B10 preview
- Thread starter rikki-tikka-tava
- Start date
Just something to munch. Have a better one doesn't have to pay to read?
I’ll fade the Iowa FF prediction until I see them improve defensively.
looks to me like I could pull most of those names out of a hat and come up with just as good of a list. League looks deep, and very solid at the bottom. I could see this being a year where we beat up on one another, a bunch of teams get in to the dance, and no one is better than a 3 seed.
20 years and counting. Would be nice to see the conference actually win a title for a change.
last season conference play records were abnormally skewed towards home teams early on, then things began to normalize later in the year. With no fans it will be curious to see how it all plays out. We can’t all finish .500, can we?
looks to me like I could pull most of those names out of a hat and come up with just as good of a list. League looks deep, and very solid at the bottom. I could see this being a year where we beat up on one another, a bunch of teams get in to the dance, and no one is better than a 3 seed.
20 years and counting. Would be nice to see the conference actually win a title for a change.
last season conference play records were abnormally skewed towards home teams early on, then things began to normalize later in the year. With no fans it will be curious to see how it all plays out. We can’t all finish .500, can we?
You know how I feel about sportswriters and their opinion based previews. They're nothing but fans .. and any fan can write a list. Where he really annoys me is not mentioning Rutgers' weak offense or Iowa's weak defense. Neither will be any better unless they improve on their most glaring weakness. Then he lists almost every freakin transfer as an impact transfer, when it's pretty much known that transfers in a majority just don't pan out. There may be 2 or 3 impact transfers on that list at best.
Torvik has a much better projection based on actual data and far less feelings. Torvik Big Ten
Last edited:
What am I missing with Ohio St? Don’t understand them being ahead of us - or especially Illinois
The transfers filling spots and CH historical defense numbers? If the transfers work out they may be a good team. 50/50 on that. They don't have a true post defender though and will be playing smaller this year, so that defense may fall a bit.
Man, Illinois is all hype not really backed by numbers. Ayo and Cockburn are in the top percentile but the rest of that team is not very productive. The two freshman guards may make an impact though. Calling Frazier a good on ball defender is stretching it a bit, and calling Williams a glue guy? lmao .. sure Jan, he plays unproductive minutes which must mean he's a glue guy.
I mean, maybe OVERhyped, but ALL hype? We were a top 20 team last year that got MUCH better as the year went on, we return our best players and we bring in a good class.
Isn't Rutgers supposed to be good this year? They lost one of their players recently and I am not sure how that impacts them
“better than Rutgers” based on what, exactly?
Who doesn't like Rothstein? You might get off on pouring through Torvik, Kenpom and Basketball reference data, Rothstein does the same.
I guess your gripe is more with sports analysts as a whole? A lot of them are bad, I agree. Rothstein is a good egg.
If Rutgers dick slaps IU again and we finish lower than 5th it'll be time for a new coach.
TJD played 15 min
Durham and green played 43 min with
10 pts
2 A
5 TO
4 F
Net Bpm of -5.3
They lost by 9 on the road.
I am not concerned about Rutger
The casual fans and settlers will say they’re not worried about Rutgers, but those of us who actually follow the program know better.
Indiana should be concerned about everyone! There are no automatic wins on the conference schedule. Granted we bullied the bottom feeders last year. But we were mediocre in conference last year. I think we will be better this year but we got dog walked too many times last year in conference to dismiss the 10 teams that were better than us.
For that program, they will be good. IU played them early and the outcome would likely have been different late.
This season the loss of McConnell is tough for Rutger as he is that versatile "glue guy" that is often the difference in close games.
Placing them ahead of IU right now is wishful thinking at best.
Exactly. We were in the bottom third of the conference last year. There’s not a team we can or should take lightly.
180,000+ words & innumerable idioms in the language and that's your choice? Such class...
There are two ways to look at the prognostications. One is to highlight past trends that includes things like coaching consistency and offensive+defensive efficiency. The other is to just look at who is on a team and ask, how many of these guys can play? Coach Knight always considered that. When the games start, who, on a roster, can really play who has been here, and who can really play who might be new this year.
So you have to look at both categories.
Iowa has several guys who can play who will be ready to score right away. But they don't have much when it comes to a history of stopping the other team. Michigan State has a lot of both. Ohio State looks like they either lack guys who can play, or they at least lack knowing ahead of time if their guys can play. I think OSU is over-rated. I would put Michigan ahead of OSU in my predictions.
Maryland lost a lot of production, but they haven't lost a number of key players in the rotation. Whether they have enough to step up is a big question but the same could be said for IU.
I think there are 4 teams that stand out a bit based on what other have and what we may expect. MSU, Illinois, Iowa and Wisconsin.
Teams like Rutgers and Maryland and Michigan and Purdue will not be easy to beat, and honestly, Archie better start beating them, but they are not likely to be top teams from a win-loss standpoint. Or to say it another way, that's where a coach of the year nod could come from.
On paper, Indiana still looks a year away and unfortunately, that would include keeping TJD and Lander around. But IU should be capable of improving on last season's record- If some guys step up where production is needed. I doubt anyone is looking at Indiana and thinking of anything except double teaming TJD.
So you have to look at both categories.
Iowa has several guys who can play who will be ready to score right away. But they don't have much when it comes to a history of stopping the other team. Michigan State has a lot of both. Ohio State looks like they either lack guys who can play, or they at least lack knowing ahead of time if their guys can play. I think OSU is over-rated. I would put Michigan ahead of OSU in my predictions.
Maryland lost a lot of production, but they haven't lost a number of key players in the rotation. Whether they have enough to step up is a big question but the same could be said for IU.
I think there are 4 teams that stand out a bit based on what other have and what we may expect. MSU, Illinois, Iowa and Wisconsin.
Teams like Rutgers and Maryland and Michigan and Purdue will not be easy to beat, and honestly, Archie better start beating them, but they are not likely to be top teams from a win-loss standpoint. Or to say it another way, that's where a coach of the year nod could come from.
On paper, Indiana still looks a year away and unfortunately, that would include keeping TJD and Lander around. But IU should be capable of improving on last season's record- If some guys step up where production is needed. I doubt anyone is looking at Indiana and thinking of anything except double teaming TJD.
Especially since they controlled the game pretty much throughout. Believe IU only led briefly, trailed at the half, and never took the lead in the second half.
Grad?
I am just always curious about fans that use the term "we". I never have and i am a 2X grad. ticket holder for 26 years and booster for 26.
There is nothing wrong with using the term we. Fans identify with their teams, especially alumni.
I couldn’t imagine being concerned enough to actually gripe over such a thing. I doubt the poster believes he’s on the coaching staff or suiting up for games this season.
Says you. It's mostly false and presumptuous to speak for the University and the alumni, and utter BS to use "we" to speak specifically about the Team unless one is on it. Most haven't but the remotest sense and zero experience of anything to do with what individual or collectively goes into putting on the Candystripes. Unless and until one does, there is no 'we' for anyone who actually respects the Players/Staff.
Same principle as presuming to speaking for any subset of the citizenry just because "we' all happen to be American - one can say it but it doesn't make it any less false.
I see both sides of this as i know folks love and feel connected to their team. For me, it is a matter of respect as you say here for the program and I have been a donor and ticket holder in two and sometimes three sports for almost three decades.
I use "we" when talking about alumni fans but not any of the programs.
Correct, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with using “we”, either from the perspective of fan, friend, employee, or alumnus / alumna (or some combination of those) Of the University.
How’s that song go? “Indiana our Indiana”....
who do “we” open the season against anyhow?
who do “we” open the season against anyhow?
