Norm Peterson

This just kind of has the feel of a team of destiny. It just feels like this team is meant to make the dance. Maybe I'll be wrong, but it just seems like this team is meant to get there. We're tantalizingly close and we get tantalizingly closer with every game we play. If we win two of the next 3 and get a 4 seed in the conference tournament, regardless whether we beat Michigan there or not, we should have punched our ticket and if we get left out, it's a crime.

It blows my mind that we're at 20 wins on the season with 3 regular season games left to play. It blows my mind that we're at 11 conference wins with 3 (very winnable) conference games to play.

All they can expect of us is to win the games we're playing, and we're doing that. All we can do at this point is to win the games we play in. So far, we're doing that. At least to some extent we control our own destiny. There's still enough games to be played to get us where we need to be. Win out in the regular season (doable) and then beat Michigan in the conference tournament (also doable). That should be enough to rest comfortably until selection Sunday.

Can we just pretend we never played them? I mean, that stuff sounds like how Rivals' football recruiting rankings would downgrade your recruiting class if you ADDED a 2-star kicker and nothing else changed. I don't know if Rivals' system still works that way or not, but it's dumb if it does. You shouldn't be downgrading by ADDING a player no matter what his star raking is. He's an add. Period. Same with RPI. Our RPI shouldn't be better if we hadn't played a game that we won. A double-digit scoring margin win should never hurt you. Maybe it shouldn't help you, but it certainly shouldn't hurt you. Your RPI should not be less because you whooped a bad team. #SystemIsBroke

I think you have the RPIs of St. Bonaventure and La Salle reversed. Agree we want a win by La Salle, but St. Bonnie is the one ahead of us, not La Salle.

There's not much difference between being 0-6 in Tier 1 and 0-7. There is a difference between being 4-1 in Tier 2 and being 4-2. It would mean we'd only have 1 loss outside the top quadrant (assuming we win out.) Besides, their success bumps our SOS.

Interesting to read what MD fans have to say. They're pissed that we only played Purdue, MSU and OSU once each. Waaaaaa. But, surprisingly, they ain't real confident they can get it done tonight. I would have expected them to be looking down their nose at us, still, but they seem to think we're for real. I wish the NCAA computers would catch up with that way of thinking.

If Copeland and Palmer stick around for their senior years, we'd have a chance to snag a couple of transfers at the end of this season who could come in and be eligible the year after Copeland and Palmer would exhaust their eligibility. If we lose either Copeland or Palmer at the end of this season, it would decimate our roster with no real opportunity to find their replacements for next year. If this group reaches the Sweet 16 this year, then, by all means, go pro. If they don't, there's still something to prove AND next year could be really, really special.

By the way, don't look now but that UCF loss is headed in the direction of a quadrant 1 loss instead of a quadrant 2 loss. They picked up a road win at Memphis on Sunday and have jumped into the top 60 in the NCAA rpi. They could really do us a solid by beating Wichita State at home on March 1. Not too solid, though. Don't want them jumping over us.

In my personal opinion, he can improve some things and get drafted by coming back. There are some things he needs to work on, one of them you mentioned above. He's not yet ready for the show, but he could be in a year.

I don't think I'll ever have the sense of arrogant entitlement and sanctimonious superiority to know what it would feel like to be a Creighton fan.

That's saying something, because this has been the best year for road wins in conference for the men since I can't tell you when.

That's a tough closing stretch for the ladies with 3/4 on the road and finishing at Maryland. Yeah, they could beat Maryland, but probably the better idea is to get as many wins from middle-of-the-pack conference foes before you head to turtle land. And road games haven't seemed to be much of an impediment for these ladies, so that's good.

Besides, I think most kids that enter the coaching ranks want to get as broad a set of experiences as possible. She's now played for two different college coaches with proven success. Go work for a third. Learn from as many different, quality coaches as possible because you'll pick different things up at all stops, not just what to do but maybe see some things not to do. Makes perfect sense. And good luck to her.

