Now isn't this special

[brewtownbrian]

Let's stop the back and forth bickering. I think it's obvious that after the 4 or 5 pages worth of "we did this, yeah well we did this"...nobody is going to give in. And arguments can be made for why both sides are solid programs, with solid traditions.

Personally, I'm a Panther fan and just about everything related to MU disgusts me, but you other UWM fans have got to admit that MU getting to the Final 4 was impressive. Anytime any team makes it to the Final 4, it's impressive. They took it to Kentucky! And as much as I was cheering against them the entire tourney, and loved it when Kansas took it to them, they got to the Final 4, enough said. Knowing MU, and the last 4 pages have proved it...they will always hang their hat on that.

And in my opinion, nobody on this board truly knows the details about the UWM/MU series. So to say it's been on the table, or that it's only been offered as of late, or that Bruce Pearl knew about it and backed out, or anything else is hearsay and unless you know for sure and are ready to back it up...I, for one, won't believe it.

The bottom line in my mind is let's save all the flaming back and forth for when these 2 teams actually play one another. Until that point, it's kind of a waste, don't you think?

crazyfred is not going to change. Myself, and most UWM fans, will likely not gain any amount of respect and/or admiration for MU based on MU fans posts. So let's just agree to disagree and save it for the stands!

[SRT4driver]

brewtownbrian said:

And in my opinion, nobody on this board truly knows the details about the UWM/MU series. So to say it's been on the table, or that it's only been offered as of late, or that Bruce Pearl knew about it and backed out, or anything else is hearsay and unless you know for sure and are ready to back it up...I, for one, won't believe it.

Will you believe it if Tom Crean himself says it?


From a 2004 interview with the Journal-Sentinal:

...Throughout it, Marquette coach Tom Crean kept his thoughts to himself. But on Monday in his office, Crean broke his public silence on what has become a somewhat contentious issue within the community.
"I'm disappointed that so much is being made about a hypothetical that's not happening and won't happen for a long, long time," Crean said.
[glow=red,2,300]"We just choose not to," he said when asked why MU won't play UWM. [/glow]"We have one major rival in the state, and that's the University of Wisconsin. That's all it has ever been and that's all it will ever be."

www.jsonline.com/story/?id=216579


So Tan Tommy must have sent a subliminal message out to certain MU fans that this really meant "we have an offer on the table, but Pearl turned us down".

[crazyfred]

srt4driver said:

brewtownbrian said:

And in my opinion, nobody on this board truly knows the details about the UWM/MU series. So to say it's been on the table, or that it's only been offered as of late, or that Bruce Pearl knew about it and backed out, or anything else is hearsay and unless you know for sure and are ready to back it up...I, for one, won't believe it.

Will you believe it if Tom Crean himself says it?


From a 2004 interview with the Journal-Sentinal:

...Throughout it, Marquette coach Tom Crean kept his thoughts to himself. But on Monday in his office, Crean broke his public silence on what has become a somewhat contentious issue within the community.
"I'm disappointed that so much is being made about a hypothetical that's not happening and won't happen for a long, long time," Crean said.
[glow=red,2,300]"We just choose not to," he said when asked why MU won't play UWM. [/glow]"We have one major rival in the state, and that's the University of Wisconsin. That's all it has ever been and that's all it will ever be."

www.jsonline.com/story/?id=216579


So Tan Tommy must have sent a subliminal message out to certain MU fans that this really meant "we have an offer on the table, but Pearl turned us down".

SRT4....SIGH. March 22, 2004 is when that article was written.

That would be about 27 months ago.

I said you've had an offer on the table for close to 20 months.

Try again....wait, I thought you weren't going to talk to me anymore?

SMOOCH!

[famouspnthrfan]

crazyfred said:

Are you going to suggest that you are a better team than Kansas because the last two years you have gone farther in the NCAA tournament then the Jayhawks (even though they BEAT you head to head). Are you really going to suggest this?

In any college sport or professional, whether it's football, basketball, soccer or table tennis...what do you play your whole season for?

Answer: playoffs, tournaments.

