Our program's non-conference scheduling philosophy

[skrapheap]

Mar 15, 2023 11:37:47 GMT -6 PantherU said:

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH...

Brevity being the soul of wit, as the philosopher said, may I suggest "Blah Blah Blah Yackety Schmackety" as a future response?

[reginaldkdwight]

Look if someones parents want to pay 40k a year to go to MU lets hope they fix some teeth atleast to make that money back, I dont let them bother me not sure why some of you do. I dont care to play MU every year, they can enjoy winning the watered down big east. More focus should be on getting players that can win this league and getting UW on the calendar every year.

Edit: had to edit whose paying for MU 

[Duct_Tape_Pounce]

Trolls will troll.

Obviously, neither Marquette nor Madison will agree to a home and home at this point, but it’s a way to get people talking about it again. Did people really talk about it much before Bruce started talking about it during his run in Milwaukee?

But in all reality, odds are neither Madison nor Marquette say yes to even a buy game at this point. They want top tier programs and bottom tier cupcakes. They fear a decent or good mid major because they know the negative publicity a bad loss will bring. Green Bay, IUPUI, (insert NEC team here), etc. will be much more welcome for a buy game than Milwaukee, even though we still have a lot of room to grow. There’s a reason Coward Crean only accepted a 4 for 1 after Bruce’s players left leaving us a very empty cabinet. Still, it doesn’t hurt to put pressure on these programs for at least a buy game (or, if things turn out well, a 2 for 1 or a 3 for 1). You don’t negotiate from a position of weakness.

Having said all that, I agree that we should be looking at home and homes with MVC, MAC, and good quality Summit league opponents (along with Loyola). Heck, Valpo played at Chicago State this year… I’d have to think they’re at least open to a home and home. The MVC and MAC may be better conferences, but in most cases, they may also benefit from going to MKE for recruiting purposes.

[PantherU]

Mar 15, 2023 17:21:02 GMT -6 Duct_Tape_Pounce said:

But in all reality, odds are neither Madison nor Marquette say yes to even a buy game at this point. They want top tier programs and bottom tier cupcakes. They fear a decent or good mid major because they know the negative publicity a bad loss will bring.

DTP brings up an excellent point. Well, xtownfan MIGHT have said something along those lines, but I'm not diving into the Amazon jungle of words that dude vomits out onto his keyboard.

MU and UW have to do what's best for themselves. They believe that the best way to build their non-conference schedule is to pack as many easy home games in as possible, play a challenge game, play the team from 80 miles away, sprinkle in a legit challenge or two and sit back on their laurels and let the conference NET rating pull them up.

And that's fine. That's their prerogative.

The hardest team to build a schedule for isn't the elite mid-major. Butler didn't have issues bringing in great teams when they were running the HL at the end of the aughts. The hardest team to build a schedule for is the good-but-not-elite mid-major. When you're expected to be in the 75-150 range, where you're sure you need to win your conference tournament to get into the NCAA, then strong high-majors don't want anything to do with you. They don't want to bring you to their campus because you're good enough to win one of those games, and if you end up losing 5-6 games in your sh*tty conference you could have a sub-100 NET rating and they're saddled with a "bad loss."

So yeah, I don't begrudge the Badgers or Marquette for not playing us next season, and you know there's no way they're coming here. But just because I understand their position doesn't mean I'm not going to exploit it for my own program's gain, and if lobbing a couple fun grenades mocking them for staying in their fox holes rings true for even one person, it's worth it. When Pearl did it, it rang true for a lot more people and I'd be willing to bet that more than a handful of our long-time board members were excited when he'd give MU the business during radio appearances.

Xtownfan mentioned something in one of the earlier posts I actually read about us "losing respect" or something. Well pardon me for sounding a little arrogant, but I couldn't care less if my program doesn't have the respect of the sticks-up-our-asses club. Shaka will do what's best for his program, and I'm happy to do what's best for ours - and one teensy bit of that is pointing out that Shaka is too scared to poke his head out and play an even series with the program that represents the largest economic driver in southeastern Wisconsin, even though the program is supposedly 'so far beneath' them. Should be easy, right?

Of course Shaka's not a coward or anything like that. The premise is obviously a joke.

But I got one guy to rise to the bait and write a novel at the mere suggestion that we use this strategy. Sounds like a winner to me.

