MU Trib - WTF...

[MarquetteDano]

I get the general jist of the aritcle... that Marquette rises early season, non-conference and conference.  Then, fails come tournament time.  Although he shows his lack of knowledge saying...

1) As PR mentioned in an earlier post, that Marquette could have three losses, including two at home to low RPI teams, and be ranked.  I guess the joke is they are still ranked at that point?

2) That Marquette loses by thirty to Cincy or an equivalent team?  Perhaps with a lot of injuries?  Though he doesn't mention that.

3) That Marquette would reach the NIT final four playing the teams he mentions.  Chances are that there would be 1-2 high major programs we would have to beat.  They have off years too... or doesn't he understand that?

It just seems like a mean-spirited rant really.  There is something lately to our post season "wanes".  Couldn't one write about that and provide reasons or concerns?

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

It just seems like a mean-spirited rant really.  There is something lately to our post season "wanes".  Couldn't one write about that and provide reasons or concerns?

I agree.

I don't think there is anything wrong with criticizing the program if he provided some actual insight or a different perspective.

It would be interesting if he really went in depth to find out why MU can have such highs in a season (beating Duke, PITT, etc.) and have such lows (getting blown out by MSU).

Some people blame injuries, coaching, workouts, and all sorts of other stuff. If he thinks MU is going to fizzle out again in 2008, it would be interesting for him to explore why MU has fizzled in the past and why he thinks they will do it again.

Of course, that would take some research, perspective and a good amount of thought to do that...

[Wareagle]

Normally hatchet jobs come from the sports writers of other schools.

"James' NBA draft stock continued its slow, painful, Titanic-like descent."

I think we can award the 2007 Stephen T. Colbert Award For The Literary Excellence - Stilted Prose Category to Mr. Strittmatter right now.

[MUCHI814]

this guy did exactly what he wanted to do.  Just like a Mariotti he just writes to get a rise out of people, hell this is probably the most talked about piece this entire year in the Trib.  While it is questionable journalism, its getting notice and a lot of people will be looking for this kid's pieces in the future.  I think he's full of crap and doesn't actually believe this, but hey, he's getting some attention, probably the most out of any writer in the Trib

[MileHigh]

remember it is the TRIB...they hate the school.  if u read every issue, you will see they hate us

[Buzz Williams' Spillproof Chiclets Cup]

Since when has anyone expected anything resembling legitimate journalism, intelligent thought, rational analysis, or hell, even serviceable birdcage flooring to come out of the Marquette Tribune?

[🏀]

I have used at birdcage flooring right now as we speak...if I had a camera, I'd supply visual evidence.

[NCMUFan]

Well, the idiots article will be forgotten soon.  It may be his journalism highlight of his college career as pathetic as it is.

[ozmetal71]

This guy reminds me of a moron frosh who sat behind me at the MU-SLU game in 2003 and was ripping on Wade the entire game saying he was overrated and terrible....all because he was struggling in one game.  My friends and I who were seniors at the time told the kid to shut up and appreciate how good Wade was and how the program would be nowhere near as good without him.

The sense of entitlement and stupidity regarding the basketball program among some in the current student body is ridiculous.  MU was 30-28 my first two years and we lost games to notable powerhouses like Baylor and South Alabama.

If we lose by 32 to Cincinatti we should forfeit the rest of the season.  I hope this guy is simply a typical hack sportswriter who is trying to build up controversy and not as utterly stupid as he appears to be in this column.  Seriously, is this kid Jay Marriotti's love child?

[Final Four or Bust]

The article is over the top, and shouldn't have been published in the school newspaper (at least MU's newspaper).  That being said, there are some points that people here dismiss far too easily:

1)  Why are we a lock for the NCAA all of a sudden?  Last I checked, the name on our jersey didn't magically become Duke or UNC overnight.   Making the tourney will be a struggle, especially in a conference that is as tough as the new Big East.  Do people forget that even after we made the Final Four we didn't make it the next few years? 

2)  Our roster is VERY vunerable.  With Mbakwe down, what happens if Burke or Ooze gets hurt?  We have no one to fill in right now with any size (even a Kinsella or Grimm type player to log some minutes and be a brusier).  If that happens we will struggle even more down low and that would make the tourney even more difficult.

3)  We will lose to a small school somewhere along the way -- everybody does.

4)  Frankly, we are a very poor shooting team -- if I hear another Villanova comparison I am going to choke.   They had lots of shooters on that team, we don't have many at all.  That is clearly a weakness, but we have many other strengths that we can take advantage of, including atheticism and pressure D.  Let's hope Crean uses that more this year.

