Hawkeyes No. 19 in AP, No. 21 Coaches this Week

[WindsorHawk]

All IMO...

College teams with college age players are up and down emotionally. They often play down to the level of their opponent and get up for a big game. Teams like Michigan State and Duke are loaded with talent. They can show up flat and still win because they are more talented and have more options if a couple guys aren't up for a given game.

 

[mopkins]

Maybe. MSU doesn't have many off nights. This is the ultimate test in toughness, physical and mental for the Hawkeyes. They can't play just OK and win.

And the point of my tweet was that the last 20 teams MSU has played in the conference it's beaten. Iowa losing on Thursday isn't the end of the world or the end of the season.

But you wait, if Iowa does lose on Thursday, it will be compared to losing to Iowa City Regina on here.

or Iowa beats Sparty at home on Thursday and then loses on the road in Minnesota on Sunday.

Full...Forum...Meltdown

 

[thedukeofearl]

I refuse to get excited about the Hawks until they beat the Golden State Warriors on the road.

I would be just as pleased if they beat the Rockets at Houston while holding James Harden scoreless.....

 

[MelroseHawkins]

Sorry, I just don't agree. It's talking points. It doesn't have much carryover ... it just doesn't.

Example ... my son's AAU team (probably about 10-11 years old) played a team that they had no business beating. Well, for one game, the shots fell for our kids and didn't for the other team. A good play at the end, and our kids' team won. Big upset.

2 rounds later, our kids' team ended up playing that team again in the championship of their bracket. There was a different outcome. It was at least a 20-30 point blowout. Was the other team more focused because our kids had beaten them earlier. Nope, they were just better ... period.

If Michigan State would have lost yesterday, how do we know that the players would not start doubting themselves or they are just not playing as well? Or, maybe Iowa is just that much better at this point of the season? Did Kansas beat ISU last night because they lost to West Virginia on Saturday? I don't believe so.

Thanks for proving my point.

Let me as you a question then I'll be done with this. You have to pick one. Either "A Win" or "A Loss".

Question: Would you rather play Michigan St. after coming off a win or coming off a loss?

 

[Robowe]

Thanks for proving my point.

Let me as you a question then I'll be done with this. You have to pick one. Either "A Win" or "A Loss".

Question: Would you rather play Michigan St. after coming off a win or coming off a loss?

My point .. and please take this as intended (fun)

But, if you MAKE me pick one, I will take after a win (because they actually won).

 

[MelroseHawkins]

My point .. and please take this as intended (fun)

But, if you MAKE me pick one, I will take after a win (because they actually won).

Yea. Been a good debate. "My point" was your explanation about your son's team back-to-back games, hence, much of the reason they lost by 20-30 pts in the 2nd game.

 

[Robowe]

Yea. Been a good debate. "My point" was your explanation about your son's team back-to-back games, hence, much of the reason they lost by 20-30 pts in the 2nd game.

It's a good back and forth. Thanks for that.

I don't think the first game (in the kids tourney) mattered at all. I don't think the opponent wanted to win any more than they did the first game. They just played better. Shots went in. They changed some things up.

Here'a a good clip that describes my position. Did Simpson play any different/harder in two games vs NW? Or, ...

 

[PCHawk]

It's a good back and forth. Thanks for that.

I don't think the first game (in the kids tourney) mattered at all. I don't think the opponent wanted to win any more than they did the first game. They just played better. Shots went in. They changed some things up.

Here'a a good clip that describes my position. Did Simpson play any different/harder in two games vs NW? Or, ...

I think you're underestimating the human element of the game. It's very possible a loss would have made them focus more for our game. Its equally possible a loss would have started them on a downward slide for our game. There is no way to know which one would happen, but to say a loss cant effect the next game is wrong in my opinion.

Winning over and over definitely breeds complacency. There is no telling when it will kick in, but you can only kick ass so many times before you start to lose a slight edge.

A few years ago we beat Northwestern by 26 points both games during the season. I think that was a major factor in why we lost to them during the Big 10 tournament. How could 2 blowouts possibly not affect college kids for the next game? Of course they went into that game assuming they could win easy. I'm hoping MSU beating us so bad causes them to do the same to us Thursday.