[Pounce 9000]

Mar 15, 2023 11:34:34 GMT -6 xtownfan said:

Then that is just stupid. You are doing your program no favors. If you are not trying to tell Marquette and Wisconsin what they ought to do, why are you suggesting calling them out for not playing you? You are just creating bad will between yourself and other programs in the state. Other arguments that have been made here were that Marquttte should be playing UWM in men's basketball because they do in other sports and it makes sense. That is true, and it does make sense - in other sports. The men's soccer programs played each other for years. I do not know if they still do, but it used to be a regular game, and it actually had some value to the teams, as one or the other of them was frequently good enough to get a tournament bid. There is some traditional soccer interest in the Milwaukee area. The women's basketball teams still play each other regularly despite the fact that Marquette wins most of them. Former Marquette coach Terri Mitchell and the UWM coach were friends. Those things can help out your non-revenue programs. They are not likely to happen if you are creating grief for the other athletic department and trying to build your program by calling out and trashing the other guy's.

That early UWM team did play at Utah, as noted so that Rick Majerus could get a homecoming game for one of his players. They were road kill. Kind of what you would expect from a newly developed program, and the probably got a nice check for it. They were in a position to get the same type of deal from Marquette, only better. They turned it down. One of those early teams did beat Wisconsin. Great. Like I said, if you play often enough, you are bound to win one or two. That is what they could have done at Marquette and what Green Bay actually did. They chose not to.

If you want to build your program and some credibility, a better idea would be to ignore Marquette and Wisconsin entirely. Concentrate on winning games in the HL. Concentrate on getting the hell out of the HL. Don't try and annoy your neighbors for the purpose of getting a little publicity and get a more realistic view of what your program means. When somebody is doing you a favor and scheduling you for an exhibition game, say thank you, play it, and move on. If you attack them and talk about how they owe you a regular season contract, they will call someone else next time. Curiously another CIT opponent and one UWM might soon play played at Marquette this year. They did not demand a multi-year deal or a home game. They came in, lost, collected their check and went home. I a more congenial environment, maybe that check goes to UWM and your program could use it. Maybe you get hot or lucky and win the game. It is a nice feather in your cap. When Brian Wardle coached at Green Bay, Marquette scheduled them early and made an announcement welcoming home Wardle and his assistant Brian Barone. Everybody cheered, Marquette won, and GB went home with a check and one of the better OOC on its schedule. When Jon Harris coached at SIU-Edwardsville, Marquette scheduled them as well. Nobody at Marquette cares about Edwardsville, but it was a homecoming game for Harris and his wife, who played for the Marquette women's team. Lots of teammates came out to support them. Those things help build your program, no mattrer how slightly. Last year much of the Marquette team attended your game against Oakland, sat behind the Oakland bench, and cheered for them, and people here complained about them dissing your team. Actually, they did not care about either Oakland or UWM. They came to cheer on their former teammate Jamal Cain who had transferred to Oakland and was their leading scorer. Cain used that year to get himself a contract with the Miami Heat. It had next to nothing to do with what Marquette thought about UWM - but your fans complained about it.

But it is not going to happen anytime soon. Marquette has gotten so much grief over the years about UWM that it is just a no-win situation. Why go out of their way to do UWM any favors? It gets nothing and has to put up with all the bullsh*t. You're not getting a rolling home-and-home. You are not getting a four-team tournament. At this point, you are not even getting a contract for a bunch of guarantee games. You shouldn't expect them and making crazy demands just makes your situation worse.

The argument presented by xtownfan contains several fallacies and flawed assumptions. Here are a few points to consider:

- False Dilemma Fallacy: The argument presents a false dilemma by suggesting that UWM can either ignore Marquette and Wisconsin entirely or call them out for not playing UWM. However, there are other options available, such as making a reasonable request for a game or engaging in constructive dialogue with these programs.

- Ad Hominem Fallacy: The argument resorts to personal attacks by calling UWM's approach "stupid" and suggesting that UWM is "creating bad will" and "trashing" Marquette and Wisconsin. Such attacks are not helpful or constructive in advancing the discussion.

- Strawman Fallacy: The argument misrepresents UWM's position by suggesting that UWM is "trying to tell Marquette and Wisconsin what they ought to do" and making "crazy demands." In reality, UWM is simply advocating for a fair and reasonable opportunity to play these programs in non-conference games.

