Marquette Game

[davidnark]

Is anyone else watching this game? The shooting is UGLY. It wasn't much better in the Memphis game either. Plus, I have yet to see any sign of interior offense in either game.

[gister]

A lot of the poor shooting is probably due to it being the first real game of the year. The Bills were terrible in the first half of the exhibition game last week.

On the other hand, didn't Marquette take a foreign trip in the last month which allowed them to get in an extra 10 days of practice?

[tseugnekillib]

Ugly shooting thus far by both teams. Diener is the man for UM. The new BE is going to be some conference, but not unbeatable.

[billiken_roy]

i was working on my basement tonite and my son came down talking about how helter skelter memphis looked. typical calipari non-coaching job. i personally cant stand to watch a memphis game calipari does such a poor job with the talent and size he always has.

[Schasz]

What's a basement? Didn't have one in Seattle...luckily, we do have an oversized 3 car garage here in Palm Harbor, FL. Oh! The tradeoffs to live in the sunshine state year round.

[alameda bob]

Schaz, I'm sitting in my basement in Alameda typing this. Does your garage have cars in it? Mine is full of junk, or should I say storage. This is also where my surround sound TV is and the games are on ESPN. The guy just said something over 300 games on the family of ESPN this year. I need to get ESPN+ to see 2 more Bills games.

[Taj79]

Let me say this .... with the disclaimer that Marquette was my second choice for college behind Saint Louis so I always hold them in highest regards .... but ...

... no way Steve Novak shoots 50% from 3-point range this year without defenses having to guard against Dwayne Wade;

... no way a team can depend on a 6'1" frail point guard to carry the load for them this whole season without a Dwayne Wade: and

... no way Marquette is strong in the middle with Scott Merritt (shown to be a big three) holidng down the fort minus Robert Jackson, without the threat of a Dwayne Wade, coupling in the fact that 6'10" Novak is nothing more than the second coming of Chris Braun.

This is not to say Marquette is doomed; frankly they are better than the Bills by a long shot but based on what I saw last night, Crean and company have a long way to go. The game demosntrated, to me, just how dominating a team can be having one really super-dee-duper player on the floor like a Dwayne Wade. Get two and your aces. Get three or four and your Duke (how do they manage to lose at all any year?).

If ... and this is a huge if and I echo thicks in not wanting to place too much pressure on the kid .... Tommie Liddell is everythign Brad believes him to be ... yowza, yowza, yowza!

[3star_recruit]

"frankly they are better than the Bills by a long shot"

Based on what?

[Quality Is Job 1]

I concur. I was going to say the same thing. I'm not ready to say that Marquette will be better than SLU, let alone considerably better.

[mcglotherirvin]

I really think Marquette some of the sportswriters are expecting way too much of Marquette this year. They had one of those runs last year like Mizzou had two years ago where players like Novak and Paulding, Johnson and Diener really start to show their stuff on the national stage. I didn't think it was fair to expect Mizzou to finish as high as some were predicting that next season - top 10 in some polls. The situation with Marquette is very similar, only they don't have anyone who can take over games like Paulding and Johnson. I don't think Novak is going to do much at all this year without guys like Jackson and Wade around. He's the type of guy who will kill you when you're concentrating on the others but who won't be able to do it on his own when there isn't anyone else around.

I wish Marquette all the luck in the world with the move to the Big East and I'm sure we would have gone had the offer been there. But man, I am happy with the way things have worked out. Marquette, to get to the tourney will have to finish somewhere in the top 5 or 6 each year in a conference with Pitt, Syracuse, UConn, Louisville, Cincy, St. John's, Nova, etc. Each one of these teams, with the exception of St. John's is truly on the rise. New coaches and new players. This will be an excellent conference. I don't see too many tournament runs at Marquette with or without Crean.

