Tubby Smith rips into 12-th ranked Gophers after loss to Northwestern

Donate To GopherHole
station19 said:
...BTW you can call me 19, both of my friends do.:)
Click to expand...

19, Thanks for considering someone else and me as your two friends. That really means something to me. What it means, I don't know, but it really, really, really means something.
 

Minnesconsin fan said:
Joe Esposito ‏@Coach_JEsposito

Things I know for sure 1. The sun will come up today 2. I love our team 3. We will get better 4. We won't point fingers 5. Learn and move on
Click to expand...

That's interesting. Creighton Coach Greg McDermott posted the same thing (exactly word for word) after his team was upset by Drake last night.
 

Gopherpride13 --

Nice of you to falsely accuse me of calling people "bad fans" and for "being happy with mediocrity".

A part of me whats to tell you to F*** Off.

But the other part of me thinks that there might be a chance to reason with you. I am NOT ok with mediocrity. I've NEVER called anyone a "bad fan". I've made mention of negative fans and positive fans, and also expressed that BOTH have flaws. Negative fans can sometimes be TOO NEGATIVE, and Positive fans can sometimes be TOO POSITIVE. But BOTH types of fans want what is best for the team. The 2 types of fans just don't agree on what that is.


As for the game with NW, I am not justifying anything. Just trying to show that NW is a better team than some Gopher fans were making them out to be.

I am NOT saying that NW is as good as Minnesota, but LOTS of lesser teams win home games over better teams.


NW has shown that it can beat Top 50 ranked teams, in fact, 3 of them, even in those Top 50 ranked teams own arenas.


Basically, if you were to rate teams on a scale of 10, with 10 being a Top 10 team, and 1 being a high school level team, some Negative Gopher fans would like people to believe that NW is a 1 and that Minnesota losing to them must mean that they are a 6 and not the 10 that we believed they were.

I'm arguing that NW is not a 1, but more like a 6, and that Mn losing to them proves that they are not the 10 we thought that they were, but maybe more like an 8.

Do I find the loss to a 6 acceptable?! No! I do not. I thought that we were a 10, but even now thinking that they may only be an 8, I do not think that they should lose to a 6 like NW. But it was a ROAD game and sometimes 8's lose to 6's.

We just have to hope that we can pull off a win vs a 10 to make up for it. I think that is possible. I think we can beat IU when we play them at home. As an 8, losing to IU at home is acceptable, so now to make up for the NW loss, and Unacceptable loss, we need to beat someone like IU at home, or OSU or MSU when we go on the road to play them.
 

#1alph/numero...Damn, I like reading your extended length posts. I need to remind you, by the time I get to the end of your lengthy comments, Oh, $hit, I forgot what I was gonna say. Keep up the good work, my friend. :)
 

Dr.Don said:
19, Thanks for considering someone else and me as your two friends. That really means something to me. What it means, I don't know, but it really, really, really means something.
Click to expand...

I have imaginary friends, it's the IN THING.

One of them is George Kaplan.
 


Savagerube -- Do you know how they figure the RPI?!

2 comparable teams can have very different RPI rankings. If you do not understand this, then maybe you need to school yourself on what the RPI is, and what it means, etc..

The RPI may have NW at #80, but the Sagarin Rankings have NW at #71 and TeamRankings dot com has NW at #64.


What is the MAJOR factor that drops NW down to #80?

fully 6 games vs tms ranked #200 or higher compared to only 2 games for Mn vs tms ranked that high.


I am NOT saying that NW is as good as Minnesota. I am simply saying that they are better than most have made them out to be.

And as for my comparison of NW and Wichita St, it is a legitimate comparison. Again, not saying that NW is as good as WSU, but their is legitimacy in comparing the two.

Both teams worst loss is to a team ranked just outside the Top 100 in the RPI rankings. BOTH teams have only 3 wins vs Top 50 RPI ranked teams.

WSU has 2 losses, NW has 8. Subtract a game each to #105 and #106 that basically cancel each other out. That leaves 1 to 7.
NW has FOUR losses to teams ranked in the Top 15. WSU hasn't played a single team ranked in the Top 20. So would it be so unheard of to assume that if WSU played 4 games vs Top 15 teams that they might lose those games? They lost to a team ranked #105, it's not out of the realm of possibility. So if you just don't count those 4 games, now that leaves us with 1 to 3.

That's not a HUGE difference seeing as those 2 extra losses were to legit tourney teams 15-4 Maryland and a 2 pt loss to Stanford.


Wichita St's BEST win is vs #28 Creighton. NW has winS vs #10 Mn and a ROAD win vs #29 Illinois.


