Gophers have a better resume than Iowa

Donate To GopherHole

I see this as a case where you don't want to listen to the media. Iowa has been built up all year as a team with a lot of depth, but that depth hasn't done much lately for them. I think the committee will keep both Minnesota and Iowa on the same line - both in, or both out.
 

Bewilderme said:
I see this as a case where you don't want to listen to the media. Iowa has been built up all year as a team with a lot of depth, but that depth hasn't done much lately for them. I think the committee will keep both Minnesota and Iowa on the same line - both in, or both out.
Click to expand...

Nope, I think one or the other or both out. Zero chance both are in.
 

Surprised we haven't seen any Hogeye fans come over here and tell us how ridiculous we are. They must really be sweating it out.
 

Also, I want to see us get in over them just to piss off ***********.
 




PitinoFan said:
I read through the first page. It's unanimous. This one is my favorite.


"Re: objectively, would you pick Iowa for the NCAA?
LOL Hell no.

Oh, was that rhetorical?

A pox on the NCAA selection committee if they select these losers. There are far more deserving teams out there."
Click to expand...

LOL, somebody get that to Lunardi and Palm on twitter.
 

I hate to say this, my Gopher bias is begging me NOT to say this, but I think its impossible to ignore the Top 20 status of Iowa in the far more reliable Sagarin and Ken-Pom Rating systems.

If there was only 1 spot left and it was a choice between Minnesota and Iowa, and ALL the other 67 spots were given to either automatic qualifiers or WORTHY candidates and the Committee chose Iowa over Minnesota because they have said that they want to get away from favoring teams who have done well in their last 10 and want to move towards looking at a team's body of work, then I'd be ok with that.

Personally I think that both Iowa and Minnesota are more deserving than several teams being considered as IN, and it shouldn't be a choice between Minny and Iowa. It should be a choice between Minny and all the other bubble teams, and then a separate choice between Iowa and all the other bubble teams, and yes, UMn and Iowa AND Nebraska for that matter, would be included in those lists of bubble teams, but it shouldn't be a one on one head to head comparison and choice of only 1 of the teams.


But at the same time, if Iowa's sagarin rating is to be taken into consideration, shouldn't UMn's 3 Top 20 Sagarin wins compared to ZERO Top 20 Sagarin wins for SMU be taken into consideration? Or the fact that UMn played a Top 50 ooc SOS, while SMU played an ooc schedule ranked 296th.

SMU has 22 games played vs teams rated 100+, that's OVER 2/3rds of their schedule. And that's either RPI or Sagarin ratings.

UMn has only 15 if you look at the RPI, and only 10 if you look at the Sagarin Ratings.


22 vs 10. That's criminal.


Also, UMn has just 2 bad losses looking at the RPI, but only ONE when looking at the Sagarin Ratings.

SMU on the other hand has THREE bad losses no matter which rating you look at.

And UMn's are vs teams rated #124 & #144, while SMU's are vs teams rated #143, #176 & #231 in the RPI


Those are some REALLY ugly losses. And that's not even taking into consideration Hollin's was injured for those 2 losses of ours.


Vs the Sagarin Top 25, UMn played 11 games and SMU only 5. That is a 6 game difference.

Vs the Sagarin 200+, UMn played 5 games and SMU 11. That is a 6 game difference.

SMU's record is 23-9, UMn's is 20-12.


Wanna guess what each teams records would be if SMU played 3 additional Top 25 games and 3 fewer creampuffs, and if UMn played 3 fewer Top 25 games and 3 more creampuffs?!

UMn would likely be 23-9 and SMU 20-12, and UMn would STILL have a tougher SOS.



UMn lost EIGHT games to Sagarin Top 20 rated teams but won THREE. SMU only played 3 games vs Sagarin Top 20 opponents and lost all 3.


I'd say 3-8 is better than 0-3.

UMn went 9-11 vs the Sagarin Top 75. SMU went 4-6.


That's OVER twice as many Top 75 wins, 9 to 4.


UMn played 20 games vs the Sagarin Top 75, SMU only 10. We played TWICE AS MANY games vs legit opponents.


Then we played another 3 games, going 2-1, vs teams rated #76-100. SMU adds none. We're 11-12

Then we played another 3 games, going 2-1, vs teams rated #101-135. SMU adds just 1 game, a win over Wyoming.


So, that puts us at 26 games(13-13) vs Sagarin Top 135 rated teams, and SMU with 11(5-6).


26-11.


UMn goes 7-0 vs teams rated 135+ in the Sagarin.

SMU goes 18-3 vs teams rated 135+ in the Sagarin.


But SMU is going to get rewarded with a #10 seed in the NCAA tourney while we are relegated to the NIT.


Goes to show you how little they actually care about SOS.



I wish I had more time to do this kind of analysis for about 20 other teams considered either already in and locks or on the bubble but looked at favorably in comparison to Minnesota.


I'm telling you, the cbb world just hates Minnesota. It wouldn't shock me if BOTH the men's and women's ended up being the 1st one out in both tourneys.
 



You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom