Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, REDZONEDAN said:

It’s nice to be getting some recognition, but I’m not ready to be ranked just yet.  Let’s get a couple of Big Ten games under our belt and see where we are at then.

 

Absolutely.  We know nothing about this team or the teams we've played so far, really.  Creighton seems to me to have been vastly overrated based purely on reputation alone.

 

These guys have a long ways to go before I'll even consider them a potential NIT team.

Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, 49r said:

 

Absolutely.  We know nothing about this team or the teams we've played so far, really.  Creighton seems to me to have been vastly overrated based purely on reputation alone.

 

These guys have a long ways to go before I'll even consider them a potential NIT team.


I don’t agree with that. Creighton might not be final four good like the last couple but they are a good team, that we man handled on their own court. I watched them beat up Purdue on the same floor. Losing Ashworth for an extended time will test for them though.
 

Not saying you have to pencil anyone into the tourney but we’ve seen enough to know we can be a pretty good team if we keep improving. Nothing wrong with people thinking we are good enough to get votes. Enjoy the ride.

Edited by Art Vandalay
Posted
21 minutes ago, 49r said:

 

Absolutely.  We know nothing about this team or the teams we've played so far, really.  Creighton seems to me to have been vastly overrated based purely on reputation alone.

 

These guys have a long ways to go before I'll even consider them a potential NIT team.

 

To me, Creighton and St. Mary's are both mid-seed NCAA teams with the chance to win a game or two in March. We'll know a lot more about both after this week.

 

St. Mary's get's USC (5-1) and then either New Mexico or Arizona State (both of who are 5-1).

Creighton gets San Diego St (2-1 lost by 13 to Zags), Texas A&M (4-1 lost to UCF game one of season) and then either Rutgers, Alabama, Houston, or Notre Dame.

 

So stiff tests for them this week that should tell us a lot about the team we beat and almost beat.

Posted
1 hour ago, Art Vandalay said:


I don’t agree with that. Creighton might not be final four good like the last couple but they are a good team, that we man handled on their own court. I watched them beat up Purdue on the same floor. Losing Ashworth for an extended time will test for them though.
 

Not saying you have to pencil anyone into the tourney but we’ve seen enough to know we can be a pretty good team if we keep improving. Nothing wrong with people thinking we are good enough to get votes. Enjoy the ride.

Good take...BUT...I am not convinced that Purdue is close to last year's team.  In my humble opinion, we are clearly more talented and deeper than Purdue.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Huskerpapa said:

Good take...BUT...I am not convinced that Purdue is close to last year's team.  In my humble opinion, we are clearly more talented and deeper than Purdue.

I totally agree they are not nearly as good as last couple years, especially now their big guy is out for the year. Still think they are a tournament team most likely. CU could not stop their mid range game either but CU scored at will on Purdue.

Edited by Art Vandalay
Posted
2 minutes ago, 49r said:

 

^^^ McDermott...apparently...

 

image.png

 

The very hilarious thing about this Creighton rosters is that if Fred Hoiberg was the coach he would have Kaulkbrenner run the Derrick Walker role and this team would be shooting 38% from 3. 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...