Buzz Cut

[The Sultan]

If

If message board commenters ran the team MU would have the top five players in America every year and a final four appearance would be a down year, thus resulting in the need to change a coach.

And? What is your point?

[brewcity77]

If message board commenters ran the team MU would have the top five players in America every year and a final four appearance would be a down year, thus resulting in the need to change a coach.

Sure, and you can make straw men all day but none of those scarecrows can hit a three.

Generally speaking, the baseline for success here is a NCAA tournament bid. That's the floor. Lower than that is a failure. Where we're at after five games makes that unlikely. Not impossible, but unlikely. Failed seasons lead to coaching changes. None of this is revelatory, but it is the reality we are in.

[GoldenEagles03]

Sure, and you can make straw men all day but none of those scarecrows can hit a three.

Generally speaking, the baseline for success here is a NCAA tournament bid. That's the floor. Lower than that is a failure. Where we're at after five games makes that unlikely. Not impossible, but unlikely. Failed seasons lead to coaching changes. None of this is revelatory, but it is the reality we are in.

I would argue making a reactionary coaching change because of one bad season, is how you destroy a program. The guy wins a high percentage of basketball games. I think moving on from him would be worse for the program than Shaka's stubborn approach to roster construction. A good coach can adjust as needed. Getting rid of a good coach in hopes you hit on a better one is a risky decision.

[panda]

I would argue making a reactionary coaching change because of one bad season, is how you destroy a program. The guy wins a high percentage of basketball games. I think moving on from him would be worse for the program than Shaka's stubborn approach to roster construction. A good coach can adjust as needed. Getting rid of a good coach in hopes you hit on a better one is a risky decision.

No one is saying he should be fired. A failure this year, ignoring the portal next off season and another lackluster season puts him squarely on the hot seat.

[Pakuni]

I would argue making a reactionary coaching change because of one bad season, is how you destroy a program. The guy wins a high percentage of basketball games. I think moving on from him would be worse for the program than Shaka's stubborn approach to roster construction. A good coach can adjust as needed. Getting rid of a good coach in hopes you hit on a better one is a risky decision.

Outside of perhaps the usual trolls, no one here is suggesting a "reactionary coaching change because of one bad season." That's a straw man.
The reality we're facing is a bad season on top of a second-half collapse last year. As has been mentioned, this program has two quality wins in 2025, three if we want to be generous enough to consider Georgetown a quality win. If that happens AND Marquette underachieves again in 2026-27, then Shaka's seat is going to get warm. It's not just about one bad season.

[GB Warrior]

Outside of perhaps the usual trolls, no one here is suggesting a "reactionary coaching change because of one bad season." That's a straw man.
The reality we're facing is a bad season on top of a second-half collapse last year. As has been mentioned, this program has two quality wins in 2025, three if we want to be generous enough to consider Georgetown a quality win. If that happens AND Marquette underachieves again in 2026-27, then Shaka's seat is going to get warm. It's not just about one bad season.

I will say I have my doubts Shaka can evolve. But he'll get another year to prove it

[bradforster]

Outside of perhaps the usual trolls, no one here is suggesting a "reactionary coaching change because of one bad season." That's a straw man.
The reality we're facing is a bad season on top of a second-half collapse last year. As has been mentioned, this program has two quality wins in 2025, three if we want to be generous enough to consider Georgetown a quality win. If that happens AND Marquette underachieves again in 2026-27, then Shaka's seat is going to get warm. It's not just about one bad season.

Are we sure this is going to be a bad season?  There is so much time for improvement.  Yesterday's game was highly disappointing, but to already declare this a lost year is a ridiculous proclamation to make in mid-November.

[ATL MU Warrior]

Agree with

Are we sure this is going to be a bad season?  There is so much time for improvement.  Yesterday's game was highly disappointing, but to already declare this a lost year is a ridiculous proclamation to make in mid-November.

Agree with this but I've seen nothing that gives me optimism. 

[Badgerhater]

Outside of perhaps the usual trolls, no one here is suggesting a "reactionary coaching change because of one bad season." That's a straw man.
The reality we're facing is a bad season on top of a second-half collapse last year. As has been mentioned, this program has two quality wins in 2025, three if we want to be generous enough to consider Georgetown a quality win. If that happens AND Marquette underachieves again in 2026-27, then Shaka's seat is going to get warm. It's not just about one bad season.

If MU will keep zero-accomplishment Wojo for as long as it did, Smart is just fine.

[Zog from Margo]

Oh please. This is a load of malarkey. If Providence can get the best player on an SEC tourney team and starters from two other high majors with Kim English's track record, I think Shaka with Marquette's resources could do just fine in the portal. Especially with rev share coming.

