ESPN picks Iowa #25 in early pre-seaon poll

[nationalchamps]

He misjudged just how good this year's team would be. The scheduling wasn't stupid, because we weren't really supposed to be fighting for an NCAA bid this year. It was a young team that was going to experience a lot of growing pains. Or at least that was the prevailing theory before the season. The team exceeded expectations and the schedule came back to bite them because of it. I'm sure he'd do it again with a similar team. It won't be so weak next year.

Spot on. I expect to see some mid-majors and a possible top 20 team coming to Carver next year. A little birdie told me a home and home with UCLA is being tossed around, but guess where the hang up is? JD, let me know if you've heard anything on this front.

 

[activebadger]

ESPN

Eat your heart out WI.

HAHAHA

I'll save the heart eating for the END of the season when Wisconsin will be in the Top 4, in the Top 25 AND in the NCAA tournament.

And there's about a million Top 25's out there with Wisconsin as high as 10 and most in the Top 20. Gary Parish of CBS (the network that covers the NCAA tournament) has Wisconsin as #13.

But it doesn't matter. All that matters is the end of the season. I'll keep these Jon Miller predictions and come back the 2nd week of March.

 

[Section136]

HAHAHA

I'll save the heart eating for the END of the season when Wisconsin will be in the Top 4, in the Top 25 AND in the NCAA tournament.

And there's about a million Top 25's out there with Wisconsin as high as 10 and most in the Top 20. Gary Parish of CBS (the network that covers the NCAA tournament) has Wisconsin as #13.

But it doesn't matter. All that matters is the end of the season. I'll keep these Jon Miller predictions and come back the 2nd week of March.

Your boner for Jon is very creepy.

 

[hawkfan33]

HAHAHA

I'll save the heart eating for the END of the season when Wisconsin will be in the Top 4, in the Top 25 AND in the NCAA tournament.

And there's about a million Top 25's out there with Wisconsin as high as 10 and most in the Top 20. Gary Parish of CBS (the network that covers the NCAA tournament) has Wisconsin as #13.

But it doesn't matter. All that matters is the end of the season. I'll keep these Jon Miller predictions and come back the 2nd week of March.

I picture AB as a very ******** version of John Nash. Sitting in a room with print outs from various message boards taped all over. Trying to figure out why everyone is out to troll him all the time.

 

[Sparky]

Oh how much I would love to see the Hawks ranked before the clowns.

 

[JHHawk]

It took a huge 20 point comeback to beat Gardner-Webb at home, we barely beat Central Michigan here. People love to overlook this point and act like playing teams 100 spots better in the RPI would be automatic wins. We play a tougher schedule, even marginally tougher, there's a good chance we drop a game or two more.

Exactly. And in the summer,it is hard to predict exactly how these teams are going to shake out in 6 months. Some are worse than expected. Va.Tech ended up with a horrible RPI, and they blew us out. So, did Fran think they would be better than they ended up? Probably. Not an exact science.

 

[WindsorHawk]

He did a very poor job of it last season. He has said he'd do it again, but that is the arrogance of a coach speaking. All coaches are arrogant, it only gets annoying when they start losing. Take KF, when Iowa was winning, we loved how Iowa beat teams through execution and thought Kirk was pretty funny when talking about Iowa not being sexy. We don't like that phrase anymore.

We are- for the most part- accepting of Fran's stupid scheduling last season, because he has taken Iowa on a very sharp incline. It doesn't change the fact that he was very wrong with this year's schedule.

He did a great job of scheduling. The team had to build up some confidence and the young guys had to adjust to college basketball. There is no NCAA tournament if he schedules tougher and we lose 4 or 5 of those games we won. You made reference to KF which leads me to believe you might be more of a FB guy. You clearly don't understand college basketball. Again, the schedule did not keep us out of the NCAA tournament. Marble's injury did.

 

[WindsorHawk]

Nobody is asking him to schedule tougher, just smarter. Instead of playing 300+ RPI teams, play a team in the 175-225 range, these are still bad teams, likely wins, but not RPI killers. They do not represent a noticeable step up in difficulty in reality, but look much better to the computers. Or, instead of scheduling these 300+ teams, schedule a non D1 school or, they do not get computed in the RPI, so the schedule is actually easier, even though the RPI will rank you higher.

This isn't all 'after the fact' reasoning either. Many people complained about the schedule prior to the season.

