So What is your Expectation for Iowa Basketball?

[Luftgekuehlt67]

When 68 teams make the tourney every year, we should be one of them.

First and foremost, I want to say I'm not picking on you (or at least I'm not intending to pick on you). Your assertion just spurred me to do a bit of research.

Really, 68 teams as an absolute number doesn't mean much. 32 of those bids are auto bids, only 1 of which is allocated to the Big Ten. That leaves you with...

- 70 high major teams (76 total minus the 6 conference tournament winners)
- 255 mid/low major teams (281 total minus the 26 conference tournament winners)

...competing for 36 at large bids.

In practical terms, from Iowa's little corner of the world, I think the question is where does Iowa need to be within our direct peer group (i.e. the Big Ten) to make the tournament? Well, since the expansion to 68 teams in 2011, the Big Ten has been pretty consistently sending half their member teams to the tournament. To make it simple, I think you can say if you aim for .500 or better in the Big Ten, more years than not, you're going to get a pretty good look at an at-large bid. Not a guarantee by any stretch, but I think it's a reasonable floor to shoot for in terms of having realistic hopes of an at large.

Historically, how does this break down for Iowa? I have conference records for Iowa going back to 1908-09 and I looked through 2019-20. These are more or less hand-tallied counts, so give me a little leeway, please!

In the pre-Fran era, Iowa was able to accomplish a .500 or better conference record about 54% of the time. Fran has accomplished the same feat in 70% of his seasons. That's better than program average by 16%.

Under Fran, we've made the tournament only 4 times. But, we were a lock last year pre-covid, so that's 5. Throw a brick at my head for me saying this if you'd like, but I count 2012-13's NIT final run as sort of an honorary NCAA bid by the logic that, if you're able to get all the way to the NIT final, you were likely a "miss" by the NCAA committee that year. So that's 6 for me.

If you're curious how that compares to the football side, I have conference records going back to 1900.

In the pre-Ferentz era, we were .500 or better only 47% of the time in those 100 seasons. In Ferentz's 21 years (through 2019), we've been .500 or better 76% of the time. That's significantly better than the program average - almost 30% better.

Speaking purely statistically, given historical performance and within the current system of NCAA basketball, I'd expect Iowa to make the tournament about every other year. Fran's at least in that ballpark. If you gave him another 10 years, I wouldn't fall out of my chair if went on to just slightly outperform that every other year pace.

I don't mean this to be a blanket defense of Fran, I'm just trying to be objective (which, for me, as a fan can be very difficult). On the basketball side, *realistically* we could *possibly* be *slightly* better. We could also *definitely* be *much* worse. On the football side, like it or not, under Ferentz I think you're realistically seeing more or less "peak Iowa".

Speaking purely of on-field performance, Ferentz looks like a no-brainer to me. Iowa's been smart to lock him down as Coach for Life. Fran looks more like a "eh, yeah, this is working, I guess" to me. Making a switch would be a gamble, but not an outrageously risky one.

 

[Fryowa]

...if I were a major donor, worth way more than a couple billion $ I'd want a coach who could get the guards he's sorely lacking. I'd want nothing short of Ronnie Lester 2.0 and a team that could play defense from November to April.

See that's where everyone's wrong, though...

It's not that simple and it's not even possible. That attitude is what got Nebraska football where it is today. You could be Bill Gates and still not get what you want in players. Because those players are going to go to good teams that give them the best exposure.

Success in college sports (basketball and football) is dependent on one of two things:

1) A long history of success driving top shelf recruiting, or

2) Luck.

Luck in the form of hiring Nick Saban or Mike Krzeskysewskfszycrwski when they're at the beginning of success, or luck in the form of having a couple cinderella seasons out of nowhere that get you some good recruits.

Recruiting today more than ever is a chicken/egg problem. You can't just go out there and "by gosh golly win one for the Gipper!" just through grit and determination. This isn't "Hoosiers." You have to be really good to get top recruits, and it takes top recruits to get really good in the first place. And forget about coaching other than game management. The days of college coaches being able to coach kids into winners is over, man. Kids start playing a hundred games a year on the AAU circuit when they're 8 years old and the good players have had top-level coaching for a decade before they even get to college. In 2021 kids either have it when they get to school or they don't. And if they don't, you aren't going to compete in P6 ball anyway.

