MU Royalty

[jsglow]

I think Goose is right on target.  DWade is the greatest talent in MU history.  But all the very tip top players in the 70's were significantly more talented than any of the guys from this century, appropriately adjusted for their respective eras.  (Today's guys jump higher, run faster, shoot better, yadda yadda.)  What some of you young guys aren't appreciating is that MU was one of the top 4-5 programs in the entire country for the better part of a decade.  We were the equivalent of a #1 or #2 seed essentially every year and played in 2 national championship games.  About 6-8 guys drove that and have been discussed.  But when we bring up wonderful players like DJO, Jae, Vander, and Rel, remember that we successfully competed to the top third of the BEast and went into the tourney as a middle seed with Sweet 16 aspirations.  That's really, really good.  But it simply isn't elite.

Which leads to another point.  Anyone who truly can't be happy unless MU can return to its 70's dominance is forever going to be unhappy.  That's how great we were.  Me?  Compete for the BEast every year and play the second weekend with a shot at the Final 4.  All good.   

[Goose]

jsglow

There is close to zero chance for any dominance similar to Al's last decade at MU. I would be quite happy with the scenario you noted.

[Galway Eagle]

I think Goose is right on target.  DWade is the greatest talent in MU history.  But all the very tip top players in the 70's were significantly more talented than any of the guys from this century, appropriately adjusted for their respective eras.  (Today's guys jump higher, run faster, shoot better, yadda yadda.)  What some of you young guys aren't appreciating is that MU was one of the top 4-5 programs in the entire country for the better part of a decade.  We were the equivalent of a #1 or #2 seed essentially every year and played in 2 national championship games.  About 6-8 guys drove that and have been discussed.  But when we bring up wonderful players like DJO, Jae, Vander, and Rel, remember that we successfully competed to the top third of the BEast and went into the tourney as a middle seed with Sweet 16 aspirations.  That's really, really good.  But it simply isn't elite.

Which leads to another point.  Anyone who truly can't be happy unless MU can return to its 70's dominance is forever going to be unhappy.  That's how great we were.  Me?  Compete for the BEast every year and play the second weekend with a shot at the Final 4.  All good.

I don't think any of the younger lads here are forgetting how good we were. I think you're dead on about the team dominance but when it comes to individuals it's a different story. Let's take 11-12, DJO and Jae topped at no8 and sweet 16, now instead of a cast of  Otule, Mayo, obese Gardner, D Wilson, Jones, Williams, cadougan let's surround them with any supporting cast the 70s had (minus the two stars). Are you gonna tell me that team wouldn't achieve at least upgrade to the top 4-5, which is what you said we were back then. Now take that argument with most the squads of the best 2000s teams. The big 3 and zar in 08-09 surrounded by the guys that meminger or Tatum had? That 12-13 team with some of the 70s players instead of Jake Thomas, Otule, d Wilson etc. If at any point you thought to yourself hey the stars on that team would've been a top 4-5 squad with the bench the 70s Stars  had then aren't you essentially saying they would've been legends as well but came along at a time the talent drop off was much greater than in the 70s?

[WarriorDad]

Add Earl Tatum and Don Kojis to tier 1.

Move Jim Chones to tier 1.

Add Tony Miller, Lazar, JFB and Jae Crowder to tier 2.

Drop Larry McNeill and Jim McIlvaine from the list.

YES

[Goose]

Hurler

Similar to my post yesterday, what the hell are you talking about? Do you know who the supporting cast was in the '70's? Do you know how deep Al went with players in the game? The good teams of the 2000's (minus Wade time) had a solid team of talent, but no stars. Al had stars and role players. What MU has missed, sans Wade, was a great player.

Wade is a great example of how one great player can change a team. Thus, many of the all time great at MU were a superstar playing with good player and role players. There were several teams that were exceptions to that, but they were teams that 2, 3 or 4 superstars on it.

