Seriously?!?!?!?! you lose to an unranked KSU Team by DOUBLE DIGITS on the road and you only go down 2 places?!?!?! Okkkkkk..
http://collegebasketball.ap.org/poll
http://collegebasketball.ap.org/poll
AP Poll
- Thread starter TheEnigma80
- Start date
I have no problem with it. OK has only lost 3 times. We're the highest ranked 4 loss team. Also, we're in danger of losing to unranked IU now, so let's not be too hurt and just take care of business.
Because the media loves Buddy. When you have what many consider to be the best bball player in the nation, its difficult to drop the team much further down the list
It would be a great accomplishment to have a #1 ranking. This is our best chance in how many years. Problem is Villanova. Probably won't lose any more games, so they will keep that top ranking.
11 first place votes is pretty damn cool.
#1 is always cool, but like the football team, now we have the attention of everyone in the country and first place in the Big Ten. Just need win at least 6 of next 7 to stay in top 2 in conference and consideration for #1 seed in tournament. Then do our talking on the 94' play area over a 6 game span. Even with all the parity in college basketball, we need to make Sweet 16 to make this season legitimate in eyes of the rest of the country. A loss in the first two rounds of the NCAA would be a major black eye on the perception of Iowa. I think we need to remember that Iowa has played on national TV only a couple times this year and two of those were in December if I remember correctly. Maryland game was national, but we lost so that is the perception that most people will remember. Most of our games have been on B1G network.
Note, this may not seem like I am setting the bar high enough or am discounting a top 5 ranking, but given the parity in the top 10-15 teams, once you get to second weekend of tournament, anything will be possible. Not at all, this team is good!!
Note, this may not seem like I am setting the bar high enough or am discounting a top 5 ranking, but given the parity in the top 10-15 teams, once you get to second weekend of tournament, anything will be possible. Not at all, this team is good!!
I think the Licks got 11 votes for 11th place in conference one year. Does that count as a ranking since we weren't last?
I could swear that I read right here on HR how lowly ole Iowa has no national recognition...
This is a really fun group to watch on the court. How about we enjoy that for a second or so before issuing edicts about how they must perform in the tourney a month down the road?
Go Hawks !
Based on our points in the poll our average ranking from each voter is 3.37. I think usually a team's average is a little less than their ranking (since teams below 25 take some of the points too). 1471 poll points will almost always get you ranked on the top 3.
Happy days period, as the Hawkeyes are ranked above a whole bunch of perennial powers: Kansas, Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, Michigan State, Louisville, Connecticut, Arizona, and Gonzaga....not to mention UCLA!
I have more of a problem with the coaches Poll, not necessarily being ranked #5 (which is whatever) but which coach voted Iowa as #10 or lower in the nation. At this point it doesn't really matter anyway, plenty of time to shake itself out
http://collegepolltracker.com/basketball/team/ui2/2015
Voters in the south and Indiana (hmmm) seem to like us. Dicky Vitale not yet a believer.
Voters in the south and Indiana (hmmm) seem to like us. Dicky Vitale not yet a believer.
Kind'a sick of hearing this. Polls are never meaningless...they are a sense of pride for the fan base and many times directly impact whether our games are televised nationally. If they were meaningless, why would they update and publish them every week?
Bottom line, every one of us would rather Iowa be ranked than unranked...that alone proves they're not meaningless.
Polls are never meaningless. How did the bluebloods become bluebloods, by getting the kind of media attention that elite athletes (recruits) TV executives and officials subconsciously associate the institution with victory.
Like seeing the institution's name in the scrolling top twenty at the top of the ESPN banner; the sports news cover the ranked teams more and usually better.
The difference between fourth and ninth isn't particularlysignificant but a top ten presence is enormously important.
Like seeing the institution's name in the scrolling top twenty at the top of the ESPN banner; the sports news cover the ranked teams more and usually better.
The difference between fourth and ninth isn't particularlysignificant but a top ten presence is enormously important.