105 vs 106 for worst losses.

28 vs 29 for best wins(before the win over Minny)

Seems somewhat comparable to me.

You could count their BIG win over Mn as significant enough to cancel out one or two of their losses.

So that would make the 1 loss vs 3 losses comparison drop to 1 vs 2 or 1 vs 1.


So STILL not saying NW is as good as WSU, but in many ways, they ARE comparable.
 


cfb120 said:
Why is everyone so high on Ellenson? I have a cousin who coached in the same area that he attended high school, and he said that Ellenson cannot shoot the ball. He is a great jumper, and a nice kid, but his competition in high school was sub-par, and Wisconsin didn't even want him. My understanding is that the Gophers only took Wally to get his much more talented younger brother to commit in the future. Don't be surprised if he never plays much.
Click to expand...

I watched Ellenson play several times. He can shoot the ball.
 

I never copy and past spackler.

I'm on vacation for 5 months. Daughter just turned 18 in May and is off on her own now, I'm not married, work seasonally and have my small business on hold right now. So I have very little to do other than watch my Gophers, watch movies and talk to my girlfriend who is going to be overseas for several more months. Bought a house not necessarily near where any of my friends live, and its too cold to go out much, so I'm choosing to hibernate this winter. I'm spending very little money, and I have big plans for my business and my personal life come summer time, so no reason to needlessly spend money now. SO, I entertain myself here at the GH and at other sites online, biding my time til the weather warms up and Spring arrives. It's very inexpensive entertainment, lol.
 



#1nHkyCfbBsbDncSolarDebat said:
Savagerube -- Do you know how they figure the RPI?!

2 comparable teams can have very different RPI rankings. If you do not understand this, then maybe you need to school yourself on what the RPI is, and what it means, etc..

The RPI may have NW at #80, but the Sagarin Rankings have NW at #71 and TeamRankings dot com has NW at #64.


What is the MAJOR factor that drops NW down to #80?

fully 6 games vs tms ranked #200 or higher compared to only 2 games for Mn vs tms ranked that high.


I am NOT saying that NW is as good as Minnesota. I am simply saying that they are better than most have made them out to be.

And as for my comparison of NW and Wichita St, it is a legitimate comparison. Again, not saying that NW is as good as WSU, but their is legitimacy in comparing the two.

Both teams worst loss is to a team ranked just outside the Top 100 in the RPI rankings. BOTH teams have only 3 wins vs Top 50 RPI ranked teams.

WSU has 2 losses, NW has 8. Subtract a game each to #105 and #106 that basically cancel each other out. That leaves 1 to 7.
NW has FOUR losses to teams ranked in the Top 15. WSU hasn't played a single team ranked in the Top 20. So would it be so unheard of to assume that if WSU played 4 games vs Top 15 teams that they might lose those games? They lost to a team ranked #105, it's not out of the realm of possibility. So if you just don't count those 4 games, now that leaves us with 1 to 3.

That's not a HUGE difference seeing as those 2 extra losses were to legit tourney teams 15-4 Maryland and a 2 pt loss to Stanford.


Wichita St's BEST win is vs #28 Creighton. NW has winS vs #10 Mn and a ROAD win vs #29 Illinois.


105 vs 106 for worst losses.

28 vs 29 for best wins(before the win over Minny)

Seems somewhat comparable to me.

You could count their BIG win over Mn as significant enough to cancel out one or two of their losses.

So that would make the 1 loss vs 3 losses comparison drop to 1 vs 2 or 1 vs 1.


So STILL not saying NW is as good as WSU, but in many ways, they ARE comparable.
Click to expand...

This right here shows that you don't understand RPI. Creighton was # 12 when Wichita State beat them. As a result, that goes down as a win over a top 12 team; not a #28 team. Furthermore, the Gophers win over Illinois accounts for a win over a #12 team, not a #29 team. The RPI is a formula that calculates the quality of a win over an opponent and their current ranking, not their ranking at the end of year.. Just because Illinois is currently unrated doesn't mean that they weren't rated when the Gophers beat them. Hence, the reason why the NCAA looks at top 25 wins when they select teams for the tourney. With that said, Wichita State has a win over a #12 team; the Gophers have wins over a #19 team in Memphis, #18 win over Michigan State and a win over #12 Illinois. Correct?
 

Savagerube --

Well, a part of me wants to be mean right here, but I won't be. You are simply wrong. That is not how they figure the RPI. Sorry.

Its a mathematical equation and has NOTHING whatsoever to do with a team's ranking.

