Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

.

knightxc said:
if that was true then they would also be the best conference overall.....because the metric doesn't just take the top 3 teams from a conference....i know logic is hard
Click to expand...

Logic must be hard, because you aren’t demonstrating much of it here. The Big Ten’s best teams are better than the Big XII’s best teams (according to Kenpom). The Big Ten’s worst teams are better than the Big XII’s worst teams (according to Kenpom). So how might the Big XII be the better overall conference? Maybe...the Big XII’s middle-of-the-pack teams are much better than the Big Ten’s middle-of-the-pack teams? Or is that too much logic for you?
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: JP4CY
benjimill said:
Logic must be hard, because you aren’t demonstrating much of it here. The Big Ten’s best teams are better than the Big XII’s best teams (according to Kenpom). The Big Ten’s worst teams are better than the Big XII’s worst teams (according to Kenpom). So how might the Big XII be the better overall conference? Maybe...the Big XII’s middle-of-the-pack teams are much better than the Big Ten’s middle-of-the-pack teams? Or is that too much logic for you?
Click to expand...
so when you say top to bottom, you only mean the top and the bottom? also i do believe Texas Tech just beat Michigan and Michigan State.
 
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: JP4CY and GTO
benjimill said:
Logic must be hard, because you aren’t demonstrating much of it here. The Big Ten’s best teams are better than the Big XII’s best teams (according to Kenpom). The Big Ten’s worst teams are better than the Big XII’s worst teams (according to Kenpom). So how might the Big XII be the better overall conference? Maybe...the Big XII’s middle-of-the-pack teams are much better than the Big Ten’s middle-of-the-pack teams? Or is that too much logic for you?
Click to expand...

I can't believe I'm doing this...just by simple average KenPom literally says Big 12 is better top to bottom than Big 12 (according to KenPom which is what is being discussed). I mean do you seriously not know how averages work? Has the education system failed you or do you try to be this dumb?

Big 12:
5
15
17
20
25
32
33
40
83
95
Average (you add up and divide by # of teams): 36.5

Big Ten:
3
6
9
16
24
37
42
44
46
47
52
74
78
84
Average (again that's the sum divided by number of teams): 40.1

So the average Big 12 team is 36th or 37th in KenPom, the average Big Ten team is worse, 40th.

I hope you are trolling us and not actually this stupid. Either way pretty sad existence.
 
  • Winner
  • Funny
Reactions: TheJackWePack5, Cyclone27inQC and knightxc
HFCS said:
I can't believe I'm doing this...just by simple average KenPom literally says Big 12 is better top to bottom than Big 12 (according to KenPom which is what is being discussed). I mean do you seriously not know how averages work? Has the education system failed you or do you try to be this dumb?

Big 12:
5
15
17
20
25
32
33
40
83
95
Average (you add up and divide by # of teams): 36.5

Big Ten:
3
6
9
16
24
37
42
44
46
47
52
74
78
84
Average (again that's the sum divided by number of teams): 40.1

So the average Big 12 team is 36th or 37th in KenPom, the average Big Ten team is worse, 40th.

I hope you are trolling us and not actually this stupid. Either way pretty sad existence.
Click to expand...

The Big Ten is better at the top. The Big Ten is better at the bottom. Therefore, from the top - to the bottom - the Big Ten is better.
 
  • Dumb
  • Creative
  • Funny
Reactions: JP4CY, CloneGuy8 and knightxc
benjimill said:
The Big Ten is better at the top. The Big Ten is better at the bottom. Therefore, from the top - to the bottom - the Big Ten is better.
Click to expand...

Again, I hope you're trolling.

To dissect your stupidity you could say at the top AND the bottom the Big Ten is ranked higher in KenPom. Top-to-bottom you are off the charts wrong, the average is the measure of top to bottom.