Example: In the NBA playoffs, the Bucks lost in the first round to Detroit, while the Cleveland Cavaliers dispatched of the Wizards...hmm...which team had a more successful season...damn right it's the team that moves on. Believe it or not crazyfred (probably not since you think you are always right), but your argument is completely stupid. In no way did Detroit have a better season than Miami, however their regular season record was much better, and it can be argued that Detroit could beat anybody in the league on any given day, while Miami flat out couldn't until the playoffs....how did that end up?...you would know...the bobblehead special and my personal second favorite player in the league was on that team...so don't give me this bs about us thinking we're better than Kansas...however, I tend to think that we finished more successfully than them...which IS a valid argument...

crazyfred said:

Otherwise, your "argument" is nothing but pure hyperbole. No two teams have the same draw and play the same teams which is exactly why it's a different path for every team and so much luck is involved.

What does luck have to do with one basketball team beating another...it's all about stepping up in crunch time...You mean to tell me that NW St. got lucky by making that buzzer-beating 3 pointer against Iowa. What about the other 61 points they scored? Luck?

crazyfred said:

We've actually won 32 NCAA games to your 3

What's interesting is our NCAA Tournament Records since we became a Division 1 School

Marquette: 7-7 .500
Milwaukee: 3-3 .500

Well, it took us a few years to get there...forgive us for trying to become a successful basketball program, but in my eyes since we existed...your far superior school...isn't as superior as you thought...

[crazyfred]

famouspnthrfan said:

crazyfred said:

Are you going to suggest that you are a better team than Kansas because the last two years you have gone farther in the NCAA tournament then the Jayhawks (even though they BEAT you head to head). Are you really going to suggest this?

In any college sport or professional, whether it's football, basketball, soccer or table tennis...what do you play your whole season for?

Answer: playoffs, tournaments.

Example: In the NBA playoffs, the Bucks lost in the first round to Detroit, while the Cleveland Cavaliers dispatched of the Wizards...hmm...which team had a more successful season...damn right it's the team that moves on. Believe it or not crazyfred (probably not since you think you are always right), but your argument is completely stupid. In no way did Detroit have a better season than Miami, however their regular season record was much better, and it can be argued that Detroit could beat anybody in the league on any given day, while Miami flat out couldn't until the playoffs....how did that end up?...you would know...the bobblehead special and my personal second favorite player in the league was on that team...so don't give me this bs about us thinking we're better than Kansas...however, I tend to think that we finished more successfully than them...which IS a valid argument...



What does luck have to do with one basketball team beating another...it's all about stepping up in crunch time...You mean to tell me that NW St. got lucky by making that buzzer-beating 3 pointer against Iowa. What about the other 61 points they scored? Luck?

crazyfred said:

We've actually won 32 NCAA games to your 3

What's interesting is our NCAA Tournament Records since we became a Division 1 School

Marquette: 7-7 .500
Milwaukee: 3-3 .500

Well, it took us a few years to get there...forgive us for trying to become a successful basketball program, but in my eyes since we existed...your far superior school...isn't as superior as you thought...

Famous...read what I said. I said are you telling me that UWM is a better TEAM than UWM because they got farther? I said nothing about a more successful season, I said who is a better team. Big difference.

To use an NBA argument like you do is insane. In the NBA it's best of 7, in the NCAA its one game. In the NCAA the best team doesn't always win and we see that time and time again with upsets. That's why they are called upsets. Do you think in a 7 game series George Mason beats North Carolina, Michigan State UCONN? Please.

Eventually you come around to the same conclusion I do which is you are not a better team than Kansas...it just took you awhile to get there. Because of the NCAA format and the way it is setup, to me the season is setup into two distinct seasons. You can have a very good year by winning your conference, having a successful year but still losing in the NCAA tournament. Just as easily you can suck balls all year, get hot for 3 days and win your conference tournament and pick up a win in the NCAAs. Is that somehow a more successful season? Not in my mind. It's more like a lucky streak (by the way, I'm not saying this about UWM).

