B1G post-season standings

okeefe4prez

okeefe4prez

Well-Known Member
Can we keep a running list of B1G teams' post-season records.

I know Ohio State and Iowa are both 3-0. Not sure about Purdue, when I ran their tournament through the google, it led me to a page that was more virus-laden than HawkeyeNation.

Wisconsin 0-1
Illinois 1-1
Minnesota 1-1
MSU 2-0
Michigan 2-0
Indiana 2-1

Not bad that the Hawks are up there at the top.
 












TwinCitiesHawk said:
6 tournament wins (BT and NIT) in 3 years vs. 0 tournament wins for Lick in the same amount of time! Yippee!
Click to expand...

Let's leave aside the BTT wins because according to the Alford-bashers those are irrelevant. Leaving those aside, the guy is 4-1 in post-season tournament play at Iowa (with his only loss coming I believe to an Oregon team that is in the Sweet 16 this year because they leveraged a great NIT run into a great NCAA run), which puts him at 80%. I haven't looked at the big name coaches such as Roy Williams, Calipari, Coach K, etc., but that .800 win percentage has to be among the elite. It's pretty remarkable.
 


okeefe4prez said:
Let's leave aside the BTT wins because according to the Alford-bashers those are irrelevant. Leaving those aside, the guy is 4-1 in post-season tournament play at Iowa (with his only loss coming I believe to an Oregon team that is in the Sweet 16 this year because they leveraged a great NIT run into a great NCAA run), which puts him at 80%. I haven't looked at the big name coaches such as Roy Williams, Calipari, Coach K, etc., but that .800 win percentage has to be among the elite. It's pretty remarkable.
Click to expand...

Not to mention Fran was able to win more NCAA games in his last 3 years at Siena than Alford could win in 7 years at Iowa. Remarkable indeed.
 


okeefe4prez said:
Let's leave aside the BTT wins because according to the Alford-bashers those are irrelevant. Leaving those aside, the guy is 4-1 in post-season tournament play at Iowa (with his only loss coming I believe to an Oregon team that is in the Sweet 16 this year because they leveraged a great NIT run into a great NCAA run), which puts him at 80%. I haven't looked at the big name coaches such as Roy Williams, Calipari, Coach K, etc., but that .800 win percentage has to be among the elite. It's pretty remarkable.
Click to expand...

We all know about your man-love for Steve, but no one is claiming the wins in the BTT are irrelevant. Most of us saner Hawkeye fans just think you win the Big Ten Championship by doing it in league play over the conference season. Not in one weekend like Alford believes.
 


MisterLucky said:
We all know about your man-love for Steve, but no one is claiming the wins in the BTT are irrelevant. Most of us saner Hawkeye fans just think you win the Big Ten Championship by doing it in league play over the conference season. Not in one weekend like Alford believes.
Click to expand...

Especially when you have to put so much effort into the conference tournament that you're team is spent by the time the NCAA tournament rolls around and you have to watch some team with an NCAA tournament history that rivals NW suddenly knock off your 3 seed conference tournament champ team.
 








okeefe4prez said:
Let's leave aside the BTT wins because according to the Alford-bashers those are irrelevant. Leaving those aside, the guy is 4-1 in post-season tournament play at Iowa (with his only loss coming I believe to an Oregon team that is in the Sweet 16 this year because they leveraged a great NIT run into a great NCAA run), which puts him at 80%. I haven't looked at the big name coaches such as Roy Williams, Calipari, Coach K, etc., but that .800 win percentage has to be among the elite. It's pretty remarkable.
Click to expand...

Good point about Oregon using last year's NIT as a springboard, O'Keefe. I was thinking, if we don't pull off the NIT championship this year, don't you think it's probably because we could have benefited more from a deep CBI tournament run last year to propel our NIT run this year, instead of being a weak NIT team last year and only playing a couple games before elimination? I remember I argued against the CBI last year, but maybe other posters were right. Maybe we could have used those extra CBI games and learning how to win last year. I was greedy and all about sneaking into the NIT no matter what.
 


