IU winning the 2016 regular season B1G Championship had a lot to do with who they played twice, and of the 8 one time games, who they got at home and who they had to play away
Early B10 Power Rankings.....wow
- Thread starter perryhawk
- Start date
IU winning the 2016 regular season B1G Championship had a lot to do with who they played twice, and of the 8 one time games, who they got at home and who they had to play away
The deal was when they went to this new scheduling, which they have already cheated a bit was that it was supposed to NOT be two teams back to back in two consecutive years. But we played Purdue twice the last two years. I don't see how that could have happened. But I can still come dang close. Based on the last three years of schedules, we should see:
Twice:
Ohio State
Northwestern
Minnesota
Wisconsin
And one of: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State
Home:
Purdue
Rutgers
Maryland
Michigan St? Unless they cheat again...and that causes somebody to play us one time TWICE in a row at our place.
Away:
Illinois
Nebraska
Two of: Michigan, Indiana, Penn State.
Last edited:
I would take that schedule, although Minny and NW are two of the likely teams in the top 5. Wisky will still be tough, but probably a step down from the past decade. OSU will have a couple of really good players (Tate and Bates-Diop), but is really thin otherwise. Don't want MSU twice.
I hate replying to my own thread but I have a feeling that last home/away will be Penn State. Regardless, as long as it isn't Michigan State I can't help but see at least twelve wins and I'll be predicting thirteen.
This team is young. It's better to be underrated to provide the players a little motivation. We should be thanking this guy.
Exactly. He acted like last years class did little, and we were up a creek without Jok. Did anybody watch the games last year when Pete was out? Yes he made first team all conf last year, but we'll be fine without him. Big year for Moss, Cook, and the freshmen. I'd slot Iowa between 4 and 6 in the BIG.
Excellent point. Who you play 2x and get for single game home and road games definitely factors in when determining how teams will finish next year. Curious to see who Iowa plays 2x next season. Dan nice work on projected breakdown of who it could be.
Not bad but IMO it could be anywhere from top to about 7, though I think if I had to pick I'd say 2 or 3, but it's awfully early yet.
You don't see it because you are a rabid Iowa fan that can speak intelligently about every player on the roster. But from an outside perspective a team that finished 10th in the conference in KenPom (#71 just ahead of #73 Ohio State) and lost their leading scorer is not going to rate highly by most random neutral observers, especially when there are no super highly rated freshmen or transfers coming in.
It is what it is. If you are an Iowa fan/coach/player it can motivate you. But if you are a basketball journalist that sees Iowa lost Jok and wasn't very good last season it's hard to get terribly excited about moving them up highly in preseason.
Michigan State deserves to be the preseason #1 in the Big Ten next season for obvious reasons. Beyond that, though, is a big jumble of teams that all have lots going for them as well as a question or two. Rutgers, Illinois, Ohio State, and Nebraska would seem to have the bottom 4 on lockdown. #2-#10 is the big tight grouping IMHO.
Personally I'd probably go MSU, Purdue, Michigan, Northwestern, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Maryland, Penn State, Indiana, Illinois, Ohio State, Nebraska, Rutgers.
I think it's clear MSU is on top.
After that, I've seen folks predicting any of the following group as the 2nd tier:
Purdue, Northwestern, Minnesota, Maryland, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Indiana
The problem is there are only so many spots for a "2nd tier" (or else the B1G is going to get like 10 teams into the dance). Some of those teams have more question marks than others, and none of them are "sure things".
People also expect Penn State to be at least decent.
So the question becomes how does that pack of teams finish. I tend to think they'll likely all be good enough to win on any given night. It will come down to scheduling, injuries, and who gets Valentine'd down the stretch.
Without knowing the schedules, I'd assign the chance that Iowa finishes in each of these positions:
2: 5%
3: 10%
4: 15%
5: 25%
6: 25%
7: 10%
8: 5%
9: 5%
I certainly think we're more likely to finish 5th or better than 6th or worse given the expected jumps we should see from 6 sophomores (and if only a few come through, we have options that help resolve the playing time challenges we're all expecting to see).
After that, I've seen folks predicting any of the following group as the 2nd tier:
Purdue, Northwestern, Minnesota, Maryland, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Indiana
The problem is there are only so many spots for a "2nd tier" (or else the B1G is going to get like 10 teams into the dance). Some of those teams have more question marks than others, and none of them are "sure things".
People also expect Penn State to be at least decent.
So the question becomes how does that pack of teams finish. I tend to think they'll likely all be good enough to win on any given night. It will come down to scheduling, injuries, and who gets Valentine'd down the stretch.
Without knowing the schedules, I'd assign the chance that Iowa finishes in each of these positions:
2: 5%
3: 10%
4: 15%
5: 25%
6: 25%
7: 10%
8: 5%
9: 5%
I certainly think we're more likely to finish 5th or better than 6th or worse given the expected jumps we should see from 6 sophomores (and if only a few come through, we have options that help resolve the playing time challenges we're all expecting to see).
