5 year plan

[Herman Cain]

We lost the one game we played in the tournament.  At no point in the year were we in the top 25.  We went 4-0 against Creighton and Xavier, who had both lost very key players due to injury.  We weren't a very good team.  Not terrible, just not especially good.

We were a fun team to watch that year. Had JJJ , Luke, Duane, Katin, Sam , Markus , Haanif etc very good team chemistry I thought.

[Its DJOver]

We lost the one game we played in the tournament.  At no point in the year were we in the top 25.  We went 4-0 against Creighton and Xavier, who had both lost very key players due to injury.  We weren't a very good team.  Not terrible, just not especially good.

And yet the only evidence that you've presented to support your claim is that we lost in the tournament and that we could have lost other games if players weren't injured.  Again, if you start playing playing the "if" game, the are potential scenarios that favor your argument as well as those that counter your argument.

[Lennys Tap]

Coach Williams left MU, he also has zero tourney wins in his new stint, but he's doing well.  NCAA tournament wins don't always align with success or failure of the team that year.

Coach Williams is at a historically bad program. Achieving at a slightly higher level of success at V Tech (or Rutgers, say) than the guy at Marquette is roughly equivalent to the guy at Marquette doing slightly better than the guy at UNC, Kansas, Duke or Kentucky. I'd take that any day. Coming close to Virginia Tech? Not so much.

[Silent Verbal]

And yet the only evidence that you've presented to support your claim is that we lost in the tournament and that we could have lost other games if players weren't injured.  Again, if you start playing playing the "if" game, the are potential scenarios that favor your argument as well as those that counter your argument.

I also stated we were never in the top 25 that year. 

[Its DJOver]

I also stated we were never in the top 25 that year.

Fair point. That is still not enough evidence to make a compelling argument IMO.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I don't think Wojo is a great coach. He's been decidedly average so far. He is a C level coach. Doesn't make the team better than the sum of its parts, doesn't make it worse. He can make up for this by assembling strong rosters. I think he has assembled a B+ A- type roster this season.  If he plays to expectations, we will have an enjoyable season. Next season we should have an A/A- roster and really enjoy the season.  If  Wojo doesn't meet expectations those preaching patience will quickly grow impatient.

Oh and he gets an A in all other aspects of being a coach.

[WarriorDad]

We lost the one game we played in the tournament.  At no point in the year were we in the top 25.  We went 4-0 against Creighton and Xavier, who had both lost very key players due to injury.  We weren't a very good team.  Not terrible, just not especially good.

The same Xavier team that went to the Elite 8?  The same Creighton team that also made the NCAA tournament, finished 3rd in the Big East, made the Big East tournament final?

Despite their loss of key players, they somehow managed to do just fine that year. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Honest question,  how much non MU college basketball do Scoopers watch? Because I hear things like "our offense has always sucked" and "we always have long periods where we don't score" and "we looked too sloppy against the cupcakes". It makes me feel like the answer is "none". I am pretty much in a constant state of watching college basketball and also every game I have watched this season has featured an extended scoring drought for at least one of the teams (Disclaimer, yes the one last night was extreme). Go back and watch some of the replays of our old teams under Buzz,  if you want to see some painful offense. Most high majors have periods where they look sloppy against cupcakes.

[WarriorDad]

Coach Williams is at a historically bad program. Achieving at a slightly higher level of success at V Tech (or Rutgers, say) than the guy at Marquette is roughly equivalent to the guy at Marquette doing slightly better than the guy at UNC, Kansas, Duke or Kentucky. I'd take that any day. Coming close to Virginia Tech? Not so much.

Va Tech was the better seed last season and lost.  What happened the previous 100 years doesn't particularly matter.  Last season they were in the tournament, had the higher seed and lost.  The previous season they were the 9 seed and lost to Wisconsin by double digits.

