20-11 (8-10) makes no sense as that means we lose one of the remaining non-conference which are all against #250+ teams (yes, Mizzou is that bad).
What will ISU be ranked?
- Thread starter mynameisjonas
- Start date
I might have typed something wrong. More detail below and a new insight.
The team is 10-0 (0-0) right now. Here is what is is giving me...
W over SELA, Chicago State, and Missouri = 13-0
Within the Big 12...
W
---
Texas Tech
Texas
TCU
@ West Virginia
Kansas State
@ TCU
Oklahoma
West Virginia
@ Kansas State
Oklahoma State
L
---
Baylor
@ Oklahoma
@ Kansas
@ Texas Tech
@ Oklahoma State
Kansas
@ Texas
@ Baylor
Looks like 0-2 against Baylor and Kansas.
Split 1-1 with Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State.
Sweep 2-0 against West Virginia, TCU, and Kansas State.
= (10-8) in the Big 12
= 23-8 (10-8) overall
Something that I noticed...
Good gosh the Big 12 schedule is frontloaded. That projection above is projecting the team to start 1-3 in the Big 12, needing tough wins at home against Texas and on the road in Lubbock to avoid going 1-5 to start the conference slate, and eventually ending up 3-7 before going on a 7-1 tear (including a seven-game winning streak, the only loss being the B12 finale against Baylor in Waco) to end up 10-8. Going to be a heck of a coaching job to keep the team's chin up against the first half of the Big 12 schedule.
Most of these will shake out and be reasonable after a while. But once you are 8 or more games into the season it is idiotic to have residual impacts from the prior year in college basketball. Yes, 8 games in a college basketball season with all the uncertainty in SoS is a low number of data points. But in a sport where turnover is massive, if the "solution" is to still have residual effects of a prior season by this point, then it's a dumb model. And again, if a model is spitting out that Xavier, Memphis, and Iowa are 20 or so spots better than ISU, then the model must be thrown out as a valid source of information at this point.
Amazing how much of this is still media bias due to name brand. Texas a perfect example. Two tests and two failures. Best win is over Northern Colorado. You give them our resume and they’re top 5 right now.
Michigan States losses are not bad losses by any stretch (KU and Baylor). Some quality wins like Penn State, Minnesota, Butler, UConn, Louisville, etc. some of those teams not great but at least power 5 wins.
But again, give them our resume and they’re top 5.
Michigan States losses are not bad losses by any stretch (KU and Baylor). Some quality wins like Penn State, Minnesota, Butler, UConn, Louisville, etc. some of those teams not great but at least power 5 wins.
But again, give them our resume and they’re top 5.
Last edited:
I know it's easy to get worked up about who's ahead of us and concerned about where we think we should be, but...
Holy Cow People!!! The Iowa State Cyclones are #11 in the country!!!
#11 seemed soooooooo far away from any place we could comprehend last year. We won two f-ing games! Two!
Enjoy this ride for the next couple weeks and as long as it lasts after that! Getting this team to this point is one of the most amazing accomplishments in Iowa State- and college basketball- history!
Holy Cow People!!! The Iowa State Cyclones are #11 in the country!!!
#11 seemed soooooooo far away from any place we could comprehend last year. We won two f-ing games! Two!
Enjoy this ride for the next couple weeks and as long as it lasts after that! Getting this team to this point is one of the most amazing accomplishments in Iowa State- and college basketball- history!
Yea the poll tracker is a good weekly reminder how clueless many in sports media are.
I guess people are a little surly because if those two voters had given ISU a reasonable ranking ISU would be in the top 10. Just a dozen votes separates 10 and 11.
The first 6 big 12 games have to be the toughest stretch I can remember us having.
Our resume is top 10 but I think we all know we really aren't. At least not yet or not until our offensive efficiency improves. Otherwise we'd see more people predicting 12 or 13 conference wins.
I believe the poll should reflect what a team has accomplished not what we think they are. Prove it on the court. If a team has a top 10 resume, reward them with a top 10 ranking.
This is why I think preseason polls are the dumbest things ever.
And I'm not bothered much that it's #11 instead of #9 due to outliers, it's mainly puzzlement about how some voters made selections
(I'm sure Iowa State isn't the only team affected by those ... and might not be limited to the voters in ISU's case).
It's kind of snapshot/resume vs. perceived strength.
ISU hasn't played/beaten a top 10 team, but doesn't mean the existing body of work is without value (and it's compared to all other teams, not in a vacuum).
We'll get a chance in a couple of weeks so we'll see.
again a lot of this comes down to philosophy...do you think the poll should be a ranking of the top 25 best teams, or the top 25 most deserving teams. People answer this question differently, and thus rank teams differently.
Five weeks into the season no one really knows who the top 25 best teams are so really the resumes are all they have to go on. By the end of the season there is enough data to have a reasonable chance to peg the top 25 best teams. Anyone who thinks they know who the top 25 best teams are at this point of the season is fooling themselves.
First that came immediately to mind, on the Brutality Scale.*
2002-03 (ranking at time game was played):
(14) Kansas
at (8) Texas
(5) Oklahoma
at (21) Missouri
Nebraska
at (9) Oklahoma State
(* This is for opening 6 games, not 6-game stretch anywhere within the season ... there could be other examples of that even worse than this example).
Last edited:
I have a really hard time believing that all of those teams receiving top 25 votes have a win over a top 10 team. In fact, very, very few of them do.
Good point - I should have noted such, by extension, with my post. I mean, they have to rank 25 teams SOMEHOW, and it's unlikely many have beaten a top 10 or they'd be IN top 10 and plenty haven't played a top 10 (some might not have any top 25 wins, but I didn't dig that deeply).