The Fran fade

"GCU was a bad matchup because they had big men to compete with Luka."
"Oregon was a bad matchup because they didn't have players to match up with Luka."

Apparently any team good enough to get into the tournament was a bad matchup for iowa.
Waukee and Centennial would have been bad matchups, too. I'm guessing Fran's overall 11 year record in March is not very good.
 
It's crazy. It's as if the entire school, some of their players and most of its media were all but certain, even with Gonzaga in their region, that Iowa was going to at least the final four, if not win the national championship. Furthermore, it's as if even with the loss to Oregon in the 2nd round, they're still convinced that's the case. I just can't figure out who they're trying to convince....themselves or everyone else. I think it's a combination of the 2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Statefan10
Thought Garza was supposed to be a bad matchup for Oregon. He went off for about 40, think if the crappy Iowa guards could have done anything, they should have won by 20.


If Iowa State had better coaching and better players they could've won the national title this year. But.....
 
  • Funny
Reactions: Cy4Lifer
I didn't bring up their history. Someone else did and made fun of it. I just merely pointed out that Iowa has a much better history than ISU.

I said at the beginning of the year that I thought Iowa would be a solid top 20 team. I never bought into the whole top 5 thing or Big Ten Contenders. They actually exceeded my expectations this year except for the Oregon game.


I guess Army has a better football history than Iowa too.
 
Yeah but that's just your schtick in general - set Iowa State expectations impossibly high, set Iowa expectations unreasonably low. Lmao if you're really trying to spin Iowa exceeding your expectations this year
somebody else here does that same thing all the time. not going to name names
 

Help Support Us

Become a patron