PDA

View Full Version : NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23

Back2BackU-MnPride2002
03-15-2013, 02:11 AM
I don't think it is funny. I said he put you in a box. Then, you basically ignored what he said. Maybe you should read the thread title again. This is accomplishments only. Quantifiable ones. No intangibles. Yet, here you are typing thousands of words to try and argue a point that goes against what this thread is about. Something JDUBBS also tried to do and failed miserably and got on everyone's nerves. That is what is dumb to me.



Tipsy --

Maybe you will notice post #367. I did try to get the topic back on track, and I will try again, btw, because I am not JDUBBS, I do care about quantifiable accomplishments.









As far as Miami goes, I am not trying to re-invent the wheel. I guess you are. People that are probably a lot smarter than me made some mathematical formulas to determine the relative strength of a hockey team. People have been using them for years, and if there are better methods out there someone should publish them and explain why they are better. Until then, I guess we will just have to use RPI, PWR and KRACH. The RPI, PWR and KRACH all have Miami as the 3rd best team in the country. Your statement that "They have to be the worst #3 rated team ever in the history of college hockey" was not backed up by any "facts and stats and wins and losses and scoring margins." I didn't see any comparisons to #3 teams of previous years.




There are better systems out there. The Sagarin & Ken-Pom and Massey Ratings. But I am not sure those people apply their systems to college hockey. Massey does, but not sure about Sagarin or Ken Pomeroy?


Massey has Miami rated 7th.


And my guess is if MSU wins 1 or 2 games vs them, which I believe they might, that rating might drop some more. And maybe they'll get through the CCHA conf tourney without a problem, because they probably are the best team in the conf, and that probably won't hurt their rating, but the CCHA is weak, so it won't prove anything.

But the PWR is a stupid rating system and the RPI is even more asinine. These are not brave new ideas I've come up with, 90% of knowledgeable cbb fans HATE the RPI. The KRACH is better than the other 3, but it too is lacking in comparison.

I'll go look and see if I can't find any other rating systems out there for college hockey, but like many have said, its not like college hockey is the biggest media darling out there, so I might not find anything.




Also, dude, who says you need someone else to tell you how to think? Unlike you, I'm not going to take one post here, or one post there from someone here and judge them to be stupid. My guess is that you are not stupid, that you are fairly, or at least of average intelligence, and being only of average intelligence, you should be able to look at a team's schedule, at who they've beaten and who they've lost to, and by how much, and come to your own conclusions. That's what cbb fans all the time, and often times they are right and the polls or ratings are wrong. Those polls and rating systems can only do what they are designed to do, and its up to you to simply use them for what they are good for, which isn't always all that much. The RPI system is just a mathematical equation of which 75% of is determined by what OTHER teams do, not your team.

Well, I've said plenty. I'll go look for one of those rating systems, and I'll also repost what I posted in 367 and try AGAIN to get this thread back on track before the games start this weekend.

Back2BackU-MnPride2002
03-15-2013, 02:25 AM
HEY EVERYONE!!!


I have an idea. With a weekend full of conf tourney games going on, some of which will determine if teams get into the NCAA tourney or not, and with POINTS to be earned by winning these Conf Tourney Titles, just to recap where we are now...


1. Michigan - 454
2. Bost Coll - 408
t3 Nrth Dak - 399
t3 Minnesota - 399
5. Boston U - 390
6. U of Denv - 328
7. U of Wisc - 275
8. Mich State - 259


Did an "unofficial" Top 8 this time, seeing as both Denver and maybe Wisconsin could make the Tourney, even without winning their Conf tourneys. Suppose MSU could win their conf tourney?!

Could be interesting, if either UNC or Minny wins the WCHA Conf Tourney Title, that team would only have to go one game further than BC in the FF to tie or pass them. Even without a Conf Title, either team could pass them if they win the Title and BC only makes the FF. BU could move all the way into 2nd if they win it all and BC loses in the 1st or 2nd round and neither UND or UMn make it to the Title game, I think? There are so many different combinations of what could happen and who could end up where?! And most likely, Michigan isn't gaining any points, so everyone from 7th on up could easily gain lots of ground on Michigan.


And as for teams placed down further than 8th, maybe I'll get to you all later, unless HumRsky beats me to it with the "Official" updated standings.