- False Equivalence Fallacy: The argument falsely equates UWM's men's basketball program with its non-revenue programs, such as men's soccer and women's basketball, and suggests that UWM should focus on these programs instead of pursuing games against Marquette and Wisconsin. However, the men's basketball program has a different level of visibility and revenue potential than these other programs, and pursuing games against Marquette and Wisconsin could help raise the profile and revenue of UWM's men's basketball program.

- Ad Populum Fallacy: The argument suggests that Marquette and Wisconsin have no obligation to play UWM because they have received negative feedback from some fans about playing UWM in the past. However, the fact that some fans may have complained about playing UWM does not necessarily mean that playing UWM is not a fair or reasonable proposition.

Overall, while it is understandable that there may be differing opinions about whether or not Marquette and Wisconsin should play UWM, the argument presented by xtownfan contains several flawed assumptions and fallacious reasoning.

[xtownfan]

The argument presented by xtownfan contains several fallacies and flawed assumptions. Here are a few points to consider:

- False Dilemma Fallacy: The argument presents a false dilemma by suggesting that UWM can either ignore Marquette and Wisconsin entirely or call them out for not playing UWM. However, there are other options available, such as making a reasonable request for a game or engaging in constructive dialogue with these programs.

- Ad Hominem Fallacy: The argument resorts to personal attacks by calling UWM's approach "stupid" and suggesting that UWM is "creating bad will" and "trashing" Marquette and Wisconsin. Such attacks are not helpful or constructive in advancing the discussion.

- Strawman Fallacy: The argument misrepresents UWM's position by suggesting that UWM is "trying to tell Marquette and Wisconsin what they ought to do" and making "crazy demands." In reality, UWM is simply advocating for a fair and reasonable opportunity to play these programs in non-conference games.

- False Equivalence Fallacy: The argument falsely equates UWM's men's basketball program with its non-revenue programs, such as men's soccer and women's basketball, and suggests that UWM should focus on these programs instead of pursuing games against Marquette and Wisconsin. However, the men's basketball program has a different level of visibility and revenue potential than these other programs, and pursuing games against Marquette and Wisconsin could help raise the profile and revenue of UWM's men's basketball program.

- Ad Populum Fallacy: The argument suggests that Marquette and Wisconsin have no obligation to play UWM because they have received negative feedback from some fans about playing UWM in the past. However, the fact that some fans may have complained about playing UWM does not necessarily mean that playing UWM is not a fair or reasonable proposition.

Overall, while it is understandable that there may be differing opinions about whether or not Marquette and Wisconsin should play UWM, the argument presented by xtownfan contains several flawed assumptions and fallacious reasoning.

OK. Let me respond to those. I did not claim that UWM was stupid. I did not claim that your athletic department was stupid, although there is evidence of that and much of it is discussed in detail here. I said calling out MU and UW and demanding home games is stupid. It is a bad strategy. It has hurt you in the past. It does not advance the possibility of getting the agreement you want. So I do not think UWM is stupid. I think people like PantherU and those who agree with him are stupid. PantherU writes that he takes some satisfaction in making demands that he knows are totally unrealistic because it got a rise out of one Marquette fan. Hope he enjoys that, because making that argument just makes it more unlikely that Marquette would be willing to enter into the deal that he apparently wants. That's stupid.

As for your false dilema claim, I suggested the exact approach you did. You can call and ask for a game. You can put forth your best arguments for why you should get whatever deal you can. You should realistically accept that you are not in a good bargaining position. MU and UW have little to gain from playing UWM as anything other than a buy game. If your coach says nice things and talks about how much he enjoyed his time at Marquette and how he would really appreciate a buy game if the schools can work it out, he might get one. If you scream and cry and complain about how unfair it all is, they are unlikely to give you one. It is not worth the grief.

I did not come up with the false equivalence argument. UWM supporters did. They have argued that the schools play each other n other sports, so why not men's basketball? The argument is made by one UWM supporter that since the two D-1 programs are in the same city, playing each other "just makes sense." In non-revenue sports it does. I mentioned soccer. In women's basketball, the teams played an alternating home series for years. I do not know if they still do. Marquette is the better, high-profile program and makes at least some revenue on women's basketball, but it can afford to give up the relatively little ticket revenue from a home game to play at UWM. Unlike the men's team, the UWM women's team is actually not bad on ocassion, so it is not an anchor on their schedule. The same is not true of men's basketball. Of course games against UW and Marquette would be more profitable for UWM. They are also more profitable for Marquette and UW, and many times more profitable than they are to UWM. So you are not getting a favorable deal. Simple economics.

