Illinois #5 in 2/2 AP Poll

Status
Not open for further replies.
#126      
Yeah, that 2021 team could look dominant (I still think the stretch to end the regular season through the BTT Championship might have been the single best streak of basketball by any Illini team in history ... at least for now!), but they seemed to have a more sever Achilles' Heel compared to this year's team. As crazy as this is in retrospect, I actually initially thought the 2022 team could end up going further in the Tournament due to the simplified game plan of "If you try to double team Kofi, we'll kill you from three ... if you don't, Kofi will terrorize you." You can tell I am no Xs and Os expert, lol, but the point is that the 2021 team looked AMAZING when things were going well, but the Loyola performance is one of the most disappointing in a long time. While you shouldn't judge a team by one game, that loss was sort of a depressing microcosm of what could happen if you game planned them effectively.

This year's team is so versatile. Yes, Wagler is our superstar and carries us in a lot of games, but we have had so many guys step up. Granted this is just looking at offense, but it's interesting to look at the scoring balance for what are pretty clearly our five best teams of this century. To choose a cutoff somewhere, I will do the top 8 scorers.

2001 | 77.9 PPG
14.9 Frank Williams
11.3 Marcus Griffin
11.2 Brian Cook
9.9 Cory Bradford
7.5 Sergio McClain
7.2 Robert Archibald
5.7 Sean Harrington
5.0 Lucas Johnson

2005 | 77.0 PPG
15.9 Luther Head
13.3 Dee Brown
12.5 Deron Williams
12.0 Roger Powell, Jr.
10.1 James Augustine
4.5 Jack Ingram
3.3 Nick Smith
2.6 Rich McBride

2021 | 80.5 PPG
20.1 Ayo Dosunmu
17.1 Kofi Cockburn
10.2 Trent Frazier
9.1 Andre Curbelo
8.3 Adam Miller
5.5 Da'Monte Williams
5.1 Giorgi Bezhanishvili
4.6 Jacob Grandison

2024 | 83.4 PPG
23.0 Terrence Shannon, Jr.
15.9 Marcus Domask
12.1 Coleman Hawkins
9.6 Quincy Guerrier
6.2 Ty Rodgers
6.1 Dain Dainja
5.7 Luke Goode
5.6 Justin Harmon

2026 | 84.6 PPG
18.1 Keaton Wagler
14.3 Kylan Boswell
13.3 Andrej Stojakovic
12.4 David Mirkovic
10.1 Tomislav Ivisic
7.2 Zvonimir Ivisic
5.5 Ben Humrichous
5.1 Jake Davis

2005 and 2026 are the only teams with five players averaging double figures. It is also the case for both teams that the next three players who are not averaging double figures (A) could knock down huge shots and (B) played very well alongside the higher-scorers ... and frankly, the "supporting cast" of the 2026 team is much more dangerous from three and more able to have huge games themselves.
To build on the point you’re making, I think a strong case can be made that this team is the most disciplined and system-driven group of any team listed above, rivaling the 2005 team. One of the key reasons championship teams in recent years tend to have experience and continuity is because this has helped build disciplined systems. Systems only work when players fully commit to them.

Brad and staff have clearly built and developed an extremely disciplined roster, and that shows up in several notable stat parallels to the 2005 team:

Turnovers - This year’s turnover rate sits at 14.1%, the lowest of any Illinois team this century. The 2005 team turned it over at 16.5%, while even the better Groce teams (2015 and 2016) were only around 15%. Most seasons typically fall in the 18–20% range. This level of ball security shows this team's discipline and decision-making.

Tempo and shot selection - This team plays at the second-slowest tempo among the teams mentioned, averaging roughly 65.6 possessions per game, compared to 64.1 for the 2005 team. Nearly every other team operates closer to 70 possessions. Like the 2005 group, this team is comfortable playing slowly because it is consistently generating the right shots for the right players.

Offensive rebounding as a system pillar (edit: not necessarily a similarity to 2005)- The ability to play this slow is directly tied to elite offensive rebounding. Every player on the floor is fully bought into attacking the offensive glass, and it has become the team’s secret sauce. This may be the strongest evidence of discipline, as it clearly required retraining players to commit to a demanding, team-wide philosophy that only works with total buy-in.

Shot quality on both ends - Finally, as a bit of a cherry on top, average 2-point attempt distance further highlights this team’s discipline. While it’s a newly tracked stat, this team is elite at only taking close twos offensively, while also forcing opponents into longer twos defensively.
 
