ike1024:

 

Did Wisconsin challenge for a Big Ten title two years ago?  I will assume that you think that they had a chance to win the conference that year.  They finished 2 games behind Ohio State.  That same year Marquette finished three games back in a league that plays two more games.  Although Marquette hasn't won, or even been within a game, they were close enough where I think most would say they contended.

 

Yes.  UW lost a head-to-head road game with national runner-up OSU by 1 point the second to last game of the year..... winning that would have given them the title (a share of it).  That is about as much of a challenge as you get without actually winning it.

We were for all intents and purposes out of the running well before the end of the season and ended up tied for 5th.

You really need this stuff explained to you, or are you just being difficult? 

ike1024:

Although Marquette hasn't won, or even been within a game,

 

... or within 2. 

"Oh we (WI) lost, but it was a close game..."

 WAAH! 

weak sauce again by abe.

AbeFroman:

You really need this stuff explained to you, or are you just being difficult? 

Whoa, you're so much smarter than me, please explain it again.

Marquette lost last second games to Notre Dame and Georgetown and Georgetown won two games that they shouldn't have won.  Thus, by your "almost won" logic, Marquette could have easily been 13-5, G-Town could easily have been 12-6, ND would have been 13-5.  It's easy to play that game in retrospect, but if referees didn't call last second fouls 80 feet from the basket or did call goaltends, then Georgetown would not have 15-3.  If Marquette would not have had Trend in the game against ND, they would have had a layup to take the lead with no time left.  If they wouldn't have blown a ten point lead late against G-Town, they would have beaten them.

Notice how I will just say that Marquette contended without making excuses for why they didn't come closer, but you have to explain away why UW lost the conference by two games.  Yes, with Brian Butch Uw may have won that game and tied for the conference, but they didn't, and they lost by two games.

ike1024:

AbeFroman:

Doesn't matter?  What have we won?  Have we gone full circle back to top 6 conference finishes being a big accomplishment?

UCONN had a terrible year last year (for the reasons I mentioned above) and 'Cuse has been down because Boeheim doesn't have a clue when it comes to anything but recruiting (which he does as well as anybody).  That being said, those two teams along with Pitt and Georgetown have hardware in the last three years.  I don't think Louisville has actually won a title in that timeframe, but they have two 2nd place finishes, and Elite 8 appearance and 4 tourney wins..... clearly more success than we've had.

What hardware?  Are you basing success on conference championships but an inability to win multiple games in the NCAA tournament?  Who cares about that if you can't win more than two games in the tourney?  You're talking about being nationally competitive by getting better players.  Being nationally competitive in recruiting is a means to more than a conference championship, or just a conference tourney championship.  I think being top six in the BE every year is just as much a sign of success as being second one year and tenth the next. 

And again, your reasons for why those teams have such different finishes is irrelevant, it only means that they don't produce every year, regardless of who they are recruiting.  

Furthermore, I think we would all agree that Marquette has been outcoached in just about every tournament game since '03, save the Stanford game.  I think that has something to do with the inability to move past the second round.

Would you rather have Marquette be 20-25 every year or 10th one year and 50th the next?  I guess it depends on what you want.

 

How dillusional are you?  The only time Marquette has been a top 10 team was when Wade carried them on his back... other than that it is middle of the conference finishes with no conference titles and not making out of the first weekend of the tournament every year.   

ike1024:

  Conference championships are nice, but they mean nothing.

They mean nothing until you win them... why did Marquette even join the Big East then?  All MU fans could talk about was going "big time" on their move to the BE and how it was going to improve their recruiting and now all you hear them do is complain about how difficult it is year and year out when they disappoint.  Boo hoo.

U Dub Dub:

ike1024:

AbeFroman:

Doesn't matter?  What have we won?  Have we gone full circle back to top 6 conference finishes being a big accomplishment?

UCONN had a terrible year last year (for the reasons I mentioned above) and 'Cuse has been down because Boeheim doesn't have a clue when it comes to anything but recruiting (which he does as well as anybody).  That being said, those two teams along with Pitt and Georgetown have hardware in the last three years.  I don't think Louisville has actually won a title in that timeframe, but they have two 2nd place finishes, and Elite 8 appearance and 4 tourney wins..... clearly more success than we've had.