Does anyone really think we couldn't outbid Providence for Jason Edwards, or Butler for Michael Ajayi, or Seton Hall for Budd Clark? We're not goddamn paupers here begging for scraps. We're a high major team with high major investment and a coach that has a Final Four, NCOY award, and numerous NBA alumni. We aren't in the portal because we make that CHOICE.

It wouldn't be a guarantee to work if we took transfers, but it's not like we can't compete for players if we choose to.

You really think MU can compete with UConn financially if UConn really wants a player? How about UNC or Duke or Kentucky or Alabama or Michigan or St. John's? So odds are you start out in the portal below the first tier players.

People act like MU is some financial juggernaut in college basketball. That's not reality. Look at their coaching hires. They've never hired a top HC at his peak. Shaka fell into their laps only because he struggled at Texas.

I have no problem with MU using the portal but it won't be a cure all. Top programs will almost always have first dibs in the top players in the portal and you can miss on transfers just like you can miss on HS players.

[Pakuni]

If MU will keep zero-accomplishment Wojo for as long as it did, Smart is just fine.

Why do people keep going back to Wojo as the baseline? Being better than Wojo should not be the measure of success for a Marquette basketball coach. That's literally COLE talk.

[The Sultan]

If MU will keep zero-accomplishment Wojo for as long as it did, Smart is just fine.

Without Covid messing things up, Wojo would have made the NCAA tournament the year before he was fired.

[brewcity77]

You really think MU can compete with UConn financially if UConn really wants a player? How about UNC or Duke or Kentucky or Alabama or Michigan or St. John's? So odds are you start out in the portal below the first tier players.

This is a straw man. I never said anything like this. I specifically mentioned programs and players below us in the league & financial pecking order.

People act like MU is some financial juggernaut in college basketball. That's not reality. Look at their coaching hires. They've never hired a top HC at his peak. Shaka fell into their laps only because he struggled at Texas.

Another straw man. I didn't say any of this. I said we have the finances to be competitive with peer and lower programs.

I have no problem with MU using the portal but it won't be a cure all.

I didn't say it was. I specifically said otherwise: It wouldn't be a guarantee to work if we took transfers

Top programs will almost always have first dibs in the top players in the portal and you can miss on transfers just like you can miss on HS players.

And another straw man. Might be a Scoop record for one post.

The reality is we could use the portal to augment the roster, fill holes, & provide options when the R & G don't lead to V. Not doing so is a choice that limits us compared to other programs.

[Superfan]

You really think MU can compete with UConn financially if UConn really wants a player? How about UNC or Duke or Kentucky or Alabama or Michigan or St. John's? So odds are you start out in the portal below the first tier players.

People act like MU is some financial juggernaut in college basketball. That's not reality. Look at their coaching hires. They've never hired a top HC at his peak. Shaka fell into their laps only because he struggled at Texas.

I have no problem with MU using the portal but it won't be a cure all. Top programs will almost always have first dibs in the top players in the portal and you can miss on transfers just like you can miss on HS players.

[Zog from Margo]

"We're not goddamn paupers here begging for scraps. We're a high major team with high major investment and a coach that has a Final Four, NCOY award, and numerous NBA alumni."

So MU's "high major investment" can't compete with the investment of "really" high majors and schools with billionaire backers. You were just pointing out that MU could be like Providence. Got it.

[The Sultan]

"We're not goddamn paupers here begging for scraps. We're a high major team with high major investment and a coach that has a Final Four, NCOY award, and numerous NBA alumni."

So MU's "high major investment" can't compete with the investment of "really" high majors and schools with billionaire backers. You were just pointing out that MU could be like Providence. Got it.

Marquette has the resources to compete with other P5 teams for a transfer or two to cover recruiting misses. They aren't going to need four or five guys each season.

[brewcity77]

I would argue making a reactionary coaching change because of one bad season, is how you destroy a program. The guy wins a high percentage of basketball games. I think moving on from him would be worse for the program than Shaka's stubborn approach to roster construction. A good coach can adjust as needed. Getting rid of a good coach in hopes you hit on a better one is a risky decision.

I would argue that too! Why bring that up though, who mentioned such a crazy thing? Certainly not me.

[Zog from Margo]

Marquette has the resources to compete with other P5 teams for a transfer or two to cover recruiting misses. They aren't going to need four or five guys each season.

I don't disagree. My point was simply to note that MU's basketball resources tend to be overstated when compared to the top programs. As a result, HS recruiting will need to remain the primary focus.

[The Sultan]

I don't disagree. My point was simply to note that MU's basketball resources tend to be overstated when compared to the top programs. As a result, HS recruiting will need to remain the primary focus.

I don't think anyone is suggesting otherwise.