Last edited:
#128      
1989 would have dunked the sh$t out of this team...... Way to physical and athletic for this 25-26 version. And they had shooters too.....
Basketball Ok GIF by Malcolm France
 
#129      
This means that Brad Underwood is playing under new rules. It doesn't mean that he is a better coach.

That is all
 
#130      
Hahaha always fun conjecture!

But lets tap the brakes on Wagler > Ayo ok? Ayo has become one of the best 6th men in the league and is 30 lbs bigger doing the same sh!t as Wagler.

Ayo would abuse Wagler rn.
Wagler in 3 years and 20 lbs doing the same sh@t? Ok.
 
#131      
One would think that people on a computer would be alerted when they add an unnecessary apostrophe.
 
#132      
To build on the point you’re making, I think a strong case can be made that this team is the most disciplined and system-driven group of any team listed above, rivaling the 2005 team. One of the key reasons championship teams in recent years tend to have experience and continuity is because this has helped build disciplined systems. Systems only work when players fully commit to them.

Brad and staff have clearly built and developed an extremely disciplined roster, and that shows up in several notable stat parallels to the 2005 team:

Turnovers - This year’s turnover rate sits at 14.1%, the lowest of any Illinois team this century. The 2005 team turned it over at 16.5%, while even the better Groce teams (2015 and 2016) were only around 15%. Most seasons typically fall in the 18–20% range. This level of ball security shows this team's discipline and decision-making.

Tempo and shot selection - This team plays at the second-slowest tempo among the teams mentioned, averaging roughly 65.6 possessions per game, compared to 64.1 for the 2005 team. Nearly every other team operates closer to 70 possessions. Like the 2005 group, this team is comfortable playing slowly because it is consistently generating the right shots for the right players.

Offensive rebounding as a system pillar (edit: not necessarily a similarity to 2005)- The ability to play this slow is directly tied to elite offensive rebounding. Every player on the floor is fully bought into attacking the offensive glass, and it has become the team’s secret sauce. This may be the strongest evidence of discipline, as it clearly required retraining players to commit to a demanding, team-wide philosophy that only works with total buy-in.

Shot quality on both ends - Finally, as a bit of a cherry on top, average 2-point attempt distance further highlights this team’s discipline. While it’s a newly tracked stat, this team is elite at only taking close twos offensively, while also forcing opponents into longer twos defensively.
I dislike the implication that fewer possessions = slow. We get a ton of offensive rebounds that extend possessions and reduces opponent possessions in the process. Without looking it up, I bet our shot attempts per game are on par or higher than many teams with 70+ possessions.
 
#133      
2005, like someone mentioned for 2021, also got knocked out because of its major weakness - lack of depth. It was a team that essentially only went 6 deep. When your big gets fouled out for existing in the same zip code as Sean May, it's hard to overcome that. If Brian Randle hadn't punched a wall, I wonder how that game would've looked different.

I think if you matched up starting fives of this year's team and 2005, then Dee, Deron, and Luther lead the way. Full team, however, there's just so many weapons this year. Who takes charge? It's probably Keaton, but it could also be Kylan, Andrej, Ivisic (T or Z). All on a team that's going at least 8 deep. And if only Ty hadn't gotten hurt on this team.

I was about two weeks old when the 88-89 season started, so I didn't get to watch that team, but otherwise this may be the best all around team I can remember seeing in my lifetime
 
#134      
I dislike the implication that fewer possessions = slow. We get a ton of offensive rebounds that extend possessions and reduces opponent possessions in the process. Without looking it up, I bet our shot attempts per game are on par or higher than many teams with 70+ possessions.

I'm sorry to hear that you dislike it, but it's not an implication, and there isn't necessarily a correlation between offensive rebounding rate and tempo.

Fewer possessions = lower tempo = slower. I'm guessing that our staff came to the conclusion that there's a correlation between optimizing pace and championship basketball (See: the Trapezoid of Excellence) when you have a high Net Rating.

Illinois being good at rebounding isn't a new phenomenon. Last year, we were one of the best rebounding teams in the country, however slightly worse at offensive rebounding (by about 4%). Last year, our possessions (tempo) was 71.5, and this year it's 65.7. 4% improvement in offensive rebound rate doesn't account for 6 more possessions per game.

Florida is ranked 2nd in the nation in offensive rebounding rate at 43%, along with a tempo of 69.9 (ranked 60th in the country). They play faster than us. Arizona is ranked 5th in the nation in offensive rebounding rate at 39.6%, along with a tempo of 71 (24th in the nation). They play faster than us.

