Gophers Ranked #1

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
25,651
Reaction score
6,748
Points
113
Good post. This narrative from a small few out here of the clear superiority of the NCHC is without merit. SCSU just dropped two games to a three-win WMU.

Definitely a rough weekend. Hard to tell what happened here. Really....it was a bad weekend of hockey all around. College that is. Wild with a couple of fun OT wins.
 

MUgopher32

Active member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
696
Reaction score
236
Points
43
You claimed from the very start of the other thread....when talking about the top teams in the NCAA....that SCSU shouldn't be considered. But you did claim that ND (who SCSU split with) and UMD (who SCSU has taken three of four from) are on that level. I even said that I don't think that SCSU is as good as the Gophers. But I specifically pointed out that previous tournaments have zero implications with the current year. Different team with different players. For some odd reason, likely stemming from an unhealthy hubris, you've continued to press on with the thought that it really does matter. That curses and ghosts carry forward to subsequent years.

I said that you were silly for thinking that. And you've proceeded to dig in further. My analogy with Marquette is that I wouldn't consider their underperformances, losing 5 of their last 12 first round games as a favorite, have any impact in future years. I knew that it was the kind of analogy that would force you to completely abandon your ridiculous initial claim.

No you "specifically" pointed out that they havent had clunkers(they have).

I haven't abandoned any claim. Everything I have said is dead on and you got caught so flat footed you spammed two different threads with meltdowns bringing college basketball into it

And you keep coming back for more.
 

MUgopher32

Active member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
696
Reaction score
236
Points
43
Good post. This narrative from a small few out here of the clear superiority of the NCHC is without merit. SCSU just dropped two games to a three-win WMU.

Uhh hes been religiously defending SCSU lol.
 

bonin21

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 4, 2014
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
530
Points
113
Good post. This narrative from a small few out here of the clear superiority of the NCHC is without merit. SCSU just dropped two games to a three-win WMU.
NCHC is the best conference and if you don't believe that you're in denial.

Last four national champions. Would have made it five last year between UND and UMD. Good odds this year with UND.

Hockey East is second best. Big Ten is third.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
25,651
Reaction score
6,748
Points
113
No you "specifically" pointed out that they havent had clunkers(they have).

I haven't abandoned any claim. Everything I have said is dead on and you got caught so flat footed you spammed two different threads with meltdowns bringing college basketball into it

And you keep coming back for more.

Actually I "specifically" said that they played a clunker against WMU.

stocker08 said:
They had ONE clunker against Western Michigan early in the year when they lost 2-1.

Do you think that lying makes your wacky argument stronger?

And I know you didn't abandon any claim. You've doubled down on your superstitious belief that historical results have any impact on future results....yet you've put on the blinders to avoid the double standard when it comes to your Marquette team. Five out of twelve games dropped in the first round as higher seeded team since 2000. That's bad. But keep telling yourself that this isn't underperforming.

I realize that their historical tendency to choke in the NCAA Tournament means nothing to a roster of completely different players. So I won't write off Marquette when they make the tournament next time. I think that they can beat teams that they are favored over even if they had struggles with it in the past.
 


MUgopher32

Active member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
696
Reaction score
236
Points
43
Actually I "specifically" said that they played a clunker against WMU.



Do you think that lying makes your wacky argument stronger?

And I know you didn't abandon any claim. You've doubled down on your superstitious belief that historical results have any impact on future results....yet you've put on the blinders to avoid the double standard when it comes to your Marquette team. Five out of twelve games dropped in the first round as higher seeded team since 2000. That's bad. But keep telling yourself that this isn't underperforming.

I realize that their historical tendency to choke in the NCAA Tournament means nothing to a roster of completely different players. So I won't write off Marquette when they make the tournament next time. I think that they can beat teams that they are favored over even if they had struggles with it in the past.

Are you autistic???? I'm actually wondering.

You keep repeating yourself after being proven wrong like someone with aspergers would.

I am so badly in your head you are literally carrying on the exact same conversation about Marquette basketball on two different threads about Gopher hockey.

13-12 is not a bad NCAA tournament record. 5-11 is.

5/12 is less than 50/50. My god you are next fu cking level stupid.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
25,651
Reaction score
6,748
Points
113
Are you autistic???? I'm actually wondering.

You keep repeating yourself after being proven wrong like someone with aspergers would.

I am so badly in your head you are literally carrying on the exact same conversation about Marquette basketball on two different threads about Gopher hockey.

13-12 is not a bad NCAA tournament record. 5-11 is.

5/12 is less than 50/50. My god you are next fu cking level stupid.

Name calling is the exact kind of wild flailing that a stubborn child resorts to when their ego has taken a hit and their brain can't process it.

No. 13-12 isn't a bad tournament record. Fortunately Marquette had a few good teams to make up for all the ones that lost their opening round against underdogs. But you can wash your hands of the general trend of underperformance. It has no bearing moving forward. You'll learn that someday....and you'll be happier for it.
 

MUgopher32

Active member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
696
Reaction score
236
Points
43
Name calling is the exact kind of wild flailing that a stubborn child resorts to when their ego has taken a hit and their brain can't process it.

No. 13-12 isn't a bad tournament record. Fortunately Marquette had a few good teams to make up for all the ones that lost their opening round against underdogs. But you can wash your hands of the general trend of underperformance. It has no bearing moving forward. You'll learn that someday....and you'll be happier for it.