 

[Robowe]

I think you're underestimating the human element of the game. It's very possible a loss would have made them focus more for our game. Its equally possible a loss would have started them on a downward slide for our game. There is no way to know which one would happen, but to say a loss cant effect the next game is wrong in my opinion.

Winning over and over definitely breeds complacency. There is no telling when it will kick in, but you can only kick ass so many times before you start to lose a slight edge.

A few years ago we beat Northwestern by 26 points both games during the season. I think that was a major factor in why we lost to them during the Big 10 tournament. How could 2 blowouts possibly not affect college kids for the next game? Of course they went into that game assuming they could win easy. I'm hoping MSU beating us so bad causes them to do the same to us Thursday.

For every example of a team losing a game to a team they have blown out twice, there's an example of a team blowing a team out the third time they played (Kansas beat WV 3 times last year). It's too simplistic to think a team just became complacent.

Kansas has won the Big 12 umpteen times in a row. The common link is Bill Self. He just wants to keep winning, at all costs (as we have seen in the news).

 

[PCHawk]

For every example of a team losing a game to a team they have blown out twice, there's an example of a team blowing a team out the third time they played (Kansas beat WV 3 times last year). It's too simplistic to think a team just became complacent.

Kansas has won the Big 12 umpteen times in a row. The common link is Bill Self. He just wants to keep winning, at all costs (as we have seen in the news).

In not saying every team will be complacent on that 3rd game. I'm saying I think iowa did. I'm also saying it eventually happens to everyone if they win long enough. There may be a player here or there that would never ever get complacent. But most teams are full of players that will. Of course they will. It's crazy to argue they won't.

 

[Robowe]

In not saying every team will be complacent on that 3rd game. I'm saying I think iowa did. I'm also saying it eventually happens to everyone if they win long enough. There may be a player here or there that would never ever get complacent. But most teams are full of players that will. Of course they will. It's crazy to argue they won't.

I don't agree. I think it is an easy narrative to fall into after the fact. I think Iowa just had a bad game and NW had a good game in the 3rd matchup. Possibly some changes helped (injured players returning, a change in a defense, etc.).

Look at the matchups that year:
1) Iowa 93 - NW 67 (at Carver) --> Iowa shoots 57% overall, 57% from 3. NW shoots 39% overall, 21% from three.
2) Iowa 76 - NW 50 (at NW) --> Iowa shoots 52% overall, 41% from 3. NW shoots 36% overall, 20% from three.
3) NW 67 - Iowa 62 (Tourney) --> Iowa shoots 32% overall, 25% from three. NW shoots 52% overall, 48% from three

Did Iowa not take NW seriously in the Big 10 Tournament (so, they didn't guard them)? Did NW take Iowa more seriously (and guarded Iowa better)? Or, did NW play a good game and Iowa play a bad game just because? NW was the better team, that day - period.

Again, look at the clip with Collins and Beilein above. In the first game, Xavier Simpson was 0-5 from three vs NW. Michigan won by 2. In the 2nd game, NW did the same thing against him defensively, and he went 5-10. Michigan wins by 20. The shots went in.

 

[PCHawk]

I don't agree. I think it is an easy narrative to fall into after the fact. I think Iowa just had a bad game and NW had a good game in the 3rd matchup. Possibly some changes helped (injured players returning, a change in a defense, etc.).

Look at the matchups that year:
1) Iowa 93 - NW 67 (at Carver) --> Iowa shoots 57% overall, 57% from 3. NW shoots 39% overall, 21% from three.
2) Iowa 76 - NW 50 (at NW) --> Iowa shoots 52% overall, 41% from 3. NW shoots 36% overall, 20% from three.
3) NW 67 - Iowa 62 (Tourney) --> Iowa shoots 32% overall, 25% from three. NW shoots 52% overall, 48% from three

Did Iowa not take NW seriously in the Big 10 Tournament (so, they didn't guard them)? Did NW take Iowa more seriously (and guarded Iowa better)? Or, did NW play a good game and Iowa play a bad game just because? NW was the better team, that day - period.

