stars on the bench ready to win games but is too dumb to see it. Anybody who has played intramural basketball can see in 5 minutes what he hasn't seen in 5 months.

Given the two scenarios that you paint, isn't it about time to call for his head? Do you really want a coach who tanks games out of stubbornness or knows less about his team than you do?

I generally agree with the annoyance to so many over the top anti-Buzz comments lately (cause so many of them are just so freaking dumb and embaressing). But Buzz also isn't infallible and I just wish there could be a legitimate debate/criticism about what he is doing right/wrong this year instead of it turning into Buzz is a Stubborn Idiot vs Buzz Knows All argument every time. Doesn't always have to be black and white around here.

[NersEllenson]

So in your assessment there are 2 possibilities:

1.Buzz is a smart guy and a good coach. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that
Derrick is a piece of crap and that Marquette can't win with him at the point. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that he has a much better player on the bench who could have won MU a boatload of games that they've lost. He doesn't care. His loyalty to Derrick trumps winning, his loyalty to Marquette, etc. He's tanking the season because of it.

Or:
2. Buzz is a basketball idiot who couldn't pass basketball 101. He's got stars on the bench ready to win games but is too dumb to see it. Anybody who has played intramural basketball can see in 5 minutes what he hasn't seen in 5 months.

Given the two scenarios that you paint, isn't it about time to call for his head? Do you really want a coach who tanks games out of stubbornness or knows less about his team than you do?

You can drop the whole notion of "Derrick is a piece of crap."  He's a good kid.  However, his performance as a basketball player has been horsecrap - let's keep the distinction clear.

Are you satisfied with our results thus far?  All my contention all along has been, was to get Dawson 20 minutes a game and get an idea for what he could do.  Perhaps if he'd gotten more time against the cupcakes, he'd be in a better position to contribute at this point - since Buzz still apparently doesn't seem to think he's worthy.

I don't see Derrick showing much improvement, over where we were at Thanksgiving time, nor has the team shown much improvement.  For the life of me, I cannot understand why you and about the 5 other Pro-Derrick guys - feel things could get worse if Buzz made the move..or that in absolute certainty you still believe Derrick gives this team the best chance to win.  BUZZ HAS ONLY GIVEN DAWSON A LEGITIMATE CHANCE IN ONE GAME, AND DAWSON DELIVERED.  CAN YOU POINT TO ONE GAME THAT DERRICK HAS ACTUALLY HAD A DIRECT HAND AND IMPORTANT ROLE IN US WINNING??

[MU82]

I think you hit the nail on the head - if Dawson comes in and makes so much as one screw up, and perhaps 1 missed shot on top of a screw up (such as a turnover, or bad defensive rotation), he's out the game, no ifs and buts about it thus far.

I want to see more of Dawson, too, but hyperbole is not a good way to make a compelling argument. Dawson was really bad for several minutes before Buzz yanked him out against Nova.

Again, just stick to the facts. They make the argument for you.

[Lennys Tap]

I generally agree with the annoyance to so many over the top anti-Buzz comments lately (cause so many of them are just so freaking dumb and embaressing). But Buzz also isn't infallible and I just wish there could be a legitimate debate/criticism about what he is doing right/wrong this year instead of it turning into Buzz is a Stubborn Idiot vs Buzz Knows All argument every time. Doesn't always have to be black and white around here.

Certainly not infallible. I would actually like to see a little more Dawson, maybe even a little more JJJ. Of course last year there was a time I would have liked to have seen a little more Mayo and a little less Lockett - I couldn't have been more wrong. I try to remember that when I get frustrated with our players.

[Lennys Tap]

I don't see Derrick showing much improvement, over where we were at Thanksgiving time, nor has the team shown much improvement.  For the life of me, I cannot understand why you and about the 5 other Pro-Derrick guys - feel things could get worse if Buzz made the move..or that in absolute certainty you still believe Derrick giveso this team the best chance to win.  BUZZ HAS ONLY GIVEN DAWSON A LEGITIMATE CHANCE IN ONE GAME, AND DAWSON DELIVERED.  CAN YOU POINT TO ONE GAME THAT DERRICK HAS ACTUALLY HAD A DIRECT HAND AND IMPORTANT ROLE IN US WINNING??