It was a serious question, and you didn't answer. Are you on the spectrum??? There is nothing wrong if you are, it would just actually explain a lot. Just not sure why you keep saying the same things over and over even after having the argument collapsed.

Not sure id call 4/12 tourney teams winning at least 2 games "a few". At least not when using it to argue against St. Cloud who has 1/4th the success.

You see, St Cloud had a "few" teams(1 to be exact) that didn't embarrass themselves in March. Theyve had a handful that got trounced by the last team or 2 in the field however.

Btw, Marquette was seeded higher in those games. But they were actually the underdogs against Michigan State and Washington haha. But you are right, losing a 8/9 game to a HOF coach and his blue blood type program is the same as getting bounced by National American University and Air Force in back to back years.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
25,651
Reaction score
6,748
Points
113
It was a serious question, and you didn't answer. Are you on the spectrum??? There is nothing wrong if you are, it would just actually explain a lot. Just not sure why you keep saying the same things over and over even after having the argument collapsed.

Not sure id call 4/12 tourney teams winning at least 2 games "a few". At least not when using it to argue against St. Cloud who has 1/4th the success.

You see, St Cloud had a "few" teams(1 to be exact) that didn't embarrass themselves in March. Theyve had a handful that got trounced by the last team or 2 in the field however.

Btw, Marquette was seeded higher in those games. But they were actually the underdogs against Michigan State and Washington haha. But you are right, losing a 8/9 game to a HOF coach and his blue blood type program is the same as getting bounced by National American University and Air Force in back to back years.

Keep the insults coming. It doesn't set off the "triggered" alarm at all. :rolleyes:

I'm still not sure why you are trying to compare SCSU and Marquette results. I KNOW that SCSU has played really bad in the NCAA tournament. I also know that their upset losses don't matter anymore.

You'd be wise to realize that yourself. Making the assumption that Marquette is going to continue to underperform and lose to lower seeded teams because of what happened in the past is only going to lead you to more sleepless nights....tossing and turning.....hoping that the curse (that doesn't exist) will go away.
 



MUgopher32

Active member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
696
Reaction score
236
Points
43
Keep the insults coming. It doesn't set off the "triggered" alarm at all. :rolleyes:

I'm still not sure why you are trying to compare SCSU and Marquette results. I KNOW that SCSU has played really bad in the NCAA tournament. I also know that their upset losses don't matter anymore.

You'd be wise to realize that yourself. Making the assumption that Marquette is going to continue to underperform and lose to lower seeded teams because of what happened in the past is only going to lead you to more sleepless nights....tossing and turning.....hoping that the curse (that doesn't exist) will go away.

Asking a question isn't an insult, but yet here you are showing it again...

Bolded. Um no, actually if i only go off Marquette past 20 year history I will sleep better about their chances. That means they have a 52% chance of winning a tournament game this year(should they make).

I would be floored with those odds with this current team.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
25,651
Reaction score
6,748
Points
113
Asking a question isn't an insult, but yet here you are showing it again...

Bolded. Um no, actually if i only go off Marquette past 20 year history I will sleep better about their chances. That means they have a 52% chance of winning a tournament game this year(should they make).

I would be floored with those odds with this current team.

Stupid questions from triggered posters don't warrant a response.

And that's the spirit. They were 5-5 in first round games as the higher seed since 2000. So you've got a coin flip on beating a lower ranked team if you want to use historical results as a forward projection.....which apparently you do.
 

MUgopher32

Active member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
696
Reaction score
236
Points
43
Stupid questions from triggered posters don't warrant a response.

And that's the spirit. They were 5-5 in first round games as the higher seed since 2000. So you've got a coin flip on beating a lower ranked team if you want to use historical results as a forward projection.....which apparently you do.

Correct. 50/50 advancement odds are solid. Keeps me guessing. I dont have to have expectations.

I'd be much more worried if my odds were 33%
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
25,651
Reaction score
6,748
Points
113
Correct. 50/50 advancement odds are solid. Keeps me guessing. I dont have to have expectations.

I'd be much more worried if my odds were 33%

I'd be concerned about that too. Mostly if the ghostly effects of previous year under performances were actually a thing.
 



MUgopher32

Active member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
696
Reaction score
236
Points
43
I'd be concerned about that too. Mostly if the ghostly effects of previous year under performances were actually a thing.

You should really just be concerned with how the Gophers played this weekend.

That a ship that needs to righted. Cloud will be Cloud.
 






MUgopher32

Active member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
696
Reaction score
236
Points
43
Because it swept a one-win team?

Because they went 2-0 while the two teams in front of them went 0-3 combined

Denver is good so maybe UND wont be punished at all, but I doubt it. I expect BC gets the nod at 1
 

bonin21

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 4, 2014
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
530
Points
113
Because it swept a one-win team?
1 BC
2 Kato
3 UND
4 UMN
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
25,651
Reaction score
6,748
Points
113
Because it swept a one-win team?

BC is very good. And if you watched the Juniors at all.....they've got a goalie named Spencer Knight that might be the best in the nation. Completely shut down the Canadian junior team who were HEAVY favourites in the gold medal game.
 


PMWinSTP

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
10,920
Reaction score
1,565
Points
113
BC is very good. And if you watched the Juniors at all.....they've got a goalie named Spencer Knight that might be the best in the nation. Completely shut down the Canadian junior team who were HEAVY favourites in the gold medal game.
No doubt a great goalie. BC tied (SO loss) a five-win UConn last night.
 




Top Bottom