You could make a good argument we play the six best ACC teams on the road.
I think that Clemson gae may come back to bite us
I don't think it will, I hate to say it, but cusehulk was right, it wasn't a bad loss in the least.
Knicks411 said:I never said it was a bad loss. But i think we're going to be on the wrong side of the bubble, and that was a game we had won.
If we finish 9-9 that means we are 15-7 overall and 9-6 in conference with JB, based on what the committee said that makes me think we'd be in.It wasn't a bad loss, but it was a crucial loss. We need to get to 9-9 to be considered. Being 3-3 right now would be huge right now. Instead we are 2-4 with roadies at Duke and UVA up next. Clemson loss was a killer
It wasn't a bad loss, but it was a crucial loss. We need to get to 9-9 to be considered. Being 3-3 right now would be huge right now. Instead we are 2-4 with roadies at Duke and UVA up next. Clemson loss was a killer
Not sure how it can be a "killer" when we are only 7 games into the conference schedule.
If anything a case can be made that our first 8 conference games are the toughest games (with only BC at home at sure win) on our conference schedule and if we continue to play the way we are now we could go 7-3 after the Virginia game the rest of the way.
In other words, lots of time to go so Clemson, while I agree we shouldn't have lost that game at home, can hardly be described as a "killer" at this point.
Cheers,
Neil
Starting to see why Clemson loss was a killer yet? We're now back to being 2 games under 500 in conference with a good ND team coming up next. Have to win 3 straight now to get over 500.Not sure how it can be a "killer" when we are only 7 games into the conference schedule.
If anything a case can be made that our first 8 conference games are the toughest games (with only BC at home at sure win) on our conference schedule and if we continue to play the way we are now we could go 7-3 after the Virginia game the rest of the way.
In other words, lots of time to go so Clemson, while I agree we shouldn't have lost that game at home, can hardly be described as a "killer" at this point.
Cheers,
Neil
Starting to see why Clemson loss was a killer yet? We're now back to being 2 games under 500 in conference with a good ND team coming up next. Have to win 3 straight now to get over 500.
Win Clemson and we are 500 right now without needing to string together 3 straight just to get over 500
We need the next 5. Absolutely.
Yes i realize the schedule gets more manageable in the next 5. I also realize that we need to go 4-1 in these next 5 manageable games to get over 500 in conference. And that same 4-1 mark would put us 3 games over 500 had we beaten Clemson.Again. Do I think we should have beaten Clemson? Yes. But do I think it's a "killer" as you claim? No. Now I have some questions for you:
Do you realize that we were front-loaded in terms of conference schedule (5 out of the 1st 8 teams are virtually sure-fire NCAA teams with each projected to be in the Top 30 in RPI at the end of the season and 4 of those 5 on the road) and that even with the Clemson loss most sites have us projected to finish at worse 9-9 in conference some at 10-8?
Do you realize that many sites, even with the Clemson loss and the projected loss against UVa which became a reality today have our projected RPI at the end of the regular season in the 30s and our SOS in the 20s?
Cheers,
Neil
Yes i realize the schedule gets more manageable in the next 5. I also realize that we need to go 4-1 in these next 5 manageable games to get over 500 in conference. And that same 4-1 mark would put us 3 games over 500 had we beaten Clemson.
I also realize that Clemson will most likely be on the bubble right beside us and they will have a win in their back pocket against us on our home floor
We did what we had to do by going 1-1 on the Virginia and Duke Swing.
We need 4 of the next 5. We will be favoured in all, but taking 4 of 5, will put us in good shape to get to 9-9, which may be enough with a first round ACC win.