If my math is correct, that looks like a 20-point win. That's blowout territory, if I remember correctly.

So, "They" think there's a better chance that we lose out than that we win out? With 3 out of 4 remaining games at home and the only road game against a team at the bottom of league standings? Tells me the computers still believe they were right about us at the outset of the season and that we've been overachieving this whole time. The computers are wrong. One thing that concerns me is our expected RPI if we lose even one game. Puts us lower than where we are today. But winning out puts us squarely on the right side of the bubble.

Ohio State has the tie-breaker over both Michigan State and Purdue. I think it's unlikely either Michigan State or Purdue will lose another conference regular season game, and Ohio State should win 3 of 4 with the 4th being against Michigan. Ohio State could get away with dropping a game against Michigan in conference and still have the overall #1 seed in the conference tournament. Since we own the tie-breaker against Michigan, we could lose 1 game and still have the 4th seed even if Michigan wins out. So, the likely scenario is that we finish 4th, play Michigan after two byes, beat them and go up against Ohio State in the semis. Under that scenario, I think we have a decent shot at making the finals.

aphilso, that's a specious argument. How many white supremacists do you suppose there are out there? How many Dylann Roofs have there been? Are you espousing rounding up all avowed white supremacists in order to prevent the next Dylann Roof? Anyway, I'm done with this discussion. Not going to be dragged into doing exactly what I think shouldn't be done, which is to give this douche attention he doesn't merit.

I don't want my "ignore him" take to be construed as some sort of tacit support for the idiot white nationalist dude. I don't support his views; I condemn them in the strongest of terms. But that doesn't mean that the right response is to draw attention to this guy. But this isn't my first rodeo. This isn't the first neo-Nazi turd to walk around Lincoln, Nebraska. He's the second, actually. The first was a guy who graduated from Lincoln East in the early 70s. His name was Gary Lauck. Lincoln became described by some as sort of the neo-Nazi capitol of North America because, supposedly, this guy was mailing off more neo-Nazi literature from Lincoln than was coming out of any other place in the US. My high school teachers would mention this Gary Lauck; my professors at college would sometimes bring him up. But no one organized marches or cry-ins or kumbaya sessions because of him. If we thought of him at all, it was with ridicule because THE GUY WAS AND STILL IS A LOSER. As a result, he's now a little-known, largely ignored pimple on the butt of humanity. I question whether there's anyone on this board younger than 40 who's even heard of him before reading this post just now. So, my question is why give this current douche attention? The attention gives him a sort of power that he doesn't rightly possess and only experiences by virtue of the reaction people are giving to him. Why give that to him? Why make him think his message is reaching its mark? He's not capable of inflicting any actual harm; he only has the power you give him and you can choose not to give that to him by ignoring him, which is what I would do.

I don't know. Is there a reasonable belief that their safety is actually threatened? As to the "ignore it" strategy, NO ONE WOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THIS GUY if people would have just ignored him. He would have died an anonymous, unknown loser. He wasn't publicizing his idiotic views. Someone else did that.

If a video falls in the middle of a forest and no one is around to watch it, does it really constitute a "threat"? Quit giving this guy attention he doesn't deserve. (Not just you, but everybody.)

All but one of our quadrant 1 opponents were in the to 1/3 of the quadrant.

I don't think you understood my point. I'm kinda saying the same thing you are. The quadrant system renders home/away distinction moot for the most part because the quadrants are smaller for your home games (except quadrant 4.) So, a quadrant 1 win is a quadrant 1 win regardless of whether it's home or away.

Look how many of our quadrant 1 and 2 games were away. Sure, we don't have a lot of wins in those two quadrants, but we have more wins than home games. That should speak well for us. Edit: I guess the quadrant system factors home/away out of the equation by the way it's structured such that there are more away teams per quadrant for all quadrants except quadrant 4.

If he can learn to put the ball on the floor and drive like James Palmer and shoot treys like Thomas Allen, he'll be a lottery pick. These are things he actually could learn. You can't learn 6'8" with long arms and freakish athleticism, however.