B-Law you made a comment about jealousy somewhere below that I guess was directed at all of us. I hardly consider myself jealous of Marquette's success. In fact, I was at one point a big fan of Marquette. However, the attitude you bring to this board really turns people off. For example, you never made any positive comments about the Bills' first game, but you came on here with a link to a site that has them ranked something like ninth in the conference. You bash the new arena and I think you may have encouraged a move to the MVC. No wonder that people get annoyed with you and the other Marquette people. You're always trying to point out the bad in SLU and the good in Marquette. We all know Marquette had a better season last year. Get over it though. At one point you guaranteed that Marquette would beat SLU this year. And then you pout when everyone replies. After seeing that performance last night, you may want to take back that prediction.

[davidnark]

After watching last night's games, I have in fewer concerns about our post play. Those were supposed to be four top 40 caliber teams, but I didn't see any decent offensive post play in either game.

I assume those four teams will shoot the ball better as the season progreses, but I cannot imagine that our four guards--Clarke, Drejaj, Fisher, and Bryant--will shoot the ball any worse from the outside than those four teams did.

Needless to say, I was not impressed by what I saw last night.

[davidnark]

>B-Law you made a comment about jealousy somewhere below that

>I guess was directed at all of us. I hardly consider myself

>jealous of Marquette's success. In fact, I was at one point

>a big fan of Marquette. However, the attitude you bring to

>this board really turns people off. For example, you never

>made any positive comments about the Bills' first game, but

>you came on here with a link to a site that has them ranked

>something like ninth in the conference. You bash the new

>arena and I think you may have encouraged a move to the MVC.

> No wonder that people get annoyed with you and the other

>Marquette people. You're always trying to point out the bad

>in SLU and the good in Marquette. We all know Marquette had

>a better season last year. Get over it though. At one

>point you guaranteed that Marquette would beat SLU this

>year. And then you pout when everyone replies. After

>seeing that performance last night, you may want to take

>back that prediction.

Well said.

[DeSmetBilliken]

>coupling in the fact that 6'10" Novak is nothing more than

>the second coming of Chris Braun.

While I was pretty much in agreement with most of the things you said, I don't agree with this. Novak might not be the next Dwyane Wade for Marquette, but he's definitely not Chris Braun either.

[Billiken Law]

>B-Law you made a comment about jealousy somewhere below that

>I guess was directed at all of us. I hardly consider myself

>jealous of Marquette's success. In fact, I was at one point

>a big fan of Marquette. However, the attitude you bring to

>this board really turns people off. For example, you never

>made any positive comments about the Bills' first game, but

>you came on here with a link to a site that has them ranked

>something like ninth in the conference. You bash the new

>arena and I think you may have encouraged a move to the MVC.

> No wonder that people get annoyed with you and the other

>Marquette people. You're always trying to point out the bad

>in SLU and the good in Marquette. We all know Marquette had

>a better season last year. Get over it though. At one

>point you guaranteed that Marquette would beat SLU this

>year. And then you pout when everyone replies. After

>seeing that performance last night, you may want to take

>back that prediction.

The jealousy comment was directed at CentralFloridaBilliken who spends all of his time taking shots at MU. Not anyone else.

I couldn't go to the Bills first game (brief worth 60% of my grade in due the next day, also suffering from the flu) so how could I make comments on what I didn't see? As far as the link, it was a national publication's prediction - everyone else here was linking what other mags were predicting. How is it different for me? If SLU had been predicted #2 in CUSA I would have linked it as well.

I have never bashed the new arena outside of the cost, and I am hardly the only one to do that. For $80 million I expect marble concourses, solid gold fixtures and leather, vibrating seats for all of the fans.

I never "encouraged" a move to the MVC but I really didn't think I was the death of the program everyone here made it out to be. I simply stated that I thought the MVC was a better conferece than many felt and that if SLU were to join they would dominate it and be a regular in the NCAA tourney.

Marquette has had more than one better season than SLU. If defending my alma mater is "bashing" SLU then the definition of "bashing" is really convoluted here. Many on this board act like the programs have always been even and that Marquette just got lucky landing Wade and that is the only difference between the programs. Hardly. Some people take themselves way too seriously and think that is someone else says something positive about another it's bashing them.