5)  Overall, the trajectory of the season fits with what we have seen the past few years -- out of the gate hot by taking pre-season tourneys and faltering down the stretch in the conf. tourney and NCAAs.  We need to change that trend.  Hopefully with more upperclass leaders we can do that, but I for one haven't been pleased the past few years. 

In short, the article is inappropriate in its placement and some of its venom toward the players.  That said, some of the points shoulnd't be dismissed.  I do think we will make the NCAA's, but don't think it will be as easy as many of you suggest.  If you disagree, look at the first two games we've just played.

[bs4173]

what a mindnumbingly pathetic article. sure, our team has a lot of kinks to work out, and we're in no way a lock for the tournament...big surprise. however, it's pretty obvious that Strittmatter is starving for controversial attention like some of the other equally-airheaded writers on the MU Tribune staff, and i shake my head in disbelief that the same College of Communications that helped produce Steve Rushin is in some way responsible for educating this moron, too.

oh, if anybody cares, the "defense less effective than the Munich Agreement" comment was plagiarized from last week's issue of The Onion. (in the "Statshot" insert). get your own material, Ambrose, Jr.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

The article is over the top, and shouldn't have been published in the school newspaper (at least MU's newspaper).  That being said, there are some points that people here dismiss far too easily:

1)  Why are we a lock for the NCAA all of a sudden?  Last I checked, the name on our jersey didn't magically become Duke or UNC overnight.   Making the tourney will be a struggle, especially in a conference that is as tough as the new Big East.  Do people forget that even after we made the Final Four we didn't make it the next few years? 

2)  Our roster is VERY vunerable.  With Mbakwe down, what happens if Burke or Ooze gets hurt?  We have no one to fill in right now with any size (even a Kinsella or Grimm type player to log some minutes and be a brusier).  If that happens we will struggle even more down low and that would make the tourney even more difficult.

3)  We will lose to a small school somewhere along the way -- everybody does.

4)  Frankly, we are a very poor shooting team -- if I hear another Villanova comparison I am going to choke.   They had lots of shooters on that team, we don't have many at all.  That is clearly a weakness, but we have many other strengths that we can take advantage of, including atheticism and pressure D.  Let's hope Crean uses that more this year.

5)  Overall, the trajectory of the season fits with what we have seen the past few years -- out of the gate hot by taking pre-season tourneys and faltering down the stretch in the conf. tourney and NCAAs.  We need to change that trend.  Hopefully with more upperclass leaders we can do that, but I for one haven't been pleased the past few years. 

In short, the article is inappropriate in its placement and some of its venom toward the players.  That said, some of the points shoulnd't be dismissed.  I do think we will make the NCAA's, but don't think it will be as easy as many of you suggest.  If you disagree, look at the first two games we've just played.

I'm inclined to agree with you, and this team and this program certainly isn't perfect. However, this kid writing for the MU tribune should have just reported the facts, or if he really wanted to write a column, he should have explored of the the ideas you listed about in depth.

Why has MU faded down the stretch the past 2 years?

He could have come up with all of the rationale and then prognosticated on how this season would go based upon his research and deduction.

Like I said, at this point its just "controversial", but nowhere near "fresh" "informative" or "educational", which are 3 words that I would definitely want a column to be.

[marquette09]

Look at the Cincy results so far
11/09 Belmont L 86-75
11/10 W Carolina W 66-64
11/11 BGU L 69-67 (Bowling Green)

Now way in hell is this team beating MU by 32

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

The article is over the top, and shouldn't have been published in the school newspaper (at least MU's newspaper).  That being said, there are some points that people here dismiss far too easily:

1)  Why are we a lock for the NCAA all of a sudden?  Last I checked, the name on our jersey didn't magically become Duke or UNC overnight.   Making the tourney will be a struggle, especially in a conference that is as tough as the new Big East.  Do people forget that even after we made the Final Four we didn't make it the next few years? 

2)  Our roster is VERY vunerable.  With Mbakwe down, what happens if Burke or Ooze gets hurt?  We have no one to fill in right now with any size (even a Kinsella or Grimm type player to log some minutes and be a brusier).  If that happens we will struggle even more down low and that would make the tourney even more difficult.

3)  We will lose to a small school somewhere along the way -- everybody does.

4)  Frankly, we are a very poor shooting team -- if I hear another Villanova comparison I am going to choke.   They had lots of shooters on that team, we don't have many at all.  That is clearly a weakness, but we have many other strengths that we can take advantage of, including atheticism and pressure D.  Let's hope Crean uses that more this year.

5)  Overall, the trajectory of the season fits with what we have seen the past few years -- out of the gate hot by taking pre-season tourneys and faltering down the stretch in the conf. tourney and NCAAs.  We need to change that trend.  Hopefully with more upperclass leaders we can do that, but I for one haven't been pleased the past few years. 