Your history doesn't play games.  You earn what you earn each year.  What your history can do is help to recruit, help to validate a program, but in the moment of the game it means nothing.  Your 5 guys against their 5 guys.   This the year he gets a tournament win? Probably, especially if their freshman's ACT test results are cleared and they add his talent.

[WarriorDad]

I also stated we were never in the top 25 that year.

We were according to the computer guys a few times.  Voters are usually the last to know.

[Silent Verbal]

The same Xavier team that went to the Elite 8?  The same Creighton team that also made the NCAA tournament, finished 3rd in the Big East, made the Big East tournament final?

Despite their loss of key players, they somehow managed to do just fine that year.

That Creighton team was 18-1 before Watson's injury, 7-9 after. 

Xavier, after losing Sumner, went through a stretch where they lost 6 in a row, during which we played them twice.  The first time we played them, they were also missing Blueitt.  Eventually they figured out how to play without Sumner and made a nice run in the tournament (crapshoot), but we caught them at the best possible time.

[wadesworld]

That Creighton team was 18-1 before Watson's injury, 7-9 after. 

Xavier, after losing Sumner, went through a stretch where they lost 6 in a row, during which we played them twice.  The first time we played them, they were also missing Blueitt.  Eventually they figured out how to play without Sumner and made a nice run in the tournament (crapshoot), but we caught them at the best possible time.

Okay. We were 0-4 against those 2 teams that year then.

And since we haven't had Greg this year, let's just call Indiana and Kansas wins!

[skianth16]

I don't think Wojo is a great coach. He's been decidedly average so far. He is a C level coach. Doesn't make the team better than the sum of its parts, doesn't make it worse. He can make up for this by assembling strong rosters. I think he has assembled a B+ A- type roster this season.  If he plays to expectations, we will have an enjoyable season. Next season we should have an A/A- roster and really enjoy the season.  If  Wojo doesn't meet expectations those preaching patience will quickly grow impatient.

Oh and he gets an A in all other aspects of being a coach.

In general, I would agree with this. Based on what we've seen this year, I'm beginning to worry that if he isn't able to reign Markus in, that we could end up seeing a team that is worse than the sum of its parts. I don't think the second half of Kansas will be a common occurrence, but complaints of hero ball are nothing new. And too much hero ball can make other players worse.

Also, what other aspects of being a coach do you give him an A for? He gets a B+/A- for recruiting and a C for X's and O's based on your comments above? What's left? Is this a reference to running a clean program?

[skianth16]

Va Tech was the better seed last season and lost.  What happened the previous 100 years doesn't particularly matter.  Last season they were in the tournament, had the higher seed and lost.  The previous season they were the 9 seed and lost to Wisconsin by double digits.

Your history doesn't play games.  You earn what you earn each year. What your history can do is help to recruit, help to validate a program, but in the moment of the game it means nothing.  Your 5 guys against their 5 guys.   This the year he gets a tournament win? Probably, especially if their freshman's ACT test results are cleared and they add his talent.

History doesn't matter? Come on, everyone knows that's wrong. Tradition and historical success absolutely matter in college athletics. To say otherwise is just... crazy.

[curbina]

Posted by willie warrior

So what should be the minimum acceptable results for next year to put out the red carpet for Wojo. This would be a good scenario:

1. Compete for BEast regular season title--at least a top 3 finish.
2. A deep run in BEast tourney
3. A top 15 ranking
4. Regular season record of at least 23-7
5. NCAA tourney regional seed of 4 or better
6. No one and done in tourney
7. Improved home attendance.

The above should be easily attainable given the assets Wojo/MU has, and the support many on this board have advocated on Wojo, and their reasons why we should be so good.

[Lennys Tap]

Va Tech was the better seed last season and lost.  What happened the previous 100 years doesn't particularly matter.  Last season they were in the tournament, had the higher seed and lost.  The previous season they were the 9 seed and lost to Wisconsin by double digits.

