Lamenting two defensive possessions...

[ColumbusCatFan1]

If NU was able to stop GT from driving into the lane and prevent Corey Saunders from getting a free look, it's surprising how much different their post season outlook would be.

With Penn State and Nebraska emerging as legitimate competition, NU would have had a single sub 100 RPI loss (IU #107) and with a win on Saturday could have potentially entered the conversation for an at large tournament bid.

Crazy.

 

[FeliSilvestris]

If NU was able to stop GT from driving into the lane and prevent Corey Saunders from getting a free look, it's surprising how much different their post season outlook would be.

I know what you meant, but there ain't such thing as a defensive POSSESSION...Could "defensive stand" (or lack of??) be what you meant to say?

 

[ricko654321]

If NU was able to stop GT from driving into the lane and prevent Corey Saunders from getting a free look, it's surprising how much different their post season outlook would be.

With Penn State and Nebraska emerging as legitimate competition, NU would have had a single sub 100 RPI loss (IU #107) and with a win on Saturday could have potentially entered the conversation for an at large tournament bid.

Crazy.

I think if we had won both those games we still wouldn't really be in tournament conversation, but to each their own I suppose

 

[Styre]

If NU was able to stop GT from driving into the lane and prevent Corey Saunders from getting a free look, it's surprising how much different their post season outlook would be.

With Penn State and Nebraska emerging as legitimate competition, NU would have had a single sub 100 RPI loss (IU #107) and with a win on Saturday could have potentially entered the conversation for an at large tournament bid.

Crazy.

We'd also still only have one good win (Michigan). We'd basically be Nebraska with a significantly worse record and they're barely clinging to the bubble right now.

 

[ColumbusCatFan1]

I think if we had won both those games we still wouldn't really be in tournament conversation, but to each their own I suppose

That's true, but as I mentioned in the original post, GT/Rutgers plus a win against Michigan State tomorrow would significantly change the calculus. As it currently stands, a victory over the Spartans (as incredible as it would be) would not vault NU back into bubble territory. Bummer.

I know what you meant, but there ain't such thing as a defensive POSSESSION...Could "defensive stand" (or lack of??) be what you meant to say?

If you understood the post via context, then why post this?

What a completely uncessesary (and jerky) response.

 

[FeliSilvestris]

If you understood the post via context, then why post this?

What a completely uncessesary (and jerky) response.

Your OWN reply is FAR 'jerkier' than mine. That I understood what you meant doesn't mean everyone did.

Fact is you used an oxymoron-ic terminology (no pun intended). In basketball, a team does not normally POSSESS (the ball) -- which is what POSSESSION refer to -- and at the same time defend.

You would have looked far better appreciating the opportunity to clear up your misunderstandings about the sports terminology.

 

[ColumbusCatFan1]

Your bolding shitck is TIRESOME, JERKY,
and OBNOXIOUS.

The same goes for your CONDESCENDING tone.

I'm not going to waste my time or clog up the board responding to your posts in the future. Adding you to ignore with Wrassler and Mystic.

Long overdue.

 

[ricko654321]

That's true, but as I mentioned in the original post, GT/Rutgers plus a win against Michigan State tomorrow would significantly change the calculus. As it currently stands, a victory over the Spartans (as incredible as it would be) would not vault NU back into bubble territory. Bummer.



If you understood the post via context, then why post this?

What a completely uncessesary (and jerky) response.

Huh? I just disagreed with your statement, I happened to think switching those two plays wouldn't have made much of a difference to our tournament prospects. Also, if you start down that road you could easily pick individual plays late in games we won to switch too. But I didn't insult you personally or anything like that. So not sure why my post was unnecessary and jerky, if you can't someone responding to your post with a different view not sure that a message board is the best place to go. That said, as I wrote in my prior post, to each their own...

 

[ThatkidfromHolland]

Huh? I just disagreed with your statement, I happened to think switching those two plays wouldn't have made much of a difference to our tournament prospects. Also, if you start down that road you could easily pick individual plays late in games we won to switch too. But I didn't insult you personally or anything like that. So not sure why my post was unnecessary and jerky, if you can't someone responding to your post with a different view not sure that a message board is the best place to go. That said, as I wrote in my prior post, to each their own...

That poster wasnt calling you Jerky. Was calling another poster that. I believe based on reading and where the other posts where quoted.

 

[hoosboot]

Your OWN reply is FAR 'jerkier' than mine. That I understood what you meant doesn't mean everyone did.

Fact is you used an oxymoron-ic terminology (no pun intended). In basketball, a team does not normally POSSESS (the ball) -- which is what POSSESSION refer to -- and at the same time defend.

You would have looked far better appreciating the opportunity to clear up your misunderstandings about the sports terminology.

So, it's a possession (where the ball is controlled or "possessed" by a team") where the team in question is defending against the other team scoring. It was very easy to understand. You should give your fellow posters on WildcatReport more credit.

 

[NUCat320]

Huh? I just disagreed with your statement, I happened to think switching those two plays wouldn't have made much of a difference to our tournament prospects. Also, if you start down that road you could easily pick individual plays late in games we won to switch too. But I didn't insult you personally or anything like that. So not sure why my post was unnecessary and jerky, if you can't someone responding to your post with a different view not sure that a message board is the best place to go. That said, as I wrote in my prior post, to each their own...

Ha! I get it! I ignore Felis, too. If you 'show ignored', you'll see that Columbus was annoyed by Felis, not you.

 

[ColumbusCatFan1]

Huh? I just disagreed with your statement, I happened to think switching those two plays wouldn't have made much of a difference to our tournament prospects. Also, if you start down that road you could easily pick individual plays late in games we won to switch too. But I didn't insult you personally or anything like that. So not sure why my post was unnecessary and jerky, if you can't someone responding to your post with a different view not sure that a message board is the best place to go. That said, as I wrote in my prior post, to each their own...

Ricko,

I was responding to both you and Feli in the same post via multi quote (the first paragraph was for you). Feli's completely unnecessary response (blocked if you have that poster on ignore) to the thread is what prompted the terse second paragraph. He/she on now on my ignore list.

I appreciate your contributions here and your "picking and choosing" thought on this thread is a good one. My apologies for the confusion.

 

[ricko654321]

Ricko,

I was responding to both you and Feli in the same post via multi quote (the first paragraph was for you). Feli's completely unnecessary response (blocked if you have that poster on ignore) to the thread is what prompted the terse second paragraph. He/she on now on my ignore list.

I appreciate your contributions here and your "picking and choosing" thought on this thread is a good one. My apologies for the confusion.

Ah sorry got it, I have him on ignore too so I prob missed his response and was confused haha

All good!!