In short, the article is inappropriate in its placement and some of its venom toward the players.  That said, some of the points shoulnd't be dismissed.  I do think we will make the NCAA's, but don't think it will be as easy as many of you suggest.  If you disagree, look at the first two games we've just played.

I'm inclined to agree with you, and this team and this program certainly isn't perfect. However, this kid writing for the MU tribune should have just reported the facts, or if he really wanted to write a column, he should have explored any of the the ideas you listed about in depth.

Why has MU faded down the stretch the past 2 years?

He could have come up with all of the rationale and then prognosticated on how this season would go based upon his research and deduction.

Like I said, at this point its just "controversial", but nowhere near "fresh" "informative" or "educational", which are 3 words that I would definitely want a column to be.

[Tribby]

Tribby is sad about poor Trib quality nowadays. 

[🏀]

The top journalists in the journalism department generally do not write for it. Last year's graduates none of the Summa Cum Laudes were Trib writers. Only about 1/3 of the Magna Cum Laudes were writers.

[Ready2Fly]

what a mindnumbingly pathetic article. sure, our team has a lot of kinks to work out, and we're in no way a lock for the tournament...big surprise. however, it's pretty obvious that Strittmatter is starving for controversial attention like some of the other equally-airheaded writers on the MU Tribune staff, and i shake my head in disbelief that the same College of Communications that helped produce Steve Rushin is in some way responsible for educating this moron, too.

oh, if anybody cares, the "defense less effective than the Munich Agreement" comment was plagiarized from last week's issue of The Onion. (in the "Statshot" insert). get your own material, Ambrose, Jr.

Wow, was that honestly stolen from The Onion?  Blatant rip-offs like that are grounds for immediate termination.  The article itself was bad enough, but this takes the cake.

[Tribby]

The top journalists in the journalism department generally do not write for it. Last year's graduates none of the Summa Cum Laudes were Trib writers. Only about 1/3 of the Magna Cum Laudes were writers.

Let's be fair here. The top editors at the Trib put in crazy hours (40-50 a week in the case of the EIC and managing editor) in addition to being full-time students. Not many people can do that and still get straight A's. The real test is whether objective awards, like the College of Communications' Journalism Student of the Year, are going to Trib writers.

A professional newspaper editor doesn't care what a journalism student's grades were, but rather what his/her clips look like. Those Summa Cum Laudes won't be getting a professional journalism job if they don't have clips, I promise.

[🏀]

Yeah, but the majority of them work for Chicagoland papers. While the Trib writers are working the Watertown Press.

[CTWarrior]

Over before it begins
By: David Strittmatter
Posted: 11/8/07
...On a positive note, the Golden Eagles' three wins in the NIT doubled the number of postseason wins since the 2003 Final Four run...

david.strittmatter@marquette.edu

what, did we have 1.5 postseason wins since 2003?
[/quote]

You must've been a business major.  Three wins would double our win total if we had three wins over the span (from 3 to 6), not 1.5.  Three wins for a theoretical team with 1.5 (I know 1.5 wins is not possible) wins would triple their win total from 1.5 to 4.5.

The rest of the article was not the best thing I've read, but it wasn't horrible and it made a point.  I could see this team struggling and slipping to the NIT due to our lack of inside game, but I'd say its 85% we're in the NCAAs and better than 50% with a top 8 seed.

Even though I am on the fast track to becoming a grumpy old man, I would advise you to let kids like the author of this piece try and find their voice.  That's what college is all about, experimentation and improvement, right?  Why the same people thinks it's horrible to criticize a college player but would have no problem criticizing a college newspaper writer is inconsistent.

[Tribby]

Even though I am on the fast track to becoming a grumpy old man, I would advise you to let kids like the author of this piece try and find their voice.  That's what college is all about, experimentation and improvement, right?  Why the same people thinks it's horrible to criticize a college player but would have no problem criticizing a college newspaper writer is inconsistent.

This is easily the best post I've read on this board.

[Wareagle]

Even though I am on the fast track to becoming a grumpy old man, I would advise you to let kids like the author of this piece try and find their voice.  That's what college is all about, experimentation and improvement, right?  Why the same people thinks it's horrible to criticize a college player but would have no problem criticizing a college newspaper writer is inconsistent.

I think it's fine to hold him up to higher scrutiny because he is lambasting college athletes by name.  If he was only talking about the team's play, that's one thing, but he makes special note of James' NBA stock falling precipitously and throws in a pot shot at Barro for good measure. 

To summarize, if he was just a random college kid who wrote a random crappy article, I wouldn't say anything.  But he is a college writer criticizing other college kids specifically, and that's why I apply different rules to him. 

There was no reason for him to throw in those bits about Ousmane's game or Dominic's draft prospects.  They were cheap shots that didn't advance the article.