Illinois is ranked 4th in the nation in offensive rebounding rate at 39.7%, with a tempo of 65.7 (262nd in the nation). We play slow. Houston has a slightly lower offensive rebounding rate at 37.3% (20th in the nation), and their tempo is 63.4 (346th in the nation). We aren't as slow as Houston, but our tempo is a lot closer to Houston's than it is to Florida's or Arizona's.
 
#135      
Probably true but so far Wagler has handled pressure better than Ayo did his whole time at Illinois. If he could have kept his calm and composure like Wagler we never would have lost to Loyola.
 
#136      
Today's kenpom rankings (Feb.4). Michighan #2, Illini #5, Purdue 9, Mich. State 10
 
#137      
I'm sorry to hear that you dislike it, but it's not an implication, and there isn't necessarily a correlation between offensive rebounding rate and tempo.

Fewer possessions = lower tempo = slower. I'm guessing that our staff came to the conclusion that there's a correlation between optimizing pace and championship basketball (See: the Trapezoid of Excellence) when you have a high Net Rating.

Illinois being good at rebounding isn't a new phenomenon. Last year, we were one of the best rebounding teams in the country, however slightly worse at offensive rebounding (by about 4%). Last year, our possessions (tempo) was 71.5, and this year it's 65.7. 4% improvement in offensive rebound rate doesn't account for 6 more possessions per game.

Florida is ranked 2nd in the nation in offensive rebounding rate at 43%, along with a tempo of 69.9 (ranked 60th in the country). They play faster than us. Arizona is ranked 5th in the nation in offensive rebounding rate at 39.6%, along with a tempo of 71 (24th in the nation). They play faster than us.

Illinois is ranked 4th in the nation in offensive rebounding rate at 39.7%, with a tempo of 65.7 (262nd in the nation). We play slow. Houston has a slightly lower offensive rebounding rate at 37.3% (20th in the nation), and their tempo is 63.4 (346th in the nation). We aren't as slow as Houston, but our tempo is a lot closer to Houston's than it is to Florida's or Arizona's.

Even outside of the rebounding Illinois plays offense in a very deliberate way. We don't get a lot of transition opportunities, dont push the ball off of rebounds, and dont take quick shots. The idea of hunting for a gold shot means the ball moves around and a lot of the shot clock get used on every possession. And then comes the offense rebounds. I think we need to dispute the idea that slow = low scoring slog on offense or not fun basketball because that's not the case but Illinois IS SLOW.
 
#138      
Even outside of the rebounding Illinois plays offense in a very deliberate way. We don't get a lot of transition opportunities, dont push the ball off of rebounds, and dont take quick shots. The idea of hunting for a gold shot means the ball moves around and a lot of the shot clock get used on every possession. And then comes the offense rebounds. I think we need to dispute the idea that slow = low scoring slog on offense or not fun basketball because that's not the case but Illinois IS SLOW.
and very deliberate, honestly the best run offense of any team we have watched this year, maybe several years, maybe ever! I love that this team is flying a little under the radar, maybe not as much after this ranking, but enough to remove some of the pressure associated with high rankings. We're all into enjoying the show, even Brad. Love, love, love it
 
#139      
Even outside of the rebounding Illinois plays offense in a very deliberate way. We don't get a lot of transition opportunities, dont push the ball off of rebounds, and dont take quick shots. The idea of hunting for a gold shot means the ball moves around and a lot of the shot clock get used on every possession. And then comes the offense rebounds. I think we need to dispute the idea that slow = low scoring slog on offense or not fun basketball because that's not the case but Illinois IS SLOW.
It has been a total sea change this year

17th nationally in tempo last season, 262nd this season.
 
#140      
It has been a total sea change this year

17th nationally in tempo last season, 262nd this season.
Yep, and I think it was a smart change. You expend more effort on defense than offense (at least you should if you're effective). Bring able to play at slower place effectively in the halfcourt forces teams to play over 20 seconds of defense every possession and then if you're a good offensive rebounding team, the opponent is forced to defend for an additional 10-15 seconds. It starts to wear on a team especially if they're going down the court and being 1 shot and done in the first 10-15 seconds of the shot clock.