Your history doesn't play games.  You earn what you earn each year.  What your history can do is help to recruit, help to validate a program, but in the moment of the game it means nothing.  Your 5 guys against their 5 guys.   This the year he gets a tournament win? Probably, especially if their freshman's ACT test results are cleared and they add his talent.

You're right. History doesn't matter. If a guy coaches Rutgers to the same success as the guy coaching Kentucky, they are equal. History no matta.

Utter BS.

[GGGG]

History matters no doubt.  But I don't think it matters as much as you are implying.  Kentucky is a great program because of huge fan support, monied donors backing the program, and SEC money.  History is part of that, but also history CREATES that. 

There are examples of historically poor programs using their resources to become national powers.  Wisconsin, Arizona, Florida were all programs that shed their history and took that next step. 

[Lennys Tap]

That Creighton team was 18-1 before Watson's injury, 7-9 after. 

Xavier, after losing Sumner, went through a stretch where they lost 6 in a row, during which we played them twice.  The first time we played them, they were also missing Blueitt.  Eventually they figured out how to play without Sumner and made a nice run in the tournament (crapshoot), but we caught them at the best possible time.

This is spot on. Any fair, non slurper assessment acknowledges how incredibly lucky we were to catch Creighton and Xavier when we did. If we go 2-2 in those games (best scenario possible IMO) do we even make the tournament?

[GGGG]

So now we are going to asterisk our good wins?

Don't overthink it.  A win is a win.  A loss is a loss.

[wadesworld]

This is spot on. Any fair, non slurper assessment acknowledges how incredibly lucky we were to catch Creighton and Xavier when we did. If we go 2-2 in those games (best scenario possible IMO) do we even make the tournament?

Teams deal with injuries and players missing games for any number of reasons. Who cares what our record would've been had those teams been playing with those players? They weren't.

[Lennys Tap]

History matters no doubt.  But I don't think it matters as much as you are implying.  Kentucky is a great program because of huge fan support, monied donors backing the program, and SEC money.  History is part of that, but also history CREATES that. 

There are examples of historically poor programs using their resources to become national powers.  Wisconsin, Arizona, Florida were all programs that shed their history and took that next step.

Bo Ryan, Lute Olson and Billy Donovan are hall of famers.

And historically speaking I don't think any of those programs ranked as low as V Tech.

But I agree it's not impossible to win there - just a lot harder than it is to win at Marquette.

[GGGG]

Bo Ryan, Lute Olson and Billy Donovan are hall of famers.

And historically speaking I don't think any of those programs ranked as low as V Tech.

But I agree it's not impossible to win there - just a lot harder than it is to win at Marquette.

Which is why Buzz has not, and likely will not, have the same success that he did at MU.

[BM1090]

This is spot on. Any fair, non slurper assessment acknowledges how incredibly lucky we were to catch Creighton and Xavier when we did. If we go 2-2 in those games (best scenario possible IMO) do we even make the tournament?

No we don't. But that's a bad argument. Providence "caught us at the best possible time" after our win vs. Villanova. We also had to play our game at providence on a damn ice rink. Our loss to Pitt came as we were working a bunch of new guys into the lineup. We played without one of our guys at Georgetown if I remember correctly.

There are good breaks and bad breaks over the course of the season. It happens every year

[GGGG]

I mean, at some point having our best perimeter defender out gives a close loss an asterisk this year right?

[Lennys Tap]

No we don't. But that's a bad argument. Providence "caught us at the best possible time" after our win vs. Villanova. We also had to play our game at providence on a damn ice rink. Our loss to Pitt came as we were working a bunch of new guys into the lineup. We played without one of our guys at Georgetown if I remember correctly.

There are good breaks and bad breaks over the course of the season. It happens every year

LOL. There is a big difference between phony excuses and legit ones. We played 7-9 Creighton and 0-6 Xavier both twice. They were without their best players, not "a guy".

Dishonest assessments of where we are and where we've been as a program won't make this any better, but by all means keep drinking the kool aid.