That's a team that knows it's on the bubble .......

[Shmuley]

the NIT bubble.

 

[kired]

If only we’d played some great teams and gotten blown out by 20... we’d be in the damn tournament

 

[stateu1]

If only we’d played some great teams and gotten blown out by 20... we’d be in the damn tournament

Exactly. The most ridiculous thing ever.

 

[Msubulldogfan1]

If only we’d played some great teams and gotten blown out by 20... we’d be in the damn tournament

Really tho, it’s absurd...we better schedule at least decent next year, because it really doesn’t matter if you lose them as long as you go 8-10 in conference.

 

[Cow College]

You act like this is New. We have done it every year to inflate our win total. No one thought we would have a chance to make the dance. It but is in the tail

 

[Lazy Lightning]

We don't ever schedule extremely great but we have scheduled better then this in the past. Ususually we have at least a non conference tournament, and a few games against name brand opponents. For example, in 2012 we played a ranked Texas A&M team as well as Arizona at the garden and beat them both. Then we also played WVU at the hump and won. Then we played Baylor on a nutrual court and lost.

 

[Go Budaw]

If only we’d played some great teams and gotten blown out by 20... we’d be in the damn tournament

Or if we had just scheduled 7 more ganes against teans in the RPI 100-200 range instead of 7 teams outside of the Top 300 plus North Georgia, and won 5 or 6 of them, we’d also be in. That’s what is so frustrating. You don’t have to play any good teams to have a relatively strong SOS. You just have to avoid scheduling a bunch of awful ones.

 

[Drebin]

the NIT bubble.

Have a Benedict, rabbi. Of course you are correct.

 

[Dawg1979]

Maybe play someone in the top 100 on the road too.

 

[MSUDawg25]

nutrual court

Autocorrect couldn’t quite solve this riddle I see.

 

[Drebin]

If only we’d played some great teams and gotten blown out by 20... we’d be in the damn tournament

It's not just about playing better teams....it's about beating better teams. They dont have to be great teams. Doing something as simple as replacing the SWAC schools with teams in the 100-120 rpi range would have dramatically improved our position.

 

[thf24]

It's absurd to insist that we haven't been locked into the NIT for weeks. We were projected as a 3 seed before last night's game. No way we'd have fallen all the way out with a loss.

 

[MSUDC11]

1. Terrible nonconference schedule
2. Two really bad conference losses
3. No signature wins.

That said, I think we can make things interesting if we win the next two. May still have to win on Sunday, but if we get to that point then maybe there’s a prayer.

 

[T-TownDawgg]

This team is weird. Both it's Cinderella and Meltdown potential are off the charts.

 

[thekimmer]

This team is weird. Both it's Cinderella and Meltdown potential are off the charts.

Yes, we build a good lead then go brain dead and give most of it back in just a few seconds.

 

[KurtRambis4]

I disagree with the

"NO" signature wins.

I'd say beating teams that the tournament selection committee, et. al have drooled over as being sure things at one point or another, is a signature win.

 

[patdog]

We're 2-7 in Group 1 games, and the wins are over a couple of overrated teams in A&M and Arkansas. Even with them being overrated, still no top 25 wins.

 

[MSUDC11]

"NO" signature wins.

I'd say beating teams that the tournament selection committee, et. al have drooled over as being sure things at one point or another, is a signature win.

We’ve got several wins over teams that will be 7 or 8 seeds. Those are quality wins, but not signature wins. We are 2-7 against Q1.

Tennessee tonight would be a signature win. We don’t have a win of that caliber. Bama has beaten both Auburn and UT. A&M won at Auburn and beat Kentucky. Mizzou has beaten Tennessee and Kentucky.

We don’t have a comparable win at this stage. Right now our best RPI win is on the road against a team that finished 9-9 (8th) in the league and is already eliminated from the conference tournament.

 

[KurtRambis4]

I didn't say

our record was excellent.

I just corrected the statement that we didn't have ANY quality wins.

 

[KurtRambis4]

You're splitting

hairs in arguing "quality" vs "signature."

Again, to me, wins against teams that are going to the dance or ahead of us in the debate are quality/signature.

 

[fishwater99]

Yes, we build a good lead then go brain dead and give most of it back in just a few seconds.

They have to learn how to finish off teams, we are still young and learning but it can be frustrating to watch.

 

[Drebin]

"NO" signature wins.

I'd say beating teams that the tournament selection committee, et. al have drooled over as being sure things at one point or another, is a signature win.

You're getting a bit crazy now.

Name a signature win this team has. The answer is zero. We've had opportunities, and fumbled them. It's not a pessimistic take or a negative opinion. It is a fact.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

They have to learn how to finish off teams, we are still young and learning but it can be frustrating to watch.

Smartest post in the thread.

 

[patdog]

Here's hoping that tomorrow morning, we'll all agree that we have a signature win.

 

[KurtRambis4]

I guess

I'm crazy for thinking that beating teams that talking heads have been saying off and on for weeks now are tourney teams, are big wins.