hoosierbgh

  LOL, you just can't admit that Tom Crean's success at Marquette compares favorably to both the success of previous coaches at Marquette or any viable candidate to replace him can you? I can respect your conviction but it is just not supported by facts.   As for Mike Deane, it is pretty clear that he started out with a full cupboard and then nosedived since his only tournament appearances were in his first two years. 

Greg Marshall is the only name bandied about that in my opinion is both a real possibility and even worth a look. Even saying that, he has only made the tournament 10 times in 16 years and is only 3 of 7 at WSU, only has a 70% winning percentage overall, and has only made it past the 2nd round once in 16 years. Those are not exactly awe inspiring numbers.

  No, I'm not focusing on one year, I'm looking at the whole history of Marquette not just picking and choosing parts of it to support my argument. Marquette was a mid-major program when Tom Crean took over a bad team there, one that finished 14-15 overall and 6-10 in conference. It took him two years to build the program, then he took them to the tournament 5 of his 7 remaining years. Before his arrival, Marquette had only been to the tournament 7 times in the previous 20 years. Also they had only made it past the second round 5 times in 25 years. Despite taking over a bad team as a first time head coach, Crean also had a higher winning percentage than all but three other coaches who coached more than 1 year in Marquette history. His long conference championship was also one of only 4 total the school has ever won.    Of course it matters what the previous coaches did at a school if you actually want understand the context of the discussion. Then again, I guess it isn't important at all if you just want to push an agenda and don't really want to put any effort into supporting your position. Btw, it would have been kind of difficult for Mike Deane to have much tournament success considering he only made the tournament twice in his five years despite taking over a good team.   All that aside you never even touched my main point that none of the reasonable/viable replacements candidates bandied about have demonstrated Tom Crean's level of success. 

I too remember the old days after Tom Crean was hired and the hordes of Marquette fans that graced Scout with their presence and there seems to be a lot of revisionism going on here. Those Marquette fans were very upset at losing Crean and took every opportunity to lash out, those that expressed the mostly level headed view that the author of the linked article did were few and far between. The truth of the matter is the only person that accomplished more at Marquette than Tom Crean was Al McGuire and most of the MU fans realized what they were losing which is why so many felt the need to invade IU boards with their vitriol. Those MU fans played the jilted ex role extremely well and it still amazes me how many IU fans on the boards bought so fully into the crap they were spreading        If you are so underwhelmed about Crean's accomplishments then I can't see how you can possibly be excited about any of the prospective replacements that are bandied about who might actually come here.Maybe it is just the "shiny new thing" syndrome.    As for Davis he couldn't and still can't walk and chew gum at the same time when it comes to coaching and additional experience has done nothing to change that. That being said, he shouldn't have been forced out until IU was prepared to replace him with a homerun hire. That is how we ended up with Sampson.