Hell I even see it in HS baseball these days. Good hitters in high school are so specialized that they know more about hip rotation, weight transfer, swing plane, and their own exit velocity than any coach is going to tell them, because really good hitters are already getting private instruction and playing year round for academies like PG, Diamond Dreams, or Showcase, etc.. College basketball is just a competition for the best players and you land where you land. Are there good coaches out there who can change a player's game in college? Absolutely. But for every one of those coaches there are even more teams that already have studs in place who don't have to be coached like that.

Your idea of a donor saying, "F this, I'm gonna pay whatever it takes to get the best coach possible and win the conference" is exactly what Nebraska did when it hired total flops like Callahan, Riley, and Frost, and exactly what it did when it fired really good coaches like Solich and Pelini. You need to just face it that Iowa is what it is, and that ain't changing until we luck into it, which might be never. Are you willing to have Lick 2.0? Because playing musical coaches has way worse odds than roulette...there are 100 Licks on the wheel and only one or two truly good ones at any given time.

 

[HuckFinn]

First and foremost, I want to say I'm not picking on you (or at least I'm not intending to pick on you). Your assertion just spurred me to do a bit of research.

Really, 68 teams as an absolute number doesn't mean much. 32 of those bids are auto bids, only 1 of which is allocated to the Big Ten. That leaves you with...

- 70 high major teams (76 total minus the 6 conference tournament winners)
- 255 mid/low major teams (281 total minus the 26 conference tournament winners)

...competing for 36 at large bids.

In practical terms, from Iowa's little corner of the world, I think the question is where does Iowa need to be within our direct peer group (i.e. the Big Ten) to make the tournament? Well, since the expansion to 68 teams in 2011, the Big Ten has been pretty consistently sending half their member teams to the tournament. To make it simple, I think you can say if you aim for .500 or better in the Big Ten, more years than not, you're going to get a pretty good look at an at-large bid. Not a guarantee by any stretch, but I think it's a reasonable floor to shoot for in terms of having realistic hopes of an at large.

Historically, how does this break down for Iowa? I have conference records for Iowa going back to 1908-09 and I looked through 2019-20. These are more or less hand-tallied counts, so give me a little leeway, please!

In the pre-Fran era, Iowa was able to accomplish a .500 or better conference record about 54% of the time. Fran has accomplished the same feat in 70% of his seasons. That's better than program average by 16%.

Under Fran, we've made the tournament only 4 times. But, we were a lock last year pre-covid, so that's 5. Throw a brick at my head for me saying this if you'd like, but I count 2012-13's NIT final run as sort of an honorary NCAA bid by the logic that, if you're able to get all the way to the NIT final, you were likely a "miss" by the NCAA committee that year. So that's 6 for me.

If you're curious how that compares to the football side, I have conference records going back to 1900.

In the pre-Ferentz era, we were .500 or better only 47% of the time in those 100 seasons. In Ferentz's 21 years (through 2019), we've been .500 or better 76% of the time. That's significantly better than the program average - almost 30% better.

Speaking purely statistically, given historical performance and within the current system of NCAA basketball, I'd expect Iowa to make the tournament about every other year. Fran's at least in that ballpark. If you gave him another 10 years, I wouldn't fall out of my chair if went on to just slightly outperform that every other year pace.

I don't mean this to be a blanket defense of Fran, I'm just trying to be objective (which, for me, as a fan can be very difficult). On the basketball side, *realistically* we could *possibly* be *slightly* better. We could also *definitely* be *much* worse. On the football side, like it or not, under Ferentz I think you're realistically seeing more or less "peak Iowa".

Speaking purely of on-field performance, Ferentz looks like a no-brainer to me. Iowa's been smart to lock him down as Coach for Life. Fran looks more like a "eh, yeah, this is working, I guess" to me. Making a switch would be a gamble, but not an outrageously risky one.

This is really amazing stuff! I really appreciate the cold, hard facts. You avoided the old “yeah, he just picked the stats that defend his position” with careful analysis. It will come as no surprise to many on HN that I am proud of the Hawks and therefore “liked” your post. I will add that I am really disappointed by our basketball team’s performance in recent weeks.

 

[Motigerhawk]

Do you think, had Iowa gotten the real coach behind Butler instead of Lick, we would have been better?