Not trying to be an ass, but you really do not understand the program's past and you compare players and teams from your lifetime. I have no problem with that, provided you knew what the past looked like.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I think Goose is right on target.  DWade is the greatest talent in MU history.  But all the very tip top players in the 70's were significantly more talented than any of the guys from this century, appropriately adjusted for their respective eras.  (Today's guys jump higher, run faster, shoot better, yadda yadda.)  What some of you young guys aren't appreciating is that MU was one of the top 4-5 programs in the entire country for the better part of a decade.  We were the equivalent of a #1 or #2 seed essentially every year and played in 2 national championship games.  About 6-8 guys drove that and have been discussed.  But when we bring up wonderful players like DJO, Jae, Vander, and Rel, remember that we successfully competed to the top third of the BEast and went into the tourney as a middle seed with Sweet 16 aspirations.  That's really, really good.  But it simply isn't elite.

Which leads to another point.  Anyone who truly can't be happy unless MU can return to its 70's dominance is forever going to be unhappy.  That's how great we were.  Me?  Compete for the BEast every year and play the second weekend with a shot at the Final 4.  All good.

This is the part I always struggle with. I know the players from the 70s were at unparalleled levels compared to their peers. No one other than Wade has reached those levels since (and he surpassed them IMHO). But I do wonder if they actually were that much better at basketball than the current greats.  I think it's generally accepted that basketball players are at very least better athletes now than they were in the 70s. And the landscape was certainly different. But I really can't say for sure since I didn't get to watch them with my own eyes.

I understand Bags point about the idolism of youth. I still think of Mclvaine, Hutchins, Crawford, and Wardle as great players because I watched them in my formative years. I know now that they are nowhere near the greats in our programs history but I remember them as better than they were

[Dr. Blackheart]

It looks like most of the Scoop Intelligencia is a strong thumbs up for Chones. So, why the down vote by MU?

Bad blood for leaving early by MUBB alums? 

[jsglow]

I don't think any of the younger lads here are forgetting how good we were. I think you're dead on about the team dominance but when it comes to individuals it's a different story. Let's take 11-12, DJO and Jae topped at no8 and sweet 16, now instead of a cast of  Otule, Mayo, obese Gardner, D Wilson, Jones, Williams, cadougan let's surround them with any supporting cast the 70s had (minus the two stars). Are you gonna tell me that team wouldn't achieve at least upgrade to the top 4-5, which is what you said we were back then. Now take that argument with most the squads of the best 2000s teams. The big 3 and zar in 08-09 surrounded by the guys that meminger or Tatum had? That 12-13 team with some of the 70s players instead of Jake Thomas, Otule, d Wilson etc. If at any point you thought to yourself hey the stars on that team would've been a top 4-5 squad with the bench the 70s Stars  had then aren't you essentially saying they would've been legends as well but came along at a time the talent drop off was much greater than in the 70s?

Bags, I have one huge advantage over you.  And it's not anything you can do anything about.  I saw them all play......  In person.......  Numerous times.

Do you have any idea how mediocre Craig Butrym, Bill Neary, Dave Delsman or Guy Lam were?  Have you ever heard of Guy Lam?  My goodness, we used to have a scholly 'reserved' for a Marquette HS kid.  And in Al's early years the 'scrambled eggs', guys so very bad their only purpose was to run around for 2 minutes until Pat and George could catch their breath and get some water.  Please don't make a supporting cast argument.

[jsglow]

This is the part I always struggle with. I know the players from the 70s were at unparalleled levels compared to their peers. No one other than Wade has reached those levels since (and he surpassed them IMHO). But I do wonder if they actually were that much better at basketball than the current greats.  I think it's generally accepted that basketball players are at very least better athletes now than they were in the 70s. And the landscape was certainly different. But I really can't say for sure since I didn't get to watch them with my own eyes.

I understand Bags point about the idolism of youth. I still think of Mclvaine, Hutchins, Crawford, and Wardle as great players because I watched them in my formative years. I know now that they are nowhere near the greats in our programs history but I remember them as better than they were

It's really unknowable TAMU.  Call it the Babe Ruth syndrome.

[Goose]

TAMU

How many All Americans at MU since Al? How many first round draft picks since Al? Of course the game has changed, the talent has risen and athletes are getting better. But how can a player be considered great if they are not even first team BE. Apples to apples, our best guys were better than than 99% of the rest. Today, are best guys are nowhere near at that level against the rest of the players nationally.