Polls are awesome for fans as well as for the national attention...which breeds recruiting dividends in future classes.
Polls are meaningless to the current team and their actual ability to make (and win) the Final Four.
Two different arguments...both sides are accurate.
Polls are meaningless to the current team and their actual ability to make (and win) the Final Four.
Two different arguments...both sides are accurate.
Get to be #1 the old fashion way; earned by running the gauntlet of the NCAA tournament. Now a #1 rating is just something to brag about as fans. Often this year, it has only lasted till the next game.
In another month, polls will be a lot more meaningful. With more than a month to go in the season, whether we are #3 or #5 or whatever might matter to some fans, like you, but it doesn't have much other meaning. Right now, a really high ranking, especially if you become #1, just puts a target on your team and tends to raise expectations for fair weather fans to an unrealistic level.
Heck, just having 11 scholarship players would have been neat. Or just 11 players total. I think 3 of Iowa's current walkons would have been starters in Lick's final year. My gosh how bad was he?
the last time IA was ranked # 1 was in Dr. Tom's 1st season went 18-0 to start the season, this after the majority of the publications predicted IA to finish 9th in a 10 team league.
LoHaus was told by Ravelling that he could either sit on the bench or leave as he did not fit into his plans. Dr. Tom saw him shooting 3 pointer in practice and made him his version of Uthoff and Woodbury rather than finishing his career on the bench ended up a 2nd round NBA pick of the Boston Celtic.
BJ was coming off a freshmen year where he avg'd 2.8 ppg it was Dr. Tom thar developed him to a NBA pick
Jerry Wright developed under Dr. Tom as did Horton, Marble was the only real known quantity when Dr. Tom took over. Dr. Tom also brought in Street, Earle a NBA Pick, Bullard and Bowen both NBA picks. this is coach that some of you wanted run off because he did not win enough.
these were the coaches and teams he had to beat to be as successful as some/most wanted.
Knight of Indiana
Keady of Purdue
Heathcote of MSU
Henson of Illinois
Freider of Michigan the team with the best players could buy
Bennett of Wisconsin
the other I for get and back then they played each other TWICE as they played 18 games with a total of 10 teams.
Davis was run off as these changes were being made.
Painter for Keady @Purdue 95
Knight was leaving
Izzo replaced Heath cote
Bo for Bennett
Henson left
this was a time where Davis could have stepped in as the top dog in the BT.
LoHaus was told by Ravelling that he could either sit on the bench or leave as he did not fit into his plans. Dr. Tom saw him shooting 3 pointer in practice and made him his version of Uthoff and Woodbury rather than finishing his career on the bench ended up a 2nd round NBA pick of the Boston Celtic.
BJ was coming off a freshmen year where he avg'd 2.8 ppg it was Dr. Tom thar developed him to a NBA pick
Jerry Wright developed under Dr. Tom as did Horton, Marble was the only real known quantity when Dr. Tom took over. Dr. Tom also brought in Street, Earle a NBA Pick, Bullard and Bowen both NBA picks. this is coach that some of you wanted run off because he did not win enough.
these were the coaches and teams he had to beat to be as successful as some/most wanted.
Knight of Indiana
Keady of Purdue
Heathcote of MSU
Henson of Illinois
Freider of Michigan the team with the best players could buy
Bennett of Wisconsin
the other I for get and back then they played each other TWICE as they played 18 games with a total of 10 teams.
Davis was run off as these changes were being made.
Painter for Keady @Purdue 95
Knight was leaving
Izzo replaced Heath cote
Bo for Bennett
Henson left
this was a time where Davis could have stepped in as the top dog in the BT.
If you're saying Dr. Tom wasn't given a chance, well it was more than ten years from the time of his elite 8 team with Marble, BJ, Horton, Lohaus, and Gamble until he was let go. Dr. Tom had some good years, he had some bad years too. Not much of a recruiter.
