|
Replies: 18
| visibility 1,605
|
All-TigerNet [11473]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 13631
Joined: 10/27/04
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Medallion [67842]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115469
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: We are not even at Bubble Watch now...
Feb 9, 2019, 10:05 AM
|
|
well we still have a chance. it would have been helpful to beat the pack but at least we can still do it with some solid play
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [73569]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 78044
Joined: 11/30/98
|
We lost all our good games, last a few bad ones
Feb 9, 2019, 10:14 AM
|
|
And.havent beaten anybody yet. With that said, they are playing better now but first half of yr will.haunt them
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1852]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1876
Joined: 2/1/18
|
Re: We lost all our good games, last a few bad ones
Feb 9, 2019, 10:28 AM
|
|
Hoping for a quality win today. I’m cautiously starting to like this team but today will be a very telling game on defensive side. We can’t score enough to get in a shootout with Tech so hope defense keeps them in the 60s. Win today and I think we are officially on the bubble.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7718]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7444
Joined: 1/10/16
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1665]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1588
Joined: 10/2/00
|
Creighton and Nebraska are not NCAA tournament teams,
Feb 9, 2019, 12:42 PM
|
|
and we did not play them on their home floors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7718]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7444
Joined: 1/10/16
|
Re: Creighton and Nebraska are not NCAA tournament teams,
Feb 9, 2019, 12:46 PM
|
|
Creighton is 55 in NET
Nebraska is 36 in NET
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1665]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1588
Joined: 10/2/00
|
They are both 13-10 as of today. I would not bet even money
Feb 9, 2019, 12:50 PM
|
|
on either one of them getting in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7718]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7444
Joined: 1/10/16
|
Re: They are both 13-10 as of today. I would not bet even money
Feb 9, 2019, 12:52 PM
|
|
Their record doesnt change their ranking.
Sorry you dont like my facts. Neither of those are "bad losses" bad losses are to teams ranked outside the top 100.
We have none of those.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1665]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1588
Joined: 10/2/00
|
We have to win against teams with those rankings, especially
Feb 9, 2019, 12:58 PM
|
|
at home or on a neutral court, to have a chance at the tourney. If we had won those 2 games, we would be listed as on the bubble or better. We lost them, hence we are not listed as a bubble team. With the automatic berths, I can guarantee you a number 55 team isn't going in with that kind of winning percentage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7718]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7444
Joined: 1/10/16
|
Re: We have to win against teams with those rankings, especially
Feb 9, 2019, 12:59 PM
|
|
I am aware of that... I have never said that we did.
We dont have any signature wins that is what is holding us back right now.
You and the other guy said we have bad losses... We in fact have zero bad losses. We just need to get some good wins on the resume.
Once again Creightons NCAAT outlook doesnt matter to their quality. Good teams dont go to the NCAA T every year.
Message was edited by: Clemalum07®
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1665]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1588
Joined: 10/2/00
|
I said we had losses to teams that will not be in the NCAA
Feb 9, 2019, 1:03 PM
|
|
tourney. I stand by that statement. So you made the cutoff for bad losses for a ranking of 100 or lower. Does the NCAA selection committee sanction that, or did you come up with that all by yourself?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7718]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7444
Joined: 1/10/16
|
Re: I said we had losses to teams that will not be in the NCAA
Feb 9, 2019, 1:10 PM
|
|
When looking at teams resumes they literally break down your record based on teams ranked 1-25 25-50 50-100 and 100 up.
Anything greater than 100 is considered bad...
No you jumped into a conversation about bad losses by saying that we had bad losses.
You were wrong period have a nice day im enjoying watching Clemson win instead of trying to tear them down with false claims.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1665]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1588
Joined: 10/2/00
|
I never used the term bad losses. I said non-NCAA tounament
Feb 9, 2019, 1:17 PM
|
|
teams. When you trying to secure a NCAA tournament bid, any losses to NIT bound teams at home or on a neutral court are bad. It is stupid to conclude anything else. Turn those losses to wins, and we are considered contenders today. Without those, we have to win sone games against NCAA bound teams going forward to get back in the hunt. I hope that begins today. It is common sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7718]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7444
Joined: 1/10/16
|
Re: I never used the term bad losses. I said non-NCAA tounament
Feb 9, 2019, 1:19 PM
|
|
I asked who were our bad losses and you said those two teams...
That is basically you calling them bad losses.
Not going to argue semantics with you. You were wrong. Our lack fo quality wins are holding us back not our "bad losses".
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1665]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1588
Joined: 10/2/00
|
We shall agree to disagree. You think my stance is wrong,
Feb 9, 2019, 1:22 PM
|
|
and I think yours is totally irrational.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7718]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7444
Joined: 1/10/16
|
Re: We shall agree to disagree. You think my stance is wrong,
Feb 9, 2019, 1:22 PM
|
|
Mine is fact based.
Facts dont care about your feelings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1665]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1588
Joined: 10/2/00
|
Mine are fact based. The OP stated we are not listed
Feb 9, 2019, 1:27 PM
|
|
as a bubble team going into today. That is a fact Those 2 losses are the reason why. You called me wrong, and I am calling you wrong. You are right about those 2 losses not being bad when being considered for the NIT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16256]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12783
Joined: 11/14/09
|
Today's game is definitely big time.
Feb 9, 2019, 10:55 AM
|
|
Hoping Brownell can help keep our momentum going as this is must-win territory.
Go Tigers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 18
| visibility 1,605
|
|
|
50
