Marquette opens -6 vs. SHU

[Skip Intro]

It was not an example of great coaching on the fly...

An inbound pass with 0.8 on the clock needs to be placed just about perfectly, and needs to hit the shooter's hands as close to their in-shot motion as possible (i.e., a lob pass, not a chest- or bounce pass to the corner).  If there's one guy on the team I trust to lob an inbounds pass to that specific spot from three-point range, it's Markus.

If there would have been 1.5 seconds or more on the clock, I bet we would have seen a different inbounder, with Markus as a decoy or actual last-shot option.  That's on-the-fly coaching...

[tower912]

In a situation like that, without benefit of a timeout, you go with what you practice.    All game long, all season long, when in the game, Markus takes the ball out under the basket.     Wojo went with what the team had practiced and called a play they had practiced.    Sam and Markus have enough experience and trust in each other that eye contact was enough for them to make a small adjustment and have Sam drift a little higher into an open area.     It is the product of coaching, it is the product of experience, it is the product of two players in sync with each other.   
    Could Wojo have, with the benefit of another timeout, drawn up something different?    I am sure the answer is yes.    However, without benefit of time, giving the guys the call in a 3 second brush by was all he could do.     It is actually a tribute to his coaching that his guys had a plan for that situation that they could default to.   

[Floorslapper]

The fact that you think that's why you have been repeatedly banned from Scoop shows you will never, ever, learn a damn thing.  But I guess telling yourself a lie, and hilariously painting yourself as a persecuted "alpha"...I guess it gets you through the day.

Stay in your lane pud.  You aren't a moderator here. 

Everyone knows why I got banned - being critical of Wojo and Derrick Wilson - and not relenting on that despite the heard mentality of the most prolific posters here trying to shout my viewpoint down.

[tower912]

'herd' mentality.     I don't want my mentality to be judged by hearing. 

[Floorslapper]

Did I ever say Chartouny was as good of a decoy as Markus? The only thing that matters is that Joe was good enough of a decoy to make the play work. He drew a Creighton defender away from Sam and Joey so one of them could make the shot.

I can understand why you would switch Joe and Markus. Makes complete sense. It also makes complete sense to have your best passer make the inbounds pass in this situation. There's more than one way to skin a Blue Jay. I don't understand why you feel like there's only one acceptable strategy, especially when the strategy we used worked.

Markus had 9 turnovers in the Creighton game.  He's hardly our "best passer," but he clearly is our best offensive threat.

The fact some people here are trying to suggest there was a high degree of difficulty on the inbounds pass Markus had to execute is laughable. 

But yes, Sam made the bucket from 25 feet having to retreat further from the basket due to the play design and chosen alignment.  But it worked out. 

It's just amusing that the biggest Wojo fanboys complain about those who have been critical never being able to give him any credit (which is not true), yet when confronted with a clear situation that was NOT good coaching, they pretzel logic their way into suggesting it was good coaching.

[BM1090]

Markus had 9 turnovers in the Creighton game.  He's hardly our "best passer," but he clearly is our best offensive threat.

The fact some people here are trying to suggest there was a high degree of difficulty on the inbounds pass Markus had to execute is laughable. 

But yes, Sam made the bucket from 25 feet having to retreat further from the basket due to the play design and chosen alignment.  But it worked out. 

It's just amusing that the biggest Wojo fanboys complain about those who have been critical never being able to give him any credit (which is not true), yet when confronted with a clear situation that was NOT good coaching, they pretzel logic their way into suggesting it was good coaching.

There are plenty of clear examples you could point to that were not good coaching. This is not one of them. Having Markus inbound was perfectly logical. Nobody disagrees with you that Markus could be used as a decoy, but you can't acknowledge why it was done despite many providing a number of good reasons.

Weird corner to back yourself into.

[wadesworld]

Markus had 9 turnovers in the Creighton game.  He's hardly our "best passer," but he clearly is our best offensive threat.

The fact some people here are trying to suggest there was a high degree of difficulty on the inbounds pass Markus had to execute is laughable. 

But yes, Sam made the bucket from 25 feet having to retreat further from the basket due to the play design and chosen alignment.  But it worked out. 

It's just amusing that the biggest Wojo fanboys complain about those who have been critical never being able to give him any credit (which is not true), yet when confronted with a clear situation that was NOT good coaching, they pretzel logic their way into suggesting it was good coaching.

Amusing indeed.

