Will we ever be happy?

[Hards Alumni]

You're not entirely wrong. These things can and do occur with any team or coach. The questions arise when these things keep happening to the same team or coach.
Getting upset by a double digit seed happens to every coach once in a while. Getting upset by a double digit seed three times in five years is a little harder to write off as bad luck.

Yes, of course.  I'm not above questioning the results.  I don't disagree that some help for this team would have been great.  Was there decent help available that didn't compromise team chemistry or culture though?  Shaka is the only one to know that.

Buuuut, hypothetically, let's say Shaka beats New Mexico on Friday, and then loses to MSU on Sunday.  I'm quite sure a lot of the same people here crowing about losing would still be crowing.  Would the season have felt successful with that extra victory over UNM?  Doubtful.

So what is the bar to have considered it a success?  Little willie (and more than a few others) expect Marquette to win it all ever year.  That feels unreasonable.  What would your bar be?

[Billy Hoyle]

Buuuut, hypothetically, let's say Shaka beats New Mexico on Friday, and then loses to MSU on Sunday.  I'm quite sure a lot of the same people here crowing about losing would still be crowing.  Would the season have felt successful with that extra victory over UNM?  Doubtful.

Losing to a 2 seed conference champ led by a legendary coach is far more palatable than losing to a 10 from a mid-major conference. One tourney win does make the season feel more successful.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

Buuuut, hypothetically, let's say Shaka beats New Mexico on Friday, and then loses to MSU on Sunday.  I'm quite sure a lot of the same people here crowing about losing would still be crowing. 

I think that's the heart of the matter. 

My opinion, if over a four year stretch our worst is bubble team/squeak into the tourney and best is S16 with shot to go further sign me up.

I totally soured on Wojo well before the Ja debacle - but the heart of it was that team was the best we would be under his leadership...and we werent that great.

I'm not convinced yet that we've seen the best of Shaka and I hope its here.

[Galway Eagle]

Losing to a 2 seed conference champ led by a legendary coach is far more palatable than losing to a 10 from a mid-major conference. One tourney win does make the season feel more successful.

Given how people feel about 2023 I'm not sure that specific legendary coach has anything to do with it so much as the seed does.

[Scoop Snoop]

Losing to a 2 seed conference champ led by a legendary coach is far more palatable than losing to a 10 from a mid-major conference. One tourney win does make the season feel more successful.

1SE would have really loved that. He made it clear that the tourney is all that matters to him and had a 0-1 season.

One tourney win would have made the season a bit more successful to me, but it would have taken a W over MSU to move the needle much. But that's just my opinion.

[tower912]

Shaka is the only one to know that.

Shaka didn't'know'.  He (and by definition, his coaches) made a best guess.  He guessed he would have Sean back by conference season.  He guessed that Hamilton's development would continue and translate to games. He guessed that Amadou would not need a redshirt (Declared on Nov.5). He guessed that DO would be healthy.  So, projecting all of that, he signed Clark with the intention to redshirt and develop him.  Those guesses did not pan out as he hoped.

Still won 23 games.  Imagine if he had hit on 75% or even 50%.

[CTWarrior]

It just means sh!t happens even to great coaches, highly regarded teams and star players.

Sh!t does seem to happen to Shaka every year in the tournament, though.

I think Shaka has been a Godsend to Marquette, but you have to admit his NCAA performance has not been great after his initial big run at VCU.

[Billy Hoyle]

Given how people feel about 2023 I'm not sure that specific legendary coach has anything to do with it so much as the seed does.

That is why I included all three (seed, conference champs, Izzo), not just "legendary coach." I am still pissed over 2023 since we were the two and favored, but losing to MSU this year would have been different since we would have been the underdog.

[Scoop Snoop]

Shaka didn't'know'.  He (and by definition, his coaches) made a best guess.  He guessed he would have Sean back by conference season.  He guessed that Hamilton's development would continue and translate to games. He guessed that Amadou would not need a redshirt (Declared on Nov.5). He guessed that DO would be healthy.  So, projecting all of that, he signed Clark with the intention to redshirt and develop him.  Those guesses did not pan out as he hoped.

Still won 23 games.  Imagine if he had hit on 75% or even 50%.

Fair points. I guess.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

are you thinking more regular season wins leads to a higher tourney seeding thus a potential easier path, hence more tourney wins? Maybe so.
My point is, we need to start winning ncaa games. Shaka has won 3. A solid floor. Making the S16 last year was great. More of that. I guess I bring an optimism from a career in sales. Think big. Figure out how to get past the roadblocks. Game plan to win not 'hope' to win. Gonzaga, as Pakuni referred , comes to my mind often in these discussions...a program in small market Spokane wins a lot more than Marquette does in the postseason. Yeah, the BE is far superior to the WCC, but if it's all relative, we should be able to recruit to get tourney wins as they have. Obviously Few is better than Wojo, so they've had a solid foundation. But at this point, I just feel like these past 4 seasons should be the floor, the step to bigger. Admittedly, maybe I'm missing something or overly optimistic.

Yes, that's exactly what I mean.  If we're winning enough games to get a protected seed say 2 out of every 4 seasons, I'm confident a tourney breakthrough would be forthcoming. 

I'm sure Shaka is well-aware of the questions regarding tourney performance and he's probably harder on himself than any of the turds here are.  Self-reflection seems to be a big part of who he is.

Now if we're having the same conversation about lack of tourney results 4 years from now I think those concerns will be more than fair.  I'm just not there yet and I have a hard time holding Tyler's injury and a 4-31 shooting performance against the staff. 

[Pakuni]

Yes, of course.  I'm not above questioning the results.  I don't disagree that some help for this team would have been great.  Was there decent help available that didn't compromise team chemistry or culture though?  Shaka is the only one to know that.

Buuuut, hypothetically, let's say Shaka beats New Mexico on Friday, and then loses to MSU on Sunday.  I'm quite sure a lot of the same people here crowing about losing would still be crowing.  Would the season have felt successful with that extra victory over UNM?  Doubtful.

So what is the bar to have considered it a success?  Little willie (and more than a few others) expect Marquette to win it all ever year.  That feels unreasonable.  What would your bar be?

Are you asking about this season or four years?
The overall body of Shaka's work at MU has been terrific. I don't think his seat is anything but ice cold, nor should it be.

Completely agree that what happened in the Sweet 16 last year can't be pinned on Shaka. He built a roster that was capable of going to the Final Four, coached them into a position to succeed and had them playing pretty well at the end of the year (even in games TK and Oso missed, which showed his ability to adjust as needed). They just ran into a rough shooting night at the worst possible time.
(Same shouldn't be said for Shaka's other tourney losses since 2021 ... his teams just played poorly).

But he didn't do a particularly good job this season. Not because of the results of one game. It's more the process that led to that result, which, if we're being honest, had been inevitable since early February.
IMO, his roster decisions didn't maximize the returning talent he had and his inability/unwillingness to find answers as things went t-ts up beginning in February didn't put this group in a position to succeed. If his plan was to see major growth from the likes of Ben and Tre ... well, he didn't get that out of them.
Could it be that this roster just wasn't that capable of March success? Maybe. But the early season results indicate otherwise. Even if those were just a mirage, then we're back to the issue of roster construction.

Are you asking my definition of tourney success? I think you at least have to play to your seed most years and occasionally knock off a higher seed.

[willie warrior]

That is why I included all three (seed, conference champs, Izzo), not just "legendary coach." I am still pissed over 2023 since we were the two and favored, but losing to MSU this year would have been different since we would have been the underdog.

Kolek injuring his changed that games outcome.

[Uncle Rico]

Kolek injuring his changed that games outcome.

Kolek was soft.  Al would have had him out there

[Hards Alumni]

Are you asking about this season or four years?
The overall body of Shaka's work at MU has been terrific. I don't think his seat is anything but ice cold, nor should it be.

Completely agree that what happened in the Sweet 16 last year can't be pinned on Shaka. He built a roster that was capable of going to the Final Four, coached them into a position to succeed and had them playing pretty well at the end of the year (even in games TK and Oso missed, which showed his ability to adjust as needed). They just ran into a rough shooting night at the worst possible time.
(Same shouldn't be said for Shaka's other tourney losses since 2021 ... his teams just played poorly).