I believe this change is one of the bigger reasons why our opponents start wearing down and having more defensive lapses in the 2nd half. Giving up late buckets and getting killed on the boards is draining and it starts feeling inevitable. Not much more discouraging than that. And being able to play slow and efficient in the halfcourt means you can produce and make your own shots within the offense and not have to rely on turnovers, fast breaks, and unset defenses.

Really like what we've done this year and it's very much working.
 
#141      
Yep, and I think it was a smart change. You expend more effort on defense than offense (at least you should if you're effective). Bring able to play at slower place effectively in the halfcourt forces teams to play over 20 seconds of defense every possession and then if you're a good offensive rebounding team, the opponent is forced to defend for an additional 10-15 seconds. It starts to wear on a team especially if they're going down the court and being 1 shot and done in the first 10-15 seconds of the shot clock.

I believe this change is one of the bigger reasons why our opponents start wearing down and having more defensive lapses in the 2nd half. Giving up late buckets and getting killed on the boards is draining and it starts feeling inevitable. Not much more discouraging than that. And being able to play slow and efficient in the halfcourt means you can produce and make your own shots within the offense and not have to rely on turnovers, fast breaks, and unset defenses.

Really like what we've done this year and it's very much working.
Well and it reflects the abilities of our current roster. It's not that we've really changed the principles of our offense, we're just running the same stuff in a different way.

BU has had a couple of the most devastating fast break players in recent CBB history in Ayo and TSJ, and played to that strength when he had it. We don't have a guy like that now, and in fact have a bunch of excellent passers and half court decision makers, so we're leaning into that.
 
#142      
Even outside of the rebounding Illinois plays offense in a very deliberate way. We don't get a lot of transition opportunities, dont push the ball off of rebounds, and dont take quick shots. The idea of hunting for a gold shot means the ball moves around and a lot of the shot clock get used on every possession. And then comes the offense rebounds. I think we need to dispute the idea that slow = low scoring slog on offense or not fun basketball because that's not the case but Illinois IS SLOW.
To this point, our assist % prior to the winning streak was like 46 - 48% if I remember correctly. During the winning streak, I think it's around 54%. So ball movement has been a somewhat important and unheralded factor to our recent success.
 
#143      
and very deliberate, honestly the best run offense of any team we have watched this year, maybe several years, maybe ever! I love that this team is flying a little under the radar, maybe not as much after this ranking, but enough to remove some of the pressure associated with high rankings. We're all into enjoying the show, even Brad. Love, love, love it
I think you would feel hard-pressed to find a team over the last 25 years who is 19-3 overall, 10-1 and tied for first in the Big Ten, on an 11-game winning streak and that just beat TWO top 5 teams on their home courts in the last week plus ... and yet is still being talked about as "clearly" a tier below #1 seed consideration by the media. It sounds crazy to say we are still "flying under the radar" while ranked #5 ... but that is a testament to JUST how great we have been playing, IMO.
 
Last edited:
#144      
I think you would feel hard-pressed to find a team over the last 25 years who is 19-3 overall, 10-1 and tied for first in the Big Ten, on an 11-game winning streak and that just beat TWO top 5 teams on their home courts in the last week plus ... and yet is still being talked about as "clearly" a tier below #1 seed consideration by the media. It sounds crazy to say we are still "flying under the radar" while ranked #5 ... but that is a testament to JUST how great we have been playing, IMO.
Fully agreed.

People were letting Lunardi have it in the Bracketology thread about the gap between 1 and 2 seeds, but he's right if we're talking the current aggregated bracket (See: Bracket Matrix), looking at the next grouping after the AP top 4. There is no other seed group gap even close to as large as the one between Connecticut and Illinois (although UConn's claim for a one seed can certainly be argued based on the quality of their schedule).

That said, if we can make it to the end of the season with only 2 losses, I think we have a pretty fair shot at a 1 seed ahead of the current AP top 4.

As others have pointed out, there are numerous tough roads and cannibalism ahead for the teams at the top of the polls currently:

Arizona - Since playing UConn in November, Zona has only played 2 teams in the top 25 of KenPom - Alabama and BYU. In their final 9 games, 6 of these games are KenPom top 25 matchups, with Kansas twice, Houston Away, Iowa State, and BYU and TTU.

Duke - Compared to the other teams at the top, Duke and UConn have cupcake schedules. That said, their toughest game will be Michigan in Washington DC on 2/21. I know I'll be rooting for Duke here, but it would help our case even more if Duke also lost some of the games to UNC, Clemson, Virginia, NC State... although I don't see that happening.

