What about toughness quotientThat will be balanced by recency bias. In other news, humans are quite silly.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What about toughness quotientThat will be balanced by recency bias. In other news, humans are quite silly.
99-00 set the standard there. Not sure you can accurately compare such a thing two decades apart, but I will say that if this team walks onto Houston's home court and takes that game from them, they're in the conversation.What about toughness quotient
I don’t expect anyone on this team sobbing as their coach throws in the towel in the elite 8.99-00 set the standard there. Not sure you can accurately compare such a thing two decades apart, but I will say that if this team walks onto Houston's home court and takes that game from them, they're in the conversation.
I would not be surprised to see some anguish when kids have worked so hard to achieve something and then have it ripped away. Almost everyone's season ends that way (well, not Iowa this year lol, but you get the point).I don’t expect anyone on this team sobbing as their coach throws in the towel in the elite 8.
Cincinnati was ranked #1 most of the year, beat ISU in Hawaii during the non con, and would have been a 1 seed but #1 draft pick Kenyon Martin broke his leg in the CUSA tournament which no doubt the committee had to of taken into account. Horrible luck, a major what if that year along with the cyclonesThe other weird thing about the seedings in 2000 was the Big 12 got six teams in the tourney, tied with the Big 10 and SEC for most teams. So it wasn't like the committee thought the league was overall weak.
The #1 seeds in 2000 were:
- Duke: 28-4 (15-1), ACC regular season and tourney champs, 3-3 vs. ranked teams
- Stanford: 26-3 (15-3), Pac-10 regular season co-champs, no tourney, 3-2 vs. ranked teams
- Arizona: 26-6 (15-3), Pac-10 regular season co-champs, no tourney, 7-1 vs. ranked teams
- Michigan State: 26-7 (13-3), Big 10 regular season and tourney champs, 5-4 vs. ranked teams
The #2 seeds were:
The amount of bullsh** here is difficult to comprehend. The ACC and Pac-10 sucked this year, they each had only 3-4 good teams yet the ACC champ with three good wins gets a #1 seed, both Pac-10 "co-champs" (oh brother) get a #1 seed, Michigan State losing to 11-17 Wright State in late December is ignored but Iowa State losing to Drake is evidently enough to drop us down a seed line.
- Iowa State: 29-4 (14-2), Big 12 regular season and tourney champs, 6-2 vs. ranked teams
- Temple: 26-5 (14-2), A10 regular season and tourney champs, 3-0 vs. ranked teams
- Cincinnati: 28-3 (16-0), CUSA regular season champs, 3-1 vs. ranked teams
- St. John's: 24-7 (12-4), Big East 3rd place and tourney champs, 7-2 vs. ranked teams
I agree.This team may be the best by the end. The emotional attachment people have towards the past team will keep most from acknowledging it if this team does surpass the old one.
I don't even think those two are the same type player at all.Since CJones and Gilbert have come on strong I am really reminded of how that team had 3 guards where they were all bulldogs and they could all hit big shots (Tinsley/Horton/Nurse vs Tamin/Gilbert/Jones).
Obviously we don't have a Fizer (hardly anybody does) but we have more total frontcourt depth and Milan is probably a more skilled version of Rancik. All three of our big guys are better on defense and transition than Shirley.
Eh, I think we are selling some of these players short on their talent. Some people need to be reminded that we have had 2 players get triple doubles this year. This team depth wise is probably one of the most talented teams we've ever had.Talent wise they are not a top 10 ISU team, but damn they are tough and they win games. A lot of fun to watch this year.
Comparing this team to 99-00 team is premature. We can revisit this after Houston gameThis current team has a lot to prove before being compared to 99-00. Dumb thread to start on February 15.
The 2001 team only played 4 ranked teams all year including #24 Ole Miss in non conf.
This team will most likely face 10 ranked teams before the Big 12 tournament and most likely somewhere around 11 to 13 ranked teams total.
I have absolutely no problems comparing this team to the '01 team even if they don't get any Big 12 hardware, the conference is RADICALLY stronger now.
The 2000 team was at worst the second best team in the nation so yeah this team would possibly need to make the Final Four for me to think they are better.
I don’t expect anyone on this team sobbing as their coach throws in the towel in the elite 8.
We definitely have some good depth, and better bigs than we are used to having.Eh, I think we are selling some of these players short on their talent. Some people need to be reminded that we have had 2 players get triple doubles this year. This team depth wise is probably one of the most talented teams we've ever had.
Coooooooold bloooodedI don’t expect anyone on this team sobbing as their coach throws in the towel in the elite 8.
We definitely have some good depth, and better bigs than we are used to having.
What’s most impressive about out current team is their depth (as mentioned) and their consistent defense and grit. I’ve been most impressed by their road win at TCU without Lipsey and the close loss at Baylor in a game where they objectively played poorly. On the other hand, playing at BYU showed they can be beat (handily) by a good offensive team shooting well from deep.
There are still a lot of conference games left, with a lot to prove for this team.
If they somehow get through the rest of the season with only 1 loss, I’d put them a class above any other ISU team besides 99-00. If 2 losses, I’d say they’re easily in the convo as a top 3 team all time, with a chance to shine and rise the ladder with a post season run. If 3 losses or more, they are still a top 5-10 team and very good by historical standards, but not top 5 (Hoibergs last 2 years coaching, tinsley years, 95-96, and basically all the Niang/morris years were all as good or better)