We swear, so check at your own risk. But Fran didn't schedule properly, and all who are saying otherwise, are simply wrong. Iowa playing Coppin State next year - Hawkeye Lounge

Actually, you're wrong. The harder you push the more wrong you are. I am willing to concede it is better to schedule teams in the 175-225 range. Please respond to this post by listing those 50 schools for next year. You obviously know exactly which 50 teams are going to fall in this range and you also know they are all waiting for Iowa to give them a call and invite them to Carver for a ball game...left a spot open on their schedule just for us. I will check your list against the end of season RPI next year and acknowledge your extensive basketball knowledge if you have even 40 of them right...should be easy because you are so much smarter than Fran and the rest of us.

 

[WindsorHawk]

It took a huge 20 point comeback to beat Gardner-Webb at home, we barely beat Central Michigan here. People love to overlook this point and act like playing teams 100 spots better in the RPI would be automatic wins. We play a tougher schedule, even marginally tougher, there's a good chance we drop a game or two more.

This is a very good post and 100% accurate...very refreshing.

 

[Campbell]

Oh how much I would love to see the Hawks ranked before the clowns.

You mean this upcoming season or like in recent years?

 

[dave3912]

HAHAHA

I'll save the heart eating for the END of the season when Wisconsin will be in the Top 4, in the Top 25 AND in the NCAA tournament.

And there's about a million Top 25's out there with Wisconsin as high as 10 and most in the Top 20. Gary Parish of CBS (the network that covers the NCAA tournament) has Wisconsin as #13.

But it doesn't matter. All that matters is the end of the season. I'll keep these Jon Miller predictions and come back the 2nd week of March.

Much of like how you were hiding from this whole site when WI lost in the first round of the NCAA tourney? You were going on and on how there was no way Connie would lose in the 1st round, yelp it happened. Now you show up and give us your top 20 predictions well, good for you, sir.

But the crow you should have been eating a long time ago is starting to go bad, please eat it soon or it might make you sick when you finally eat it.

The difference between real Iowa fans and worthless cry-baby WI fans, is that if an Iowa fan is wrong we are man enough to admit it. WI fans, hide until they have a hint of light to poke their heads out and act like nothing happened.

 

[deanvogs]

HAHAHA

I'll save the heart eating for the END of the season when Wisconsin will be in the Top 4, in the Top 25 AND in the NCAA tournament.

And there's about a million Top 25's out there with Wisconsin as high as 10 and most in the Top 20. Gary Parish of CBS (the network that covers the NCAA tournament) has Wisconsin as #13.

But it doesn't matter. All that matters is the end of the season. I'll keep these Jon Miller predictions and come back the 2nd week of March.

Hold on here. You say it DOES matter where JD predicts Wisconsin will finish next year, and that you HATE lazy analysis.

So why now with every other poll, it DOESN'T matter where they pick the Vadge? Many people see Wisconsin in the exact same way as JD, and that doesn't make them "lazy analysis". The truth is you are intellectually lazy, and dishonest. You are obsessed with JD and his opinion, and it is really kind of creepy. So what he doesn't think the Vadge will be as good next year.....I don't see you out stalking other people with the same opinions as JD

 

[HawkeyeWalker]

HAHAHA

I'll save the heart eating for the END of the season when Wisconsin will be in the Top 4, in the Top 25 AND in the NCAA tournament.

And there's about a million Top 25's out there with Wisconsin as high as 10 and most in the Top 20. Gary Parish of CBS (the network that covers the NCAA tournament) has Wisconsin as #13.

But it doesn't matter. All that matters is the end of the season. I'll keep these Jon Miller predictions and come back the 2nd week of March.

please don't come back until then. You were baited...and you bit. dumb troll is dumb. Jon owns you.

 

[ssckelley]

It took a huge 20 point comeback to beat Gardner-Webb at home, we barely beat Central Michigan here. People love to overlook this point and act like playing teams 100 spots better in the RPI would be automatic wins. We play a tougher schedule, even marginally tougher, there's a good chance we drop a game or two more.

Gardner Webb was the previous seasons Campbell except they woke up in time to take over the game, that same GW team gave Illinois all they wanted before losing by 1 point. I would not read to much into the Central Michigan game, I am sure Keno Davis and Kevin Gamble had them well prepared to play Iowa and I hope they show up on the schedule again.

People are making to much out of the RPI rankings of the opponents, the ranks of the opponents does not mean anything it is their win percentage. Iowa needs to avoid playing those teams like Texas A&M CC and Howard that wind up 6-23 in a horrible conference. If Iowa needs to schedule a cupcake against the MEAC play Morgan State (17-15) not South Carolina State (4-24).

 

[hawktransplant]

Where is Iowa State?

