I definitely think that Hoiberg will land one of these guys soon and will continue to supplement his roster with talented transfers and next tier recruits. Having that wide range of options available is really the best way to keep a good balance to your program and helps minimize the valleys that come from an unexpected problem or a large group of guys graduating at once. ISU should have a nice long run of consistently excellent teams for as long as Hoiberg chooses to stick around.
Becoming a Blue Blood - Article
- Thread starter Psiclone
- Start date
I wouldn't classify them as his mishaps, but they've obviously have happened under his coaching - but the OWI's of the players, they are obviously the players fault, but you can still call out a few "mishaps." Nothing to do with actual in game coaching, but its still part of the players staying out of trouble that I was getting at.
Well said. I fully believe that ISU can have the same type of consistent impact and standing in the sport that teams like Michigan State, Florida and UConn have now. there is no reason to believe otherwise. It's all about keeping a good coach when you have them and doing everything you can afford to do while you have them. All three of those schools got a good coach and did what was necessary to keep him. Having the personal tie to ISU can only help ISU build a successful program around Hoiberg.Which is an absolutely scary thing when one thinks about that. The fact that these people cast a vote for their livelihood and many are so ignorant when it comes to even knowing who their states constituents are. But, not to bring politics into a sports topic. Both sides can argue until they are blue in the face, no pun. The average person is going to say Kentucky, Duke, UNC, and Kansas...different generations are going to throw different teams into that category based on when they were growing up in each era. UCLA will be thrown in for history, but recent success says they shouldn't be. The 2nd tiered teams could make a case if given another decade or two into the future if they keep winning championships. It just depends on if people go by their own terms or a dictionary definition when compiling their list. To the initial statement of whether ISU could ever be one, no in agreement with some others who have said. ISU will NEVER be a blueblood, they could be a powerhouse. I hope they become a natural household name and a possible contender year in and year out. This allows for a steady stream of 5 star recruits, but I think saying they will is a bit ridiculous...
They've only had 3 seasons of double digit wins since 1993. That's over 20 years. They've only finished in the top 10 twice in that timespan.
Gary pinkel at mizzou has finished with double digit wins 4 times in the last 7 years with two top ten finishes.
Iowa's done it 4 times with 4 top 10 finishes.
Notre Dame might have the name cache but they are anything but a blue blood at this point with results on the field.
Wow! For once I am actually agreeing with you. Izzo, Donovan, Calhoun are all the reasons why those three schools have maintained such success (you can even throw Boeheim and Matta in there as well) and gotten such a high profile name. With a guy like Fred, we can elevate ourselves to these levels. I think Diallo is our best shot at landing a top tier recruit with our next real shot being in the following class. Looking at our roster, we can make a lot of noise and with a little bit of luck land one or two big time recruits to help keep elevating this program and then it'll just keep building from there. ISU has done EXACTLY what they need to in order to keep Hoiberg around thus far. Call me crazy, but as long as they keep him around and keep him happy, there's no reason to think he can't be a Billy D or Jim Boeheim ten years from now. He's off to a heck of a start.
Blue Bloods
UCLA
Kentucky
KU
Duke
UNC
Indiana
Great Programs
Michigan State
Louisville
Florida
UConn
Syracuse
I agree with others that ISU will never be a blue blood. But we have a lot to achieve just by getting ourselves to the next level. A Final Four would be the minimum requirement before this thread even gains any credibility.
UCLA
Kentucky
KU
Duke
UNC
Indiana
Great Programs
Michigan State
Louisville
Florida
UConn
Syracuse
I agree with others that ISU will never be a blue blood. But we have a lot to achieve just by getting ourselves to the next level. A Final Four would be the minimum requirement before this thread even gains any credibility.
These recruits are overrated they leave before they get that good.
ISU recruits a very high caliber of player that you know will stay 4 years and gets the best transfers every year.
Id bet a million bucks the Clones win more games over the next 5 years than UNC even if UNC gets more burger boys and higher ranked classes.
You really want 1 year of Nerlins Noel over 4 years of Georges Niang???? F NO!
ISU recruits a very high caliber of player that you know will stay 4 years and gets the best transfers every year.
Id bet a million bucks the Clones win more games over the next 5 years than UNC even if UNC gets more burger boys and higher ranked classes.
You really want 1 year of Nerlins Noel over 4 years of Georges Niang???? F NO!
