Character

[1990Warrior]

I was surprised to see nothing on the board about Mike Jarvis's statement about our not winning on the road was a reflection about a lack of character.  He said this in a very general way about winning on the road but was clearly taking a shot at this years team.  I, and probably most on the board, can attribute this (lack of character) first to poor senior leadership with Fitz's extremely poor play and Ooze not playing as much of a role (obviously until yesterdays game).  However, I think this really begs the question of why the three amigos (at least one of them) has not stepped up yet to set the tone on the road (especially on the offensive end).  Also, who is the most likely to do so this year?  James would have been the obvious choice, but his wrist injury looks to take a long time to heal and he apparently re-injured it at the end of yesterdays game.  Mcneal has been absent from the first part of the road games and while Matthews has done great as a role player, he really has done much offensively to start these games.  This brings me to our super sophomore Lazar Hayward.  I think that we should run our offense through him more to start games as he has been very consistant throughout the year.  Overall, I think that you have to agree with Jarvis to at least say that this team has shown suspect character.  I think that we will come through however, in the second half of the BE season with yesterdays big road win and the senior leadership of Barro playing a huge role.  If we don't get it from Barro every night, which is a given, maybe Lazar will step up more. 

[MR.HAYWARD]

I took some exception to the comment.  I would agree that we did not show great character in the 3 losses, however, that was a very general and in my opinion an off base statement.  What about at Wisoconsin or at MAui, or for that matter this same group was agroup of road Warriors last year.
I think we lacked fortitude in those three games but to say the team in general lacks character or toughness due to three particualr games is simply a dumb comment. 
Furthermore, I do beleive the 3 amigos are doing their  just becuase things did not go as you hope does not mean they are not trying or leading.  In fact the biggest compliant for Jerel and Dj is some times they try too hard.  If that is the worst thing we can say about them we cannt be too unhappy.

[Nukem2]

Jarvis is a fine one to talk about character after his trials at SJU.

[BuzzSucksSucks]

Although I didn't hear Jarvis' statements, I agree.  Recently we've seen sophisticated statistical analysis of this team's performance, and from that analysis we've been able to discern many things:  That rebounding has fallen off; that we need to establish a post presence; and that our style of play, coupled with our weaknesses, becomes this risky gamble that causes these blowout wins and losses, etc.

Analyzing statistics, however, is a posteriori reasoning, by which we analyze data after the fact. We're assuming that the playing field is level otherwise, and that the differences between teams are things that can be measured. However, there are other factors, a priori, which do not appear in the statistics, things we might be able to observe but can't measure, things which influence the numbers that we do measure.

I believe that the way the pendulum swings with this team is a sign of immaturity, a fragile psyche, and a lack of leadership.  We've seen this team play at a high level.  No need to list examples, since there are many.  We know it, and our opponent knows it.  Just because poise, leadership, will, a hot hand, etc. don't show up in the numbers doesn't mean they don't exist.

Jean Van de Velde came to the 18th tee at the 1999 British Open with a three-shot lead. He made a triple bogey and lost in a playoff. Jack Nicklaus shot 30 on the back nine at Augusta to come from behind to win the 1986 Masters, after starting the day tied for 9th. The numbers don't communicate the extent to which Van de Velde wilted, Jack rose to the occasion, or Seve cracked. Now, just because basketball is a game with a defender in your face doesn't change the fact that each team brings its own psyche. It's a true fact with all sports.  One team comes more prepared to win than the other, and that's something you don't read in a box score.

Incidentally, this is one of the reasons we love sports.  Because in addition to execution and excellence, it is also a test of character and will.

[NavinRJohnson]

I'd love to hear the exact quote on this, because I don't believe for a second that he even implied that MU lacked "character." Perhaps that explains why nobody commented on it - because it may not be exactly what he said.

[ecompt]

Mike Jarvis has no right to ever talk about character. The ONLY reason anyone ever heard of him was that he was able to get an All-American high school player to graduate without that player being able to read a single word. His St. John's teams were a joke, too.

[Pardner]

Let's see:  18-22 year old young men, full time students, away from home the first time, grade pressures to stay eligible with a free ride on the line, playing in front of 18,000 people and a national TV audience, flying a time zone or three away, quick turnover games going from Milwaukee to Tampa, girl friends, class work, high visibility, spending hours in an airport, barely any in your own bed, and a cadre of alumni, press, agents and fans putting unreasonable pressure on you.  Is not playing well all the time a question of "character" or physiological fatigue?

When I was at MU, 8:00AM class and finding the library was a "character" issue for me.  I think our boys are doing quite well.

[IAmMarquette]

I didn't take the comment as a knock on the character of our guys per se, but more of a comment on mental toughness/heart required to win on the road in this conference.

I'm not sure if that's much better--calling our guys gutless vs. just bad people--but I don't think Jarvis intended it as an insult.

[1990Warrior]

I'd love to hear the exact quote on this, because I don't believe for a second that he even implied that MU lacked "character." Perhaps that explains why nobody commented on it - because it may not be exactly what he said.

I do not have the exact quote but he said that it takes character to win on the road in a discussion of our three previous road losses.  There was definitely an implication.

[sigep80]

I heard him make that comment and did think about as well. 

I believe he was not dissing our guys, as much as saying it takes something special to win, especially on the road in the BE.  You've got to really be prepared to come out and compete from the start of the game so that it doesn't get away from you.  Stick to your strengths, the gameplan and don't sacrifice "easy" shots for hard work. 

We clearly did not do this in the 3 road losses, and it took us about 12 minutes to get back to it at Cincy.  Hopefully the lesson is learned.

Let's bury the Cards!!!

[HarveysWallbangers]

Losing three games on the road to tough teams is not a poor reflection of the team's character.

Getting completely embarrassed with a seeming lack of 2nd half effort (and at least one instance of our point guard waving cameras out of his face while he sat on the bench) is a poor reflection of the character on the team.

[MUCHI814]

he definitely did make the comment, however i'm pretty sure he prefaced it first by saying something like he didn't want to say it or was reluctant to.  However, I don't think he was out of line by saying it or was trying to be malicious one can interpret "character" in many ways.  And i probably would agree with what he said.