Michigan - it's been discussed ad nauseam, but Michigan really has a tough schedule ahead. The clearest path to a 1 seed for us is for Michigan to lose 3 or 4 plus the game to us. That sounds crazy, but they have Purdue at Mackey, Duke, Illinois on the road in the state farm center, on the road at Iowa, and on the road at MSU. I would not want their schedule to close the season.

UConn - Again, they have a cupcake schedule, but I think if they split games with St. John and lose to Nova away, there is a case to be made for us bunny hopping them. The Big East is a joke this year.

Iowa State/Houston - The Big 12 is going to suffer from cannibalism to end the season, and hopefully there is the right amount of it so one of these two teams doesn't go on a heater and pass us...
 
#145      
Fully agreed.

People were letting Lunardi have it in the Bracketology thread about the gap between 1 and 2 seeds, but he's right if we're talking the current aggregated bracket (See: Bracket Matrix), looking at the next grouping after the AP top 4. There is no other seed group gap even close to as large as the one between Connecticut and Illinois (although UConn's claim for a one seed can certainly be argued based on the quality of their schedule).

That said, if we can make it to the end of the season with only 2 losses, I think we have a pretty fair shot at a 1 seed ahead of the current AP top 4.

As others have pointed out, there are numerous tough roads and cannibalism ahead for the teams at the top of the polls currently:

Arizona - Since playing UConn in November, Zona has only played 2 teams in the top 25 of KenPom - Alabama and BYU. In their final 9 games, 6 of these games are KenPom top 25 matchups, with Kansas twice, Houston Away, Iowa State, and BYU and TTU.

Duke - Compared to the other teams at the top, Duke and UConn have cupcake schedules. That said, their toughest game will be Michigan in Washington DC on 2/21. I know I'll be rooting for Duke here, but it would help our case even more if Duke also lost some of the games to UNC, Clemson, Virginia, NC State... although I don't see that happening.

Michigan - it's been discussed ad nauseam, but Michigan really has a tough schedule ahead. The clearest path to a 1 seed for us is for Michigan to lose 3 or 4 plus the game to us. That sounds crazy, but they have Purdue at Mackey, Duke, Illinois on the road in the state farm center, on the road at Iowa, and on the road at MSU. I would not want their schedule to close the season.

UConn - Again, they have a cupcake schedule, but I think if they split games with St. John and lose to Nova away, there is a case to be made for us bunny hopping them. The Big East is a joke this year.

Iowa State/Houston - The Big 12 is going to suffer from cannibalism to end the season, and hopefully there is the right amount of it so one of these two teams doesn't go on a heater and pass us...
Michigan plays MSU at home.
 
#146      
I think you would feel hard-pressed to find a team over the last 25 years who is 19-3 overall, 10-1 and tied for first in the Big Ten, on an 11-game winning streak and that just beat TWO top 5 teams on their home courts in the last week plus ... and yet is still being talked about as "clearly" a tier below #1 seed consideration by the media. It sounds crazy to say we are still "flying under the radar" while ranked #5 ... but that is a testament to JUST how great we have been playing, IMO.
A big reason for this also is that the Top 4 teams this year have better metrics than previous years. Now some of that for sure is the difference in scheduling and the willingness now to run up scores for the sake of efficiency compared to how it was done historically. But it's also that the Top 4 teams are historically good as well.

To show what I mean, I'm going to use kenpom because he has an awesome database that is easily searchable for point in time metrics. We currently are +32.13 and ranked 5th in kenpom metrics as of 2/3/26. This is where we would have ranked in any prior calendar year on Feb 3rd of that year (i.e. day of effiviency ranking, not final overall season efficiency ranking) so it's more of an apples to apples comparison.

2/3/26: 5th (+36.38 1st)
2/3/25: 3rd (+36.11 1st)
2/3/24: 2nd (+33.91 1st)
2/3/23: 1st (+29.15 1st)
2/3/22: 2nd (+32.74 1st)
2/3/21: 3rd (+35.50 1st)
2/3/20: 1st (+30.31 1st)
2/3/19: 4th (+35.90 1st)
2/3/18: 2nd (+33.05 1st)
2/3/17: 2nd (+32.69 1st)
2/3/16: 1st (+27.55 1st)
2/3/15: 3rd (+38.38 1st)

I could go back further, but basically in the past 12 years, there's never been a Top 4 on February 3rd as good as this current year's top 4. So much so that we would be a clear 1 seed in every other year, and we would have been on pace to be THE #1 1 seed in 25% of the past 12 years! So the issue isn't us, we're playing great, this is just an absurdly good year for college basketball at the top.
 
#147      
Fully agreed.

People were letting Lunardi have it in the Bracketology thread about the gap between 1 and 2 seeds, but he's right if we're talking the current aggregated bracket (See: Bracket Matrix), looking at the next grouping after the AP top 4. There is no other seed group gap even close to as large as the one between Connecticut and Illinois (although UConn's claim for a one seed can certainly be argued based on the quality of their schedule).

That said, if we can make it to the end of the season with only 2 losses, I think we have a pretty fair shot at a 1 seed ahead of the current AP top 4.

As others have pointed out, there are numerous tough roads and cannibalism ahead for the teams at the top of the polls currently:

Arizona - Since playing UConn in November, Zona has only played 2 teams in the top 25 of KenPom - Alabama and BYU. In their final 9 games, 6 of these games are KenPom top 25 matchups, with Kansas twice, Houston Away, Iowa State, and BYU and TTU.

Duke - Compared to the other teams at the top, Duke and UConn have cupcake schedules. That said, their toughest game will be Michigan in Washington DC on 2/21. I know I'll be rooting for Duke here, but it would help our case even more if Duke also lost some of the games to UNC, Clemson, Virginia, NC State... although I don't see that happening.

Michigan - it's been discussed ad nauseam, but Michigan really has a tough schedule ahead. The clearest path to a 1 seed for us is for Michigan to lose 3 or 4 plus the game to us. That sounds crazy, but they have Purdue at Mackey, Duke, Illinois on the road in the state farm center, on the road at Iowa, and on the road at MSU. I would not want their schedule to close the season.

UConn - Again, they have a cupcake schedule, but I think if they split games with St. John and lose to Nova away, there is a case to be made for us bunny hopping them. The Big East is a joke this year.

Iowa State/Houston - The Big 12 is going to suffer from cannibalism to end the season, and hopefully there is the right amount of it so one of these two teams doesn't go on a heater and pass us...
Yea both the big ten and big 12 are so back loaded, it's not really worth worrying too much about where Arizona, Michigan, ISU, Houston, etc. sit in early February. And UConn isn't as good as everybody else at the top - they'll drop out of that gold plated 1 seed tier when they drop one of the Saint Johns games and then another random Big East game they should have won.

ACC sucks though, so Duke will cruise to a 1 seed (maybe Michigan can beat them and then lose to Illinois & drop another couple games to shake it up).
 
#148      
Fully agreed.

People were letting Lunardi have it in the Bracketology thread about the gap between 1 and 2 seeds, but he's right if we're talking the current aggregated bracket (See: Bracket Matrix), looking at the next grouping after the AP top 4. There is no other seed group gap even close to as large as the one between Connecticut and Illinois (although UConn's claim for a one seed can certainly be argued based on the quality of their schedule).

That said, if we can make it to the end of the season with only 2 losses, I think we have a pretty fair shot at a 1 seed ahead of the current AP top 4.

As others have pointed out, there are numerous tough roads and cannibalism ahead for the teams at the top of the polls currently:

Arizona - Since playing UConn in November, Zona has only played 2 teams in the top 25 of KenPom - Alabama and BYU. In their final 9 games, 6 of these games are KenPom top 25 matchups, with Kansas twice, Houston Away, Iowa State, and BYU and TTU.

Duke - Compared to the other teams at the top, Duke and UConn have cupcake schedules. That said, their toughest game will be Michigan in Washington DC on 2/21. I know I'll be rooting for Duke here, but it would help our case even more if Duke also lost some of the games to UNC, Clemson, Virginia, NC State... although I don't see that happening.

Michigan - it's been discussed ad nauseam, but Michigan really has a tough schedule ahead. The clearest path to a 1 seed for us is for Michigan to lose 3 or 4 plus the game to us. That sounds crazy, but they have Purdue at Mackey, Duke, Illinois on the road in the state farm center, on the road at Iowa, and on the road at MSU. I would not want their schedule to close the season.

UConn - Again, they have a cupcake schedule, but I think if they split games with St. John and lose to Nova away, there is a case to be made for us bunny hopping them. The Big East is a joke this year.

Iowa State/Houston - The Big 12 is going to suffer from cannibalism to end the season, and hopefully there is the right amount of it so one of these two teams doesn't go on a heater and pass us...
I think they already won that game , didn't they ??.................
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back