MU will be just fine this year. There is no replacement for Wade but I also don't think there's a true replacement for Marque. As of last week MU had 5 healthy scholarship players for practice. Jackson and Merritt couldn't play in Costa Rica due to injuries (in fact I was shocked to see NewJax dress, let alone play last night) and they have not had an opportunity to develop continuity on offense due to the injuries. If we are going to determine overall success for the season based on the first game then how do you explain Syracuse, who lost to Memphis last year in the first game, winning the title.

[3star_recruit]

> Many on this board

>act like the programs have always been even and that

>Marquette just got lucky landing Wade and that is the only

>difference between the programs.

Really? Who?

>

>MU will be just fine this year. There is no replacement for

>Wade but I also don't think there's a true replacement for

>Marque.

Fine. So if MU will be just fine without Wade then SLU will just fine without Marque, right?

As of last week MU had 5 healthy scholarship

>players for practice. Jackson and Merritt couldn't play in

>Costa Rica due to injuries (in fact I was shocked to see

>NewJax dress, let alone play last night) and they have not

>had an opportunity to develop continuity on offense due to

>the injuries.

They've had a lot more time than almost any other team due to the extra practices. Jackson isn't a scorer so his absence wasn't exactly a huge blow to the offense. Scott Merritt scored 20+ points in each of Marquette's exhibition games and the team scored 51 points in the first half against Team Nike. I don't think continuity on offense was the problem. I think St. John's defense was.

I agree that it is wrong to project a team's season based on one game. But I think it's pretty obvious that the offense won't run as smoothly without Jackson on the inside and the NBA's #5 pick on the outside.

[kshoe]

anybody on the Billiken's roster.

[mcglotherirvin]

"Many on this board act like the programs have always been even and that Marquette just got lucky landing Wade and that is the only difference between the programs. Hardly."

That is the attitude I am talking about. All of the Marquette fans I know seem to have become very shortsighted since the final four run. During Wade's time at Marquette, SLU never won a game. Marquette swept both seasons. However keep in mind that SLU swept when Hughes was here and in the preceding season. Minus Hughes and minus Wade, the series has been pretty even. I don't have any stats in front of me so I can't compare tournament appearances and all that, but I can tell you that prior to Wade I can't remember the last time Marquette was ranked in the top twenty five. Yet I distinctly remember Clagget and Highmark's team being ranked 17th at one point. I'm sure you will remind me that Marquette won a national championship. Like MU, SLU won a national championship before I could walk. My point - its ancient history. Marquette may have a little more mystique because of Al McGuire, but since I've been following the programs over the last 20 years, they've been pretty evenly matched.

Your comments indicate either a bias toward Marquette, a lack of knowledge about the Bills or a lack of knowledge about basketball in general. Take your pick which is the case. I had a similar conversation with a Marquette fan not too long ago who told me that the A-10 just didn't have any real teams worth playing against. He called Xavier a mid-major and said they have never really done anything. I reminded him that Xavier has been consistently better than Marquette and SLU for the past 15 years without a doubt. He just couldn't believe that.

I doubt you would have posted a link to any prediction that had the Bills 2nd, unless it had Marquette first. When we signed all the recruits, I saw no positive comments from you. All I heard was that Marquette backed off on Liddell. Maybe that's true, but you'll never know that for sure unless you are related to Tom Crean. No booster or "insider" will ever admit that his school simply got beat in a recruiting war. There's always a reason.

You haven't jumped on the Soderberg bandwagon yet either. In fact you stated below that he hasn't done more than Romar yet and that he was able to land his recruits because of the path Romar paved in St. Louis. You're nuts if you really believe that. Romar got who in the area besides Sloan? Kern, Edwin? Outside St. Louis, he got who? Pulley, Varner. I would have hated to see who Romar would have brought when he realized Kern wasn't getting in. I can guarantee we wouldn't have gotten a player like Ohanon and when Pulley left we would have never gotten Drejaj. Do you really think Romar laid the groundwork with Meyer, Liddell, and Polk. I don't think so. How about Ian or Darren Clark? If he was in so tight with them, why not even give them a look from Washington. Going after players 9000 miles away never was a problem for him at SLU. In conclusion, I just want you to be more positive about the Bills. Try to see things a little more objectively.