As for the luck comment...it has to do with WHOM you draw. Where you play them, how injured they are, how injured you are, etc. Luck is prevelent in sports on a daily basis and always will be. A groundball hit 3 inches more to the right might be the difference in a game. A bad holding call by a referree might call back a game winning touchdown. Etc, etc. Luck is part of the deal. All I'm saying is just because team A beats team B and 2000 miles away team C beats team D...what the hell do any of them have to do with the other? Nothing. Team D isn't playing Team A. There is no second chance.

In your world you seem to be saying George Mason is the 4th best team in the country...yet they weren't even the best team in their own damn league!!!


Finally, that's wonderful on your NCAA DI argument. I'll tell you what, we'll let you add all of your DII and DIII tournament appearances in there to even it out. Oh wait...nevermind.

[fan]

crazyfred said:

Famous...read what I said. I said are you telling me that UWM is a better TEAM than UWM because they got farther?

It sucks that you start off your rant with your stupidest moment. Once I point this out, I can't really top it. Look at how great this is. You not only screw up, you claim that you said the same statement previously, AND you attempt to use it as proof of you being right in a situation. Ouch.

crazyfred said:

Do you think in a 7 game series George Mason beats North Carolina, Michigan State UCONN?

ABSOLUTELY SIR! No doubt about it. Arguing the contrary holds slightly less weight than claiming that its true. Try it. I encourage you.

crazyfred said:

In your world you seem to be saying George Mason is the 4th best team in the country...yet they weren't even the best team in their own damn league!!!

Is this Carrot Top typing? Cause that was a terrible joke. You follow up a speech on luck and matchups with the claim that Mason wasn't the best team in their league? REASONING ERROR! REASONING ERROR! I thought they helped kids with special needs at Marquette? How could they let you slip through the cracks?

[famouspnthrfan]

crazyfred said:

Famous...read what I said. I said are you telling me that UWM is a better TEAM than UWM because they got farther? I said nothing about a more successful season, I said who is a better team. Big difference.

To use an NBA argument like you do is insane. In the NBA it's best of 7, in the NCAA its one game. In the NCAA the best team doesn't always win and we see that time and time again with upsets. That's why they are called upsets. Do you think in a 7 game series George Mason beats North Carolina, Michigan State UCONN? Please.

Eventually you come around to the same conclusion I do which is you are not a better team than Kansas...it just took you awhile to get there. Because of the NCAA format and the way it is setup, to me the season is setup into two distinct seasons. You can have a very good year by winning your conference, having a successful year but still losing in the NCAA tournament. Just as easily you can suck balls all year, get hot for 3 days and win your conference tournament and pick up a win in the NCAAs. Is that somehow a more successful season? Not in my mind. It's more like a lucky streak (by the way, I'm not saying this about UWM).

As for the luck comment...it has to do with WHOM you draw. Where you play them, how injured they are, how injured you are, etc. Luck is prevelent in sports on a daily basis and always will be. A groundball hit 3 inches more to the right might be the difference in a game. A bad holding call by a referree might call back a game winning touchdown. Etc, etc. Luck is part of the deal. All I'm saying is just because team A beats team B and 2000 miles away team C beats team D...what the hell do any of them have to do with the other? Nothing. Team D isn't playing Team A. There is no second chance.

In your world you seem to be saying George Mason is the 4th best team in the country...yet they weren't even the best team in their own damn league!!!


Finally, that's wonderful on your NCAA DI argument. I'll tell you what, we'll let you add all of your DII and DIII tournament appearances in there to even it out. Oh wait...nevermind.

Unfortunately IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO THE BETTER TEAM IS!!!!...what matters is how you finish flat out. Do you think Kansas said to themselves after they lost...our record was better so that loss doesn't even matter...obviously teams go into the tourney knowing it is 1 and done. It's not a 7 game series obviously!...but just because some joe schmo thinks that their team could beat another (as in your case with MU and UWM) doesn't mean they've had a better year or span of years...what you measure success upon from a basketball standpoint is whether you make it to a tournament and then how well you do in the tournament...I never said we were better than Kansas, or Alabama, or BC, or Oklahoma....but we came to play, and they....and MU did not...I'm not gonna say "OK crazyfred...you're right. Your Marquette Golden Eagles have been more successful than us the last few years because you send more guys to the league...or ok Marquette you've had better seasons than us because you beat Boise State that one year and we couldn't...and I agree about the 2 seasons comment...however...even though we ARE in a "rinky dink" league compared to the Big East or even the form CUSA...we have been successful...look it up...we've won reg. season titles, and tourney titles which by your definition is a measure of success...i know we may have not played the best teams...but we beat them...and then as a cherry on top of the NCAA sundae...we beat high major teams too...just because people like YOU doubted us. (fits another of your definitions of success...doing well in the tourney)

