I've been watching college basketball a long time and I always thought the magic number for teams in weaker leagues was at least 22 wins. The exception to this rule is in the Big East maybe. I'd feel better with 22 wins or at least a strong showing in the Pac-12 tourney.

---------------------------------------------
--- ntxduck wrote:

None of you really understand how the tourney selection committee works. Barring an epic collapse down the stretch (meaning like 2-7 in our next 9) this team is in.

The committee looks at the body of work with your best players (if they come back from injury). When Artis comes back and we play better (we certainly will--how could we play any worse?), they will not look at this rough stretch too closely.

Seriously, I know the team looks like as*hole right now. But some of you need to step away from the ledge.

---------------------------------------------

we don't deserve it. 47 points deserves a cbi invite.

No...they don't anymore. Haven't looked at that in 3 years.

---------------------------------------------
--- talos4 wrote:

The tournament selection committee looks at your last 10 games of the season to determine if you make it in, and without Artis, we will not make it in.
It's that simple.
Teams in similar circumstances to ours that went 2-8 late in the season failed to make it in, and that is where we are now.
We have what- 8 games left in our regular season? Unless we win at least 4 of those, we will be excluded on selection Sunday, short of winning the P12 tournament.
What a big letdown and great disappointment that will be.

---------------------------------------------
--- mcduckster wrote:

Say goodbye to staying in the top 25. Our only hope to garner some votes would be a dominating win on Saturday. We need to play better than .500 ball from here on out to secure a NCAA bid.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

Did you read what I said??
The last two games (Colorado & Cal) could have been won without Artis. We blew a late lead against both of them. WITHOUT Artis. Hence it was winnable without him. The team just played bad down the stretch, but they did not need Artis.
The Stanford game would have been more winnable with Artis.


---------------------------------------------
--- FoutsForever wrote:

I couldn't disagree more. We had no chance against Stanford the way we played the game, but we lost tow very close games because we have no PG and no 3 point shooter without Artis. With him, no doubt in my mind we win the last two games.

---------------------------------------------
--- RimofDaWorld wrote:

I don't even think Artis has anything to do with our last two losses. We blew leads at the end in both games. The Stanford game was probably winnable with Artis, but the last two was winnable without him.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

wallawalladuck wrote: we don't deserve it. 47 points deserves a cbi invite.

You're really obsessed with the 47 points, aren't you?

Of course if Oregon had scored 49 points it would have been a win instead of a loss.

But since 47 points is worthy of the CBI, then surely 49 would be, what, NIT at best, right?

You also, based on a previous doom-and-gloom post (your specialty), seem to think effort and execution are synonymous. Last night's execution -- the past three games, for that matter -- was indisputably poor. Especially at the end of the last two. But effort was not lacking. You don't hold a team to 48 points (CBI-NIT bubble, tough call) without effort.

Again, I'm not trying to excuse the lack of execution -- poor shooting, blown dunks, turnovers, etc. But to fall back on the "they didn't show up tonight," or "where was the effort?" canards every time the team executes poorly is just silly. A team can play badly and play hard in the same game. Happens all the time.

"I don't even think Artis has anything to do with our last two losses."

Learn to write better then.

---------------------------------------------
--- RimofDaWorld wrote:

Did you read what I said??
The last two games (Colorado & Cal) could have been won without Artis. We blew a late lead against both of them. WITHOUT Artis. Hence it was winnable without him. The team just played bad down the stretch, but they did not need Artis.
The Stanford game would have been more winnable with Artis.


---------------------------------------------
--- FoutsForever wrote:

I couldn't disagree more. We had no chance against Stanford the way we played the game, but we lost tow very close games because we have no PG and no 3 point shooter without Artis. With him, no doubt in my mind we win the last two games.

---------------------------------------------
--- RimofDaWorld wrote:

I don't even think Artis has anything to do with our last two losses. We blew leads at the end in both games. The Stanford game was probably winnable with Artis, but the last two was winnable without him.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------
--- ntxduck wrote:

None of you really understand how the tourney selection committee works. Barring an epic collapse down the stretch (meaning like 2-7 in our next 9) this team is in.

The committee looks at the body of work with your best players (if they come back from injury). When Artis comes back and we play better (we certainly will--how could we play any worse?), they will not look at this rough stretch too closely.

Seriously, I know the team looks like as*hole right now. But some of you need to step away from the ledge.

---------------------------------------------

Therein lies the problem. Down the stretch, 2-7 is about what I see coming.

As of now, there's really no one that we can count on for a definite win left on the schedule- not even Utah, who has won at UW a couple of weeks ago.
I don't see us winning 20 games now. Something's wrong with this team's psyche, and it has now imploded for some reason.
They are way too tentative late in games, can't shoot, have no idea of what to do with the ball, and seemingly are, quite frankly, playing not to lose. When you add all that up, you lose almost every single time, barring a complete miracle happening.
Sad to say, but this team is done for the season now. It's over, unless Artis can come back much earlier, and rejuvenate the guys into playing with some kind of confidence and passion that they don't have now.