JDUBBS1280
03-15-2013, 02:29 AM
Hey, JDubbs resents (resembles) that remark.

I do. And don't apologize for it.

At least I'm honest.

SanTropez
03-15-2013, 02:40 AM
I do. And don't apologize for it.

At least I'm honest.

It's all good Dubbers.

Keep fighting brother, I enjoy your rantings, I mean writing.

2 thumbs up!

LynahFan
03-15-2013, 04:35 AM
B2BU - feel free to keep posting percentages to your heart's content. The big picture is that fewer than 2% of all NCAA D1 men's hockey players have played for the University of Minnesota. The idea that the fans of all of the other 98% are "better off" because of where those 2% were born (or maybe grew up, or maybe just went to high school) is just plain nuts.

Besides, if those 2% of players were sooooo important to the sport, wouldn't we all have been "better off" if they were distributed among all the teams? That way we could have ALL reveled in their otherworldly hockey prowess and we might have actually had something to cheer for instead of just sort of wandering around our rinks and picking our belly button lint like I've been doing at games for the last 25 years....

Osorojo
03-15-2013, 10:04 AM
Ok, I'm convinced.
Now I'm dying to know the reason for the obvious superiority of Minnesota hockey. Is it the water? A superior gene pool of hockey talent in those born within Minnesota's invisible boundaries? Better methods of conditioning and instruction which are unknown outside of Minnesota?
The massive gap between the achievements of Minnesota college hockey and everyone else must have a cause. It's not fair for you G.G.'s to just sit around and gloat over Minnesota's Unrivaled Hockey Empire, but refuse to even mention what made it possible. Come on, give the rest of the world a hint.

Shirtless Guy
03-15-2013, 10:23 AM
unsubscribe...I'm done, bored with this debate, no more need to beat this dead horse AGAIN.

UncleRay
03-15-2013, 11:36 AM
Ok, I'm convinced.
Now I'm dying to know the reason for the obvious superiority of Minnesota hockey. Is it the water? A superior gene pool of hockey talent in those born within Minnesota's invisible boundaries? Better methods of conditioning and instruction which are unknown outside of Minnesota?
The massive gap between the achievements of Minnesota college hockey and everyone else must have a cause. It's not fair for you G.G.'s to just sit around and gloat over Minnesota's Unrivaled Hockey Empire, but refuse to even mention what made it possible. Come on, give the rest of the world a hint.You're not paying attention, Red, it's because they only recruit from within their borders. It hasn't worked for their other teams, but they are obvious out-liers, and inconsistent with the rule.

ScottK
03-15-2013, 12:37 PM
Nitpicker?

Yeah, doesn't surprise me. People without substance behind their bs, usually fall back on other tactics to attack the person whose opinion they hate. They nitpick spelling or minor errors, or they resort to name calling, etc..

All out of the weakness of their argument.

Actually, I could care less about Minnesota. I just happen to be reading this thread and saw that. If you really want to convince people about your side of something, you should get your facts straight first. Otherwise, you don't have any credibility.

Back2BackU-MnPride2002
03-15-2013, 02:23 PM
B2BU - feel free to keep posting percentages to your heart's content. The big picture is that fewer than 2% of all NCAA D1 men's hockey players have played for the University of Minnesota. The idea that the fans of all of the other 98% are "better off" because of where those 2% were born (or maybe grew up, or maybe just went to high school) is just plain nuts.

Besides, if those 2% of players were sooooo important to the sport, wouldn't we all have been "better off" if they were distributed among all the teams? That way we could have ALL reveled in their otherworldly hockey prowess and we might have actually had something to cheer for instead of just sort of wandering around our rinks and picking our belly button lint like I've been doing at games for the last 25 years....




LynahFan --

And you just seem still not to get it, and that's fine, your like a slow-pitch softball pitcher pitching me some nice slow perfectly arching pitches. If I was a brilliant and quit witted person, I'd be knocking em out of the field left and right.

But instead I am just a long winded stats guy, who spends 60% of his sports time paying attention to cbb, cwr, and all of the other sports the Gophers are participating in now, so not exactly dedicated to this cause, who just so happens to have the truth on his side, and so I might whiff on a couple of your pitches, but they are too easy and I know I'm getting a couple singles and double off of them.