 

[thedukeofearl]

I am going to go the Easy Route

And use Andy Katz's prediction

Number 3, Baby

https://twitter.com/marchmadness/status/1359158687231860745?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axioslocal_desmoines&stream=top

Of course, predictions are not exactly Gospel

I do certainly believe we will do Much better playing teams
Not in the Big Ten Conference

 

[okeefe4prez]

See that's where everyone's wrong, though...

It's not that simple and it's not even possible. That attitude is what got Nebraska football where it is today. You could be Bill Gates and still not get what you want in players. Because those players are going to go to good teams that give them the best exposure.

Success in college sports (basketball and football) is dependent on one of two things:

1) A long history of success driving top shelf recruiting, or

2) Luck.

Luck in the form of hiring Nick Saban or Mike Krzeskysewskfszycrwski when they're at the beginning of success, or luck in the form of having a couple cinderella seasons out of nowhere that get you some good recruits.

Recruiting today more than ever is a chicken/egg problem. You can't just go out there and by golly win one for the Gipper just through grit and determination. This isn't "Hoosiers." You simply have to get good recruits to be good, and to be good you have to get good recruits. And forget about coaching other than game management. The days of college coaches being able to coach kids into winners is over, man. Kids start playing a hundred games a year on the AAU circuit when they're 8 years old and the good players have had top-level coaching for a decade before they even get to college. In 2021 kids either have it when they get to school or they don't. And if they don't, you aren't going to compete in P6 ball anyway.

Hell I even see it in HS baseball these days. Good hitters in high school are so specialized that they know more about hip rotation, weight transfer, swing plane, and their own exit velocity than any coach is going to tell them because really good hitters are already getting private instruction and playing year round for academies like PG, Diamond Dreams, or Showcase, etc.. College basketball is just a competition for the best players and you land where you land. Are there good coaches out there who can change a players game in college? Absolutely. But for everyone of those coaches there are even more teams that already have studs in place that don't have to be coached like that.

You're idea of a donor saying, "F this, I'm gonna pay whatever it takes to get the best coach possible and win the conference" is exactly what Nebraska did when it hired total flops like Callahan, Riley, and Frost, and exactly what it did when it fired really good coaches like Solich and Pelini. You need to just face it that Iowa is what it is, and that ain't changing until we luck into it, which might be never. Are you willing to have Lick 2.0? Because playing musical coaches has way worse odds than roulette...there are 100 Licks on the wheel and only one or two truly good ones at any given time.

+1. Like. Excellent post. Even current football power Clemson has stumbled into extraordinary luck. Dabo is a fantastic coach, but their conference disappeared almost overnight. Georgia Tech, Florida State, The U and Va Tech are all good to stellar historical football programs and they have all fallen to the point where I honestly don't think any of them could do better than 4th in Big Ten West.

Basketball is a game where "diamonds in the rough" are next to impossible to locate because there is tape on kids from freaking middle school and weirdos who will analyze everything and determine the likely stars. Ja Morant was from a small town in SC and wasn't even ranked by the recruiting services and went to Murray State and then went second in the draft behind another SC player, Zion Williamson. Everyone and his brother knew Zion was going to be an epic college player. It is virtually impossible for Iowa to ever get a player like Zion or a player like Ja Morant.

Luka is an unreal player and he qualifies as a diamond in the rough, but even Luka is not an unranked to lottery pick story. And the horrific thing is Luka is a once a generation guy. Iowa will never land a somewhat unheralded recruit who is legitimately in the conversation as the best player in the country ever again in our lifetimes. So enjoy it.

The amount of luck involved in even landing Luka was huge. And as we've seen, you can't really "scheme around" having an "athletically challenged" point guard or a wing who can't methodically drain uncontested shots from more than 10 feet out. A team like Iowa would seriously need to get insanely lucky on probably 3 guys over 2 or 3 recruiting classes to really have a chance to win a national title. It would have to be something like what Wisconsin did when they had Kaminsky and Dekker come through at the same time. Basically, if Luka was in the program at the same time as Devyn Marble and Aaron White or something ridiculous like that. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's certainly not going to be the norm.

 

[thedukeofearl]

Do you think, had Iowa gotten the real coach behind Butler instead of Lick, we would have been better?