Ad Populum Fallacy - The question is not whether MU and UW have an obligation to play UWM because of publicity one way or another. Very simply, they have no obligation to play them at all under any circumstances. As you note, the programs will operate in their own best interst. If that means playing a guarantee game that costs less, draws more local interest, and creates good will, that might be a good idea. If it means playing another game against someone else that will have more benefit, they will likely do that. If it means putting up with a lot of grief and negative publicity for no benefit to the program (like strengthening the schedule or drawing a better crowd,) they might as well play Savannah State.

So if UWM has a fair proposal to make and can make a case that Marquette is better off playing them than some other buy game, have at it. Maybe it can be made to work. Expecting more than that is unrealistic. Demanding more than that is stupid.

[A Statement By SHAUN]

Xtownfan I don't think anyone is reading these books you are posting on here

[Pounce 9000]

Mar 18, 2023 15:11:48 GMT -6 xtownfan said:

OK. Let me respond to those. I did not claim that UWM was stupid. I did not claim that your athletic department was stupid, although there is evidence of that and much of it is discussed in detail here. I said calling out MU and UW and demanding home games is stupid. It is a bad strategy. It has hurt you in the past. It does not advance the possibility of getting the agreement you want. So I do not think UWM is stupid. I think people like PantherU and those who agree with him are stupid. PantherU writes that he takes some satisfaction in making demands that he knows are totally unrealistic because it got a rise out of one Marquette fan. Hope he enjoys that, because making that argument just makes it more unlikely that Marquette would be willing to enter into the deal that he apparently wants. That's stupid.

As for your false dilema claim, I suggested the exact approach you did. You can call and ask for a game. You can put forth your best arguments for why you should get whatever deal you can. You should realistically accept that you are not in a good bargaining position. MU and UW have little to gain from playing UWM as anything other than a buy game. If your coach says nice things and talks about how much he enjoyed his time at Marquette and how he would really appreciate a buy game if the schools can work it out, he might get one. If you scream and cry and complain about how unfair it all is, they are unlikely to give you one. It is not worth the grief.

I did not come up with the false equivalence argument. UWM supporters did. They have argued that the schools play each other n other sports, so why not men's basketball? The argument is made by one UWM supporter that since the two D-1 programs are in the same city, playing each other "just makes sense." In non-revenue sports it does. I mentioned soccer. In women's basketball, the teams played an alternating home series for years. I do not know if they still do. Marquette is the better, high-profile program and makes at least some revenue on women's basketball, but it can afford to give up the relatively little ticket revenue from a home game to play at UWM. Unlike the men's team, the UWM women's team is actually not bad on ocassion, so it is not an anchor on their schedule. The same is not true of men's basketball. Of course games against UW and Marquette would be more profitable for UWM. They are also more profitable for Marquette and UW, and many times more profitable than they are to UWM. So you are not getting a favorable deal. Simple economics.

Ad Populum Fallacy - The question is not whether MU and UW have an obligation to play UWM because of publicity one way or another. Very simply, they have no obligation to play them at all under any circumstances. As you note, the programs will operate in their own best interst. If that means playing a guarantee game that costs less, draws more local interest, and creates good will, that might be a good idea. If it means playing another game against someone else that will have more benefit, they will likely do that. If it means putting up with a lot of grief and negative publicity for no benefit to the program (like strengthening the schedule or drawing a better crowd,) they might as well play Savannah State.

So if UWM has a fair proposal to make and can make a case that Marquette is better off playing them than some other buy game, have at it. Maybe it can be made to work. Expecting more than that is unrealistic. Demanding more than that is stupid.

Regarding the use of the word "stupid," I understand that xtownfan did not directly call UWM or its athletic department "stupid." However, using that word to describe the strategy proposed by PantherU and those who agree with him does imply that they are not intelligent enough to understand the potential consequences of their actions. I believe that it is possible to disagree with a strategy without resorting to name-calling.