We have to be good. Why? Because when you have good players as we have, and precious minutes to distribute, they will be hungry.Thanks for the link. It's night and day between a CBS talking head and Sherman Dillard. And I think I'll believe Dillard.
Others can call it black and gold glasses...or bias or whatever...but when a team returns all but one contributing player, including two All Big Ten Freshmen, the Big Ten's 6th Man from last year........I don't care if we lose an All Big Ten 1st Teamer...nobody should have us DROPPING spots in the league! The rest of the league, including Michigan, have lost more, finished lower, recruited no better, and in some cases got rid of a coach!!!!
Tenth my butt...not even close unless Bohannon gets seriously injured.
The only caveat is that you aren't accounting for what teams are adding to the mix. It isn't just what you lose (or don't lose), it's what you add. Michigan (as I'm obviously familiar) is a team that is rightly getting knocked for having lost Derrick Walton and DJ Wilson and Zak Irvin. But just leaving things at that kind of ignores adding in transfers Jaaron Simmons and Charles Matthews that should both be in the mix for all conference honors this season as well as adding in some impactful freshmen and another that redshirted last season.
You can find similar additions for other teams.
And while as an Iowa fan it's right to point out they tied for 5th in the conference last season, I don't think any neutral person or computer thinks they were the 5th best team in the conference last season. KenPom's rank of 10th best last season is more in line with the quality of their season overall IMHO.
So while I think Iowa has a reasonable shot at ending up in the 5th-7th range in the Big Ten when it's all said and done, I think you can say that about a number of teams. Just remember, gotta talk about what every school adds in and not just what they lose and with 21 kids from the Rivals top 150 and a number of transfers and kids that redshirted being added in to the conference, that's a lot of talent to account for that you miss out by just looking at who lost what.
I don't care what any computer or "neutral" person says. We did tie for fifth. That's why the games are played. And as to the rankings thing out of high school, I know we have had our disagreements in the past about how important they are. You just keep on looking at paper and I'll just keep on looking at results.
Flip Michigan and Iowa in your ranking, and I think you are pretty close. With the players Michigan lost, UM better have some great new players, or there is no way they will finish third. I guess you demonstrate pretty well what you are saying about Iowa fans, only you are looking through Maize and Blue glasses.
E
Who does that for Michigan?
Every team needs a guy to do the garbage work defensively and set the tone. Even the warriors need someone like Green.
Who does that for Michigan?
Most people don't realize just how great transfers Simmons and Matthews are likely to be in Ann Arbor. Simmons is a big time point guard and Matthews is a former high end recruit from Kentucky that will have had almost a year and a half practicing in Ann Arbor and was often the best player on the court in scrimmages for Michigan last year. Add in a very good redshirting center and several very good freshmen and Michigan does add some great new players.
Tied for 5th in the standings, but nobody thinks they were the 5th best team. I mean they certainly weren't one of the 7 teams the conference put into the NCAA tournament and I don't recall anybody on selection Sunday claiming they deserved to be in.
In unbalanced conference schedules, conference standings (especially in big tie situations) is not a good way to determine how good teams are overall if you want to be logical about it.
Also, I'm not sure what paper I'm looking at and what results you are looking at.
Won't be at all surprised if Iowa is in top 3 in B1G this year and next. The recruits we got this year are Big ready and will produce this year along with our 2 returning all big ten freshman and big ten 6th man ... None of those players will be our best player this year either, that will be our starting 2 guard, well maybe ?
"but nobody thinks they were the 5th best team."
I don't know.....Hawkeyes beat Wisconsin at Wisconsin. They beat Maryland on the road. They handed Purdue one of their league losses. Last but not least they beat Michigan in Iowa City. Those teams and their fans might give some thought to Iowa being pretty decent. If they just disregard the Hawkeyes coming in to this year I think that speaks more to arrogance than common sense.
Simmons improved on his 4 turnovers a game the last two seasons he played?
I'm actually kind of rooting for Matthews after he admitted how lazy he was about working on his game, and bombing at Kentucky.
As to the NCAA invite, it wasn't the Big Ten conference that kept us out, but the nonconference from when we struggled as a VERY young team. Keep hanging your hat on that.
I never liked you, but you used to be fairly smart. Did you have a stroke or something?
Iowa sucked the first 10 games of the season, and their rankings never recovered. Fran did a pretty remarkable job of bringing the young team along, as the year progressed. For the last 10 games of the season, Iowa was a very dangerous team, capable of beating anyone in the B1G. The original writer seems to have looked right past that.
This is why it is fun to be a college fan, unless you root for Rutgers... Iowa and UM have coaches who win without cheating, and play student athletes. Sounds like UM will be better than I expected this year, but I am pretty sure Iowa will also surprise if our PG stays healthy.
+1. The Michigan fan is focusing entirely on new guys, ignoring the guys they have to replace. The question I have is will they even be as good as last year? That's where his paper eyeing methods may falter, whereas we have quite the actual physical evidence of improvement. And that includes while Jok was out for two games and playing wounded in several others.
I'm not saying that Michigan can't be a very good team. But I think it is tantamount to denial to presume they will be better than the Hawkeyes. I can't hardly handle waiting for this upcoming season.
