The conference is going to prioritize making sure all teams play each other at least once, where possible. Michigan State and Indiana hadn't played yet, and we already have a game on the books with Indiana, so that's why our game isn't the first rescheduling priority.
I was told by the person selling tickets at Carver it will be rescheduled.
In the post game interview, Jan also made it sound like it’ll be rescheduled.
I would sure like to see how they squeeze it into Iowa and Indiana's schedules. I had thought maybe the 22nd, but the Iowa men have a home game that night. The only way I see it happening is to move Iowa's game at Rutgers from Thursday to Friday, then having Iowa play Indiana here on Wednesday the 23rd. That would give Iowa five days off from the 14th to the 20th, followed by 4 games in 8 days to end the regular season.
See my post above. The Iowa men have a home game on the 22nd. I can't see them moving it.
They could start the game at 8:30 or 9. The teams have had double-headers in the past. It's certainly not ideal, but probably better than trying to moving the Rutgers date.
Another option would be to switch home games for Iowa and Indiana between the 20th and 22nd. Just trying to think of all possibilities.
Oof that’s a rough tip time 😅 There won’t be as many fans as there could be there that’s for sure
Or they could play earlier in the old North Gym at the Field House, as the Iowa women occasionally did circa 1975.
We were projected as a 6 seed prior to yesterday's game. I think we need to go 4-1 to finish the season and advance to the BTT semi to get a 4 seed. We don't really have any great marquee wins against the field other than Nebraska and UCF. If UNI were to win the MVC that would help as it would get them in the field.
In the top 16 reveal, Michigan is at #5 (1st 2 seed), Indiana is at #8 (4th 2 seed).
It might depend in part on who we actually beat to finish 3-2. Maryland is probably ahead of us right now. If we beat them, that helps in our chance to jump them. Indiana is well above us right now, but if we sweep them, they drop an extra game or two, and Holmes isn't back, they could conceivably drop below a 4 seed.
It depends on how Indiana does and if other games are made up. With the games currently scheduled, Iowa would finish 15-3, Michigan 14-3, and Indiana could finish 13-3. There wouldn't be a tiebreaker in that scenario. Iowa would win outright. If other games are rescheduled and teams tie, I believe the first tiebreaker is record vs. the other tied teams. if those records are identical, it moves to a second tiebreaker.
IU has got to be clamoring to play Rutgers, especially with the benefit that Rutgers sucking has given to Maryland and OSU. With Rutgers unexpectedly cratering to form a clear bottom 4 (Ill, WI, RU and PSU), Maryland and OSU get to play those 4 teams a total of 6 times, while Iowa gets to play 4 games against the bottom 4. IU is scheduled for 5, but that includes the missing Rutgers game, which, if not scheduled, would leave them with the short end along with Iowa.
I agree with your overall point that IU would really want the Rutgers game rescheduled. But Maryland will only play those bottom teams 5 times, not 6; RUx2, PSUx2, and WIx1. Maryland's game @ Ill hasn't been rescheduled.
It also means all the averages are off for the Iowa women, since it says they have now played 14 conference games instead of 13. Maybe Kyle or Braydon can contact the Big Ten office to get it corrected.
Sounds like the score of Iowa Maryland last year, so maybe they just looked at the score and filed it without looking at the detailsAh, did Iowa beat Maryland 110 - 87?
Joe Touissant would solve a lot of our athleticism issues. I say suite him up for the Maryland game since the conference has already endorsed it.
Touissant will blend well with the three other 6-ft guards already on the team. Nobody will notice