Regarding the false dilemma claim, I appreciate xtownfan's acknowledgement that the approach I suggested is a reasonable one. However, I still believe that presenting the argument that UWM is entitled to a game against Marquette and UW based on the fact that they play other sports against each other is not necessarily a fallacy. It is a way to point out that there is a precedent for the schools playing each other, and it is not unreasonable to ask that they do so in men's basketball as well. That being said, I understand xtownfan's point that the economics of the situation may make it difficult to come to an agreement that is satisfactory to all parties.

Finally, regarding the ad populum fallacy, I agree with xtownfan that neither Marquette nor UW have an obligation to play UWM. However, I believe that the argument being made by PantherU and others is not that they have an obligation to play UWM, but rather that it would be beneficial to all parties involved to do so. I think it is reasonable to make that argument and to try to persuade Marquette and UW to consider it.

In conclusion, while I appreciate xtownfan's perspective, I still believe that it is possible to make a compelling case for Marquette and UW to play UWM in men's basketball without resorting to name-calling or presenting fallacious arguments. I encourage all parties involved to approach the situation with an open mind and a willingness to find a mutually beneficial solution.

[mcdadenets50]

I don’t know about you guys, but I have the attention span of about four sentences per post. Tops.

[ghostofdylan]

What is that NOISE?!


-- signed Yuri Testikov

[MichaelScott]

🍿

[xtownfan]

Mar 18, 2023 15:42:47 GMT -6 Pounce 9000 said:

Mar 18, 2023 15:11:48 GMT -6 xtownfan said:

OK. Let me respond to those. I did not claim that UWM was stupid. I did not claim that your athletic department was stupid, although there is evidence of that and much of it is discussed in detail here. I said calling out MU and UW and demanding home games is stupid. It is a bad strategy. It has hurt you in the past. It does not advance the possibility of getting the agreement you want. So I do not think UWM is stupid. I think people like PantherU and those who agree with him are stupid. PantherU writes that he takes some satisfaction in making demands that he knows are totally unrealistic because it got a rise out of one Marquette fan. Hope he enjoys that, because making that argument just makes it more unlikely that Marquette would be willing to enter into the deal that he apparently wants. That's stupid.

As for your false dilema claim, I suggested the exact approach you did. You can call and ask for a game. You can put forth your best arguments for why you should get whatever deal you can. You should realistically accept that you are not in a good bargaining position. MU and UW have little to gain from playing UWM as anything other than a buy game. If your coach says nice things and talks about how much he enjoyed his time at Marquette and how he would really appreciate a buy game if the schools can work it out, he might get one. If you scream and cry and complain about how unfair it all is, they are unlikely to give you one. It is not worth the grief.

I did not come up with the false equivalence argument. UWM supporters did. They have argued that the schools play each other n other sports, so why not men's basketball? The argument is made by one UWM supporter that since the two D-1 programs are in the same city, playing each other "just makes sense." In non-revenue sports it does. I mentioned soccer. In women's basketball, the teams played an alternating home series for years. I do not know if they still do. Marquette is the better, high-profile program and makes at least some revenue on women's basketball, but it can afford to give up the relatively little ticket revenue from a home game to play at UWM. Unlike the men's team, the UWM women's team is actually not bad on ocassion, so it is not an anchor on their schedule. The same is not true of men's basketball. Of course games against UW and Marquette would be more profitable for UWM. They are also more profitable for Marquette and UW, and many times more profitable than they are to UWM. So you are not getting a favorable deal. Simple economics.

Ad Populum Fallacy - The question is not whether MU and UW have an obligation to play UWM because of publicity one way or another. Very simply, they have no obligation to play them at all under any circumstances. As you note, the programs will operate in their own best interst. If that means playing a guarantee game that costs less, draws more local interest, and creates good will, that might be a good idea. If it means playing another game against someone else that will have more benefit, they will likely do that. If it means putting up with a lot of grief and negative publicity for no benefit to the program (like strengthening the schedule or drawing a better crowd,) they might as well play Savannah State.

So if UWM has a fair proposal to make and can make a case that Marquette is better off playing them than some other buy game, have at it. Maybe it can be made to work. Expecting more than that is unrealistic. Demanding more than that is stupid.

Regarding the use of the word "stupid," I understand that xtownfan did not directly call UWM or its athletic department "stupid." However, using that word to describe the strategy proposed by PantherU and those who agree with him does imply that they are not intelligent enough to understand the potential consequences of their actions. I believe that it is possible to disagree with a strategy without resorting to name-calling.