It's too bad this argument doesn't have some brilliant person making its case, because the debate would be over by now if that were the case. But this argument just has little ole me trying to make its case, and STILL I'd say I'm doing a decent job of it, which is pretty hard not to do with so much evidence and facts on my side to work with.




You say that less than 2% of college hockey players have been Minnesota Gophers?! WOW. That's not many, that's a pretty low percentage.


Kind of crazy then that from my count, just about 1/4th of the college hockey players in the US Hockey Hall of Fame were Gophers?!!!


2% produces 25%???


I mean, UMn all by itself has about the same # of former Gophers in the US Hockey Hall of Fame as Harv, Dart, Yale & Princeton...

COMBINED

UMn also, all by itself, has about the same # of former Gophers in the US Hockey Hall of Fame as BC, Mich, BU & Wisconsin...

COMBINED

And finally, UMn all by itself, has about the same # of former Gophers in the US Hockey HOF as every other college out there...

COMBINED.


And that's not taking into account how the things Minnesota did to try to improve American hockey, mostly by improving hockey in the state of Minnesota, affected other programs positively. UMn graduates had significant positive effects on programs like UND, Wisconsin, UMD, SCSU, Bemidji St, Mn St-Mankato, Eveleth Jr College & St Thomas. Those schools account for about 15% of the former US Collegians in the US Hockey Hall of Fame. Now I am not sure how to quantify the affect UMn had on those other programs, so I will not continue discussing that part of this argument.


But a quantifiable thing would be the percentage of Minnesota natives that could/can be found on ALL of the US American College hockey programs out there. Minnesota is the leader in this category, and some years its by a large margin.


So Minnesota is NOT keeping that awesome incredible 2% all to ourselves. We sent that 2% out into the college hockey world and they've coached teams like UND, Wisconsin, SCSU, Eveleth Jr College, etc., and led those teams to wins over the Gophers, and to Natl Titles even, and they steal some of the top recruits in the state of Minnesota from us. UMD, Mn St-Mankato, SCSU, Bemidji St ALL rose up to Div 1 status on the coattails of Minnesota and its success or because of what former Gophers did for them. Herb Brooks went and coached at SCSU and was a big influence and factor in getting SCSU raised up to Div 1 status. Craig Dahl, a former Gopher, spent years coaching SCSU and struggled to move them up in the rankings. Some of these schools built rosters out of players who felt spurned by the Gophers and then wanted to get on the ice and beat them and show they that they made a mistake going after someone else. Dean Blais, a former Gopher, did a lot to put UND back up into the upper echelon of college hockey programs winning them their last 2 Natl Titles. And who made Wisconsin a hockey power? First, former Gopher Bob Johnson, who recruited extensively out of the state of Minnesota, led them to their first 3 Natl Titles, and his replacement was another Minnesota native. And probably the most influential of them all is former Gopher Cliff Thompson who led both an Eveleth HS Hockey Dynasty arguably the best ever, in the nation, in history, and the Eveleth Jr College. And his combined efforts at the high school level and college level are probably as significant as any other factor which led to the US Hockey Hall of Fame choosing Eveleth for its location. If John Mariucci is considered the "Father of Minnesota Hockey", then Cliff Thompson is very deserving of the title the "Grandfather of Minnesota Hockey".


Michigan only has something like 6 US Hockey Hall of Famers as far as I could find, and half of those were Minnesota boys who were stolen out of Minnesota while Mariucci was struggling because of his policy to recruit only Americans. So surely Michigan is happy Mariucci had that principle. Williard Ikola and John Matcheffs off the top of my head were two of Michigan's earliest super stars. Or maybe Michigan didn't steal them, its just as possible that those player's coach, Cliff Thompson, may have told them about or advised them about going to Michigan?



So I'm adding a lot of commentary to my quantifiable accomplishments, in part to stay kind of on topic and also to respond to your comments LynahFan.



Minnesota's kept enough of the best players and coaches to keep themselves up near or at the Top of the College Hockey heap throughout its history, and part of the reason its not been OVERWHELMING at the top the whole time, IS BECAUSE of how generous we've been towards all the other colleges out there in America that have or want to have Div 1 college hockey.

And what we did for Men's College Hockey in the past, we are now doing for Women's College Hockey now in the present.




So how many points does Minnesota get HumRsky for having produced LESS THAN 2% of all American College Hockey players in history, but yet that 2% has produced 25% of the American College Hockey players in the US Hockey Hall of Fame?!