Again, look at the clip with Collins and Beilein above. In the first game, Xavier Simpson was 0-5 from three vs NW. Michigan won by 2. In the 2nd game, NW did the same thing against him defensively, and he went 5-10. Michigan wins by 20. The shots went in.

Well I'm no D1 athlete and I know there's a difference, but I'm guilty of playing to my level of competition due to complacency. I figured since I did it and everyone I know does it that it was a common thing. Again I cant speak for D1 athletes.

 

[Robowe]

Well I'm no D1 athlete and I know there's a difference, but I'm guilty of playing to my level of competition due to complacency. I figured since I did it and everyone I know does it that it was a common thing. Again I cant speak for D1 athletes.

I agree.

 

[Knight78]

Just curious from this thinking ... do teams really not try as hard or coaches not care as much if they win the previous game? My belief is ... at this level, the coaches and players want to win every game. Izzo is who he is because he wants to win every game all the time. And, he recruits players who want the same thing. Or, he coaches them into it.

IMO, the 'momentum' from a previous game (win or loss) does not last very long. For instance, did Duke beat Virginia because they lost to Syracuse earlier in the week? I think they are independent events.

All I know is that when we lost a game we felt we should win, Levick had us running extra. Going through that extra running was extra motivation for the next game, at least for me. (Just to set the record straight, I was in the 20/20/20 club: I got in the game with 20 seconds left if we were 20 points up or 20 points down.)

 

[Knight78]

Thanks for proving my point.

Let me as you a question then I'll be done with this. You have to pick one. Either "A Win" or "A Loss".

Question: Would you rather play Michigan St. after coming off a win or coming off a loss?

If it's Mich St coming off a loss, I'd rather not play them. Izzo would make their practices hell because he'd feel that they shouldn't have lost the previous games and the team would respond with a very focused effort. Sorry, that's just the way it works. If you look at careers of any really good NBA player, he may have one or two down games but works harder to get back into his groove. Jordan, Barkley, Shaq, Magic, etc. have all admitted this - that when they have a one or two game slump they focus more.

 

[Robowe]

If it's Mich St coming off a loss, I'd rather not play them. Izzo would make their practices hell because he'd feel that they shouldn't have lost the previous games and the team would respond with a very focused effort. Sorry, that's just the way it works. If you look at careers of any really good NBA player, he may have one or two down games but works harder to get back into his groove. Jordan, Barkley, Shaq, Magic, etc. have all admitted this - that when they have a one or two game slump they focus more.

I know you played in college, so I respect that. However, I don't think added focus makes you play better necessarily (in the next game/rest of the season). It might help in preparation (looking at the little things), but once play starts, it is just playing the game.

So, Michigan lost this past weekend to Wisconsin. You would think, uh oh, Minnesota is in trouble tonight. Michigan will be looking for blood after the first loss of the season. The Wolverines beat the Gophers by 2, at home.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

If it's Mich St coming off a loss, I'd rather not play them. Izzo would make their practices hell because he'd feel that they shouldn't have lost the previous games and the team would respond with a very focused effort. Sorry, that's just the way it works. If you look at careers of any really good NBA player, he may have one or two down games but works harder to get back into his groove. Jordan, Barkley, Shaq, Magic, etc. have all admitted this - that when they have a one or two game slump they focus more.

Yep.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I know you played in college, so I respect that. However, I don't think added focus makes you play better necessarily (in the next game/rest of the season). It might help in preparation (looking at the little things), but once play starts, it is just playing the game.

So, Michigan lost this past weekend to Wisconsin. You would think, uh oh, Minnesota is in trouble tonight. Michigan will be looking for blood after the first loss of the season. The Wolverines beat the Gophers by 2, at home.

Michigan does not = Mich. St. and Tom Izzo.

 

[Robowe]

Michigan does not = Mich. St. and Tom Izzo.

Michigan was undefeated this season until Saturday and made the Final Four last year. What is the difference between the teams as far as preparation and coming off a loss or not?

 

[MelroseHawkins]

Michigan was undefeated this season until Saturday and made the Final Four last year. What is the difference between the teams as far as preparation and coming off a loss or not?

I knew I'd get a response out of that.

In a perfect world all teams should respond. But, the difference is Tom Izzo to be specific to my original point about not wanting to play Mich St. after a loss.