Zaide Didn’t Travel With Team

[Billy Hoyle]

Yes this, shakas done great over 4 years, this is not a down year it's a bottom falling out year and pro Shaka need to call it what it is. Then due to his previous statements people are right to panic about the next year as well rather than expect a pivot. If he pivots and gets back to respectable program then as 1SE put it great we'll all laugh about it but if he doesn't then as you put it he's not uniquely gifted at having success here

This exactly, Galway. It's four 20+ point losses; it's barely scraping by Valpo. It's brutal home losses to bad, undermanned teams like Maryland and Georgetown. It's going into games, seeing the spread and thinking, "Oh yeah, Purdue will cover that" while people in Mackey are asking "what the hell happened to Marquette?"

If we had lost close games to IU and Purdue and not melted down on our home court against Maryland or Georgetown, and had optimism for turning things around instead of wondering where the BE wins were going to come from, then that would be a "down" year. But this is a meltdown; we're a bad team and other fans and national media all recognize it. 

[Galway Eagle]

Yes, obviously. Didn't think teal was needed for that one.

If you're thinking making one Sweet 16 every five years is the absolute best Marquette can ever hope for, then we disagree. I mean, Buzz made three in three years, yet one in 5 years is peak Marquette? How does that make sense?
Marquette isn't Duke or Kansas, where anything less than an Elite 8 is a terrible season. But a goal of advancing to the second weekend just 20% of the time doesn't seem outlandish to me.
Why should Marquette should set its standards lower than Xavier? Or Creighton? Or Nova?

Well for starters Creighton has no history to suggest that should be their expectation, till a couple years ago they hadn't advanced in like 60yrs or something.

I think that's a reasonable goal to reach for and it's my hope and believe that Marquette can get there but as Wades and I both pointed out there's zero in our history that doesn't include AL to show that we should reasonably expect that as of now. If you're 55 you've seen MU advance 7 times

Let's look at some data cuts without AL to figure out why we should expect that level of success:

Since AL 7 S16 or higher in 53 tournaments, don't need to be a math wiz to see that that's not ideal.

But Majerus, Dukiet and the first couple O'Neil years were rough so let's go since 93 of 32 potential tournaments 6 S16 or higher, that's less than every 5 years.

Ok well Deane broke us and Crean needed to rebuild, so let's go since he got us back in 02 5 >S16 in 23 potential tournaments which while above 1 every 5yrs is rounded up to every 5yrs.

But let's step back and see the entire program since its first appearance, sans Al, that's 56 potential tournaments we've advanced in 9 of them...

Let's splice it into just Crean and buzz because that's the best stretch since AL. advanced 4x in 15 years. Your win not exactly a glowing example of us at our zenith.

Outside of those three buzz years (one of which id take 2023 100% of the time over), and Al, there's no point in 70 potential tournaments since our program first came on the map that we've been at our "zenith"

I've gotta get the kids ready for Xmas, so I'll leave you with this. This is the first year since i started following MU after deciding to go to Marquette in 08/09 that  I've taken down my flag mid season so I am pissed and disheartened. But I throw out all these stats because without context of our program's position, without one of probably the top 20 or so coaches all time, then we'll always be disappointed.

[muwarrior69]

The difference between Shaka and his predecessors is there were plenty of signs he wanted to make this his long-term and perhaps last stop.

I think most here would want that kind of stability, which does assume consistent success.

Obviously, the results this season are completely unacceptable and Shaka has some significant decisions to make once the season ends.

If either side moves on, if feels like we'll be back to being a perpetual stepping stone, where we either fire someone if they don't succeed or someone moves on in 5-6 years if they're successful.

That's why I'm more inclined to give Shaka a bit more leeway to clean up this mess.

Indeed and not just cutting some players. He and his staff have done a poor job of evaluating HS talent. If Shaka stays some of them will have to go as well. RGV could have worked if the players were good enough to pay them to stay (i.e. retention) but they're not. If the season thus far is any indication, we are actually over paying these guys assuming Marquette's financial resources are there. How many on our current roster would be picked by another high major program via the portal?

[rocky_warrior]

we're a bad team and other fans and national media all recognize it. 

I've taken down my flag mid season so I am pissed and disheartened.

Yeah, it's disappointing that I can't give a good reason for it when I talk about my MU fandom with people.  Chatted with a random SJU fan on the chair lift, I said something like, "I'm a Marquette fan, but they're pretty bad this year", he responded with something like "Yeah, they're bad.  When they're good they are really good, but they suck this year"

Similar conversation with a friend (Texas fan), who said he turned on one of our games to see how we were doing, and changed the channel quickly because we were so bad.

Anyhow, I'll stop venting.  Merry Christmas y'all.