---------------------------------------------
--- Ducksatbat wrote:

who are we going to beat to get 2 wins?


---------------------------------------------
--- RAWDuck wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- ntxduck wrote:

None of you really understand how the tourney selection committee works. Barring an epic collapse down the stretch (meaning like 2-7 in our next 9) this team is in.

The committee looks at the body of work with your best players (if they come back from injury). When Artis comes back and we play better (we certainly will--how could we play any worse?), they will not look at this rough stretch too closely.

Seriously, I know the team looks like as*hole right now. But some of you need to step away from the ledge.

---------------------------------------------

Therein lies the problem. Down the stretch, 2-7 is about what I see coming.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

sports.espn.go.com/ncb/bubblewatch?id=144

This thread is going to be hilarious when I bump it in 4 weeks.

Wow, I've not seen so much bandwagoning is a long time. We've been scolded for 2 months about not supporting this "great team" and now we have people thinking we are going 0-9 to finish the season.

I never played basketball competitively but I played team sports including college and you need a point guard to distribute, break down the defense, and lead the team. Aaron Brooks spent 3 years learning to be a point guard. Dominic Artis is pretty special to be this effective as a true frosh. But he's injured. Moore is lost out there (as I would expect for a true frosh) and Jonathon Llyod is very athletic but he's small (tough to play defense when you are barely 5' 8"), and he hasn't got a jump shot. So teams are doubling down on everyone else whenever he's on the court. He's an OK option for a few minutes a half but he can't carry the load.

Losing Artis makes this team pretty awful. Yeah, one guy makes the difference from top 25 (never should have been top 10 IMO) and what we have here.

Every team hits a wall. Indiana just lost a game like this last night. Duke did it too. It's pretty rare to not have a stretch like this at some point, even for a top 2-3 team in the nation.

Lastly, I know one play doesn't make or break a win or a loss, but Singler was hacked on the final drive and on his last shot.  He should have had the opportunity to win it at the line. Then this thread wouldn't exist.

Legitimate question...maybe Utah and WSU?

---------------------------------------------
--- Ducksatbat wrote:

who are we going to beat to get 2 wins?


---------------------------------------------
--- RAWDuck wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- ntxduck wrote:

None of you really understand how the tourney selection committee works. Barring an epic collapse down the stretch (meaning like 2-7 in our next 9) this team is in.

The committee looks at the body of work with your best players (if they come back from injury). When Artis comes back and we play better (we certainly will--how could we play any worse?), they will not look at this rough stretch too closely.

Seriously, I know the team looks like as*hole right now. But some of you need to step away from the ledge.

---------------------------------------------

Therein lies the problem. Down the stretch, 2-7 is about what I see coming.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

as usual the sky is falling, isn't it wallawalla

---------------------------------------------
--- wallawalladuck wrote:

we don't deserve it. 47 points deserves a cbi invite.

---------------------------------------------

You wrote that: "I don't even think Artis has anything to do with our last two losses." I disagreed with this statement and the notion that we could have beaten Stanford with Artis. Did you even read what you said?

---------------------------------------------
--- RimofDaWorld wrote:

Did you read what I said??
The last two games (Colorado & Cal) could have been won without Artis. We blew a late lead against both of them. WITHOUT Artis. Hence it was winnable without him. The team just played bad down the stretch, but they did not need Artis.
The Stanford game would have been more winnable with Artis.


---------------------------------------------
--- FoutsForever wrote:

I couldn't disagree more. We had no chance against Stanford the way we played the game, but we lost tow very close games because we have no PG and no 3 point shooter without Artis. With him, no doubt in my mind we win the last two games.

---------------------------------------------
--- RimofDaWorld wrote:

I don't even think Artis has anything to do with our last two losses. We blew leads at the end in both games. The Stanford game was probably winnable with Artis, but the last two was winnable without him.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

Poor shooting and turnovers will kill ya.

Bumping this thread again...to expose all the chicken littles and people who know nothing about hoops.

Did we score more than 47 points?

It's always the same posters, with the same negativity.

I have to wonder why some of them are even fans? What enjoyment do they get out of being so consistently negative toward what should be a leisurely diversion and escape from real life?

ntxduck wrote: Bumping this thread again...to expose all the chicken littles and people who know nothing about hoops.

We have to win 3 more games to have a shot.

And we have at least 7 left....

---------------------------------------------
--- Eksynyt wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr" ><strong>ntxduck wrote:</strong> Bumping this thread again...to expose all the chicken littles and people who know nothing about hoops.</blockquote> We have to win 3 more games to have a shot.

---------------------------------------------

Bump