[Billiken Law]

>>MU will be just fine this year. There is no replacement for

>>Wade but I also don't think there's a true replacement for

>>Marque.

>

>Fine. So if MU will be just fine without Wade then SLU will

>just fine without Marque, right?

-Marquette isn't going back to the Final Four. I think if they make the Sweet 16 that would be a hell of an accomplishment. When I say "fine" I mead that they'll win more than the lose and make the tourney. However, some on this board have stated that now that Wade is gone MU will fall off the face of the earth and may not even make the CUSA tourney, let alone the NCAA tourney. I think SLU will also be "fine" without Marque but, like MU, will struggle, especially early, to match last year's win totals. When you look at the 2 players they were just as important to their respective teams as the other. But the idea that anyone could replace Marque but MU will never replace Wade that has been perpetuated on this board is short sighted.

>

> As of last week MU had 5 healthy scholarship

>>players for practice. Jackson and Merritt couldn't play in

>>Costa Rica due to injuries (in fact I was shocked to see

>>NewJax dress, let alone play last night) and they have not

>>had an opportunity to develop continuity on offense due to

>>the injuries.

>

>They've had a lot more time than almost any other team due

>to the extra practices. Jackson isn't a scorer so his

>absence wasn't exactly a huge blow to the offense. Scott

>Merritt scored 20+ points in each of Marquette's exhibition

>games and the team scored 51 points in the first half

>against Team Nike. I don't think continuity on offense was

>the problem. I think St. John's defense was.

-their 2 starters in the post didn't practice before the Costa Rice trip nor did they play down there. The Johnnie's D was good, I won't deny that, and there are guys on MU's team who don't know their roles yet. That will change. Also, we can't take much, if anything, from exhibition game. If so then we can conclude that SLU, SIU and UMKC are superior to Wake Forest, who looked pretty good last night.

>

>I agree that it is wrong to project a team's season based on

>one game. But I think it's pretty obvious that the offense

>won't run as smoothly without Jackson on the inside and the

>NBA's #5 pick on the outside.

[Billiken Law]

>That is the attitude I am talking about. All of the

>Marquette fans I know seem to have become very shortsighted

>since the final four run. During Wade's time at Marquette,

>SLU never won a game. Marquette swept both seasons.

>However keep in mind that SLU swept when Hughes was here and

>in the preceding season. Minus Hughes and minus Wade, the

>series has been pretty even. I don't have any stats in

>front of me so I can't compare tournament appearances and

>all that, but I can tell you that prior to Wade I can't

>remember the last time Marquette was ranked in the top

>twenty five. Yet I distinctly remember Clagget and

>Highmark's team being ranked 17th at one point. I'm sure

>you will remind me that Marquette won a national

>championship. Like MU, SLU won a national championship

>before I could walk. My point - its ancient history.

>Marquette may have a little more mystique because of Al

>McGuire, but since I've been following the programs over the

>last 20 years, they've been pretty evenly matched.

-In the past decade MU has 3 conference titles ('94 GMC, '97 CUSA and '03 CUSA. Also made the CUSA tourney title game 2 other times, '96 and '02). They have been to 6 NCAA's (Sweet 16 in 1994, second round in 1996, Final Four last year) and 3 NIT's making the final in 1995 and quarters in 1998. They were pretty consistantly ranked during the 1994, 96 and 97 seasons. Crean is 7-1 against SLU too.

In 1994 MU finished the season ranked higher than SLU and I think they swept SLU that year in the regular season (but didn't SLU beat MU in the first round of the GMC tourney, or was that 1995?).