[Billy Hoyle]

Yeah, it's disappointing that I can't give a good reason for it when I talk about my MU fandom with people.  Chatted with a random SJU fan on the chair lift, I said something like, "I'm a Marquette fan, but they're pretty bad this year", he responded with something like "Yeah, they're bad.  When they're good they are really good, but they suck this year"

Similar conversation with a friend (Texas fan), who said he turned on one of our games to see how we were doing, and changed the channel quickly because we were so bad.

Anyhow, I'll stop venting.  Merry Christmas y'all.

Merry Christmas to you as well, Rocky, and all fellow posters!

[tower912]

Discussions around here about MU. Me:  Bad this year.  Shaka bet on developing players already in the program and it didn't work this season.  Discussions of where and why  this season went sideways.
  Inevitably segues into discussions about the portal, how much it is hated, and a surprising number of relatively neutral fans were secretly hoping Shaka's no-portal philosophy would pan out.   A fair amount had no idea and were shocked he would even try.

[MuggsyB]

Well for starters Creighton has no history to suggest that should be their expectation, till a couple years ago they hadn't advanced in like 60yrs or something.

I think that's a reasonable goal to reach for and it's my hope and believe that Marquette can get there but as Wades and I both pointed out there's zero in our history that doesn't include AL to show that we should reasonably expect that as of now. If you're 55 you've seen MU advance 7 times

Let's look at some data cuts without AL to figure out why we should expect that level of success:

Since AL 7 S16 or higher in 53 tournaments, don't need to be a math wiz to see that that's not ideal.

But Majerus, Dukiet and the first couple O'Neil years were rough so let's go since 93 of 32 potential tournaments 6 S16 or higher, that's less than every 5 years.

Ok well Deane broke us and Crean needed to rebuild, so let's go since he got us back in 02 5 >S16 in 23 potential tournaments which while above 1 every 5yrs is rounded up to every 5yrs.

But let's step back and see the entire program since its first appearance, sans Al, that's 56 potential tournaments we've advanced in 9 of them...

Let's splice it into just Crean and buzz because that's the best stretch since AL. advanced 4x in 15 years. Your win not exactly a glowing example of us at our zenith.

Outside of those three buzz years (one of which id take 2023 100% of the time over), and Al, there's no point in 70 potential tournaments since our program first came on the map that we've been at our "zenith"

I've gotta get the kids ready for Xmas, so I'll leave you with this. This is the first year since i started following MU after deciding to go to Marquette in 08/09 that  I've taken down my flag mid season so I am pissed and disheartened. But I throw out all these stats because without context of our program's position, without one of probably the top 20 or so coaches all time, then we'll always be disappointed.

Put your flag back up!  That's uncalled for Galway! 

[Pakuni]

Well for starters Creighton has no history to suggest that should be their expectation, till a couple years ago they hadn't advanced in like 60yrs or something.

I think that's a reasonable goal to reach for and it's my hope and believe that Marquette can get there but as Wades and I both pointed out there's zero in our history that doesn't include AL to show that we should reasonably expect that as of now. If you're 55 you've seen MU advance 7 times

Let's look at some data cuts without AL to figure out why we should expect that level of success:

Thanks for your reply and crunching those numbers.
Still, I'm going to disagree a bit here.

I don't believe that Marquette basketball is somehow fated to be an amalgamation of its past performances. Because the program made one Final Four, one Elite 8 and seven Sweet 16s over the past 40 years doesn't mean that one Final Four, one Elite 8 and seven Sweet 16s is the best or target outcome for the next 40 years.
We're not slaves to the past 40 years. I don't imagine Nate Oats brought that fatalism to Tuscaloosa or Curt Cignetti brought it to Bloomington. And they were right.

Second, if we're setting expectations for performance based on past results - and that's what we're doing here, right - why are we factoring bad runs into that equation?
Mike Deane and Wojo were fired for failing to meet the program's standards. So why are we including their tenures in some formula establishing reasonable standards? It makes no sense. I'd rather look at the successful tenures, and the successes of similarly situated programs, and set that as the expectation, not some average that includes failed administrations.

Lastly, you started off by referring to Creighton. How successful do you think McDermott's tenure would have been if he'd looked at the 40 years that preceded him and said "that's all this program should aspire to be?"

[WhiteTrash]

Thanks for your reply and crunching those numbers.
Still, I'm going to disagree a bit here.

Lastly, you started off by referring to Creighton. How successful do you think McDermott's tenure would have been if he'd looked at the 40 years that preceded him and said "that's all this program should aspire to be?"

Mic drop!?!?

[MU82]

Crazy question to ask given the thread's title, but I'll go for it anyway:

What's the latest with Zaide?

[cheebs09]

Crazy question to ask given the thread's title, but I'll go for it anyway:

What's the latest with Zaide?

Waiting to see if he gets coal in his stocking or not.