[jsglow]

One other factor in all of this.  The very best 21 year olds were in college then.  Chones was only the second 'hardship' in college basketball history.  Today, they are in the NBA by 19.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

TAMU

How many All Americans at MU since Al? How many first round draft picks since Al? Of course the game has changed, the talent has risen and athletes are getting better. But how can a player be considered great if they are not even first team BE. Apples to apples, our best guys were better than than 99% of the rest. Today, are best guys are nowhere near at that level against the rest of the players nationally.

I think we are on the same page

[Galway Eagle]

Bags, I have one huge advantage over you.  And it's not anything you can do anything about.  I saw them all play......  In person.......  Numerous times.

Do you have any idea how mediocre Craig Butrym, Bill Neary, Dave Delsman or Guy Lam were?  Have you ever heard of Guy Lam?  My goodness, we used to have a scholly 'reserved' for a Marquette HS kid.  And in Al's early years the 'scrambled eggs', guys so very bad their only purpose was to run around for 2 minutes until Pat and George could catch their breath and get some water.  Please don't make a supporting cast argument.

Fair enough, as I've said numerous times (in the links posted from the last two times we had this conversation) I wasn't there can only read about it and watch clips which, contrary to Goose's opinion, I have done. The season I was using as a reference point was 74 where a supporting cast behind Lucas consisted of Walton, Ellis, Campbell, Tatum. Now, again, I wasn't there but to me that sounds a lot better than the supporting cast of the 11-12 year I used as an example. I get each years different though so it was probably a poor comparison

[jsglow]

Fair enough, as I've said numerous times (in the links posted from the last two times we had this conversation) I wasn't there can only read about it and watch clips which, contrary to Goose's opinion, I have done. The season I was using as a reference point was 74 where a supporting cast behind Lucas consisted of Walton, Ellis, Campbell, Tatum. Now, again, I wasn't there but to me that sounds a lot better than the supporting cast of the 11-12 year I used as an example. I get each years different though so it was probably a poor comparison

'74 was an incredible team.  Our best ever?  Perhaps.

[Goose]

Hurler

'74 was a very good team, not a great one. '75 would have been had Lucas remained.

Glow

Did you really mention Rick Campbell? One of my favorite guys during that time, but not a name I would be throwing out as anything other than a role player.
Much of what you have posted is good stuff, but Rick is off base. Also, you mentioned Chopper and Butrym, neither saw any minutes aside from a route.

[jsglow]

Hurler

'74 was a very good team, not a great one. '75 would have been had Lucas remained.

Glow

Did you really mention Rick Campbell? One of my favorite guys during that time, but not a name I would be throwing out as anything other than a role player.
Much of what you have posted is good stuff, but Rick is off base. Also, you mentioned Chopper and Butrym, neither saw any minutes aside from a route.

Honestly Goose, I'm not really remembering Campbell's game.  And I don't think I mentioned him.  The quality 'role' players I always think of are Bill Neary and Jerry Howman.  I also remember how Al was always frustrated by Toone who was actually a helluva player, at least talent wise if not always for his attention to detail.

[Goose]

Glow

My bad, Hurler mentioned Rick. As for Jerry Homan,  Al said the following, "going into the season I had no idea how we can win win with Jerry, now I don't know how we will win without him". Jerry had outstanding Sr year, minus his last game.

[oldwarrior81]

'the '74 team was actually fairly young.

pic of starting lineup
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CrR2XcdUEAQLdzT.jpg

Marcus Washington the lone senior starter after McNeill left after the previous season. 
Luke was a junior.  Tatum a soph, as was Walton playing his first season coming from the juco ranks.  Bo a Freshman. 
Campbell was the top scorer off the bench at 4.1 a game.


Lloyd talked about his recruiting.   From the Chicago area (Mount Carmel), he played juco ball in Iowa.  After his freshman year he had decided to play at Jacksonville.  Jacksonville was a solid program, running off a streak of 20+ win seasons in the early 70's including making the championship game behind Artis Gilmore.  They really moved the ball up and down the court which was a good fit for Lloyd.  Bob Gottlieb was to become their new coach in '74.