What hardware?  Are you basing success on conference championships but an inability to win multiple games in the NCAA tournament?  Who cares about that if you can't win more than two games in the tourney?  You're talking about being nationally competitive by getting better players.  Being nationally competitive in recruiting is a means to more than a conference championship, or just a conference tourney championship.  I think being top six in the BE every year is just as much a sign of success as being second one year and tenth the next. 

And again, your reasons for why those teams have such different finishes is irrelevant, it only means that they don't produce every year, regardless of who they are recruiting.  

Furthermore, I think we would all agree that Marquette has been outcoached in just about every tournament game since '03, save the Stanford game.  I think that has something to do with the inability to move past the second round.

Would you rather have Marquette be 20-25 every year or 10th one year and 50th the next?  I guess it depends on what you want.

 

How dillusional are you?  The only time Marquette has been a top 10 team was when Wade carried them on his back... other than that it is middle of the conference finishes with no conference titles and not making out of the first weekend of the tournament every year.   

Point to the part where i said Marquette was a top 10 team.  Abe is saying Syracuse and UConn are so much better, they are the ones that are top 10 one year and 50th the next.  If you can't stay with the conversation, you probably shouldn't try to join in. 

U Dub Dub:

ike1024:

  Conference championships are nice, but they mean nothing.

They mean nothing until you win them... why did Marquette even join the Big East then?  All MU fans could talk about was going "big time" on their move to the BE and how it was going to improve their recruiting and now all you hear them do is complain about how difficult it is year and year out when they disappoint.  Boo hoo.

Idiotic all the way around.  You think Marquette joined the BE to win conference championships?  Don't you think that Marquette would've had an easier time winning conference championships in CUSA?  They probably wouldn't have joined the BE if that was their goal.  I don't see anyone complaining about how hard it is every year.  I'm not complaining about that, in fact, I'm saying that it's ok to finish in the top of the BE even if they don't win because it is somewhat irrelevant who wins the conference, since that isn't the main goal for any team.  See my last post about joining the conversation.

ike1024:

U Dub Dub:

ike1024:

  Conference championships are nice, but they mean nothing.

They mean nothing until you win them... why did Marquette even join the Big East then?  All MU fans could talk about was going "big time" on their move to the BE and how it was going to improve their recruiting and now all you hear them do is complain about how difficult it is year and year out when they disappoint.  Boo hoo.

Idiotic all the way around.  You think Marquette joined the BE to win conference championships?  Don't you think that Marquette would've had an easier time winning conference championships in CUSA?  They probably wouldn't have joined the BE if that was their goal.  I don't see anyone complaining about how hard it is every year.  I'm not complaining about that, in fact, I'm saying that it's ok to finish in the top of the BE even if they don't win because it is somewhat irrelevant who wins the conference, since that isn't the main goal for any team.  See my last post about joining the conversation.

If you truly feel that winning your conference is irrelevant, than more power to you but I don't know any fans who watch their team throughout the season and don't follow the position in their conference.  There's a reason for the big celebration at the end of the year and trophy presentation.  Florida won back to back titles and they still found the SEC Championship to be worth their time to celebrate. 

I wasn't saying Marquette joined the BE to win conference championships.  They thought it would enhance their exposure and they'd be able to recruit better and all I hear from MU fans is how difficult the BE is.  My point is, don't complain about it when that's what you signed up for... and if you haven't heard it, just work on your listening skills, I hear it all year.

U Dub Dub:

If you truly feel that winning your conference is irrelevant, than more power to you but I don't know any fans who watch their team throughout the season and don't follow the position in their conference.  There's a reason for the big celebration at the end of the year and trophy presentation.  Florida won back to back titles and they still found the SEC Championship to be worth their time to celebrate. 

I wasn't saying Marquette joined the BE to win conference championships.  They thought it would enhance their exposure and they'd be able to recruit better and all I hear from MU fans is how difficult the BE is.  My point is, don't complain about it when that's what you signed up for... and if you haven't heard it, just work on your listening skills, I hear it all year.

