Solomon shut down Cook the year prior. He's a good player. Definitely a role player but he's good. Lard has been bad all year.
Wigginton was 6 man of the year in the B12. He's good but took forever to play well after his injury.
Solomon shut down Cook the year prior. He's a good player. Definitely a role player but he's good. Lard has been bad all year.
Wigginton was 6 man of the year in the B12. He's good but took forever to play well after his injury.
I used ISU as an example. They were able to get a quality P5 coach in Johnny Orr to come to their (at the time) crap basketball program. They have consistently brought in much better athletes. There is NO reason Iowa can’t do the same or better.
Why do you insist I have a coach in mind? Why should I have to? I’m not the AD. Even if I did...you and others would just say there is no way that coach would come to Iowa. But how do we know a successful coach wouldn’t come to Iowa? Then again, if you never even bother to try......
I can tell you exactly what the root underlying issue is: the current administration at the University of Iowa DOES NOT CARE about winning. They are not going to get a coach who is going to go out and get players who may be marginal academically. They won’t get someone who might bend the rules a little (not that a coach would have to do either to win). The administration knows the money will roll in no matter what. As long as things don’t get so bad the fans quit coming (Lickliter), they are perfectly content with “ok” when it comes to sports. That is why Barta hands out ridiculous contract extensions that the President signs off on.
Last edited:
So in other words changing coaches will not matter because the underlying issues will be the same. That’s validating the rinse and repeat not moving forward.
It’s all part of the overall picture.
Changing coaches CAN produce better results and recruits. But you have to have an AD and president willing to pull the trigger when the existing coach isn’t doing much better than “average”.
Do not act like Iowa played a behemoth of a non-conference schedule. ISU was the only formidable team on the non-conference schedule. Is this the same 11-0 Iowa team that almost lost at home to a 10-20 Bryant who outplayed Iowa in the 2nd half?
Unfortunately, its a fools errand hoping we get paired well in a tourney in order to have a chance to win. Either the Hawks play really well for a few games, and they could beat almost anyone, or they play poorly, and they'll lose to anyone they get matched against. It's really about how the Hawks play, and its hard to be optimistic at this point.
Frankly, in todays climate, I think Iowa would be one of those schools in a bunch of trouble with these FBI wire probes if we had a coach like Raveling today. Given his ties to the the shoe companies and AAU, I'd bet George would be right in the middle of the mess we're seeing today. No I'm not saying that any of those players took money, I'm saying that if he had those ties today, he would have Iowa in the middle of that mess. Your thoughts......
Not many of those teams get into the NCAA tournament, but fingers crossed.
The scuttle before the PAC 12 Tournament was they were a one bid league- with Washington as their only invitee to the NCAA Tournament. Oregon's muddling through a depleted and soft PAC12 Tournament does not make them a good victory for Iowa.
Disagree if you want,that is your prerogative but beating a down 10-8 in conference Oregon team does not make for a quality win. After all, a 17-14 overall Utah team place 3rd at 11-7 in conference. How about the win over a 6-12 UConn in the AAC, is that a good win? It is a fact that the PAC 12 was considered a one bid league. It is a fact that Oregon had a rebuilding year for them under Dana Altman.
Last edited:
If Michigan can be MSU we will have beaten the champs from the Pac 12, Big 12 and Big 10 by an average of 12+ points per game...
Talented teams do not have to win their conference tournament to get into the NCAA Tournament. Good coach fully agree. Oregon does not make the NCAAs if they do not win the PAC 12 Tournament, fact!!! NIT does not equal talented. By the way, NET 51 means they are a quad 2 win for Iowa on a neutral court.
Similar threads