But how "Blue Blood" or how great a position are UCLA in? OK I get Kentucky does their thing and a deep run as an 8 seed made a team that people thought was a failure a success. But look at how little having 3 first round picks did for UCLA. The freshman who went in the lottery was their WORST, and I mean WORST player and killed them with stupid shots. That team would have been better distributing LaVines minutes amongst Adams, Anderson, Alford, and Powell and not playing his ***. They couldn't even compete with a Florida team with no draft picks. Again their lottery pick SCREWED THEM and seriously hurt their team. All those other guards were much much better than him and him leaving doesn't hurt UCLA because hes still 2 years away from being good in college.
Lavine was ******* awful Alford should have never played him his kid was better and so was everyone else that played guard.
How did KU do with 2 of the first 3 picks? Bounced first weekend. Were they better the year before with the best college guard in the game who was better than Wiggins in college in Macklemore? Not really.
Syracuse just started out recruiting UConn 5 years ago after 2 decades of being outrecruited. What do we have to show for it while those lucky fers won 2 NCs in years where they almost missed the dance? Best part of 2 decades UConn seriously outrecruited Cuse. Calhoun OWNED Boeheim not only on the court but recruiting.:sad: So there was just about 20 years between when Derrick Coleman left Cuse and when Wes Johnson transferred in and the team started getting ranked top 5/10 regularly where the talent level was down a little bit and the team missed the dance somewhat often and were unranked a lot. Still made it to 2 finals in that period winning one.
So fast forward to 09. Wes Johnson transfers to SU and the team stops underacheiving and goes on a 5 year run where its ranked in the top 10 literally every week. Boeheim recruits as well as he has since the 80s and steps up his coaching big time by rededicating himself to the zone and making it a formidable weapon. Glory days sending guys to the NBA left and right. Uconn on the other hand has Calhoun slowing down and stops getting the recruits they got in the 90s and early 00s. They get good 4 year players. Rarely are ranked top 10 and are a shell of what they were in 2004 when every player had an NBA future.
Who wins 2 NCs? The team playing 4 year players who were the #60 overall prospect in their class and not #6.
Even that first part of that first sentence is debatable, really....I had the unfortunate fortune of having the time to watch that turd bucket.
Indiana hasn't even made it past the Sweet 16 since 2002. Go ahead and call them a "blue blood" if you want, but they really aren't at all anymore. In the '70's and '80's they were, but not anymore. Tom Crean is also driving that program into the ground. He's had six seasons to turn around the team that has such historical significance, but he has managed a measly 101-97 record. If you also look at his recruiting numbers, he hasn't brought in the kind of talent that he should be. I'm extremely surprised that he hasn't lost his job yet. A true blue blood school wouldn't tolerate that kind of performance no matter how lousy of a program Crean took over. Hoiberg took over just as bad of a program as Crean, a school that also has no real basketball tradition (in the eyes of outsiders), and made it a very good program that is only improving. Crean is only appearing to drive their program further into the ground.
I guess I don't understand what point you're trying to make. Are you saying that teams that recruit Top 10 players don't have as much success? I don't think you can flatout make that statement. There are a million variables. Did you not notice that 6 of the 10 players in the Rivals Top 10 for Class of '13 played in the Final Four (Randle, Harrison twins, Dakari Johnson, Chris Walker and Kasey Hill)? And one other made it to the Elite Eight (Gordon)? And that's just in their freshman years. Five of the six that made the Final Four last year returned to school for next season. Then you get the complete opposite from the Top 10 of the Class of 2012, where only 6 of the 10 even MADE the tourney and only one made it past the first round (Tarczewski to the Sweet 16 w/ AZ). You cannot simply say that teams that have a Top 10 recruit on them do not do as well as teams that have lower overall ranked recruits. It is 100% dependent on the team they go to, the teammates, the coach, etc...
Peter Lynch is an investing legend and he said in his book that one of his favorite questions to ask corporate people was who their biggest competition was. The answers usually told him what companies were the best in the industry. It helped to make him fabulously successful.
Now that is neither here nor there, but it does lead to a good idea if you're trying to establish who the true "blue bloods" are. If you consider Kentucky to be one of the blue bloods, ask some of their fans who they consider to be the other blue bloods. You can do the same with the UNC fans or whomever else you consider to be a blue blood. Everyone you ask is certain to name themselves, but you'll get a reasonable idea of who the blue bloods consider to be in their league as a blue blood.
Now that is neither here nor there, but it does lead to a good idea if you're trying to establish who the true "blue bloods" are. If you consider Kentucky to be one of the blue bloods, ask some of their fans who they consider to be the other blue bloods. You can do the same with the UNC fans or whomever else you consider to be a blue blood. Everyone you ask is certain to name themselves, but you'll get a reasonable idea of who the blue bloods consider to be in their league as a blue blood.