Really?  So you think Florida's goal was to win the conference championship?  You think the fans would have been elated if Florida won the SEC and not the NC?  I'm pretty sure the team was happy with the SEC title, but I'm pretty sure they would have disappointed if they hadn't won the NC.

And that's fine.  Some people may whine about it, but I didn't, so I'm not sure how appropriate it is to raise that point while you're disagreeing with me.  I think it has increased the exposure and recruiting, and I don't care if they ever win the Big East, if they are going to win the NC.  You don't think it's a sign of mediocrity to be satisfied with a conference championship and not want more?  I do.  I never said it wouldn't make me happy, just that it doesn't matter if I'm disappointed come the beginning of April.

ike1024:

You don't think it's a sign of mediocrity to be satisfied with a conference championship and not want more?  I do.  I never said it wouldn't make me happy, just that it doesn't matter if I'm disappointed come the beginning of April.

Winning one of the major conferences is "mediocrity"?  LOL..... That must mean we haven't been very good at all.

Obviously everybody wants to win a national title.... however, the rational among us know this isn't a realistic goal.... especially when we haven't seriously competed to win our own conference.

Champions Since 1990 

1990- UNLV (won conf.)

1991- Duke (won conf.)

1992- Duke (won conf.)

1993- UNC (won conf.)

1994- Arkansas (won conf.)

1995- UCLA (won conf.)

1996- Kentucky (won conf.)

1997- Arizona (5th)

1998- Kentucky (won conf.)

1999- UCONN (won conf.)

2000- MSU (won conf.)

2001- Duke (won conf.)

2002- Maryland (won conf.)

2003- Syracuse (won conf.)

2004- UCONN (2nd)

2005- UNC (won conf.)

2006- Florida (2nd)

2007- Florida (won conf.)

2008- Kansas (won conf.) 

Do you see a very strong trend there?  With the exception of Arizona (5th), UCONN (2nd), and Florida (2nd).... every team won their conference title.  Me thinks there might be a correlation.  We need to start competing for the BE if we realistically want to compete for anything more, and we are not even close to the first step, much less the second. 

AbeFroman:

ike1024:

You don't think it's a sign of mediocrity to be satisfied with a conference championship and not want more?  I do.  I never said it wouldn't make me happy, just that it doesn't matter if I'm disappointed come the beginning of April.

Winning one of the major conferences is "mediocrity"?  LOL..... That must mean we haven't been very good at all.

Obviously everybody wants to win a national title.... however, the rational among us know this isn't a realistic goal.... especially when we haven't seriously competed to win our own conference.

Champions Since 1990 

1990- UNLV (won conf.)

1991- Duke (won conf.)

1992- Duke (won conf.)

1993- UNC (won conf.)

1994- Arkansas (won conf.)

1995- UCLA (won conf.)

1996- Kentucky (won conf.)

1997- Arizona (5th)

1998- Kentucky (won conf.)

1999- UCONN (won conf.)

2000- MSU (won conf.)

2001- Duke (won conf.)

2002- Maryland (won conf.)

2003- Syracuse (won conf.)

2004- UCONN (2nd)

2005- UNC (won conf.)

2006- Florida (2nd)

2007- Florida (won conf.)

2008- Kansas (won conf.) 

 

Do you see a very strong trend there?  With the exception of Arizona (5th), UCONN (2nd), and Florida (2nd).... every team won their conference title.  Me thinks there might be a correlation.  We need to start competing for the BE if we realistically want to compete for anything more, and we are not even close to the first step, much less the second. 

 

I wish this thing would let me swear.  Honestly.  You're really not sufficiently smarter than me to be able to quote something I say, say I said something else, and then try to use it against me.

What did I say?  I said that it's a sign of mediocrity to be satisfied with a conference championship and not want more.

What did you say that I said?  You say that I said it's a sign of mediocrity to be satisfied with a conference championship.

Not the same thing.

If a team wins a conference championship and doesn't care about winning the NC, then that team isn't very good.  Does anyone care about Portand State?  No, because they aren't very good.

