Creighton 100 #23UCLA 89
- Thread starter NJCat
- Start date
It’s really early of course, but I think both teams we lost to are really nice teams in completely different ways. Creighton may be one of the best offensive teams in the country, while Texas Tech may be one of the best defensive teams in the country. And I don’t think either of those is an exaggeration.
Now that doesn’t excuse losing by 36, but I’m confident both those teams are tourney teams, and both could make deep runs. Texas Tech reminds me of South Carolina from last year in a lot of ways.
Agree. Many writers are saying TT is the 2nd best team in the Big 12 after Kansas. You are spot on, cannot excuse a 26 point loss but the close loss to CU is nothing to be ashamed of.
Three are, but the guys playing tonight included a couple of McDonalds All Americans, and UCLA was 3-0 and ranked #23.
Ah OK, excellent win then. Just don't follow West Coast basketball a ton due to the time difference (though I actually DID see one of the UCLA games in China out of curiosity as to what Walton would say after the shoplifting thing; he was quite brutal).
I watched quite a bit of the game and UCLA is good. Yet NU played CU closer down the stretch. I really think Turk is right, NU was just out of gas against a very good TT team.
Three freshmen including LiAngelo Ball (least heralded of the Ball kids - just a 3 star). Wasn't their core.
As you guys are saying, Creighton and Texas Tech are very good teams, and each figures to get more recognition as the season develops. While wins in either (or both) of these games would've been terrific, I don't think these two losses will hurt us too badly come Selection Sunday.
If NU fails to Dance this season, it won't be because of losses to CU and TTU. It will be because they can't play defense and lose about as many games overall as they win. Something needs to change over the next two weeks because as the great Michael Ray Richardson once said, "the ship be sinking"....NU needs to win 2 of three from @Ga Tech, Illinois and @PU. Yes, I realize it is early, but if the Cats go 0-3 in that stretch the hill to climb would be pretty darn steep!
And UCLA bounced back tonight to beat Wisconsin, who has played a brutal early scheudle (3 ranked teams in a row, all losses). Creighton up by 8 vs. #22 Baylor, but it is early...
They looked like they were out of gas, especially BMac. He looked just plain slow and I never thought that of him before. TT was starting 5 Sr's and had a good mix going, NU hasn't quite found it's chemistry yet, but I think they will.
There once was a team that started slowly and everyone was calling for the coaches heads. Let me think. What team was it?
The team started 2-3 and then regrouped and then won 6 in a row. What was the name of that team? Can someone help me out.
The team started 2-3 and then regrouped and then won 6 in a row. What was the name of that team? Can someone help me out.
The Italians. But after they won a bunch, they lost a bunch and it cost their coach his head.
If TTU and last year tell me anything, I'm not a huge fan (oops!) of this NU group in a matchup against any fast, athletic team.
I'm still trying to decide if the new Illini may fit that concept. They may.
Last edited:
The NU football team. The NU basketball team was 3-2 last season after 5 games after gut wrenching losses to Butler and ND. This year, there was the gutwrenching loss to Creighton, another Big East team who will be in the tourney and an aberration against TTech where a coach forgets to submit his starting lineup and then TTech hits a couple of three pointers and NU is done 10-0 after 2 minutes. Flush that game.
I'm trying to figure out how a team recruited and built to play man doesn't seem capable of doing that against good teams. You'd think an adjustment or two would have cleaned up some of the open bunnies and looks. The communication does not seem great. I have faith in James to clean up the post and Donlon to clean up the perimeter just as he did last year at Michigan.
I'm not turning over the victim card, but a part of this is the stupid decision to shorten the Big Ten season by a week so that the tournament can be played in MSG where noone really gives two ***** about the Big Ten. Too many games packed into too few days. But should have done better with the bad hand.
I'm not buying the comparison.
In our first three wins last season, we steamrolled our opponents, including a ranked Texas team. Not so this year. Plus, we should have beaten both Butler and Notre Dame. We were in control of both games with under 5:00 to play and then let the leads slip away and committed turnovers in the final minute of each game (playing for the win against Butler and playing to hold our lead against ND) that sunk us. The story at the time was that we were a good team that needed to learn to execute and win down the stretch to become a great team.
The story this season has been:
1) We have not come out ready to play in big games. We got down 15 in the first half against Creighton and down 20 in the first half against Texas Tech.
2) Our offense has become a turnover machine. Last season, we were 28th in the nation in Turnover %. So far, this season, we are 185th, turning the ball over on 19.4% of our possessions.
3) Our 3-point defense is horrendous. Last season, we allowed opponents to shoot only 33.3% behind the arc. This season, opponents are shooting 41.4% beyond the arc against us. Oof.
4) We are getting no production from our reserves. With Falzon back, we now have a solid six. Beyond those six, we are averaging only 5.2 ppg from Gaines, Benson, Brown, Ash and Ivanauskas combined in 39.6 minutes per game--and that includes 3 games against weak opponents.
I agree that the 3-2 records are the same, but we consistently looked really good through the first 5 games last season. We haven't looked consistently good this season at all. The four points above are serious problems that need to be corrected--not aberrations in the one blowout loss.
I am not saying that we can't or won't turn things around. I believe that we have a talented group of players and a great coach. But don't try to fool yourself into thinking that we are in the same place as a team as we were at this same point last season.
Well ..that is the fun of a season...to see what the theme is in Chapter 1...see who the protagonist, antagonist and hopefully the hero is. Looks like this year the book is a mystery. In my searching for clues...I think I have found two. The first is what if the effect of the loss of Sanjay Lumpkin? Did he take something with him? The second is the disappearance of Pat Baldwin. What was his part in volume one and who and how has he been replaced? and of course character development grabs our interest. In volume one we saw youthful Benson,Brown and Ash. We envisioned them growing in to big rough and tumble Big10 players.....but appears they spent the summer by the fishing hole waiting for a bite. And know they are part of Chapter one theme....WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED to the 16/17 Cats.....Next chapter forthcoming.
From your lips to Collins' ears. Otherwise this board won't be worth reading for months with posts from the cornfielders.
Right now, this team reminds me more of 2013 football than 2017. The same big names come back, the same talk of championships (5:03, anyone?), unusually weak performances in the early non-conference games before the massive wake-up call, and questions about the team's toughness. And for your random external factor that weighs down the team, replace unions with Allstate. I hope this analysis is proven to be laughable, btw.