Undoubtedly

 

[MWS604]

It's weird that a team struggles late in the season, it's almost like that's when they play most of their hard games or something.

Of course, but it is generally after teams are playing us a second time or have seen how other teams have beat us. B1G coaches are better at making adjustments to their game plan than Fran is. Indiana tended to go deep into the shot clock which was effective. Look for Rutgers to try the same tonight.

 

[MWS604]

Expectations now: 6th or 7th regular season, lose on Thursday at B1G tournament and lose their 2nd game in the NCAA tourney. Anything better and I would be pleasantly surprised.

Note this is true for any season going forward. Regardless of talent level or hype, this is Fran's ceiling. He doesn't possess the defensive coaching or in-game adjustment chops to rise above this level.

 

[WindsorHawk]

Do you think, had Iowa gotten the real coach behind Butler instead of Lick, we would have been better?

For sure.

 

[tweeterhawk]

My expectation?

 

[tweeterhawk]

Do you think, had Iowa gotten the real coach behind Butler instead of Lick, we would have been better?

You mean the young guy currently coaching in the NBA? Uh, yeah.

 

[PCHawk]

+1. Like. Excellent post. Even current football power Clemson has stumbled into extraordinary luck. Dabo is a fantastic coach, but their conference disappeared almost overnight. Georgia Tech, Florida State, The U and Va Tech are all good to stellar historical football programs and they have all fallen to the point where I honestly don't think any of them could do better than 4th in Big Ten West.

Basketball is a game where "diamonds in the rough" are next to impossible to locate because there is tape on kids from freaking middle school and weirdos who will analyze everything and determine the likely stars. Ja Morant was from a small town in SC and wasn't even ranked by the recruiting services and went to Murray State and then went second in the draft behind another SC player, Zion Williamson. Everyone and his brother knew Zion was going to be an epic college player. It is virtually impossible for Iowa to ever get a player like Zion or a player like Ja Morant.

Luka is an unreal player and he qualifies as a diamond in the rough, but even Luka is not an unranked to lottery pick story. And the horrific thing is Luka is a once a generation guy. Iowa will never land a somewhat unheralded recruit who is legitimately in the conversation as the best player in the country ever again in our lifetimes. So enjoy it.

The amount of luck involved in even landing Luka was huge. And as we've seen, you can't really "scheme around" having an "athletically challenged" point guard or a wing who can't methodically drain uncontested shots from more than 10 feet out. A team like Iowa would seriously need to get insanely lucky on probably 3 guys over 2 or 3 recruiting classes to really have a chance to win a national title. It would have to be something like what Wisconsin did when they had Kaminsky and Dekker come through at the same time. Basically, if Luka was in the program at the same time as Devyn Marble and Aaron White or something ridiculous like that. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's certainly not going to be the norm.

Getting Luka and Wieskamp and the same time is about as good as it gets. Especially if you add CJ in too. Problem is, you still need some luck to go your way for a magical season. Win some close games, maybe a down year in the conference, stay healthy, and the big one, lucky uneven conference schedule. We got lucky with the roster, but everything else has been pretty damn unlucky.

 

[atomicblue224]

First and foremost, I want to say I'm not picking on you (or at least I'm not intending to pick on you). Your assertion just spurred me to do a bit of research.

Really, 68 teams as an absolute number doesn't mean much. 32 of those bids are auto bids, only 1 of which is allocated to the Big Ten. That leaves you with...

- 70 high major teams (76 total minus the 6 conference tournament winners)
- 255 mid/low major teams (281 total minus the 26 conference tournament winners)

...competing for 36 at large bids.

In practical terms, from Iowa's little corner of the world, I think the question is where does Iowa need to be within our direct peer group (i.e. the Big Ten) to make the tournament? Well, since the expansion to 68 teams in 2011, the Big Ten has been pretty consistently sending half their member teams to the tournament. To make it simple, I think you can say if you aim for .500 or better in the Big Ten, more years than not, you're going to get a pretty good look at an at-large bid. Not a guarantee by any stretch, but I think it's a reasonable floor to shoot for in terms of having realistic hopes of an at large.

Historically, how does this break down for Iowa? I have conference records for Iowa going back to 1908-09 and I looked through 2019-20. These are more or less hand-tallied counts, so give me a little leeway, please!

In the pre-Fran era, Iowa was able to accomplish a .500 or better conference record about 54% of the time. Fran has accomplished the same feat in 70% of his seasons. That's better than program average by 16%.

Under Fran, we've made the tournament only 4 times. But, we were a lock last year pre-covid, so that's 5. Throw a brick at my head for me saying this if you'd like, but I count 2012-13's NIT final run as sort of an honorary NCAA bid by the logic that, if you're able to get all the way to the NIT final, you were likely a "miss" by the NCAA committee that year. So that's 6 for me.

If you're curious how that compares to the football side, I have conference records going back to 1900.

In the pre-Ferentz era, we were .500 or better only 47% of the time in those 100 seasons. In Ferentz's 21 years (through 2019), we've been .500 or better 76% of the time. That's significantly better than the program average - almost 30% better.

Speaking purely statistically, given historical performance and within the current system of NCAA basketball, I'd expect Iowa to make the tournament about every other year. Fran's at least in that ballpark. If you gave him another 10 years, I wouldn't fall out of my chair if went on to just slightly outperform that every other year pace.

I don't mean this to be a blanket defense of Fran, I'm just trying to be objective (which, for me, as a fan can be very difficult). On the basketball side, *realistically* we could *possibly* be *slightly* better. We could also *definitely* be *much* worse. On the football side, like it or not, under Ferentz I think you're realistically seeing more or less "peak Iowa".

Speaking purely of on-field performance, Ferentz looks like a no-brainer to me. Iowa's been smart to lock him down as Coach for Life. Fran looks more like a "eh, yeah, this is working, I guess" to me. Making a switch would be a gamble, but not an outrageously risky one.

Good post.

 

[Fryowa]

If you take a look at most teams in the conference over the last decade, I would imagine most of them have declining records down the stretch. That's just kind of the college game in general.

I agree with your premise of the Big Ten being really tough, but if we’re talking about conference only records that wouldn’t be true. For every team that gets a loss, the other team gets a win. It wouldn’t be possible for most teams to decline down the stretch.

If you had a bunch of teams losing games in the second half of the season you’d have to also have a bunch of teams winning games as well.

 

[WindsorHawk]

I wont wager that because I love the game threads.

But I will wager $20 to the steadman childrens hospital foundation or whatever the charity is.

We lose twice to Indiana, I dont see us winning again.

BUT will you give me the CJ out? If CJ comes back I say we win 2 more. So what Im wagering is if CJ comes back we only win 2.. If CJ comes back and we win 3 you win or if CJ does not come back and we win 1 you win.

That fair?

CJ didn’t play today and we won. So did I win our bet? Or is it not resolved because CJ came back for a game? I’m fine either way...have zero doubt we will win (more than) 1 more game.

 

[seepig]

Sweet 16 or he has underachieved.

 

[longtimer]

Sitting around bored trying to survive the frigid weather so I thought i would post something. Decided to use the 10 years + that Fran has been at Iowa to determine what is the standard we should expect from Iowa basketball. So here goes

McCaffrey is 207-149. Has finished the year 2 times ranked 25th in the AP poll

Big Ten Record
10-11 10TH
11-12 7TH
12-13 6TH
13-14 6TH
14-15 3RD tied with 3 teams
15-16 3rd tied with 3 teams
16-17 5th tied with 4 teams
17-18 11th
18-19 6th
19-20 5th tied with 4 teams
20-21 6th current
Didn't include Big Ten Tournament records which were not pretty

NCAA In the tournament 4 times (if you count a play in game)
NCAA Record 3-4 (no sweet 16s)

So if Fran was to retire tomorrow (which he isn't) and you were interviewing for a new coach would you be OK with another 10 years like this?

This is as good as it gets with Fran in the next 7 years. Maybe a first division finish once in awhile make the tournament half the time Occasionally win a first round game and get beat in the second. Fran will never make the sweet 16
It is what it is. Low standard with really no hope of anything special

 

[SmokeTownHawk]

Expectation is for one, to not get blown out in a game like this and two, to find an assistant who's specialty is coaching defense. Along with that elusive upper-level point guard.

 

[DBAHawkFan]

What year are we on and we still don’t have any athletic players for guards. Oregon just abused us off dribble and division one players are going to hit wide open threes.

this is as good as it gets with Fran and I’m so happy he’s extended!!! /sarcasm