But he didn't do a particularly good job this season. Not because of the results of one game. It's more the process that led to that result, which, if we're being honest, had been inevitable since early February.
IMO, his roster decisions didn't maximize the returning talent he had and his inability/unwillingness to find answers as things went t-ts up beginning in February didn't put this group in a position to succeed. If his plan was to see major growth from the likes of Ben and Tre ... well, he didn't get that out of them.
Could it be that this roster just wasn't that capable of March success? Maybe. But the early season results indicate otherwise. Even if those were just a mirage, then we're back to the issue of roster construction.

Are you asking my definition of tourney success? I think you at least have to play to your seed most years and occasionally knock off a higher seed.

Yeah, that's what I was looking for.  And I mostly agree.  As I mentioned elsewhere on this board, I think the team outperformed expectations early on, and then the fans expected those results to continue.  That would have been awesome, but they didn't and I think that is the reason for a lot of the disappointment around here.  Without a doubt, the second half of the season wasn't nearly as fun.

[Viper]

Yes, that's exactly what I mean.  If we're winning enough games to get a protected seed say 2 out of every 4 seasons, I'm confident a tourney breakthrough would be forthcoming. 

I'm sure Shaka is well-aware of the questions regarding tourney performance and he's probably harder on himself than any of the turds here are.  Self-reflection seems to be a big part of who he is.

Now if we're having the same conversation about lack of tourney results 4 years from now I think those concerns will be more than fair.  I'm just not there yet and I have a hard time holding Tyler's injury and a 4-31 shooting performance against the staff. 

agreed. Players play...coaches don't shoot it. Rebound it.

[muwarrior69]

Similar to FF, AI condensed that to:  A critic praised Gard's portal success while condemning Shaka's, despite Shaka's superior recent NCAA tournament record compared to many portal-using coaches.

How many coaches did not go to the portal this season?

[Pakuni]

agreed. Players play...coaches don't shoot it. Rebound it.

#coachingnomatta?

[PointWarrior]

You're not entirely wrong. These things can and do occur with any team or coach. The questions arise when these things keep happening to the same team or coach.
Getting upset by a double digit seed happens to every coach once in a while. Getting upset by a double digit seed three times in five years is a little harder to write off as bad luck.

CoS believes if something bad happens once in a lifetime to a HoF coach, it justifies it happening 3 times in 5 years to their coach.

[Hards Alumni]

CoS believes if something bad happens once in a lifetime to a HoF coach, it justifies it happening 3 times in 5 years to their coach.

[Its DJOver]

Why do Shaka's results at Texas matter? Like, we knew about them when we hired him. Are we just that desperate to cherry pick stats?

[tower912]

It is a message board.   I cherry pick 98 wins in 4 seasons.  PW cherry picks losing to a worse seed 3 out of five seasons, including one at Shaka's former employer.   Same thing.

[Its DJOver]

It is a message board.  I cherry pick 98 wins in 4 seasons.  PW cherry picks losing to a worse seed 3 out of five seasons, including one at Shaka's former employer.  Same thing.

It isn't though.  You looking at Shaka's entire career at MU is different than looking at his entire career at MU + one year at Texas.

There are several different ways to divide and observe his career.  The last 5 years is not one that makes sense.

[Hards Alumni]

It isn't though.  You looking at Shaka's entire career at MU is different than looking at his entire career at MU + one year at Texas.

There are several different ways to divide and observe his career.  The last 5 years is not one that makes sense.

5 years to judge

[Pakuni]

It isn't though.  You looking at Shaka's entire career at MU is different than looking at his entire career at MU + one year at Texas.

There are several different ways to divide and observe his career.  The last 5 years is not one that makes sense.

Five years doesn't make sense when evaluating a trend? Huh.
Is the trend better just focusing on his MU tourney results?

[Its DJOver]

Five years doesn't make sense when evaluating a trend? Huh.
Is the trend better just focusing on his MU tourney results?

A trend of making the tourney every year?

A trend of winning a game half the time?

A trend of S16 1/4 of the time?

I'm not understanding the point you're trying to make.

Richard Pitino's name is being thrown around for the Nova job, should they disqualify him because 5 years ago he was 14-15 at Minnesota?