The benefit of beating a highly ranked team is that the reason they are highly ranked is because they have a lot of wins and not a lot of losses, and their opponents have a lot of wins and not a lot of losses and their opponents opponents have a lot of wins and not a lot of losses.


You can check with any one of the sites that track these different NCAA Selection Committee criteria and you will see that I am right about this.
 

#1nHkyCfbBsbDncSolarDebat said:
Savagerube --

Well, a part of me wants to be mean right here, but I won't be. You are simply wrong. That is not how they figure the RPI. Sorry.

Its a mathematical equation and has NOTHING whatsoever to do with a team's ranking.

The benefit of beating a highly ranked team is that the reason they are highly ranked is because they have a lot of wins and not a lot of losses, and their opponents have a lot of wins and not a lot of losses and their opponents opponents have a lot of wins and not a lot of losses.


You can check with any one of the sites that track these different NCAA Selection Committee criteria and you will see that I am right about this.
Click to expand...

Huh? You lost me.. I don't understand what you're saying. If the "mathematical" equation has "NOTHING" whatsoever do with a team's ranking, then what does it have to do with????
 

The formula first takes into account a teams winning percentage, then it takes into account its opponents winning percentages, and then it takes in account its opponents opponents winning percentage. It looks something like this

(WP x .25) + (OWP x .50) + (OOWP x .25) = RPI


So everytime 2 teams play each other, it changes both teams RPI ratings and all of the RPI ratings of all of the opponents they've played so far that season, and all of the RPI ratings of the teams that their opponents have played as well. As the season progresses and more teams have played an increasingly larger number of teams, the # of teams whose RPI rating changes every time a game is played, increases, but the degree by which each teams RPI rating changes decreases.

Does that make sense to you now?
 



#1nHkyCfbBsbDncSolarDebat said:
The formula first takes into account a teams winning percentage, then it takes into account its opponents winning percentages, and then it takes in account its opponents opponents winning percentage. It looks something like this

(WP x .25) + (OWP x .50) + (OOWP x .25) = RPI


So everytime 2 teams play each other, it changes both teams RPI ratings and all of the RPI ratings of all of the opponents they've played so far that season, and all of the RPI ratings of the teams that their opponents have played as well. As the season progresses and more teams have played an increasingly larger number of teams, the # of teams whose RPI rating changes every time a game is played, increases, but the degree by which each teams RPI rating changes decreases.

Does that make sense to you now?
Click to expand...

I understand that. Your equation is right but this isn't the only factor that plays into an RPI ranking; especially in non-conference play. This is what I was trying to explain. If the formula accounted for 100% of the RPI index, it would be flawed since the Gophers play a lot non-conference foes that sport a good record (example: SDSU, NDSU, etc) even though the level of competition is nowhere near the B1G. Therefore the RPI factors in multiple equations. Let me circle back to my point: Wichita State beat a #12 team, not a #29 team as you claimed. Here's a definition:

"RPI stands for Ratings Percentage Index and is used to compare sports teams. While it could be applied to any sport, it is specifically used for college basketball because it helps factor in a strength-of-schedule component in an objective manner among a large number of teams, many of which do not play each other. RPI takes into account how the team did, how tough its opponents were and how tough of a schedule the opponents played. It is most notably used as one factor in deciding which teams get accepted into the NCAA Tournament"

The key is, "How the team did" not "how the team is doing." Hence the reason Wichita State will have a victory over a #12 team at the end of the year, not #29 team. Therefore, the disparity between Northwestern's resume and Wichita State's is significant.
 

Savagerube --


Dude, please, you are wrong. Stop embarrassing yourself in front of everyone here.

I am trying to be nice, but you keep arguing with me about it. So it's getting hard to remain nice about it.


OK, this is the deal, I could end up looking like a fool myself if I go on endlessly trying to convince you that I am right and you may never come to figure it out? I have no desire to expend a lot of energy for something that is not that important, and which brings me no entertainment value or that does not benefit me in any way. SO...


That leaves you with a choice. You can quietly go off and figure out on your own that you are wrong, and quietly slither back into the GH without anyone noticing or remembering how ignorant you showed yourself to be in regards to this particular issue, and I promise I won't remember what you said or who said what, a week from now if you drop it, OR...


You can go on advertising to the entire GH community that you are ignorant about this issue, if that is what you really want to do? But if you respond to my posts using this incorrect way of looking at the RPI, I won't be nice anymore. Now please, do yourself a favor and go do some more research or ask someone who would be qualified to know the answer.
 

Tubby needs to show more emotion out there. Get angry, get fired up. The team has been playing with little energy as of late, just as their coach is displaying very little energy on the sideline or in the locker room before the game.

Fire the kids up, Tubby!
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom