But geezo peezo. Wide-spread predictions of Iowa getting hammered by Nebraska and Northwestern after getting de-testicled by Purdue at Mackey Arena (a decades-old Iowa tradition) were a little bit of a over-reaction. Fact is there are 2 elite teams in this conference in Michigan and Michigan State, and three doormats in Penn State, Illinois, and Rutgers. That's 9 other teams to duke it out in the middle and no credible analyst should even pretend they have any idea how this will shake out at this point.
I know it is a message board...
- Thread starter hoxrock
- Start date
I saw one poster group the conference in tiers and had the cutoff under Purdue and even said there was a huge dropoff. He based it on that one game. If you want to base iowa and Purdue on one game it's one thing. But he based where teams like Minnesota and Nebraska were on our one game. You've got it right with the 3 tiers. Right now there are 9 teams you could practically draw out of a hat.
InGoodCo
Well-Known Member
The B1G is getting 8 or 9 teams in the dance. The Purdue game was with out Luka - who obviously is probably the most important piece on the team and was immediately after the Tyler Trent passing game. They played with a ton of emotion and shot lights out. I think Purdue might have beaten any team they played that day at home in that environment. I over reacted too. It was disgusting to watch. I am trying not to over react over this win either, but it's getting hard to contain with being 12-3 and all. There's still plenty of flaws with this team, but IMO, the coaching staff is working around that fact, which IMO is good coaching. Get Sunday and Iowa's ranked again.
lightning1
Well-Known Member
Hard to fault anyone for predicting this team will get hammered in BIG play. They got hammered many times last season and it's essentially the same team returning. It's a "show me" mentality at this point. We'll get hammered again this season. mark my words. Hopefully not as often as last season. This team at least acts like it wants to play defense this season. That alone is an improvement.
kicker22
Well-Known Member
I think the fact that we got absolutely abused by MSU and Purdue in our only conference road games this year, and our streak of road woes coming into the season led to the concern. I was pleasantly surprised with a win on the road with out Cook, but I'm still waiting for us to prove that we can consistently show up for road games before I convince myself that anything has changed.
That said great win and bring on OSU.
That said great win and bring on OSU.
WindsorHawk
Well-Known Member
IMO...Tiers in alphabetical order
Michigan
Michigan State
Indiana
Iowa
Maryland
Nebraska
Ohio State
Purdue
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Northwestern
Penn State
Rutgers
Illinois
Michigan
Michigan State
Indiana
Iowa
Maryland
Nebraska
Ohio State
Purdue
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Northwestern
Penn State
Rutgers
Illinois
Last edited:
JG10Hawk
Well-Known Member
2nd Nebraska supposed to be Penn State?
WindsorHawk
Well-Known Member
Yep. I fixed it. Thanks!
WindsorHawk
Well-Known Member
My 12-8 prediction.
Michigan 0-1
Michigan State 0-2
Indiana 1-1
Maryland 1-0
Nebraska 1-1
Ohio State 1-1
Purdue 0-1
Wisconsin 1-1
Minnesota 1-0
Northwestern 2-0
Penn State 1-0
Rutgers 2-0
Illinois 1-0
Note - I gave us a win at Wisconsin...just to put it somewhere. I think we win 1 (out of 2) Tier 1 home game or 1 (out of 3) Tier 2 road game...dropped it on Wisconsin.
Michigan 0-1
Michigan State 0-2
Indiana 1-1
Maryland 1-0
Nebraska 1-1
Ohio State 1-1
Purdue 0-1
Wisconsin 1-1
Minnesota 1-0
Northwestern 2-0
Penn State 1-0
Rutgers 2-0
Illinois 1-0
Note - I gave us a win at Wisconsin...just to put it somewhere. I think we win 1 (out of 2) Tier 1 home game or 1 (out of 3) Tier 2 road game...dropped it on Wisconsin.
JG10Hawk
Well-Known Member
No problem, I figured that's what you meant.
One could argue Minnesota & Northwestern but that would be splitting hairs on what the cutoff is for your tiers.
Below is how I see it:
Michigan & Michigan State
Almost everyone else
Illinois & Rutgers (wouldn't be surprised if they beat anybody besides Michigan or Michigan State)
Almost everyone else
Illinois & Rutgers (wouldn't be surprised if they beat anybody besides Michigan or Michigan State)
Ree4
Well-Known Member
It's the same players but I feel like they've added a few important pieces (JoeW and ConnorMac) and committed to playing more defense (how much is debatable), and Garza being out was a yuge deal
mopkins
King Kong
Its not hard to overreact when your team is 0-3 in the Big Ten and two of those losses were blowouts. Iowa dug themselves a huge hole in the Big Ten and are likely going to spend the rest of the season trying to dig themselves out. If they can get it back to .500 this weekend against OSU that would be a great start.
lightning1
Well-Known Member
They commit to playing defense some games but not others. It's what typically happens when you ask your team to do something they never had to do before. The goal is to get it every game. The only question is, how long will that take?
I had a similar situation when I first started coaching AAU. My first team was a 16U team. They had enough athletic ability to play man defense but not the knowledge to play team defense. It took about 6 tournaments of an 8 tournament summer before they could do it consistently. That was a rough summer for me. many nights I went home with a pounding headache. I'm a defense first coach. So I stayed on them each and every practice. I'm sure some of those kids hate me til this day. But they play better basketball for it. These Hawkeye players will be better off for it too.
I feel like defense is an attitude. It's tiring and it doesn't stuff the stat book. Everyone wants the ball and wants to score. But few ever really have a passion for playing defense. Fran has a team full of offense-first players, which makes sense since he wants to run the floor and score 90 a game. These aren't guys who have been asked to play defense alot in their careers. It is going to be a tough sell.
lightning1
Well-Known Member
Yep. I feel like the only reason it was addressed at all is because their offensive numbers last season were so good. It really forced Fran, his staff and the players to look at the real problem. I hope it made Fran change his recruiting strategy for the future.
Ree4
Well-Known Member
Honestly you might think they hate you but you probably made them better players than they would have ever been. I played football for Dan Sabers at City High and if anybody knows him, he is(was?) an oldschool, hardass screaming coach, but I always understood and was able to give just a little bit more because of what he instilled in us than people who never had the chance to play for him. I actually greatly respect him, hopefully your old players feel the same about you.
Northside Hawk
Well-Known Member
We just came off a 4-14 conference season where we were lucky it wasn't worse. We got abused in the B1G/ACC throwdown (which it was for Iowa) and in the Grand Cayman tournament. Scholarship players were quitting on the season. I was never more ashamed to be an Iowa fan, even during the Lickliter years.
Michigan State and Purdue brought back too many memories of last year. Five point defecits were exploding to fifteen, twenty, twenty five points because no player or coach would step in and do something about it. Bardo was criticizing the team's effort, saying there was too much experience for this to be happening. Izzo and Painter had to call of the dogs or those would have been forty point losses.
Baer, Bohannon and Cook spoke to the team after Purdue. That's a good sign. They've responded with two shorthanded wins, another good sign. But there's a long way to go, and plenty of opportunities to revert to old habits.
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
I'm 0-2 in my predictions that Iowa as going to get hammered, I'm going to try and keep that streak going.
Edit - Actually, heck that, I'm 0-4....I forgot Oregon and UConn.
eyekwah
Well-Known Member
I think the issue after the Purdue loss was a response to the success and failures of Fran McCaffrey as coach. Iowa has not been in contention for a men's conference championship forever. While I support the program there has to be a point when I guy runs out of chances. McCaffrey took over a terrible situation 9 years ago. He righted the ship and has never scratched his way into the top 4 teams, let alone win the championship. For his level of compensation in relation to results there is a gap.
I also believe that some of the criticism posted has some legitimacy. He has difficulty in substituting players and at the end of close games and to close the regular season he has not been great. Against NW he had a short bench and his substituting was limited, but worked out better. In the years where they went into February to finish in the top 4 they lost close games and ended up 5th.
Northside Hawk
Well-Known Member
And take a hard look at his own staff as well. There is no shame in having a defensive guru on the staff, even if it is an old grizzled veteran. Half the team's in the NFL are doing this. Phil Jackson had two on his staff during the Jordan dynasty. One knew offense, one knew defense.
