Comments on: Hoosiers ranked No. 9 in preseason coaches poll

By: rayman

rayman — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 04:23:20 +0000

i agree that iu should be a top ten pick for preseason polls. i think dj is going to become a household name across the country this year if he isn’t already. this is dj’s first chance to play with a supporting cast inside…not to mention iu is loaded in the perimeter. i would have them ahead of michigan state, who i personally think is getting a little too much hype…even though i think they’ll be among the big ten’s elite this season. i will say this, i sure am glad iu started out in the top 10 because their strength of schedule is going to be too weak for some of the “big ten haters” to move them into this spot once the season starts. i can see iu winning 16-18 of their opening 20 games scheduled…if not more. if they can get by xavier, kentucky, and southern illinois, i could see a perfect start heading into conference play…as long as no little guy steals a win. i predict they’ll remain in the top 10 for at least a large portion of the season…hopefully more.

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 23:36:57 +0000

Here’s how my preseason rankings look.
This year has a big 3 in:
1. UCLA
2. N. Carolina
3. Memphis
You can rank those three in order, this is mine, but it has to be those three teams at the top in my opinion. After them I see clearly defined next six to round out the top 9 with me putting them in this order
4. Kansas
5. Indiana
6. Georgetown
7. Tennessee
8. Michigan State
9. Louisville
10. Washington State
The Cougs slide into the number 10 spot out of all the remaining teams because I am a big fan of Derrick Low but I think they’re a step below the first 9.

By: WestCoastAlum

WestCoastAlum — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 22:26:01 +0000

I agree with PB’s comment that the team would have a lower ranking if Mike Davis was still coach. Davis was a great guy, but the perception (and probably reality) was that he never got the most he could out of his teams after the one run to the Final Four.

A more interesting question though is how would this team be ranked if Bob Knight was the coach.

One person’s opinion? I would break Knight’s career into two halves. In his early career, this team might have been higher ranked, but in his later career, he no longer seemed to have the ability to get the maximum out of his teams. He seemed to ride them too hard, almost like a horse trainer who breaks a horse so well that he kills its spirit.

By: bootsie white

bootsie white — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:48:15 +0000

probably too high for November and December.

JuCo players are freshmen, even as good as Gordon, rarely come in and dominate from Game One.

Wilmont will be missed. As will Calloway.

Plus Ratliff is not available.

This team will be Top 10 in February.

It’s a stretch for November.

By: jaime gongora

jaime gongora — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:06:08 +0000

I’m happy with nine. I think that we have more upside than the rest of the teams, which leaves us the possibility that we can contend for a national championship. It all depends how eli holman develops, and if jamarcus Ellis can provide consistency in rebounds, points, and assists.

By: Lrubes

Lrubes — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:34:59 +0000

I think we are actually better than #9. Along with proven players such as DJ and EJ I think Armon Basset is going to have a breakout year establishing himself an elite PG who can shoot the rock. Just my guess/opinion, I’ve seen Basset play a lot.

By: PB

PB — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:23:43 +0000

I figured we’d be 9th for some reason myself. It’s a good ranking considering the talent we have led by D.J. White and E.J. Not many teams have two first round picks like that. We do, however, still have a lot to prove.

If the coaches poll has us higher than the other poll, it goes to show how much the other coaches respect Sampson’s ability to get the most out of his players.

I hate to bring him up (for one, because we wouldn’t have Gordon if he were still here), but I think if we had this same team and Davis were still head coach we’d be significantly lower in the polls. Just my opinion, though.

By: MPmike

MPmike — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:01:35 +0000

I think pre-season rankings overall are overated because they are based on what’s on paper and not being able to see the teams play on the court yet.

Based on the players returning and the recruiting hype along with a proven coach, IU should be ranked in the pre-season top 10.

I believe the last time IU was ranked in the pre-season top 10 is back in the 1993-1994 season which IU ended up regular season #1. I think the following season(1994-1995)- IU was ranked in the top 25.

Finally, going back to Mike’s comments. IU has been ranked in the top 10 during the season in the last 10 years. Bob Knight’s 1999-2000 (which was Knight’s last year at IU) team was ranked 7th in the nation and Mike Davis had two teams ranked in the top ten. 2003 IU was ranked 6th and in his final year 2006 team was ranked in the top ten.

By: PostmanR

PostmanR — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:50:45 +0000

This is a little higher than I expected — was thinking in the 10-15 ranger — but hey, I’ll take it.

But, in the end, this is just a preseason ranking. Doesn’t really mean much except we are supposed to be good — they still have to bring it once the season starts.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:39:37 +0000

Big A…yea im talking about the initial preseason rankings. I was going for the bonus points from the article haha