ESPN: Iowa could be Big Ten's sleeper team

Donate To GopherHole

Iowa definitely has the look of a team that could cause a lot of problems this year. The B1G is lining up to be so ridiculous next year, with top line teams, combined with some amazing depth it appears.
 

I think Iowa lost a great shooter. He will be very hard to replace.

Go Gophers
 

"A Big Ten team that has finished 9-9 hasn't been left out of the [NCAA] tournament."

Not to get picky Fran, but that's not true, though I understand what you're trying to say. Going as far back as the 1992-93 season, 6 teams finished the Big Ten regular season with an exact conference record of 9-9 yet did not play in the NCAA Tournament.

1992-93: Gophers
1994-95: Iowa, Penn State
1995-96: Michigan State
1996-97: Michigan, Michigan State

Note that from 1997-98 through 2006-07 the B1G only played 16 conference games, so there were no 9-9 teams. In that time period (10 seasons), 13 B1G teams finished with a conference record of 8-8 or better yet did not play in the NCAA Tournament (at least a couple were ineligible anyways because of NCAA sanctions):

1997-98: Iowa (9-7), Penn State (8-8)
2001-02: Gophers (9-7)
2002-03: Michigan (10-6), Gophers (8-8)
2003-04: Iowa (9-7), Michigan (8-8), Northwestern (8-8)
2004-05: Indiana (10-6. ... who can forget the memorable "We're the 4 seed" mantra from Mike Davis after IU was eliminated by the #5 seed Gophers in the conference tourney quarterfinals), Ohio State (8-8)
2005-06: Michigan (8-8)
2006-07: Iowa (9-7), Michigan (8-8)

All that said, I agree that the Hawkeyes could be dangerous this season, despite their horrific nonconference schedule. In short order, McCaffery has done a nice job making the Hawkeyes relevant again.
 

I told my brother that Iowa could be a surprise team this year and he didnt believe me!
 


I don't know how people don't see them as a sleeper, they swept both us and Wisconsin last year.
 


If Iowa really is a sleeper, I'd be surprised if they didn't go unbeaten in that nonconference schedule. But whether they have a resurgence all depends on how much those guys are willing to defend. But the reality is you don't flip a switch and then suddenly defend a lot better - that's why there's good reason to be skeptical. A lot of times up-tempo teams like Iowa look can great on paper because they have a lot of guys who scored a good amount of points, and talented recruits, but if you don't guard you don't go anywhere.

As far as the 9-9 remark, that was dumb. There are some teams that finished 10-8 in recent years that missed the tourney - I hardly think it is wise to suggest 9-9 is magical and 10-8 is worse. OSU was 10-8 in the Big Ten in 2008 and were left out of the tournament, a snub in my book not based on the resume as much as the reality that quality of play of the OSU team at the end of the year and the talent on that team was clearly better than some of the teams the Committee put in there instead as at-large teams - an "eye test" snub if you will. The Committee then left out PSU at 10-8 the next year and they won the NIT as well, although not in as dominant a fashion as OSU. Illinois was 10-8 and left out in 2010, but they had impotent Bruce Weber as coach.

So I guess McCaffery sees 9-9 as superior to 10-8?
 

Gatens was a big prt of their offense last year, I thnk they are a year away, the 2013-2014 season they will be tough.
 



Have a chance to be good this season (i.e., make the tourney). In 2013-14, dangerous.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom