ADVERTISEMENT

Huskers vs PSU

Wish we could have gone through the entire B1G healthy. We very well may have a winning record right now and looking at the NIT. We've really missed Morrow, and Watson not being at full strength has hurt too. Gotta finish strong and maybe we can still get there.
 
I thought Jordy should have played more in the last game.
And last night. Fine to let the walkons finish up, but Tschimamga left with about 12:00 to go and I don't think he got back in. Just found that odd, given how well he played.
 
Huskers win the 2 games they lost earlier (tOSU and Michigan) and beat Illinois at home that should keep us out of the bottom 4 and playing on Wednesday which right now is what I'm hoping for moving forward, not ruling out beating Sparty or Minny but those 2 games will be tough to win on the road.

Those 2 losses to bucknuts and Rutgers which we should have won really hurt right now we could be looking at 7-6 in conference and in the middle of the pack in conference play.
 
Huskers win the 2 games they lost earlier (tOSU and Michigan) and beat Illinois at home that should keep us out of the bottom 4 and playing on Wednesday which right now is what I'm hoping for moving forward, not ruling out beating Sparty or Minny but those 2 games will be tough to win on the road.

Those 2 losses to bucknuts and Rutgers which we should have won really hurt right now we could be looking at 7-6 in conference and in the middle of the pack in conference play.
I guess Ohio State is bucknuts, so I'd also not want to leave out Wisconsin at home when they banked in a 3 and got a 3 from a guy who shoots around 20% from there.

This team is not nearly as bad as some on the board wish to believe. It's just a shame they've not gotten their way on these close games and now probably don't get to go to the NIT where an appearance there would be really beneficial to have heading into next season.
 
I guess Ohio State is bucknuts, so I'd also not want to leave out Wisconsin at home when they banked in a 3 and got a 3 from a guy who shoots around 20% from there.

Well that does cut both ways. NU got the game into OT on a 3 from a guy who shoots 14% from there and hadn't made one since before Christmas.

Wisconsin was a gut-wrenching loss, but to a better and more experienced team that will probably get a few rounds into the tournament. Definitely not the case with Rutgers, which is what makes that loss hard to take. OSU is a closer call, but NU is more talented when at full strength.
 
Well that does cut both ways. NU got the game into OT on a 3 from a guy who shoots 14% from there and hadn't made one since before Christmas.

Wisconsin was a gut-wrenching loss, but to a better and more experienced team that will probably get a few rounds into the tournament. Definitely not the case with Rutgers, which is what makes that loss hard to take. OSU is a closer call, but NU is more talented when at full strength.

When you look back at the season, the Huskers have actually fared OK in close games. Of course, you can never expect to win or lose all close ones, but as I looked back, the Huskers are actually 5-4 in games that were decided very late or in OT. So I'm not going to cry over the three that "should have been" wins, when it's probably fair to say a game against Maryland should have been a loss, a game @Indiana should have been a loss, etc.

Clemson (L) 60-58
Dayton (W) 80-78
@Indiana (W) 87-83
@Maryland (W) 67-65
Iowa (W) 93-90
Ohio State (L) 67-66
@Rutgers (L) 65-64
Purdue (W) 83-80
Wisconsin (L) 70-69

At the end of the day, this is what you get when you have a young, but talented team. Sometimes they get over the top and sometimes they fall just short. I still take the level of competitiveness from this team over what I've seen in the recent past, sans the hot Petteway team that streaked to the NCAA tournament. And that team was a bit of fool's gold as it really rode a hot Petteway hand with very little other support.
 
Wish we could have gone through the entire B1G healthy. We very well may have a winning record right now and looking at the NIT. We've really missed Morrow, and Watson not being at full strength has hurt too. Gotta finish strong and maybe we can still get there.

IMO, as it stands today, with a winning conference record we'd be looking at the dance and not just the NIT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dinglefritz
Probably better odds than the NIT if that happened.
It's a good question but with the subpar non-conference record, I think the team would need to be more than just winning in conf. play. I'd guess they'd need maybe minimum of 11-7, Maybe even 12-6. The conference is down and the committee knows it. 10-8 isn't good enough to get in.

The only reason NCAA over NIT would have been possible was because of the really strong schedule strength and the fact that the team is getting closer to full strength when a number of losses occurred when Morrow was hurt.

Unfortunately, in the real world, the team is 5-8 in conference and 11-14 overall. In order to make the NIT, the team needs to get to go 4-1 down the stretch in the conference schedule overall and win at least one game in the B1G tourney.

Let's look at the upcoming schedule.

@Ohio State - tough game, probably a mild underdog
@Michigan State - playing a team likely fighting for the NCAA tourney on their home floor - probably a bigger underdog
Illinois - should be favored at home
@Minnesota - playing a pretty hot team on their home floor. Nebraska has had success but they should be 6-8 point underdogs
Michigan - Michigan is playing much better and trying to play their way into the dance. Probably a pick'em.

Asking this team to go 4-1 with this stretch of games is probably too much to ask. Not impossible, but a pretty big ask.