Of course there is a correlation between teams that won a NC and teams that won a conference championship.  Nothing I've said has disputed that.  I never said that Marquette can compete for a NC before contending for a conference championship.  I merely stated that I don't care if they win a conference championship as long as they compete for a NC, because a NC is the true goal of any real team.

Let it go, ike. Wisconsin has won a couple conference titles recently so Abe wants to claim that those are incredibly meaningful. He has also discredited Final Four appearances. Not coincidentally, Crean has one of those and Bo doesn't. Whatever best fits into Abe's logic is what he bases his arguments on, regardless of any and all other factors. He doesn't listen to anything anyone says so it's pointless to argue with him.

I can't believe he didn't get banned and we're going to let him ruin this board too.

ike1024:

I wish this thing would let me swear.  Honestly.  You're really not sufficiently smarter than me to be able to quote something I say, say I said something else, and then try to use it against me.

What did I say?  I said that it's a sign of mediocrity to be satisfied with a conference championship and not want more.

What did you say that I said?  You say that I said it's a sign of mediocrity to be satisfied with a conference championship.

Not the same thing.

If a team wins a conference championship and doesn't care about winning the NC, then that team isn't very good.  Does anyone care about Portand State?  No, because they aren't very good.

Of course there is a correlation between teams that won a NC and teams that won a conference championship.  Nothing I've said has disputed that.  I never said that Marquette can compete for a NC before contending for a conference championship.  I merely stated that I don't care if they win a conference championship as long as they compete for a NC, because a NC is the true goal of any real team.

Portland St.?  We are discussing major conference titles and national championships and you bring Portland St. into the diccussion?  WTF.  Talk about a straw man. 

I didn't address your point about teams wanting to win national championships because it is such an obvious statement I didn't really think it needed to be expounded on.  Every team that wins a major conference wants to win the national championship.  Duh.

So to clarify- you are disappointed with any season in which MU doesn't win the national championship and winning the Big East wouldn't matter if we then subsequently didn't win the NCAA tournament.  That's absurd.

AbeFroman:

ike1024:

I wish this thing would let me swear.  Honestly.  You're really not sufficiently smarter than me to be able to quote something I say, say I said something else, and then try to use it against me.

What did I say?  I said that it's a sign of mediocrity to be satisfied with a conference championship and not want more.

What did you say that I said?  You say that I said it's a sign of mediocrity to be satisfied with a conference championship.

Not the same thing.

If a team wins a conference championship and doesn't care about winning the NC, then that team isn't very good.  Does anyone care about Portand State?  No, because they aren't very good.

Of course there is a correlation between teams that won a NC and teams that won a conference championship.  Nothing I've said has disputed that.  I never said that Marquette can compete for a NC before contending for a conference championship.  I merely stated that I don't care if they win a conference championship as long as they compete for a NC, because a NC is the true goal of any real team.

Portland St.?  We are discussing major conference titles and national championships and you bring Portland St. into the diccussion?  WTF.  Talk about a straw man. 

I didn't address your point about teams wanting to win national championships because it is such an obvious statement I didn't really think it needed to be expounded on.  Every team that wins a major conference wants to win the national championship.  Duh.

So to clarify- you are disappointed with any season in which MU doesn't win the national championship and winning the Big East wouldn't matter if we then subsequently didn't win the NCAA tournament.  That's absurd.

Your disconnect with the reality of what is being said is truly astounding.

I had to make that statement because you seemed to think that I was saying that I was saying no team should care about winning a conference championship.  I, of course, said no such thing and no one even paying marginal attention to my posts would think that I was saying that.

And yes, I think that if a team is capable of winning a major conference, they are certainly capable of winning a NC.  So yes, I think it would be disappointing if Marquette won the Big East and then failed to win the NC, because they almost certainly would have been capable. 

What is the ultimate goal for a college basketball team?  Winning the conference or winning the NC?  I never said that it wasn't exciting for a team to win its conference, or that fans shouldn't be excited, I said that it would then be a disappointment if that team didn't win the NC.

It takes no skill to purposely misstate another's argument.  I assume you're doing it on purpose because you seem bright.  Try arguing your point while not misstating or using something that I've said out-of-context.  You're a smart guy, I'm sure you can do it.