It is a quantifiable accomplishment, right? lol

Back2BackU-MnPride2002
03-15-2013, 02:28 PM
You're not paying attention, Red, it's because they only recruit from within their borders. It hasn't worked for their other teams, but they are obvious out-liers, and inconsistent with the rule.



It hasn't worked for "their other teams"??? Yes it has worked for many of them, actually. But when you have more sports than 90% of colleges out there, yeah, there will be a few its not going to work for, especially when the locals don't care so much. What are we supposed to do? Spend millions of dollars trying to force Minnesota residents to get into sports they aren't into, just because UMn supports one of those teams? LOL. Whatever dude.

Back2BackU-MnPride2002
03-15-2013, 02:43 PM
[QUOTE]Actually, I could care less about Minnesota. I just happen to be reading this thread and saw that. If you really want to convince people about your side of something, you should get your facts straight first. Otherwise, you don't have any credibility. [/QUOTE


Scott K --

I don't actually think he was criticizing me, but someone else, I just thought it was weak, so I let it be known that is how I felt. I doubt it was me he was talking about, because I don't think I'd ever refer to the Hockey Hall of Fame as the "NHL Hall of Fame". But if I did, that's hardly the kind of mistake that should destroy someone's credibility.

Let the person who is without error or mistakes, who is perfect in all knowledge and wisdom cast/post the first nitpicking criticism. lol

4four4
03-15-2013, 02:47 PM
Michigan only has something like 6 US Hockey Hall of Famers as far as I could find, and half of those were Minnesota boys who were stolen out of Minnesota while Mariucci was struggling because of his policy to recruit only Americans. So surely Michigan is happy Mariucci had that principle. Williard Ikola and John Matcheffs off the top of my head were two of Michigan's earliest super stars. Or maybe Michigan didn't steal them, its just as possible that those player's coach, Cliff Thompson, may have told them about or advised them about going to Michigan?

It should be noted at the time Minnesota didn't give out hockey scholarships like Michigan did back then.

Back2BackU-MnPride2002
03-15-2013, 03:20 PM
Now just to make sure I'm not misrepresenting any school's # of US Hockey Hall of Famers, I'll list the #s as I have them, and if they are wrong, I welcome anybody to point out where my #s are mistaken.

This is what I have,


1. Minnesota ---- 26 total - 18 inductees as individuals + 8 inductees as part of a team.
2. Harvard U ---- 15 total - 13 inductees as individuals + 2 inductees as part of a team.
3. Dartmouth ---- 9 total - 9 inductees as individuals + 0 inductees as part of a team.
4. Boston Univ --- 8 total - 3 inductees as individuals + 5 inductees as part of a team.
5. Boston Coll ---- 7 total - 7 inductees as individuals + 0 inductees as part of a team.
6. U Michigan ---- 6 total - 6 inductees as individuals + 0 inductees as part of a team.
7. UMn-Duluth --- 5 total - 3 inductees as individuals + 2 inductees as part of a team.
8. U Wisconsin --- 5 total - 3 inductees as individuals + 2 inductees as part of a team.
9. Eveleth Jr C --- 3 total - 3 inductees as individuals + 0 inductees as part of a team.
t9. U Nrth Dak --- 3 total - 2 inductees as individuals + 1 inductee as part of a team.
t9. Bwling Grn --- 3 total - 1 inductee as an individual + 2 inductees as part of a team.
t12. Yale Univ ---- 2 total - 2 inductees as individuals + 0 inductees as part of a team.
t12. ColoradoC --- 2 total - 2 inductees as individuals + 0 inductees as part of a team.
t12. St Thmas ---- 2 total - 2 inductees as individuals + 0 inductees as part of a team.
t12. St Mary's ---- 2 total - 2 inductees as individuals + 0 inductees as part of a team.
t12. Mich State --- 2 total - 0 inductees as individuals + 2 inductees as part of a team.
t17. Princeton ----- 1 total - 1 inductee as an individual + 0 inductees as part of a team.
t17. St Cloud St --- 1 total - 1 inductee as an individual + 0 inductees as part of a team.
t17. Denver Univ -- 1 total - 1 inductee as an individual + 0 inductees as part of a team.
t17. Notre Dme --- 1 total - 1 inductee as an individual + 0 inductees as part of a team.
t17. New Hamp --- 1 total - 1 inductee as an individual + 0 inductees as part of a team.
t17. Mich Tech ---- 1 total - 1 inductee as an individual + 0 inductees as part of a team.
t17. Colgate U ---- 1 total - 1 inductee as an individual + 0 inductees as part of a team.
t17. Providence --- 1 total - 1 inductee as an individual + 0 inductees as part of a team.
t17. U of Illinois --- 1 total - 1 inductee as an individual + 0 inductees as part of a team.
t17. Norwich U ---- 1 total - 1 inductee as an individual + 0 inductees as part of a team.