 

[Hawkstrat]

Actually, you're wrong. The harder you push the more wrong you are. I am willing to concede it is better to schedule teams in the 175-225 range. Please respond to this post by listing those 50 schools for next year. You obviously know exactly which 50 teams are going to fall in this range and you also know they are all waiting for Iowa to give them a call and invite them to Carver for a ball game...left a spot open on their schedule just for us. I will check your list against the end of season RPI next year and acknowledge your extensive basketball knowledge if you have even 40 of them right...should be easy because you are so much smarter than Fran and the rest of us.

Sorry for the long delay, I was busy today.

It's not my job to do the research required to do what you asked of me- I don't get paid to do that. But the RPI isn't a some crap shoot, the terrible teams Iowa played this past season were all expected to be terrible prior to the start of the season- it wasn't a fluke and you didn't need a crystal ball. So no, I couldn't give you the exact list of teams that will finish 175-225, but I could find seven to ten teams that will fall in that range, if you really want me to. Schedule a couple of those games, a couple of non D-1 teams and presto, a schedule that appears much, much better to the computers- without offering a significant challenge.

Iowa would not have a problem attracting those types of schools to come to Carver, even if it takes a little extra cash, a money game that doesn't kill your RPI- and tournament chances right along side it- is worth it.

Projecting teams isn't a science, but it's not magic either. Look at conferences that do fairly well on a routine basis- not just individual teams, as the RPI takes into account your opponents' opponents, and let that be your starting point. Many of these smaller conferences have the RPI figured out, I have full faith that Iowa can as well.

Now, in theory, Iowa could lose an additional game by playing slightly better teams, but winning isn't as important to the RPI as some people assume. The RPI is one part win percentage (weighted for home/road) one part SOS, and one part opponents SOS, so two-thirds of the formula is who you play, not who you beat.

Throwing the gauntlet down for some internet poster doesn't boost your argument, there are people capable of doing this, just look at how the Mountain West gamed the system, are you suggesting nobody in the sports department is smart enough to figure this out. If they aren't, pay someone who is. For instance, ISU consulted one of KenPom's guys when scheduling last year, Iowa should (needs to) do that as well.

 

[H8IAST8]

#16 in USA Today
No. 16. Iowa (25-13, lost in NIT final): The Hawkeyes were extremely close to netting an NCAA tournament bid in 2012-13, eventually falling to the NIT due to several narrow losses to Big Ten powers Indiana, Michigan State and Wisconsin. Returning starters Mike Gessell, Roy Devyn Marble and Aaron White led Iowa to the NIT championship game. That experience will give Iowa the confidence it needs to turn those close losses into wins come next season.

Forecasting the NCAA basketball top 25 in 2013-14

 

[ssckelley]

Sorry for the long delay, I was busy today.

It's not my job to do the research required to do what you asked of me- I don't get paid to do that. But the RPI isn't a some crap shoot, the terrible teams Iowa played this past season were all expected to be terrible prior to the start of the season- it wasn't a fluke and you didn't need a crystal ball. So no, I couldn't give you the exact list of teams that will finish 175-225, but I could find seven to ten teams that will fall in that range, if you really want me to. Schedule a couple of those games, a couple of non D-1 teams and presto, a schedule that appears much, much better to the computers- without offering a significant challenge.

Iowa would not have a problem attracting those types of schools to come to Carver, even if it takes a little extra cash, a money game that doesn't kill your RPI- and tournament chances right along side it- is worth it.

Projecting teams isn't a science, but it's not magic either. Look at conferences that do fairly well on a routine basis- not just individual teams, as the RPI takes into account your opponents' opponents, and let that be your starting point. Many of these smaller conferences have the RPI figured out, I have full faith that Iowa can as well.

Now, in theory, Iowa could lose an additional game by playing slightly better teams, but winning isn't as important to the RPI as some people assume. The RPI is one part win percentage (weighted for home/road) one part SOS, and one part opponents SOS, so two-thirds of the formula is who you play, not who you beat.

Throwing the gauntlet down for some internet poster doesn't boost your argument, there are people capable of doing this, just look at how the Mountain West gamed the system, are you suggesting nobody in the sports department is smart enough to figure this out. If they aren't, pay someone who is. For instance, ISU consulted one of KenPom's guys when scheduling last year, Iowa should (needs to) do that as well.

Good post, even I can look at what some of these schools have coming back for next season and tell you which of the low majors will at least be decent next season. If I can do it surely the coaching staff can look at these teams and know which ones will at least be respectable in their conference.