Obviously there is luck...but that is why you have to come to play...you can't whine about the fact that you got a bad draw or play too close to the opponents campus or blah blah blah. Because in the end it all tends to equal out. Look at our two respective teams for example. In my opinion we both got favorable matchups and high seeds this past year, but one team capitalized, and one well...you know where i'm going with this.

And I don't understand where you are going with the adding our DII and DIII tourney wins to our total. We've only been DI for about 15 years...how can you hold that against us??? Don't blame me for giving you those numbers. They are real statistics. Just like us being 0-6 against you since we've been DI which by the way the last time we played you was before we had ever made it to the tournament...

[SRT4driver]

crazyfred said:

srt4driver said:

Will you believe it if Tom Crean himself says it?


From a 2004 interview with the Journal-Sentinal:

...Throughout it, Marquette coach Tom Crean kept his thoughts to himself. But on Monday in his office, Crean broke his public silence on what has become a somewhat contentious issue within the community.
"I'm disappointed that so much is being made about a hypothetical that's not happening and won't happen for a long, long time," Crean said.
[glow=red,2,300]"We just choose not to," he said when asked why MU won't play UWM. [/glow]"We have one major rival in the state, and that's the University of Wisconsin. That's all it has ever been and that's all it will ever be."

www.jsonline.com/story/?id=216579


So Tan Tommy must have sent a subliminal message out to certain MU fans that this really meant "we have an offer on the table, but Pearl turned us down".

SRT4....SIGH. March 22, 2004 is when that article was written.

That would be about 27 months ago.

I said you've had an offer on the table for close to 20 months.

Try again....wait, I thought you weren't going to talk to me anymore?

SMOOCH!

For the record, I wasn't talking to you, but it doesn't surprise me that you assumed I was.

And funny, I thought I remembered many MU fans, including yourself, on both MU boards stating that UWM [glow=red,2,300]AND Pearl[/glow] had an offer on the table from Crean for several years, "but Pearl kept turning it down". Now that Crean's own words refute that, your story conveniently changes to "the offer has only been on UWM's table for less than 20 months."?
Of course...

[crazyfred]

fan said:

crazyfred said:

Famous...read what I said. I said are you telling me that UWM is a better TEAM than UWM because they got farther?

It sucks that you start off your rant with your stupidest moment. Once I point this out, I can't really top it. Look at how great this is. You not only screw up, you claim that you said the same statement previously, AND you attempt to use it as proof of you being right in a situation. Ouch.


ABSOLUTELY SIR! No doubt about it. Arguing the contrary holds slightly less weight than claiming that its true. Try it. I encourage you.

crazyfred said:

In your world you seem to be saying George Mason is the 4th best team in the country...yet they weren't even the best team in their own damn league!!!

Is this Carrot Top typing? Cause that was a terrible joke. You follow up a speech on luck and matchups with the claim that Mason wasn't the best team in their league? REASONING ERROR! REASONING ERROR! I thought they helped kids with special needs at Marquette? How could they let you slip through the cracks?

Fan...just so I have your comments correct...you're saying Mason would beat UCONN in a 7 game series? Is that correct?

Secondly I believe, if I read your diatribe correctly, that you are also saying my claim that Mason wasn't the best team in their league is inaccurate....is this also correct?

Please confirm...by the way...George Mason did not win their conference outright. In fact, they were the #2 seed in their conference tournament. Seems strange that the "best team" in their conference wouldn't be the #1 seed with an entire season to prove themselves. Oh, and in their conference tournament they again fell short of being the best.


And if you think GMU would beat UCONN in a best of 7 or a best of 5 or a best of 3....well more power to you ...SIR. LOL

[crazyfred]

srt4driver said:

crazyfred said:

SRT4....SIGH. March 22, 2004 is when that article was written.