[tower912]

The pretzel logic to convince yourself that a hail Mary that worked is bad coaching is the amusing part.    A play that they had practiced.    A play that, according to Markus, Sam makes all the time in practice.   

Can an argument be made that there should be a tree of plays that involve Chartouny (absolutely NOT Sacar) taking the ball out in a similar situation?    Sure.  Particularly from the side.   To argue that this successful play was wrong because it isn't what you would have run?   

[Floorslapper]

Amusing indeed.

It is.  The depths of your mancrush on Wojo is funny AF.  I'd understand it if the guy had a track record here like Buzz, but he's yet to win an NCAA game 4 years in and has us at 34 in the magical Year 5, and some of you are celebrating as if we've arrived.

But, to be fair, that is a function of the underwhelming first 4 years.

[wadesworld]

It is.  The depths of your mancrush on Wojo is funny AF.  I'd understand it if the guy had a track record here like Buzz, but he's yet to win an NCAA game 4 years in and has us at 34 in the magical Year 5, and some of you are celebrating as if we've arrived.

But, to be fair, that is a function of the underwhelming first 4 years.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 the guy talking about betas and emojis uses "AF." 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 go put your Uggs and flannel on and pick up a pumpkin spice from Starbucks sweetie. Basic b!tches are taking over Scoop.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Markus had 9 turnovers in the Creighton game.  He's hardly our "best passer," but he clearly is our best offensive threat.

The fact some people here are trying to suggest there was a high degree of difficulty on the inbounds pass Markus had to execute is laughable. 

But yes, Sam made the bucket from 25 feet having to retreat further from the basket due to the play design and chosen alignment.  But it worked out. 

It's just amusing that the biggest Wojo fanboys complain about those who have been critical never being able to give him any credit (which is not true), yet when confronted with a clear situation that was NOT good coaching, they pretzel logic their way into suggesting it was good coaching.

Who is a better passer then Markus besides one of the Hauser brothers who were needed to hit the shot?

Im not going to address the rest because it's been gone over ad naseum. There are plenty of examples of bad coaching from Work. I don't think this is one of them.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Stay in your lane pud.  You aren't a moderator here. 

Everyone knows why I got banned - being critical of Wojo and Derrick Wilson - and not relenting on that despite the heard mentality of the most prolific posters here trying to shout my viewpoint down.

Everyone knows -- except the obnoxious, argumentative pud.

[MU82]

Effen Wojo! His stoopid play cost us the loss!!

[Floorslapper]

Everyone knows -- except the obnoxious, argumentative pud.

Says the guy who is an obnoxious, argumentative, pud.  Question for you pud:  As a self-described big deal at 34,000 person firm who "runs your firm's entire portfolio of business with 2 of the Fortune 5 companies," how is it that you have ample time over the course of the workday to participate on Scoop?  (No doubt though, you've been a good yes man over the years and tip of the cap to you there.)

[tower912]

It is.  The depths of your mancrush on Wojo is funny AF.  I'd understand it if the guy had a track record here like Buzz, but he's yet to win an NCAA game 4 years in and has us at 34 in the magical Year 5, and some of you are celebrating as if we've arrived.

But, to be fair, that is a function of the underwhelming first 4 years.

I have posted elsewhere and I will post it again.   Just as I was not ready to fire Wojo after IU or Kansas, I am not ready to build a statue for him now.    What you call a mancrush, I call patience.     I don't think Wojo is reinventing the game.    I know the angry little boy look he had on the sidelines during his early seasons gave me pause.     But, the powers that be wanted the anti-Buzz and they got him.   Long term build, avoiding JUCO's, minimizing off court issues, choirboy image.    What has Wojo done that is contrary to that? 
So, here we are in year 5, 14-3, top 15, and you are arguing that Wojo sucks because the rebuild didn't happen as fast as you thought it should, that he wasn't an instant hall of famer,  and most recently, he ran an end-game out of bounds play (that WORKED!) that you didn't like.    But everyone who showed patience and didn't call for his firing is a fanboy with a mancrush.  Everyone else is the problem.    With our 'heard' mentality.         

[wadesworld]

Says the guy who is an obnoxious, argumentative, pud.  Question for you pud:  As a self-described big deal at 34,000 person firm who "runs your firm's entire portfolio of business with 2 of the Fortune 5 companies," how is it that you have ample time over the course of the workday to participate on Scoop?  (No doubt though, you've been a good yes man over the years and tip of the cap to you there.)

Honest question, do you know what being a "yes man" means?  You've now used it on two different people and in both cases you've completely contradicted yourself in the very same post.