List has been updated with all team members. These are the #s I could glean from the bios at the US Hockey Hall of Fame site. It's good to double check, because I missed a couple for the Gophers my first time through.

burd
03-15-2013, 03:33 PM
Which reminds me: anybody know a good deprogrammer?

A friend of a friend appears to be in a downward spiral that is accelerating.

Osorojo
03-15-2013, 04:24 PM
[QUOTE]Actually, I could care less about Minnesota. I just happen to be reading this thread and saw that. If you really want to convince people about your side of something, you should get your facts straight first. Otherwise, you don't have any credibility. [/QUOTE


Scott K --

I don't actually think he was criticizing me, but someone else, I just thought it was weak, so I let it be known that is how I felt. I doubt it was me he was talking about, because I don't think I'd ever refer to the Hockey Hall of Fame as the "NHL Hall of Fame". But if I did, that's hardly the kind of mistake that should destroy someone's credibility.

Let the person who is without error or mistakes, who is perfect in all knowledge and wisdom cast/post the first nitpicking criticism. lol

The "Hockey Hall of Fame" is the exclusive creation of the NHL. I added the "NHL" to the "Hockey Hall of Fame" to prevent some homer from claiming it owes its existence to Minnesota.

Wisko McBadgerton
03-15-2013, 04:41 PM
B2BU said some stuff here that I quoted by selecting REPLY TO QUOTE before deleting it and adding this instead.

Back2BackU- On the lower right of any person's post it says "Reply With Quote". If you click on it, it will pop up a reply box with that person's quote already in it. It's nifty, you should definitely try it.

Back2BackU-MnPride2002
03-15-2013, 05:04 PM
The "Hockey Hall of Fame" is the exclusive creation of the NHL. I added the "NHL" to the "Hockey Hall of Fame" to prevent some homer from claiming it owes its existence to Minnesota.



But its NOT the NHL Hall of Fame. Calling it that implies that you have to have played or coached in the NHL to gain entry into the Hall. You don't. There are several players and coaches in the Hockey Hall of Fame who never played or coached in the NHL.

But I'm not a nitpicker, I don't care what you call it, I'm intelligent enough to know what you are talking about whether you use your made up name for it, or the recognized name for it, or a nickname for it. As long as the context is clear, it shouldn't be that tough.

Back2BackU-MnPride2002
03-15-2013, 05:05 PM
Back2BackU- On the lower right of any person's post it says "Reply With Quote". If you click on it, it will pop up a reply box with that person's quote already in it. It's nifty, you should definitely try it.


What do you know? An old dog CAN learn a new trick, lol.

Osorojo
03-15-2013, 06:41 PM
But its NOT the NHL Hall of Fame. Calling it that implies that you have to have played or coached in the NHL to gain entry into the Hall. You don't. There are several players and coaches in the Hockey Hall of Fame who never played or coached in the NHL.

But I'm not a nitpicker, I don't care what you call it, I'm intelligent enough to know what you are talking about whether you use your made up name for it, or the recognized name for it, or a nickname for it. As long as the context is clear, it shouldn't be that tough.

Calling it that "implies" nothing. Using "NHL" as an adjective specifies which hockey hall of fame is being discussed. After all, there is a U.S. Hockey Hall of Fame, a Minnesota Hockey Hall of Fame, a University of Minnesota Hockey Hall of Fame. There must be at least a couple dozen hockey halls of fame in Minnesota, and by the sounds of previous posts on this thread some Minnesota hockey fans are convinced that hockey is all about their state, and perhaps even all about their township. I didn't want some zealot belaboring me with a list of local hockey heros on a plaque in their village square.