It may just be a little too much to believe, but according to the PTL commissioner, Nunge and Garza are our two best bigs, now! Imagine that when we have guys like Cook, Kriener, etc.
Never have met him but am also exposed to his posts in another community, I tend to like him. No question that there is blue blood in his veins, but he is respectful and I do learn from him, whether he draws the right conclusion or not.
To say nobody takes in a lot of people. That in itself is an ignorant statement.
I respect Beilein as a coach but their fans IMO are Sparty wannabes.
I respect Beilein as a coach but their fans IMO are Sparty wannabes.
Sorry but posting on HR this ...
Tied for 5th in the standings, but nobody thinks they were the 5th best team.
is not respectful. Our program under Fran is trying to get to a high level in the B1G...whether we do or not..I'm getting tired of other school posters come on here & we get told what? ... this.
Just like no one considers us to have been anywhere near 3rd best the previous year, 4th best the year before, and top half the year before that.
The thing is... our record seems to always overachieve compared to outside expectations, so we should probably be used to hearing these things, although you would think that for the rest of the time Fran is here people would start realizing they ought to be giving him the benefit of the doubt.
Thank you Dan. Its not about what you look like. Take a look at the teams overall progress since Frans arrived. Steady upward movement, with a little step back last year with four freshmen starting most of the year. I'd agree that Iowa's incoming bigs may not be top 50 guys, (as the next couple of years recruits are), but I'll be shocked if they don't have an impact this year. Garza was defintely getting some solid attention, and played high level high school ball, and Nunge is a sleeper extrordinare, if you can call the runner up for player of the year in Indiana such a thing. I'd be willing to bet that if Indiana had been after his services from early on, Jack would have been a top 100 recruit, easily. I'd slot the Hawks this year somewhere in a solid pack from 3rd to 6th this year, and next year I think were right there fighting for that BIG title.
I see you point Bob. I should have said civil instead of respectful in this case.
Unfortunately, I tend to ignore arguments like block's in this instance because for years similar comments ( not always civil) were make about Wisconsin basketball.
OH I hated Bo Ryan.. I also have never gone to another school site to say so. ...but I respected his success at Wisconsin - remarkable.
Considering how young we were and as previously pointed out..we were really not playing well in non-conference....the fact this team was able to pull itself up to finish 10-8 & tied for 5th was pretty good...and the late wins at your place..we destroyed Mary there...ya we may have not made the NCAA..but it was our November&earlyDec and one stupid loss in the BTT that was the cause..
its pretty hard to ignore on one hand but then learn something on the other.
My clock doesnt work that way.
No offense, but when you resort to personal attacks you've basically given up.
As for Simmons and his turnovers, did you know that he and Bohannon had near identical TO rates last season (as in turnovers per possession used)?
Everybody agrees Iowa was decent last season. I don't know why pointing out that neither computers nor pollsters nor NCAA tourney selection committees feeling Iowa was not the 5th best team in the conference is "disregarding" them. But it's equally fair to say Iowa tied for 8th in the conference as it is for 5th. Because if you want to point out some individual games that Iowa won last year, you need to do the same for every other team.
I'm not trying to offend Iowa in this thread, just pointing out that #2 to #10 in the conference seems to be one big log jam heading into next season and it's hard to get too much personal offense in any of those slots.
here's one for you..go the F away...maybe you can go play footsy with your big brothers in the green/white.
Did you know that JBo played in the B1G last year and helped beat your ass in OT? How wonderful was that?....didnt you disappear about that time?
OK, let me clarify. Iowa was in a 4 way tie for 5th-8th in conference play last season which is slightly roughly 60% of their season as a total. OOC and postseason games also get factored into the overall assessment of how good each team was. We can't just pretend those things didn't happen. I'm quite consistent in my thinking on this over the years. I never pretended like Michigan was the best team in the Big Ten in 2012 when they were part of a 3 way tie for the conference title with MSU and OSU. They tied for 1st but that doesn't mean they were better than the other schools they tied with because those schools had better overall seasons.
KenPom felt Iowa was overall the 10th best team in the conference last season, other computer systems like Sagarin were similar.
I actually like Iowa's young talent. I feel their team will be better than last season overall despite the loss of their best player. But that still lands them in a big jumble with 9 other teams IMHO. I could see them realistically slotting anywhere from 4th to 9th next season depending on how schedules and injuries shake out.
Last edited:
I enjoy the intelligent discussion that happens over here and I disappeared nowhere after that game and I respectfully kept my complaints over the officiating away from this forum.
Sorry pal, not leaving just because you don't like rational discussion. I've been posting on this board long before you showed up and hope to long after you have gone.
Perhaps Iowa's conference standing will turn out to overachieve on an annual basis compared to their overall season and tourney success. It is certainly possible.
the games we won were pointed out to you because of this
Tied for 5th in the standings, but nobody thinks they were the 5th best team.
if you dont get how offensive that is...than you are a little guy in his own little world...now go away.
Latest posts
-
Players file lawsuit against state for privacy rights violations
- Latest: WaterlooChazz
-
-
-
-