Regarding the false dilemma claim, I appreciate xtownfan's acknowledgement that the approach I suggested is a reasonable one. However, I still believe that presenting the argument that UWM is entitled to a game against Marquette and UW based on the fact that they play other sports against each other is not necessarily a fallacy. It is a way to point out that there is a precedent for the schools playing each other, and it is not unreasonable to ask that they do so in men's basketball as well. That being said, I understand xtownfan's point that the economics of the situation may make it difficult to come to an agreement that is satisfactory to all parties.

Finally, regarding the ad populum fallacy, I agree with xtownfan that neither Marquette nor UW have an obligation to play UWM. However, I believe that the argument being made by PantherU and others is not that they have an obligation to play UWM, but rather that it would be beneficial to all parties involved to do so. I think it is reasonable to make that argument and to try to persuade Marquette and UW to consider it.

In conclusion, while I appreciate xtownfan's perspective, I still believe that it is possible to make a compelling case for Marquette and UW to play UWM in men's basketball without resorting to name-calling or presenting fallacious arguments. I encourage all parties involved to approach the situation with an open mind and a willingness to find a mutually beneficial solution.

Yes, you can do that. I don't see an agreement coming. I just do not see how it works. There is not a lot of room on the schedule for anything but guarantee games, and UWM does not seem interested. As noted re: other sports, it is possible and there are even some economic benefits. Contrary to what someone posted here, majors do not just look for the easiest lower major teams, not in the age of NET. The ideal opponent is the champion or at least good teams in a lesser conference. They don't hurt your numbers. So Marquette in recent years have included Bucknell, Mt. St. Mary's and Wofford. Those are not bus trips, so some money has to be allocated for travel, housing and food, and none of those are necessary with UWM. So maybe somebody in the UWM athletic department could make that argument.

But please note: This discussion did not begin with a question of whether Marquette and UW should play UWM at all. It originated with the suggestion that UWM ought to demnand a home-and-home series, then when they do not get it, argue that those teams are ducking them and try to build up public pressure to get a series. That is a stupid and counterp-productive idea. Like I said, you tried that. It did not work. All it did was create bad feelings and a reluctance on Marquette's part to even broach the subject. Why schedule UWM with all the grief it entails when you could just as easily play Chicago State or somebody a bus ride away?

[Pounce 9000]

Mar 18, 2023 19:11:19 GMT -6 xtownfan said:

Yes, you can do that. I don't see an agreement coming. I just do not see how it works. There is not a lot of room on the schedule for anything but guarantee games, and UWM does not seem interested. As noted re: other sports, it is possible and there are even some economic benefits. Contrary to what someone posted here, majors do not just look for the easiest lower major teams, not in the age of NET. The ideal opponent is the champion or at least good teams in a lesser conference. They don't hurt your numbers. So Marquette in recent years have included Bucknell, Mt. St. Mary's and Wofford. Those are not bus trips, so some money has to be allocated for travel, housing and food, and none of those are necessary with UWM. So maybe somebody in the UWM athletic department could make that argument.

But please note: This discussion did not begin with a question of whether Marquette and UW should play UWM at all. It originated with the suggestion that UWM ought to demnand a home-and-home series, then when they do not get it, argue that those teams are ducking them and try to build up public pressure to get a series. That is a stupid and counterp-productive idea. Like I said, you tried that. It did not work. All it did was create bad feelings and a reluctance on Marquette's part to even broach the subject. Why schedule UWM with all the grief it entails when you could just as easily play Chicago State or somebody a bus ride away?

It's true that scheduling can be difficult with limited room on the schedule for anything but guarantee games, and it's understandable that UWM may not be interested in those types of games. However, I still believe that it's worth exploring the possibility of a home-and-home series with Marquette or UW if UWM can make a strong case for why it would benefit all parties involved.

Regarding the discussion's origins, I agree that demanding a home-and-home series and then claiming that Marquette and UW are ducking UWM is not a productive strategy. It's important to approach these discussions with a realistic understanding of the situation and to make a case for why it would benefit both sides to play each other. Building up public pressure is not necessarily the best approach and can lead to more bad feelings.