That would be about 27 months ago.

I said you've had an offer on the table for close to 20 months.

Try again....wait, I thought you weren't going to talk to me anymore?

SMOOCH!

For the record, I wasn't talking to you, but it doesn't surprise me that you assumed I was.

And funny, I thought I remembered many MU fans, including yourself, on both MU boards stating that UWM [glow=red,2,300]AND Pearl[/glow] had an offer on the table from Crean for several years, "but Pearl kept turning it down". Now that Crean's own words refute that, your story conveniently changes to "the offer has only been on UWM's table for less than 20 months."?
Of course...

SRT...we look forward to playing...whenever it is you guys get around to signing that 4 for 1 deal.

;D

[crazyfred]

Famous...I have no doubt that Kansas and MU and anyone else that lost that one game were incredibly disappointed with their tournament results. I just don't lump success or failure of an entire year on one game. I never have and never will. The tournament can salvage a mediocre season, it can be the icing on the cake for other teams, it can be a disappointment for others, it can be validation or whatever else you make of it.

Depends on what your regular season was like, what your expectations are, etc. And, of course, it depends on who you're playing, etc.

If we were playing a team I clearly expected to win I would be disappointed. We were 1 point favorites....not exactly a clear favorite. We lost. Let's put it this way, I had UWM beating Oklahoma in all of my pools. That was a great matchup for you guys and you won...congratulations. The Sooners had problems all year long.

The one that surprised me was Wisconsin's pathetic showing against probably the worst Arizona team in 15 years...not just being beat but run out of the building.

Look forward to playing you guys when you get around to signging that 4 for 1 deal!

I'm off jet skiing...talk to you in a few days.

[fan]

crazyfred said:

Fan...just so I have your comments correct...you're saying Mason would beat UCONN in a 7 game series? Is that correct?

Actually, I believe I lumped in MSU and UNC as well but yes I did say that. Again I would love to see an argument for the contrary. The percentage of any team in any sport of winning a 7-game series is clearly higher for the team that won the first game.

crazyfred said:

Secondly I believe, if I read your diatribe correctly, that you are also saying my claim that Mason wasn't the best team in their league is inaccurate....is this also correct?

Please confirm...by the way...George Mason did not win their conference outright. In fact, they were the #2 seed in their conference tournament. Seems strange that the "best team" in their conference wouldn't be the #1 seed with an entire season to prove themselves. Oh, and in their conference tournament they again fell short of being the best.

I will confirm all three statements. I will also say that I am quite flattered that you consider my post so eloquent to be described as a diatribe. Finally I will confess that I have a problem following any reasoning you have proposed in determining which team is the better team when comparing two teams. Likewise I don't think you have made it clear how you determine which team would win a game.

Does the best team win the game? Does the best team score more points per game? Is the best team taller?

You have stated that George Mason isn't the best team in their conference because they didn't win games in a tournament, yet you also somehow claim that they aren't better than teams they beat in another tournament. It seems that you attempt to use some wildcards such as "luck," matchups, and familiarity to account for the gaping holes in your reasoning.

Can you really argue that UConn is a better team than George Mason? Or even that they would win if they did play a series involving more than one game? I'm sure you could attempt to do so, but I can't see how you can develop anything strong enough to overcome the fact that they lost.

[teddyp00]

Fan,

This is why you are going to be a very good lawyer and well as for myself, I am going to be an accountant and will hire you if I get my a$$ into hot water.

When this site gets back to hoops I will hop in again, until then I will just read about MU fans crying about how we are crying now that cry baby Crean is trying to force a deal down our throats.

[famouspnthrfan]

crazyfred said:

The one that surprised me was Wisconsin's pathetic showing against probably the worst Arizona team in 15 years...not just being beat but run out of the building.

Well...at least we can agree on something crazyfred. You make a good point.

[JimmyLemke]

The problem with our arguments here is that the 2 MU people that post here the most, crazyfred and muwarrior2007, are not representative of the Marquette community. While crazyfred has a rational mind, muwarrior2007 is a foul-mouthed punk that has already been apologized for by other Marquette posters.