I feel it's a sign of disrespect to move Iowa down 5-6 spots for losing a close game on the road to a T10 opponent, while moving OK down only 1-2 spots for losing on the road to a bad/unranked opponent.
All we want as Iowa/B1G fans is for our program/conference to be given the respect it's earned.
Let's face it, when discrepancies like this happen, it proves that many of those voting are not well educated about the programs who weren't hyped in the pre-season...(Iowa)...and refuse to do their research. That, and perhaps they are much more willing to give the presumed PoY's team the benefit of the doubt.
I'm not doubting there's some bias, but cmon. Iowa's the top rated 4 loss team, and last week was the top rated 3 loss team.
If only Dr. Tom could have added Raveling to his staff as the recruiter. That would have been an amazing partnership - each providing that at which he excels and neither expected to do what he cannot (or will not, in the case of Tom Davis).
You seem to be critical of the decision to let Tom Davis go.
Dr. Tom was a good guy, but it was definitely time for Iowa to move on. You mentioned that the last time Iowa was ranked #1 was his first season. Coach Davis's inaugural season with Iowa basically telegraphed what his entire 12 years here would become. He certainly was able to coach the players Raveling had gathered to much more success.
But let's be honest here: The talent on that Iowa team was the best in the nation, hands down. They absolutely should have won the national championship. The reason they didn't was Tom Davis's coaching style.
Here are some things that you could always expect during Coach Davis's tenure:
1) The platoon-style personnel changes, which frequently put "hot" shooters on the bench.
2) While I generally liked the full-court pressure, Coach Davis used it ALWAYS. It didn't matter if Illinois or Michigan or whoever had burned us for an easy layup 10 times in a row, he stayed with it. This refusal to back off when it obviously wasn't working cost Iowa many games.
3) Above all else, a steadfast refusal to defend against 3-point shots, even if No Name State has been dropping them in all game.
4) Someone mentioned the recruiting, that was definitely an issue.
I think Dr. Tom was a much better coach than Raveling, but we reached the pinnacle of his potential during his first year, and Iowa would never get close to that level again with him at the helm.
It was time for a change.
Last edited:
True. On the other hand -- I'm sure I'll be vehemently corrected if I'm wrong -- Iowa has no more currently ranked teams on its schedule, while Oklahoma has three, ISU has four, etc. This is a mixed blessing; it makes it more likely the Hawks will win out, but it will have the effect of weakening the Iowa RPI a bit.
IMHO, the biggest thing Iowa has going for it in terms of seeding is that the Hawks so far have no really bad losses. Unlike ISU (UNI) and Oklahoma (K-State) and most other teams.
Iowa gets a #1 seed if they win the B1G outright. they can share the title or finish 2nd and still sneak into a #1 seed with a very strong showing in the BTT. The biggest thing Iowa has going for it is the fact that they are pretty clearly one of the best 4 teams in the country right now...right now. obviously this could all change. They've earned the benefit of the doubt at this point. it's time for them to step-up and continue to confirm what all the metrics show.
Iowa started the season ranked 10th in the country. Actually, I remember expectations being high. Ah, revisionist history.
Either rankings are valid or they are not. Playing both sides of the avenue has long been the LC preferred method, but honestly it gets old reading one post that he thinks rankings are worthless and the other where rankings are the end all to be all.
Senility for LC, I'm guessing.
What's his point? Weakened RPI or not if Iowa wins out they are the #1 seed, probably the overall #1.
My point is that they are in a good position, compared to other teams, to win out and thus be the #1 seed. My secondary point is that a loss is likely to hurt them more than a loss would hurt some other teams.
There is a chance that Iowa could win the Big 10 and not get a one seed. If KU and OU both finish strong and tie for the championship, say they only lose 1 game each, they will have both have a much better resume than Iowa as far as RPI goes because they have several games remaining against top 25 and top 50 RPI teams while right now I don't think Iowa has any remaining games against teams in the RPI top 50. Indiana is supposed to be their toughest game left and they are at 53 right now in the RPI.
