RossWB's picture



Minneapolis, MN (via Sioux City, IA)

Member since 24 July 2016 | Blog

Recent Activity

Comment 5 hours ago

You're not comparing apples to apples. Private schools are not germane to this discussion so I'm not sure why you're bothering to include Creighton and Marquette except to falsely inflate the numbers in Nebraska and Wisconsin. 

More importantly, those "other" D1 programs in Nebraska and Wisconsin have a key program missing -- football. Nebraska Omaha killed its football program years ago. Milwaukee has no football program. Nor does Green Bay. Missouri has a few other colleges that compete at the D1 (FCS) level in Missouri State and SE Missouri State, but they also have 2x the population of Iowa and no Iowa State-comparable school as well. (FWIW neither Creighton nor Marquette play football, either.)

If UNI wants to survive in something close to their current state, they need to choose what sports matter to them.  This notion of them continuing to offer everything they've been offering just can't persist. It isn't viable. Realistically, that probably means axing football. 

Comment 17 Jan 2017

They "should"? Why, other than because you want them to? 

It's not happening, for reasons which Pat explained: 

Non-conference games in basketball are fairly precious commodities.  Iowa usually has three or four games associated with a tournament, for which it receives money and a free trip for its team.  It plays Iowa State and another game in the Big Four Classic.  There is generally a game in the Big Ten/ACC Challenge.  Starting this year, there is another in the Gavitt Tipoff Games against the Big East.  That leaves five openings, which are generally reserved for home games against easy opposition to keep Iowa's record above water and its coffers full.  

The Gavitt Games aren't an every-year thing for Iowa (there are more B1G teams than Big East teams, so some B1G teams have to sit out) and I have a hunch that Iowa may be sitting out the Gavitt Games and playing this game against Colorado instead. 

Comment 16 Jan 2017

I think there's definitely a lot of truth in that.  The biggest key, more than anything else, is having those guys who can go out and score a lot of points. Iowa simply hasn't had enough of those guys in recent years. Meanwhile, Penn State (and Ohio State) have, which is why they've won national titles. I think we're starting to see an improvement from Iowa in this regard when it comes to recruiting -- guys like Kemerer, Marinelli, Lee, Warner, etc. have really strong pedigrees and that *should* translate to a lot of points in college. But we'll have to wait and see, I suppose. And even in the best case scenario, we're a few years away from really getting to enjoy the fruits of that recruiting labor, which is certainly frustrating. 

FWIW, I think Oklahoma State is essentially a better version of the sort of team that Iowa has been for the last few years -- lots of good-to-really good guys, but not enough truly elite guys or enough big-time point scorers. That balance makes them very formidable in a dual meet (as we found out yesterday), but it makes for a more precarious projection in a tournament. If everything goes just right, they can pull it off. But the odds of everything going just right are not great. (They are helped by the fact that unlike Iowa in the last few years, there aren't any obvious holes in their lineup -- their "worst" guys are still ranked in the 9-12 range, which suggests that they're at least fringe All America contenders -- which gives them a little more margin of error.)

Comment 16 Jan 2017

125: Very intrigued for Gilman-Suriano. Suriano looks like the real deal as a TR FR, but I want to see how he fares against Gilman. This might be the first of three matches they have this year. 

133: Ranking 133 is going to be a mess. I think Clark can beat anyone at this weight, although I want to see how he does against Tomasello in a few weeks. We know he can beat Richards and Montoya and I came away from this match thinking Clark can definitely beat Brock. 

149: Sorensen is probably going to have Zain twice more before NCAAs (Friday and at Big Tens), which is probably two more losses. To get ahead of Collica, he's going to need Collica to suffer a few surprising losses. Need to root for Mayes to eat losses, too. Micah Jordan (OSU) is a little bit of a wildcard here, too. I think Sorensen definitely needs to beat him to have any hope of getting 2 or 3 at NCAAs. (And he might have to beat him 2x -- at the dual and at Big Tens.)

157: I am curious to see just what the gap is between Kemerer and Nolf. Kemerer's defense has been really solid this year, which has been impressive... but Nolf is on another level. 

184: Brooks has a slew of really tough matches coming up -- should give us an idea of how he stacks up in the pecking order at 184. Going 2-2 against those four guys wouldn't be the worst thing, but I'd really like to see him go 3-1. 

197: If Weigel is the #4 guy at that weight, that weight is even more garbage than I thought it was. Not impressed. Cox and Pfarr are really good at 197, but beyond that... I'm not sure anyone is all that impressive. I think Wilcke's Top 5 hopes hinge on how he looks vs McCutcheon and Ricky Robertson. Pfarr, Studebaker, and Kollin Moore look like a pretty solid Top 3 in the Big Ten.