Lloyd says the phone rang and Al was on the other end.  Lloyd says I'm taking a plane trip to Jacksonville, and will commit when I'm there.  Al said don't get on the plane until we speak to you.
1 1/2 hours later Majerus shows up at Walton's with a pizza.  Classic Rick recruiting.  They talked for a bit.  Rick drove him to Milwaukee and he signed.

[Goose]

oldwarrior

Great stuff.

[Newsdreams]

This is the part I always struggle with. I know the players from the 70s were at unparalleled levels compared to their peers. No one other than Wade has reached those levels since (and he surpassed them IMHO). But I do wonder if they actually were that much better at basketball than the current greats.  I think it's generally accepted that basketball players are at very least better athletes now than they were in the 70s. And the landscape was certainly different. But I really can't say for sure since I didn't get to watch them with my own eyes.

I understand Bags point about the idolism of youth. I still think of Mclvaine, Hutchins, Crawford, and Wardle as great players because I watched them in my formative years. I know now that they are nowhere near the greats in our programs history but I remember them as better than they were

As you know the game has changed so much. Shot clock, 3-point line. I would say there was much more emphasis on fundamentals, specially per position. I mean back then most players played one position and learned the fundamentals to that position. Al was a master at finding all the pieces to the puzzle and build a team for that era. I believe Wojo is the doing tge same for this era. Not that we will be as dominant, but we should be up there.

[Dr. Blackheart]

The good news is that we can argue eras.  Lots of great players who would be legends at most schools,

#firstworldproblem

[dgies9156]

I loved Earl Tatum, but he first guy out, IMO. He was a great player, on some great times, but not at same level of dgies Tier 1 list. Chones is high on the tier 1 list. Anyone after those guys had very, very nice careers, but nowhere near the same level. Honestly, they are way behind the all time best.

Goose,

I suspect that leaving Earl Tatum off the Tier II list is the first sign of senility. He was an incredible player and belongs on that list. I am deeply regretting leaving one heck of a basketball player off the list of significant ballplayers to Marquette history.

As to Mr. Chones, as much as I loved him and wished he was able to stay for his entire career, which would have put him in the Tier 1 list, he is not a Tier I, never wear the uniform again player. He was a two-year varsity letterman and while he was as dominant and quality a player as we ever had, his early departure meant that he was unable to have the impact on our team that he should have or could have. Keep in mind that the players in Tier 1 drove history at Marquette.

I also would agree that Don Kojis and Terry rand probably belong in Tier II. Tony Smith was a tough one to leave off, but he played for some pretty bad MU teams.

[4everwarriors]

Huh, hey? Wee lost won game wit #22 at center. Therefour, game changer, impact playa, one of MU's goat. Know question, aina?

[Nukem2]

As to Mr. Chones, as much as I loved him and wished he was able to stay for his entire career, which would have put him in the Tier 1 list, he is not a Tier I, never wear the uniform again player. He was a two-year varsity letterman and while he was as dominant and quality a player as we ever had, his early departure meant that he was unable to have the impact on our team that he should have or could have. Keep in mind that the players in Tier 1 drove history at Marquette.

Need to give Jimmy some rope here.  Al told him to take the money and pretty much shoved him out the door. Much as it upset us all, lets not rain on Jimmy's parade. Just what it was.  MU lost only one game with him and that was a travesty of injustice. Jimmy is right there with #3, who managed to be on the losing end of quite a few games.

[Goose]

Truthfully, I cannot agree with any argument on keeping Chones number from being retired. The first time I saw Wade in person, I had his number retired in my head. If he had played one season and never saw a FF, Wade was still the all time best, IMO. The same holds true for Chones.

Aside from those two, Bo Ellis comes to mind. From the day he stepped on the Arena floor he was a great college player. His career was outstanding for four years. That said, I never would have thought Butch Lee would be a national POY after his freshman season. Butch needed his junior year to cement himself as an all time great. Wade and Chones made their impact known from day one.