ESPN Preseason Rankings...
- Thread starter Divided Sky
- Start date
Maybe they got us and Iowa mixed up?.... I mean, I guess I can see why we could be ranked 90th but there is no way Iowa is the 50th best team in the nation. No way.
This isn't as far fetched as you would hope. The national media confuses ISU/Iowa all the friggin time.
Personally I'm very optimistic that the Hawks will be improved but I can't see ISU at 90. Don't know what they're looking at.
I also don't EXPECT the Hawks to be on the NCAA bubble. I'll be very satisfied with a winning record and NIT invite....improvement.
So you are saying we have no shot at the dance?
Care to elaborate on why you feel that way? I tend to shy away from "absolutes".
When CFH was hired people said give him 3 (or more) years to get to post season play. I think we have a good chance for NIT this year,and depending on what happens,a shot at the Dance. My concern is the people who sucked in all the hype without any caution, and should we miss the Dance, they are going to be screaming. Don't care what detractors say about him, DG will be missed, and there are a lot of other questions. I do like the attitude and excitement the team seems to have though.
ISU and UNI as 90 and 91 is a solid prediction, nothing insane there. They're likely accurate to within 50 places up or down on both teams.
Iowa at 50...if they end up anywhere remotely close to #50 and thus a bubble team, Fran should get every single vote for Coach of the Year. I'll run the campaign myself.
Iowa at 50...if they end up anywhere remotely close to #50 and thus a bubble team, Fran should get every single vote for Coach of the Year. I'll run the campaign myself.
I don' see how anyone could think 90 is a reasonable prediction for ISU. Sagarin had us at 87 last year, and even the most pessimistic Cyclone is expecting material improvement this year.
USATODAY.com
USATODAY.com
The key point is whether ESPN has ISU at 90 based off computer rankings projected from last year (which would make sense) or whether their 'experts' have tabbed us as the 90th best team in the country. If it's the latter than that's asinine.
I can see ISU's 90th ranking, but Iowa should be below ISU at best. Do they have some incredible class of freshmen coming in? Otherwise they have to be below ISU. Interestingly they have our football team at #33 and Iowa in the 60s.
I know Ill be bashed for it.. But I can not believe how good people think this team is going to be. Step back and you see a lot of missing things and VAST amounts of inexperience. ISU fans tend to compare what is good or not by comparing to last years team. An average NIT team would have been a huge upgrade from last year. Hopefully our upgrade in talent has gone further than making us an NIT type team. Im not so sure it has.
Is the gross amount of talent on this team improved? Some I am sure due to overall numbers. But Im not sure its a huge differnce than if u compare last yeasr 5 to this.
DG, Jake and JVB were pretty ok players.
No pg is killer.
I want this team to be as good as the rest of us. I just have a hard time buying that this team can win all the close games it will take to win big in the Big 12.
Is the gross amount of talent on this team improved? Some I am sure due to overall numbers. But Im not sure its a huge differnce than if u compare last yeasr 5 to this.
DG, Jake and JVB were pretty ok players.
No pg is killer.
I want this team to be as good as the rest of us. I just have a hard time buying that this team can win all the close games it will take to win big in the Big 12.
other than indiana and nc state (both with national championships) I cannot think of another school with as diehard following/attendance and crappy bball as isu. the expectations of the team are more a reflection of desperation for some talent/wins than any rational analysis.
we had no chance to win with gmac, fred started with zilch, and now we feel we finally have a fighting chance, with scholarship/b12 caliber athletes.
we had no chance to win with gmac, fred started with zilch, and now we feel we finally have a fighting chance, with scholarship/b12 caliber athletes.
If you look at last years team positional battles in comparison to this years, I see a great improvement everywhere except PG. Christopherson and Ejim return as starters which one would believe they have improved. I'd take RW, Booker, Gibson and Railey as better or equivolent post players than JVB and Babb and Allen as better shooters than both Uncle Jake and JVB. And then our players on the bench (quantity and quality) will be much improved. Hard not to at least expect an NIT birth. We were led in rebounding by a 6'3" player and failed miserably in that stat as a team yet still were in games. Hard to imagine being any worse than last year in rebounding and now we will have fresher legs at the end of games.
I think our team is actually a team and will play harder than most of our opponents. This team will not settle for losses and I think we will see an increased passion from Fred Hoiberg coached teams. I hated how we would (under MCD) give up, could never win close games, and flat out rolled over against superior teams. Those were weak teams, this is a strong team. I expect this team to win games and finish above K-State and Mizzou. We have the firepower to finish 6th. If everything goes better than planned I think we will be better than 6th, especially considering the hits KU has taken and how much Okie St will be relying on a frehsman (LeBryan Nash) for the majority of their scoring.