>I doubt you would have posted a link to any prediction that

>had the Bills 2nd, unless it had Marquette first. When we

>signed all the recruits, I saw no positive comments from

>you. All I heard was that Marquette backed off on Liddell.

>Maybe that's true, but you'll never know that for sure

>unless you are related to Tom Crean. No booster or

>"insider" will ever admit that his school simply got beat in

>a recruiting war. There's always a reason.

-It wasn't a booster who told me that Crean stopped recruiting them. Besides, I stated on this board what Crean told me when Tommie verbaled - he really liked his game, saw him a lot and thought he was a heck of a talent. However, if you look at the MU roster they are pretty guard heavy and needed post players in this year's class.

>

>You haven't jumped on the Soderberg bandwagon yet either.

>In fact you stated below that he hasn't done more than Romar

>yet and that he was able to land his recruits because of the

>path Romar paved in St. Louis. You're nuts if you really

>believe that. Romar got who in the area besides Sloan?

>Kern, Edwin? Outside St. Louis, he got who? Pulley,

>Varner. I would have hated to see who Romar would have

>brought when he realized Kern wasn't getting in. I can

>guarantee we wouldn't have gotten a player like Ohanon and

>when Pulley left we would have never gotten Drejaj. Do you

>really think Romar laid the groundwork with Meyer, Liddell,

>and Polk. I don't think so. How about Ian or Darren Clark?

> If he was in so tight with them, why not even give them a

>look from Washington. Going after players 9000 miles away

>never was a problem for him at SLU. In conclusion, I just

>want you to be more positive about the Bills. Try to see

>things a little more objectively.

-Didn't say that, re-read the post with what you preach - objectivity. All my post stated that Romar wasn't the Ekker-eque disaster many make him out to be.

[slufanskip]

Someone with a better memory than mine please post SLU's results through the 90's. It will not be that far off Marquette's minus last year. I think that is what we are saying ... though Marq. may be slightly better during the last decade or so until last year they were not as far apart as one might think. Perception and reality are not always the same.

Personally, I like Marquette and Crean ... and a poster on this board good or bad won't change my mind ... I wish them success.

Just try and remember this is a Billiken board ... not a Marquette board.

[Schasz]

Bob,

Cars in two sides and lots of junk in the 3rd. We aupposedly had a moving sale before leaving our Edmonds, WA house; however, I think my wife is the Queen of all pack rats. What a bunch of junk!!!

[Schasz]

Please you are giving the snake oil salesman too much credit. He'll be toast soon as Hedges doesn't stay with her hires for too long.

[billiken_roy]

no way your wife tops the lovely anita as the queen of packrats. when i started this basement finishing project, i was amazed at the junk i found down there. i told her it had to go. she has yet to throw it out. she just keeps moving the pile around the basement depending where i am working. she says she is going to sell it. whatever. i guess she could sell it to schasz's wife so she could put it in his garage.

[mcglotherirvin]

Sagarin gives the computer rankings since the 98-99 season. SLU was ranked ahead of Marquette in three of the five, the last two being Wade's seasons.

98-99 SLU=82, MU-118

99-00 SLU=54, MU=82

00-01 SLU=74, MU=97

01-02 SLU-90, MU=14

02-03 SLU-76, MU=10

In the prior seasons, SLU was 26-6 in 94, 23-8 in 95, very mediocre in 96 and 97 (16-14 and 11-18 respectively). 22-11 in 98(hughes).

Although I don't have a media guide in front of me, the seasons listed above include 4 NCAA tourney appearances if i'm not mistaken - 3 with Spoon and 1 with Romar. 2nd round twice. 2 points away from sweet sixteen one time. at least 2 NIT appearances. a CUSA tourney title.

I'm pretty sure that SLU was ranked higher in 93-94, 94-95 and 97-98. That would total 6 seasons in the past ten in which SLU was ranked higher than MU. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Seem pretty even to me with a few off-balanced years when Wade and Hughes were around.

[Schasz]

Roy,

You and I need to donate half of their junk to the next gypsy caravan...when is it???