Also at this point it's useless to say the Big Ten is better at the top than Texas Tech by any metric, they completely annihilated the top of your conference on neutral courts.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: GTO and knightxc
benjimill said:
The Big Ten is better at the top. The Big Ten is better at the bottom. Therefore, from the top - to the bottom - the Big Ten is better.
Click to expand...

How are you this dumb? You said the dumbest thing I’ve seen in ISR in a very long time and now you’re doubling and tripling down on it like it’s some sort of dinner for schmucks competition.
 
  • Winner
  • Funny
Reactions: Cyclonesrule91, Joel1, GTO and 2 others
Bigman38 said:
How are you this dumb? You said the dumbest thing I’ve seen in ISR in a very long time and now you’re doubling and tripling down on it like it’s some sort of dinner for schmucks competition.
Click to expand...

I'm leaning towards he actually is this dumb.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Bigman38
ArgentCy said:
The Big X had four or 5 good teams but the bottom was awful.. no one came close to giving the Michigan schools a game in the conf tourny. Meanwhile the last team to beat the potential National Champs was the last place team in the Big 12.
Click to expand...
Or it means conference tournaments mean basically nothing. Minn beat Purdue. It meant nothing. Same as WV beating Tech.
 
benjimill said:
More verification you don’t know how to read. I said the Big Ten is the best conference top to bottom. That is true. I never said the Big Ten is the best overall conference.
Click to expand...
benjimill said:
Logic must be hard, because you aren’t demonstrating much of it here. The Big Ten’s best teams are better than the Big XII’s best teams (according to Kenpom). The Big Ten’s worst teams are better than the Big XII’s worst teams (according to Kenpom). So how might the Big XII be the better overall conference? Maybe...the Big XII’s middle-of-the-pack teams are much better than the Big Ten’s middle-of-the-pack teams? Or is that too much logic for you?
Click to expand...
benjimill said:
The Big Ten is better at the top. The Big Ten is better at the bottom. Therefore, from the top - to the bottom - the Big Ten is better.
Click to expand...
giphy.gif

200w.gif

200w.gif
 
  • Funny
Reactions: Joel1, GTO and knightxc
benjimill said:
The Big Ten is better at the top. The Big Ten is better at the bottom. Therefore, from the top - to the bottom - the Big Ten is better.
Click to expand...
And yet, the Big 12 regular season co-champ just beat two of the three best Big 10 teams in the last 10 or 11 days? So the top of the Big 10 is better?
 
Mick Mars said:
And yet, the Big 12 regular season co-champ just beat two of the three best Big 10 teams in the last 10 or 11 days? So the top of the Big 10 is better?
Click to expand...
Watch out, you'll be called a TT Cyclone because other Iowa fans aren't calling out Benji's stupidity.
 
Amazing Hawkeyes w/ their Big 10 revenue sharing??
(Mich., Mich St, Penn St FB subsidizing IOWA'S athletic budget)

ZERO regular season conference titles
ZERO regular season conference tourney titles,

for TEN STRAIGHT YEARS of Gary Barta (APPROXIMATELY 2006-2016??)

22 SPORTS

44 CONFERENCE TITLE chances / SEASON (Regular Season + TOURNEY)

440 total conference title chances
(10 seasons; Regular + TOURNEY)

IOWA?

0-440

LAST IN THE BIG 10~~

So shut up already

U of Iowa's bloated budget and your lame AD has produced JACK SQUAT
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: heitclone, WalkingCY, CyTwins and 4 others
AttackOfTheClones said:
Yes...Iowa milked that ISU win for weeks. The pollsters gave it a lot of weight

ISU was without FOUR players with starting experience vs Iowa
Young
Wiggington
Lard
Talley

But that doesn't matter with typical closed-minded Hawk fans living in their bubble, who can't even name more than 2 starters on their own teams' roster
Click to expand...

Hey man, I'll take the more successful season and the win. You do you.
 
  • Optimistic
  • Informative
Reactions: dexterhawk and Bigman38
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back