SwirlinLingerie said:
Good point about Oregon using last year's NIT as a springboard, O'Keefe. I was thinking, if we don't pull off the NIT championship this year, don't you think it's probably because we could have benefited more from a deep CBI tournament run last year to propel our NIT run this year, instead of being a weak NIT team last year and only playing a couple games before elimination? I remember I argued against the CBI last year, but maybe other posters were right. Maybe we could have used those extra CBI games and learning how to win last year. I was greedy and all about sneaking into the NIT no matter what.
Click to expand...

Good thinking, I did not even consider that. Iowa could have paid to have all the games at home also, so yeah, a CBI championship could have locked down winning the NIT this year and then win the NCAA next year.
 


Maybe we could have played in, and won, both the CIT and the CBI Tournaments. After all, the more games, the better, right?
 


SwirlinLingerie said:
Good point about Oregon using last year's NIT as a springboard, O'Keefe. I was thinking, if we don't pull off the NIT championship this year, don't you think it's probably because we could have benefited more from a deep CBI tournament run last year to propel our NIT run this year, instead of being a weak NIT team last year and only playing a couple games before elimination? I remember I argued against the CBI last year, but maybe other posters were right. Maybe we could have used those extra CBI games and learning how to win last year. I was greedy and all about sneaking into the NIT no matter what.
Click to expand...

Well, while I like your thought process, I think the issue most people had last year was that they knew we were going to be a totally different ballclub this year. As you will recall there were a lot of uninformed posters constantly saying "WE R BACK" and stuff, but that based on Gesell and Woodbury coming in, plus Gatens was leaving. Winning the CBI last year would have been totally awesome, but in a scenario where the team construct is going to change drastically, you are better off going for the prestige and exposure the NIT brought. I don't think Uthoff or Jok would have signed up without that NIT appearance, so that has to be considered.

Yesterday, when I was poo pooing the NIT, I was pretty concerned about the comments about the team learning to win and stuff because I was thinking the team was going to really change in the offseason with Uthoff and Jok joining, which would mean the team would need to re-learn how to win. Now, I realize I was mistaken because Uthoff and Jok, while both will be all-B1G freshmen despite only playing in garbage time, won't really be needed much in order for the team to win because Marble will score 40+ a game and the team will shoot 100% from the FT line and about 50% from downtown every game next year.
 


MisterLucky said:
Maybe we could have played in, and won, both the CIT and the CBI Tournaments. After all, the more games, the better, right?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't work. We have limited banner space at Carver. Two new championship banners along with the rasslin' stuff and the retired jerseys and the rafters would have been an eyesore.
 


I'm pumped for next season already. They've followed the path I was hoping we could follow.

Year 1: Rough year, maybe an upset or two. (Check: Purdue)
Year 2: Be above .500 with a chance at NIT. (Check and NIT win)
Year 3: Comfortably make NIT and be on bubble for NCAA. (Check and check. 3 NIT wins and counting)
Year 4: Make the NCAA tournament and hopefully at least tie Alford's NCAA win total at Iowa. (Promising)
 


okeefe4prez said:
Well, while I like your thought process, I think the issue most people had last year was that they knew we were going to be a totally different ballclub this year. As you will recall there were a lot of uninformed posters constantly saying "WE R BACK" and stuff, but that based on Gesell and Woodbury coming in, plus Gatens was leaving. Winning the CBI last year would have been totally awesome, but in a scenario where the team construct is going to change drastically, you are better off going for the prestige and exposure the NIT brought. I don't think Uthoff or Jok would have signed up without that NIT appearance, so that has to be considered.

Yesterday, when I was poo pooing the NIT, I was pretty concerned about the comments about the team learning to win and stuff because I was thinking the team was going to really change in the offseason with Uthoff and Jok joining, which would mean the team would need to re-learn how to win. Now, I realize I was mistaken because Uthoff and Jok, while both will be all-B1G freshmen despite only playing in garbage time, won't really be needed much in order for the team to win because Marble will score 40+ a game and the team will shoot 100% from the FT line and about 50% from downtown every game next year.
Click to expand...

You think only 50% from downtown next year? I hear Oglesby usually makes 8 or 9 out of 10 during most scrimmages. Once he adjusts to the extra weight he put on this year (different getting used to it game situations vs. practice), I figure he'll be at 60% from three point land next year. That's conservative, because I think he still needs to prove it in games. And we know Jok will be above 50% so not sure why you think only 50% as a team.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts

Share this page






Top