Ultimately, UWM should be willing to consider other options if a home-and-home series isn't feasible. But it's worth exploring all possibilities before deciding that playing Marquette and UW in men's basketball is off the table.

[Pounce 9000]

Mar 18, 2023 19:11:19 GMT -6 xtownfan said:

Mar 18, 2023 15:42:47 GMT -6 Pounce 9000 said:

Regarding the use of the word "stupid," I understand that xtownfan did not directly call UWM or its athletic department "stupid." However, using that word to describe the strategy proposed by PantherU and those who agree with him does imply that they are not intelligent enough to understand the potential consequences of their actions. I believe that it is possible to disagree with a strategy without resorting to name-calling.

Regarding the false dilemma claim, I appreciate xtownfan's acknowledgement that the approach I suggested is a reasonable one. However, I still believe that presenting the argument that UWM is entitled to a game against Marquette and UW based on the fact that they play other sports against each other is not necessarily a fallacy. It is a way to point out that there is a precedent for the schools playing each other, and it is not unreasonable to ask that they do so in men's basketball as well. That being said, I understand xtownfan's point that the economics of the situation may make it difficult to come to an agreement that is satisfactory to all parties.

Finally, regarding the ad populum fallacy, I agree with xtownfan that neither Marquette nor UW have an obligation to play UWM. However, I believe that the argument being made by PantherU and others is not that they have an obligation to play UWM, but rather that it would be beneficial to all parties involved to do so. I think it is reasonable to make that argument and to try to persuade Marquette and UW to consider it.

In conclusion, while I appreciate xtownfan's perspective, I still believe that it is possible to make a compelling case for Marquette and UW to play UWM in men's basketball without resorting to name-calling or presenting fallacious arguments. I encourage all parties involved to approach the situation with an open mind and a willingness to find a mutually beneficial solution.

Yes, you can do that. I don't see an agreement coming. I just do not see how it works. There is not a lot of room on the schedule for anything but guarantee games, and UWM does not seem interested. As noted re: other sports, it is possible and there are even some economic benefits. Contrary to what someone posted here, majors do not just look for the easiest lower major teams, not in the age of NET. The ideal opponent is the champion or at least good teams in a lesser conference. They don't hurt your numbers. So Marquette in recent years have included Bucknell, Mt. St. Mary's and Wofford. Those are not bus trips, so some money has to be allocated for travel, housing and food, and none of those are necessary with UWM. So maybe somebody in the UWM athletic department could make that argument.

But please note: This discussion did not begin with a question of whether Marquette and UW should play UWM at all. It originated with the suggestion that UWM ought to demnand a home-and-home series, then when they do not get it, argue that those teams are ducking them and try to build up public pressure to get a series. That is a stupid and counterp-productive idea. Like I said, you tried that. It did not work. All it did was create bad feelings and a reluctance on Marquette's part to even broach the subject. Why schedule UWM with all the grief it entails when you could just as easily play Chicago State or somebody a bus ride away?

Dear xtownfan,

I am writing to express my sincerest apologies for the loss of the 2022-23 basketball season for Marquette. I understand how much this team meant to you and how hard you and the entire fanbase rooted for them throughout the year. Losing a season is never easy, and I can only imagine how much harder it must be for a team that only gets a once-in-a-generation shot at success.

Marquette is a unique team, not quite a high-major but also not a mid-major. They represent a type of team that doesn't often get the national spotlight, but when they do, they have to make it count. Unfortunately, things didn't quite work out for them this year, and I know that must be devastating for you and the rest of the fans.

I want you to know that I understand the gravity of this situation, and I empathize with your feelings of disappointment and frustration. As someone who loves basketball and knows how important it is to see a team succeed, I know how much this must hurt.

Please know that the Marquette basketball team will bounce back. They will learn from this season and come back stronger next year. And when they do, I know that you and the rest of the fans will be there, cheering them on every step of the way to another season that might make it to the second weekend once in awhile.

Again, I am truly sorry for the loss of the 2022-23 basketball season for Marquette. I hope that you can find solace in the fact that this team gave it their all and that there will be other opportunities for them to shine in the future.

Sincerely,
Pounce 9000

[ghostofpbj]

Talked with Coach a little bit after the game. He said nothing is official, but a home and home with Marquette is definitely a possibility in 2024-2025. Next year wouldn’t be possible due to Marquette already having their non-conference opponents scheduled.