Please stop yelling at the 5 guys you think are "pro Derrick guys". We're not pro Derrick. We're pro Marquette. Unlike you, we root for all of our players, including Dawson. But also unlike you, we feel that Buzz has a reason for limiting Dawson's minutes and that the reason is neither a)trying to lose nor b)being a basketball know nothing. You disagree. Yell at Buzz. Email him. Email the BOT. Email Fr Wild. Email the Journal. He's gotta go.

[wardle2wade]

Buzz is playing with fire by sticking with this absurd backcourt rotation.  If he continues to stick with it, we are highly likely to lose all the remaining games.

This is one of the more unbelievable statements I've read on here in a while.  That's saying a lot.

[Eldon]

I've long been in the dawson camp in the dwil/dawson debate. I obviously don't think Buzz is an idiot. He's forgotten more basketball than I'll ever know. I get it.

But in my opinion, Buzz likes to have/be in control of everything that he can. He strikes me as someone who is extremely averse to risk.  This makes him neither stupid nor stubborn. But let's face it, we are a mediocre team. Mediocre teams should play risky. Sports econ studies show bad teams should take more risks.

In a word, I want Buzz to take more risks (eg play Dawson more)

[4th and State]

Certainly not infallible. I would actually like to see a little more Dawson, maybe even a little more JJJ. Of course last year there was a time I would have liked to have seen a little more Mayo and a little less Lockett - I couldn't have been more wrong. I try to remember that when I get frustrated with our players.

I was against Lockett at the beginning of last year as well, but the team was winning and the guy even had a contract with Kings at some point last year.  Hard to compare that with the likes of Thomas and Wilson.  Hopefully I'm wrong again.

[NCMUFan]

I see it as you have X players and you have Y players.  I think X is better and hence I play X.  But I never tried Y to see if my conclusions were correct.  Hence I stay with X right or wrong because I think X is best.

[Atticus]

Let's just cut to the chase of all of these disparate threads:  You are claiming that Buzz is stupid because Buzz plays Derrick and Jake over freshmen.  Except what about the last 6 years when by most measures our teams over performed?  Was he stupid then? Hard to defend that, so instead of "stupid" we get "stubborn."  A "nicer" word with the same meaning.  Except what about the Georgetown game?  Was Buzz stubborn then when Dawson played most of the second half and overtime?  Guess not.  So is he selectively stubborn?  Possibly, but if you are willing to change based upon at least one situation then almost by definition you are not stubborn.  So maybe he has a reason for what he does.  Or are you saying that Buzz wants to lose?  After all he must be able to see what you see, and unless he changes what he has been doing we are going to lose every single game we have left, right?  So Buzz wants to lose.  That's the way for any coach to get ahead--lose intentionally.

You may not agree with him, and I admit I don't understand his thinking all of the time,  but I am tired of talking and reading about it, so I'll stop now.  Thanks.

But what if Buzz honored his scholarships? What if all of his JUCOS never stepped foot on campus?

The fact of the matter is that Buzz & Co are not very good evaluators of high school talent. Either that, or they can't get their top targets to commit. So then they settle. And then kids transfer for WHATEVER REASON. Then Buzz fills in his classes with older, more physically mature player that are "more" ready right away.

To the haters that don't like UK or KU or UConn, etc....

Those programs don't regularly have to fill holes in their rosters due to poor high school recruiting. We do. And some of Buzz's kid were academically in eligible out of high school. That's a fact.

[Texas Western]

This is one of the more unbelievable statements I've read on here in a while.  That's saying a lot.

The point is if we play our current guards there is a pretty high probability we lose all our remaining games. This conference is tough top to bottom.  There is not one game left that is a sure win if Buzz insists on the current rotation.

If he is willing to go with Mayo starting, extensive time to the freshman and STj we have a real chance of winning.

I think he has to eat some humble pie and admit he screwed up.

Not making the NCAA is a very expensive proposition for a school like Marquette.  Buzz has to get out of his bubble and realize what is at stake here.

[🏀]

The point is if we play our current guards there is a pretty high probability we lose all our remaining games.

Wow, wow, wow...