Argumentative pud; yes man.
One of three Wojo slurpers remaining; yes man.

I'm 100% certain you don't know what a yes man is.

[MU82]

I have posted elsewhere and I will post it again.   Just as I was not ready to fire Wojo after IU or Kansas, I am not ready to build a statue for him now.    What you call a mancrush, I call patience.     I don't think Wojo is reinventing the game.    I know the angry little boy look he had on the sidelines during his early seasons gave me pause.     But, the powers that be wanted the anti-Buzz and they got him.   Long term build, avoiding JUCO's, minimizing off court issues, choirboy image.    What has Wojo done that is contrary to that? 
So, here we are in year 5, 14-3, top 15, and you are arguing that Wojo sucks because the rebuild didn't happen as fast as you thought it should, that he wasn't an instant hall of famer,  and most recently, he ran an end-game out of bounds play (that WORKED!) that you didn't like.    But everyone who showed patience and didn't call for his firing is a fanboy with a mancrush.  Everyone else is the problem.    With our 'heard' mentality.         

As is so often the case, tower, outstanding post.

Oh, and just to throw this out there ... Mrs. Smart's husband is 10-6 in Year 4 at UT.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Says the guy who is an obnoxious, argumentative, pud.  Question for you pud:  As a self-described big deal at 34,000 person firm who "runs your firm's entire portfolio of business with 2 of the Fortune 5 companies," how is it that you have ample time over the course of the workday to participate on Scoop?  (No doubt though, you've been a good yes man over the years and tip of the cap to you there.)

You mean my 1.028 posts per day? LOL

Once again, Ners is reduced to "I know you are, but what am I?"

[Floorslapper]

Honest question, do you know what being a "yes man" means?  You've now used it on two different people and in both cases you've completely contradicted yourself in the very same post.

Argumentative pud; yes man.
One of three Wojo slurpers remaining; yes man.

I'm 100% certain you don't know what a yes man is.

"One of three Wojo slurpers remaining?"  What does that even mean? 

[wadesworld]

"One of three Wojo slurpers remaining?"  What does that even mean?

You tell me.  According to you it's impossible to continue defending Wojo and the number of people trying to do so is down to 3, including me.  Yet I'm a yes man.  Direct contradictions.

But good deflection.

Do you know what a yes man is?  You've used it on 2 people that you claim are the opposite of yes men.

[rocky_warrior]

Stay in your lane pud.  You aren't a moderator here. 

Everyone knows why I got banned - being critical of Wojo and Derrick Wilson - and not relenting on that despite the heard mentality of the most prolific posters here trying to shout my viewpoint down.

You were banned for name calling, and incessant arguing.  Like you are doing here.  If you understand that, and you still do it, I can only imaging you want to be banned again?

So, tone it down, or I'll do it for you. Again...

[Floorslapper]

You tell me.  According to you it's impossible to continue defending Wojo and the number of people trying to do so is down to 3, including me.  Yet I'm a yes man.  Direct contradictions.

But good deflection.

Do you know what a yes man is?  You've used it on 2 people that you claim are the opposite of yes men.

Please quote where I've posted there are 3 Wojo slurpers left?

What a "yes man" is, is one who toes the company line - which on this board was that Wojo did a good job in Year 1 and was right to play Derrick Wilson 30+ minutes per game despite Matt Carlino and Duane Wilson being available, while also limiting Deonte Burton to 16 minutes per game.

[mu_hilltopper]

MUScoop's mods, myself especially, maintain a lot of "institutional amnesia" whereby we rarely ban people and when we do, we rapidly forget who or why -- somewhat on purpose.   

The Banned come back after a time, and we let them because (first and foremost) Arbys, and secondly, we hope for the best.  We hope for the best of Marquetters to step forward and behave like decent humans.  Scoop is home to many chances.

Floorslapper just used up his latest chance.  Beef and Cheddar goes to the first user who can identify his next account name.

[tower912]

Tower914.

[ATL MU Warrior]

MUScoop's mods, myself especially, maintain a lot of "institutional amnesia" whereby we rarely ban people and when we do, we rapidly forget who or why -- somewhat on purpose.   

The Banned come back after a time, and we let them because (first and foremost) Arbys, and secondly, we hope for the best.  We hope for the best of Marquetters to step forward and behave like decent humans.  Scoop is home to many chances.

Floorslapper just used up his latest chance.  Beef and Cheddar goes to the first user who can identify his next account name.