Clean program matter?

[mudeltaforcegurl]

Let's start with the obvious:

Clean means that our ballplayers' sexual antic s DO NOT end up on Page 1 of the Chicago Tribune.

Clean means that our Public Safety employees follow Wisconsin law, even when basketball players are involved.

Clean means we are recruiting within the rules of the NCAA. That's means we follow rules for spending, avoiding payment to agents, families and players themselves.

Clean means we accept that there are limitations on when we can call on players, when we can text them and when we can write them.

Beyond that, Marquette should expect that our ballplayers are college students. We know they will inevitably do dumb things and some of those dumb things may bring unwanted and perhaps unwarranted publicity on themselves and on Marquette. We respect them as people but expect them to respect the university and we the community as well.

Marquette basketball players get degrees. Even if they turn pro early,  Marquette should expect and encourage them to come back as their lives permit and earn their degrees.

That's a clean program. This is what matters and, candidly, Marquette has to stand for something. Those among us who remember the Al days also remember that Coach McGuire's players graduated. Coach insisted on it and I believe only two did not have degrees by the time they were 30. Kids that left early inevitably came back and Marquette worked with them to get them their degrees.

Look, we need to find a way to be elite and to be clean!

Agreed, need to find a way to be an elite team with good people. I prefer not cheer for dirt bag people. 😇

[MomofMUltiples]

Stupidest. Thread. Ever.

And that's saying a lot.

[Jockey]

I am not the moral arbiter for collegiate behavior (and from what I have seen the NCAA shouldn't be either).  I don't want our players duck taping their room mates to chairs and interrogating them with cigarettes, but honestly, minor violations wouldn't phase me.

And you get to be the one to decide? Or can I be the one?

That sounds snarky, but I don't mean it that way. Rather, everyone has a different opinion as to what a "minor violation" is. Maybe you and I would agree - maybe we wouldn't. But to a defender of any particular institution, almost anything could be classified as minor where an outside might not see it that way..

[WarriorDad]

Love this thread.  We just pissed away a Big East regular season title and a high seed in the Tournament, so why not try to distract people from that by reminding them what a horrible human being Buzz was when he coached here half a decade ago?

That was not the purpose of it.  Multiple members said at least we have a clean program sarcastically implying we shouldn't and it would lead to better results apparently if we were less clean.

How important is it to our graduates and fans? 

[forgetful]

Buzz ran a clean enough program for me while pushing some boundaries. That's my baseline for a guy that can coach as well as him

Buzz is shady. I know of a program that routinely runs afoul of NCAA regs that considered Buzz, but decided against him because he painted too far outside the lines.

[Lennys Tap]

Let's start with the obvious:

Clean means that our ballplayers' sexual antic s DO NOT end up on Page 1 of the Chicago Tribune.

So if a student athlete is accused (not charged or convicted, accused) of sexual assault that means the program is dirty? How about if student athletes are accused of stealing (Hazel), gambling (Ammo), drugs (Mortenson) or assault (Manchild Mathews, Vander)?

As for Al, I was around then and knew many of the players. Plenty of them were solid student athletes and plenty of them were directed by the coaching staff to Horton Roe classes and other profs who were "friendly" to the program. I still have no problem with this (didn't have any problem with some of their heavy drug use either) - but I'm sure a Tribune reporter could have had a field day with it had he or she so desired.

[Lennys Tap]

Buzz is shady. I know of a program that routinely runs afoul of NCAA regs that considered Buzz, but decided against him because he painted too far outside the lines.

Sure. LOL.

[Jockey]

So if a student athlete is accused (not charged or convicted, accused) of sexual assault that means the program is dirty? How about if student athletes are accused of stealing (Hazel), gambling (Ammo), drugs (Mortenson) or assault (Manchild Mathews, Vander)?

As for Al, I was around then and knew many of the players. Plenty of them were solid student athletes and plenty of them were directed by the coaching staff to Horton Roe classes and other profs who were "friendly" to the program. I still have no problem with this (didn't have any problem with some of their heavy drug use either) - but I'm sure a Tribune reporter could have had a field day with it had he or she so desired.

I agree with what you say about Al. But it was about helping players rather than skirting rules to gain an advantage.

[Billy Hoyle]

  the problem ain't that they "partook" but that they got caught.  gotta be cool about it and maintain man...gotta maintain

The issue was Buzz thumbing his nose at university policy. 3 strikes and you're out? Not when I need a PG. Syracuse was cited in their NCAA violation report for not following their departmental policies for drug test violations. Buzz was doing the same thing.

I don't care about using weed or underage drinking, but I care about putting athletes above the law. If they get caught then face the same consequences you and I would have.

[Lennys Tap]

I agree with what you say about Al. But it was about helping players rather than skirting rules to gain an advantage.

Al was a great guy, no doubt about it. And sure, it was "about helping the players" - which coincidently was also about helping Al.

