Thanks, good stuff.
Yep, back half of the schedule is definitely "easier" than the front half. As long as the team wins the games against the teams right around them there is a good chance to move out of the bottom 3 at least.
I don't know....for those counting the days until Johnson is fired those extra few days might just be too much to handle.
^^^ THIS is an example of a Ben apologist.I don't know....for those counting the days until Johnson is fired those extra few days might just be too much to handle.
I mean what if the team goes on a run.....wins the Big Ten Tournament.....gets to the dance.....advances to the sweet 16.....we might be stuck with Ben forever......
lol....In no way shape or form does anything I said there imply that Ben is the answer. And the 4 more years thread was complete sarcasm. And if you took that last part literally at all I don't know what to do for you because that was clearly a joke.....even put the smiley face in there to help those that read everything literally......
Guessing it won't happen but how crazy would it be for Rutgers, with the recruiting class they brought in, ended up missing the Big Ten Tournament? I guess if there is a good time to play Michigan State it is probably right now while we are playing at a high level.
START THE B1G TOURNAMENT NOW!!!!!
They couldn't have beaten Wichita And Wake Forest. Only one or the other. They have three very close losses (North Texas, Wichita and OSU) and one very close win (Michigan.) The two to regret are Wichita and OSU because they basically had them won.
It might be elsewhere in the thread, but do your standings take into account the practically infinite tiebreaker scenarios or just overall winning percentage like published standings seem to? I keep seeing both Nebraska and Rutgers on the road and I get concerned. Both those places are house of horrors and they could easily be the ones we are scraping with at the end of the season.
You are a great athletic supporter.
I use the tiebreakers as much as humanly possible early on, but it’s tougher without enough data.
year 3 wasn't historically bad. it was actually a very good season for minnesota basketball. going 9-11 in conference and making the NIT
True but it also begs the question whether that is worthy of continuing if that is peak or near peak performance of the current leadership. I think most of us say no. Neither of which downplays the recent streak and good feelings it elicits. My struggle is that it would be much easier to be on a high with it if I could project it continuing at least into the short term future. I can’t with only one contributor having a chance to be back next season.
9-11 is "very good?" Gagging the B1G tournament is "very good?" Not even sneaking into the tournament is "very good?"
At least the Steve Pikell is the second coming talk has abated.
I had a flashback to HS football, as the RB wasn’t taught/ blessed with social grace San wore the same jock for two weeks at time and it reeked.
Having your best players as freshmen is no longer a formula that will work for big winning. Rutgers best players are freshmen but they are in a Catch 22 because if you can get them at a mid level Power 5 you take them. But without enough experienced talent it won’t work. I can’t remember but didn’t Rutgers have some decent players with eligibility left portal after last season?