Epic Collapse Signifies Poor Coaching - Wojo Embraces Inconsistency Again

[mileskishnish72]

Sam disappeared? Hell, Duane's picture was on the milk this AM.

Free throws don't count - oops.

[muwarrior69]

I'm wondering where the narrative that we played defense today is coming from? This was one of our best eFG% defense games of the conference season.

We lost today because of, in order:

1. Offensive Rebounding
2. Free Throw Disparity
3. Turnovers

4. Not as athletic as PC.

[Warrior_2002]

At this point in time it's really tough to judge.  I think Wojo is doing a good job considering the hand he was dealt in the way in and the fact that he is changing the system and getting his guys in.  Now his guys need to be developed. As the recruiting shifts the fill ins like carlino and Reinhardt go away Wojo will have a consistent program.  The problem currently is that there is no one or two leaders out on the floor.  Everyone is jostling for that leader role.  Howard has real potential there and I think Hauser does as well.  Wilson is the only guy who can be a leader now but he's sort of on the outside being from the old regime.  I don't think his style fits Wojos and that's why we don't see him.  With the young guys being the leaders it will take time to improve their defense but it will get there.  You can see Wojos passion for defense so I doubt he's the reason for the ole defense we see out there at times.  It'll come I have faith.  Lots of great coaches have taken the fourth year to get to the tourney (coach K, J Wright).  And I think the battle with so many like teams in the BEAST make it really difficult to rise up.  Yes we had our chances and have blown them and that pisses me off but this decade's "what have you done for me now" mentality needs to chill out.  Have to see the forest through the trees and build for long term.  I think wojo is the guy for that.  Maybe I'm wrong and that's not to say I won't be calling for his head next year or year after but this is a philosophy shift for us and it's going to take a bit of time.  There is improvement and getting rid of wojo now wouldn't help.  This conference is crazy good and no one expected that.  Wojo is doing this the right way I believe - consistent and long term.  And I like his old school mentality (bench the starters, take away the practice jerseys with the Marquette name on them).  Hopefully we still get in and that would be an overachievement given where we were picked in the BEAST standings to start the year.  Otherwise NIT is an improvement and we WILL be in the NCAA next year either way.  Mark it!  Out!

[Mr. Sand-Knit]

If you look at many of the games we lose we get beaten up on the boards.  Luke Fisher is historically soft and it takes feathery touches to compketely clear him out of rebounding position.  Add to that that he fumbles away 1-2 rebounds a game.  Wojo has finally realized that Fischer is fools gold, any points he might bring on offense are lost twofold on the oppisite end.  Matt Heldt has improved us tremendously, he fights and has good hands.  He us only a sophomore.  Hauser fights but is only a Freshman and is still undersized n gives up strength.  Jjj has little interest in rebounding nor does Rinhardt.  The team compketely lacks a 4. Put a muscle bound 4 on this sqyad and we prolly dont have more than 3-4 losses. 
Its really that simple.
From an interview with Stan Johnson ... "We had a handful of guys that to be honest with you, we missed out on because in their hearts they felt that Henry was coming back. That 4 spot has haunted us ever since because we failed to fill that spot because people thought Henry was going to still be here"

That 4 spot has haunted us... Pretty strong words n illustrates the compkete void at that position.  Sam is the only one that can even try to fill that spot n hes 18 pkaying in a big boys league, what other BE program has a undersized freshman playing the 4?

[Warrior_2002]

Very interesting Stan quote.  Thanks for sharing.  You can definitely see this issue.  You can't not go get an Ellenson but that hurt.  And he should have come back. Can't blame him for going for the money but he needed a lot of work.

[rocky_warrior]

To properly attribute that Stan quote - Dodd's posted it, you should read the full thing

http://www.scout.com/college/marquette/forums/2850-mens-hoops/15417996-i-asked-stan-johnson-about-froling-henry-going-pro-and-impact

[Galway Eagle]

That's the point though...good teams don't fold down the stretch like that. And it hasn't been just this game, it was the blown large second half lead against Pitt, the blown 18 pt lead at Butler, the failing to secure a rebound of a FT(twice) at Seton Hall that cost them the game, PC at home, Butler at home,  then today. I mean at some point during the year you want to see progress in that area..something that says "okay, they have learned how to win the tight games", but they haven't. In fact, if anything they have learned new ways to throw them away. So it isn't one play, it's been several, in the same situations(tight games), and they have lost them all. That should be very concerning to most everyone. And yes, one play a victory rather then a loss, but they weren't victories, that's the problem.

Name this Marquette team:

Blew an 11pt lead against NC State
Blew a 17pt lead against FSU
Lost to Depaul when Depaul was an even worse program than now
Blew a 15pt lead against Washington

This Marquette team was also extremely undersized and had to rely on 3pt shooting to carry itself to wins. They made the NCAA tournament and I'm sure in your blind memory they were another great Marquette team. But based on what you say on this board they didn't deserve to be there and the coach was never going to figure out how to put that team together.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

To properly attribute that Stan quote - Dodd's posted it, you should read the full thing

http://www.scout.com/college/marquette/forums/2850-mens-hoops/15417996-i-asked-stan-johnson-about-froling-henry-going-pro-and-impact

Johnson is absolutely right. We tried to convince players like Levin, Froling, Washington, Willis, etc that Henry was one and done. But no matter how high he was ranked, recruits were skeptical that some white boy from Rice Lake, WI was going to go pro after one season. Impossible to know what would have happened if he didn't come, but imagine if instead of 1 year of Henry we had:

15-16: Taylor and Levin
16-17: Levin, Washington, and Froling

The 15-16 team is just as good as the one with Henry and this year's team would be top 25. But, its an academic exercise at this point. Besides, you have to go after the 5 star when you can get him. I'd rather have the coach who gets the 5 star and fails to recruit a backup than the coach who is too scared to go after a 5 star because he's not sure he'll be able to recruit behind him.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

If you look at many of the games we lose we get beaten up on the boards.  Luke Fisher is historically soft and it takes feathery touches to compketely clear him out of rebounding position.  Add to that that he fumbles away 1-2 rebounds a game. 

Hairy wet cat

[Lennys Tap]

Name this Marquette team:

Blew an 11pt lead against NC State
Blew a 17pt lead against FSU
Lost to Depaul when Depaul was an even worse program than now
Blew a 15pt lead against Washington

This Marquette team was also extremely undersized and had to rely on 3pt shooting to carry itself to wins. They made the NCAA tournament and I'm sure in your blind memory they were another great Marquette team. But based on what you say on this board they didn't deserve to be there and the coach was never going to figure out how to put that team together.

I agree the two teams are similar in size (the 2009 team was actually smaller) and style. And I agree that volatile swings and the potential to wear down late happens with those types of teams.

But just because there are similarities doesn't mean the teams are or have been on the same trajectories. The 2009 team finished 11-7 in a league with 5 teams in the top 18. This year's team is 8-8 in a conference with 2 teams in the top 22. The 2009 team was a 6 seed. This year we're squarely on maybe the softest bubble in history.

[GGGG]

Scoop loooovee mediocrity. You'd think this was a George Mason or Memphis board if you didn't know any better.

Scoop doesn't "love mediocrity."  Scoopers want to win.

The difference is that some Scoopers are more patient than others.  Are they too patient?  Are they too optimistic when they talk about progress?  Time will tell. 

However saying they love mediocrity is dismissive bullsh*t.

[B. McBannerson]

I agree the two teams are similar in size (the 2009 team was actually smaller) and style. And I agree that volatile swings and the potential to wear down late happens with those types of teams.

But just because there are similarities doesn't mean the teams are or have been on the same trajectories. The 2009 team finished 11-7 in a league with 5 teams in the top 18. This year's team is 8-8 in a conference with 2 teams in the top 22. The 2009 team was a 6 seed. This year we're squarely on maybe the softest bubble in history.

Your points are accurate, but there is more to it.  Let's take the polls out and use ratings, at least any bias is done by an algorithm.

Only four teams were in top 18 at this point in the season in 2009-10.  Georgetown made it after their later due to the post season run.

Both this year and that year, the Big East is rated the third best league in the country.

The Big East also had three teams worse than 150th in 2009-10, this year's league has one. In 2009-10, the league had six top 50 teams, despite 16 members.  This year's Big East also has six top 50 teams, but only 10 members.  60% is better than 38%.

This year's league has suffered two major injuries to two top teams (Creighton and Xavier) when they were both top 15 in the country and that has dropped them as a result.

MU played the 46th toughest schedule in 2009-10.
MU has thus far played the 57th toughest schedule this year, but with at least two quality opponents still to play and perhaps 3 to 4, which will likely see us finish around 50 for schedule.

[Herman Cain]

I'm wondering where the narrative that we played defense today is coming from? This was one of our best eFG% defense games of the conference season.

We lost today because of, in order:

1. Offensive Rebounding
2. Free Throw Disparity
3. Turnovers

4.Ed Cooley said the crowd was a huge factor in PC's favor.

[HoopsterBC]

4.Ed Cooley said the crowd was a huge factor in PC's favor.

Forgot one thing, seniors play like Freshman.  If they would have played like seniors this team might have been pretty good.  When you can not get an easy basket
at the end of the game, it is because Luke is on the bench.  All Matt does is set picks, no inside presence.   When Luke is good, MU is good.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

People really overrate the impact of seniors. College game has changed completely since 1977. Sure Nova had Ochefu and Archi last year, but it was Jenkins and Hart who ran that team.

Look at the Duke team the year before with Okafor, Allen, Winslow and Jones. Kentucky in 2012. The list goes on. Seniors can be important but everybody is really overplaying this whole "senior leadership" garbage.

[MikeDeanesDarkGlasses]

People really overrate the impact of seniors. College game has changed completely since 1977. Sure Nova had Ochefu and Archi last year, but it was Jenkins and Hart who ran that team.

Look at the Duke team the year before with Okafor, Allen, Winslow and Jones. Kentucky in 2012. The list goes on. Seniors can be important but everybody is really overplaying this whole "senior leadership" garbage.


 Seniors have a huge impact on the game which is what allows smaller school teams to compete with the bigger programs.  See Wichita State, Wisconsin, Gonzaga, etc.  Essentially, senior laden programs from the smaller schools are what creates the parity in college basketball. 

Advantages with Seniors:

Maturity
More developed bodies
Leadership
Game time experience
Increased abilities
ETC.

I've seen a lot of feeble posts on this site, but none that have lacked so much insight before.  Talk about not having a grasp on the game of college basketball, let alone common sense.  A total disaster.  One of the worst posts in MUScoop History.  Embarrassing.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Feel free to look at our own womens team as an example mate. One senior on the entire squad, probably option number 5, and they will probably make the tournament for the first time since 2011.

Cheers for the attempted lecture though. Just made me even more confident in my point. Also just a tip, next time please make your post readable. I spent way too much time trying to figure out where your incoherent rambling began.

[MikeDeanesDarkGlasses]

Feel free to look at our own womens team as an example mate. One senior on the entire squad, probably option number 5, and they will probably make the tournament for the first time since 2011.

Cheers for the attempted lecture though. Just made me even more confident in my point. Also just a tip, next time please make your post readable. I spent way too much time trying to figure out where your incoherent rambling began.

I'll dumb it down for you next time.  Your point doesn't hold any water whatsoever.  What does one team only having one senior have to do with the argument?  You talk to any coach and they'd rather have seniors than underclassmen for the reasons I posted above.  Do you not understand basic college basketball and human development/growth? 

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

I'll dumb it down for you next time.  Your point doesn't hold any water whatsoever.  What does one team only having one senior have to do with the argument?  You talk to any coach and they'd rather have seniors than underclassmen for the reasons I posted above.  Do you not understand basic college basketball and human development/growth?

Disagree, theres a phrase coaches use all the time called a "good graduation" it has nothing to do with being a senior or not. It just has to do with being a better player. Bad players will not magically be better just because they grow into their body, get stronger or become a senior.

[tower912]

People really overrate the impact of seniors.

And some people underestimate the impact of senior leadership when it is being expected of them.     Sure, Kentucky doesn't need senior leadership.   And maybe Duke and UNC, but they have Cal, K, and Roy and reload every year.     There is a reason that some senior-led mid-major pulls off an upset every year and frequently makes the sweet 16.  There is a reason that Jae/JFB/Lazar are canonized among the MU community. 
    Wojo is trying to build a culture.    He needed his seniors to step up and lead every single game.   He hasn't gotten it.   And it has gotten so bad that after a week off, when all the positions were opened up to those working the hardest in practice, none of the seniors started.   

[MikeDeanesDarkGlasses]

Disagree, theres a phrase coaches use all the time called a "good graduation" it has nothing to do with being a senior or not. It just has to do with being a better player. Bad players will not magically be better just because they grow into their body, get stronger or become a senior.

It's not magic.  It's called practice, weight room, and experience - you know all of the things that go into creating a better basketball player.  Any senior version of a basketball player will be better than their freshman self.  That's just common sense.   

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

And some people underestimate the impact of senior leadership when it is being expected of them.     Sure, Kentucky doesn't need senior leadership.   And maybe Duke and UNC, but they have Cal, K, and Roy and reload every year.     There is a reason that some senior-led mid-major pulls off an upset every year and frequently makes the sweet 16.  There is a reason that Jae/JFB/Lazar are canonized among the MU community. 
    Wojo is trying to build a culture.    He needed his seniors to step up and lead every single game.   He hasn't gotten it.   And it has gotten so bad that after a week off, when all the positions were opened up to those working the hardest in practice, none of the seniors started.

Okay? Still not seeing your point. Someone else step up then, you dont have to rely on people just because they're older. How are the womens team so successful with a team entirely composed of Sophomores then?

I unnatural carnal knowledgeing hate the term senior leadership. Its a silly cliche, its so much more dependent on the individual player than their age.

[MikeDeanesDarkGlasses]

You're lost homey.

If you'd rather have a freshman version of player A than senior version of player A, you're just double digit in the IQ department.  God dealt you a poor hand.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

You're lost homey.

If you'd rather have a freshman version of player A than senior version of player A, you're just double digit in the IQ department.  God dealt you a poor hand.

God doesnt exist

Improving your ability and leadership are not one and the same. Completely different concepts, its like trying to compare organic chemistry and creative writing.

And to answer your statement, yes. There are many players I have seen that I would much rather have the younger version of themselves.

[MikeDeanesDarkGlasses]

Improving your ability and leadership are not one and the same. Completely different concepts, its like trying to compare organic chemistry and creative writing.

And to answer your statement, yes. There are many players I have seen that I would much rather have the younger version of themselves.

Who said it was about leadership?  I demonstrated the ability portion in my first post.  *Sigh*  This shouldn't even be an argument.  You're arguing that this MU team would be better now than if they were all seniors.  Dear lord.....