In the words of Bob Seeger:

She used me
And I used her
And neither one cared -
We were gettin' our share

[dgies9156]

So if a student athlete is accused (not charged or convicted, accused) of sexual assault that means the program is dirty? How about if student athletes are accused of stealing (Hazel), gambling (Ammo), drugs (Mortenson) or assault (Manchild Mathews, Vander)?

As for Al, I was around then and knew many of the players. Plenty of them were solid student athletes and plenty of them were directed by the coaching staff to Horton Roe classes and other profs who were "friendly" to the program. I still have no problem with this (didn't have any problem with some of their heavy drug use either) - but I'm sure a Tribune reporter could have had a field day with it had he or she so desired.

Brother Lenny,

First of all, you and I are of the same generation and yes, I knew about the drug use and "How many Hortons are in your GPA?" as well. The drug use largely was weed, which was still illegal but the players were no different than the rest of campus.

Bro, look no further than some of the problems the University of Tennessee has had with their football team. I specified sexual assault only because it made Page 1 of the Tribune. But I agree with you that assault, theft, drugs and illegal gaming also are problems Marquette should avoid. The illegal gaming, notably, is less of factor because if a player really wants to gamble, the Potowatomi are less than a mile away.

Bottom line, Sister MUDeltaForceGurl said it best -- we need to be clean and to be elite. I share our Sister Scooper's belief that we can be.

[mu03eng]

+1000, he never violated any NCAA rules, and more importantly to me...he won, and won a lot. too many people freak out about some things that happened off the court..They point to that and say that was why they wanted Buzz gone...that's ridiculous. as long as NCAA rules are being followed and you win...and win as much as he did..I want him. The stupid administration ruined MU basketball because they didn't like him.

He absolutely did, he just never got caught to the point of NCAA violations being announced. Buzz routinely trampled all over academic standards for both admittance and for in season participation. He also covered for repeated player behavioral problems that should have been nipped in the bud instead of enabled.

[mu03eng]

I want a clean problem in that by and large the students do the right things when it comes to academics and societal engagement, but I'd be perfectly fine with a program that was a bag dropper. I want to see the NCAA's revenue model turned on it's head regarding paying players and the fastest way to that is to get every team dropping bags. I just want to see the current model burn.

[Billy Hoyle]

So if a student athlete is accused (not charged or convicted, accused) of sexual assault that means the program is dirty? How about if student athletes are accused of stealing (Hazel), gambling (Ammo), drugs (Mortenson) or assault (Manchild Mathews, Vander)?

Hazel - gone
Ammo - gone (for online poker)
Mortenson - gone (steroids)
Matthews - gone (though I never heard about an assault, it was plagiarism in English 001 that got him sent packing)
Vander - legal bills paid by MU, no consequences.

Notice the difference between coaching staffs and decisions?

[Nukem2]

Hazel - gone
Ammo - gone (for online poker)
Mortenson - gone (steroids)
Matthews - gone (though I never heard about an assault, it was plagiarism in English 001 that got him sent packing)
Vander - legal bills paid by MU, no consequences.

Notice the difference between coaching staffs and decisions?

Matthews was involved in a physical altercation with one of the coaches?

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

Hazel - gone
Ammo - gone (for online poker)
Mortenson - gone (steroids)
Matthews - gone (though I never heard about an assault, it was plagiarism in English 001 that got him sent packing)
Vander - legal bills paid by MU, no consequences.

Notice the difference between coaching staffs and decisions?

Frankly you should have a bigger problem with the institution.  If the 'coach' was making these decisions than the powers that be were not doing their job.

[WarriorDad]

I agree with what you say about Al. But it was about helping players rather than skirting rules to gain an advantage.

Jim Chones on record saying players weren't paid. 

[WarriorDad]

+1000, he never violated any NCAA rules, and more importantly to me...he won, and won a lot. too many people freak out about some things that happened off the court..They point to that and say that was why they wanted Buzz gone...that's ridiculous. as long as NCAA rules are being followed and you win...and win as much as he did..I want him. The stupid administration ruined MU basketball because they didn't like him.

His staff did violate NCAA rules. 

[BrewCity83]

Matthews was involved in a physical altercation with one of the coaches?

Not Wesley Matthews.  There was a different Matthews that IIRC never suited up for MU....

[tower912]

Not Wesley Matthews.  There was a different Matthews that IIRC never suited up for MU....

James.   Ended up at EMU.   I think

[Lennys Tap]

His staff did violate NCAA rules.

A ride home to a recruit who missed his train - BFD.

[Lennys Tap]

Matthews was involved in a physical altercation with one of the coaches?

Punched an assistant IIRC.

[NickelDimer]

A ride home to a recruit who missed his train - BFD.

Seriously. I can't believe that was even posted

[Lennys Tap]

Jim Chones on record saying players weren't paid.

Chico - where in this thread does anyone suggest that players were paid?

[Cheeks]

Yes it matters.  I assume the nearly 20% who said no are not alumni and don't give a rip about the integrity of the school.

You can win without the extracurricular baggage