I'll just add a few things and let this go.

1. I didn't know there was an objective "nerves" measure. I've coached over 1,000 games and I've never been able to tell objectively what is nerves and what is poor execution or due to a superior opponent just making plays. I doubt the GW players were shaking in the locker room paralyzed with fear of playing Kansas State. I think "nerves" is the easy catchall excuse for anything from poor execution early to being overhyped to just plain bad luck to playing a superior opponent. These kids have played in lots of big games at many levels against big-time players and teams with many eyes on them. By the time they get to college, this isn't anything new (except for possibly the freshman having their first MTE experience in a nice resort against a P5). I would imagine playing Kansas State in St. Thomas is far less nerve racking than playing in a summer AAU game with perhaps a hundred college coaches evaluating your every move in hopes you might get a scholarship. 

2. No one is down playing the opponent's role here. Kansas State was the better team and for sure some of the misses were caused by the opponents. But it was the same Kansas State team in the second half as the first half and we shot the ball twice as well. At some point you have to look at the first half and say maybe we performed below what would be expected. Perhaps we exceeded what was expected in the second half. But we missed a bunch of shots early and that contributed to the Kansas State lead. To be accurate, it wasn't even halftime when the offense picked up. It was around the 8 minute mark of the first half. We score 15 points in the last 8 minutes which is just slightly below our average for the season. The problem was we had only scored 12 up until that part. The biggest problem was that we gave up 46 points and we could also to point to things like rebounding.   

3. It's ok to say we lost to Kansas State just because they were the better team. Going down a rabbit hole looking for reasons to see how we could've or should've won (or been more competitive) seems to be an exercise in futility for a young team with a lot of new parts 5 games into the season. We weren't expected to win that game and I don't believe any amount of additional preparation whether in practice or by virtue of the schedule would have changed the outcome.  This is a game of matchups and they had something we couldn't really counter - a superior front court - which is reflected in point in the paint and rebounding. To me the story of that game is that unlike teams in the recent past, we didn't fold after getting down big and instead mounted a serious comeback. That kind of resiliency against a team like Kansas State will serve us well later in the season if we should find ourselves down early. Making some or most of the story about first half nerves (not saying that is the only story you painted) I think overshadows the positives from that game and again, is a red herring here.

DC Native wrote:

GW’s NET ranking dropped from 133 to 155 after last night’s loss…

And KenPom fell to 145.  Smalls misses that wild buzzer three and we’re 10 spots or so higher (or even if we played OT close instead of losing by 10).  Such a frustrating game.

Joel Joseph wrote:

wishing to be 135 instead of 145 - depressing! shows how far we have fallen as a program.

Sure, but it’s about the general trajectory.

And I’m always going to root for us to be ranked higher.  If we’re 145, I want 135 if a single game allows it.  If we’re 213, I want 203 in that last game.  And if we’re 60, I want 50.  That’s the kind of fan I am. 

And I’ll admit, I don’t understand fans who don’t root like that. 

I realize I’m arguing now with someone who showed up on the message board during the Lonergan years, and for whom virtually every post is about reminding us that we had it better under Lonergan (and that the administration is to blame), but I just don’t get why you don’t want us to get the highest possible ranking we can get (unless an I told you so agenda is more important than results). 

But back to the general trajectory. We haven’t been this high since 2017 so of course I’m going to root for us to keep inching higher.  I don’t expect us to be an NIT team overnight. But for the first time in years, I’m seeing progress that could lead there if this young core decides to stay together and we get some help with injury luck.


That said, it’s tough.  Much harder to get to postseason than it was a decade ago for us.  Between the portal and NIL, everything changed for schools at our level - and to our misfortune, it happened when we were at our lowest.  If it happened 20 years ago when we still had buzz, who knows where we’d be.  But it didn’t.

So my expectations are lowered. And if your attitude is that our ranking doesn’t matter if we’re not an NCAA or NIT team - one year after we ranked 203rd - then rooting for GW isn’t going to be any fun for you so I suggest you get a new hobby.

For me, I’m going to keep hoping that in every single game we can play our best and climb a little closer to where we all want to be.  And that if everyone pulls in the same direction instead of sharpening their knives every time we have a bad game, maybe we can build something to be proud of in this new era.

FQ, I've been following this team since the later Jarvis years and the fan board since the Hobbs years. Switched to the moniker "Joel Joseph"  after the debacle of 2016. I have degrees from and follow the athletic programs from 3 universities (GW, UMD, GTown). Each program has had their ups and downs.
That said, you aren't arguing with anybody. I treat you the same way I treat the dude, when you say something I don't agree with I comment (I now just ignore the dude). I'm not retired and don't spend everyday on this board like some who have thousands of posts. For your sanity, I suggest you widen your interests - just don't follow the Wizards since that won't help you!

GW's NET has climbed back up to 135, which is very close to what it was before the American game (133). KenPom is more or less the same at 131. We are currently 9th in the conference in both rankings. Due to a favorable schedule, however, if we beat everyone ranked below us and lose to everyone ranked above us, we finish the A10 schedule at 9-9. I would like to see us finish with a winning record, which means we would have to win at least one game against a higher ranked team. If we lose 1 or 2 games to lower ranked teams, which is very possible, we would need 1 or 2 more wins against higher ranked teams. The best opportunity for such wins at home would be St. Joes (114) and Mason (90). Best road opportunities would be Davidson (111) and Loyola (104).

What are your predictions for A10 play, and what would constitute a successful campaign to you?

BTW, there is only one other team in the A10, URI, that has not yet played a Quad 1 or 2 game. Yes, even the Kansas State game is currently a Quad 3 loss... Illinois State is our only Quad 3 win, but they are now ranked just below us in NET (138), so we currently have no "upset" wins, although we only have one bad loss in American (which has dropped to to 251, a Quad 4 loss).

I would sign up for 10 conference wins righ now.  Of course I would piss and moan about the 8 losses, but a jump from last place to over 500 would be a big accomplishment.

Looking at the schedule, I'm seeing 9-9:

@Richmond - W
vs. Dayton - L
@URI - W
vs. Duquesne - W
@ Mason - L
@ UMass - L
vs. SLU - L
vs. Richmond - W
@ La Salle - W
vs. Mason - W
@ Bona - L
vs. VCU - L
@ Davidson - W
vs. Saint Joseph's - L
vs. UMass - W
@ Loyola - L
vs. La Salle - W
@ Fordham - L

Our best case scenario is 12-6 with a UMass sweep, win at home vs. SLU and a win at Fordham, but I'm not convinced yet.

Worst case is 6-12. I could see us failing to sweep a down Richmond team because Mooney seems to have our number, La Salle could be better than I give them credit for, and my URI win might be some magical thinking. Mason could sweep us on paper, but I think we're destined for season splits with them for a long time to come.

I’m in the camp of the over/under being 6 for this team. If we get 9, I agree that’s heaven territory. Would love to be wrong.