I think we have to deal with the reality that the post-season is not likely in the cards this year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigboxes
It's a good question but with the subpar non-conference record, I think the team would need to be more than just winning in conf. play. I'd guess they'd need maybe minimum of 11-7, Maybe even 12-6. The conference is down and the committee knows it. 10-8 isn't good enough to get in.

The only reason NCAA over NIT would have been possible was because of the really strong schedule strength and the fact that the team is getting closer to full strength when a number of losses occurred when Morrow was hurt.

Unfortunately, in the real world, the team is 5-8 in conference and 11-14 overall. In order to make the NIT, the team needs to get to go 4-1 down the stretch in the conference schedule overall and win at least one game in the B1G tourney.

Let's look at the upcoming schedule.

@Ohio State - tough game, probably a mild underdog
@Michigan State - playing a team likely fighting for the NCAA tourney on their home floor - probably a bigger underdog
Illinois - should be favored at home
@Minnesota - playing a pretty hot team on their home floor. Nebraska has had success but they should be 6-8 point underdogs
Michigan - Michigan is playing much better and trying to play their way into the dance. Probably a pick'em.

Asking this team to go 4-1 with this stretch of games is probably too much to ask. Not impossible, but a pretty big ask.

I think we have to deal with the reality that the post-season is not likely in the cards this year.
I'd bet the house on 1-4 with that schedie...just too tough...
 
IMO, as it stands today, with a winning conference record we'd be looking at the dance and not just the NIT.

I was speaking more so of our overall record, but I agree. Very few B1G teams don't make it to the Tourney that go 10-8 or better.
 
It's a good question but with the subpar non-conference record, I think the team would need to be more than just winning in conf. play. I'd guess they'd need maybe minimum of 11-7, Maybe even 12-6. The conference is down and the committee knows it. 10-8 isn't good enough to get in.

The only reason NCAA over NIT would have been possible was because of the really strong schedule strength and the fact that the team is getting closer to full strength when a number of losses occurred when Morrow was hurt.

Unfortunately, in the real world, the team is 5-8 in conference and 11-14 overall. In order to make the NIT, the team needs to get to go 4-1 down the stretch in the conference schedule overall and win at least one game in the B1G tourney.

Let's look at the upcoming schedule.

@Ohio State - tough game, probably a mild underdog
@Michigan State - playing a team likely fighting for the NCAA tourney on their home floor - probably a bigger underdog
Illinois - should be favored at home
@Minnesota - playing a pretty hot team on their home floor. Nebraska has had success but they should be 6-8 point underdogs
Michigan - Michigan is playing much better and trying to play their way into the dance. Probably a pick'em.

Asking this team to go 4-1 with this stretch of games is probably too much to ask. Not impossible, but a pretty big ask.

I think we have to deal with the reality that the post-season is not likely in the cards this year.
Totally agree. I said "if". That does not mean I believe it
 
I'm going to go on a bit of a tangent here...getting to watch Wichita State basketball all the time has jaundiced me, because, no matter what people think of Marshall, he is an incredible game coach AND he generally develops good talent into much better talent....AND they defend.

And yet it is the Huskers with the signature wins at Indiana, Maryland, and at home vs. Purdue...head scratcher...I don't get it...

And I'm not really sure what I'm getting at here...hey, have a great day!!!:)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huskers129870
Reduce the turnovers and play better defense are musts for his team to improve.

A full and healthy front court is what they need, Oh and Santa a point guard at 100% would be nice too.
Is it wrong to say I'm CAUTIOUSLY optimistic for next year???

Not at all, we have been competitive and just took a critical injury at a bad time. We can get SO much better. I can't wait for Roby to play like a veteran.
 
I was speaking more so of our overall record, but I agree. Very few B1G teams don't make it to the Tourney that go 10-8 or better.
10-8 in the B1G is no guarantee. Especially with the conference being down this season. I think 11-7 is a lock. 10-8 puts you on the bubble.
 
I'd guess they'd need maybe minimum of 11-7, Maybe even 12-6. The conference is down and the committee knows it. 10-8 isn't good enough to get in.

Flip 3 games (GW then 2 of OSU, Rutgers, Wisconsin) and we have a better resume than Sparty, who's currently in the dance according to Bracketology. There are 7 B1G teams "in", as of Monday; Wisconsin, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Purdue and Northwestern. And I believe Indiana was 1 of the last 4 out, or something like that - could be wrong.

I have no doubt if we had 2 more conference wins, plus GW, we'd be in the discussion at this moment.
 
14-11 and 7-6 in conference should we flip those games. I don't think that's good enough to be in even with the strength of schedule.
 
14-11 and 7-6 in conference should we flip those games. I don't think that's good enough to be in even with the strength of schedule.

Sparty is 15-10, with a lesser resume and they're currently in. Heck, Indiana was to begin the week and they have a losing conference record. I'm saying we'd be in the discussion.

7-6 conference record would put us in 6th place. 7 teams currently in, and 8th on the bubble but they'd skip over 6th place Nebraska? You'll have to detail this one out, as there's no way I can see what you're saying....
 
10-8 in the B1G is no guarantee. Especially with the conference being down this season. I think 11-7 is a lock. 10-8 puts you on the bubble.

More times than not if you finish with a 10-8 conference record in the B1G you will be in the tournament providing Your RPI isn't dog s€¥££ and you have a winning non conference record.
 
I'm EASILY able to justify if this team would not have been chosen with a winning conference record by two words...Gardner-Webb.....at home. Worthy teams do NOT lose those games. Period.
 
I'm EASILY able to justify if this team would not have been chosen with a winning conference record by two words...Gardner-Webb.....at home. Worthy teams do NOT lose those games. Period.

Even losing to G-W Nebraska was still only 6-6. That's not a winning record it's 0.500.
 
The conference record and good loss are secondary
components of the selection.

When you go back to the expansion of the tournament to 68, only 1 team earned an at large berth with less than 19 total wins, (Oklahoma St in 2015 18-13).


In reality, 20 wins is the real floor. Since 2011 (expansion to 68) only 2 seasons had more than 1 team with less than 20 wins make the NCAA tournament as an at large team, 2011 (5) and 2016 (4). In 2012, 2014, and 2015 one team with less than 20 wins made it and in 2013 all at large teams had more than 20.

That is why loses to Gardner-Webb and Rutgers are significant as compared to loss to Creighton or Wisconsin.
 
Last edited:
The conference record and good loss are secondary
components of the selection.

When you go back to the expansion of the tournament to 68, only 1 team earned an at large berth with less than 19 total wins, (Oklahoma St on 2015 18-13).


In reality, 20 wins is the real floor. Since 2011 (expansion to 68) only 2 seasons had more than 1 team with less than 20 wins make the NCAA tournament as an at large team, 2011 (5) and 2016 (4). In 2012, 2014, and 2015 one team with less than 20 wins made it and in 2013 all at large teams had more than 20.

That is why loses to Gardner-Webb and Rutgers are significant as compared to loss to Creighton or Wisconsin.
MORE significant...I'm not talking about 'getting in'...I'm talking about worthiness of a team...
 
When you go back to the expansion of the tournament to 68, only 1 team earned an at large berth with less than 19 total wins, (Oklahoma St on 2015 18-13).

In reality, 20 wins is the real floor. Since 2011 (expansion to 68) only 2 seasons had more than 1 team with less than 20 wins make the NCAA tournament as an at large team, 2011 (5) and 2016 (4). In 2012, 2014, and 2015 one team with less than 20 wins made it and in 2013 all at large teams had more than 20.

Huh? I'm either confusing myself, or your response doesn't make sense.
 
Huh? I'm either confusing myself, or your response doesn't make sense.

It is not confusing. You are just trying to make it so.

The field expanded to 68 in 2011.

In 2011 five teams earned at large berths with less than 20. All had 19

2012 one team earned an at large bid with 19 wins. All other at large teams had 20 or more

2013 all teams that earned at large bids had 20 or more wins.

2014 one team earned an at large bid with 19 wins. All other at large teams had 20 or more

2015 one team earned an at large bid with 18wins. All other at large teams had 20 or more.

2016 four teams earned an at large bid with 19 wins. All other at large teams had 20 or more.

6 seasons, 36 at large bids per season is 216 at large berths. 12 awarded to teams with less than 20 wins.

6 seasons, 36 at large bids per season in 4 of those 6 seasons 35 or more teams selected had 20 wins or more.
 
Last edited:
It is not confusing. You are just trying to make it so.

I'm not the one who said this, you did...

When you go back to the expansion of the tournament to 68, only 1 team earned an at large berth with less than 19 total wins, (Oklahoma St on 2015 18-13)

Then you proceed to say 11 other teams made the tournament with less than 19 total wins.
 
I have, multiple times so obviously I'm missing something...


Yes you are. The first paragraph says less than 19. That was the Oklahoma State team in 2011 that won 18 games. The rest say less than 20, that includes the 2011, 18-win Oklahoma St team.

Again I believe you are just looking to argue.
 
Yes you are. The first paragraph says less than 19. That was the Oklahoma State team in 2011 that won 18 games. The rest say less than 20, that includes the 201, 18-win Oklahoma St team.

Again I believe you are just looking to argue.

Ah, simple, thanks. No, I wasn't looking to argue, I was looking for an explanation as it wasn't registering with me.

If I wanted to argue, I'd be a prick and laugh at your mistake....

In 2011 five teams earned at large berths with less than 20 wins. Four had 19 wins and one had 18.

In 2011, all 5 at-large teams with less than 20 wins had 19 total wins heading in to the tournament.

19 win Michigan State
19 win Penn State
19 win Illinois
19 win USC
19 win Tennessee

Which also went against your original Oklahoma State claim.

But, I wasn't looking to argue, unless that's what you want...
 
Correct. I couldn't read my writing. The 18 win Oklahoma St team was 2015. They were the only at large with less than 20 wins.

The premis is still the same.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT